Oxford scholars' grace protest: principled or petulant?

   At Trinity College Oxford the ancient custom is that scholars and exhibitioners (benefiting from funds from pious benefactors in past centuries)  should recite grace at formal dinners in the college Hall.
      But now - reports Cherwell - a prim contingent say they won’t, because they aren’t believers. The Chaplain replies sharply  ““The personal beliefs of the individual are incidental...There seems to be some confusion about the difference between personal and public prayer, the individual and the role. The scholar/exhibitioner is asked to recite the grace, it is a personal matter whether they also pray it”
   Frankly, if Professor Richard Dawkins can admit to singing Christmas carols with gusto (“O come let us adore Him”),   it is hard to see why these  clever young things make such a meal of a few words of general gratitude.  Nobody forced them to apply to a 453-year-old institution (there are other Oxford colleges) nor to accept the scholarship when it was offered. It would be brave and principled to refuse the honour and the money on grounds of atheism.  This is neither.

Comments

[Coel]

It is astonishing that coerced religious participation is still considered acceptable by many. Suppose there were a requirement for people to recite "there is no God", just imagine how many "petulant" objections one would get from Christians!

And, Libby, can't you see the difference between Dawkins CHOOSING to participate in hymns and scholars being REQUIRED to recite prayers? (To help you, I've emphasized the relevant words!).

[Nicolas]

Libby, I am surprised you show so little sympathy for these Oxford students. The problem is this:
- the prayer cannot be a purely formal matter - this is offensive to Christians who want prayer to be more than ceremonial;
- the prayer cannot be religious as this is offensive to atheists and indeed anyone who does not believe the words

Moreover, the college could simply get others to say the prayer if the ceremony is felt important. It seems as if the students have a case.

[Alistair]

Good post Coel.

And Libby might also like to ponder a similar situation in relation to the Scout's promise. Here is an organisation claiming to be inclusive and open to all, and then stipulating that the invidual must subscribe to a belief in a supernatural deity. Should scouts also merely "recite" their oath but not actually "pray" it?

[J Cline]

If they don't want to pray, fine. Let them meditate on their navels for 30 seconds. A few seconds of peace does no one any harm.

[Tony Francis]

Coel, I sense you are quit close to joining the Catholic Church. I suspect you are closer than you would dare to imagine!

[Chris Gillibrand]

These petulant youths should realise that they are benefiting from an education at the College of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity and from the benefactions of those believers who established it. They should remember the old scholastic term, grace perfects nature and does not destroy it. By complying with the simple wishes of their benefactors, they may even find that they become better atheists.

[Mrs Margaret Elward]

Isn't it frightening that so many Christian traditions and practices are being forced out one by one by athiests, humanists, and of course by other faiths especially Muslims.
Memories are very short, it is only because of Christian people, and their faith, that we have what we have in this country today. A sad state of affairs when we argue against a small prayer of thankfullness.

[alan]

That reminds me - I NEARLY got into Cambridge myself (I'm emphasizing the relevant word).
OK, you're right, that's completely irrelevant.
But surely this prayer business is just another example of a religious "requirement", quietly accepted by the majority without a moment's thought for the feelings of the non-religious?

[Chris]

Not content from reserving a third of state schools for themselves, Christians are now laying claim to Oxford colleges!

A university is a community of teachers and scholars - no exclusions on the grounds of race, creed or colour should apply.

[Godfrey]

Libby appears to be one of a large number of those whom think it is acceptable to force people to 'pray' to a god they do not believe in against their will.
It includes the present government who force impressionable children to engage in a daily act of collective worship at school, whether the school is or is not a church school.

[Lapinbizarre]

Is this a formal, written grace, or is its form optional? In my day unbelieving academics passed muster with "For what we are about to receive, may we be truly thankful". Chris Gillibrand's response, shot through with the reaction that is the defining feature of this and many, many of his past posts, is, in this day and age, just plain silly.

[Riley]

Chris G, You seem to be severley missing the point. May i remind you that medicine is a SCIENCE. It does everything from stopping you cough to curing your cance. So using your logic, if hospitals are scientific places then anyone who believes in creation isn't allowed treatment. Hmmmm.

[Alex]

They have every right to protest. Oxford colleges by and large began as religious institutions, but today they are multi-racial and multi-faith. Religion still plays a shockingly large role in college life, not least in the employment of chaplains using college money. If these students don't want to pray then they should not be forced to, nor should their only other option be to reject the reward that they have gained through hard graft in their course. I can't help but wonder if the rection would have been different had these students protested against the grace because they were Muslim, or Hindu: for some reason it's alright to expect atheists to be forced to contradict their beliefs

[Strappado]

What if Christian students were required to denounce God before eating?

[Alan C.]

I would have no problem saying grace at dinner, so long as you changed "our father" and instead gave thanks to the farmers who produced the food, or the people in the kitchens who prepared it.
"Our father" takes no part in the process.

[TLH]

Chris G
By your logic all those priests, vicars and believers at faith schools should realise they are benefiting from the tax subsidies of atheists like myself. Are they petulant for not offering regular praise to the secular tax payer for establishing their institutions?

[Trinity Man]

How shaming. I thought this was the sort of bolshiness that only happened in Balliol. Bloody Balliol.
Glad the Chaplain has some guts.
And indeed what about Sir Thomas Pope, Knight, our Founder and the Lady Elizabeth his wife, deceased and all other our benefactors by whose liberality we are here brought up in godliness and learning.

[Alistair]

"Memories are very short, it is only because of Christian people, and their faith, that we have what we have in this country today"

No, Margaret, I disagree, as dos history. What we have in Britain today is due to the Enlightenment, the reaction against the oppression, superstition and dogma of Christianity.

It is not "a sad state of affairs when we argue against a small prayer of thankfullness." Rather, it is a sad state of affairs that coerced religious participation is still considered acceptable in a 21st century plural democracy and its public institutions.

[Coel]

Mrs Margaret Elward writes: "Isn't it frightening that so many Christian traditions and practices are being forced out [...]".

No, it isn't frightening. Many customs that stem from a time when 90% of the population attended a Christian church on a Sunday are no longer appropriate when only 4% of the population attend a Christian church on a typical Sunday. The 4% need to realise and accept that.

[RoyC]

In my university days I think a polite request to be excused the duty would have been sympathetically received without the need for strident hedline-grabbing. But that was Cambridge, the more civilised university.

[Mrs Margaret Elward]

What 'Enlightenment' Alister?
Do you honestly think things are much better now since so many people have given up on God? I don't think so. Just a look at the state of peoples lives, the news confirms that.
I would agree, however, that in the established Church, there is too much superstition and dogma.
The simple christian faith, that can offer a prayer of thankfulness is still a lovely thing, and I would remind you that although many people have been 'enlightened' and don't believe in God, we still live in Christian country. Perhaps God hasn't given up on them. Have you heard of Revivals of Christianity? I reckon that this is our only hope.

[Michael Stevens]

If those scholarships were established with that provision, then they should either follow the benefactors' rules or give up their scholarships.

[bill]

It would be fair if the students could preface grace by announcing they don't believe what what are about to recite.

(I sent a prior fuller version of this but it perhaps got censored!)

[Steve]

If it is wrong to force Christians to "promote" homosexuality in schools how can it be acceptible for force non-Christians to "promote" Christianity just after leaving school for University through prayer? Religion is a lifestyle choice. Those who have chosen it should not seek to impose their lifestyle upon young, vulnerable, students.

[Coel]

Mrs Margaret Elward writes: "Do you honestly think things are much better now since so many people have given up on God?"

Yes. A lot better.