As a secular nation, I am quite perplexed as to why we still have a prayer recited in our parliament. In the 2006 census only around 55% of our population identified themselves as being of the Christian faith, yet our government recites a prayer that is blatantly Christian every day it is in session.
Here is the prayer that is recited.
Almighty God, humbly acknowledging our need for Thy guidance in all things, and laying aside all private and personal interests, we beseech Thee to grant that we may conduct the affairs of this House and of our country to the glory of Thy holy name, the maintenance of true religion and justice, the honour of the Queen, and the public welfare, peace, and tranquillity of New Zealand, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
There are several things in that prayer that I have a problem with.
1) I do not believe in a god, along with over 30% of this nation, so "humbly acknowledging" the need for guidance from a deity means nothing to me.
2) No one speaks like that anymore, so it is only for the sake of religious reverence that they still recite a prayer in old english.
3) The Queen does nothing except have her face embossed on our currency, so why should she be referenced in a prayer to an imaginary sky-daddy.
4) The mention of "true religion" embarrasses me. Coming from the mouths of the government of a secular nation, calling Christianity the true religion is unacceptable.
5) The Lord of the writer of this prayer has done nothing to keep this country wealthy, safe, peaceful or tranquil, those are all the works of our forefathers. We should be thanking them, not some genie.
Hi shreddakj
ReplyDelete55% puts the Christians in the majority, so a change is unlikely. Do you also want the National Anthem changed?
As to your other points
1- so over 70% acknowledge a high power, again a change seems unlikely for only 30% don't you think?
2- No one is out to kill the speaker anymore either... well not with Lockwood, I would have understood with Wilson. It is called tradition.
3- The Queen is the head of state.
4- Too bad. Having the green party in parliament embarrasses me.
5- Got any proof of that?
Regardless of your belief or origins, you cannot deny that New Zealand was founded on a bedrock of Western Christian civilisation. Our values and traditions developed as a result of the struggles and compromises between secular and non-secular approaches to state governance ove the past 2000 years, and our tolerance of current religions and political thought is a product of this. Why are you so opposed to a little recognition of the founding principles of our nation? While we must look forward to the future, we do so with our feet firmly placed in the past; our past defines, shapes, and guides us, and cannot be discarded or ignored just because we might not like it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with a lot of Lukas' points:
1. You and at least 30% of the population don't believe in God (I'd have thought it was more than that, but never mind). Good on you. Perhaps you can console yourself with the idea that in this case "god" may be a metaphor for the common desire by parliamentarians to do what is go(o)d.
2. The framing of the speech in antique formal English (note this is not Old English - if it was, you wouldn't be able to understand half of it) is to connect Parliament with the traditions of those who came before. Ceremony and tradition are an important part of a healthy and functioning society.
3. Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of New Zealand in her own right (and also Queen of the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, etc...) is our legitimate head of state. She does about as much as the President of France or Israel does, and doesn't require an electoral/popularity contest every 3 or 4 years to continually divide the population along partisan lines. She links us to our nation's ancestral heritage and the occasional pomp and pagaentry enlivens our otherwise dull democratic process.
4. Hear hear Lukas! The "Greens" (aka the Reds) are an embarassment to themselves as well as sensible environmentalists and the country as a whole, and most of the Maori Party aren't much better. For that matter, there's a few National and Labour MPs that embarass me as well. Oh, and I really don't like having that southern cross on our flag, can't we just get rid of it and go back to flying a Union Jack? And what's with Coronation St? Get rid of that shit.
5. It could perhaps be argued that our forefathers did their best to ensure NZ's peace, tranquility, safety and wealth due to their inspiration from or commitment to the principles of the "god" of the author of the prayer.
Lukas, I said over 30% do not believe in god. I believe the number at the last census was around 34-38%. This number is constantly increasing, and my prediction is that it will be nearly 50% by the time the 2011 census comes around. So for you to try and flip it and say over 70% believe in god is deceitful.
ReplyDeleteThe antiquated language doesn't bother me so much, it's just a bit out of place.
Yes, the Queen is the head of state technically. Does she actually do anything? Doubt it. What did she do to deserve being 'honoured' in a prayer in our parliament? Nothing, she gets it because she's the Queen.
Your point 4 completely misses the point of my point 4. It wasn't primarily about being embarrassed, but rather that it is unacceptable for a secular government to be calling something the 'true religion'.
The difference between thanking our forefathers for building this nation, and thanking god, is that we ACTUALLY KNOW what our forefathers did. You can go read books about the founding of New Zealand, and those books will not say "And then god protected the land" or anything like that. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim that god is responsible for making the country wealthy, safe, peaceful etc. It is not my onus to prove that god isn't responsible, but rather to point out that it is a pointless, bald assertion to say that he did.
I can almost guarantee you that the percentage of NZers that call themselves christian will be below 50% at the next census.
Haha, KJ is prophesying over the census :D
ReplyDeleteI believe it's called a prediction, the source of the prediction is trend observed from looking at the data from the past few census'.
ReplyDeleteWhile a very simple definition of prophesy renders it almost undistinguishable from 'predict', its supernatural connotation is undeniable.
A quick google search brings me back this definition:
"to declare or foretell by or as if by divine inspiration. ".
I imagine you were simply trying to provoke me, as thats what it looks like to me, but if you weren't then it looks like you're trying to paint the "RELIGION" label on atheism again.
shreddakj, thanks for taking the time to reply.
ReplyDelete"So for you to try and flip it and say over 70% believe in god is deceitful."
It is a pretty black and white question on the census form, you have the option of ticking that you believe in a form of god or you don't. So, I don't think that is deceitful at all. Granted, the prayer in parliament is a Christian prayer, so the muslims, jedi knights, hindus etc will not be that happy!
"The antiquated language doesn't bother me so much, it's just a bit out of place."
As are most of the rituals that are carried out in Parliament. Did you see the swearing in of the new Government? These are traditions that should be preserved and kept. The stories behind some of them are fascinating and I encourage you to find out more about them.
"Yes, the Queen is the head of state technically. Does she actually do anything? Doubt it. What did she do to deserve being 'honoured' in a prayer in our parliament? Nothing, she gets it because she's the Queen."
There are no technicalities about it. She is the Head of State. Does she do much for the country? probably not, but I wouldn't really expect my 83 year old Grandma to be traveling half way around the world. I suspect we will see more discussion around this when HRM departs.
"Your point 4 completely misses the point of my point 4. It wasn't primarily about being embarrassed, but rather that it is unacceptable for a secular government to be calling something the 'true religion'."
I think you miss my point too. The "green" Party are pushing their own religion (rather successfully) on the people of NZ. This embarrasses me no end, but they have a right to voice their views and beliefs.
"I can almost guarantee you that the percentage of NZers that call themselves christian will be below 50% at the next census."
I would hazzard a guess that it already is below that at the most recent census.
No it's not black and white on the census form. From what I can remember of the 2006 census, it had about 7 or 8 options and then "other" ______.
ReplyDeleteI wrote that over 30% of the population do not believe or do not associate themselves with a god, and you said over 70%, you're either terrible at math, or just being deceitful.
Green party religion? What? If you mean their pseudo-environmentalist communism then perhaps you are right to some degree, but it really isn't a religion at all. It's a political ideology.
It was around 55% at the most recent census, so you're not very observant are you. I wrote that in the original post.
Haha it was a throw away joke. Not meant to be taken seriously/Google defined/Atheism's a religion or anything of the sort :D
ReplyDeleteI'll make an effort to not make anymore similar comments ;)