Introduction

This chapter explores some fundamental philosophical, scientific, sociopolitical and theological controversies that underlie the place of faith in the public realm. The quality of these debates has been variable and often inflamed.

The two guiding questions of the chapter combine the normative and the empirical:

• • Should religious faith have an organised presence in the public realm?

• • What are, and what might be, the consequences of a faith presence?

Specifically, the chapter addresses a strong secularist critique of ‘public religion’ in the UK in which the following objections are prominent:

• • Religion is irrational and essentially at odds with science and evidence-based debate.

• • Religion is a source of division and conflict.

• • Religion is oppressive, an obstacle to free speech, personal liberty and political democracy, and a threat to a neutral public secular space.

Nobody, including the present author, comes ‘from nowhere’ in these debates. Within the constraints of a short chapter, therefore, the following discussion aims, not only to present these secularist objections, but also to explore critiques. Nevertheless, the overall purpose is to prompt the reader's own assessment, informed further by the later chapters of this book.

Faith, rationality and ‘civilised dialogue’

Are we required to choose between scientific rationality and religious irrationality? Or can the encounter between science and religion contribute to an enriching and plural ‘civilised dialogue’ (Parekh, 2005)? Debates on the relationship between religion, science and reason have been especially intense in recent years. Central to this controversy is the view that religion is irrational and a matter of ‘blind faith’. This argument has been pressed by particular scientists, philosophers and cultural commentators in widely read books (for example, Grayling, 2004; Dawkins, 2006; Dennett, 2006; Harris, 2006; Hitchens, 2007).

Sam Harris (2006, p 25) argues that religion involves such a misuse of our minds that it constitutes ‘a vanishing point beyond which rational discourse proves impossible’. He argues that this ‘singularity’ of religion, with which we have grown up and been asked to respect, should be challenged in the light of the ‘hammer blows of modernity’. Exploring the nature of ‘belief ‘, Harris notes that there is not a single meaning and that beliefs exert overwhelming power in our lives.