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.

You are entitled to believe that

Others believe otherwise
Some have seen miracles and they are real

So if according to the Social Attitudes survey, 38% of people are Christian (of which 12% are Anglicans) and 52% of people are not religious, then maybe we will lose the link between Church and State - maybe in my life time.

The role of the Church of England in national events and in the State in general.

In a country where 52% of the population say they are not religious.

That's the case in many ceremonies on a grand scale, eg HM's funeral, but it's only the Christians who get bashed, the easy tsrget because these days we don't fight back.

It was the Lord's Prayer that was said by the Bishop of London.

And it's not bashing Christians.

Why did the Lord's Prayer need to be said?
Would it have been a lesser ceremony if it had not been said?

The Lord's Prayer is said because it would have been the most common prayer for service men and women, and is probably still the most well known today

Why did the Lord's Prayer need to be said?
Would it have been a lesser ceremony if it had not been said?

👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

I know that it's the most common prayer. I had to say it every day at school. Twice

I think that a national ceremony with a secular nature would be good. Faith leaders could be present and lay wreaths.

Maybe Charles could lead it. As the figurehead of our nation.

None of it is needed.

What is done is what the veteran community (who run the event) wants to happen.

If you want different events, organise them. The level of support for alternatives will be formative of any future changes. Start locally (there are events up and down the country) and if there is support, then the movement will grow and change will happen

Might be a bit hard to close Whitehall and ask politicians to attend.

But I am sure as the UK population changes over the years, the ceremony will change too.

But l think the cerony needs to stay! Just without the religion.

WW2 and 2 were seismic terrible events. They shouldn’t be forgotten.

So if the religious aspect is dropped and those who appreciate it complain, what then? More division in a society already divided. The ceremony of remembrance has had a religious aspect since it's inception. The people attending seem fine with the status quo - and let's face it, the people in the parade should have a much greater say on the mechanics than those watching from afar.

So much tradition being thrown out with the bathwater. OK, things move on, but change for change sake? Not always the best way to move things forward.

As I said upthread, I have no religious faith, but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate the tradition, history, art, music, literature that stems from all faiths and I think the world would be poorer without it. And yes, I do perceive the damage that can be done by individuals in the name of faith. We all need something to believe in, but it's up to us as individuals to not use faith, or let's face it, lack of faith, to push a personal agenda.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow , then why did you say the man didn’t exist? Whether he was the Messiah is a completely different question.

You were implying that he was a made-up entity, , like Rumpelstiltskin or something.
It’s best not to confuse historical fact with what you prefer to think.

I really don’t agree with countries having a state religion. Religion should be a personal thing, and not woven into the fabric of the state.

I’m commenting generally not on Remembrance Day specifically. I think the ceremony should stay.

YABVU, OP.

I don’t think there’s much historical fact on miracles.

I believe a guy called Jesus existed. But he was just a normal guy. No walking on water or any such nonsense.

We have a state religion. That's how it is.

Where as the US has separation of church and state - look how great that does.

You know Charles is head of the Church of England as King don't you?

You know Charles is head of the Church of England as King don't you?

Dunno if you have RTFT but if not I'll precis briefly for you - there are 14 pages of various people explaining why state and public occasions have a religious component and OP is STILL posting vague, waffly posts along the lines of 'The Church of England, but whyyyyyyyyy isn't this all secular? can't we do it another way, I've got ideas?'

Spare yourself and don't engage. It's now either deliberate goading or beyond ignorant.

I think a good ceremony would be:

Charles, as Monarch, leading it. (Yes, he is Head of the Church of England) but he would be there in his role as Head of State.

He could lead it. Talk about the sacrifices of war, thank the veterans on behalf of a grateful nation. There could be the Last Post, They shall not grow old, and then representatives could lay wreaths.

No Lord Prayers. Maybe the National Anthem.

Just the Head of State (as Head of State) thanking the veterans and remembering the dead.

You'll need to sell that model to your local branch of RBL, and if a secular version catches on, then it'll spread round the regions, and will percolate up (remembrance is grassroots led)

That's what I meant by starting local

The Cenotaph ceremony would of course continue to be annual, and Whitehall would be no more difficult to close than it is now.

Remember there are thousands of other ceremonies, of same format, going on at the same time. Starting local means getting those to change. It means talking to the veterans and volunteers and persuading them to change. And changes that are welcome will spread

I don't think a speech would be a particularly good replacement for the traditional words of remembrance that have be spoken through the years. But perhaps, when you start taking your online idea into the RL veterans and wider community that people would prefer that

(Yes, he is Head of the Church of England) but he would be there in his role as Head of State

As has been explained to you (and I don't know why I'm rising to the bait, but still...) Head of State and Head of CoE are intertwined for state and public occasions and you don't have one without the other. The service we have on the second Sunday of November has been in pretty much that format for 103 years, only you seem to have an issue with it; if anyone else does they find something else to do once a year.

Get another hobby, FFS. Or help.

He could lead it. Talk about the sacrifices of war, thank the veterans on behalf of a grateful nation

Remembering the sacrifices of war and thanking the veterans is what Remembrance Sunday IS FOR AND HAS BEEN SINCE 1919

You're trolling now. You have to be, no-one's this (struggles for word that won't get me banned) incapable of understanding.

You don't seem to understand yourself.

It would be the same ceremony as now.
EXCEPT there would be no Lord's Prayer.

The Church of England would be on an equal footing with other faith groups. Free to put down a wreath along with the other faith groups on behalf of their communities.

It would be the Monarch leading it. In their role as Monarch. He would be taking the lead.

No need to have the Lord's Prayer. It would be a secular service but almost the same as it is now. Except the bit by the Bishop of London.