How would you feel if, before every day at work, you were expected to participate in a collective act of talking to an unknown, unseen, mythical being, and if this time-consuming act never ever resulted in any demonstrable, substantive change in anything? Personally, I might think it was a waste of time.
If, over time, this act no longer was expected of me, but the ceremony was still continued for the few who wanted to get there early to participate, I might ask: “Why does the company still do this? Surely, those that want to can do it in their own time. Why does the company still support it in the way that it does? Surely, you hard-nosed executives can see that it is achieving nothing?”
I wouldn’t be overly impressed if the answer I received was: “These prayers are an important symbol of the establishment of religion in this company which is valued both by those of faith and those of none.” And I would definitely be thinking: “But the establishment of religion in this company was an historical accident brought about by a lecherous and murderous monarch who was prepared to do anything to get a divorce settlement. The way religion was established in the company certainly didn’t spring from worthy or ideal motives.”
I agree, symbols can be important, but usually only if they are symbolic of something real and important. Symbols of illusions are merely empty.
Secular members of the House of Lords have urged that the prayers that precede sessions in the Lords should be scrapped. Lord Avebury, Lord Desai, Lord McIntosh of Haringey, Lord Taverne and Baroness Turner of Camden have all have said they would prefer no replacement at all to the prayers. All but one, Lord Avebury, said they would be prepared to accept an alternative of a short period of silence before sessions, as in the Northern Ireland Assembly – indeed, Lord McIntosh prefers that option.
The peers’ letter followed a Parliamentary question tabled by Lord Rana raising the possibility of Christian prayers at the beginning of House of Lords sessions being replaced by a “multi-faith” version. Of course, a multi-faith version would exclude those people of no faith. The issue is not the content of the prayers, but the publicly enshrined act of praying itself as part of the working day.
Why can’t the honourable members just get on with their work? Everybody else does - without time for prayer (multi-faith or otherwise), and without collective silence.
A Church of England spokesman argued for the status quo: “Prayers in both Houses are also a symbol of the establishment of the Church of England, the importance of which the Government has repeatedly stressed as something valued by people of all faiths and none.” But then, he would say that, wouldn’t he?
And the people who are unquestioningly content to allow the prayers to continue during work time, may feel very differently if worktime prayers were introduced at their place of work, or if their participation in something equally quaint or symbolic (Morris Dancing?) was suddenly encouraged.
(Source: National Secular Society)
Support UK Separation of Church and State on Facebook.
[polldaddy poll=1120498]
I think I might like having a regular morris dancing session in the work place. Its exercise, bonding, and history all in one
Its also a strange ritual for non-British television companies to show on their “aren’t foreign people funny” programmes.
But in all seriousness, either allow prayer (or quiet contenmplation) time in all workplaces, or scrap it in the Lords.
Wow! I wonder if they pray before session in the Canadian parliament. If they did, it would piss me off.
Maybe I will find out and raise an issue of it, as you have with England.
Lorena
Interesting. I know they do in Australia. I would guess they do in the US. I would be curious to know if they do in Canada.
[...] post of Poet Laureate is an unnecessary anachronism. In some ways, like starting the day in Parliament with prayers, having an official compose art for public occasions, reflects values from a different age in a [...]