A Roman Catholic archbishop says Britain is spiritually lost and intends to do something about it. His ambitions are the point of the Catholic Church’s spear into this historic bastion of Protestantism.

Britain is becoming “aggressively antireligious,” says the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Birmingham Vincent Nichols, top contender to replace the current head of the Catholic Church in Britain. “There is a need in political life to dig deeper and find the foundations, aspirations and values,” Nichols stated earlier this month. In comments reminiscent of what have become typical remarks of Pope Benedict xvi, the crusading archbishop, speaking of a moral vacuum, gave voice to the increasingly assertive stance of the Catholic Church in Britain in an interview with the Times. Earlier, Nichols exhorted the priests of his diocese to fight that antireligious culture.

Echoing sentiments expressed recently by Benedict, Nichols bemoaned the rising tide of secularism threatening Britain, saying that the country is losing its moral compass. “There is a version of secularism going around which is antireligious, which wants to banish religion from (the political) public forum,” he told the Times. Unafraid of controversy, also like Benedict, Nichols points an accusatory finger at Islam: Atrocities committed by Muslim extremists had “shaken people’s perception of the presence of faiths in this country and around the world.”

Caught between what it sees as the twin threats to Britain—secularism and Islam—the Catholic Church has emerged fighting. Seeking exemptions for Catholic institutions in matters relating to homosexual adoption to faith-based schools, the church has taken on the government in a manner that is unprecedented in modern times. In general, Nichols has been at the center of the debate and the prime instigator. In a range of issues, he has been seeking special exemptions for the Catholic Church.

In his interview with the Times, Nichols “said a greater distinction should be made between the Islamic tradition and mainstream Christianity, which shaped the wider moral values of British society” (Daily Mail, April 7). Nichols stated, “This should also be reflected in the government’s handling of Muslim and Christian faith schools.” What he was actually saying was that Islamic schools should be integrated into the state system, but not Catholic schools. “The deep roots of our contemporary secular culture lie in Christianity,” he said. “But Islam is a newcomer ….”

The archbishop was specifically referring to a raging controversy, the latest round of which was in fact won by the Catholic Church in what has been referred to as a humiliating defeat for the government. Last October, Nichols forced the government to back down on proposed legislation to introduce admission quotas at faith-based schools (which account for about a third of British state schools). In an effort to reduce the polarization of society and to ward off the growth of exclusively Muslim schools in particular (not to mention the issue of taxpayers funding schools that their children cannot attend), Education Secretary Alan Johnson proposed that each new school allocate 25 percent of its enrollment to students who are of a different faith, or of no faith (the Church of England had already agreed to do this voluntarily). The Catholic Church, led by Nichols, was at the vanguard of the fight against the legislation, calling on its 2 million voters to make the ruling Labor Party pay at the polls. In an unprecedented move, Catholic voters were asked to write to their members of Parliament expressing “outrage” at the proposed legislation. Nichols wrote to the country’s 2,000 Catholic headmasters requesting them to lobby their members of Parliament to oppose the proposals. These Catholic headmasters then wrote to parents, asking them to join in the campaign against the government, while bishops asked priests to preach about the legislation in their pulpits. “[T]his issue has galvanized the Catholic community,” said the policy officer for the Catholic Education Service.

Nichols published an article in the Birmingham Post stating that, as a result of its proposal, the government “cannot expect cooperation or respect” (Oct. 25, 2006). The amendment “has to be resisted,” he wrote.

Almost immediately, in a dramatic climbdown, the education secretary bowed to Catholic pressure and dropped the proposed legislation. Instead of faith schools having to reserve spaces for non-believers, the government would now pay for additional spaces to be created should there be a demand. The unprecedented lobbying campaign by the Catholic Church had paid off. In what may say even more than the decision itself, Johnson actually announced his U-turn in a letter to Archbishop Nichols. “Commentators awakened to the fact that this is not how things are supposed to work in Britain,” noted Canada’s National Post. “Certainly, Cabinet ministers are not supposed to reverse government policy in letters to Catholic bishops” (Nov. 2, 2006).

In a more recent example, the Catholic Church has not had quite as much success in its challenge to government legislation. It concerns the church’s demand that Catholic adoption agencies be entitled to refuse homosexual couples children to adopt, when new Equality Act regulations come into effect.

Though the church failed to prevent the Sexual Orientation Regulations becoming law, it has succeeded in raising the profile of the Catholic Church and bringing the matter of religion into public discussion—which, it seems, was the intention. “In reality, gay couples are extremely unlikely to approach the Catholic Adoption Agency, which only deals with 4 percent of all adoptions every year anyway,” London’s Guardian reported. “This was an area where the Equality Act’s requirements were unlikely ever to reach. But that’s not the point; both sides of this argument are agreed on one thing: They want to clarify the role of faith in public life and who has jurisdiction over it” (January 25).

“[E]ven if it has lost the first battle,” the Daily Mail reported, “it is hard not to conclude that the row over adoption has been good for the church. It has roused the public to discuss morality and has stirred religious leaders to be re-energized” (February 1).

Hence the forceful response by the Catholic Church to the government’s failure to give (state-sponsored) Catholic adoption agencies an exemption. The head of Catholics in England and Wales, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, lashed out at the government for “legislating for intolerance.” “The lecture delivered in Westminster made him the first Catholic leader in nearly 180 years to place a question mark over the allegiance of his church to the British state,” reported the Daily Mail (March 28). Murphy-O’Connor stated that it seemed Catholics were being asked to accept a form of democracy that was at odds with their religion, putting into question whether Catholics could be “proud British citizen[s].”

The Catholic Church has also weighed in on the abortion issue in Britain, with a Roman Catholic hospital seeking to prohibit its staff from providing contraceptives or abortion referrals. “Staff at the Hospital of St. John and St. Elizabeth in North London is introducing a code of ethics for its resident GPs and other staff. Anyone working there will not be able to offer any service which conflicts with Catholic teaching on the value of human life or sexual ethics” (Daily Mail, April 16). A Westminster bishop has been appointed to the ethics committee to ensure that the hospital abides by the Catholic principles that make up the new code of ethics, which is to go into effect next month.

The Catholic Church is also launching a large-scale campaign in England and Wales against the proposed legalization of physician-assisted suicide. London’s Daily Telegraph reports that Catholic bishops are blanketing two regions with half a million anti-euthanasia brochures and dvds.

This, it appears, is becoming the new face of Catholicism in Britain. Archbishop Nichols, according to the Birmingham Post, “says the only way to tackle growing numbers of critics is to answer them back” (March 29). “I would like Catholics to be more confident to speak out against their critics, not with over-assertiveness, but with reason and faith,” stated Nichols. “There is the increasing assumption that God plays no part in our postmodern and postindustrial secular world and that we don’t need Him. But that is not true and we need to be better equipped to deal with our critics.”

It appears Nichols himself may be just the man who will help this happen. The ambitious Nichols is tipped to become the next leader of Catholics in Britain when the current archbishop of Westminster, Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, steps down, which is expected to be this August. “Senior Catholics believe the pope will be keen to replace Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor with someone who shares his more orthodox approach,” the Telegraph reported (July 29, 2006).

Ian Ker, a church historian, said: “There is a perception at the Vatican that the English Catholic Church has become too detached from Rome in recent years. They’ll be looking for someone who will steer the church away from the liberal course it has been pursuing, which Rome believes has been a major factor in the decline of Catholicism here.”

Nichols could be a favorite for both Rome and people in Britain. He has a message that is already striking a chord with those in Britain who are growing concerned at the inroads both Islam and secularism have made in the country. As Stephen Glover of the Daily Mail approvingly wrote, “[I]t is a long time since senior churchmen spoke out publicly in such forthright terms, defending Christian values …” (Dec. 21, 2006).

On the other hand, though known as a combative individual, Nichols puts a modern, soft touch on the church’s beliefs to appeal to the masses. He might be just the sort of leader Pope Benedict xvi is looking for.

Regardless of the future leadership of the Catholic Church in Britain, what most do not realize is that, despite what appear valiant attempts to uphold morality, the Catholic Church’s growing aspiration to get involved in secular politics foretells a time when that same church will seek to impose its version of morality—and religion and politics—upon its constituents. What we see now is just a brief glimpse of the intent of a great religion that, traditionally, has had as its goal the conversion of the world.

Long viewed by the Vatican as “Mary’s dowry,” England has been a thorn in the side of the Roman Catholic Church since King Henry viii split the church in England off from Vatican dominance and established the Church of England in 1534. Ever since, the Vatican has wanted the British Isles to once again yield to Rome in matters of both religion and politics. For centuries, the Vatican has desired the Catholicization of Britain as the final jewel in the papal crown.

Toward this end, it would not be surprising for a more aggressive Catholic leader to take up position as head of Catholics in that nation. Nichols has already proven his mettle, not squeamish to go head to head with the government, while at the same time, in a fashion akin to Benedict, remaining popular with the people.

In any case, watch for the Vatican to get much more aggressive in its attempts to realize its goal for England in the future. There are already signs that the Roman Catholic Church under Benedict xvi is on course to revert to tactics used during centuries past to convert peoples to its cause.