Freethought & Rationalism Archive

missus_gumby · 07-20-2002, 03:53 AM

The Church of England openly admit there is a spiraling decline in religious belief and church attendance. One wonders if their <a href="http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/07/20/nheres20.xml&sSheet=/news/2002/07/20/ixhome.html" target="_blank">giant stride back to the dark ages</a> will achieve the desired effect!

Every now and then the British press report on atheist clergy who 'out' themselves, and now it looks as though the church is trying to do something about it. It seems to me they are shooting themselves in the foot by bringing back trials for heresy. The more the merrier I say - they couldn't be helping the decline in religious belief over here any more if they did it on purpose! It's almost as if the upper echelons of the church of England are going out on the streets, getting down on their knees, and begging the population to become non-religious.

Is it just me, or does anyone else find trials for heresy, here in the 21st century, utterly laughable?

Martin

TooBad · 07-20-2002, 04:20 AM

Ludicrous.

Born Free · 07-20-2002, 04:49 AM

Absolutely Martin and I don't think it will ever happen, tell you what if it does though, I'll get on a train go wherever it's happened and protest...loudly.

missus_gumby · 07-20-2002, 05:11 AM

Alli, the church of England are desparate. They have started selling the family jewels to stave off financial ruin, and at the same time they are sucking in millions in tax payer revenue to keep hundreds of their buildings repaired, and even deliberately manipulating <a href="http://www.secularism.org.uk/nss/figuring.htm" target="_blank">church attendance figures</a> to try and make themselves look legitimate. What they hope to achieve by alienating (an as yet unknown percentage of) their front-line clergy, and their associated congregations, is beyond my comprehension. Not that I'm against their continued decline of course!

I don't think I would go and protest a heresy trial, should it occur. I am all for letting the established church dig it's own grave, anyway, I don't think they would be calling for atheist vicars to be burnt at the stake!

Or would they?

Martin

One of the last sane · 07-20-2002, 06:43 AM

Methinks they are just doing it to try to generate some publicity.

Many British churches are very interesting buildings though. Atheist though I am, I enjoyed exploring them while I was there. Does the National Trust (if I have that name right) get involved in preservation of old churches? Personally I think they should be preserved for reasons of history, art, and architecture.

[ July 20, 2002: Message edited by: One of last of the sane ]</p>

07-20-2002, 06:57 AM

I don't think the National Trust usually does churches. They are a non-government organisation and depend a great deal on funding from their members and visitors. They are already pretty stretched and would lack the resources to take over most churches withour government funding.

Of course, we might arrive at the point where CofE priests become state employees doing "religious services" as a tourist attraction, rather like the tame Tibetan monks I saw chanting in a monastery in China (real China, not Tibet).

A lot of the less architecturally interesting churches have been sold off for conversion into houses for the trendy. No doubt this will continue.

Egoinos · 07-20-2002, 06:39 PM

Churches are generally kept up by the CoE or whatever church owns them, unless they are ruined and no longer in use, in which case English Heritage, or Scottish Heritage, takes them over. The National Trust does more in the line of stately homes and things like that.

In that article, it said that critics of the heresy trials were naming the theological panel as "witch hunter generals". Sorry to be pedantic, but it should be witch finder generals.

[Edited to add: My guess is, if Rowan Williams becomes the new Archbishop of Canterbury, all this may not occur, or the terms of what is "heretical" may be made very lax indeed. He's not known for being a conservative, after all. It is possible they are introducing this partly to stop people constantly laughing at the CoE for accepting anybody as a priest, but also to placate the Episcopal church in Africa, and other regions, where they are notably more conservative, and oppose "liberal" measures such as the consecration of female bishops.]

--Egoinos--

[ July 20, 2002: Message edited by: Egoinos ]</p>

Sephiroth · 07-20-2002, 07:29 PM

What's the penalty of being convicted of heresy?

If it's just excommunication then I don't have a real problem with it since it is their religion, if it's a prison sentence (or even a fine) then that's ludicrous.

fando · 07-21-2002, 04:29 AM

As long as they're being medieval about it, I say that the punishment should fit the accusation. Burn the heretics at the stake!

Triple Six · 07-21-2002, 04:16 PM

It's silly but only because the religion itself is. Within the confines of the religion itself it is a perfectly logical thing to do and I can't condemn them for doing what is really an internal disciplinary matter when all the hype is cut away. Put it this way, would you welcome fervent god botherers working as paid employees of an organisation promoting atheism, publically questioning the aims of the organisation?

If they were using the law against the general public then it would be a problem but they are not.

07-20-2002, 03:53 AM	#1
missus_gumby Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: UK Posts: 1,898	UK state religion shoots self in foot The Church of England openly admit there is a spiraling decline in religious belief and church attendance. One wonders if their <a href="http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/07/20/nheres20.xml&sSheet=/news/2002/07/20/ixhome.html" target="_blank">giant stride back to the dark ages</a> will achieve the desired effect! Every now and then the British press report on atheist clergy who 'out' themselves, and now it looks as though the church is trying to do something about it. It seems to me they are shooting themselves in the foot by bringing back trials for heresy. The more the merrier I say - they couldn't be helping the decline in religious belief over here any more if they did it on purpose! It's almost as if the upper echelons of the church of England are going out on the streets, getting down on their knees, and begging the population to become non-religious. Is it just me, or does anyone else find trials for heresy, here in the 21st century, utterly laughable? Martin

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-20-2002, 04:20 AM	#2
TooBad Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Oblivion, UK Posts: 152	Ludicrous.

07-20-2002, 04:49 AM	#3
Born Free Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Scotland Posts: 4,177	Absolutely Martin and I don't think it will ever happen, tell you what if it does though, I'll get on a train go wherever it's happened and protest...loudly.

07-20-2002, 05:11 AM	#4
missus_gumby Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: UK Posts: 1,898	Alli, the church of England are desparate. They have started selling the family jewels to stave off financial ruin, and at the same time they are sucking in millions in tax payer revenue to keep hundreds of their buildings repaired, and even deliberately manipulating <a href="http://www.secularism.org.uk/nss/figuring.htm" target="_blank">church attendance figures</a> to try and make themselves look legitimate. What they hope to achieve by alienating (an as yet unknown percentage of) their front-line clergy, and their associated congregations, is beyond my comprehension. Not that I'm against their continued decline of course! I don't think I would go and protest a heresy trial, should it occur. I am all for letting the established church dig it's own grave, anyway, I don't think they would be calling for atheist vicars to be burnt at the stake! Or would they? Martin

07-20-2002, 06:43 AM	#5
One of the last sane Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: hereabouts Posts: 734	Methinks they are just doing it to try to generate some publicity. Many British churches are very interesting buildings though. Atheist though I am, I enjoyed exploring them while I was there. Does the National Trust (if I have that name right) get involved in preservation of old churches? Personally I think they should be preserved for reasons of history, art, and architecture. [ July 20, 2002: Message edited by: One of last of the sane ]</p>

07-20-2002, 06:57 AM	#6
DMB Guest Posts: n/a	I don't think the National Trust usually does churches. They are a non-government organisation and depend a great deal on funding from their members and visitors. They are already pretty stretched and would lack the resources to take over most churches withour government funding. Of course, we might arrive at the point where CofE priests become state employees doing "religious services" as a tourist attraction, rather like the tame Tibetan monks I saw chanting in a monastery in China (real China, not Tibet). A lot of the less architecturally interesting churches have been sold off for conversion into houses for the trendy. No doubt this will continue.

07-20-2002, 06:39 PM	#7
Egoinos Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Edinburgh Posts: 423	Churches are generally kept up by the CoE or whatever church owns them, unless they are ruined and no longer in use, in which case English Heritage, or Scottish Heritage, takes them over. The National Trust does more in the line of stately homes and things like that. In that article, it said that critics of the heresy trials were naming the theological panel as "witch hunter generals". Sorry to be pedantic, but it should be witch finder generals. [Edited to add: My guess is, if Rowan Williams becomes the new Archbishop of Canterbury, all this may not occur, or the terms of what is "heretical" may be made very lax indeed. He's not known for being a conservative, after all. It is possible they are introducing this partly to stop people constantly laughing at the CoE for accepting anybody as a priest, but also to placate the Episcopal church in Africa, and other regions, where they are notably more conservative, and oppose "liberal" measures such as the consecration of female bishops.] --Egoinos-- [ July 20, 2002: Message edited by: Egoinos ]</p>

07-20-2002, 07:29 PM	#8
Sephiroth Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 625	What's the penalty of being convicted of heresy? If it's just excommunication then I don't have a real problem with it since it is their religion, if it's a prison sentence (or even a fine) then that's ludicrous.

07-21-2002, 04:29 AM	#9
fando Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Los Angeles Area Posts: 1,372	As long as they're being medieval about it, I say that the punishment should fit the accusation. Burn the heretics at the stake!

07-21-2002, 04:16 PM	#10
Triple Six Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: formerly Lae, Papua New Guinea Posts: 1,867	It's silly but only because the religion itself is. Within the confines of the religion itself it is a perfectly logical thing to do and I can't condemn them for doing what is really an internal disciplinary matter when all the hype is cut away. Put it this way, would you welcome fervent god botherers working as paid employees of an organisation promoting atheism, publically questioning the aims of the organisation? If they were using the law against the general public then it would be a problem but they are not.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.