The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Why secularism must fail > Comments

Why secularism must fail : Comments

By Peter Sellick, published 10/2/2016

Secularism was born in the European Enlightenment when it was proposed that there is only one kind of reason.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All
Of course everybody knows that the christian ecclesiastical powers that be (in all times and places) had a very in-bed-relationship with the political establishments in all times and places. Indeed in many places and time the church WAS the political establishment.

And that as such they were responsible for massive violence against their perceived enemies (and their imaginary ones too).

Furthermore christian-ISM is both a "heresy"-hunting religion.
Such "heresy"-hunting become the norm when the "official" institutional church was established 1700 years ago by those who WON the culture wars at the time. All the losing factions were (over time) systematically eliminated.

Furthermore, because the "catholic" church pretends that it is the ONLY source of truth in the world, and that it has an (entirely bogus) "great commission" to convert ALL human beings to the "one-true-way" it has effectively declared war against all other faith traditions and their multi-various cultural expressions. It has thus used whatever means that it could get away with in any time and place to achieve this inherently TOTALITARIAN agenda.

Systematic Cruelty was thus the (dis)-order of the day:
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/cruelty.html

One modern means of doing this is via Concordats with various states, whereby the "church" operates completely outside of the laws of the States in which they have such "agreements". It is explained here: http://www.concordatwatch.eu
Posted by Daffy Duck, Wednesday, 10 February 2016 9:16:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Interesting piece. Maybe as a compromise Christians could work to establish an alternative public square rather than worrying too much about non-believers. 2 Cor 6:17 "Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you".
Posted by progressive pat, Wednesday, 10 February 2016 9:16:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Why not also google the topic: the vatican in world politics.
Posted by Daffy Duck, Wednesday, 10 February 2016 9:54:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thank God for saving the church from being contaminated by state-affairs and worldly powers.

It would probably take a few more generations for the church to complete this rehabilitative purification process so its spirituality can shine again.

The tyranny of evidence was a justified fashion in reaction to the stagnation of the church. Once the church is no longer stagnated, this insistence on evidence will naturally wither and fall by the way-side.

Thank you Pat for this excellent quote from Corinthians.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Wednesday, 10 February 2016 12:06:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Secularism's "meaning over time has changed and has come to refer to a realm that excludes the sacred" -- Not really: that new 'meaning' has largely come through religious people resenting secularism as equal space in the public sphere for all beliefs and for those with no belief, and then misrepresenting secularism as 'a realm that excludes the sacred'.

notice my reference to space - it is hardly about time.

"Secularists are antagonistic towards Christianity ..." -- true secularists can include Christian-secularists.

True secularists are antagonistic towards overbearing Christianity - i.e. Christianity that seeks to impose itself on non-Christians, especially in public institutions and in the public sphere/space (as it is against other overbearing religions that seek theocracy or Dominionism).

"Secularism must fail because it is unable to address the human dilemma, it knows nothing of grace, would reduce humanity to the result of evolutionary process and is in danger of producing a new totalitarianism of universal reason" -- lol --

Secularism is against those who know nothing of grace.

Secularism is not about reducing humanity.
Posted by McReal, Wednesday, 10 February 2016 12:48:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Once again Sells is rabbiting on about time. Get real man.

David
Posted by VK3AUU, Wednesday, 10 February 2016 3:38:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
One can read between the lines and the hugely resented loss of Authority/influence? The real bugbear of unelectable control freaks?

It's not secularism that's failing, just the dictatorial cults, who as always,cannot err?

The real failure is theirs, and proven by the way their former following are voting with their feet!?
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Wednesday, 10 February 2016 6:09:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sellick concludes his impenetrable "reasoning" on secularism with one of his best passages: "Secularism must fail because it is unable to address the human dilemma, it knows nothing of grace, would reduce humanity to the result of evolutionary process and is in danger of producing a new totalitarianism of universal reason."

Firstly, secularism has no remit to address a contrived "human dilemma". Intellectually independent humans are proving time after time, dilemma after dilemma, more than capable of finding solutions within themselves, using their own resources, rejecting the deep personally comforting cowardice of inadequacy. Considerable comfort can be drawn from the realisation that as humankind seeks new frontiers in the Cosmos, this kind of cowardice will find disfavour in the minds of those who know that in the survival imperative the self is all that can be relied upon. Those on their knees in supplication, praising cowardice in song and verse will receive short shrift. Evolutionary influences may well arise independently.

It is expected that humans, at this juncture, will finally demonstrate that all moral good stems from our being social animals who know the value of love, compassion, fellowship, charity and co-operation without being threatened by fearsome punishment if we neglect to declare our own inadequacy and our dependence on a supernatural source for them.

One does truly marvel at the naivete of which the faithful are capable when Sellick with a quaint historic amnesia portends
"a totalitarianism of universal reason." History has been recording humankind's dissatisfaction with the alternative "totalitarianism of universal religious power" beginning about 600 years ago and that dissatisfaction has grown over the centuries. Reference to a slim volume by Helen Ellerbe entitled THE DARK SIDE OF CHRISTIAN HISTORY will assist in explaining why.
Posted by Pogi, Thursday, 11 February 2016 12:53:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
.

Dear Peter,

.

You wrote :

« … secularism … refer(s) to a realm that excludes the sacred »
That is incorrect. Secularism upholds the right of everybody to believe whatever he or she wishes, including belief in “the sacred”.

Secularism does not refer to any particular realm. It is simply “the principle of separation of the state from religious institutions” (OED definition).
.

« Paul who, in Romans13, accepted the role of government as serving God by ordering society aright »

In a secular society, “serving God” is not the “role of government”. It is a role that those members of society (including members of government) who believe in “God” assign to themselves – but not to the government as an institution.
.

« … the Church … sees the government's role as removing all religious practice, symbolism and debate from public life … The state assumes a position of negative tolerance and religion is relegated to the private sphere »

If “God” really did exist and he wanted to control humanity, he wouldn’t need any help from “the Church”. He would be big and powerful enough to do it himself.

Apparently, he doesn’t want to control humanity. So “the Church” would be wise to follow his example and abstain from interfering in public life and State affairs too – unless, of course, it wants to substitute itself for “God”.

Also, the “negative tolerance” you mention is not just one way. It is reciprocal. The State does not tolerate any interference by itself in religious affairs anymore than it tolerates interference by religion in State affairs.

This appears to be quite equitable. There is no justification for imposing the religious belief of some on the whole of society – which is what you are clearly advocating.

In reality, the last paragraph of your article should read :

« Religion must fail because it is unable to address the human dilemma, it knows nothing of grace, would reduce humanity to the result of religious belief and is in danger of producing a new totalitarianism of universal dogmatism »

.
Posted by Banjo Paterson, Thursday, 11 February 2016 2:22:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sellick writes: "There is a relationship between secular time and fundamentalist religion in that both insist on evidence and on an exact, literal view of events."

I confess that this is the first time I have seen fundamentalist religion described thus.

And so we are treated to an astonishing sequence of non-sequiteurs. The first leads to this twaddle: "The events stand for themselves; they are not vulnerable to interpretation. Fundamentalism is thus a product of modernity and of secularism."

He persists: "In our time, secularism insists on a "language of rights and liberties, law and equity, a language to transcend the various forms of murderous tribalism which afflict our world.""

And in our time we are afflicted indeed with a murderous tribalism, it happens to be for the most part, a murderous religious tribalism that seems to be tearing nations apart and the driving force in a modern exodus replete with just about every example of humankind's worst and best traits.

"The Church is less and less a partner with secular authorities, a situation that has, especially in the twentieth century allowed the rise of unfettered totalitarianism often in the name of universal reason."

No doubt a diligent search by Sellick will uncover secularism's responsibility for Ebola virus, El Nino fluctuations, the 2008 GFC, Jack the Ripper and extinction of the dinosaurs.
Posted by Pogi, Thursday, 11 February 2016 3:33:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
.

Dear Peter,

.

You wrote :

« Fundamentalism is thus a product of modernity and of secularism »
.

I have, on occasion, admired your undeniable talent for intellectual toe dancing and acrobatic prowess on the high wire of the circus trapeze under the big tent. But, never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined that I would live to see the day when you would succeed in realizing such an incredible feat as attributing “fundamentalism” to “secularism”.

That day has come! The miracle has occurred! BRAVO! BRAVO! BRAVO! …

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7b1FkZYarU#t=635.539

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxENBg_t9wo
.

Behold! Peter is the greatest! Peter works miracles! …
.

Peter? Which Peter? Peter who?
.

Radical Peter, of course! Peter, the extremist! Peter, the one and only! Our Peter! The rock on which … anything is possible! … everything is possible!
.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IB2r7e4x3g8

.
Posted by Banjo Paterson, Thursday, 11 February 2016 10:15:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Peter Sellick wrote,
"In our time, secularism insists on a "language of rights and liberties, law and equity, a language to transcend the various forms of murderous tribalism which afflict our world." Since religious language does not fit this universal system it must be relegated to the private sphere. The Church is less and less a partner with secular authorities, a situation that has, especially in the twentieth century allowed the rise of unfettered totalitarianism often in the name of universal reason.

Secularism must fail because it is unable to address the human dilemma, it knows nothing of grace, would reduce humanity to the result of evolutionary process and is in danger of producing a new totalitarianism of universal reason."

In 2011 a German research group studied well-being and satisfaction in the 31 OECD countries. Using assessments on eight different criteria the first six places were filled by Iceland, the Scandinavian countries and The Netherlands, all low religiosity countries. That paragon of Christian virtue, The USA, finished 27th only ahead of Greece, Chile, Mexico and Turkey.

The results are at;
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/29/opinion/blow-americas-exploding-pipe-dream.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha212
http://www.sgi-network.org/pdf/SGI11_Social_Justice_OECD.pd

Peter does not appear to accept that those who controlled and carried out the Inquisition were fundamentalists. It is a short step from "Believe as I believe or God will punish you to believe as I belief or I will kill you."
Posted by Foyle, Friday, 12 February 2016 6:36:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy