Since when did the Judiciary deem themselves fit and proper to define theological matters? The presumptuousness of it!
Mr Justice Langstaff, a High Court judge says that Christians have no right to decline working on Sunday as it is not a “core component” of their beliefs. Apparently this was because some Christians were prepared to work Sundays.
Since Apostolic times Christians have gathered together one day a week to worship, break bread, offer the Eucharist and confess their sins. St Justin and Tertullian both mention the importance of Sundays. From thenceforth on there have been numerous Councils and ecclesiastical bodies.
Germany has had Sunday rest enshrined in its basic law as a day of rest and “spiritual elevation and indeed Sixteen of the EU's 27 members have already provided legal protection for Sunday as a work-free day. This is where unions and churches have worked together to ensure that people, workers and families get the rest and protection that they need.
Aside from my own inclination to having Sunday as a day of rest why do I think that the Judge is wrong? It's because of his reliance upon 'The fact that some Christians were prepared to work on Sundays meant it was not protected.'
There we have a Judge at odds with earlier precedents on religious matters, and it always seems that Christians are treated differently. Consider the case of Sarika Singh, it's as plain as the nose of my face that not all Sikhs wear the 5 items yet a Judge makes law as though all do. Yet as soon as an Orthodox Christian wearing a cross or Sunday working comes into the frame we get hit with 'well not all Christians do that'.
Authored by Chris Hall