WWTD.
3 Likes
Popcorn , but interesting .
A fair observation, although the key and important difference is that all of those differences will lead to valuable discussion about how we take the organisation forward and best deliver upon our ambitions for young adults (disagree as we will on the detail).
Why we’d introduce an issue which is not only clearly irrelevant to our purpose but also impossible to agree upon (personal religious beliefs) is beyond me.
The sooner we acknowledge that Sunday church (or alternative) is where people go for religious nourishment and this is where they come in a secular capacity to learn about flying, STEM, teamwork, and to make friends, the better.
If we were starting a conversation about introducing religious observance to our organisation, I think it’d be a much shorter conversation.
are these unique to Christianity though?
i hold my hand up to 
my ignorance of religious beliefs but are such “common values” we all live by defined by only one religion?
don’t most/all religions call for a “good moral compass” (or similar words?) respect for all and for nature (God’s creations to use the religious wording), everyone is equal, etc etc…
While religions do then indicate an allegiance to a “God” and how the followers should worship that God(s) when does such “general values” become uniquely Christian?
1 Like
I have the Analects of Confucius on my bookshelf and can confirm that “the golden rule” predates religion. In fact, it was a very necessary development in our evolutionary history, long before we’d have been talking about it.
I confess it’s one of the more widely held beliefs that seems harmless but is incredibly alienating to those of us who don’t accept those religious beliefs.
To be told we’re only good because of your god is to rob us of our very being and much of what we value.
I’m already struggling with all the pronouns, don’t add any more… 
1 Like
personally i prefer this:
and i think this is fundamentally the crux of the topic.
no one appears to be Anti-religion/faith, but to design a civic event (Remembrance) around a religious ceremony (waving about in my face) some (those without faith) take offence too
3 Likes
Not wrong
One interesting observation to make, a lot of the local & town ceremonies are based on the RBL festival of remembrance on the Saturday night.
That has an explicit religious component at the end as the drum head service with hymns & Lord’s Prayer.
I’ve not watched the London cenotaph service for years but not sure if there is a religious component in that.
The link in remembrance is that similarities to the national parades so we are all doing broadly the same thing at the same time on the same day.
2 Likes
Erm citation needed?
Confucius lived c. 551 – c. 479 BCE.
Ten Commandments - circa 1600 BCE but may have been codified
The golden rule (do unto others) possibly 1650 BCE
Religious history is linked to the earliest writings circa 3200BCE.
I believe Hinduism goes back to 30,000 BCE so I wouldn’t say that it existed before religion (unless you are talking about the modern linguistic definition of religion rather than a faith itself)
2 Likes
Without getting bogged down, my point was that Christianity doesn’t own morality like many Christians claim: “Christian values” etc.
Anything Christians frequently claim as being something good they have imparted to society is neither unique to them nor started with them. Specifically in terms of moral values.
Unless, as is frequently claimed, my values come from their god regardless of whether I believe in their religion. But that is again a rather alienating overreach.
One could obviously cite a number of rather bad things that, if we accept the premise, have then necessarily come from Christians when if it really does stem from an all-knowing god, should never have been permitted or come to pass. But that’s a detour that isn’t really what this thread is aiming to focus on.
1 Like
I had this one thrown at me by someone who was not pro-inclusion.
Citing the fact that non-Christians are indirectly discriminated against and excluded from a national event all over the country is a poor argument for continuing the practice.
The national Cenotaph event has gone the route of allowing all faith and none-faith representation, but that is ultimately a sloppy solution as it is still with Christian primacy and it’s impossible to represent everyone fairly in this way, so a fully secular event should still be aspired to.
(Thanks for bringing it back around!)
1 Like
Also, this now goes against RBL policy, which is to ensure inclusivity.
the The Right Reverend and Right Honourable Dame Sarah Mullally DBE, the Bishop of London gives some words to recognise why people are gathered.
She does start, perhaps no surprisingly “oh mighty God…”
There is then the hymn " O God, Our Help in Ages Past", prayers and the Lords Prayer and National Anthem.
There are also wreaths laid by the representatives from heads of other religions
2 Likes
I think the move to increase individual representatives is a distraction to preserve the Christian primacy as long as possible.
It’s still an incredibly exclusionary ceremony.
All I want is to be respected as an equal by my own country!
There is perhps no surprise there is contradiction here.
the following are screenshots taken from the RBL Ceremonial Handbook (found here)
It is hard to suggest this is “inclusive” given the strong religious leaning throughout this suggested service
1 Like
They don’t even highlight the Act of Remembrance by name (whereas they do for an act of repentance).
So they basically absorb the secular bit into the religious bit fully.
This is entirely why I’m pro-challenging the status quo.
It’s one thing for organisations to claim they’ve become inclusive and then another thing entirely to challenge those with the power to deliver on their pledges.
I’ve flagged the above with the RBL’s EDI head.
just as a FYI
Remembrance Sunday is a civic event, owned by and the responsibility* of the local Council NOT the RBL.
While I suspect in 90% of cases the RBL is heavily involved, if not taking the lead regardless of the expectation it should be completed by the local council (certainly in smaller/village committees where it is up to volunteer parish councillors or volunteer RBL members) what a “Remembrance Sunday” service is/looks like not up to the RBL to decide (and thus not for the CHB to determine - it is only a guide)
the RBL Ceremonial Handbook (CHB)is only ever a guide in this case to present to the Council if they ask “what should it look like”.
As such you could beat down the RBL doors, speak to the right person and convince them to change the book, but it i will be the Village/Parish, Town and City Councils you will actually have to convince and that will be on a case by case basis rather than a single document change (RBL CHB) which will in time be adopted nationally.
with my RBL hat on, the local branch works very closely with the local council, and i would say takes more than 50% of the organisation tasks on, but 100% of the decisions being made in cooperation with the Council or simply posing the question - please make a decision on X
while the branch has a good working relationship with the Council, and so takes on board the suggestions they are not obligated to - if indeed the Branch wish to either.
by changing the CHB is all well and good, but the RBL Branch (due to its typically demographic) may not wish to “modernise” and so not make the suggestion to the Council that the CHB has changed and thus the village/town service should change.
This is of course if the Branch has someone who pays attention to changes in the CHB. not every Branch as a Ceremonial Officer/Parade Marshall who treats the CHB as a bible.
so at best you’ll only reach those branches who pay attention to changes in the CHB, and of those who want to take it on board, and propose/highlight the change to the local council who in turn are happy to change the status quo which has been in place for 40+ years
i commend your efforts but feel you are fighting a losing battle if you expect a national change by an amendment to the RBL CHB.
*following a serious incident (life changing injuries) during a Remembrance event in 2018, the RBL’s public liability insurance (PLI) was tested and found that it did not cover Temporary Traffic Management Orders (TTMO) - what we call road closures.
It was following this event that the RBL sent out a reminder and made it clear that Branches should not be running, organising or managing Remembrance events.
As such even when the local RBL Branch is “running” the event, they will still need council cooperation to close the road as the RBL have told branches in no uncertain terms, Branches cannot apply for road closures (TTMOs) and certainly cannot use the RBL’s own PLI to cover the event.