It is hard to find any reaction to Rowan Williams' lecture in today's media that is not based on over-reaction and misinformation, but there was a voice of sanity to be found on the letters page of today's Times:
"Sir,
As one who was present at the lecture, I have been astonished at the wholly inaccurate coverage of the measured and thoughtful contribution that Dr Williams has brought to bear on the current debate.
Religious organisations are no different from any other members’ club or voluntary association. They have their own rules of conduct and process to which their adherents sign up when they join, and which are mutually binding as a matter of quasi-contract. The secular courts are required, when necessary, to enforce these internal regulations.
While reluctant to engage with matters of doctrine, the courts do so when necessary but have traditionally shown deference to the internal governing instruments of individual faith communities, provided they do not offend the law of the land. There is nothing novel in what Dr Williams is suggesting. For centuries Britain has shown toleration to religious minorities and afforded accommodations in laws of general application. Such is the mainstay of a liberal democracy in a plural state.
Professor Mark Hill
Centre for Law and Religion
Cardiff University"
For more reasoned comment see Paul Trathen's blog on the issue by clicking here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Nickel Creek - Reasons Why.
No comments:
Post a Comment