MISREPRESENTING SECULARISM

This letter appears in today's Leicester Mercury:

Misrepresenting secularism

Bishop Tim (First Person, February 18 ) suggests that this is an opportunity to "make those who are secular feel at home".

I would welcome that: for I did not feel welcome when he kept me from speaking in the civic service as chaplain to the Lord Mayor, nor when he wrote in these pages that my beliefs were a "tale told by an idiot", nor when the Lord Mayor, Lady Mayoress and I found ourselves listening to a psalm in which the psalmist grieves about "the ungodly" prospering but is reassured knowing that they will "consume: perish and come to a fearful end!".

I do not feel welcome when he insinuates that I would get rid of spires, churches, gurdwaras and temples – he did this several years ago in correspondence over setting up the Samworth Academy – he has had ample time to learn otherwise.

And as for wanting "a secular state from which all signs of human believing have been removed" – it is very difficult to engage with fantasies.

These may be personal matters, but when we come to Baroness Warsi's Vatican Speech, we are getting to serious issues important to us all.

We have a senior figure in our government who seems not to have the first idea of political and religious history, who lacks breadth of vision, who is dangerously intoxicated and naively enthusiastic.

Her smearing and demonising of secularism is frighteningly like the demonising of Islam that she and I would both condemn – it is never plain "secularism", but always "militant and deeply intolerant secularism", "aggressive secularism imposed by stealth", "totalitarian secularism that denies people the right to religious identity", "secularism that attempts to remove all trace of religion from culture, history and public discourse".

How did she get these ideas? Not by growing up in Leicester.Humanists and secularists do not ask people to give up or diminish their faith or dumb down – we ask them to look more deeply into them and share what they can with us.

We fully recognise that religion has a role to play and that it is central to the lives of many – we have always defended and will always defend freedom of religion.

We share with the Pope the view that "the world of secular rationality and the world of religious belief... need one another and should not be afraid to enter into a profound and ongoing dialogue, for the good of our civilisation".

We share with caliph Ali ibn Abu Talib: "Every man is your brother... either your brother in faith or your brother in humanity."

We share with Sayeeda Warsi the view that "the cultures we've created, the values we hold and the things we fight for stem from something we've argued over, dissented from, discussed and built up" – but does she have any idea what these things are? We share humanity with everyone.

Allan Hayes, Leicester Secular Society

It's ironic that, when I read Allan's letter on the Mercury website, two of the three "Ads by Google" listed immediately below it were: "How to convert to Islam" (become a Muslim with Live Help chat) and "Loft Conversion Experts".

COMPULSORY WORSHIP IS WHAT WE ARE OPPOSED TO

This letter appears in today's Leicester Mercury:

Compulsory worship is what we are opposed to

The Bishop of Leicester writes that "No-one is forced to worship against their own conscience" ("This is not the time to build a secular state", First Person, February 18).

He appears to overlook the fact that the Church of England lobbied for (and continues to oppose any changes to) the current law requiring acts of collective worship in state schools, the majority of which, in any given school term, should be "wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character".

The law gives parents the right to have a child excused from worship, but no such rights are recognised for school pupils, even those above school-leaving age.

Leicester Secular Society has been campaigning against this meaningless concept of "compulsory worship" for decades, but to date the Bishop, and his colleagues in the House of Lords, have strongly opposed allowing children to follow their conscience. I hope the Bishop's words mark a change of policy by the Church of England.At present the requirement for Christian worship is divisive, making it more difficult for schools to promote a cohesive community.

As to "it raises the question, what would a secular culture look like?", I would suggest that he looks at a the secular government of the USA where all forms of religion are much stronger than in the UK.

Secularists can be of all faiths and none, and some work to help preserve local churches. Secularists don't want to demolish places of worship any more than they would want to demolish golf club houses.

Secularists want to protect the freedom to practise religion (or not) and to pray, including in public. What we do object to is prayer being involved with the process of government, which should be completely agnostic with regard to religion.

John Catt, Loughborough

STAFF BRIEFING AT BELVOIR ICU, BRADGATE MENTAL HEALTH UNIT

At Bradgate Mental Health Unit, Glenfield Hospital this afternoon, promoting the NHS Staff Multi-Faith Resource that Leicester Council of Faiths has helped produce for Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust (LPT).

I'm here with Abida Hussain, Equality and Human Rights Officer in the Integrated Equality Service for LPT and the city and county Primary Care Trust (PCT) cluster, as we continue the process of briefing those most likely to use this resource.

We’re here specifically to meet ward staff in the Belvoir Intensive Care Unit. This is the second time we've come to Belvoir ICU. On our first visit to the Bradgate Mental Health Unit (see blog entry for Friday 13 January) we were booked to visit five wards, including Belvoir ICU (and Beaumont Ward, for that matter) in one afternoon. However, there had been some miscommunication and our visit wasn't in Belvoir ICU's diary, so we couldn't get staff together and deliver the briefing that day. Today we pop in an hour before our visit proper (scheduled at 1400) just to make sure that the briefing is in the  diary this time: it isn't. Rather than reschedule again, we agree to come back at 1400, even if only to speak to a couple of staff members.

After half an hour or so spent in the Involvement Centre, we come back to Belvoir ICU, where we deliver our briefing to three members of staff, who receive us warmly and listen to the briefing with interest.

INVOLVEMENT CENTRE AT BRADGATE MENTAL HEALTH UNIT

Abida Hussain and I fetch up at the Bradgate Mental Health Unit, Glenfield Hospital an hour or so before our appointment at the Belvoir Intensive Care Unit, where we're scheduled to deliver one of our briefings on the NHS Staff Multi-Faith Resource this afternoon.

This is the second time we've been booked to visit Belvoir ICU. On our first visit (13 January) there had been some miscommunication and our visit hadn't been entered in the ward diary, so we couldn't deliver the briefing. We thought we should call in early this time, to make sure that we're in the diary for today. We're not. Faced with rescheduling again, we decide to come back at 1400, the time we'd booked, even if it means we'll only be speaking to a couple of staff members today.

In the meantime, we head for the Involvement Centre, to get a coffee and kill some time till our meeting at Belvoir ICU. This turns out to be serendipitous. On entering the Involvement Centre, I'm pleased to see Grant Paton (photo above, at his post), whom I've known for years now, from my time at Network for Change, who is volunteering here. He sits with us and talks about the Involvement Centre, with lots of enthusiasm. We're joined by Louise Maine, member of staff in charge of the centre. Over the next 20 minutes or so, we agree that we'll come in and do one of our briefings on the NHS Staff Multi-Faith Resource for the volunteers in the Involvement Centre (actually, two such sessions in the next few weeks). We also float the possibility of us providing briefings for the groups and organsiations who support the Involvement Centre, such as Genesis and LAMPdirect.

I promised Grant that I'd big up the Involvement Centre on the blog, so here it is:

Who is the Involvement Centre for? Everyone.

What is it? A place where people can meet and work in partnership with LPT to improve services.

Where is it? At the Bradgate Unit site.

Why have one? Because service users, carers and local groups asked for an involvement centre.

What's in it? Coffee shop, desk space, meeting tables, wi-fi access, information on services and all issues that people may want to know about who are seeking care and treatment.

Who will be there? Volunteers, service users, carers, local groups.

What will it offer? PALS (Patients Advice and Liaison Services), meet the manager, gather people's thoughts and opinions.

Do I have to go to the centre? It's up to you. It's not a day care centre or a drop in centre. It's only the second in the country.

Yes, but what does it do?

• it provides a dedicated space where the service user and carer groups can book space, meet, network and use shared facilities.
• it will support commissioned service user and carer groups to develop in-reach and out-reach services
• it will support the development of social enterprise groups and provide opportunities to network
• recruit people to become Foundation Trust Members
• recruit people to become volunteers
• offer opportunities for people to engage in arts and sports
• provide access to Patients Advice and Liaison Services
• provide access to Welfare Rights and benefits services
• provide access to Spiritual and Pastoral Care services
• provide access to advocacy services
• provide access to employment facilitators
• provide information on local groups, services, education, employment
• provide information for people's health and well-being and host "Let's Talk About Health" events
• signposting people to available groups and support that may need to be language, faith, age, culture and sexuality specific
• work with service users and carers to develop and undertake questionnaires, surveys and research projects which will serve to improve care services
• provide a variety of ways for people to express their views, e.g. electronic, 1-1, meetings, groups, advocates, PALS, "Listening and Working Together" events

LPT SPIRITUAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT TOOL

At a meeting with members of the Spiritual and Pastoral Care Team for Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust (LPT) this morning, I'm given a copy of their Spiritual Needs Assessment Tool, recently developed for use with patients in ward settings. It's a fairly simple and straightforward questionnaire, which I've copied out below.

Spiritual and Pastoral Care

Chaplains from the Spiritual and Pastoral Care Team are available to visit on wards to provide spiritual and pastoral care for those of any faith or none. You do not need to be religious to use our service.

If you would like support from the team please could you fill in the form and return to use. Thank you. [Then, after space for Name, Ward and Date]:

1. Do you follow any faith or religion?
2. If so, which one?
3. Do you wish to practise whilst in hospital? (If "No", go to Q4)
4. What do you need to do this?
5. Would you like pastoral or spiritual support from the team?
6. Is there anything that gives you a sense of meaning or purpose?
7. What are the sources of hope, strength, comfort and peace for you?
8. What keeps you going in difficult times?
9. What or who helps you most when you feel anxious or need help?
10. What are your fears about the future?
11. Have you had any major losses recently?

BRIEFING LPT'S SPIRITUAL & PASTORAL CARE TEAM

I'm at the Chaplaincy Centre, Daisy Peake Building at The Towers on Gipsy Lane this morning with Abida Hussain, Equality and Human Rights Officer, Integrated Equality Service, Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust (LPT).

We're briefing members of the Spiritual and Pastoral Care Team on the NHS Staff Multi-Faith Resource. Four of their six-member team are here this morning:

• Revd Sally Martin, Lead Chaplain;
• Revd Frances Ballantyne (no relation), Christian Chaplain who covers Ashby, Coalville, Hinckley and Loughborough community hospitals as well as one afternoon per week at the Bradgate Unit;
• Revd Rowenna Bass, Christian Chaplain who covers Lutterworth, Market Harborough, Melton Mowbray, Oakham community hospitals;
• Imam Fazlur Diwan, Muslim Chaplain who covers the Bradgate Unit, Arnold Lodge, and also works with Community Teams.

Sally was helpful in the development of the resource, which contains appropriate information about the services of the Spiritual and Pastoral Care Team.

Abida and I have done a number of briefings on the resource to ward staff at various hospitals over the past few months (see blog entries passim). These tend to be brief (though, hopefully not rushed), catching staff at the times of handover between shifts. This morning, it's good to be able to speak longer and to discuss the content and use of the resource in greater depth.

We also talk about the Prayer Room at Lakeside, LPT’s new company headquarters. I offer a copy of the dossier compiled by Rosemarie Fitton when we were working with Highcross on their Prayer Room, so that LPT can benefit from its collection of examples of good (and bad) practice, not only for this facility at Lakeside, but for Prayer Rooms operating at its other sites.

We discuss the proposed Staff Inter-Faith Forum, which is still in embryonic form. We talk about how use of social media (particularly podcasting) can play its part in making this project a success.

IN DEFENCE OF SECULARISM

This letter appears in today's Leicester Mercury:

In defence of secularism

Bishop Tim Stevens worries about the erosion of Christianity from public life and suggests that secularism – the separation of the church and state – threatens the whole fabric of the church. However, one only has to take a look across the pond to America to realise that a secular constitution will not impede the practice of religion, in fact, quite the reverse!

As the bishop mentions in his article, the ruling on council prayers will not prohibit groups of people from praying before council meetings, if they so wish. The ruling just upholds the right of individuals in office not to be forced to take part in religious practices. Personally, I would not dream of forcing my own ideology upon others.

I suspect that the real reason for advocating keeping the church and state together is that this arrangement best suits the interests of the church, as the religious customs of the state help to promote the church's message and give it credibility it would otherwise not enjoy.

The bishop's position is, therefore, not motivated out of fairness for other religions and beliefs but purely out of interest for his own church.

It is true that the constitutional arrangement between church and state is a long established part of our history. However, so was public hanging. Simply because an arrangement has been present for centuries does not mean it is fit for the 21st century.

Secularism is not about getting rid of Christianity. In fact, secularism serves to protect all religions equally and to defend the right of people to practise whatever faith/belief they wish. What secularists are against are the privileges the church enjoys, which are purely down to an accident of history, rather than anything else.

Richard Hopper, Braunstone

TAKE THE TRAIN, BISHOP!

This letter appears in today's Leicester Mercury:

Take the train, Bishop!

I refer to the article by the Bishop of Leicester, "This is not the time to build a secular state" (First Person, February 18) in which he asks, "what would a secular state look like?"

In fact, if he takes the train from St Pancras to Paris he will be in one, for France is a secular state. Otherwise he can travel to Mexico or Turkey, which are both countries with serious problems, but in the latter case are partly caused by a religious party trying to get its hands on the reins of government.

However, instead of taking a trip on Eurostar, he paints a fantasy-picture of what he thinks life would be like.

In fact, his statement that there would be "no great public services" really is nonsense.

The churches can have their services as much as they wish, except that they should stand on their own two feet and not expect the rest of us to support their bishops in the House of Lords, their subsidised chaplains in the armed forces and in hospitals (costing the taxpayer nearly £30 million a year).

He sees cathedrals, churches, gurdwaras and mosques being razed to the ground.

Perhaps he is thinking of the period of the formation of his own schismatic church, which destroyed and plundered the great monastery buildings, such as Leicester Abbey at the time of the Reformation.

He falls back on the statement that the CofE has shaped and coloured our national life; however that is not an unqualified good. Can he not see that the non CofE members of Bideford Council may find it insulting to have their time wasted by having to kowtow to prayers from a religion to which they do not subscribe? He should take the Eurostar.

Michael Gerard, president, Leicester Secular Society

CREATING THE CONDITIONS FOR INTEGRATION

A statement to the House of Commons today, by the Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government:

I am today publishing “Creating the Conditions for Integration”, the Government’s approach to enabling and encouraging integration in communities throughout England.

“Creating the Conditions” sets out how integration is achieved when neighbourhoods, families and individuals come together on issues that matter to them. It is based around five key factors:

I. Common ground—Shared aspirations and values, and a focus on what we have in common rather than on difference

II. Responsibility—Promoting a strong sense of mutual commitment and obligation.

III. Social mobility—People able to realise their potential to get on in life.

IV. Participation and empowerment—People have the opportunities to take part and take decisions in local and national life.

V. Challenge to intolerance and extremism—A robust response to threats which deepen division and increase tensions. 

Most people from different backgrounds get on well together, feel they belong to their neighbourhood and to this country, and have a sense of pride in the place where they live, but challenges remain in particular places. Building a more integrated society requires collective action across a wide range of issues, at national and local levels, by public bodies, private companies, voluntary and community organisations and, above all, communities and individuals. “Creating the Conditions” sets out the Government’s views and our role in this process. 

We recognise that integration is a vital local issue. We will ensure that the integration benefits of national programmes and projects are recognised and supported. All Government Departments have an important role in tackling barriers to integration, in particular those relating to long-term social and economic challenges.

Beyond this, integration requires a local response and we strongly encourage local partners such as local authorities, police forces and other statutory bodies to work together to drive action and to learn from each other. To support this we will use tools such as the Localism Act 2011 to give people the power to come together to take action. We will seek opportunities to support projects that are sustainable through community or business support and which exemplify positive activities or pioneer new approaches. We are committed to outflanking and challenging extremism and intolerance and we will take the necessary action to do so.

Together, these are fundamental changes to how Government Departments and the rest of the public sector work in this area. This approach will make integration the everyday business of public services, the private sector and wider civic society, while ensuring local responsibility and the opportunity for everyone to contribute.

THE ROLE OF CHURCH SCHOOLS

This letter appears in today's Leicester Mercury:

The role of church schools

There are a number of misleading ideas in Allan Hayes' letter "A divided society looms" (Mailbox, February 13).

Contrary to the implication of the letter, most Church of England schools do not "select pupils by their religion" and have very inclusive admission policies which are open to people of any religion or none. What is on offer is a Christian ethos in terms of the values and practices of the school and the approach to education.

This, however, is not exceptional. There is no such thing as a "neutral" school in terms of ethos and a secular-humanist outlook is just as much a faith stance as a religious one.

Of course, it would be natural for Anglicans to want the next generation to understand and experience the Christian faith at school, but the idea of the church "using schools more systematically to evangelise" is again misleading, and church schools would understand the distinction between education and ethos on the one hand and any attempt to convert on the other.

Finally, saying that "the church is offering to take the place of local authorities in providing assistance" and "looking to be the biggest 'provider' of education in the country" makes it sound as if the church has initiated big expansionist plans.

The fact is that the Government has introduced the academies initiative and the provision of the local authority in the county is diminishing fast.

Leicester diocese's board of education is very committed to support its 97 church schools, many of which are small and are very vulnerable in this new era. Consequently clustering with other schools is one way to ensure that they continue to have access to good quality services.

Sometimes it will make sense to partner with non church schools too.

However, the purpose of that would not be to make them become church schools, but to benefit from shared support and resources.

So I would have no quarrel with Allan Hayes' conclusion – "We must work together" – a commitment to the best education for our children demands that.

However, misleading statements about the nature and purpose of church schools is only going to increase division and defensiveness, when in reality they are as committed to an inclusive vision for education as anyone.

David Newman, Archdeacon of Loughborough and chair of the Board of Education for Leicester Diocese