Removal of the permanent Cross at Torbay Crematorium Ceremony Hall

Posted by Chris Clayton.

Below is my posting to BHA Forum and a letter I have emailed to the Herald Express. Should any of you wish to send letters to the Editor the address is letters@heraldexpress.co.uk

Some of you will have seen/heard reports in the national (and very much locally here) of the 'row' over the decision in Torbay to remove the permanent Cross from the crematorium and to rename the Chapel as Ceremony Hall. I append below a letter I have emailed to a local paper (Herald Express) and would appreciate any comments and particularly factual information to back up what I have said in case I have to answer negative response (or corrections I have not be accurate). In particular info on (a) attitudes (b) actions of secularists and Humanists towards religious symbolism in Crematoria etc.

By the way, does the BHA have 'removable' representations of the Happy Human symbol which can be put on display where appropriate?

Chris

Dear Sir,

Torbay Council and Councillor Alan Faulkner in particular should be congratulated for the position they have taken over the removal of the permanent Christian cross at Torquay crematorium. The facilities there are not 'for Christian services' as a funeral director from Brixham quite wrongly claims and the misnamed 'chapel' cannot have been consecrated under the Cremation Act of 1902, according to the Institute of Cemetery and Crematorium Management. The facilities at Torquay Crematorium are there for all residents, of all religions and none, so removable symbols which can be put in place as required are clearly appropriate. If they were practical, and I understand they are not, curtains to conceal a permanent symbol of just one religion would at best be a limited compromise.

The term 'chapel' has a wide variety of meanings, including 'a place of worship for people who are NOT members of the Church of England' but most of the usages imply a religious building of some sort so it really is not suitable for the growing numbers of citizens like myself who are positively non-religious. Hence the term Ceremony Hall is much more acceptable to myself, my family and fellow members of Devon Humanists.

I am pleased to see that Alan Faulkner, as a practising Christian, is showing sensitivity towards those who have different beliefs to himself. He is doing his best, I would suggest, to treat others as he would wish to be treated himself, a moral principle which non-theistic Humanist share with most religions. Your Editoral (June 8) was entirely wrong to suggest that atheists and agnostics are unlikely to object to a cross on display at funeral services. Members of the National Secular Society and the British Humanist Association, the two largest organisations of atheists and agnostics in this country, have often tried with success to get permanent religious symbols removed, while fully supporting the provision of symbols appropriate to whatever belief system concerned. As the chief executive of the Institute of Cemetery and Crematorium Management says "You will find it very difficult to find any crematoriumin this country that doesn't have removable religious symbols." The remark you made in your Editorial reveals the lack of understanding which many religious adherants have of those who do not share their beliefs.

Perhaps those who complain about not being consulted have a valid case. However, one does have to say that the record of the religious establishment with regard to consulting their fellow non-religious citizens is, with a few honourable exceptions, utterly dismal.

Yours faithfully,

Christopher Clayton

Member, British Humanist Association and Devon Humanists