to think there is nothing wrong with saying britain is a christian country

[Slutbucket]

I have no strong opinion about David Cameron but I don't think h e has said anything wrong in describing Britain as a christian country. Our main holidays are Christmas and easter, the head of state needs to be protestant and much of our history and traditions are based around the christian religious calendar. We are moving to a more secular society but I can't see these traditions dying out. I live in a very multi cultural area where all festivals are celebrated. I have friends from many cultures who are not alienated by the christian festivals. Many send Christmas cards as a mark of respect (and some just celebrate Christmas because they like the festival) some people are not religious but will celebrate these festivals in some form ie buy an Easter egg for their children, celebrate pancake day.

Well, Christianity is not orthopraxic, so church attendance is not necessary.

I seem to recall the defining feature is the belief that Jesus was the son of God. I cannot make citations for that at the moment, but Wikipedia will refresh my memory in a minute.

I wonder how we would treat the poor?
Probably in the same disgusting manner that we do now.

I wonder how much more (if any) than that 10% churchgoing number would profess a belief in the divinity of Jesus as the son of God?

Actually, I rephrase. I think regular church attendance could well be part of orthopraxis for the Orthodox church. For the rest, the internet is engaged in bitter argument.

I am unwilling to speculate on what percentage of the UK could be said to accept the Nicene creed or Trinitarianism ! (I can tell you that my mother has taken up 'Christianity' and she doesn't.)

Encyclopedias are showing me that there are various groups still extant which do not. I have a horrid feeling I'm going to continue reading about Christian theology for the rest of the week...

The Independent article quoted above says, "Church of England attendance now stands at around 800,000 on a typical Sunday."

What's that... 1 in 75 of the population. Hmm.

Not got all the way through, but if it hasn't been said.... If dc is a Christian given his attitudes and acts he's a very limited one.

I don't like him coming out with his personal beliefs on religion: I don't want politics and religion mixed up, or we'll be having religious wars instead of oil next.

And has anyone yet said that the real reason he's come out with it, as did Blair before him, is because he wants to go be a big shot in America after this, where it seems public religious confession is a prerequisite to a political career? That's what it looks like to me. All these politicians sucking up to America, wish they would all clear off there and leAve us alone.

I think it would be more accurate to say that the UK is a country in which Christian religious groups- and more specifically the C of E- enjoy a vast amount of political power and educational influence, and state-funded financial backing .

I thought he should have referred to a need for religion in general terms. He would have been inclusive and not have caused the criticism he has given rise to. Prince Charles spoke awhile ago of wishing to be a defender of all religions and he was criticised for not referring to Christianity.

So I'm guessing I shouldn't consult Mr Cameron on the Nicene creed, or the meaning of Trinitarianism then? Dammit.

Actually, they should totally publish that book. I'd buy it.

HappydaysArehere ah, Prince Charles was absolutely pilloried in Private Eye for that.

Interesting fact, though. The F.D. for Fidei Defensor, which we are accustomed to seeing on our coinage was a title originally granted to Henry VIII by a then Pope, before the schism and foundation of the Church of England. Henry VIII was quite the amateur theologian and he wrote a pamphlet defending the Roman Catholic church, before the Pope refused him a divorce and he rebelled against the Church.

I think it's a bit much for Henry (and all his descendants) to glory in a title granted by the institution he broke away from!

Thanks TillyTellTale. That has reminded me where it all started. Old Henry was a real hypocrite but highly educated and spoilt. What a combination!

many people are 'good Christians' because of the manner in which they conduct their lives.

But surely they are only "Christians" if the manner in which they conduct their lives is motivated by a belief in Christian doctrine (whether they go to church or not)?

I suspect that the vast majority of people live "moral" lives because of their own personal values, rather than any religious obligations.

I don't think anyone can reasonably dispute that Britain is a Christian country, at least in some senses. However, I am curious as to what exactly David Cameron meant when he said that we should be "more evangelical" about Christianity.

His arguments seemed to me to be a little confused. He warned of the potential "consequences" that might flow from the "secular neutrality" advocated by some, but didn't really articulate what these might be. He just made vague reference to the fact that Christianity helped some people to have a moral code, but then hastened to point out that some Christians weren't very nice people after all, while lots of non-Christians happen to be quite moral in spite of themselves. His point being?

I checked Wikipedia, and it's even more ironic than I remembered.

"The title was conferred in recognition of Henry's book Assertio Septem Sacramentorum (Defence of the Seven Sacraments), which defended the sacramental nature of marriage and the supremacy of the Pope. This was also known as the "Henrician Affirmation" and was seen as an important opposition to the early stages of the Protestant Reformation, especially the ideas of Martin Luther."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidei_defensor

Wikipedia goes on to point out that the Pope revoked the title, but Henry was obviously attached to it, so Henry's pet the English Parliament declared the King to be Fidei Defensor. No conflict of interest there.

If Christ came back tomorrow, the reality is that Cameron and his supporters would monster him as a dangerous lefty

I've often thought this and it's probably why he got knocked off back then too :). Not because of the Messiah claims. The reality is that the powers that be have waged war on us and with us for far too long, flooded us with immigration when birthrates collapsed so their ideal economic models of endless supplies of cheap labour worked and now that things have got more than a bit uncomfortable for them on the demographic front, are hoping the 'reconquista' types (whom they have so badly betrayed with jobs and education) will come crawling out of the woodwork to save the day. They will despise them and abandon them just as much as they did after the other wars but right now they are perceived as needed so I expect we'll be hearing a lot more of this sort of thing. I thought Jack Straw was Jewish? I've been reading a couple of articles in relation to this and they said he's Christian but I'm almost certain a few years back he was described as being active member of synagogue etc.

Shocked by the attorney generals comments. There is absolutely no evidence that the majority of the country believe in a supernatural being. I hope he exercises better control over his wishful thinking and confirmation bias when he is making professional decisions.

So... because moderates don't want to be associated with extremists they won't express religious belief (in his opinion ... I've certainly not noticed any reluctance of people to claim to be religious if there's a school place at stake) he's blaming atheists rather than er, the religious extremists?

Besides which, this is an issue of secularism not atheism - a secular country is the best guarantee of religious freedoms for all, as the Founding Fathers of the USA, in an age of extreme intolerance of other religions (or none) by religious people with power, realised clearly.

As to our laws being based on Christian ethics - many of the truly ethical laws are common to many civilisations (crimes against the person and property ... surely Romans, greeks, Norsemen etc had these, limiting to those which will have input into our culture) and some are decidedly post-Christian (equality legislation).

TillyTellTale, That's wonderful. It becomes more interesting as you delve into the past. Have you read Wolfe Hall and Bring Up the Bodies? Hilary Mantel brings that era to life. DH loves those books and history so will show him your postings. Thank you.

I thought he should have referred to a need for religion in general terms. He would have been inclusive and not have caused the criticism he has given rise to

just noticed this... er... how on earth do you suppose that 'a need for religion' inclusive?

Happy Hilary Mantel's books are still, like so much, on my reading list! The Reformation is an absolutely fascinating period of history (my favourite with Roman Britain), but most of my knowledge comes from Antonia Fraser and wikipedia.

Kim The article is odd. overnight. They (the atheists) are deluding themselves.”

In aDaily Telegraphinterview Mr Grieve warned people were being discouraged from openly declaring their beliefs because of the “deep intolerance” of religious extremists of all faiths, including Islam and Christianity. He said: “I do think that there has been a rise of an assertiveness of religious groups across the spectrum. That is why those with softer religious views find it disturbing and say they don't want anything to do with it.” The actual quote from Mr Grieve doesn't match with the journalist's introduction, does it? I would like to hear all of what Mr Grieve said.

I'm also puzzled by the bit about most people having "a religious belief in the supernatural or a deity". Is he roping in people who believe in astrology, and watch Britain's Most Haunted to shore up his numbers? If he's going to be that loose with his parameters about it, he might be rifht.

Just pointing out that church numbers in decline doesn't mean less believers. It just means less bums on seats. Britain has always been "four wheel believers"; driven in to church by pram - christened, driven in by car/carriage - weddings, driven in by car /carriage - funerals.

Nothing I see in Britain has actually altered. People stil basically work this way and believe "ish". Just some groups are noisier than before.