BIBLE, CULTURE AND IDENTITY

This letter is published in today's Leicester Mercury:

Bible, culture and identity 

Allan Hayes, of the Leicester Secular Society, expresses his concern that Mr Cameron's speech about Christianity allegedly misrepresents the past and "shows no understanding of the present" (Mailbox, December 26). 

He states that "it is all 'spin' in pursuance of a personal fantasy". He fears it might be to the detriment of those who "promote the shared values and sense of community". 

He criticises the Church for opposing democracy, extension of voting rights, election of MPs of other faiths, introduction of state education, access of women to universities and birth control. He seeks reassurance from members of the Church that "we are being dealt with fairly" and "we can move on". 

He objects to "a privileged" religion as promoter of values. He feels these should be based on "our common humanity". He criticises Mr Cameron for implying that only "Christianity will save us". 

He claims we are not a Christian country, but a country "that belongs to all who live here". 

And this is the problem. Many people living here do not regard it as such. I venture to suggest that this country belongs to all those who accept its culture. 

VS Naipaul, the Nobel prize winning author (born in Trinidad to Indian Parents) said: "A person can't say, 'I want the country. I want the laws and the protection, but I want to live in my own way.' I think if a man picks himself up and comes to another country he must meet it halfway. If he does not, it's wrong." 

A country can remain cohesive only if there is at least a residual sense of togetherness, in other words, patriotism. 

Olympic Games are an outward sign of patriotism but sometimes it is sad to see that sports people do not sing the National Anthem when representing their country. Ethnicity is not a bar to this idea. It should be noted that Soviet Union and Yugoslavia were truly multicultural societies. 

If one has a different view on multiculturalism one is immediately branded a racist so it thwarts reasoned discussion and results in discontent festering beneath the surface. That is counter productive. Mr Cameron's speech was marking the end of the 400th anniversary year for the King James Bible. He said he was not on a mission to convert the world. He said: "This book is important to understand the past and to shape the future of this country." He said that we should not be frightened to recognise this. 

We should note that: Firstly it "permeates every aspect of our culture (a high point of the English language) and heritage from everyday phrases to our greatest works of literature, music and art". It is noteworthy that many references to the Bible, in literature, culture or music, are not understood by young people. 

Secondly, the Bible has been a spur to action for people of faith throughout history in "politics, human rights, equality, constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy". 

Thirdly, "we are a Christian country and should not be afraid to say so whilst respecting other people's right to have or not have a religion". 

For the many shortcomings in British history Mr Cameron pointed out that debates in 1647 in the Church of St Mary the Virgin in Putney saw the first call for "One man and one vote" and demand for vesting of authority in Parliament rather than King. 

The Church built hospitals, created charities, fed the hungry, nursed the sick and looked after the poor to whom they gave shelter. 

Humanitarian crises are mainly supported by the Church charities.Mr Cameron stated that the Bible has helped to give Britain a set of values and morals which we should stand up for and defend. Moral neutrality was not an option. 

St Thomas Aquinas wrote: "It is through culture that man lives a truly human life." The words were repeated by John Paul II at the Unesco headquarters in 1980. No country should abandon its own culture or heritage since doing so eventually leads to its loss of identity. 

Michael Myers, Leicester