Religion, the Church of England and State Ceremonies

[cakeorwine]

I know we have an established church. I get that. And that's probably the answer to this question.

I do feel uncomfortable with the role that religion - specifically the Church of England - plays in State Ceremonies.

Watching the Cenotaph events on Remembrance Sunday. A moving event - but it does have a lot of religious elements. Prayers, hymns and The Lord's Prayer.

I think that anything religious should stick to events that are just for people of that religion. Or if it is multi-faith, then involve other faiths.

Remembrance Sunday is a national event. Keep religion out of it and just stick to remembering the people who died.

I am not a fan of monarchy.

However, if you are not religious, and don't believe in the divine right of Kings, what on earth do you want to crown some randomer for? What is the point of a king to an atheist? A desire for feudalism?

Put it back to the 11th and can you imagine all the screaming about the disruption to people's lives and how they're expected to stop their daily routine for a religious service?

l don’t think the majority of people would be bothered. The religious could still have a ceremony on the Sunday if they want. But Joe Public don’t really care. It should be on the 11th

The majority of people in the U.K. aren’t religious.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_Kingdom

Well for a start all the roads around Whitehall would have to be closed. That would be a massive inconvenience if you've seen the weekday traffic around there.

The reason it was changed to Sunday (1939, not the 1950s) was not for 'the religious' but so that wartime production wouldn't be halted - somewhat ironical, under the circumstances.

Well for a start all the roads around Whitehall would have to be closed. That would be a massive inconvenience if you've seen the weekday traffic around there

Oh, so it’s on a Sunday for convenience. And all these posters squealing about religion. Make your mind up.

I can see it changed to the 2nd Sunday in November because of the Archbishop of Westminster

"In May 1945, just before VE Day, the new government began consultation with the churches and the British Legion on the future of remembrance. Armistice Day in 1945 fell on a Sunday, preventing the need to change wartime practices. Some thought that continuing with the 11 November would focus more on the First World War and downplay the importance of the Second.

Other dates suggested were 8 May (VE Day), 6 June (D-Day), 15 August (VJ Day), 3 September (the declaration of war), and even 15 June (the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215).

The Archbishop of Westminster proposed that the second Sunday in November should be named Remembrance Sunday in commemoration of both World Wars, a suggestion which was endorsed by the Home Office in January 1946.

In June of that year, the prime minister, Clement Attlee, announced in the House of Commons that "the Government felt that this view would commend itself to all quarters of the country. I am glad to say that it has now found general acceptance here and has been approved by The King."

I think you are confusing me with someone else. I'm not 'squealing' about religion, that's the OP. Remembrance Sunday is not primarily about religion, anyway. I'm pointing out that having the 11th November ceremony on the 11th would be a massive logistic inconvenience.

For Christianity, according to the office of national statistics though, in 2019 In 2019, an estimated 51.0% of the population reported their religion as Christian. That is a considerable amount, even if it has reduced over the years. This also won't include always those who are culturally Christian. Such as myself. And many of the people I know

It will be interesting to see the ONS census - when they changed the question

humanists.uk/2019/07/11/latest-british-social-attitudes-survey-shows-continuing-rise-of-the-non-religious/

That is the headline findings of the 2018 British Social Attitudes Survey, the results of which are published today. The survey, which offers a detailed look at the non-religious and religious beliefs of the British adult population for the first time since 2008, concludes that there is ‘compelling evidence that the process of secularisation continues unabated.’
The survey finds that 52% of people belong to no religion, 12% are Anglicans, 7% are Catholics, 19% are some other type of Christian, and 9% belong to a non-Christian religion. The rise of the non-religious is largely attributed to generational change – and with just 1% of those aged 18-24 saying they belong to the Church of England, the trend looks set to continue

The census in 2011 asked:

"What is your religion?"

A different question to:

The British Social Attitudes Survey uses a two-part question which asks ‘Do you regard yourself as belonging to any particular religion?’ and ‘If yes, which?’ This approach gives a reliable indication of the actual identities of Britons, unlike the Census.

When asked the census question ‘What is your religion?’, 61% of people in England and Wales ticked a religious box (53.48% Christian and 7.22% other) while 39% ticked ‘No religion’.

But when asked ‘Are you religious?’ only 29% of the same people said ‘Yes’ while 65% said ‘No’, meaning over half of those whom the census would count as having a religion said they were not religious. Even more revealingly, less than half (48%) of those who ticked ‘Christian’ said they believed that Jesus Christ was a real person who died and came back to life and was the son of God. Asked when they had last attended a place of worship for religious reasons, most people in England and Wales (63%) said they had not attended in the past year, 43% of people last attended over a year ago and 20% of people had never attended. Only 9% of people said they had attended a place of worship within the last week.

The arguments over the last few pages have become even more incoherent than the OP's, if that's possible. I'm not even sure what the debate's about now.

Yes tradition, based on Christian traditions in a Christian country. It doesn't have to be held on a Sunday No, but being a Christian country?

Am I not saying it right? Why are people so surprised in a Christian country that certain traditions are based on Christian ones?

It could be removed when it comes to the Coronation

Religion removed when it comes to the coronation? Isn't the monarch only their because God supposedly chose them? They'd have no legitimacy as rulers otherwise.

I find your comments incredibly offensive. I’m not a Muslim or Sikh but would never describe Muhammad or Guru Nanak’s teachings as “fairy tales”. Show some respect for the views of others. It’s not all about you and your world view.

Nope - the Divine Right of Kings was disavowed in the Glorious Revolution of 1688

Do keep up!!

But l have no respect for any of it. I find your obsession offensive. How about you show some tolerance if you’re so keen on religion? Surely it’s meant to teach ‘tolerance’😂

l use the word ‘teach’ loosley.

Nope - the Divine Right of Kings was disavowed in the Glorious Revolution of 1688

Thank you for that information.

I've never been a fan of the monarchy. How is it they have legitimacy to rule us since then? <goes off to Google>

Rule by parliamentary consent. Essentially we have an elective monarchy.

It's the way of the world now. Everyone is entitled to an opinion but everyone isn't entitled to change everything just because they have an opinion... especially is a stompy way. But unfortunately people think the world must change just to suit them.

In todays service religion played a minor part out of the whole ceremony so there's really nothing to get upset about.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow , I am not a believer but AFAIK the existence and execution of JC was documented by the Romans.

Yes, it’s documented, l agree, as a person, he did exist. But he’s not some divine being who rose to heaven and carried out miracles. No one can do that.

I agree. Ignorant and intolerant. 🤔

Well that was an eye opener. 😳