I'm with Sheddy, it's not a major issue. The club have a chaplain, I'm not anti-religion nor am I religious. I'm not particularly interested in what he has to say (would rather read an increased Brian Noble column) but I'd say the club are more than within their rights to have him as a columnist.

The club are undoubtedly within their rights to do it, it just seems a bit, y'know, odd. Would they have a column from, say, a tory councillor or a spokesman for the TUC? I'm not desperately d to be honest, but if there was a vote I'd vote against it.

I haven't bothered to read the other 3 pages. but would like to be reminded we were a Sunday School , the club was formed by one , and like alot of other Rugby clubs has its roots in the Muscular Christianity movement in the late Victorian period .

I'm in no way religious of any persuasion, so declined to read the page in the match day program .
however we have a large group of overseas players Samoans who count themselves Christians.

We were also given salvation by a maverick from the Middle East who tends to rub up the authorities the wrong way...

Hmm that sounds oddly familiar.

[url=http://s576.photobucket.com/user/razzle_dazzle_daz/media/TheProfet.jpg.html[/url

Being serious for a minute I did read when there was the reports that the Doc was after Williams that he either offered too or did actually take him to prayers, surely if this is something the Doc can do to assist recruitment of a high quality player then someone of any faith should welcome it.

I did some digging and there seems to be a trend in Australia for stars who have gone of the rails somewhat to find some form of comfort in conversion to a different faith. Think that Anthony Mundine was possibly the catalyst for this though I'd hope that others following him don't come out with rash statements as he did about September 11th and the reasons for this.

Personally I'm not religious in any way and if I was the faith in my family history would make for some odd prematch rituals.

It is odd but I suppose that's what programmes are about. I would say there is a clear distinction between the Tory and the TUC spokesman, who are actively pushing an agenda as opposed to the club chaplain who isn't. You could say he's pushing God but I've just looked at his column from the Saints match and he actually says he doesn't want the article to turn in to 'religious lecturing that no one will read.' In fact his whole column consists of a review of the Wakefield match - hardly Mullah Omar.

I would probably vote to keep it just because in general I find the Richard Dawkins/Ricky Gervais aggressive anti-religion agenda just as irritating as fundamental religious cranks.

I found the advert for The Optimist's podcast on the adjoining page far more offensive to be honest.

I'm against it.

It's not the place for it. If the column has little religious content then you have to ask why bother? If it does have Religious content then it's misplaced, unless you give everyone else's beliefs equal footing, and we know there's not enough room, or matches for that. Religion should be a personal thing and never shoved under peoples noses without being consulted first.

I'm an Atheist and the same would apply if for some reason there was an atheist column in the programme. It's not the place for it.

It's great that players feel they gain something out of it, but they only do so on a personal level. I find the whole 'Thanking God/Allah/whoever' in sport when players score/win somewhat distasteful. If you think about it, it's like them thinking that an almighty God has enough interest in their performance instead of say, doing nothing to intervene in a famine or a murder.