I can agree with much of what the author is saying about the Catholic Church. However, one thing is to complain about a car moving forward too slowly because the driver has his foot on the brakes too often , and another thing is to think that the problem would be solved if the car had no brakes at all.

Noel Preston writes: As we moved from sanctuary to sanctuary, there were reminders of martyrs who witnessed to costly discipleship, sometimes in spite of the established church, though such stories often went unmentioned by our guides. For instance, the official tour of Westminster Abbey made no mention of the ten twentieth century martyrs (including Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Father Kolbe and Martin Luther King) represented in a row of stone busts above the entrance to the Abbey.

Were Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Father Kolbe and Martin Luther King martyrs to their faith? If we look at the circumstances of their deaths that is in doubt. Both Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Father Kolbe were killed by the Nazis who were for the most part supported by German Christians. Martin Luther King was murdered for his activism in opposing segregation and the oppression of black people. Most white Christians in the south supported that oppression. Their religious beliefs may well have been a factor in their acts. However, that ignores the far more numerous communicants of the same faiths who supported those who murdered them.

Born and bred a Catholic, Hitler grew up in a religion and in a culture that was anti-semitic, and in persecuting Jews, he repeatedly proclaimed he was doing the "Lord's work."

In Mein Kampf.- "Therefore, I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the Lord's work."

Hitler said it again at a Nazi Christmas celebration in 1926: "Christ was the greatest early fighter in the battle against the world enemy, the Jews . . . The work that Christ started but could not finish, I--Adolf Hitler--will conclude."

In a Reichstag speech in 1938, Hitler again echoed the religious origins of his crusade. "I believe today that I am acting in the sense of the Almighty Creator. By warding off the Jews, I am fighting for the Lord's work."

Most German Christians accepted and supported Hitler.

continued

continued

F. G. Wood wrote “The Arrogance of Faith.”

Wood's argument rests on two fundamental precepts of Christianity. His first argument is that Christianity's devotion to evangelisation and belief that only Jesus is "the way, the truth, and the life" give Christians a superiority complex vis-à-vis non-Christians. "Christianity - from Richard the Lionhearted to Billy Graham - has almost certainly been responsible for more worldwide proselytizing and obtrusion than any religion in history. One can only wonder how many 'infidels' have been killed or enslaved in the name of Christ”

The second Christian precept that Wood says contributes to its racism is the Christian teaching on the Bible. Christianity's belief in the inerrancy of scriptures, according to Wood, gives the Christian blinders when it comes to dealing with people of other faiths. In the United States, Southern Protestants took the King James Version (a deeply flawed translation) and used it, along with their view of the Bible's inerrancy, to justify the holding of slaves. The King James Version rarely made distinctions between servants and slaves by often using the same English word in translating very different Greek and Aramaic words. But to the Southern slaveholder, grey areas in Biblical translations didn't matter. The slave owner would read Leviticus 25:44 "Both thy bondsmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you" and believe that God had ordained slavery. The Bible is the inerrant word of God himself. The Bible authorizes the enslavement of heathens. Africans are not Christian, therefore they are heathens. Therefore God must approve of enslaving the Africans.

After the Abolition of slavery most southern Christians continued their racist attitudes to support denying black people the vote and equal rights to education and public facilities.

Many white Christians supported the civil rights movement, but I think more supported the continuation of white dominance.

Christians emphasise the martyrdom of Christians, but many Christians ignore the martyrdom of others caused by Christian oppression. I think the number of Christian oppressors is far greater than the number of Christian martyrs.

"In my heart of hearts the question was never far away: what would the Nazarene think of all this?"

Since 'the Nazarene' -- for goodness' sake, why not just call him 'Jesus' like everyone else? -- was almost certainly a fictional character, you can presumably make up any kind of response you like on his behalf. But why stop there? Why not ask what would Gandalf have thought of it? Or Gulliver? Or Gilgamesh? You're just as likely to get a meaningful answer.

An interesting article. I hope that the end of Christendom and the secularisation of society will ultimately prove beneficial both for society and for Christianity, but there’s no doubt it is a difficult transition, especially for the more traditional denominations.

David F

You make some good points and I agree with much of what you say, but I’ll take issue with some of it. You say that Bonhoeffer, King etc. do not qualify as martyrs because their persecutors and opponents included many Christians, and because their message was ostensibly more political than religious.

You rightly recall Christianity’s shameful record of persecuting other faiths. Sadly, it also persecutes its own. Since about the fifth century many (perhaps most) of the people the churches have called martyrs have been killed by fellow-Christians, and often for political reasons. Bonhoeffer is no less entitled to be called a martyr than Edward the Martyr, Joan of Arc, Thomas Moore, Becket and Cranmer, and a host of others.

And Jesus was a Jew crucified by secular Roman authorities because he was perceived as a political threat.

I believe that Christianity does not belong in the machinery of power, which is why the end of Christendom is ultimately to be welcomed.

John J

Far more historians think that Jesus existed, than think he was invented - including those of faiths other than Christianity, or no faith at all. It is by far the most simple and logical explanation for the accounts we have of Jesus’ life and death.

But even if you were right, and Jesus was only a literary character, it doesn’t mean that Noel’s question is meaningless. What would Gandalf think, or Harry Potter, or Atticus Finch, or Sherlock Homes, is a perfectly reasonable question assuming their character is drawn plausibly and consistently enough to provide an exemplar.

certainly the article brings out the Christopobics who continue to be their interpretation on things to justify their own beliefs no matter how perverted.