The last thing we want in this country is a return to any form of theocracy; but it might do a world of good if once again the Church’s excommunication was something politicians dreaded. No-one wants the clergy to have power again, but can anyone think of a better voice than that of Religion to curb the overweening ambitions of unscrupulous men? And is there any chance of this being possible, unless Religion is once again honoured by the vast bulk of our citizens, so that they can make their voice heard?
Men and women who see Religion as the means of facilitating their entry into heaven, and who fail to see it as their best opportunity to curtail the encroachments of evil into the lives of others, richly deserve to forfeit heaven, and inherit hell instead. If you fancy yourself as living for others, then you have a duty to preserve the State, which is infinitely preferable, with all its shortcomings, to the chaos which would follow were the State to fail. If the State does not feature in your religion, at least think of the fate of others should the State fail.
Normally I would not ask the question, “What would Jesus have done?”; the conditions are so different. He took for granted the cohesiveness of the community; and Jews have retained their Jewish culture through 2000 years of persecution. Whereas with the luxury of modern conveniences, the cohesiveness and morale of our society is disintegrating before our eyes. So normally I would use my own initiative to make up my mind, on the basis of my trained instinct and experience so far as it exists, as best I could. But occasionally one should ask, “What would Jesus have done?” The answer is sometimes not in doubt. As regards mathematical physicists who dare not proclaim the freedom of the will, as to microbiologists who boast that cumulative genetic change explains everything and there is no room for further creative thought still less to honour the Creator, as to clergymen who drop consecrated wine on rice-paper wafers, as to the politically correct who are so like the Pharisees of his own day, as to the zealots whose insanity would disarm our country whereas in his day with equal insanity they urged rebellion against Rome, as to the “do-gooders” who say we are all one big family and sin and crime do not matter anymore, he would have defied the lot! And gone his own way. So why should we not do the same?
Yet – we all know that the mystical language of Christendom is identical with the mysticism of Islam, Hindu India, and for that matter similar to that of the religions of Isis and Mithras long ago. They were fully conversant with the idea of an ecstatic union with the Supreme Being; it did not begin with Ignatius Loyola, though its amoral ruthlessness may have begun with him. And one is tempted to ask why Jesus was so careless as to get himself crucified, if the only differences between religions lay in their outward forms and ceremonies?