Set Religion Free

I've been pondering the concept of "secularism".

You see, for all that the court case against Bideford Council was sponsored by the British Sad Sacks, and the bloke who brought the complaint was a bit Mr Beanish - I can't see why prayers (presumably of the traditional "broadly Christian nature") should be on the agenda. If councillors want to pray, let them do so in their own cupboards, as the Lord said. Or, if they want to get together to do so - let them do so beforehand. I'll not begrudge them the electric. Not least as I don't pay the bills in Bideford.

It just bothers me that any religion should be expected to be privileged in a modern state. Why should it? The Church managed 3 centuries without getting to demand that the State did what the Church requested - and once it had State recognition, I'm not convinced it did such a great job with it all the time then. The Church was never meant to have power.

It strikes me that, if religion is in touch with the heart of God (or gods, for we at the Beaker Folk accept people of all faiths and nuns) then it doesn't really need this kind of  protection. Blasphemy laws are foolish, obviously - for if God can't defend Godself against blasphemers, given the divine sanctions of eternal damnation and thunderbolts, what can mere human beings do? But if religious morals are in accord with natural law - thosee mandates that in one sense don't need to be written down because they can be deduced from the way things are - why should we need to appeal to the Divine to back them up? As CS Lewis pointed out when he listed all the religions that have the Golden Rule, these things must be fairly clear. The Universe was kind of built round them, if God did indeed build the Universe.

Likewise I'm not too fond of bishops in the House of Lords. Or, let me clarify that - I'm quite fond of bishops, and I've no problem with bishops being in the House of Lords, provided that they've either been elected by the populace into a proper, democratic Lords or they've been appointed for their general contribution to the life of the Nation. Personally I'd have no problem with removing the whole of the "Great and the Good" that currently occupy that hallowed place en masse, and starting again with no appointment of retired politicians, party donors or John Prescott.

You see, Jesus will one day reclaim his right to rule the whole Universe. But he didn't tell his Church to. He expected his Church, as far as I can tell, to be few in number, often oppressed and rarely if ever in power. The idea of Cardinal Richelieu, Rasputin or bishops in the House of Lords did not, as far as the Good Book tells us, ever cross his mind. If the Church is running the show, if it's on the side of power, then it can't identify with or speak for the weak, that's what I reckon. Let the country have an even playing field, privileging no creed, that's what I say. Then the Faith can be set free.