Britain plans to open a registry for religious figures and force them to undergo government-specified training in an effort to stem extremism. The controversial proposal comes from a leaked draft of the Government’s new counter-extremism strategy, which goes substantially further than previous versions of the document.
All faiths will be required to maintain a national register of faith leaders and the Government will establish the minimum level of training and checks faith leaders must have to join the new registry. The registry is compulsory for faith leaders that have dealings in the public sector, such as universities, prisons, and other establishments, at least for now.
The new regulation represents a significant deepening of the Government’s involvement in religion. The document defines extremism as, “the vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs.” Its most radical measure would ban individuals whose behavior “falls below the thresholds in counter-terrorism legislation” but which “undermines British values.”
If the proposal becomes law Muslim extremists will be able to use it to exploit their grievances against the British government. It will serve their purposes well and play into their hands, according to Haras Rafiq, director of the counter-extremism think tank Quilliam, calling the proposal “Orwellian and totalitarian.” He pointed out that the main Islamic groups are not opposing the proposal.
Prime Minister David Cameron has said: “For far too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens that as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone. This government will conclusively turn the page on this failed approach.”
The Catholic Church said it was not consulted on the plan and that it would firmly resist any government monitoring of priests activities.
Note that the definition of extremism includes mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs. Under this type of regulation, how will God’s faithful people speak out against the religious and political institution known as the beast and the whore in Revelation, when it will be considered to be disrespectful and intolerant of other religions?
Note that “undermining of British values” is a very nebulous ideal. What may be defined as undermining British values today is not necessarily what it will be tomorrow. Usually, these definitions expand and become more controlling over time. In an ecumenical era, any religious figure that speaks against ecumenism and its entities would be considered to be “undermining British values.”
Proposals like this could start seemingly innocuously, but easily expand to include activities not in the public sector. The definition of extremism can also easily be expanded to include preachers who teach the Bible principles of prophecy including the exposure of the end-time apostate churches.
Every principle of liberty will be uprooted in the new world order. See Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 5, and page 451.
Source Reference