Discussion on Church and State Relations

Let's talk now to Stephen Evans, CEO of the National Secular

Society, uh, who's been listening to that conversation.

A very good afternoon to you, Stephen Evans.

What does the National Secular Society have to say about this?

Afternoon, Fi. Hi, good to be with you.

Um, well, yes, as soon as Andy Burnham took office,

this is something that we wrote

to him suggesting he should do. Um, so somewhat surprised that

four weeks later that's actually happened.

But of course, it's just-- it's absolutely right in principle

that Jewish and

Catholic prime ministers shouldn't be prevented by law from carrying

out the full functions of their office.

So I think the government's absolutely right to remove these discriminatory

restrictions. But as, as Kaya was just saying there, I think the

elephant in the room, if you like, the big question is why

any prime minister is involved in appointing bishops and

senior Church of England figures at all.

Church appointments really should be a matter for the Church, not the State.

So I hope this does open up the conversation about the,

the, um, the relationship between Church and State.

Because we, we need to keep in mind that this, uh, outdated

anomaly, as Andy Burnham called it, really only exists because the Church of

England remains established by law, and it has these

significant constitutional privileges.

So it leaves us with these sort of absurdities where you have, uh,

prime ministers

involved in the appointment of bishops, parliamentary sittings

opening with Anglican prayers. Uh, we have to have an Anglican monarch.

The monarch has to be a practicing Christian.

Uh, in a modern democratic country, that doesn't make sense.

Uh, we also have twenty-six bishops sitting as

of right in the House of Lords,

mandatory worship in schools. All these sort of things are

absurdities in, in modern Britain.

So I hope this opens the door to a conversation about that.

And do you know whether or not this would have been on the Prime

Minister's slate were you not to have written a letter

saying, "We would like

this tackled straight away"?

I don't know. I mean, it is-- it's not something

that comes up very often.

Um, I am personally surprised that this is one of the, uh,

seeming priorities of the new Burnham administration.

But I think it does-- it-- what it does for the Labour Party,

I think,

the, the Labour government, it gives them a quick, easy

win on constitutional reform because there's gonna be little pushback to

this. So they got rid of the hereditary bishops

in the House of Lords.

They're getting rid of this, um, discriminatory, outdated,

uh, constitutional anomaly, um, that discriminates against Catholics and

Jews. So it's a quick, easy win, I think, for the government on constitutional

reform. But it does send a signal that, you know, if we want,

um, uh, well, I, I-- the National Secular Society certainly

thinks that Britain should be a secular democracy where all

citizens are equal regardless of religion or belief, and this

does send a signal that that's his aspiration, too.

So I think it is symbolic. Um, I think it's a, it's a modest reform,

but I think it is significant.

Sure. On that division, uh, between Church and State

and any kind of overview that the State has on the

Church, with regard to appointments made, wouldn't it be fair,

though, to say that actually any scrutiny

is good scrutiny?

No, I think the Church of England, uh, should run its own affairs, and I don't

think, uh, any religious organization in the UK

really

should be, uh, uh, the, the governance of that

institution should be, uh, any business of the State

whatsoever, whether that's the Catholic Church, uh,

you know, Islam,

Christianity, Judaism. It, it's really none of

the business of the State. So they can take an interest, of course,

and

questions can be raised in Parliament and all the rest of it,

but there shouldn't

be any direct, uh, involvement in the governance of the

Church of England.

It should be completely separate from the State, in my view.

So if you believe that you have the Prime Minister's ear on

this, and evidence

would say that you do at the moment, Stephen Evans, what, what is next on your

list?

Well, I, I, I do think the next reform should be

reform of the

House of Lords, and it's a difficult, uh, reform to get through

because no one can agree on what to do.

But what I can hope that we all would agree on is

that no one should have a

seat as of right in the House of Lords.

So twenty-six Anglican clerics at the moment have seats

as of right. As I say, we've got rid of the, um, the hereditary

peers, and I think the next reform should be

removing the seats as of right for

Anglican bishops. And then we should do away with all forms

of mandatory

worship in schools as well. The law still requires all schools to hold

a, a daily act of broadly Christian worship,

and that

is another outdated absurdity in modern Britain.

So I think they would be, uh, the two at the top of my list.

Right. And an awful lot of schools have simply

decided that that's not what they're

going to do anyway, haven't they? Do you think that that still is quite a,

a problem?

It is a problem because it just means that if, uh, the leadership of a

particular school want to impose, impose prayers, they

have, you know, a, a mandate to do so.

You're right, many schools just ignore the law,

but that's a sign that it's a bad

law. Um, it's not good, I don't think, for laws to be, to be widely

flouted and ignored. So it would be a tidying up exercise in

some respects,

but, you know, we're aware of many, uh, pupils in schools who have a daily

act of Christian worship imposed upon them,

and that's not just in church schools.

That's in non-religious schools, too.

So it's, it's an obvious reform to make, I think.

Um, you know, people should be free to pray,

but they shouldn't be-- have prayer

imposed upon them within the school day.

Is the National Secular Society a, a

forceful society these days? I mean, there is, as you've, uh,

alluded to, and all of our listeners would know,

a febrile

environment across the country at the moment, and

often,

uh, that is on religious lines or it is purported by

troublemakers to be on religious lines.

Has that meant that more people have come to you?

Yeah. There, there's a couple of things going on at the

same time.

There's an increase in fear around the role of Islam in British

society, so there's lots of concerns around that.

We're also seeing Christian nationalism at the moment, uh, particularly from

Reform. They've got quite a Christian nationalist

agenda that seems to

be developing. And, and I think you find that

if you privilege one religion,

it makes it hard to resist demands for comparable

privileges from other religions too.

So a secular state really establishes a clear principle that the law belongs to

everyone, that no religion receives special

political authority.

So I do think there's a lot to be said for secularism, particularly at the moment

when we've got anxieties around the role of Islam and other minority

religions in the UK and this growing sense of a Christian

nationalist

agenda that's been imported from the United States.

So a secular state really could protect us all, protects everyone's religion or

beliefs. So I think whatever your faith, I think there's a lot to be said for

having a secular state that protects everyone's right and, um,

ensures that no religion can impose their beliefs on others.

So yeah, w- you know, there's lots of interest in the work we do

because, uh, as

you say, a lot of the issues in Britain at the

moment do revolve around

religion. I think secularism does provide an answer.

Have we had a secular prime minister?

Uh, we haven't had anyone with a particular

secular outlook who's prime

minister, no. We've had, we've had diff- we've had an atheist prime minister, but

that's a different thing, of course.

Um, Keir Starmer was an atheist, and he actually could advise

on, uh, appointments to the Church of England as

it happens.

Um, so that's the absurdity there.

But no, I don't think Britain-- because we,

we're a country that's absolutely

steeped in religious privilege and this constitutional arrangement that's

been

so long-standing, uh, no one has really challenged that,

and that's why we've got

these absurd laws that we have now.

As I say, we have, you know, daily sittings in, in,

in the House of Commons

and the House of Lords, all begin with Anglican worship.

Mandatory worship in schools, seats as, as a right for bishops.

No, we need a proper reforming secularist

prime minister.

And Andy Burnham's a Catholic, but that doesn't mean he can't be a secularist

at

the same time. And I hope that this, this, uh,

this reform that he's introducing maybe suggests that he has got a

secularist outlook, and he will be open to, uh, you know,

in-instigating some of the reforms that frankly are, are long overdue.

Thank you very much indeed for joining us this afternoon.

That's Stephen Evans, who is CEO of the National Secular

Society. Uh-