Dear Office of the Archbishop,
I read with interest the story of the Archbishop standing up against the erosion of Christian values, and the Address to the Diocese of Newcastle. I am slightly confused. Which specifically Christian values are being eroded from society?
I appreciate the Archbishop gives some examples. The loss of free parking for Christians in Plymouth is a shock and I believe it would be to the benefit of all if this were pursued further by a strong media campaign. I suggest that he could camp out in a parking space fasting and praying for a week, as he did for peace in the Middle East in August. I would be more than willing to contribute to some of the costs of the parking tickets for such an event. However, would Matthew 22:15-22 apply here?
I am also concerned about his insistence that people should be asked for a Christian name rather than a first name. What would this mean to those of us who lack Christian names when we sign documents which we have to legally assert are accurate, such as job applications? Is this an attempt to enforce conversion to Christianity to gain employment? ? I assume that he has as he states in his address, the Archbishop has no desire to “ram it [Christianity] down peoples’ throats”, so is this a means of merely identifying outsiders who would have to request another form? Are forms asking for a first name unacceptable to Christians because they lack first names? If not then is one of the Christian principles which is being eroded the principle of creating unnecessary problems?
It is a matter of great concern that he argues religion should guide science. “It may insist that scientific enquiry be prompted by a pure love of truth and not distorted (as in Nazi Germany) by political considerations.” This deeply worries me for two reasons. One is that scientists do not pursue enquiry purely on the grounds of “a pure love of truth”. We have ethics committees. The Archbishop may be interested to note that human vivisection does not occur in the United Kingdom, not because the human body is a solved problem, but because regardless of whether scientists follow a faith or not they have decided it is wrong and not to be tolerated in civilised society. Nazi Germany in constrast was religiously guided. If the Archbishop has read Mein Kampf he will be aware that Hitler frequently attributed his success to God. Broadcasting from Berlin in 1941 he stated “Only when the entire German people become a single community of sacrifice can we expect and hope that Almighty God will help us.” Would the Archbishop think in this case a little less respect for faith leaders and a little more public questioning based on rational principles would have been a good idea?
I wholeheartedly agree with the Archbishop that “…[S]ociety must be so arranged as to give every citizen the maximum opportunity for making deliberate choices…” Would the Archbishop like to see act of being a Christian to be an informed deliberate choice? I would like to see the adoption of principles and ethics to be an informed deliberate choice. It disturbs me that Christians are imprisoned for having a faith. Does it disturb the Archbishop that across the world that people die because of the imposition of faith? Recently Nicaragua has banned abortion even in the case of ecotopic pregancy because of faith, regardless of the faith of the mother. If society exists for the individual, as the Archbishop states, should not faith be an individual matter rather than imposed by society?
As I understand Christianity’s ethics and principles are based on reason and wisdom rather than whim, and as I understand the secular movement also embraces this desire. I do not see how the preservation of free parking, or wishing someone Season’s Greetings if they are not a Christian is an evil. I hope the Archbishop will take the time to address the true meaning of Christmas this Saturnalia.
Yours,
Alun Salt
