Wednesday, January 17, 2007

It’s official: God is off the EU agenda

The forces of secularism seem to have prevailed, now that the new president of the European Parliament, Hans-Gert Poettering, has declared that he ‘will no longer press for a reference to God in the revised EU constitution’. Boris Johnson’s revived Roman Empire is not once again to be ‘Holy’ in any sense,

The ditching of God is, of course, always a concern, but so is the implicit declaration here that there is a ‘revised EU constitution’. This comes as no surprise to Cranmer; it is typical of the EU modus operandi that the people would be consulted and their voice completely ignored. Instead of a focus on the EU’s ‘Christian roots’, the key priority now will be ‘dialogue between cultures’, ie, between Christianity and Islam.

Cranmer reported last year on Chancellor Merkel’s visit to the Pope, and her desire to revisit the God clause in a re-drafted constitution. She said: ‘We need a European identity in the form of a constitutional treaty and I think it should be connected to Christianity and God, as Christianity has forged Europe in a decisive way.’ Poettering was asked by journalists if he would press for a reference to God or Christianity to be introduced in a new version of the EU constitution, and he responded: ‘As a president, I can't do it… As chairman of the EPP-ED group in the European Parliament, I favoured the mentioning of Christian values in a constitution but now I have to represent a majority position.’

Is this really now the function of a politician, to ‘represent a majority position’ on every facet of existence? Is there no leadership, no swimming against the tide, no confrontation with the spirit of the age? The ‘majority position’ within the EU is to sustain the erosion of a sense of nationhood, and an assessment of the history of Christianity illustrates why the EU should seek to marginalise the faith. Christianity amounts to a system of beliefs and values at the centre of which is a belief in God. Outwardly, this is demonstrated in worship and denominational adherence, but there remains a uniformity of syncretism which has permitted these denominations to develop particular characteristics in accordance with prevailing custom and national culture. A central feature of Christianity has been its association, to a lesser or greater degree, with national culture, and to a lesser or greater degree, with the national spirit.

In the United Kingdom, the Church developed in tandem with national institutions, becoming part of the body politic, playing an active role in government - a position which is enshrined in various constitutional acts, sustained to this day. To weaken or eradicate the role of the national church is to undermine the system of government and lessen the identity of the nation state. Since the signing of the Treaty of Rome, the concept of human rights has become central to Community law, covering virtually every area allegedly vulnerable to so-called discrimination. Such a humanist (in the modern sense) agenda is fundamentally antithetical to any notion of Christian values, and (since Community law is supreme) it must necessarily override national traditions and moral values. The unequivocal support which both the Roman Catholic and the Church of England have given the EU now appears somewhat misguided.

By EU rules, Christian teaching in so many areas is discriminatory; indeed, the very foundation of the UK’s Protestant settlement is fundamentally so. There may be a temporary derogation, but ultimately there may not be coexistence with the EU’s Marxist programme of soviet uniformity.

So ‘God’ is out. But Cranmer wonders if The Almighty was ever consulted on whether or not he wanted any mention in the ‘Constitution for Europe’ in the first place. What, after all, hath Jerusalem to do with Brussels?

18 Comments:

Anonymous Voyager said...

The role of Speaker in certain European Parliaments is most strange. It is almost party political in a way alien in Britain - then again in the USA it is also party partisan.

The EU should recall that God enjoys higher affinity and affiliation in Europe than any secular institution

17 January 2007 at 07:44  
Blogger shergar said...

Take heart, readers. At least we know we're all doomed. I, for one, welcome our new Muslim overlords.

17 January 2007 at 09:48  
Anonymous Voyager said...

I, for one, welcome our new Muslim overlords..

There are not many of them so your submission will be most welcome I am sure

17 January 2007 at 09:50  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ironic.. That God/Religion & Politics/War have been intertwined intricately in history for as long as one can remember..

17 January 2007 at 12:10  
Anonymous Ulster Man said...

Tejus - isn't that because that's the stuiff of life?! What you're saying is that human nature causes conflict. No great revelation there!!

I don't know what's going on in the EU, and who will win. But the whole church vs state argument is as old as Christianity itself. It's nothing new. It's just on a bigger scale than the old nation-state conflicts with religion - it's now whole continents.

17 January 2007 at 13:13  
Anonymous Voyager said...

But the whole church vs state argument is as old as Christianity itself

The Roman Emperor found a means to bestow the title of Pontifex Maximus on his Bishop in Rome to fuse the two..........

17 January 2007 at 13:29  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am delighted that they are trying to openly revive the constitution, rather than continue with its back door introduction.

We are still due a referendum......

17 January 2007 at 14:43  
Anonymous Ulster Man said...

No, Serf, not a hope in hell. It'll be called a constitutional treaty, which parliament can ratify without a problem. It's just 'tweaking' the Rome treaty, that's all!!

17 January 2007 at 15:04  
Anonymous Never Surrender said... said...

The Roman Emperor found a means to bestow the title of Pontifex Maximus on his Bishop in Rome to fuse the two..........


The British Monarch found a means to retain the title of “Defender of the Faith” bestowed on them by the Bishop in Rome..........

GBTP

17 January 2007 at 17:55  
Anonymous Voyager said...

The British Monarch found a means to retain the title of “Defender of the Faith” bestowed on them by the Bishop in Rome...

Not so......it was removed by The Pope and Parliament voted to bestow it anew

The difference however was that Pontifex Maximus had nothing to do with the Christian Church and everything to do with Pagan Rome

17 January 2007 at 20:27  
Anonymous never surrender said...

You may play semantics if you wish but the fact remains the title was granted by Pope Leo X to a King of England and it is still in use today, nearly 500 years later. Dissembling will not conceal the fact that Fidei defensor is a Catholic bestowed honour, Parliament has no more authority to grant such a mark of distinction than it has to forgive sin.

GBTP

17 January 2007 at 22:55  
Anonymous Colin said...

"..The Almighty was ever consulted on whether or not he wanted any mention in the ‘Constitution for Europe’"

I am sure that he was consulted because there never was or is a shortage of people, commonly called priests, making a living by claiming to know the wishes and thoughts of the Gods. For example, Mrs. Merkel claimed today in her speech at the EU parliament that almighty history (a secular God) told her that Europe needs a constitution. And here we go again. After all, who needs liberties if politicians need more power.

18 January 2007 at 00:17  
Anonymous Voyager said...

the title was granted by Pope Leo X to a King of England

and revoked by Pope Paul III for unexplained reasons.

Parliament declared the King of England, Edward VI and his Successors "Defender of Faith" or Fidei Defensor in 1544.

We do not recognise The Pope in England and certainly not his authority in any matters pertaining to this country

18 January 2007 at 05:27  
Anonymous Bob said...

Pope Paul III revoked the title when Henry VIII declared himself head of the Church of England. The reason may not have been explained but it was plain to be seen.

It is not wholly accurate to say that England does not recognise the Pope, given that he is recognised as a sovereign head of state and diplomatic relations are established between the UK and the Holy See. Furthermore the Pope appoints the Catholic bishops in England and Wales, as well as in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and indeed throughout the world. It would be more accurate to say that the Pope is not recognised by a certain section, perhaps the majority, of the people of England, but certainly not all.

18 January 2007 at 09:10  
Anonymous Voyager said...

and diplomatic relations are established between the UK and the Holy See

England had diplomatic relations with The Holy See 1479-1534 and resumed them in 1914 but it was not until 1982 that full ambassadorial relations were restored.........and now the Embassy in The Vatican State is to be abandoned and matters handled from the British embassy in Rome

18 January 2007 at 10:59  
Anonymous bob said...

The embassy may be abandoned but diplomatic relations will not. I don't think the Holy See has any plans to abandon the nunciature in London.

18 January 2007 at 11:28  
Anonymous Paul Linford said...

Isn't this all to do with the eventual accession of Turkey?

18 January 2007 at 11:33  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Isn't this all to do with the eventual accession of Turkey?

Won't be necessary - according to Die Welt Mr Erdogan is mentioning Turkey's intention to invade Iraq and have a go at the Kurds.

I don't know how Mr Verheugen will sweep that transgression under the carpet

18 January 2007 at 11:50  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older