Berkley Center

I was inspired by Danielle Lee’s JYAN letter Christianity Across the Pond to consider the topic of Christianity in Britain, although from a different perspective. Two of my classes this semester brought up the idea of Christianity as the foundation of British law and values in a much more “official” way than it is in the United States—rather than a separation of church and state, the queen is the head of the Church of England.

However, as Danielle points out, there is a contrast between this apparent religiosity and the actual role religion plays in the life of average Britons. While many Britons do continue to go to church, religious participation is much lower in the United Kingdom than in the United States, and plays a much smaller role in public life. Danielle points out a contrast I have always found interesting, which is that the religion of a politician plays little role in the United Kingdom, whereas American presidential candidates fall over themselves to prove their Christianity.

I am most interested, however, in how this religious foundation (but apparent lack of religiosity) interacts with immigrants to Britain, who are often bringing in their own religions and practices.

On the one hand, I learned in my law class at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) how immigrants are trying to work within, or fight against, a system that has evolved out of Judeo-Christian values. One guest lecturer for my class, Prakash Shah, explained how he felt Christianity runs throughout the English law system, and how this undermines non-Christians in both direct and indirect ways.

For example, in the uproar surrounding Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses there was an attempt to prosecute Rushdie for blasphemy against Islam. However, the House of Lords decided that the blasphemy laws in England apply only to Christianity. In an increasingly diverse country, this kind of discrepancy may prove problematic.

There are also issues involving acts that may seem obviously criminal to someone with a Judeo-Christian background, but not to someone from a different background. It is difficult to decide whether someone should always be judged based on the values of the country they are in, especially if their own cultural or religious background changes the meaning or intention of the act they committed.

Of course, Britain is not alone in facing these issues of legal plurality, but I found it interesting to compare the response there to that in the United States, where Christianity may have less of an official role, but nonetheless does underpin the foundations of our legal system as well. Furthermore, I think Britain’s response is interesting because those religious foundations do not seem as important to Britons today. Some Britons may find it hard to come to terms with the fact that their legal system is inherently Christian, when they themselves no longer identify as such.

Members of religions other than Christianity are therefore continuing to fight in Britain for a somewhat equal representation in society. For example, there is an ongoing discussion about state funding of “faith schools”—it was a long battle for Muslim faith schools to receive the kind of funding that Christian and Jewish schools receive, and this is still a contentious issue.

Furthermore, Britain’s Christian affiliation means that prayer is allowed (and commonplace) in state schools, and religious education is compulsory for many years. Although this worship is described as “non-denominational,” it is Christian, and, of course, parents cannot guaranteed that their religious education teacher will be of the same faith as their children.

Once again, this raises issues that are not as prominent in the United States—should parents be allowed to withdraw their children from school prayer or religious education if they feel it undermines their own teachings? This often seems to devolve into an argument of assimilation versus integration, with some Britons saying that these are British traditions that immigrants must adapt to, while immigrants ask that the schools themselves adapt.

An interesting facet of this debate, however, is that this Christian element of schooling seems to come more out of tradition than out of a contemporary sense of religiosity. I therefore wonder whether discomfort with non-Christians comes from their different religion or, rather, their greater religiosity in general. Religion has become very much a background issue in Britain, so that when certain groups, especially Muslims, visibly express their religion through dress, eating, or prayer practices, there is a backlash against a public display of religiosity in itself. While non-Christians feel that Christianity is pervasive in Britain, many apathetically Christian Britons may see marks of Christianity as cultural rather than religious, and therefore deny a need to include other religions as well. This mix of state religion with a not-very-religious population makes Britain an interesting study for how to incorporate immigrants, and their different religions, into a society.