Is God an Englishman?
Bijan Omrani joins Damian Thompson to talk about his new book God is an Englishman: Christianity and the Creation of England. They discuss the spiritual and cultural debt the country owes to Christianity. The central question of Bijan's book is 'does it matter that Christianity is dying in England?'. The faith has historically played a disproportionate role in many areas of English life that we take for granted now – for example, by shaping both charity and the welfare state. Yet this is influence is often ignored as congregations shrink and the UK slides into secularism.
But are there unexpected grounds for hope? The publication of God is an Englishman has coincided with a modest but surprising revival of traditional worship among Millennials and members of Generation Z. Is there, as the book puts it, a 'weariness of the young' with what secular society is offering them?' And could we see the eventual flourishing of a smaller but purer English Christianity?
Produced by Patrick Gibbons.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
10 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
UK issued ominous warning of 'enemies at our door' as PM unveils defence plan
The Prime Minister said the long-awaited strategic defence review would make the UK 'safer and stronger, a battle-ready, armour-clad nation' amid Russian threats Britain will move to "war-fighting readiness" and every citizen must play their part, Keir Starmer said as he unveiled a battle plan for the nation's defence. The Prime Minister said the long-awaited strategic defence review (SDR) would make the UK "safer and stronger, a battle-ready, armour-clad nation" amid Russian threats in the air, at sea and online. Speaking at a BAE Systems' shipyard in Govan, in Glasgow, Mr Starmer said the front line "is here" - with threats facing the UK "more serious, more immediate and more unpredictable" than any time since the Cold War. In an ominous warning, Lord Robertson, who co-wrote the Strategic Defence Review, said Britain's enemies "are at our door". "Cyber attacks, assassinations, election interference, disinformation campaigns" are all activities that are already happening," he told LBC. The Labour ex-Defence Secretary said: "Our enemies are at our door. They're already there. And when you've got a question about welfare or warfare, you know, what happens if a cyber attack stops our hospitals from working? What if it turns our power off? "What happens if it stops the cars, the police cars in the street? These things are real and alive. And some cases are actually happening today." He warned: "Tomorrow's war could be much nastier, much crueller, much more brutal." His warning came as the PM faces questions over how his defence commitments would be funded after he refused to spell out when his ambition to ramp up defence spending to at least 3% of GDP would be met. The PM promised in February to hike the amount the country spends on defence to 2.5% of economic output by 2027 - with an ambition to hit 3% in the next Parliament. But NATO chief Mark Rutte has already said that allies need to spend considerably more than 3%. Paul Johnson, from the respected IFS think-tank, said: "Bluntly, it really does seem to me that the only choice that is available, if we're going to go through all of those things, is some really quite chunky tax increases to pay for it." Lord Dannatt, former head of the British Army, said that vague commitments to defence spending "does not cut the mustard". He told Times Radio: "It's a little bit like saying in 1938 to Adolf Hitler, please don't attack us till 1946, because we're not going to be ready. Well, frankly, if we'd behaved like that, we wouldn't be speaking English this morning, would we?" The government has accepted all 62 recommendations in the review, which include building extra attack submarines, six new munitions factories, £15billion on nuclear warheads and thousands of new long-range weapons. The plans will help the army become "10 times more lethal", with greater use of AI and drones. The armed forces will move to "war-fighting readiness" and cash will be ploughed into defence to create jobs across the country. But the SDR laid bare how the military had been hollowed out under the Tories. It found that the armed forces were not currently fit to fight Russia or China, with inadequate weapons stockpiles, recruitment issues and problems with morale. The PM said Britain must prepare for war if it wants to avoid it. He said: "Every part of society, every citizen of this country, has a role to play because we have to recognise that things have changed. In the world of today, the front line, if you like, is here. "The threat we now face is more serious, more immediate and more unpredictable than at any time since the Cold War. We face war in Europe, new nuclear risks, daily cyber attacks, growing Russian aggression in our waters, menacing our skies. "Their reckless actions driving up the cost of living here at home, creating economic pain and hitting working people the hardest. A new era in the threats we face, demands a new era for defence and security, not just to survive in this new world but to lead." Mr Starmer said he was "100% confident" that the blueprint can be paid for. Defence Secretary John Healey, who last week said he expected to hit the target by 2034, last night told MPs: 'I am totally confident that we will meet the ambition of 3% in the next Parliament." But questions have been raised about a recruitment and retention crisis on the frontline. Mr Healey said the SDR will mark an end to an era of "hollowing out" of the armed forces. He told MPs he wants to see the British Army rise to at least 76,000 full-time soldiers in the next Parliament - 2029 to 2034. He told MPs: 'For too long our army has been asked to do more with less. We inherited a long-run recruitment crisis, 14 Tory years of cuts to full-time troops. "Reversing this decline will take time, but we are acting to stem the loss now and aiming to increase the British Army to at least 76,000 full time soldiers in the next Parliament. For the first time in a generation, we are a Government who want the number of regular soldiers to rise." Mr Healey was challenged by MP Zarah Sultana over how the Government was finding money for defence at the same time as 'slashing disability benefits, keeping millions of children in poverty through the two-child benefit cap and cutting winter fuel support for pensioners'. 'The first duty of any government is to defend the country and keep its citizens safe,' he replied. 'We invest in defence in order to deter and prevent a war that brings such extreme human and economic costs. 'If we can't defend the country, where will we be with an NHS without power, with submarine cables that mean data doesn't work? Strong national security is fundamental to a stable economy, a strong society.'
The National
11 hours ago
- The National
The Yes movement itself has dreamed up barriers to independence
His perceived problem with the direct route to independence (briefly, making a UK General Election a plebiscite by a simple manifesto seeking a majority of Scottish votes for Scotland to become independent, and undertaking to implement it on such a majority, if necessary by declaration of the Scottish MPs) is that 'Westminster doesn't have to accept our legal argument in that vote, as the election is for a UK Parliament and Scotland would not be able to generate a majority of votes in Scotland alone ... Westminster can in theory prevent us from leaving ... the majority of English MPs have a veto on what Scotland does or doesn't do.' He simply fails to grasp what the direct route is all about, in viewing it as a procedure of the Union parliament and attributing to England a role and a power which it does not have. READ MORE: The lesson for the SNP as new poll puts independence support at 54% Given that a referendum is prohibited, the one and only way which actually exists for the people of Scotland to vote for the country to become independent is by plebiscitary election. If the Scottish MPs, the highest representatives of the people, are elected as indy members by the majority of votes of the people of Scotland, they will occupy virtually all the Scottish seats, mandated by those votes to take Scotland out of the Union. Legal argument does not come into it. It is an election. The purpose and result of an election is the filling of seats. English votes and English seats do not come into it, since their make-up is neither here nor there for Scottish independence, and they have no part to play. The Scottish members would have the legal, constitutional and democratic right and authority (and indeed the duty?) to fulfil the democratic imperative and carry out their mandate irrespective of other parts of the UK (reversing, this time democratically, the step into union taken three centuries ago by their predecessors). There is no prohibition of such a course. If Mr Potts or anyone else can find one, I would be interested to know. In those circumstances, the declaration of Scottish independence by its MPs cannot properly be viewed as occurring either while Scotland is part of the Union or while it is independent. It is rather the deed of an instant marking the transition from one status to the other, a normal operation in steps of great legal effect. READ MORE: Tommy Sheppard: Why I stand by my claim after fierce debate that followed it I imagine that London will actually negotiate the mechanism and details of independence with Edinburgh, but only after Scotland has voted for it and our representatives plainly demonstrate their resolve to carry it through at their own hand if necessary. Mr Potts' position is far from unique in the independence movement, most of which may indeed be with him. Heaven help us, but the fixation with English omnipotence and the barriers it can place in Scotland's way is a concoction of the movement itself, as if we were determined not to succeed. No such claim has ever emerged from London, where any rare UK Government statement on the issue has been to the effect that Scotland may go if it no longer consents to the Union. Alan Crocket Motherwell AMIDST the ongoing chaos, let it be known that Scotland's hydro, wind and other renewable energy sources are helping to keep this broken UK afloat. Yet in return, energy-rich Scotland, pays among the highest bills in the UK and indeed Europe. The SNP and all independence campaigners cannot remain silent about this grossly unfair situation. It's time for the people of Scotland to take back control, believe, stand up and deliver independence. Grant Frazer Newtonmore
Western Telegraph
12 hours ago
- Western Telegraph
Council deputy survives vote over ‘unacceptable' comments
At an extraordinary meeting of Pembrokeshire County Council today, June 2, Independent Group leader Cllr Huw Murphy called for a vote of no confidence in Councillor Paul Miller to remain as Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member. Expanding on his reasons for the call, Cllr Murphy – in his submission - said: 'Councillor Miller on April 28 at a Cabinet meeting moved an amendment with regards to Welsh Education Strategic Plan (WESP) to request officers collect data from parents of children electing a Welsh medium education when the Schools Admission Code does not provide for the collection of such data. 'At this meeting Cllr Miller commented with regards to parental choice for Ysgol Caer Elen: '…all of them that I know who send their children to Caer Ellen honestly couldn't give a toss whether it was Welsh or English'. 'Comments such as this in 2025 are unacceptable and serve to create a perception of bias when it comes to the delivery of Welsh medium education, something that generations have striven for, namely equality and fairness. 'For a Deputy Leader of Council to make such comments and then refuse to retract when he has had ample opportunity to do so makes his position untenable both as Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member. The matter was reported to the Welsh Language Commissioner and was called in to the May Schools O&S Scrutiny Committee, ultimately returning to a May 21 meeting of the Cabinet, members agreeing to now collect data on all languages and additional information. 'Throughout the recent debate on WESP, Cllr Miller has ignored the views and advice of the Schools O&S Committee, Senior Officers, the Welsh Language Commissioner and even Mr Mark Drakeford his own Minister for the Welsh Language,' Cllr Murphy added. Responding at the special meeting, Cllr Miller repeated previously made comments, saying there had never been an intention to collect the information through a formal schools process. He reiterated the 'couldn't give a toss' comment was one made by a mother in his ward which he had repeated, apologising if he had caused upset. He added: 'I believe Cllr Murphy should be deeply ashamed of his actions, he is trying to create division in the county of Pembrokeshire where no division exists,' adding: 'To suggest that either I personally or the administration is anti-Welsh is simply not true.' Conservative Group Leader Cllr Di Clements said she was 'not really sure why we are all here,' adding: 'The deputy leader showed poor judgement in his use of inappropriate language to put forward a recommendation to evidence base decisions on why and where parents choose to send their children to school, it was rightly highlighted and called in.' 'The recommendation was changed to reflect those concerns and all present cabinet members agreed. The subject should now be closed.' She went on to say: 'This is nothing more than petty political point scoring which we want no part of,' adding the costs of the special meeting was some £2,000 for cash-strapped Pembrokeshire. Fellow Conservative Cllr Aled Thomas, the Conservative group business manager and County Council Welsh Language Champion said that 'today's meeting has done nothing but drive a wedge between Welsh and English speakers in the county.' He said Cllr Murphy has only spoken Welsh in the chamber for 26 seconds in the previous two years, adding: 'If the IPG leader was serious about promoting the Welsh language - he would practice what he preaches year-round and not just when it's politically convenient.' Another who criticising the notice was Cllr Jordan Ryan, saying it was 'a disgrace' and members should be working for the people of Pembrokeshire rather than taking part in a 'political game'. Council leader Cllr Jon Harvey said the call was 'creating division where none exists and political opportunism at its worst.' He said the amended form of Cllr Miller's proposal just sought a deeper understanding of parental choice, adding: 'This notice of motion and the reasoning behind it to my mind raises some bigger issues here; are members now not allowed to ask questions or express a view for fear of a vote of no confidence?' He said the 'anti-Welsh' claim was 'nothing more than opportunism designed to create division where none exists'. Former leader Cllr David Simpson, who had brought Cllr Miller into his Cabinet as deputy leader, described the call as 'political mischief,' saying previous independent peer reviews of the administration had described Cllr Miller as 'an inspirational member of the team,' Cllr Simpson asking: 'How many of you can say you were inspirational?' Another former leader Cllr John T Davies called on members to come together to eradicate the historic so-called 'landsker line' language barrier in the county, working towards bilingualism, saying there was a need for Cllr Miller to apologise for any offence and move on. Yet another former leader, Cllr Jamie Adams said there was a need for 'contrition and conciliation,' and for Cllr Miller to 'hold his hands up' and admit he'd 'got this wrong'. 'Perhaps Cllr Murphy's been attacked for having the tenacity for having this called in; I think there's an impression it was always going to happen to you, Paul [Miller], because there's an impression you know better than everyone else.' The no confidence call in Cllr Miller was defeated by 28 votes to 16, with 11 abstentions.
