Saturday, January 25, 2020

Religion Essays Disestablishment of the Church of England

Religion Essays Disestablishment of the Church of England Disestablishment of the Church of England â€Å"Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s† â€Å"Yesterday we asked for toleration, today we ask for religious equality; tomorrow we shall demand the disestablishment of the Church of England.† The ambiguous position enjoyed by the Church of England in the United Kingdom is one that deserves a shrewd analysis in terms of its compatibility with the interests of liberal democracy. The current constitutional settlement has faded from the spotlight over the course of the past century despite being a highly contested issue during the late nineteenth century, due, in the most part, to other more pressing issues beginning to surface. The last time the issue was considered as a whole was in 1970 but it was observed that there was a general lack of knowledge on behalf of the British public on Church-State issues and as such the matter was left as it was. However, in a new era of equality the issue must be readdressed and rectified in the interests of democracy in an increasingly multi-faith nation. The issue transcends the awareness of the British public on the issue and should be focused on the disestablishment of the Church of England as a matter of democratic imperative. To best understand what is being compromised it is important to first outline what exactly â€Å"establishment† is, what it has afforded the Church of England and how such a settlement came into existence. The current settlement is due in the most part to Henry VIII and his break from Rome, and a brief overview of the history of the Church of England is important to understand the nature of the subsequent laws establishing the Church by law. Henry VIII broke away from the Roman Catholic Communion due to the failure of the Pope to grant an annulment of his marriage to Katherine of Aragon. The Act of Supremacy 1534 recognised Henry as the Supreme Head of the Church of England, making the nobility swear an oath recognising his supremacy. When Elizabeth I became Queen in 1558 she had Parliament pass the Act of Supremacy in 1559 restoring the position of the Church of England but rewording the oath recognising her as the Supreme Governor of the Church, as the Bible recognises Jesus Christ as the Head of the Church. The idea of â€Å"establishment† is one that remains difficult to define, as there was no single statute that created the settlement that remains today, rather it was a progressive approach that is best defined through the key privileges enjoyed by the Church of England. In Chapter 1 I shall outline what establishment is and seek to produce a working legal definition in order to outline the current constitutional settlement. In this chapter I shall also explore the concept of disestablishment and previous attempts to disestablish the Church of England from the late nineteenth century to as recently as January/February 2008 when the issue once again began to build momentum with a view to highlighting how previous failures fell short of achieving religious equality. The chapter shall end with an examination of the idea of secularism and how it may not only be preferable to advocate state neutrality, but also fundamental in the interests of liberal democracy. In Chapters 2 to 4 I shall look more closely at three different elements of establishment and outline the consequent democratic deficiencies and make recommendations as to how they may best be rectified. The main privileges that characterise the established religion are; the 26 Anglican Bishops occupying ex-officio positions in the House of Lords; the role of the Monarch; and the Governance of the Church of England. Each of these issues will be dealt with in detail in an attempt to illustrate how the Church of England has been woven into the fabric of political and legal life in the United Kingdom and the subsequent problems that stem from this relationship, with particular emphasis on issues of democratic concern. To briefly identify the key problems that each of these privileges create they shall be introduced at this point in order to set the scene for the rest of this introduction. In Chapter 2 I will address the controversial issue of the House of Lords, however, discussion is restricted solely to the twenty-six Anglican Bishops. The Archbishops of Canterbury and York; the Bishops of London, York and Winchester along with the next twenty-one bishops in order of seniority sit in the House of Lords by virtue of their position within the Church. There are issues of democracy and representation within the upper chamber; however, this is not within the remit of this paper. Attempts have been made recently to address the issues in the House of Lords with the recommendation that the number of Bishops be merely reduced to sixteen. The report also recommended that other faiths should be introduced to the Lords, an idea that will only serve to further discriminate and alienate those not in the privileged few. This privilege highlights an inequality in that one religious group has been afforded the opportunity to sit in Parliament, a privilege that should be viewed with the knowledge that the Church of England can lobby for its own interests in the corridors of power while other religious groups must lobby in the traditional way. Chapter 3 is concerned with the Monarch and the dual role of Head of State and Supreme Governor of the Church of England, as well as the anti-Catholic sentiment in the laws on the Protestant succession. The Monarch is the Supreme Governor of the Church of England and as such must take an oath to defend the protestant faith. The Monarch is a figure of British unity and to represent a single religion is to alienate people from other faiths and the non-religious. The Act of Settlement 1700 requires a Protestant succession and as such it is forbidden to marry a Roman Catholic. This discrimination not only promotes exclusion to the people of Britain, many of whom belong to the Roman Catholic community, but also calls into question its compatibility with the Human Rights Act. In Chapter 4 I shall look at the governance of the Church of England and how it is restricted in its own management. This Chapter will highlight the pitfalls for the Church of England itself as being by law established The Prime Minister is responsible for appointing Bishops and other senior clergy of the Church of England, a role that has been altered recently by new Prime Minister Gordon Brown who shall now merely act as a postman and pass the recommendations to the Queen. This is a time consuming process and a waste of government resources on a privilege that is enjoyed by no other religion. However, whether any other religion would campaign for this is questionable as it restricts the Church’s control over itself. This issue of governmental control is also evident in the making of Church laws. Church laws are made by Measures that must be passed by a single vote in each House of Parliament. They cannot be amended; they must simply be passed or rejected. This also concerns Human Rights and the right of the church to self-govern without government interference. All these issues will be addressed in relation to their compatibility with the interests of liberal democracy in the United Kingdom as a whole. As a model of democracy I shall take Robert Dahl and his work on political equality. Dahl is one of the most noted commentators on political power and he provides an outline of representative democracies in Europe and a model of an ideal democracy. His observations characterised representative democracy in Europe as consisting of; government decisions and policies being accountable to locally elected politicians; free elections; freedom to stand for election; free expression; freedom of information; freedom of assembly. This analysis defines European democracy as being representative, accountable and free, in terms of human rights. His ideal model of democracy outlines what he believes a true democracy should strive to achieve, that is; effective participation; equality in voting; gaining enlightened understanding; final control of the agenda ; inclusion; and fundamental rights. Dahl believes that political equality is desirable for governing a state and the only political system that derives its legitimacy and political institutions from the idea of political equality is a democracy. In order to examine what political institutions would be necessary in a democratic state he constructed an ideal concept of democracy as a basis for comparison with the actual models of democracy already in existence. To this end I shall condense the basis principles of democracy as observed by Dahl and using them to construct my own ideal model of democracy so that it may be compared with the current constitutional settlement in the United Kingdom in relation to the Church of England. The basic principles that I have extracted from Dahl’s ideal model are; free elections; representation; participation; accountability; equality; enlightenment; inclusion; and fundamental rights. From this I have devised my own model which will be used to highlight the democratic deficits of the privileged position of the Church of England. My analysis will be based on the principles of; representation, accountability, participation; equality; inclusion; plurality; and human rights under the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. CHAPTER 1: ESTABLISHMENT AND STATE NEUTRALITY 1.1 Establishment The concept of â€Å"establishment† is one of great complexity which bears no single accurate definition, making it difficult to assess what exactly any disestablishment of the Church of England would entail. In order to effectively assess the current constitutional settlement it would be appropriate to explore the idea of establishment and what defines establishment in the first instance. The Chadwick Commission provided a definition of establishment as â€Å"the laws which apply to the Church of England and not to the other churches.† Legal writer Peter W. Edge has commented that the Chadwick definition is only concerned with the Church of England, whereas the idea of establishment may be an abstract term which has simply been applied to the Church of England. By examining the Chadwick definition Edge has developed a fuller legal definition of establishment: â€Å"A religious organisation is established where there are laws which apply to that particular religious organisation, qua that religious organisation, which do not apply to the majority of other religious organisations.† In his definition of establishment Edge highlights that establishment, as a legal construct, is not primarily a question for the Church of England, rather, like other legal constructs it is open for debate by all members of the state, not just those which it affects directly. This opens the discussion up as an issue of national importance and thus warrants this discussion on the compatibility of â€Å"establishment of religion† with the interests of liberal democracy in the United Kingdom. To claim that a particular religion is not the religion of the majority of the population is not a sound basis for a legal discussion, however, to examine the ramifications, values and limits of a legal doctrine is a legitimate endeavour. Edge claims that there are four main areas of the law that characterise establishment; the constitutional laws; the civil laws; the criminal laws; and fiscal and property laws. While this is indeed true it is only the first element, the constitutional laws, that shall be the focus of this paper due to the focus on constitutional reform and good governance. Law is not monolithic as it varies in form, principle and structure so to delve into the individual civil, criminal, fiscal and property laws would not be feasible under the remit of this paper. The â€Å"laws of establishment† are not a separate category of law which has been created under one statute, rather, it was a progressive approach that may be defined through the key privileges enjoyed by the Church of England. Phillimore J commented on the current settlement: â€Å"A Church which is established is not thereby made a department of the state. The process of establishment means that the state has accepted the Church as the religious body in its opinion truly teaching the Christian faith, and given to it a certain legal position, and to it’s decrees, if rendered under certain legal conditions, certain civil sanctions†¦the Church of England is a continuous body from its earliest establishment in Saxon times.† However, the argument that the Church of England best represents the Christian faith no longer holds any water. The National Census of 2001 indicates the following data on religious affiliation for Great Britain: 71.8 per cent Christian, 2.8 per cent Muslim, 1 per cent Hindu, 0.6  per cent Sikh, 0.5 per cent Jewish and 0.3 per cent Buddhist, whereas 15.1 per cent of the population had no religion and 7.8 per cent of people chose not to state their religion. Although almost 72 per cent of British people profess to be Christian, the Church of England represents only one of many Christian denominations in Britain. It has also been contested that these statistics are inaccurate as association with Christian denominations is based on individuals being brought up in nominally Christian households. Furthermore, it has been suggested that a decline in Church attendance represents a need to disestablish an institution that is gradually losing support and which may in turn undermine the legi timacy of a government that affords state privilege to such an institution. The idea of disestablishment is not a new concept, indeed it was very popular at the end of the nineteenth century before other issues dominated the political agenda. However, recently there has been an emergence in the call for disestablishment and the issue is once again creeping up the agenda. 1.2 Attempts to Disestablish in the late 19th Century By tracing a brief outline of failed attempts at disestablishment it is hoped that attention will be drawn to the significance and magnitude of disestablishing the Church of England and how the reasons for failure over a hundred years ago have no basis for opposition to any such attempt in the 21st Century. Furthermore, there is an overriding democratic imperative which should not be ignored in the light of religious equality and human rights. The late nineteenth century represented a period of intense interest in the disestablishment of the Anglican Church in England on the basis that such disestablishment is essential in achieving religious equality. This concept was most prominent with the Nonconformists who were the frontrunners of disestablishment in the latter part of the nineteenth century. Although disestablishment was widespread among Nonconformists there was discontent surfacing amongst the Anglican community who acknowledged that there were shortcomings in being controlled by a multi-faith House of Commons. One reason for the failure of disestablishment in England was the historic lack of unity among Nonconformists over this issue throughout much of the nineteenth century. The Liberation Society was never successful in convincing people outside the Anglican Church that a separation of church and state was fundamental in the aspiration of religious equality. A second reason for failure to disestablish the Anglican Church in England was the attitude of W. E. Gladstone, the Liberal leader during most of the late nineteenth century. Although Gladstone was an advocate of religious equality, as his administration’s parliamentary record showed, he was defiant in his support of the Established Church of England. Despite renegade members of the society working outside the party their failure only highlighted the importance of the support of a major political party in any attempt to legislate on disestablishment. Although Gladstone was the driving force in disestablishing the Church in Ireland he remained persistent in his views towards the Church of England. In an attempt to weaken the call for disestablishment he addressed specific grievances against the Church of England, which in turn picked apart any argument constructed in favour of disestablishment. Without changing his views on the Church of England, Gladstone displayed a greater tolerance for eventual disestablishment in Scotland and Wales. In 1885 he admitted that the Established Churches in both Scotland and in Wales serviced a small minority of the people and there would be no issue in allowing each nation to decide upon its own fate. But he argued that the situation in Wales was more difficult than in Scotland because the Church in Wales was organically one with the Church of England. Possibly the most significant factor in the failure to disestablish the Church of England was because as a political issue it became overshadowed by more pressing emergent issues. Irish Home Rule destroyed any chance of disestablishment being a hot political topic in the 1885 general election, which was worsened by disagreement over the issue of Home Rule between the Nonconformists and the Liberal Party. 1.3 Recent Attempts to Disestablish In the late 1980s and early 1990s MP Tony Benn proposed two Bills to disestablish the Church of England, the first in 1988 which only had one operative section: â€Å"The Church of England shall cease to be established by law, and no person shall, after the passing of this Act, be appointed or nominated by Her Majesty or any other person, by virtue of any existing right of patronage, to an ecclesiastical office in the Church of England.† He also addressed the disestablishment of the Church of England in his Commonwealth of Britain Bill in 1991 where it was proposed that the Church of England be â€Å"disestablished† and powers over doctrine and faith be transferred to the General Synod. Both Bills were unsuccessful and they highlighted what a huge operation it would be to â€Å"disestablish† the Church of England. However, complexity and length are not legitimate grounds for the government to avoid the issue, especially when democracy, the foundation of British society, is being compromised. Current Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has added fuel to the increasing demand for a complete disestablishment of the Church of England. Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s â€Å"World at One† he commented that adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law would help maintain social cohesion. These comments prompted an unforeseeable backlash and public uproar, in turn leaving many questioning the place of religious leaders in public life, and more specifically, the position of the Church of England as the established church. Co-director of think-tank â€Å"Ekklesia†, Jonathan Bartley, commented that: Letting go of privilege is a far better witness to the Christian message than either clinging on to it, seeking to preserve it on a wider basis, or speaking for others rather than engaging them as equals. A motion calling for the disestablishment of the Church of England has been listed in the House of Commons as 666. Labour MP John Austin, who has repeatedly tabled Early Day Motions urging disestablishment, put down his latest motion on January 9th 2008 as MPs debated scrapping Britains blasphemy laws, the law of blasphemy itself representing Christian privilege protected by the law. 1.4 Secularism Secularism is the principle of state neutrality in religious life whereby the state and its institutions grant no religious privileges to any religious group or organisation. By the very definition of secularism it is clear that the United Kingdom cannot call itself a secular state until it has cut official ties with the Church of England, to which it grants numerous religious privileges over all other religions and none. The concept of secularism does not compromise religious belief, nor does it seek to undermine a persons individual religious convictions, rather, it suggests the parameters which are acceptable in terms of religious plurality whereby an individual can manifest his or her religion. Secularism is a goal which any state that calls itself a democracy should strive to achieve and I shall outline the merits of such an objective as well as highlighting how religion in public life may undermine the interests of democracy. Due to increasing religious pluralism in the developed west organised religion and the interests of democracy have become increasingly â€Å"uneasy bedfellows†. The existing Christian denominations must now be added to an increasing number of new cults and, more significantly, substantial Muslim and other non-European religious communities who find the existing settlement between religion and the state problematic. This growing religious plurality is evident in the United Kingdom yet the Church of England remains by law established despite its capacity to marginalize other faith groups and those of no faith. The settlement is highly discriminatory and has created an unnecessary conflict. If religion were to have no role in public life then every group would be on a level playing field with equal opportunity to influence public decisions by way of interest groups. As to those who do not belong to any religious organisation the establishment of a state religion has placed primac y on religion and thus discriminates against those who do not hold any beliefs. One case put forward for secularity, that is the secularisation of public life, is the â€Å"Jefferson Compromise† which was defended by Richard Rorty. Rorty argues that modern democrats should privatise religion without trivialising it and that the religious experience is appropriate for what we do with our aloneness in an open and civil society where one is entitled to freedom of religious worship. He submits that a democratic polity thus has no choice but to ensure that religious believers are guaranteed their freedom to worship their God in private in return for the right of non-believers to live without religious deception within the public domains of civil society and the state. Such an argument seems logical yet the United Kingdom has failed to guarantee such rights to all its citizens. The submissions by Rorty have many merits, most prominent of these being the principle of equality whereby he outlines a pact in which each individuals own beliefs are protected through the absence of religion in public life. Secularists believe that democracy requires the separation of church and state and that citizens be emancipated from state and ecclesiastical diktat in order that they may worship according to their conscience and ethical judgements. In the bible Jesus is quoted as saying â€Å"Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s†. This phrase is ambiguous but essentially refers to a separation of the spiritual and the earthly realms, or, the separation of the church and the state. This presupposes an open and tolerant civil society which operates within a pluralist structure in order to avoid bitterness so that each person can enjoy religious freedom without being confined to the dogmatic beliefs and codes of conduct of others. In a case before the European Courts the issue of secularism was addressed in relation to the wearing of a headscarf and a conflict with constitutional law. In Sahin v Turkey (2005) it was held that the Constitutional Court’s reliance on the principle of secularism was paramount in the ban on wearing religious attire and that â€Å"where the values of pluralism, respect for the rights of others and, in particular, equality before the law were taught and applied, it was understandable that the authorities should wish to preserve the secular nature of the constitution and so consider it contrary to such values to allow religious attire to be worn†. In this case it is apparent that the European Courts perceived secularism as a fundamental principle of democracy in Turkey and as such religious belief and the freedom to manifest such beliefs were secondary to the principles of democracy. I submit that in constructing any model of democracy one of the fundamental components s hould be state neutrality in public life. Secularism is a key concept in any democratic state and presents the only logical and fair means of protecting every persons right to individual belief and right to non belief. CHAPTER 2: ANGLICAN BISHOPS IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS 2.1 Background The presence of the twenty-six most senior bishops of the Church of England in the House of Lords is a precarious situation and arguably the most visible manifestation of establishment. The current constitutional settlement is a hangover of Medieval times, which predates the Reformation and reflects the historical position of Anglican bishops as prominent land owners and advisers to the Crown. Until the mid-nineteenth century the Anglican episcopate constituted a significant faction of the second chamber, however, the Diocese of Manchester Act 1847 and the subsequent Acts disestablishing the Churches of Ireland and Wales provided for the current arrangement of twenty-six bishops. Automatic membership to the chamber is associated only with the five historically pre-eminent secs of Canterbury, York, London, Durham and Winchester, while the twenty-one other seats are filled on the basis of seniority. The twenty-six seats held by the Anglican bishops are the only formal provision made fo r the representation of religion in the second chamber in its present form, and while other members of the House of Lords have strong links with various faith groups, and might be seen as providing de facto representation of the viewpoints and beliefs of such groups, it is only the Church of England that has seats reserved for its representatives. It is anomalous that bishops should sit in the legislature ex officio as this results in a duplicate representation of religious views. This discriminates not only against other religions, whether they are Christian or non-Christian groups, but also against the non-religious, who, as I shall discuss in more detail later, have no formal representation based solely on being non-religious. I am not advocating that such provisions should be made, for either other religious groups or non-religious groups, rather, in the interests of plurality and equality the most logistic and ascertainable goal would be to eliminate any form of representation based solely on religion, and to that end, and within the remit of this discussion, the twenty-six seats held by the Anglican bishops should be revoked. 2.2 Proposed Reform of the House of Lords The broader issue of reforming the House of Lords has been a hot topic throughout the last decade, and while reformation of the upper chamber is not the focus of this paper, the subsequent reports and papers published recently address the issue of the Anglican bishops in the upper chamber. The Fifth Report of the Public Administration Select Committee has been the most radical in it’s approach to the senior bishops vis their position in the House of Lords: â€Å"If we are serious about equipping Britain with a modern Parliament and constitution, it is time to modernise this aspect of our constitution too, and to bring to an end formal representation of the church in Parliament†¦we recommend that the Bishops of the Church of England should no longer sit ex officio from the time of the next general election but one.† This report has recognised both the dated nature of our constitutional settlement and the need to get rid of the bishops in order to fully modernise Parliament. However, both the Wakeham Report and the government’s two white papers on the issue defend the position of the Church of England in Parliament. While they recommend that the bishops should remain the Wakeham Report and the 2001 White Paper agree that the number of seats so reserved should be reduced from twenty-six to sixteen, while the 2007 White Paper claims that assuming that the overall size of the House was to be reduced twenty-six Anglican bishops could not be justified. Recommendation 1 The twenty-six Anglican Bishops in the House of Lords should cease to sit in this House on an ex officio basis While the Wakeham Report and the White Papers agree that the number of bishops should be reduced to sixteen they diverge on their approach to accommodating representatives of other religions. The Wakeham Report recommends that 26 seats should be reserved for the religious representatives of the nations of the United Kingdom, and based on the population of each of the nations in the United Kingdom twenty-one seats should go to Christian denominations in England, and five to members representing the Christian denominations of Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. It recommends that of the twenty-one places reserved for Christian denominations in England, sixteen should be reserved for the Church of England. The Wakeham Report recommends that the Appointments Commission should be responsible for selecting the ten members from other Christian faith, five from England and five from Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales collectively, and should also ensure that five seats are reserved for m embers of non-Christian denominations. The Report is careful to mention the significance of secular views as well as religious views, and recommends that both be accommodated in the new format of the house, however, the Report fails to make any provisions to reserve such seats for secular representatives as they have done for the religious. The main difficulty in accepting the presence of the Anglican bishops in the upper chamber is that membership rates of the Church of England are skewered by its membership methods. Establishment has afforded the Church of England an ideology of membership which differs from any other denomination in the UK as it operates on an involuntary basis, accepting all members who do not take positive steps to set themselves outside of its community at any point in time. Recommendation 2 The method of membership to the Church of England should be on a voluntary basis like every other denomination in the UK so to allow every person born in England the free will to either select their own religion or none at all. Perhaps it is the case that from the outset the Wakeham Commission was restricted in its scope as the White Paper establishing the Royal Commission explicitly stated that the twenty-six Anglican bishops were to remain in the House. It states: â€Å"The Government does not propose any change in the transitional House of Lords in the representation of the Church of England within the House. The Bishops often make a valuable contribution to the House because of their particular perspective and experience. To ensure that contribution remains available, the Government proposes to retain the present size of the Bishops bench which we accept is justified†¦Ã¢â‚¬  It has been claimed that this diktat must have tested the Commission’s ingenuity to the limits as to how to justify the unjustifiable. The White Paper 2001 lacks a lot of the detail that the Wakeham Report has provided in its approach to accommodating other representatives of religion. It claims that the proposals set out by the Wakeham Report are unattainable as many other denominations and faith groups lack the hierarchical structure that would deliver readily identifiable representatives and that there are more faith groups than there are proposed seats. The White Paper simply recommends that the Appointments Commission should ensure that it appoints representatives of the other faith communities in the United Kingdom. While the

Friday, January 17, 2020

Illustrate the case for reading the poem as (in part) a study in becoming Roman Essay

To both modern and ancient readers alike perhaps one theme of the Aeneid has generally been perceived most strongly, that of the poem’s glorification and aetiological justification of the values and society of the Imperial Rome in which its poet, Vergil, lived. In contrast to the Hesiodic concept of the decline of society from a bygone Golden Age, Vergil implicitly argues in the Aeneid for the constant evolution of society as having produced in Rome the very pinnacle of civilisation. However, this does not mean that his view is universally rose-tinted: Vergil, also, manages to portray the pathos of those who give their lives for this end (e.g. the self-sacrifices of Dido in book IV and Nisus and Euryalus in book IX [at whose plight Vergil says siquid mea carmina possunt, nulla dies umquam memori vos eximet aevo1]). Like Augustus, Vergil tends to relate the present to mos maiorum, so that innovation is given the guise of conservatism (as Rome was, after all, a generally conservative society). In this essay, I shall discuss the ways in which the poem expresses the development of such a Roman identity. From the outset the poem explains that Aeneas’ struggles (with which we are first met) are not in vain: his descendants are, famously, to obtain imperium sine fine, in the words of Jupiter (1.277). By book XII, that goal is within clear sight. The fact that the all-powerful father of the gods programmatically and teleologically tells of such future greatness so early in the poem gives the reader no option but to focus subsequently on how Aeneas achieves this fated goal. Vergil tends not to involve the gods as directly in the narrative of human affairs as does Homer, but uses them to great effect symbolically and to give such weighty pronouncements. Another programmatic feature of the first book involves its emphasis on kingship: to give just two examples, at line 265 we are told, by Jupiter, that Aeneas will reign over Latium and he is soon after described as king of the fugitive Trojans by Ilioneus (544). Dido ‘is [termed] regina eleven times’ in book I.2 This may not be particularly surprising considering that kingship was the traditional form of government in epic poetry and the heroic world, but such emphasis could be said not only to foresee the supreme power of Augustus (though he did not, due to the negative connotations, style himself as rex or dictator) but also to legitimise it. Augustus may be seen as a benevolent dictator in the mould of Hellenistic kings. To become truly Roman it follows that Aeneas must, equally, become less Trojan, and we can see this process occurring in the poem. Due to the high esteem of Homer’s epics (and the relative paucity of other accounts), the Trojan world is, for both Vergil and ourselves, a predominantly Homeric one; accordingly, some critics have seen in the poem of a gradual rejection of Homeric values. For example, the Aeneas that we see in book II can be said to be ‘rash, implusive, brave [and] seeking when all is lost the glorious death’3: all perfectly Achillean attributes, which, one could argue, slowly recede as the poem progresses. In the second half of the poem (i.e. the ‘Iliadic half’), Turnus is a clear foil to Aeneas (n.b. his bellicose words to Pandarus at the end of book IX: ‘You will soon be able to tell Priam that here too you found an Achilles!’). The Roman way of life involves, arguably, a reliance on debate and compromise more than the manliness and aggression of Homeric heroes. However, this analysis cannot be treated too simplistically as there are points, even towards the poem’s dà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½nouement, where Aeneas is just as ruthless and cold as ever: for example, at many points during book X he rejects pleas for mercy and jeers at those who are on the point of death. Anchises’ prophetic statement in the underworld of book VI has, also, been seen by critics as important in showing both us and Aeneas how to ‘become Roman’, whilst also sanctioning the power of the Roman state: Your task, Roman, and do not forget it, will be to govern the peoples of the world in your empire. These will be your arts — and to impose a settled pattern upon peace, to pardon the defeated and war down the proud. (6.851-3) It is important to note the context, for Aeneas is now starting to act very much like the good king, by acting in accordance with the gods when he leads his men to the Sibyl; whilst in the underworld, Aeneas sees a number of his descendants and successors, many of whom are rulers, and by doing so his right to rule is implicitly confirmed. The speech of Anchises, however, sets Rome within a firm tradition: it was well accepted by many Romans that Greek culture was superior in many respects. If we look at the lines above in which Anchises mentions the Greek arts of sculpture, oratory and astronomy, he can surely be said to define Rome against Greece by tacitly accepting their superiority in these realms, but he implies that the arts of Rome, the arts of peace and war, are what really matter. Though this may seem like an exceptionally aggressive mission, the extent to which clemency (a famous virtue of Augustus) and ultimate peace are emphasised must be noted. In the light of these ideals, Aeneas’ Achillean anger towards Turnus seems ‘in this light disturbing’.4 Perhaps the ideals are too idealistic to reflect reality truly. However, whether they were actually achieved or not, the ideals seem to have been held dearly in historical Rome, if we read what Claudian wrote (albeit with some degree of bias) four centuries after the time of Augustus: This is the only nation which has received conquered people in her embrace, and protected the human race under a common name like a mother not a tyrant, has called those whom she defeated her citizens, and has united the distant parts of the world in a bond of affection for her.5 One has to consider, however, that Roman bravado is often tempered in the poem. The many Trojan deaths throughout the poem are often glorified to emphasize the individual sacrifice for the communal goal. For example, Vergil’s apostrophe to Lausus: ‘harsh death’s misfortune and your noble deeds †¦ I shall not indeed leave unsung, nor you, O unforgettable youth’. 6 Such apostrophes seem to be based upon formulae deriving from Homeric invocations of the Muse, however, which might imply that the sentiment is not so personal as it seems.7 Dido, too, is seen as merely another obstacle which needs to be overcome for Rome to flourish (though she is repeatedly described, perhaps in Vergil’s own voice, as ‘pitiable’). Indeed, in one startling way she could be said to resemble a disgraced Homeric warrior: she falls on her own sword. Aeneas’ ‘escape’ from her thus further represents his retreat from Homeric values. To look at one final such death, the final two lines of the poem focus on the death of Turnus: The limbs of Turnus were disolved in cold and his life left him with a groan, fleeing in anger down to the shades. (12.951-2) The coldness of Turnus’ body may recall in our minds the first storm scene in which we meet Aeneas at sea, and may reiterate the degree to which Aeneas has reversed his despair (turning it into the despair of his main adversary). These lines thus emphasize both the pathos of the death and the certainty of Aeneas’ victory. It recalls, and is based upon, Homer, i.e. the deaths of both Hector and Patroclus (Iliad 16.857 & 22.363).8 The sadness of his death is thereby emphasised, since he is equated with such heroes on either side of the Trojan war. His death was a natural end to the poem (though perhaps an unnatural end for him). It may now be useful to look closely at a part of the poem that is, undoubtedly, looking forward to Rome perhaps more explicitly than any other: the ecphrasis towards the end of book VIII (626-728) focusing on the shield of Aeneas wrought for him by Vulcan as a foresight of the coming Roman glory. However, the crucial intertext on which this scene was modelled is that of the ecphrasis on Achilles’ shield at Iliad 18.478ff, so Vergil is still using a Homeric model to emphasise Rome’s greatness; Greek epic has such gravitas as a genre that, if Rome is to be such a towering civilisation, Roman epic needs to look back to its Greek antecedent. Indeed, in Homer Achilles has a desperate need for new armour (with the loss of his own after the killing of Patroclus), whereas it seems that Vergil includes this scene merely to show ‘before the full-scale fighting begins, what is to be achieved by it’. 9 The final, and (both literally and symbolically) central, scene of the shield shows Augustus’ celebrations after the battle of Actium (31 BC) in which he gained imperium from M. Antonius. Indeed, the shield itself is reminiscent of the shield that was hung in the Curia to commemorate Augustus’ virtues in 27 BC; such virtues (i.e. virtus, clementia, iustitia and pietas) surely apply equally to the Roman imperator and Aeneas (especially pietas, since Aeneas’ pietas was proverbial and pius is a common epithet applied to him throughout the poem). The two men are poetically conflated, thereby giving heroic prestige to the emperor. Most pertinent, however, is that the scene shows numerous and various peoples of the earth (e.g. Nomads, Scythian Gelonians, Gaulish Morini etc.) offering Augustus gifts: the implication is clearly that virtually everyone throughout the world is universally thankful for the arrival of pax Romana. The message is not quite so clear-cut and confident, however, since the theme of war is also almost always present in this vignette. Quite obviously, the theme of ‘war is apt both for the Shield as a martial instrument and for the circumstances of its delivery’,10 however, it moreover emphasizes the extent to which Roman peace relies upon the willingness to fight, however counter-intuitive that might seem. Virgil is certainly patriotic, but he nevertheless neither shies from or tries to obscure the realities of the early-Imperial political situation. In conclusion, the Aeneid can clearly be seen as a study in becoming Roman. Aeneas’ divine mission is reiterated throughout the poem with increasing intensity, especially throughout religious symbolism and prophecy: Aeneas is well aware that he must become Roman. The poem appears to move towards Roman values as it progresses, values such as pietas and clementia, in the face of Homeric impulses and aggression. However, such an analysis needs to be tempered: most notably because of such incidents as Aeneas’ rage against and murder of Turnus when he sees him wearing Pallas’ sword belt. Moreover, the poem continuously looks forward to a Rome to come, especially the Augustan Rome of Vergil’s era. Some have seen the poem as a mere propaganda piece, but it is clear that Vergil’s implicit praise for the Augustan rà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½gime is sophisticated and not blind to the woes of war and those who are killed to make way for the Roman superpower: to use the phrase of the Aeneid, sunt lacrimae rerum. Through imitation (and innovation), Vergil also looks back to Homer. Perhaps the best summary of the message of the Aeneid is given by the ancient commentator Servius: ‘Virgil’s intention is to imitate Homer and to praise Augustus by means of his ancestors.’11 Vergil may, ultimately, have succeeded in his aim, when we consider that the poem was considered a seminal text in Roman civilisation and acquaintance with the poem was a primary method of teaching ancient children not only Latin but also the ‘Roman way of life’. Bibliography Cairns, F. (1989). Virgil’s Augustan Epic. Cambridge. Hardie, P.R. (1986). Virgil’s Aeneid: Cosmos and Imperium. Oxford. Lyne, R.O.A.M. (1987). Further Voices in Vergil’s Aeneid. Oxford. Williams, R.D. (1985). The Aeneid of Virgil: A Commentary. London. Williams, R.D. (1990). ‘The Purpose of the Aeneid’ in Oxford Readings in Vergil’s Aeneid (ed. S.J. Harrison), Oxford. 1 Aeneid 9.446-7. 2 Cairns (1989), 2. 3 Williams (1990), 28. 4 Lyne (1987), 112. 5 Cairns (1989), 205. (De Consolatu Stilichonis, 3.150-3.) 6 Aeneid 10.791-3. 7 Lyne (1987), 235. 8 Lyne (1987), 135-6. 9 Williams (1985), 90. 10 Hardie (1986), 347. 11 Williams (1990), 21.

Thursday, January 9, 2020

George Washington Leadership - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 5 Words: 1369 Downloads: 6 Date added: 2019/10/10 Did you like this example? Institution Assess George Washington?s leadership performance using at least one leadership theory The Servant-Leadership theory is a practical philosophy that backs the leaders who choose service first, and then take their role as a way of making their service felt by individuals and institutions. Servant-leadership breeds collaboration, trust, and the ethical use of authority among the leadership (Avolio, Walumbwa, Weber, 2009). George Washington can be regarded as being among the most outstanding servant leaders in the American. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "George Washington Leadership" essay for you Create order What made him a servant leader was his nature of being humble and willingness to serve his nation (Schwartz, 1983). The self-awareness was further backed by his love for the people; he was serving to others-oriented, valued the people he served, and had a commitment towards assisting people in their growth. According to Van Dierendonck (2011), servant leadership means being able to achieve the balance between serving others and exercising one’s power and authority. The nature of power portrayed by Washington neither came from his formal position of the Commander-in-Chief nor his Presidency but rather his willingness to listen, help and nurture trust and openness with the people he served. It is therefore evident that George Washington depicted high standards of leadership that were past little authority of managing people (Newman, 1992). He exercised his authority in a manner that saw him becoming a very powerful and influential leader, enough to serve his people. Consequently , George Washington was successful in building effective relationships with his followers as well as his organization. This case alone is an indication that George Washington had a strong orientation towards the sharing of knowledge, empowerment of his followers, and utilizing his focus on servant leadership as a form of persuasion. True servant leadership is evident in cases where a leader, in this case, George Washington, leads by assuming the position of a servant when relating to his followers. He, therefore, focused on the needs of the people and contributed to the greater benefit. It is common for leadership to come with defined authority over the people. However, the manner in which George Washington managed to balance that power and act to the benefit of the nation, ensured the well-being of his followers (McNeilly, 2008). He never allowed power to dominate out his perception of leadership, allowing him to prove his higher standards of leadership. Based on the theory of servant leadership, service was at the core of George Washington’s role. Despite the fact that power is associated with leadership, he only used it legitimately, for service (McNeilly, 2008). The notion that leaders need to use their power in serving both the people is a powerful one. Just like George Washington, an ideal leader sh ould use power in building trust with the followers. Was there something unique to his or her leadership? In 1777, after suffering defeat by the British, George Washington still managed to convince his demoralized troops to struggle despite facing a shortage of munitions as well as the harsh winter conditions. In this case, Washington’s success was not as a result of exerting his power or being a master motivator. His success was due to his selflessness, and willingness to face hardship alongside his troops (Washington Army, 2014). He did not demand from them anything he would not do in person. His unique leadership character makes him serve as a reminder to every leader that leadership is not just about the leaders self-interest; it is in the interests of the people they represent. As a great leader, George Washington always found ways to work with people. Power comes with great responsibility.   During the uncertain atmosphere of the American Revolution, a movement was driven by officers in the Continental Army that regarded George Washington as being a King of America. However, George Washington was quick to dispel the idea (Newman, 1992). Even though it sounds an incredible occurrence in the 200 years of U.S. democracy, it was expected of George Washington based on his characteristics.   Being a military leader of the fledgling republic, and with the support of the colonists, he was in a position to determine the future of the American people. George Washington never viewed leadership as a tool for personal gain or ambition (Greenstein, 2006). Instead, it took the opportunity to serve a higher purpose.   Unlike his role of commanding soldiers during the American Revolution, George Washington was a Democratic president of the U.S. government. His Democratic leadership was evident when he appointed powerful personalities to his staff.   He even confirmed his intentions eight after his appointment as president by not subjecting to the majority cry that he runs for a third term. He voluntarily refused to be nominated and gave up his power. His decision depicted him as a democratic leader. Being the president, George Washington had the opportunity of choosing to mimic a parliamentary system or having the aristocratic social class dominate the executive branch of the government. He could have committed himself to solely meeting the legislative directions. But instead, he used his constitutional powers in leading America through its first growing pains (Rasmussen, 1999). His leadership form helped with restoring the nation’s finances, securing the nation from dangerous war with the European, creating an opportunity for American expansion; and seeing the Constitution through allowing the first political parties. To what extent did he or she shape the times or was shaped by them? Shaping the authority of the presidency Based on the American Constitutional requirements, Washingtons vigorous policies set an example of the leadership of an energetic president, rather than a ceremonial figurehead. Subordinates were expected to seek the president’s approval of their actions. Furthermore, George Washington accepted personal responsibility for the conduct of his subordinates (Schwartz, 1983). During his consultations with the Senate on appointments, he made it clear that the only President had the authority of firing appointees. This shaped the presidents control of the executive branch of the government. Although Washington used the presidents veto constitutional power on two occasions, he insisted on the right of the president to reject any legislation he did not agree (Rasmussen, 1999). George Washington’s presidency saw the birth of the idea of implied powers in the Constitution that triggered him to signing a law that saw the creation of the first national bank. Similarly, he employed h is powers as the commander-in-chief to call out the militia to end the Whiskey Rebellion. He also set the pace for the subsequent presidents to take a hand in foreign policies that would protect Americans by prudently resisting British and French invasion and keeping America out of the European war. Many authors have reached a solid consensus that Washingtons presidency set the nation on a path that witnessed for over 200 years, making America among the longest republics in history (Schwartz, 1983; Newman, 1992; McNeilly, 2008). He established governance practices that would see America last for generations. In fact, George Washington did more to equip the presidential office beyond the expectations of everyone. Rasmussen (1999) indicates that George Washington invented tradition for American leaders as he went along. He acted more of a Founding Father, therefore becoming part of the unwritten Constitution. From a slaveholder to advocating for freedom George Washington leadership marked a revolution that made the greatest advances towards advocating for individual liberty. On the contrary, throughout a greater part of his life, he was a slaveholder who denied liberty to others and instead became wealthy from their labor (Newman, 1992). Washington considered slavery as a legal act and insisted on the property rights of slaveholders. He even went to the extent of preventing some of his slaves from fleeing to the northern states. Nevertheless, some of Washingtons private correspondence argued that he later came to reject slavery (Rasmussen, 1999). His doubts about slavery date back from the Revolution when he was against the buying and selling of Africans. He proclaimed himself as being principled against human trafficking. According to him, slavery itself was an immoral institution and no living being wished for its abolition more sincerely than George Washington did. In his will, drafted in 1799, George Washington instructed that h is slaves be freed upon his death and the death of his wife with a fund trust being set up to care for the welfare of those who were elderly or infirm.

Wednesday, January 1, 2020

Domestic Terrorism And The Security Of The Us - 1040 Words

Today, domestic terrorism is one of the major threats to the national security of the US. Since 9/11, the US intelligence services and law enforcement agencies viewed international terrorism as the major threat to the public security of the US but the threat of domestic terrorism has been underestimated. At any rate, American law enforcement agencies conduct active campaigns to prevent international terrorism but domestic terrorism become a serious threat to the national security of the US. In such a way, the US needs to develop effective strategies to prevent the rise of domestic terrorism. Otherwise, the US may face a threat of the consistent growth of domestic terrorism as do some European countries, such as the UK, for instance. Therefore, law enforcement agencies should focus their attention on the prevention of domestic terrorism because, even though domestic terrorism is unseen, it may be even more dangerous than international terrorism. Domestic terrorists undermine the count ry from within, while international terrorists attack the US from the outside and the US can raise barriers to protect Americans from the foreign threat, while domestic terrorism needs effective work of law enforcement agencies nationwide. Therefore, domestic terrorism is a serious threat to the national security of the US and American law enforcement agencies along legislators and the public have to unite their efforts in the struggle against domestic terrorism. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISMShow MoreRelatedA Brief Note On The Terrorism And Terrorism1064 Words   |  5 PagesCanan Kumas POLS 431-01 Globalization and Security Dr. Daniel Herman Research Paper Homegrown Terrorism Terrorism is terrorist activity either made on one’s homeland or made on another person’s country, which is/has become a huge concern for the United States. After the attacks of September 11, 2001, the US has taken huge measures to make sure there were not foreign attacks made on US soil again, but what about domestic attacks? The attacks of 9/11 left more than 3,000 civilians dead and moreRead MoreRed Cell Analysis Of Right Wing Extremist Militias1638 Words   |  7 PagesRed Cell Analysis of Right Wing Extremist Militias in the United States Christopher A Caley HLSS230 Intelligence Homeland Security 13 August 2015 Right wing miliita groups represent a danger to the domestic security of the United States. Their ideology of violence or the threat of violence is consistent with the laws and values of the American people as a whole. From their perspective, they believe they are defending their liberty, property, and their lives from an oppressive governmentRead MoreExamining the Domestic Terror Groups: An Important Study for the Homeland Security667 Words   |  3 Pages2001, the threat from domestic terror groups remains a central concern of those responsible for homeland security. In fact, while the United States has not suffered from another foreign attack in the decade since 9/11, research by the Federal Bureau of Investigations, along with non-governmental organizations, has found that the number of domestic terror groups has increased, a trend only exacerbated by the economic recession (U.S. Department of Justice, 2009, Domestic Terrorism). While there are aRead MoreDomestic Terrorism An d International Terrorism1335 Words   |  6 Pagesnews but our everyday reality. Terrorism has been another problem, terrorism is nothing new and has always been present but after the 09/11 attack it has been increasing throughout the years. Most terror attacks haven’t been as impactful as the 9/11 attack but most recently domestic terrorists have carried out most of the attacks. The government should take the measures necessary and focus more on domestic terrorism than international terrorism for now, because domestic terrorists are already here andRead MoreDomestic Terrorism And Its Effect On Terrorism Essay1541 Words   |  7 Pages Domestic terrorism consists of violations against federal and state law that put humans into danger. The purpose of domestic terrorism is to influence or to instill fear into the population and government. Terrorism comes in forms of gun violence, assassinations, and destruction (1). Since 1970, there have been 2,608 attacks and 226 fatal attacks up until 2011 (3). In 1867, the development of dynamite contributed to increasing terrorism, and radicals have used explosives to bring attention to politicalRead MoreDomestic Terrorism Term paper702 Words   |  3 Pagesï » ¿ Excelsior College CJ 352 Domestic Terrorism Term Paper What are some of the arguments for or against the use of the internet as an intelligence-gathering tool? The internet is serving as virtual meeting for billions of users. The intelligence-gathering is leveraging the internet using hard data for online links. The social networking sites are the main complementary link to any information. The social networking sites provide the most importantRead MoreNational Security Vs. Digital Privacy1735 Words   |  7 Pagesto the increasing crime and terrorism rates in America, the optimal solution thus far is enhancing security throughout the nation. By doing so, policies, procedures, and protocols would be amended for the sole purpose of protecting the country. Such alterations should be made because it prevents crime in a timely, reliable, and successful manner, whilst preserving the fundamental rights of all United States Citizens. In light of the controversy over national security versus digital privacy, the governmentRead MoreTerrorism And The United Nations Security Council1351 Words   |  6 PagesTerrorism by its very natu re disrupts international peace and security through premeditated, political violence. The 11th September attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon disrupted the global economy. The attacks spawned and facilitated widespread personal fear, panic and economic dislocation (Bergen, 2002). According to the United Nations Security Council, one of the objectives of the terrorists was to create a state of global anarchy by means of influencing the conduct of governmentRead MoreAn Age Of Mass Migration And International Terrorism1715 Words   |  7 Pagesinternational terrorism, the intersection of liberty and equality while also pursuing domestic security and efficiency is a major concern. The ability to untangle these forces is critical to national identities and to resolving contradictions between these principles in order to strengthen the values of justice. The values of liberty, equality, security and efficiency have different weights, but all of these have come to characterize the modern state, have guided the formation of domestic public policyRead MoreEssay about Homeland Security1415 Words   |  6 PagesSince 9/11, terrorism has become a priority for law enforcement and military personnel in the United States. Even more importantly, it has turned into a War o n Terrorism. September 11th was the worst terrorist attack ever on the United States. Therefore, our government officials responded in the only way that felt suitable, attacking terrorism. The group responsible for the events of 9/11 is called the Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda is one of the most well known terrorist groups in the world. Because