The UK is one of the last western democracies with a state religion: the Church of England.
The Church's entanglement with the state is bad for both.
Join our campaign to disestablish the Church.
CAMPAIGN ALERT: Support the disestablishment bill
In November 2023, a private member's bill to disestablish the Church of England was selected in the ballot.
Please write to your MP and urge them to support this bill, to make the UK are more equitable and democratic country for people of all religions and beliefs.
Since our founding in 1866, one of our primary objectives has been disestablishment of the Church of England: its formal separation from the state.
More than 150 years later, census figures show most people in England and Wales are not Christian. Surveys consistently reveal a similar picture in Scotland. The case for disestablishment has never been stronger.
Disestablishment means the Church would no longer have privileged input into government - but also that government could not involve itself in the running of the Church. Both sides would gain autonomy. This is why support for Church-state separation can be found within the CofE itself.
There have been many proponents, religious and non-religious, for church-state separation, and there are a wide variety of motivations for supporting this reform.
The existence of a legally-enshrined national religion privileges one part of the population, one institution and one set of beliefs. Removing all symbolic and institutional ties between government and religion is the only way to ensure equal treatment to citizens of all religions and none.
The Church of England has enjoyed significant privileges relating its established status for many centuries. These privileges have remained largely unchanged despite the massive and continuing reduction in support for the Church in the UK. It is highly likely that this trend will continue for the foreseeable future, making the Church of England's continuation as the established church unsustainable.
- Christians are a minority in Britain. In Wales and Scotland the majority have no religion.
- Just 1% of 18-24 year olds say they belong to the Church of England.
- Less than 1% of the population regularly attend Church of England church services.
The Church of England is also out of step with the UK public on several key issues: it remains opposed to same-sex relationships and allows parishes to reject women as bishops and priests. These discriminatory positions cannot be reconciled with the Church's status as part of the UK state.
And no institution with the shameful historical record of the Church of England safeguarding and abuse should retain its privileged role in the British establishment.
The existence of a legally enshrined national religion privileges one part of the population, one institution and one set of beliefs. Removing all symbolic and institutional ties between government and religion is the only way to ensure equal treatment of citizens of all religions and none.
Take action!
1. Write to your MP
Ask your MP to support the separation of church and state
2. Share your story
Tell us why you support this campaign, and how you are personally affected by the issue. You can also let us know if you would like assistance with a particular issue.
3. Join the National Secular Society
Become a member of the National Secular Society today! Together, we can separate religion and state for greater freedom and fairness.
Latest updates
Cut bishop numbers in Lords, says panel chair, following NSS criticism
Posted: Mon, 6 Nov 2017 15:53
The chair of a House of Lords committee has said the number of bishops in the Lords should fall after the National Secular Society criticised its proposals for reform.
Lord Burns, who chairs the Lord Speaker's committee on the size of the House, told the Sunday Telegraph the committee favoured a reduction. He said it had excluded the measure from a report last week because it would have been a "distraction".
The committee, which had members from all parties and the crossbenches, said the Lords should be reduced to 600 members and its size capped at that number. It only suggested changes which would not require legislation after the Government ruled out passing it. It did not consider recommending reducing the number of bishops in the Lords, as the measure was outside its remit.
The NSS criticised the proposals on the basis they would hand bishops more power.
This weekend Lord Burns told the Sunday Telegraph he accepted the number of bishops in House of Lords should be cut in line with that of ordinary peers.
"The underlying view of the committee was it would be better if there was a reduction in numbers," he said. However, he added: "whether there are 26 bishops or 16 bishops does not change the nature of this House. There's plenty of time for that.
"The most important thing is to get the major structure in place. We can then worry about some of the other issues at a later point.
"It's slightly anomalous that the result of this will be that the share of the bishops is larger, the share of the hereditaries is larger, but we can live with that, certainly for a period."
In response NSS campaigns director Stephen Evans said: "The Church of England's privileged power to shape UK legislation needs to be curtailed, and sooner rather than later.
"It is unclear why reducing the number of bishops would be a distraction, why this issue should wait for a later date, or why an increase in the bishops' power can be tolerated for a period. Lord Burns's defensive language appears designed to obfuscate the issue.
"And the power to take significant action lies with the Government. A meaningful public debate on the bishops' place in the Lords is overdue, and should conclude with the decision to remove their automatic right to sit in the UK parliament."
In its submission to the inquiry earlier this year the NSS urged the Committee to consider entirely removing the Bishops' Bench and ending the arrangement whereby religious representatives are given seats as of right. It argued that the bench is "an anomaly in a modern, liberal democracy and if a need to reduce the size of the chamber has been identified the Bishops' Bench is an obvious place to start".
A Church of England spokesman said David Urquhart, the Bishop of Birmingham and convenor of the Lords Spiritual, had "warmly welcomed" the report as "a clear way forward for dealing with the problem of the size of the House of Lords".
Bishop Urquhart "has said that bishops would not be averse to discussing the issue in principle", but "ultimately it is for Parliament to decide what shape reform of the Lords should take, and what the role of the bishops is within that".
A poll commissioned in 2010 by the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust found that 74% of the population – including 70% of Christians – believe it is wrong that some Church of England bishops are given an automatic seat in the House of Lords.
Discuss this on Facebook.
Former Archbishop of Canterbury criticises Church establishment
Posted: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 15:51
Rowan Williams, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, has appeared to agree in principle with disestablishing the Church of England.
"I've often thought of the establishment of the Church of England: I wouldn't start from here," he said on Tuesday. "It reflects a slightly odd 16th-century view of the absolute inseparability of the Church and the state, which is realistically not where we are now."
He added that he was "a bit reluctant to think of disestablishing the Church at this particular point, simply because it would feel like a concession to public secularism – pushing religious voices out of public debate".
He said the Church did not have "huge legal privileges or power" and religious communities made a "contribution to public debate" which is "important".
Williams was speaking to the Today programme, on BBC Radio 4, to mark the 500th anniversary of the reformation. His stance largely echoed comments he made in 2008, when he said "it's by no means the end of the world if the establishment disappears".
NSS campaigns director Stephen Evans said Williams's support for disestablishment in principle was "welcome" but his unwillingness to concede ground to secularists was "incredibly petty".
"Rowan Williams's instincts seem to be telling him to support disestablishing the Church and allowing it to stand on its own two feet. This would create a secular state where religion is a private matter for those who wish to hold it. That would be the right thing to do.
"His reasons for not supporting this course of action are sadly revealing. He can no longer justify the Church's privileged position in public life on reasonable grounds, so instead he has resorted to scaremongering about the secularist cause."
In this week's interview Williams said it was "impossible" to answer questions about whether the UK was still a Christian country.
"The public symbols around us, the legacy we've inherited, the cultural language we've inherited is – for the most part – Christian. We're not a nation of practising Christians, however, and that's one of the tensions which makes life for an established Church very difficult at times."
Williams also said he thought it was "harder for people to talk about their faith in public" because of the association between religion and extremism. But he added that "we're not quite as secular as we think," arguing that some people who have no personal faith use the Church for personal occasions or voice concern about churches closing.
Discuss this on Facebook.
