A brief note on Ann Widdecombe’s programme Does Christianity Have a Future?
Phillip Blond said on his twitter feed last night (re Ann Widdecombe’s programme Does Christianity Have a Future?):
Great programme but no idea why ann didn’t do the global figures – more christians than ever before in raw numbers and world percentages
The answer to this is that such figures would not perhaps fit her narrative.
In answer to the question “is the growth of secularism a worry”, put to the former British Conservative Party politician by Alyssa McDonald for the New Statesman, Ann replied:
Secularism has no central goal, it’s just promoting endless relativism. That’s why there is a huge moral drift in the country. Everybody is infallible except the Pope, if you like. Crazy.
Strictly speaking, the UK does not have secularism*, or more specifically laicism, since the head of state is also the head of the church, but certainly the state does not assume the role of religious imposer and in this regard Britain may be considered soft secular.
Amazingly however, some assume that the state, in not imposing one religious discourse to those it governs, has become morally neutral or relative, and one consequence of this is moral decay or drift.
In 2007 Widdecombe said:
“Most of our social ills are down to loss of authority; in schools, by the police, in the home, in organised religion.
“There is a slow descent into anarchy. We are in moral anarchy. In some estates it is already there. To change things, you must start to restore authority to the police.”
In some part, Widdecombe believes that today’s moral anarchy is to do with loss of authority in organised religion.
In 2010, she put it bluntly:
if today we still tried to follow the Ten Commandments we would be a better society
There is no doubt about it, for Widdecombe moral decay in our society is down to the fact that religion is less important to people.
So to return to Blond’s question “why … didn’t [Ann] do the global figures”? Perhaps because if she had noted a global growth in religiosity, particularly with the Christian religion, then given her logic of these matters, we could expect to be on some sort of road to moral harmony soon.
*Ms Widdecombe knows Britain is not secular, indeed she once said “Britain is “a Christian country. There is one established church here. The law does follow that.” But does she know what secular means?