[suppression of speech] the danger of platitudes

The Thunderdragon is a good chap and is no different to the rest of us in that he has chips on his shoulder as all political bloggers do, otherwise, we wouldn't be blogging.

One of his is about "organized religion":

This is why I find Archbishop Nichols comments so offensive. He is claiming that we need religion to be a moral person, and that religion is the basis of humanity. Well, it's not, Archbishop. Look at the atrocities that have been perpetrated in the name of religion.

Mistake 1: Lumping Christianity in with "religion" when the whole thrust of the former is towards service to our fellow man, not abstruse points of theology - check the Gospels for details of how to go about it.

Atrocities are committed by humans in the name of anything they'd like. I could commit an atrocity and say: "The Blogosphere is Great!" I could assassinate William McKinley and shout: "A Stalwart is now in Power!"

People claiming to speak for various causes and doing despicable things in the name of those causes is millennia old. The only way to verify is to go back to the original source material. The noble TD continues the theme in a more recent post:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has finally decided, in his esteemed medical opinion, that gays aren't necessarily ill … It is precisely this sort of thing that makes the Church and organised religion as a whole look entirely out of place in the 21st century, and proves to me that it is past its sell-by date.

He's right that it makes it "look" out of place, as I replied [abridged here]:

[People] like Williams, Runcie et al are, as I've posted many times before, not representing Christianity in the least. Their relativism and equivalence are sickening and they're doing all they can to drive a nail into the coffin of Christianity, coming out with inanities like this but remaining silent on important issues.

JC said "you'll know them by their fruits" and this is very much the case here. There is no such thing as "not necessarily ill". They either are or are not. He should have the courage of his convictions and stand or fall by them, instead of trying to be all things to all people.

Mistake 2: Confusing the leadership with the cause. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

...it is past its sell-by date...

Why? Because Williams said what he did or because Christianity, which is an ageless rock, unfazed by fads like gay rights and feminism, keeps on keeping on, giving succour and help in time of need? The message of Christianity, as distinct from the Official Church, is more relevant today than it ever has been, in the face of a quite serious assault on society's very basis.

This is far beyond a squabble between a couple of bloggers - it's a fundamental issue for the earth and will become increasingly so in the next few years.

ThunderDragon replied, in the comments section ...

Society has moved on from organised religion. It has tested it, and found it wanting. And now society is moving on.

Mistake 3: This is precisely how suppression begins. Someone claiming to speak for a cause utters inanities which annoy the majority. Blairite platitudes like "moving on", meaningless and devoid of stated purpose, designed and inserted into the debate to damage and instigate suppression by the majority are unquestioningly accepted by the mob and whilst the utterer of the inanities himself escapes, supporters of the cause are rounded up and neutralized.

My reply:

As Chesterton said: Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been left untried as too difficult.

You're completely right that the moment "organization" came into it, it ceased to be Christianity, which is a personal commitment and a joining together of like minded people, not unlike Blogpower. But elements from the other side have continually hijacked it and this is written about in Ephesians 6:12 with its reference to "high places".

You would be the first to concede, Chris, that Brown and Blair are not good leaders. And yet that is how the Russians see the Brits. "You British" is how anything Brown says is viewed. Why then do you ascribe Christianity to its equally corrupt leadership? Do you think corruption is restricted to parliament?

As well as that, 194 of us, at last count, were up in arms about the suppression of freedom of speech by Alisha the Hutt. Yet this is precisely what "past the used by date" is taken as.

You were merely making a personal statement but that's not how it is being taken in a highly charged climate where the essential humanitarian message of Christianity itself is under duress from high quarters, e.g. the William and Mary Cross affair, the renaming of Christmas and so on.

Or are you condoning the suppression of the Christian message? Even Mr. Eugenides came to the defence over the W&M issue [because he recognized here the danger of allowing the suppression of a point of view - that it is the thin edge of the wedge, particularly in these uncertain times.]

Bolt's Man for all Seasons has More saying to Richie Rich [paraphrased]: "And what will you do when you tear down all the defences and the Devil, cornered, turns on you? Where will your defences be then?"

[What do] you mean by "moved on"?

You really think society today has "moved on" with its drugs, underage sex, internet porn, road rage, restriction of civil liberties by Labour, [blatant greed, rampant materialism, the end of decency], destruction of the NHS, dumbing down of education, wastage of money [check Wat Tyler for this] and Tom Paine's statement that the country is no longer fit to be lived in?

Labour's policies make no sense when approached from the point of view of reason, fairness and justice. That is because they were not conceived from that point of view. The logic behind Labour's policies is simple and corrupt … Once you understand that, your sense of puzzlement at Labour's poll lead will evaporate and be replaced with a desire to find another homeland.

And all of this [has] coincided with the first turning away from, then mocking and now attempts at suppression of that which was once held dear.

If society has moved on from God, Queen and Country, support for our armed forces and the expectation of decency in public behaviour, then I don't particularly wish to be part of this Brave New Dystopia.