An unsurprising event happened the other day which seemed to spark the media's attention for a few hours. The new bishop to the armed forces Stephen Venner came out in support for terrorists. Of course he doesn't agree with their aims (I sincerely hope not) but they "can perhaps be admired for their conviction to their faith and their sense of loyalty to each other". But is anyone surprised by this? Has not been the case that church and faith have continually stood against liberalism? The tyrannies of minaret and the cathedral, when faced with a challenge to their monopoly on morals and the progressive force for liberal democracy, not mutually supported each other in words and actions.
The Christian churches unanimously backed Franco's fascist coup in the Spanish Republic. The catholic church actually financed his insurgency and encouraged Irish catholics to join Franco's front lines and fight against the International Brigades, Spanish liberals and George Orwell. Three years later the only Nazi to be excommunicated from the church was Goebbels for getting divorced. It seemed antisemitism par-extreme, the invasion of neighbouring states, killing of civilians and eventually genocide did not contradict any Christian dogmatism, until of course t the Nazi's lost the war. Let's fast forward to the last decade skipping over Pinochet, Pott and Kooney. Which groups in society have spoke out against lifestyle choices such as homosexuality, contraception and women's rights. The idea that people have a morality without the guidance of the church is anti-theta to their teachings. The fact a progressive morality encapsulated in the forces liberal democratic states is not in line with the teachings of their holy book(s) A book which is viciously anti-liberal, narcissistic, homo phobic, chauvinistic and brutal. A book compiled by a half barbaric sect in the middle of a harsh and uncivilized world. This world view should be embraced (failing that imposed) on an individuals private life, an area which is of no concern of theirs. The Koran and the Bible have more in common that we are led to believe and it is only the secular force of liberalism which impose a neutral playing field between all ideas and protects individual liberty.
It should not surprise us one instance that those who believe in universal authority given to them by divine revelation see their own reflection in the Taliban's unquestioning allegiance to Allah, faith in metaphysical claims and adherence to arcane laws and practices. The Church of England can only look in envy at the unquestioning authority the Mullahs and the Koran have over the Taliban and indeed the Saudi Kings, the Iranian government, Mujahadeen, and countless other weak states, illiterate populations and indoctrinated combatants. It is not the first time the Churches have rallied together to condemn our morality and support other messianic religions. Head of the Church of England Rowen Williams supports Sharia' law for Muslims in the UK. Individuals no longer equal under law is an affront too 300 years or progressive liberalism. On a overt attack on homosexuality the Rt Rev Graham Dow, Bishop of Carlisle, argues floods that devastated many areas of the UK are a punishment from God for our moral degradation. For the Taliban the success of 9/11 and 7/7 are attributed more to the will of God than their meticulous planning.
Stephen Venner was asked if he was sorry for his comments. If you listen even half-attentively you'll notice that he's sorry that the Daily Telegraph misconstrued his interview. It probably was made to look inflammatory. However at no point does he deny admiring the faith of the Taliban, after all that his job is based on that very premise. The Church is fading as we grow accustomed to our democratic systems and our knowledge of the universe increases. No longer are we pitted against a godless socialist enemy but one who glorifies in it's faith. This sits uncomfortably with our acquiescent of religious institutions at home . We should not be surprised when the church, fearful of being ignored, seek mutual support in other co-monotheist religions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I understand you are not saying the Christian churches are seeking support from the Taliban or Islamist fundamentalist groups, but I suspect you do see something sinister or threatening in their seeking 'mutual support' with other (mainstream) religious organisations.
ReplyDeleteIn a modern democracy all types of organisations band together to pursue their common interests. Why should we expect religious bodies be any different from trades unions, businesses, football clubs, parents groups, minority advocacy groups etc..? Also, many people in religious organisations are motivated by a deep passion to do good, and I suspect the Bishop of Carlisle said something unwise in an attempt to show consideration for a minority group that can feel victimised in our society, rather than for sinister purpose.
I'm as big a critic of religious leaders as any, and we all know the crimes they have committed in the past. Much of what they do is still very objectionable, but then lots of groups do things I find objectionable. In a free society we're supposed to accept being offended. Does anyone really think the Churches of England or Rome seek to regain the political power they once had? To me it's unrealistic to imply they're looking to overthrow our secular democracy: I suspect they're merely struggling to find a niche to exist, and yes achieve their goals, within it.
As I said. I don't see anything sinister at all. Of course they have every right to do so and I expect them to. I think we need greater freedom of association and speech in the UK. Just don't be surprised by their support for other faith groups. Religion has causal mechanism or pathways which can and often do lead to violence based on faith. These pathways are shared by all religions and all their moderate and extreme varieties. I would say the taliban is very faithfull and full of conviction. The fact a priest can relate to that doesn't surprise at all. In their struggle for legitimacy they have found some strange but unsurprising bed fellows.
ReplyDeleteOf course Christian churches won't win political support like they had in Europe or even have in the States. But in the nations where our troops are stationed they very much command and wield political power, underwritten by a constant terrorist threat. In building a democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq we will have to work with some of these groups. That doesn't mean we admire them and their morals in anyway.
If a trade unionist came out in support of Chinese labour rights I would not be surprised. If they came out saying they support Al'Queda's work ethic I would be very surprised.
I know your not usually an apologist for religion but In regards to the Bishop of Carlisle I don't understand how anyone can think that blaming the floods on homosexuality is showing concern for that very minority group.
Sorry, I meant to say the Bishop for the Forces (Venner) said something unwise, in attempting to show consideration for a societal group often feeling pressurized (muslims).
ReplyDeleteOf course what the Bishop of Carlisle said was not only riddiculous but actually came from a horrid and bigoted view of a group in society. There's no mitigating what he said. I meant to say that Venner's was different, a riddiculous comment but at least grounded in good intention.
-The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
ReplyDelete