LAST night BBC1 aired a programme entitled Are Christians being Persecuted? If you missed it, you can watch it here for a limited time – but be warned, it contains explicit scenes of Andrea Minichiello Williams, of the overworked Christian Legal Centre, in full cry.
Andrea Minichiello Williams in last night's BBC1 programme sounding off about 'persecution'
Presented by Nicky Campbell, the programme set out to show that:
More and more Christians are ending up in court, defending themselves against what they see as victimisation for not being allowed to wear a cross to work or to pray for a patient. Many Christians feel that Christianity – once the heart of British society – is being pushed to the margins.
The programme aired hours after the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan “Dumbledore” Williams, used his Easter sermon to launch an extraordinary pre-election attack on a “sustained effort” to discriminate against Christians.
Williams, according to this report, blamed “wooden-headed bureaucratic silliness” for Christians being barred from wearing religious symbols at work.
He said there was now a “strange mixture of contempt and fear” towards Christianity in Britain, and he highlighted the case of nurse Shirley Chaplin, who took the Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust to an employment tribunal claiming discrimination.
She refused to remove a necklace bearing a crucifix, saying it would undermine her faith. The trust claimed there were health and safety issues and a ruling is expected this week.
Addressing a congregation at Canterbury Cathedral, Dr Williams referred to:
Yet another legal wrangle over the right to wear a cross in public while engaged in professional duties. Â [This is] one more small but significant mark of what many Christians feel is a sustained effort to discriminate against them and render their faith invisible and impotent in the public sphere. One more mark of the curious contemporary belief that Christians are both too unimportant for their convictions to be worth bothering with and too dangerous for them to be allowed to manifest those convictions.
He added:
Now it is quite likely that this latest folly, like others, is less a sign of deep anti-Christian feeling as such than the result of wooden-headed bureaucratic silliness combined with a well-meaning and completely misplaced anxiety about giving offence to non-Christians.
But, while the legal issues are being fought over and the exact scope of religious freedom in the terms of human rights legislation is debated, we might step back a pace or two and think about the larger picture.
In an apparent challenge to the Government, Dr Williams said:
A very large number of the population… believe that Christian perspectives should have a place in public discussion and decision-making.
He said the cross was more than just a religious symbol, but a chance to:
Recognise God in the crucified Jesus.  I don’t imagine for a moment that much, if any, of this is going on in the mind of some hyper-conscientious administrative officer rebuking an employee for wearing a cross to work or even saying a prayer with a colleague. But perhaps we should take the opportunity of saying, ‘This is what the cross actually means’.
However, Williams said that it was not the case that Christians were:
At risk of their lives or liberties in this country simply for being Christians.
But Dr Peter Saunders, of the Christian Medical Fellowship, said the problems of discrimination should not be downplayed.
What we are starting to see now is personal prejudices being politicised and written into statute. There is a danger that the state itself is becoming an instrument of discrimination.
Dr Saunders is a signatory to the “Declaration of Conscience” which urges people to vote for election candidates:
Who will promote policies that protect vulnerable people and also respect the right of Christians to hold, express and live according to Christian beliefs.
Hat tip: BarrieJohn
The Freethinker was founded in 1881 by GW Foote, an outspoken critic of religion. After the publication of 
April 5th, 2010 at 11:01 am
I really think that these people need to be educated about Christianity’s history of persecuting everyone else as well as each other and then reflect upon the speck of dust in their neighbour’s eye and the log in their own.
“A stange mixture of contempt and fear.”
For the most part the contempt is pretty well deserved. As for the fear, well not so much nowadays but historically Christians have been very prone to using violence and torture to get their way, so there was a lot to be afraid of.
I sort of agree with the bit about “Wooden headed bureaurocratic silliness” though. At work we have grindstones and under health and safety rules we have to have little perspex screens AND goggles when we use them. Don’t really feel persecuted though.
April 5th, 2010 at 11:10 am
The most hilarious thing I find about claims of Christian “persecution†(28 un-elected seats in the upper house and being the established church) in this country is whenever real persecution of Christians occurs in one of the Religion of Peace countries like Pakistan, Iran Sudan or Egypt there is total deathly silence. Christians are murdered, tortured or given long sentences for blasphemy in these countries on a regular basis
There is not a word from Rowan Williams, Vincent Nichols, Keith O’Brien Nick Griffin or Stephen Green or any other supposed “Christian Leaderâ€. Yet two old bigots get told to comply with equality laws and well Herod himself might-as-well be Prime Minister
April 5th, 2010 at 11:12 am
Was anyone else shocked by the bizarre statements made by our Prime Minister just before Easter?
But Mr Brown, comparing his Government to the ‘Good Samaritan’, insisted he wanted to promote the role of religion in the community.
‘Our common realm is not and cannot be stripped of values – I absolutely reject the idea that religion should somehow be tolerated but not encouraged in public life,’ he said.
‘Our equality bill is specifically designed to protect religion and belief on exactly the same terms as race or gender or sexuality.
‘I welcome the role that people of faith play in building Britain’s future – and the Catholic communion in particular is to be congratulated for so often being the conscience of our country.’
In a Good Friday missive on the Downing Street website, the Prime Minister hailed the ‘redeeming power of faith’ and said an official visit by Pope Benedict would make this a special year for the UK.
‘The Christian churches are the conscience of our country, always ready to bear witness to the truth and to remind us of our responsibilities to what the Bible calls “the least of these”,’ he added.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....z0kDTzGh17
Has the man completely lost his marbles?
April 5th, 2010 at 11:17 am
On the matter of wearing crosses: aren’t these graven images, which are expressly forbidden by the second commandment? Isn’t this a case of Christians, yet again, picking and choosing the parts of the bible they’ll adhere to?
April 5th, 2010 at 11:30 am
The BBC programme would have been hillarious if it wasnt for the missrepresentation, bias and just plain getting it wrong. For example apparently Polly Toynbee is President of the National Secular Society. Terry Sanderson in drag anyone?
April 5th, 2010 at 11:38 am
I’m still laughing at the ‘Polly Toynbee, President of the National Secular Society’ gaff in the ‘Are Christians being Persecuted?’ programme. The rest of the research wasn’t much better either.
Christ on a mongoose, if that’s the quality of a specially commissioned programme by one of the Beebs’ best paid presenters they might as well shut up shop now.
April 5th, 2010 at 11:42 am
This documentary seems to be causing a considerable degree of righteous anger in secular circles, and also criticism from more sensible Christian sources.
The link to the Sec Cafe thread below contains a link to where Freethinker readers outside the UK can watch the prog, and also to a critical article about the documentary from a Christian source.
http://www.secularcafe.org/showthread.php?t=6291
April 5th, 2010 at 11:48 am
did Ms. Williams just return from a stay at Pet Sematary?
April 5th, 2010 at 11:51 am
Stuart H: I’m assuming that as the programme was fronted by Campbell it was a replacement for the missing edition of The B-i-i-i-g Questions – ie “philosophy-lite”!
April 5th, 2010 at 11:56 am
The threat of athiesim
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXLt3Y7mj98
April 5th, 2010 at 11:59 am
I intend to complain to the BBC about the appallingly biased quality of this programme. In particular, it gave a very misleading picture of the effect of equality legislation. It made it seem as though insisting that teachers in state-funded Christian schools should not be subject to Christian prejudice was in some way in conflict with the religious rights of Christians.
I suggest that as many people as possible complain to the BBC about this. It was a disgrace for an organisation that is supposed to be balanced.
If anyone is interested, we have a discussion going on about this here as well: http://www.secularcafe.org/showthread.php?t=6291. You have to register to post.
April 5th, 2010 at 12:56 pm
Persecuted? The most recent persecution was against anyone listening to Rowan Williams whining away in his usual abstractions on Start the Week and being accorded the usual reverential attitude from Andrew Marr. What Williams meant by ethics being trancendental to science was neither explained nor challenged. A simple question as to why he thought “good behaviour” based on an omniscient but tyrranical and vengeful god with an insatiable appetite for flattery, and hellfire if you offended him, was ethical would have done for a start.
Williams gets more pompous, slippery and whiny by the day.
April 5th, 2010 at 1:12 pm
Agreed, DMB. The documentary ommited so many pertinent key points that some of the case studies were about as balanced as Tom Thumb and Giant Haystacks sharing a see-saw.
BA never had a ban on crosses but a ban on any necklace or pendent, and they made a new rule years ago as a compromise that allowed crosses to be worn on the lapel. None of this was explained.
The parents who complained about Olive Jones told a newspaper days after the story broke that they made the complaint because she ignored their request to stop using their ill son’s maths lessons to talk about Christianity. No mention of this (or better yet, putting it directly to her), just an upset-looking Ms Jones as a talking head.
Incidentally, I read a quote from Andrea M W in the paper this morning praising a Tory’s recommendation that guest houses be allowed to bar gay couples as ‘good common sense’. What do you think she would call it (Clue – “I’ll have a ‘P’ please Bob”), if a new law allowed businesses to bar Christian couples from their establishments? I think you know!
April 5th, 2010 at 1:45 pm
barriejohn: they used the wrong Campbell if you ask me. If it had been the late Ken Campbell, who did some marvellous tongue in cheek talks for the Fortean Times crowd, I could have taken it more seriously.
By the way – we watch the Big Questions irreligiously in this house – best antidote I can find to religion for my bright kid is seeing wild-eyed zealots try to scream each other down while we roll round the floor laughing!
On a more serious note, Jonathan Bartley of Ekklesia did a good piece at http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/11670 days before the programme went out suggesting why it would be weak and what might have been a better approach to the question.
April 5th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
Same in the TV programme, Broga. Vincent Nichols comes out with this: “Secularism is a doctrine”. WHAT? He then actually goes on to compare secularism with religious fundamentalism. What on earth is the man talking about? And how the hell was he allowed to get away with such blatant nonsense? And how did he then get away with claiming – yet again – that without religion there would be no morality in society? The whole programme was a travesty.
April 5th, 2010 at 2:02 pm
Thanks for that Stuart H. I had no idea that Ken Campbell had died. When I posted a comment about the origins of the universe and what existed prior to the Big Bang, it was to his one-man show that I was referring, but I couldn’t think of his name! Yes – he was brilliant, and would have made the ideal presenter for this farrago of deception and misrepresentation.
April 5th, 2010 at 2:06 pm
Neil is correct: you would be drummed out of the Plymouth Brethren for wearing a “cross” – and I’m not joking! They are graven images, and there is NO VERSE IN THE BIBLE THAT EVEN REFERS TO THE WEARING OF ONE, so how come it has now become such an essential part of people’s faith? More bollocks, I’m afraid.
April 5th, 2010 at 3:10 pm
Stuart: I watch The Big Questions for the same reason! I too was rolling around laughing a few weeks ago when they were trying to explain why certain rules from the Old Testament can be quite happily ignored, whereas others still carry the same weight as they always did. I was really taken with the rabid Anglican on the front row (on what basis are people selected for this programme, I wonder) who was shouting and screamimg that anyone who engaged in homosexual relations was going to go to Hell, and he didn’t want other people to go to Hell. The programme ended with him literally shrieking “This is key! This is key!”, but, sadly, we didn’t find out what WAS key, which was a shame, as in all my years as a Plymouth Brother NO ONE could explain the matter to my satisfaction!!
April 5th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Barriejohn,not only is wearing a cross a not religious requirement for Christians, but nor is wearing a niqab or burqa or even a hijab a religious requirement for Muslim women.
AFAIK a turban isn’t a requirement for Sikh men either, but long hair is.
April 5th, 2010 at 4:33 pm
The Campbell we need for this job is Bruce Campbell, he knows how to deal with the undead…
April 5th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
Does anyone have any idea where we can get a transcript of this program?
April 5th, 2010 at 5:26 pm
I won’t go so far to say Christians in the UK are being persecuted, at least not at the moment. But marginalisation, mis-information and discrimination are often pre-cursors to full blown persecution. The Equality Bill is a concern not only to Christians but to other faith minority communities. Good on BBC and Nicky Campbell to raise the issue.
April 5th, 2010 at 5:39 pm
I couldn’t watch all that tosh. Not when they start whining about renaming a winter festival that they nicked and renamed from the Pagans. I just wish there was one national newspaper out there with the backbone to report this stuff honestly but I don’t think there is.
April 5th, 2010 at 5:47 pm
@ Haines: If equality measures, aimed at bringing about a more tolerant society, are repugnant to Christians and “other faith minority groups”, they deserve to be marginalised.
April 5th, 2010 at 5:53 pm
@Haines
….marginalisation, mis-information and discrimination….
Come on then, lay it out for us – maybe you could list the examples?
As I saw is the program mentioned a few non-events and then extrapolated from these, that our society would fall apart if we didn’t give enough respect Christianity, this argument has no basis in fact and didn’t even follow from the first half of the program.
If xians are upset, it’s because their privileged position to dictate how we run our lives has been diminished in recent years – Something I’m very happy about
April 5th, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Just been looking at the Mail Online where they are asking people if they are going to church this weekend. 77% say they aren’t against 23% who will. That’s the way to do it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/deb.....world.html
April 5th, 2010 at 6:25 pm
@ Rog:
“Hail to the king, baby” Next thing you know, they’ll be bleating about Army of Darkness being a direct insult to Jesus and his army of the dead, I mean, followers…
April 5th, 2010 at 7:57 pm
Christians are sooooo persecuted because they have to follow the same regulations on the job as everyone else. Why can’t they get special exemptions for their belief in fairy tales, even at the expense of patient health and safety? [/sarcasm]
Why is it that Christians, who spend so much time preaching about how moral and virtuous they are, are the ones who are first in line to violate the rights of others and endanger the health/safety/lives of others? It’s obvious pushing their dogma comes at the expense of anything and everything else–even other human beings.
April 6th, 2010 at 1:59 am
stony said:
“I really think that these people need to be educated about Christianity’s history of persecuting everyone else as well as each other”
The worm turns. It’s not so fun to imagine the crimes of history coming back on you.
The threadhead quoted Andrea M:
“Many Christians feel that Christianity – once the heart of British society – is being pushed to the margins.”
That’s paranoia. The truth is that RELIGION is being pushed to the margins by Western Civilization. And unless they, again, rise up and slaughter (not persecute) freethinkers, that is exactly what is bound to happen. Hopefully not too late.
NeoWolfe
April 6th, 2010 at 6:14 pm
The thing about the nurse and her ‘cross’ is that it IS a health and safety issue- i am a nurse and when i worked on the wards we would NEVER wear jewellery of any sort- it was and is unhygienic! stupid woman- it has nothing to do with her idiotic beliefs and she just shows what a bad nurse she is if that’s what she thinks it is all about
April 7th, 2010 at 1:16 am
You’re absolutely right, culpepper. I worked in numerous healthcare settings and we couldn’t wear such things for that very reason. Hanging jewelry is also a risk for both staff and patients because disoriented or aggressive patients can grab and pull it. Another thing that was forbidden in one of my agencies was clothing or buttons that had any sort of religious or political slogans/sayings. The people we served had mental illnesses, and since religious or other fixations/obsessions were common it was wise to not wear or speak of anything that might cause a disturbance.
People need to realize that when they are at work they’re there to do their job, not practice their religion. Rules like “no jewelry” and uniform policies are in place for a reason. It’s not religious persecution to ask a person to follow the health and safety policies that protect the people one is ostensibly there to serve, and the staff who work there.
April 7th, 2010 at 9:10 am
“People need to realize that when they are at work they’re there to do their job, not practice their religion.”
Hah! Not Christians, Buffy! I remember the constant exhortations, especially to the shy and retiring, to be constantly “witnessing” and “sharing” their faith (ie shoving their views down people’s throats). Favourite verses are “By all means save some” (taken totally out of context, of course), and “Redeeming the time (buying up every opportunity), for the days are evil”!!
April 7th, 2010 at 9:30 am
Spot on, BarrieJohn. When I was working for a publishing company in London in the early 90s, we acquired a young “born again” specimen who would start each morning by putting religious tracts on all his colleagues desks. After a week of this nonsense, I placed a stack of Freethinker magazines on his desk. He immediately rushed into the office of the Managing Director to complain that he was being “harrassed”, that he could not possibly work in the same office as someone associated with the FT, and could he please be allocated desk space as far away from me as possible. He was politely told to “fuck off”. That was the last we ever saw of the pasty-faced twat. No doubt, if it happened today, he’d be straight off to the Christian Legal Centre, bawling his pious eyes out over “persecution”.