Anglican Mainstream

by Dr Benjamin Wiker, Strange Notions

For the last half of the twentieth century, Antony Flew (1923-2010) was the world's most famous atheist. Long before Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris began taking swipes at religion, Flew was the preeminent spokesman for unbelief.

From Ancient Briton

[...]  William “Kirk” Kilpatrick’s new book Christianity, Islam, and Atheism opens with a section titled “The Islamic Threat,” in which Kilpatrick describes the rise of supremacist Islam and our correspondingly tepid defense of Western values. Our collapse in the face of Islam, he says, is due in large part to our abandonment of Christianity, which has led to “a population vacuum and a spiritual vacuum” that Islam has rushed to fill. “A secular society… can’t fight a spiritual war,” Kilpatrick writes. Contrary to the multiculturalist fantasy dominant in the West today, “cultures aren’t the same because religions aren’t the same. Some religions are more rational, more compassionate, more forgiving, and more peaceful than others.” This is heresy in today’s morally relativistic world, but it’s a critical point because “as Christianity goes, so goes the culture.”

Kilpatrick notes that Christians today have lost all cultural confidence and are suffering a “crisis of masculinity”, thanks to the feminizing influences of multiculturalism and feminism. He devotes significant space to encouraging Christians to, well, grow a pair, to put it indelicately, in order to confront Islam, the “most hypermasculine religion in history”:

Read here

by Craig Brown, Mailonline

Over the past few years, evangelical atheists have switched places with fire-and-brimstone Christians: where once it was the Christians who brooked no disagreement, now it is the atheists; and it is the atheists, too, who perform cartwheels on the heads of pins.

Christopher Hitchens once even managed to argue of the Reverend Martin Luther King, of all people, that ‘In no real as opposed to nominal sense . . . was he a Christian’.

A weaselly self-righteousness is now the hallmark of the celebrity unbeliever. Meanwhile, it is the Christian who nods diligently in any discussion, taking pains to reassure the atheists how very much he respects their point of view.

In the latest edition of Prospect magazine, the philosopher A.C. Grayling writes another of his pieces in support of atheism. In it, he exhibits a deft sleight-of-hand which, viewed close-up and in slow-motion, looks more and more suspicious.

For instance, he complains that ‘in England where 3 per cent of the population go regularly to services in the state-established Church, 26 bishops (plus a number of life peer ex-bishops) can sit in the House of Lords’.

It seems a fair point, but is it even accurate, let alone fair? There are currently 775 members of the House of Lords.

Three per cent of 775 is 23.25. This means that, even by Grayling’s own demanding calculations of what constitutes an Anglican, the House of Lords has just two-and-three-quarter Bishops above its fair share.

Read here

From Theos

Last month Cambridge University hosted a debate about the future of religion in public life. The speakers included the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and the world-famous atheist, Richard Dawkins. Not surprisingly, it was extremely well-attended.

By Ed West, Catholic Herald

The public has moved on from the anti-religious vitriol of the 2000s

Amid all the warm words expressed by public figures after Pope Benedict announced his retirement one comment rather stood out. “I feel sorry for the Pope and all old Catholic priests. Imagine having a wasted life to look back on and no sex,” wrote Richard Dawkins on Twitter.

Even with the generally low standards of decorum on the site, the 71-year-old biologist’s comment caused groans. For while he still has his fans and admirers, Prof Dawkins has been preaching to the choir for some time, and the choir shrinks as embarrassed followers slink away from the scene. New Atheism has finally had its day.

As atheist writer Douglas Murray recently noted, after sitting alongside Dawkins in a debate: “The more I listened to Dawkins and his colleagues, the more the nature of what has gone wrong with their argument seemed clear. Religion was portrayed as a force of unremitting awfulness, a poisoned root from which no good fruit could grow. It seems to me the work not of a thinker but of any balanced observer to notice that this is not the case. A new … dogma has emerged. And the argument has stalled.”

Read here

Review by Peter Hitchens, The Spectator

The God Argument: The Case Against Religion and for Humanism, A.C. Grayling (Bloomsbury, pp.269, £16.99, ISBN: 9781408837405)

‘Atheism is to theism,’ Anthony Grayling declares, ‘as not collecting stamps is to stamp-collecting’. At this point, we are supposed to enjoy a little sneer, in which the religious are bracketed with bald, lonely men in thick glasses, picking over their collections of ancient stamps in attics, while unbelievers are funky people with busy social lives.

But the comparison is flatly untrue. Non-collectors of stamps do not, for instance, write books devoted to mocking stamp-collectors, nor call for stamp-collecting’s status to be diminished, nor suggest — Richard Dawkins-like — that introducing the young to this hobby is comparable to child abuse. They do not place advertisements on buses proclaiming that stamp-collecting is a waste of time, and suggesting that those who abandon it will enjoy their lives more.

Professor Grayling is too pleased with himself to have realised this. Intoxicated with amusement at his own dud metaphor, he asks: ‘How could someone be a militant non-stamp-collector?’ I rather think he has written the manual for anyone who might like to take up this activity.

Read here

Read also:  review by Brian Appleyard, New Statesman

A C Grayling's latest attack on faith is smug, glib and lamentable by Tom Payne, Telegraph

By Douglas Murray, Spectator

My fellow atheists, it’s time we admitted that religion has some points in its favour

Sometimes a perfectly good argument can be stretched too far. I heard the resulting snapping noise last week in Cambridge during a debate with Richard Dawkins. We were meant to be on the same side at the Union. But over some months the motion hardened and eventually became ‘This House believes religion should have no place in the 21st century.’ While an atheist myself, it seems to me that claiming that religion should disappear is not just an overstatement but a seismic mistake. So I joined Rowan Williams and my close enemy Tariq Ramadan in trying to explain to Dawkins and co where they might have gone wrong.

The Union was packed, with screens relaying the debate live around the building. It was a reminder — a few days before Justin Welby, Williams’s successor as Archbishop of Canterbury, made the point — that the role of religion in our national discussion is by no means absent.

The more I listened to Dawkins and his colleagues, the more the nature of what has gone wrong with their argument seemed clear. Religion was portrayed as a force of unremitting awfulness, a poisoned root from which no good fruit could grow. It seems to me the work not of a thinker but of any balanced observer to notice that this is not the case. In their insistence to the contrary, a new — if mercifully non-violent — dogma has emerged. And the argument has stalled.

These new atheists remain incapable of getting beyond the question, ‘Is it true?’ They assume that by ‘true’ we agree them to mean ‘literally true’. They also assume that if the answer is ‘no’, then that closes everything. But it does not. Just because something is not literally true does not mean that there is no truth, or worth, in it.

Read here

From Theos

Guest contributor Leah Brumer reviews 'Atheism's New Clothes' by physicist and philosopher David H. Glass.

By Hayley Dixon, Telegraph

The world’s most famous atheist Richard Dawkins will tonight go head-to-head with the former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams to debate the role of religion in modern society.

The discussions, hosted by the Cambridge Union Society, will be the second bout between the respected intellectuals who will consider whether "religion has no place in the 21st Century".

The pair met in public discussion about the origins of life at Oxford University last year. It was televised and captured attention around the world.

Ben Kentish, president of the union, believes that tonight will be a highlight of the debating society's 200-year history.

"Our speakers are the most renowned commentators on this subject,” he said.

"The prospect of seeing Professor Dawkins and the former Archbishop of Canterbury debate the subject is particularly exciting for our members."

Read here

From NSS website

By Melanie Phillips, Mailonline

You really would need to have a heart harder than the five-pence piece in the Christmas pud not to feel sorry at present for Professor Richard Dawkins.

Christmas must be such a terrible trial for the planet’s most celebrated — and angriest — atheist. All that cheerfulness and pleasure associated with Christianity’s main celebration seems to drive him simply nuts.

[...]  His view of religion is as cheerless as it is unbalanced. As countless others prepare for an enjoyable and — dare one say it — even spiritually uplifting holiday, Professor Dawkins seems to become all the more miserable. If Charles Dickens were writing A Christmas Carol today, surely he would have replaced Ebenezer Scrooge with the figure of the joyless, rage-fuelled Dawkins spitting out ‘Bah, humbug!’ at families sitting down to the Christmas turkey.

After last week’s census details which showed that Christianity in Britain is in decline, Dawkins rejoiced that it was ‘on the way out in this country’.

Well, this is tantamount to rejoicing that Britain and western civilisation are on the way out. For Christianity underpins their most fundamental moral values — ones that both believers and non-believers hold dear, such as the difference between right and wrong, respect for other people and doing good things rather than bad.

It is also woven into Britain’s literature, art, music, history and national identity.

What’s more, despite the decline in believers, nearly two-thirds of the population still describe themselves as Christian. If Britain stops being a mainly Christian country, then it will stop being recognisably Britain.

 It is not just Dawkins and his followers, however, who are dancing prematurely on Christianity’s grave.

In the eyes of just about the entire governing class, cultural milieu and intelligentsia, belief in Christianity is viewed at best as an embarrassment, and at worst as proof positive of imbecility.

Indeed, Christianity has long been the target of sneering comedians, blasphemous artists and the entire human rights industry — all determined to turn it into a despised activity to be pursued only by consenting adults in private.

As it happens, I myself am not a Christian; I am a Jew. And Jews have suffered terribly under Christianity in the past.

Yet I passionately believe that if Britain and the West are to continue to be civilised places, it is imperative that the decline in Christianity be reversed.

Read here

By Daniel Martin

Raising your children as Roman Catholics is worse than child abuse, according to militant atheist Richard Dawkins.

In typically incendiary style, Professor Dawkins said the mental torment inflicted by the religion’s teachings is worse in the long-term than any sexual abuse carried out by priests.

He said he had been told by a woman that while being abused by a priest was a ‘yucky’ experience, being told as a child that a Protestant friend who died would ‘roast in Hell’ was more distressing.

Last night politicians and charities condemned the former Oxford professor’s views as attention-seeking and unhelpful.

The remarks are due to be broadcast tonight by Qatar-based TV network Al Jazeera.

Interviewer Mehdi Hasan asked Professor Dawkins about previous comments he made, when he said: ‘Horrible as sexual abuse no doubt was, the damage was arguably less than the long-term psychological damage inflicted by bringing the child up Catholic in the first place.’
 
Read here

Read also:  Is time running out for that poor old Christmas turkey, Richard Dawkins? by Cristina Odone, Telegraph

From Theos

Many people think religious convictions should be kept out of the public square, aruging (among other things) that religion is irrational. Religious people might do some good (it is conceded) but religious belief cannot be reconciled with serious moral reasoning.

By John Bingham, Telegraph

To the founder, Lord Baden-Powell, it was as much a peril for a young man to avoid as gambling, drunkenness, swearing or the wiles of the opposite sex.

But more than a century after the Scouting movement was founded, it is finally preparing to recognise atheism on a par with Christianity and other religions.

The association is consulting its members on plans to draft an alternative oath without references to God, allowing atheists to become full members and Scout group leaders for the first time.

It follows accusation of discrimination and intolerance after an 11-year-old boy was barred from full membership because he said he did not believe in God.

George Pratt was told he could not join 1st Midsomer Norton Scout Group in Somerset, after saying he felt unable to make the traditional promise to do his best to do his “duty to God and to the Queen, to help other people and to keep the Scout Law”.

Although originally founded along Christian lines, the Scouts have long welcomed followers of other faiths as full members.

For more than 40 years, alternative versions of the promise have existed allowing Muslims to pledge allegiance to Allah and Hindus to substitute the words "my Dharma".

Read here

Read also:  The Boy Scouts were founded as a Christian organisation, not a tree-hugging 'values-based' atheist coven by Peter Mullen

From Cranmer

[...]  Despite almost 2000 of a Europe built upon Christian notions of society, justice and general jurisprudence, history appears to be repeating itself in yet another church-state clash.

It is reported that Dr Tonio Borg, currently Malta’s Foreign Minister, is being considered for the post of European Commissioner. He is by all accounts highly qualified for the role, 'with academic qualifications in administrative and human rights law, and decades of experience in his country’s Justice and Home Affairs Ministries'.  But there's a problem: Dr Borg is Roman Catholic.

And so the hordes of self-righteous secularists are mobilising to oppose his nomination, not because he engaged in fraud, corruption or nepotism. But because he adheres to his church's teaching on issues like abortion, same-sex marriage and divorce. Such views, it is posited, are antithetical to 'European values’.

It is a curious understanding of human rights and 'European values' which seeks to deny to the individual the right to hold a particular view on matters of sexual ethics or reproduction. Dr Borg is being subject to a coordinated campaign in exactly the same way as Commissioner-designate Rocco Buttiglione was back in 2004 – his 'sexist' and 'homophobic' views (ie adherence to orthodox Christian teaching) rendered him unsuitable in the eyes of the European Parliament to be an EU Commissioner, and so he was hounded out of an office he was never permitted to hold.

Read here

From The Christian Institute

Highland Council has removed prayer from its formal meeting agenda after secularists threatened legal action.

The decades-old tradition will now be held prior to the formal meeting, in a move criticized by one councillor as a “manifestation of political correctness”.

The National Secular Society (NSS) wrote to the Council in the summer calling for the saying of prayers to be dropped or face legal action.

A note was then written to all 80 councillors in the Highlands stating that: “Time for Prayer and Reflection will be undertaken at 10.30am in the chamber” in future for those who wish to attend.

“This will be preceded by the bell to signal commencement.”

A second bell will ring to inform councillors the meeting is about to start, five minutes later than normal, at 10.35am.

Read here

Cormac Murphy-O’Connor tells Cole Moreton and Edward Malnick that the Catholic Church is in rude health and he is still, aged 80, its faithful servant

[...]  Murphy-O’Connor believes that Christians should speak up for their faith more clearly. “Christianity is important in this country,” he says. “It has to stand up for itself in the face of secularism. We must be brave enough to speak intelligently about what we believe. We must combat aggressive secularism, because it is dangerous.”

Britain is in the grip of a new “secular religion”, says the Cardinal, who is giving this interview to mark his 80th birthday but also the imminent start of the Pope’s Year of Faith, in which Catholics will be urged to share what they believe.

“There is a new orthodoxy of what it is OK to believe or not believe. Some of it is sensible, but some of it seems to me to be a cause of intolerance,” he says. “Nobody is obliged to be a Christian, but no one should be obliged to live according to the new secular religion, which says it alone decides what’s right. It says, 'We rationalists decide, and all sensible people must accept this.’ Why should believers have to conform? Especially if it’s to do with social, medical and sexual matters.

“I think there’s a small minority who are aggressive, who want religion to keep silent, not to have a voice.”

Read here

By Albert Mohler

“It is hard to think of any other profession which it is so near to impossible to leave.” That is the judgment of Richard Dawkins, perhaps the world’s most famous living atheist, as he welcomes unbelieving pastors to join the Clergy Project, a group designed to help unbelieving pastors make their way out of the ministry. Apparently, some are not moving out very fast.

By Myles Collier, Christian Post

A prominent atheist organization is calling for an investigation over reports that a high school football coach in Georgia had several local churches provide pre-game meals for the football team.

The Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation, which aims to "protect the constitutional principle of separation between state and church," recently sent a letter to the superintendent of Walker County Schools requesting that the school board look into the activities of the Ridgeland High School football coach Mark Mariakis.

"Taking public school football teams to church, even for a meal, is unconstitutional," wrote FFRF attorney Andrew Seidel in the letter. "This program is an egregious violation of the Establishment Clause and must cease immediately."

Read here