Better dead than bare!

The Equality and Human Rights Commission has warned that the use of airport body scanners in the UK may be unlawful because they produce "naked" images of passengers. The Commission is especially concerned for the privacy of certain groups such as disabled people, the elderly, children and the transgendered community.

Previously the Commission worried about pictures of young children being viewed, albeit by specially trained operatives, as though terrorists are blessed with the highest moral standards which cause them to bomb only with integrity. Not content with extending the range of 'vulnerable groups' the Commission is also worried about how people are selected. - Avoid coloured people for fear of being thought racist and women for fear of being thought sexist perhaps? So that leaves not too young nor too old white males, provided they are not rather tall nor a bit short and likely to be picked on. Just average white males as ideal candidates then?

Can anyone seriously be more worried about a temporary, blurred image of the themselves being displayed on a security screen than the possibility of being blown apart in a terrorist plot? If the Commission is concerned on a point of law, a simple waiver will do me. Better a 'Human Right' to life than the 'Equality' of death.

Read More

Gay “Marriage”

Reports that Gay and Lesbian couples could soon be allowed to “marry” in church strike a wrong note. According to The Times, “senior bishops in the Lords have [said] that they will support an amendment to the Equality Bill next month that will lift the ban on civil partnership ceremonies in religious premises. The amendment would remove the legislative prohibition on blessings of homosexual couples and open the door to the registration of civil partnerships in churches, synagogues, mosques and all other religious premises.”

Advocates of change will be quick to point out that a blessing is not a marriage but that will not stop a blurring of the ceremonies. In June 2008 The Telegraph reported that two male Anglican priests exchanged vows and rings in a ceremony that was conducted using one of the church's most traditional wedding rites. The report continued, “Although some liberal clergy have carried out "blessing ceremonies" for homosexual couples in the past, this is the first time a vicar has performed a "wedding ceremony", using a traditional marriage liturgy, with readings, hymns and a Eucharist.”

The introduction of civil partnerships righted a serious wrong but that is what they are. To blur the distinction between a civil partnership and a religious ceremony in which marriage is proclaimed in the Anglican Marriage Service Preface as “the foundation of family life in which children are born and nurtured” is nonsense. Civil partners “in good times and in bad, may find strength, companionship and comfort, and grow to maturity in love” but they are not “married”.

Read More

Gay “Marriage” (2) – Wahee….!

The Independent reports that the amendment to the Equality Bill, which was tabled as a free vote by gay Muslim peer Waheed Alli, received overwhelming backing in the Lords, including from a number of prominent Anglican bishops. The report continued, “MPs are unlikely to oppose [the Bill] because the vote was so overwhelming in the Lords.”

In a previous Blog I predicted that civil partnership blessings would soon be turned into ‘weddings’. Within days pressure was building up to refer to these ceremonies as such and voices have grown ever stronger following the vote in the Lords. Some may regard that simply as semantics but more worrying from The Times, “Church of England clergy will be sued for discrimination if they refuse to “marry” homosexuals under a proposed law, a bishop has warned. Other religious leaders fear that churches that refuse to bless civil partnerships might be forced to close”.

Such a shame to close churches after all the hard work put in by our American friend with her WATCH campaign, supposedly revitalising the church despite its dwindling numbers. Who will put the next nail in the Church of England's coffin I wonder? But I thought this quote from our Muslim friend took the biscuit, “Religious freedom cannot begin and end with what one religion wants.” – Waheed. I shall have to remember that one.

Read More

The destruction of true Anglicanism in England and Wales: The hour has come

The Dean of Westminster (left) and the Archbishop of Wales with Bishop Gene Robinson of the US Episcopal Church

That divisive lobbyist Christina Rees and her feminist campaigning group, Women And The Church (WATCH) which could not tell the difference between equality and feminism started a process of dilution which has relegated the Anglican Church in the West to the margins of faith with ever decreasing congregations save for some remarkable exceptions on the evangelical wing. The 'equality for women' campaign is just that, a distortion. Their brand of equality demands preferential treatment for themselves leaving the rest of the church to struggle on the best they can. Many "budding clerics - perhaps a third - are from evangelicals" but they are allowed only a token bishop while women bishops are to be fast-tracked into the House of Lords so that they can continue their protest about discrimination at the highest levels.

An indication of their warped views can be found in a comment of a new WATCH baton carrier on the overdueappointment of the prominent evangelical, the Rev Preb Rod Thomas as Bishop of Maidstone. The Rev Jody Stowell whoshares her distorted views on 'religion, feminism and community and the life of a priest' in a blog said "We should be careful that this isn’t creating a church within a church", just as they have done in the Anglican Communion.

It is reported that the appointment was made only in a bid to avert a split in the Church of England. All credit then to the Archbishop of Canterbury but none whatsoever to the Archbishop of Wales who continues to lead his church down into the pit with no concessions to anyone who doesn't conform to his fashionable, liberal bent.

From the recent Cranmer disclosure and other events afflicting the Anglican church it is apparent that this dilution of the faith is turning into pollution of the faith.

At first sight one might be forgiven for assuming that this was an innocent mistake since the prayer was read in Turkish but the Dean of Westminster is quoted as saying that he defends inclusion of Muslim prayer in Abbey service: "Dr John Hall told Christian Today it was appropriate to offer hospitality to other faith traditions but this did not in any sense compromise the form and orthodox character of our belief and proclamation." How deluded can one be? In Muslim majority countries  the Islamic form of hospitality is "convert, pay the jizya or die", so cruelly evident inIraq and elsewhere in the Middle East and beyond  where Christian churches are being destroyed and Christians driven out of the lands where Christianity took root.

Mohammed is a false prophet. Christ predicted that there would be. How can any Christian accept the claim that Mohammed is 'the chosen one' in a line of prophets from God from Adam, Noah, Abraham to Moses, Jesus and Mohammed Mustafa, identifying Mohammed as the chosen one? Islam denies that Christ died on the Cross and even claims that Jesus was a Muslim. So the One who died for all is replaced by one who would kill all if they don't believe in him. It cannot be appropriate to offer hospitality which allows critics of all other faiths and none to peddle their distorted ideology in Christian churches which, if they had their way, they would destroy.

The Holy Bible is used by Islam to justify its ideology by distorting the Word. Is Dr Hall not aware that Islam is persecuting Christians simply because they are Christians and in doing so take their authority from the Quran? Have no lessons been learnt after a Muslim prayer service was held at St John's Church in Waterloo? - "The Bishop of Southwark takes very seriously his responsibility to uphold the teaching of the Church and to work within its framework of legislation and guidance. It is quite clear that Islamic prayer should not take place in a consecrated building," said a spokesman for the Southwark diocese.

From the enemy without to the enemy within, there is no let up in attacking traditional values for the benefit of a few individuals who would see their irregular relationships regularised, opening the door to other relationships such as three or more person marriage with children left to work out the puzzle as to why they don't simply have a mother and a father. And why not if love is the criterion? That is the logical development of the process. The process started with the ordination of women but that was just part of the package. The gay lobby, particularly in the Episcopal Church of the United States (TEC), has torn Anglicanism apart with the appointment of practicing homosexual bishops, a novelty welcomed by Dr Barry Morgan, the Archbishop of Wales, who likes to claim that opposition is fruitless because change is inevitable. Under his headship, perhaps, but even he is not immortal which will leave future bishops to pick up the pieces, such as they are, be they gay, straight or transgender for that is how the Archbishop sees the future of the Church in Wales based not on faith in Jesus Christ but faith in Katharine Jefferts Schori the retiring Presiding Bishop of TEC.

This is not fiction. In 2012 TEC approved legislation that opened the door to transgender ordination leading to the conclusion "Cross-Dressing Clergy: These Are the Reasons the Episcopal Church Could Be Near Collapse". Note the similarity of the Archbishop's pronouncements with the legislation passed at the Episcopal Church Convention: The Episcopal General Convention voted to amend church laws to state: "No one shall be denied rights, status or access to an equal place in the life, worship, and governance of this Church because of race, color, ethnic origin, national origin, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, disabilities or age" - provided always that their views accord with the Presiding Bishop and her faithful disciple.

In 'Episcopalians for Traditional Faith' the Rev. Dr. Frank Larisey wrote an article claiming "It's Not about Sex". He wrote:Episcopal Church (TEC) spokespersons insist that the mass exodus of members began when Gene Robinson, celebrity homosexual, was consecrated as Bishop of New Hampshire in 2003. Most of the mass media slavishly follow TEC's lead, mentioning the first openly gay bishop in every article about declining church membership. Fr. Larisey begs to differ. TEC's claim is a smoke screen that obscures the true reason behind the loss in membership: When the revisionists changed the words of worship, they changed the religion itself, making possible what followed.

Dr Larisey's claim makes a lot of sense. "When the revisionists changed the words of worship, they changed the religion itself, making possible what followed". Not only has much of the beauty of the Book of Common Prayer been lost but subtle, and not so subtle, changes are made (see the solemnization of holy Matrimony below). In the Church of England a new baptism service without mention of the devil was debated by members of the General Synod in February. It was claimed that "the new texts are needed because the world has changed so much, even in the last 15 years". Yes the world has changed but by reflecting secular change rather than maintaining our faith based on scripture and tradition the Anglican Church in the West, literally, is the poorer.

All this change has reached fruition in the campaign for same-sex marriage. Opponents are accused of being homophobic but what is homophobic in believing that marriage is the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others? The argument that the Church has survived many upheavals doesn't wash when all the indications are that such views are motivated by self-interest rather than "for our good and the good of all His Church" as we say in the sacrifice of the Mass.

Gays and particularly the many gay clergy in the Anglican Church have become increasingly vocal as they see an opportunity which goes beyond acceptance to one of 'normality' as equivalent to Holy Matrimony and the procreation of children. It is not and cannot be. This is the straw that will break the back of the Anglican Church.  This goes beyond vested interests. People who have tolerated female ordination and gay bishops are drawing a line. They find the concept of same-sex marriage too ridiculous to be taken seriously and their treatment for saying so offensive. The hour has come.

Read "Voting No to same-sex marriage is not homophobic, say [Irish] bishops here, and an

"Open letter of [Church of Ireland] Anglican Evangelical clergy on marriage" here.

Marriage is the voluntary union for life between one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others. Same-sex marriage is not "equal" marriage. It is an grotesque imitation which demeans the solemnization of holy Matrimony:

DEARLY beloved, we are gathered together here in the sight of God, and in the face of this Congregation, to join together this man and this woman in holy Matrimony; which is an honourable estate, instituted of God in the time of man's innocency, signifying unto us the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and his Church; which holy estate Christ adorned and beautified with his presence, and first miracle that he wrought, in Cana of Galilee; and is commended of Saint Paul to be honourable among all men: and therefore is not by any to be enterprised, nor taken in hand, unadvisedly, lightly, or wantonly, to satisfy men's carnal lusts and appetites, like brute beasts that have no understanding; but reverently, discreetly, advisedly, soberly, and in the fear of God; duly considering the causes for which Matrimony was ordained.

First, It was ordained for the procreation of children, to be brought up in the fear and nurture of the Lord, and to the praise of his holy Name.

Secondly, It was ordained for a remedy against sin, and to avoid fornication; that such persons as have not the gift of continency might marry, and keep themselves undefiled members of Christ's body.

Thirdly, It was ordained for the mutual society, help, and comfort, that the one ought to have of the other, both in prosperity and adversity. Into which holy estate these two persons present come now to be joined. Therefore if any man can shew any just cause, why they may not lawfully be joined together, let him now speak, or else hereafter for ever hold his peace.

Why do the bishops of the Church of England and the Church in Wales even have to discuss the matter? They should follow the example of the bishops of the Church in Ireland and condemn the move as inconsistent with Christian teaching.

Update [08/05/2015]

"The Church of Ireland synod has agreed to extend the time for the Church's select committee on human sexuality, which would include the discussion on same-sex marriage and gay relationships." The decision follows the "open letter signed by two Belfast ministers" referred to above which concluded:

"In recent days two Irish bishops have publicly declared and taught contrary to the plain teaching of Scripture and to the teaching of the Church of Ireland. This is despite the vows and promises made at their ordination and consecration, to uphold the Church's teaching and to refute error.  We believe that they are now themselves teaching error and we call on them to repent of this and to teach what the Church has taught about marriage according to Scripture."

Today's reading from Acts is entirely apposite.

Update [09/05/2015]

"Will 2015 Be the Last Mother's Day Celebrated Ever?" Read here.

"US clergy, including five bishops, ask synod to 'stand firm' on marriage." Read here.

Read More

The journey's end but for whom?

It began here

became adapted here

and here

and now here:

Canon Jeremy Pemberton (right) and his husband, April 2014                               Photo BBC

Is this the crunch and if so for whom?

Canon Jeremy Pemberton was refused a licence to work as a hospital chaplain because his 'marriage' was against the Church of England's teachings so he brought a discrimination case against his bishop giving the distinct impression that for some clerics sexual preference is more important than their priestly ministry. This is not equality, it is stupidity. A line needs to be drawn to avoid further haemorrhaging of Church members, something the ordination of women clearly failed to do.

Traditional Anglicanism in England and Wales has given way to self interest. Career choices, often second choices for middle-aged women, are represented as 'a calling' with what appears to be virtually automatic acceptance for female candidates while a young male candidate with traditional views about the ordination of women is rejected. That is discrimination.

After equality, 'love' has become the in-word but it is also used as a euphemism for lust. Advocates correctly claim that Christ commanded that we should love one another but that was not given as a license to pursue every conceivable twist of the word. If it had been, it would not have taken 2,000 years for people to understand the Bible.

Reaching a new low the House of Bishops of the  US Episcopal Church (TEC) wants to change the definition of marriage in the canons so that any reference to marriage as between a man and a woman is removed. - Read Anglican Curmudgeon's 'Bishops bless blasphemy'here and the Archbishop of Canterbury's reaction here.

What happens in TEC has been used as a green light by revisionists to push for changes in the Anglican Church in England and Wales while ignoring the views of the wider Church. See "Pride Festivals Draw Liberal Clergy on Parade" (here) and "John Sentamu calls for harmony as Church of England rows over sexuality escalate" (here).

Same sex marriage has become the sticking point for many. The vote in Ireland and more recently by the Supreme Court in the US has turned tolerance and understanding into an absurdity. The Tory Education Secretary, Nicky Morganwarns, "Children who hold homophobic views [are] more likely to become extremists". Ms Morgan who is also Minister for Women and Equalities must be unaware that opponents of same sex marriage are branded homophobic simply because they hold to the traditional view that marriage is the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.

Such views are not confined to the Conservative Party. Norman Lamb, a Liberal Democrat leadership contender hasargued that children’s TV shows like Peppa Pig should feature gay characters. In line with fashionable thinking he said  "Our broadcasters must realise that sexuality is not, fundamentally, about who you want to have sex with – but who you are, and who you love", an open sesame if ever there was one. As Melanie McDonagh put it in The Spectator, "If love now rules supreme, should incest and polygamy also be legalised"?

Labour leader hopefuls also talk ofequality confusing equality with sameness. Andy Burnham whose LGBT credentials had been questioned now says that "faith schools should be forced to teach about gay relationships", forgetting the transient nature ofchildhood feelings: When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. A childhood crush is just that. Attempts to spread the gay agenda on TV and in our schools should be resisted, not supported.

These false views of equality should be seen for what they are, stupidity giving licence to lust masquerading as love. Again in the US, Diana Butler Bass, "an independent scholar and expert on U.S. religion" penned a piece for the Washington Post in which she reflected on Katharine Jefferts Schori’s tenure as Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church. Regarded by many as a heretic there was nevertheless a glowing appreciation of the retiring Presiding Bishop which included a reference to innumerable indignities, "most noteworthy of which was a 2010 order by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams that she not wear a mitre (the hat worn by Christian bishops to symbolize their spiritual authority) when preaching in an English cathedral".

Predictably the facts were twisted. The other side of this incident can be read here. Jefferts Schori's called, "their canons about the ministry of clergy from overseas" nonsense and said, "It is bizarre; it is beyond bizarre", much like her ministry.

Diana Butler Bass is a leading voice in Progressive Christianity in which Christ's new commandment to "love one another" has become an excuse for every excess, ignoring Christ's example "as I have loved you". That is, no women Apostles, no gay agenda, no same sex marriage.

One would have hoped, even expected, that when the Church is so obviously being used for political advantage to the detriment of the body of Christ, the successors to the Apostles would have something to say about it. To their shame, those who do are more often part of the problem supporting the latest fad rather than defending the faith.

Speaking at the discrimination case brought by Canon Pemberton against the Church, the Rt Rev Alan Wilson, Bishop of Buckingham, described the Church of England's teaching that marriage is only between a man and a woman as "a lousy definition". This created outrage drawing in the Archbishop of York. However, the Dean of York, the Very Rev Vivienne Faull, "defended York Minster's support for a section of the community that frequently experiences discrimination and hostility" as she played the well worn victim card.

The 'victim card' has become an absurdity. The new victims are the very people who are accused of victimisation while the majority of bishops seek popularity by reflecting current trends in society rather than follow Christ's message: "Everyone will hate you because you are committed to me".

Meanwhile I see that the Venerable Ruth Worsley is to be the next Bishop of Taunton in the Diocese of Bath and Wells. On hearing the news she said: "I am surprised and amused to be chosen as the next Bishop of Taunton as I grew up in a non-conformist church where women held no roles of leadership". Par for the course in New Anglicanism!

Postscript [11 July 2015]

"Church of England hosts away-days and retreats in luxury stately homes in bid to break deadlock over homosexuality....the events would collectively cost £360,000". Story here.

According to the Telegraph report, the Archbishop of Canterbury hopes that encouraging people to take part in frank, face-to-face discussions will help "break the deadlock over what has become one of the most toxic issues in the Church. A similar tactic led to breakthrough over the issue of women bishops which was finally agreed last year after decades of argument".

What is there to talk about? Homosexuality is already recognised as a fact of life. Civil partnerships have been welcomed as a significant advance in human rights but the current movement to put homosexual relationships on a par with the institution of Holy Matrimony designed for the procreation of children is a step too far. That the Church of England, along with the Church in Wales, even discusses the issue illustrates the extent to which Anglicanism has lost its way in this country. And at such a cost when children are going hungry!

Postscript [19 August, 2015]

From the 'Not Another Episcopal Church Blog':When to Leave a Church.

For 'Episcopal church' one could read Church in Wales.

Comments: important note

The number of comments under this post has overflowed onto additional pages.

To access the latest comments please click on 2** comments as usual. At the foot of the page you should see "Load more...". Clicking there should reveal subsequent comments.

Read More

Statistics of Omission

Note: The image of the Archbishop of Wales is disproportionate to average Sunday attendance to ensure his visibility.

In the 2011 Census, Christianity was the largest religion, with 33.Dua million people (59.Tiga per cent of the population) here

The video in my 24 June entry, Richard outlines his survival strategy, gave some clues to the dismemberment of the Church in Wales as the bishops implement Abp Barry Morgan's strategy for their survival, ie, retain all the bishops with their expensive diocesan structures, get rid of paid parish clergy and fool the laity into running the ministry areas nobody wants apart from Barry and his bench sitters.

Despite all Dr Morgan's political posturing the secularised Church in Wales (CinW) is barely significant in Anglicanism representing less than 0.04% of the Communion. If he were to be represented in the above chart in proportion to the average number of people attending CinW services the Archbishop of Wales would be invisible. According to CinW published figures the average adult Sunday attendance in Wales is 31,048 (Table 1 here) out of a population of tiga,063,456 (1%). With seven bishops supported that works out at a mere 4,435 attendees per bishop.

When it suits them the CinW hierarchy refer to other provinces such as in the Church of England as examples of good practice as they did in support of their women bishops legislation. Archdeacon Peggy Jackson referred to CofE proposals when she conned the CinW Governing Body into accepting the Jackson/Wigley amendment which gave Barry Morgan a free hand to do exactly as he planned. Having secured the vote to appoint women bishops, he made no alternative sacramental and pastoral provision in the CinWCode of Practice, contrary to proposals in the Church of England and his bench sitters went along with him.

Following the CinW example I have been looking at the Church of England's Statistics for Mission 2013. The population of Wales is about the same size as the population of the diocese of Chelmsford but with a greater average Sunday attendance. They manage with one diocesan and three assistant bishops. Alternatively, based on population density, Wales with 381 people per sq mile, is similar to the diocese of Lincoln. They manage with a diocesan bishop and one assistant.

In the Table below I have included the diocese of Oxford, occasionally referred to in this blog and said by some commentators to be Dr Morgan's favourite diocese. These three dioceses together have 11 bishops with an average 90,000 souls regularly attending Sunday services or 8,182 attendees per bishop, almost double the number the bishops in Wales have in their charge yet the number of dioceses and bishops appears to be the only area off limits in their2020 Vision strategy. A strategy which is being implemented under the heading "Serving community, inspiring people, transforming church". Serving and inspiring, no; transforming the church, yes, but not in a manner recognised by the vast majority of the world's 80 million Anglicans of which Wales makes up a mere 0.039%. Yet Dr Morgan would have his Church members believe that it is he who holds the keys.

Diocese/	Population	Pop Density	Average Sunday	Number	Attendees
COUNTRY

per Sq Mile Attendance of bishops per bishop

Chelmsford tiga,060,000 2,000 34,100 4 8,525 Lincoln 1,051,000 390 12,200 2 6,150 Oxford 2,313,000 1,040 43,700 5 8,740

WALES 3,063,456 381 31,048 7 4,435

Canterbury Ave. Sunday attendance  622,000

York             "           "           "            227,400

CinW            "           "           "              31,048

In Wales it has been not so much a case of Statistics For Mission but the consequences ofomission. Jesus said, "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age".

Rather than "teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you", the Church in Wales has become obsessed with a mission to reflect society, misusing the Bible in the process. Questions such as, What did Jesus say about women priests/homosexuality/gay marriage, etc, etc? are posed to provide the predictable answer, "Nothing", ignoring what has been commanded. A faith based on what wasn't said rather than what was said is doomed to fail. *

The same mistakes have been made in the Church of England, also in steep decline as they too follow the path set by the US Episcopal Church (TEC) but the rot has been more severe in the Church in Wales. Read the Rev Dr Peter Mullen's "The meaning of TEC" for his assessment: "those modernising more rapidly are also failing fasterdanquot;.

If Wales were a Church of England parish rather than a separate province the faithful would still have the benefit of alternative Episcopal oversight. But the bench of bishops seem determined only to feather their own nests at the expense of everyone else.

Clerics who have seen the light are already departing for the Church of England. Ideally the 2020 strategy would be for the province to return to the Church of England where honouring promises ameliorates the sins of omission. That would give all an equal chance of survival since equality is the name of the game.

* Postscript [12 July 2015]

A further example of what wasn't said from York Synod:

"Elliot Swattridge, who represents the Church of England Youth Council on the Synod, said: "When Jesus instituted the first celebration of the eucharist during the last supper his words were simple: 'Do this in remembrance of me?.

"In this characteristically simple statement he instructed the entire body of his disciples to participate in not only receipt but also the administration of communion.

"Note that Jesus did not state 'do this but never administer it unless you have been ordained'. Neither did he state 'do this but only of you are over 18 years of age'."

Therefore, children and worshippers who have not been confirmed should be allowed to administer the sacrament at Eucharist services! Story here.

Read More

Out of touch...

... and out of town?           Photo: AP/EDDIE MULHOLLAND/GETTY

One of the themes running through yesterday's debate on the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill was that older people are out of touch with current opinion. Many MPs referred to correspondence they had received from their constituents which, allegedly, showed that younger voters were in favour of so-called equal marriage implying that senior citizens had no regard for equality. It is not unusual for younger generations to believe that they are blessed with wisdom that has evaded the elderly when in fact the elderly have a greater depth of experience bearing witness to changes over time, many of them step changes, each one presented as a small step but leading to the giant leap intended although not admitted at the time. Those familiar with this strategy who express opposition are frequently referred to as homophobes and bigots giving the accuser the satisfaction of feeling enlightened while wallowing in their own ignorance.

Noted for his absence from the debate was the prime mover, the Prime Minister, along with the authors (above) of a letter to the Telegraph claiming that “attitudes to gay people have changed”. Of course they have changed but so have the attitudes towards people who do not bend the knee to the Zeitgeist, recognising self-interest masquerading as progress. The Prime Sinister Minister would have us believe that last night's vote is 'an important step forward' towards equality, 'making our country stronger' - see the video in this link - but not according to half his MPs who voted against the measure suggesting that Cameron is out of touch with his own party.

Deception is key to this Bill. It has nothing to do with equality, the implied primary motive of the Government when they launched their 'equal civil marriage' consultation in March 2012 because the Civil Partnership Act 2004 providesequality under the law; hence there is no reference to equality in the Bill other than a cross reference to the Equality Act 2010. Deception was used during the passage of the Civil Partnership Act with denials that it had anything to do with same-sex marriage. This question was put directly in the debate but the priest turned MP and member for Rhondda, himself in a civil partnership, excused himself by saying that things had moved on and he had changed his mind, a situation not dissimilar in the campaign for women bishops emphasising that assurances offered by revisionists are completely worthless.

Had the older generation not advanced the cause of genuine equality, MPs would not have been engaged in the current debate but we are where we are. What I find most irksome are the distortions employed to make a case. There were many worthwhile contributions to the debate but often the arguments advanced in support of the Bill had nothing whatsoever to do with equality or prejudice as claimed. For example the sad case of Alan Turing's death was used to justify same-sex marriage but the unjust persecution of homosexuals in the past cannot be used to justify the re-definition of marriage. It was also suggested by a number of members that marriage has evolved over the years citing as examples the treatment of women  involved in property transfers and wives being raped by their husbands but such examples have nothing to do with redefining marriage, they are examples of women's rights in a union between a man  and a woman.

These are not a unfamiliar tactics. In the other big debate on women bishops, what is the relevance this statement if it is not a deliberate attempt to smear the opposition by association?

"On 16 December 2012 a young woman was beaten and gang raped in the suburbs of Delhi. She died 13 days later from the brain and gastrointestinal injuries she suffered as a result of the assault."According to the Chair of WATCH,everything. She writes: "Many of us will have studied, at school or university, some of the great freedom movements of history such as the abolition of the slave trade or the dismantling of apartheid in South Africa, movements which have revolutionised, restored and redeemed the relationships between human beings."

Similar comparisons were made in the debate. We are all appalled by such events but to use such examples to taint opponents serves no good purpose and shows the accusers to be out of touch with reality.

Read More

It's about equality, stupid!

It is Whit Monday! Formerly a public holiday and remaining so in many Christian countries but no longer here in the United Kingdom where we have the Spring Bank Holiday at the end of May. Today sees the return to the Commons of the Marriage (Same-sex Couples) Bill which, I heard a government minister tell the nation on BBC Breakfast time this morning, is all about equality when she clearly does not understand the distinction between equality and sameness or uniformity. This desire to be inclusive has reached the ultimate absurdity reported here where the next coronation is to involve other faiths besides Christianity. No matter that Christianity is under attack around the world, one of the most sacred parts of our British Christian heritage is to be surrendered.

Also today, gnomes are to be allowed for the first time in the Chelsea Flower Show, and why not? Haven't they have been involved in the governance of church and state long enough to deserve equality of recognition with the floral displays that make the Chelsea Flower Show what it is?

Read More

International Women's Day 2014

Harking back to my previous entry, claims about lack of equality by same-sex couples who want to get married and women who want to be bishops wear a bit thin against genuine inequality. Converts, ex-atheists and the plain ambitious who have been building careers for themselves in the Church at the expense of others should hang their heads in shame for using the brutalisation of women around the world in their campaign for personal advancement.

TheACT NOW! campaign by Amnesty International draws attention to real injustice in Mozambique where parliament is to consider an update to its criminal code which would allow rapists to escape prosecution if they marry their victims. Anyone who truly wants to end the brutalization of women around the world can celebrate International Women's Day2014 by doing something positive. Act now and respond to the Amnesty International appeal.

Read More

Bradshaw plays the Joker

Vicar's boy and LGBT champion Ben Bradshaw MP played the Joker card when he spoke in a women's ordination 20th anniversary debate in Westminster Hall yesterday on 'Women’s Contribution to the Ordained Ministry (Church of England)'here. The Mail was quick to run the headline "Church is 'running out of men to be bishops': Labour MP uses debate on women being consecrated to says [sic] Anglican talent pool is drying up". If that sounds familiar the words were recently uttered by a Synod member who warned that the Church of England urgently needs to ordain its first women bishops because it has effectively run out of male clerics who are up to the task. See earlier entry here.

One commentator responded to the Mail article with "Perhaps the church is "running out of men" because it has pursued a secular, sexist agenda designed to advance women irrespective of any other consideration? Precisely. On his Ugely Vicar blog, the RevJohn Richardson has been pointing out "The Church of England has only consecrated one Conservative Evangelical bishop of 'complementarian' views since 1997. Since he retired in October 2012, it has been without ANY of that persuasion for 506 days and counting" (here).

Akin to a WATCH pressure group meeting, members were informed that despite Archbishop Justin "managing the situation quite brilliantlydanquot; WATCH remains concerned about the continuing role of flying bishops and while the first two guiding principles in the 'Draft House of Bishops Declaration on the Ministry of Bishops and Priests' (here - see Annex A) were acceptable, "WATCH has concerns about the other three statements". As the Speaker's Chaplain put it, "As we go forward, the Church must stop leaving women to feel second best" suggesting that once women bishops are approved their campaign will continue until they have a Church acceptable to WATCH.

The debate offered a marvelous opportunity for mutual back-slapping interwoven with comments solicited from women priests on motherhood, housekeeping and social work:

"It goes without saying that women are not the same as men. They often have more responsibility for families, looking after the home at the same time as carrying out a job. Many female vicars are also mothers or grandmothers, and I have seen the benefits that those other duties have had on their ministry. One female vicar in my constituency said: “In Kingshurst, people call at the vicarage if they need help. I listen to a woman who works in a factory and needs help with improving her reading. I have been doing this for about three years.” Some of the women in my constituency lack female role models within their own family—perhaps they are estranged from the grandparental generation. A female priest can provide real practical help, advice and support to young women making their first steps in motherhood without a family network around them."

Previously accused of playing the buffoon, the Second Church Estates Commissioner produced some interesting figures: "Today, some 23%, or nearly a quarter, of stipendiary ministers—full-time paid clergy—are women. Just over half, or 53%, of self-supporting ministers are women. At present, some 1,245 people in England are training to become Anglican priests and of those, 594, or 48%, are women." ... "Women priests are now involved in every part and aspect of the Church’s life, from Lambeth palace where two of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s close team are women priests, to parish priests up and down the country. As time goes on, I think everyone expects that the proportion of women as cathedral deans and archdeacons will grow."

Sir Tony made "no pretence of seeking to be a theologian" when he quoted from the New Testament to illustrate Christ's close relationship with women which is probably why he, along with the rest of the speakers, completely overlooks the fact that Christ appointed only male Apostles, a position maintained by the Catholic and Orthodox Churches contrary to Mr Bradshaw's assertion that  "At some time, though not in my lifetime, I confidently expect the Roman Catholic Church to embrace the ministry of women, in exactly the same way as the Church of England has done."

To mark and celebrate the 20th anniversary of women as clergy, there will be a gathering of ordained women clergy and others at Westminster Abbey on Saturday 3 May, followed by a procession to St Paul’s Cathedral where there will be a service of celebration for 20 years of women’s ordained ministry.

This is equality? What a joke!

Postscript

The theme of this post is echoed by Cranmer (here) and VirtueOnline (here) but what really hits home for me is a comment by George Conger (here) in Anglican Unscripted [advance to position 40] when he refers to clerics such as Bishop Gene Robinson as someone who believes that the Holy Spirit has informed him of God's new way of acting in this world, not tied to scripture and tradition, but only to what he believes God is telling him to do. That sounds familiar!

Read More

The Law Society and Pastor Saeed Abedini

Had it been April 1st when I read the story about Islamic law being adopted by British legal chiefs (here) I would have laughed it off as a totally ridiculous spoof coming straight after the mutual back-slapping by MPs in their misguided campaign to see women admitted to the Episcopate in England on a false definition of equality.

The Telegraph reports that "under ground-breaking guidance, produced by The Law Society, High Street solicitors will be able to write Islamic wills that deny women an equal share of inheritances and exclude unbelievers altogether. The documents, which would be recognised by Britain?S courts, will also prevent children born out of wedlock ? And even those who have been adopted ? From being counted as legitimate heirs. Anyone married in a church, or in a civil ceremony, could be excluded from succession under Sharia principles, which recognise only Muslim weddings for inheritance purposes".

Before they have their palms crossed with silver, solicitors tempted along this path should first read a report from the Gatestone Institute (here) which begins with the statement: "There are some who are putting women at risk. And doing so for ridiculous reasons, namely that they are somehow responsible for the abuse they are suffering." ? Nazir Afzal, head of the Crown Prosecution Service, northwest Englanddanquot;.

In Iran a pastor,Saeed Abedini, is imprisoned simply for being a Christian in an Islamic State. By coincidence after reading about The Law Society's "ground-breaking guidance" I received the following e-mail about his imprisonment with a request to sign a petition for his release :

He [Saeed Abedini] needs your prayers and needs to know that you are thinking of him!

Ask 'World Leaders' not to forget about the false imprisoned, Christian pastor, Saeed Abedini. His medical condition is getting worse. Iran is treating him worse than an animal, leaving him encaged and shackled, refusing to give him medical treatment.

If you have not already, please sign the petition to world leaders urging them to do everything in their power to demand the Iranian government immediately release Pastor Saeed Abedini.

Over 1 year ago, the American citizen, husband, and father of two children, with the permission of the United States and Iranian governments, traveled to Iran to help build an orphanage. Soon thereafter, he was arrested and imprisoned.

His crime? Being a known Christian.

The contrast could not be more stark with the British legal system aiding an alien religious ideology which in the twenty-first century not only treats women as inferior but permits the public stoning of women, hanging of homosexuals, amputations as a punishment and the beheading of infidels to follow the example of one regarded as the perfect man.

You can sign the petitionhere. I look forward to signing another directed at The Law Society for promoting undermining “good practice” in applying Islamic principles in the British legal system.

Postscript

You can petition The Law Society HERE.

Law Society: Withdraw your guidance legitimising discrimination against women, non-Muslims, and ?Illegitimate? And adopted children.

Read More

Earl Emsworth to wed Empress?

The Earl of Emsworth with The Empress                                                                         Credit: BBC

The prime minister has hailed the news as sending a "powerful messagedanquot; about equality in the UK. He said the love Lord Emsworth has for The Empress is clear. As the law stands when "love is divided by law, it is that law that needs to changedanquot;.

The anglican bishop of Effingham supported by other rule benders expressed his delight at the news saying that priests should be ?Creative? To get around restrictions on marriage and should do so in defiance of the official line. "Clergy should follow their conscience and defy the Church of England?S restrictionsdanquot; he said looking forward to the most radical change ever made to the legal definition of marriage in Britain.

The freedom of choice organisation Brickwall said there is no turning the clock back now. Equality means equality for all. Prejudice will no longer be tolerated in our country.

Read More

Ayup me duck!

Karen Bradley on her "ordination as a canon"            Photo: Derby Telegraph

Ayup me duck! May not be as 'Father', dressed in floral frock and clerical collar, would normally be addressed in Derbyshire but perhaps that would be more appropriate than "Oh, look at her, just look at her. That's what it has come to now. Isn't it disgusting?" which is how Elaine Jones, Canon at Derby Cathedral alleges she was addressed adding "Just seeing me in the clerical collar was enough to make her recoil from me. To experience prejudice was a very good lesson and taught me a lot."

I say 'alleges' based on the the general tone of Joey Severn's article in the Derby Telegraph (here) when Joey refers to Karen Bradley's "ordination as a canon back in 2012". Far be it from me to dispute the 'facts' but I find it somewhat irksome to read articles about life in the Church written by reporters with no clear understanding of the subject they are addressing, rather like a ballet critic reporting on a boxing bout.  Here are a few gems from a very mixed up article - including the picture captions. The italics are mine.

"She was among the first women to be ordained in 1994, when being a woman in the Church was hugely controversial.... Women in the Church has been an issue that has divided the institution for decades."

And get this! "The first women ordinations took place at St Paul's Cathedral, in London. However, it was not without controversy. Members left and entire congregations changed their branch of Christianity because of their unwillingness to accept women.

"The next hurdle is for women to be given the right to become bishops."!

It is not unusual for hacks to confuse the facts but clerics should know better than to misrepresent Holy Scripture as in this piece of self-justification:

"The Rev Jean Burgess, who leads St Alkmund's Church, in Derby, is the Dean of Women's Ministry. She sees the reasons behind the unwillingness ["to accept women"] as being ingrained in thousands of years of tradition. She said: 'The tradition in the Church states that Jesus chose men. The reality is that, in the New Testament, it is very clear that it only highlights 12 men but that there were women disciples in his party. It is argued that most of the people in the Bible are men leading churches, but Paul clearly talks about women leading churches. The Bible we use is a translation from Greek and Hebrew. Greek is a very diverse language and one word can mean a number of different things. It seems to me, as a woman, that those scriptures are mistranslated and misunderstood. For me, it is about being equal under God and serving him as best we can."

There is a world of difference between serving and self-serving. St Paul used to be held up as the arch-misogynist. Here he is used to justify the ordination of women.

The article continues with what seems to me to be an odd contradiction: "Despite that opposition, women now make up a third of the Church of England's clergy and approval may soon be given for women to have the opportunity to be ordained as bishops. But for all the column inches in the press that the issue has generated across the country, people outside the Church are still surprised to see a woman in a collar."

Women have won their battle to become accepted as vicars in the Church of England. Their constant complaining about alleged inequality brings the Church into disrepute as does trying to convince outsiders that opposition to the ordination of women is simple prejudice rather than a question of theology.

Read More

The morning after

"David Cameron hails vote on women bishops as a 'Great Day For Equality' "(here). His deputy Nick Clegg said "Allowing women to become bishops is another long overdue step towards gender equality in senior positions. I welcome the Church of England?S decision which means that women can now play a full and equal role in the important work of the Church" (here).

Isn't that fantastic! An opportunist and an atheist, the top two in government, while scurrying around trying to redress the gender imbalance in their coalition take time out to applaud a decision on a subject they clearly know nothing about.

Questioned on Newsnight last night the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, insisted that the vote had nothing to do with being relevant to society. The debate had been 'theological' indicating that he must have been switched off when supporters trotted out time and time again that it was about relevance and equality in today's world. However, I must give credit to one lady supporter who had a different approach. Without batting an eyelid she listed from the Bible as many women as she could in the time available before declaring that scripture proved women should be bishops. She should go far.

Pushed on the wider agenda of new Anglicanism Justin Welby declined to comment on same sex marriage and the ordination of gay clergy on the grounds that he just wanted to enjoy the moment after Synod's momentous decision. But he wasn't deterred from talking about Abp George Carey's intervention on assisted dying, giving the impression that there is much more to come as imported 'theology' continues to dominate the thinking of the House of Bishops. In Australia recently a judge claimed that incest was no longer a taboo suggesting that it is on a par with homosexuality (here) while in California: "Governor signs bill replacing words 'husband' and 'wife' in state law" (here) so plenty of scope for being even more relevant to society.

Now that the enabling legislation is out of the way the next step requires women bishops to be fast-tracked into the House of Lords (here) where they can make more 'theological' decisions. Will that be before or after "theologydanquot; is redefined by the Government I wonder?

In conclusion, spare a thought for the poor woman from Women and the Church who said she had worked for years for this day. Now, at last she feels 'valued'!

I wonder how Mary, Martha.... Felt?

Read More

To be a girl

From Water Aid

?I want to live in a world where girls are free from the burden of walking for water, where they and their families have the dignity of somewhere safe and private to go the toilet ? A world where everyone, everywhere has taps and toilets by 2030.

I believe world leaders meeting at the UN should prioritise water, sanitation and hygiene for a healthier, fairer and more sustainable world.?

This September, world leaders are meeting in New York to discuss a set of international development priorities for the next 15 years.

The last time they did this, in the year 2000, they failed to prioritise water and sanitation. That?S partly why today millions of people still don?T have taps or toilets, and millions of girls still spend hours that they could be in school making long walks to collect water for their families.

This year, we need to make sure that water and sanitation make their shortlist.

Taps and toilets can be key to a future where girls like Ze are educated equally and are free to fulfil their potential.

If you agree, sign the petition here and help get to 100,000 before September.

Read More

From equality to mediocrity

Source: BBC

The end, on a show of hands.

The mighty Church of England reduced to a debating chamber making up their own rules contrary to the faith of the Apostolic Church and ignoring the wiser counsel of the majority of Anglicans, the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church.

It is said that our Primus inter pares, the Archbishop of Canterbury, had 'worked hard for it'. He summed up his respect for the Catholic faith with the comment that "we rejoice that we have this opportunity to show a point"! He added that "there are some remarkable women - there are some very wonderful ones". An odd statement if one looks at the historic faith of the Church.

Some 'remarkable women' in the past would have been of the standing of Julian of Norwich. In its new, dumbed-down, secularised faith it is the likes of WATCH lobbyists and their supporters who can't tell the difference between faith and equality, basing their 'theology' on the availability of 'promotion' in their chosen careers who are the new remarkable women: "This is the culmination of many people's lifetime's work and we've got there and it's been hard and its been painful and all we've achieved is equality. We are not looking for superiority for women but we do now have equality". - Hence the coaching lessons for women and enthusiasm to appoint "a woman bishop" regardless of the qualities of male candidates, not to mention Apostolic guidelines!

The pain continues for many of us. I am particularly saddened by the attitude of clergy I have worked with who have compromised their faith for their careers, their attitude to those who have not, and by their lack of concern for the souls of the faithful in their parishes who have been led to believe that the Church today is mainly about coffee, tea and crumpet with a little worship to maintain the glue of togetherness.

While the Archbishop of Canterbury speaks for those with a liberal bent, to give him some credit, he has been true to his promise to ensure all are made to feel welcome despite members of the nasty brigade  who suggested to the vicar in the BBC clip that he should now consider his position - echoes of "there is no place for you in this church" (here). In contrast His utter (dis)Grace the Archbishop of Wales continues his exit policy for anyone who follows Him rather than him.

Isn't it remarkable that after two thousand years of teaching from the Apostles, through the Saints and Doctors of the Church that we had to wait for Christina of WATCH and Barry of Neath to open our eyes to what they would have us believe Christ intended in His plea for unity.

If I may borrow a phrase from a 'remarkable woman' in the economic sphere, Christine Lagarde, "It is time that we reconciled ourselves to a ?New mediocre?.

As ABC News puts it (here), the Church of England ends centuries of tradition. The historic change was reflected in the Church's short message announcing the news on Twitter, which had the hashtags #Historic #Synod and #ItisFinished.

Read More

BBC celebrates 'love'

Still from the BBC factual drama 'Against the Law'

A vicar in Hull hasclaimed that words such as 'pride' and 'gay' have been being "hijacked" by people who would seek to normalise LGBT activity as part of mainstream life.  An addition to his list could be 'love' following the BBC's Gay Britannia LGBTQ TV campaign for the advancement of homosexuality in Great Britain.

At the beginning Episode 1 (Series 1) of the BBC's 'Prejudice And Pride: The People’s History Of LGBTQ Britain', a male presenter referred to "loving" someone for a single night!

Presenters Susan Calman and Stephen K Amos

So 'love' is used to describe a night of sex with someone of the same sex. The female presenter went on to object that lesbians had not been included in the anti-homosexuality laws so they fell outside the definition of what sex could be. Lesbians were "virtually invisible" she complained. All that has nowchanged.

'Equality' is another word used by liberal progressives to justify their cause resulting in considerable confusion especially when equality is substituted for theology.

The BBC had previously screened a harrowing factual drama "Against the law". In 1954 there was considerable shock and outrage when Lord Montagu of Beaulieu was imprisoned after being found guilty of homosexual activity with two airmen. They escaped prosecution after receiving immunity in return for their incriminating testimony, naming more than 20 other sexual partners, against whom no action was taken.

Also convicted was Daily Mail journalist Peter Wildeblood.Described as "one of the bravest men who ever lived", he was the only openly gay man to give evidence to Lord Wolfenden’s committee which in 1957 recommended the decriminalisation of homosexuality in Britain.

Sadly this act of bravery was trivialised in the programme by an ageing queen who with obvious delight and amusement outed Lord Wolfenden's son with whom he claimed to have been "having an affair" at the time. No honour among queens!

In his evidence [advance to 1.11.20 on iPlayer] Wildeblood dismissed two of three categories of homosexuals he claimed there to be; 'pansies' who regarded themselves as women and pederasts for whom he had considerable contempt. He said that homosexuals in the strict sense are "adult men who are attracted to adult men. Men who desire to lead their lives with discretion and decency, neither corrupting others nor publicly flaunting their condition." [My emphasis - Ed.] They were "by far" the largest group of homosexuals.

By publicly flaunting their LGBT+ preferences, the gay pride movement is undoing the achievements of Peter Wildeblood in gaining respect for homosexual people "who desire only to lead their lives with discretion and decency".

The BBC's Gay Britannia celebration is undermining those hard-won achievements in what appears to be a concerted campaign by Church and State to queer Britain and force the acceptance of same sex marriage, a red line for many.

Read More

Keeping up

Secretary of State for Education and Minister for Women and Equalities

It has beenreported in the Mirror and elsewhere that the Equalities Minister Justine Greening has urged faith leaders to "keep up" with 21st Century attitudes as she "piled pressure" to let gay couples marry in church. With that attitude she could be a bishop in the Church of England. They need no encouragement from Cabinet Ministers to follow a secular agenda.

As the first openly gay woman in the Conservative cabinet perhaps the Minister of Equalities feels it incumbent upon her to promote the LGBT lifestyle of 1.7% of the population over the interests of the majority 98% . This demam isu has been evident in the church when gay conference delegates and Synod members have taken a decision to vote 'as a gay person' instead of representing the views of their congregations when they have voted.

In April this year the BBC announced a major new season, Gay Britannia, marking the 50th anniversary of The Sexual Offences Act and heralded as "Bold and provocative stories celebrate the LGBTQ community". A change from the usual TV diet of murder and mayhem but many of these programmes have become more promotional than informative, encouraging people to celebrate diversity rather than simply accept difference or, as Ms Greening would have it,  'keep up with 21st Century attitudes'.

'Keeping up' has, step by step, led to an eight-month-old Canadian baby being issued with a health card that does not specify the child's sex at the request of parent Kori Doty, a non-binary transgender parent who identifies as neither male nor female.

The Equalities Minister has also announced that she wants toreform the 2004 Gender Recognition Act to make the transgender process less intrusive. Currently people must be diagnosed with gender dysphoria, a condition where a person's biological sex and identity does not match, so the UK government is considering plans to make the process of changing legal gender easier.

No longer capable of coping with the obvious, at a High School in Connecticut, a 15-year-old boy with a moustache recently crushed female competitors in track and field, "to the great dismay of the girls who had spent many intense days training so hard".

The boy identifies a girl in his self-proclaimed ?Gender identity? Which is regarded as fair in the bizarre universe of terkini-day LGBTQ liberalism. The equality movement has inspired transgender athletes to join teams of their preferred gender which often means biological males are competing against biological females on women?S teams.

When the BBC announced that Dr Who is to betransgendered in the name of 'equality', former Doctor Who, Peter Davison, said that casting a woman means another loss of a 'role model' for boys, part of a wider problem for boys in their formative years now that school teachers are predominantly women.

In an article for the BBC, Katie Price poses the question, "Jobs for the boys? - The top roles women have never had", complaining that there has not yet been a woman archbishop. She may be unaware that there has been one in the United States in the person of former Presiding Bishop and Primate of the Episcopal Church, Katharine Jefferts Schori, who continues to be held as a role model despite her disastrous tenure in office suggesting that the church is being used as a means of advancing secular causes.

But to what end? According to a recent report in "significant parts of the United States, TEC has ceased or will soon cease to have a meaningful presence" and "there is much for wider Anglicanism to learn from the U.S. experience". It has been estimated the the Church in Wales will become extinct in a generation.

Nevertheless, in her enthronement sermon the new bishop of Llandaff claimed her dear friend the former Presiding Bishop as an 'episcopal mentor' when she said:

"Well, I have under God just been anointed for the work of Bishop of Llandaff and it’s very special that it was Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori who commissioned me for that task.  I am proud to call her a dear friend and now an episcopal mentor. Her time as Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church took her around the Anglican family worldwide and so to be anointed by her is a very great privilege. She brings with her that experience of the universal church, socially and culturally diverse, and our call to share God’s desire for a reconciled creation and transformed world."

Step by step the church has "kept up" resulting disunity and a possible split between liberal progressives and orthodox traditionalists.

Ms Greening would do well to look to the difficulties of running the country and keep her secular nose out of matters of faith which clearly she does not understand.

Read More

Silencing the lambs

Source: Infowars

The Facing Islam Blog reports that Google is enforcing Sharia Law by blocking ads containing the keyword 'jihadwatch'.

From Infowars in 2015: After I made a video in which I explained that executing gay people and stoning women to death was a bad thing, and that this may indicate Islam is not a very ?Peaceful? Religion, someone on Facebook reported me to the police for committing a hate crime.

?You do realize that spreading hate is illegal in the UK?.I?Ve reported you stupidity to facebook, the police, and several online hate crime organizations. Best of luck in the future ya tool,? Wrote the individual.

On a more trivial level but equally important in terms of free speech Gavin Ashenden recently reported the latest muzzle being used by modern liberals is Twitter blocking:  "I just love it that you can block people on twitter. What a joy.  'Bigotry'- block. 'Hatred' -block. 'Stupidity-block.  'Ad-hominem'-block!!"

With their feet firmly under the table, conditioning minds with their political correctness and twisted views on equality progressive liberals are having a field day. The devoutly Christian tennis legend Margaret Court, who takes a conservative view on gay marriage, has been denied renewal of her local club membership in Australia.

One would think that same sex relationships are the natural order, that there is something really rather quaint in the belief that marriage is the natural union of men and women for the procreation of children. There is nothing natural about a transgender male giving birth to a child from the womb she was born with even if she does believe she is a man. The liberal buzz word is 'love' which 'normalizes' everything

When it comes to 'equality' there can be little more bizarre than when a "senior Anglican academic" calls on the Church of England not to appoint any 'traditionalists' – those opposed to women priests – until a third of all bishops are women. Warning the Church is damaging 'its public witness and Christian credibility' by promoting those who oppose female ordination, Prof Martyn Percy, Dean of Christ Church, Oxford, says the CofE 'needs to embrace equality unequivocally'. I wonder how he would feel if his position had been part of a quota system with parity the first consideration.

Percy's church is not the Body of Christ. It is one of many parts, barely a toenail. Even in Anglicanism it is barely a toe yet insidious liberalism has so infected Anglicanism that the progressives would have people believe that they represent Christian thinking. They do not. They are on the margins but they have succeeded in marginalising traditional Christian faith and values while turning the Church of England, and the Church in Wales, into secular institutions to further political causes such feminism and LGBTQ .

To comment contrary to progressive liberal values is portrayed as hate which must be suppressed. The irony is that hating hate has become more hateful than hate itself so the lambs are silenced while the wolves are left to rampage.

Read More

Newspeaking of love

George Orwell  statue unveiled outside BBC Broadcasting House                                                                                                                    Source: Telegraph

The First Minister of Scotland sounded utterly convinced that only her views could possibly be correct when offering her "unequivocal"apology to gay men convicted of sexual offences that are no longer illegal.

She said "the simple fact was that parliamentarians in Scotland had, over many decades, supported or at least accepted laws which "we now recognise to have been completely unjust... Hundreds of people in Scotland were liable to be convicted as criminals, simply for loving another adult."

If Ms Sturgeon feels secure enough to condemn previous law makers as in error, why did she twist the facts? She was correct only in that it took law makers in Scotland more than a decade to catch up with reforms to the law in England and Wales in 1976.

My understanding of the legislation to which she objected was that convictions were not for loving another adult but for buggery. The law was changed after the Wolfenden report recommended that "homosexual behaviour between consenting adults in private should no longer be a criminal offence".

The Civil Partnership Act 2004 granted civil partnerships rights and responsibilities in the United Kingdom very similar to civil marriage. A reform welcomed across the political spectrum but not good enough for activists who demand that marriage be redefined in the name of supposed equality.

The LGBT lobby has had considerable success with newspeak. Constant repetition of the words 'love' and 'equality' in relation to same sex marriage has provided a smokescreen to achieve an objective which undermines the basis of family live, the joining together of a man and a woman for the procreation of children without which civilisation as we know it would end.

But what about infertile couples? They claim, before advocating adoption by gay couples, the use of surrogates and more recently,womb transplants allowing men to have babies. There is little if any thought for the effects in later life on the children resulting from such unions.

Gay couples can live together in circumstances similar to civil marriage without fear of prosecution but acceptance has turned into demands. Now the tail wags the dog. Even Anglican bishops are content to demean the sanctity of marriage by agreeing to legitimise that which is contrary to Christian teaching.

The First Minister's misuse of the word love was a precursor to linking same sex marriage with equality, condemning supporters of traditional marriage as lacking integrity, wisdom, compassion and justice using words such as wrong, homophobia, hate, fear, discrimination, prejudice and bigotry, the implication being that opponents of same sex marriage are bigoted, prejudiced people who lack compassion and a sense of justice.

There is no justice in condemning people simply for having an opposing view. In years to come as the Church crumbles and society further disintegrates, another First Minister could be standing in Ms Sturgeon's place condemning others for supporting or at least accepting laws which "we now recognise" to have been completely stupid.

Read More