Feedback | 6 September 2003

Comment on Render unto the Pope… by Adrian Hilton (30/08/2003)

Hiltons fear is not an irrational one. It is true that Europeans are threatening England’s sovereignty. However the EU is not a front for Rome. The existence of predominately protestant nations in the EU proves that.

Many sovereign nations both inside and outside of Europe are predominantly Catholic. These nations maintain their sovereignty and individuality. There are catholic MP’s in England. To prevent the possibility that these MP’s may in fact be papist spies plotting against Queens Bess and the realm, Hilton should be appointed a modern day Francis Walsingham to weed them out.

The English have proven themselves capable of separating faith and politics. Even if tomorrow the majority of Englishmen gave their spiritual allegiance to Rome, the thickly woven fabric of English law and politics would not unravel.

Hilton talks like every Catholic is an intellectual and theological automation, incapable of independent thought. G.K. Chesterton and Martin Luther were catholic. Was G.K. less English for being Catholic, or Luther’s mind less independent?

In any case, the Church of England is little more than Catholicism for the English, including the trappings of Roman imperialism. English imperialism was not just cheered on from the sidelines by Canterbury; it took the form of missionary C of E priests. The English empire was not just one of trade, it was an Empire of the English church.

HILTON’s problem appears to be not so much with religious figures using their moral authority to comment on political issues, but the fact that people listen to authorities other than his. It’s not as if English Church authorities refrain from shaping the politics and thought of their congregations. The words of Canterbury have the same moral authority to Anglicans as does Rome’s to Catholics, or as does the religious authorities of any organised religion to their followers.