Now even Gay Pride bows to Islamists

If I had had any respect for Peter Tatchell it would have evaporated with his decision to "respect the decision" of the organisers of Saturday's East London Pride event "not to address the gay-free zone controversy", a subject on which he has previously written passionately. A long time campaigner and no stranger to controversy and outrageous behaviour he thought nothing of invading the pulpit in Canterbury Cathedral one Easter Sunday while Archbishop Carey was preaching. So what does Islam possess that Christianity lacks? In a word 'fear'.

Apparently tomorrow's event will "celebrate LGBT life in Barking and Dagenham, Hackney, Havering, Newham, Tower Hamlets, Redbridge and Waltham Forest as well as oppose homophobia, transphobia, sexism and racism, includingislamophobia and anti-Semitism."[Islam is not a race - Ed.]They will: "not address the Gay-Free Zone controversy, not march through the E1 area and not stress the need for LGBT-Muslim solidarity" because they fear this would stir local division", said Tatchell. He added, “given the recent controversies, I believe it is very important that we reach out to the Muslim community in East London and unite with them against Islamophobia and homophobia [because] making local alliances and coalitions is the best way to conquer hate and division". Clearly in sucking up to make alliances with Muslims, Tatchell has swallowed the Islamophobia pill for a non-existing condition.

Meanwhile, outside this circus yet another Christian is taking another knock, this time simply for trying to heal the sick by whatever means he thinks appropriate for his patient. Despite all the benefits of living in a free society, Islamists constantly raise false claims of bigotry, racism and Islamophobia for not bowing to their everydemand. As Christianity is forced to take all the knocks while listening to Islamist constant complaints, moreno-go areas are being created.

No dhimmitude here thank you Mr Tatchell.

Read More

Fretting

In his piece for Pink News the Bishop of Buckingham said that having come out for gay marriage most letters received by him as a Church of England bishop are in favour of gay marriage and non-Christian people in society have moved on from fretting about the subject because 'gay people are just people like them'. Well I have been fretting, not on the subject referred to but on the attitude displayed by the bishop and others with remarks that appear calculated to imply that there is something seriously lacking with people not of their persuasion in this area.

In evidence to the Commons Committee on the Marriage (Same Sex) Bill there were similar claims that a lack of mail received against the proposal implied acceptance of the Bill, for example, "I have received two e-mails from people in my own diocese asking me if I would “clarify my position”. I received one e-mail from someone who takes a rather more conservative view... The sense I get from that is that the opposition might not be as widespread as some might think it." On the contrary, over 641,000 people have already made their views abundantly clear only to be ignored by the government! It should be obvious to members of the episcopate that unless all views are canvassed their mail will be weighted in favour of the course they advance as the bishop has discovered.

There may be some 'church people' whose attitude to homosexuality is less than charitable but that is no different to society in general. In my experience church people are far more tolerant than + Wilson suggests but his comments appear to be designed to tell his audience what they want to hear. Also some of the MPs on the Commons Committee have been using their membership not as an opportunity to gather evidence but as a platform for their particular lifestyles. Homosexuality is a fact but it does not mean that gay marriage should follow any more than those opposed to gay marriage because it is contrary to an established principle are against equality. What leaves me fretting is political and religious leaders playing to the gallery with outrageous accusations of homophobia and bigotry instead of engaging in reasoned debate.

Read More

The burden of conscience

"Fight valiantly as a disciple of Christ

against sin, the world and the devil,

and remain faithful to Christ to the end of your life."

To the non-Anglican the Church of England must appear to be an archaic debating society in which the newly 'enlightened' struggle to drag reluctant members into the 21st Century. In a secular society most people at least have some understanding of conscientious objection but apparently not in a religious context so they employ secular criteria to arrive at the wrong conclusion. I remember men who were not called to fight in WWII being described as 'conscies' without any awareness of the facts. Possibly they were conscientious objectors but they were probably in reserved occupations which barred them from active service.

During WWI in their ignorance many feminists and suffragettes handed outwhite feathers to men who were not in uniform, including honourably discharged wounded soldiers and those on leave from the front assuming them to be cowards. So earnest were some of these women that the facts became irrelevant to their cause believing only what they wanted to believe.

Little has changed. Maintaining the baptismal promise to "remain faithful to Christ" in one's attitude to the ordination of women attracts the stigma of misogyny. Continuing to believe that Holy Matrimony is an honourable estate between one man and one woman attracts the stigma of homophobia while the charge of bigotry is freely hurled at anyone who fails to toe the shifting revisionist line. Fortunately a significant minority still consider relevant facts so they refused to vote in favour of the ordination of women bishops without the promised safeguards that enabled women to be ordained priests in the Church of England resulting in a defeat of their own making.

I have no idea what to expect from the July 2013 Synod but some have suggested that a two-stage Bill similar to that being presented to the Governing Body (GB) of the Church in Wales in September may be a way forward. According to a Press Release preliminary GB group discussions are to take place on 10 April but given the firm stand already taken by the establishment (here and here) it is difficult to see what could be offered that would be acceptable to traditionalists resulting in the danger that if no agreement were possible the establishment would seek to find a way around the problem in the knowledge that the ordination of women bishops had been agreed. That does not suggest a sensible solution for those who already feel betrayed by actions taken to date.

In looking for a new way forward women who would be bishops and their supporters must accept that for traditionalists, remaining faithful to Christ is not an optional extra but the faith of the Holy Catholic Church as we understand it in common with the majority of catholic and orthodox Christians worldwide. If we were a debating society to be swayed by secular criteria we would not have to bear the burden of conscience but that is not how it is. To say yes to secularism would be saying 'no' to Christ.

The honourable way forward would be to satisfy first the needs of traditionalists and evangelicals. To do otherwise would perpetuate the legacy of ordaining women to the priesthood by fair means or foul, in that case foul given the already broken promises. In conscience as Christians we can and must do better.

Read More

Second Class or Second Rate?

I am becoming increasingly tired of pressure groups complaining about being 'second class' if they don't have exactly what they want, when they want it and as they want it.

This claim grew ever louder in the campaign for the ordination of women to the episcopate. As soon as there was a whiff of compromise to allow defeated Anglicans to worship as they wish, the feminist lobby denied that any promises had been given and cried foul: if women bishops were not to be absolute rulers they would be seen as second class bishops, an argument swallowed by ineffectual clergy and MPs who are charged with looking after the interests of us all.

It is no coincidence that the lesbian and gay movement have come up with the same strategy complaining that if they are not allowed to be 'married', their unions will be regarded as second class. But their campaign has gone further than that. They refer tointerfering 'religious' people condemning them as homophobic if they fail to support gay marriage, somewhat odd since every Tom, Dick and Sally felt it their right to decide on the ordination of women even if they had never crossed the threshold of a church. The Rev Dr Giles Fraser, a former Canon Chancellor of St Paul's Cathedral, went further. On a BBC Newsnight programme he accused people of using opposition to gay marriage as a cover for their homophobia, ignoring the fact that the vastmajority of people are opposed to re-defining marriage whether they are 'religious' or not.

One wonders how the retiring Archbishop of Canterbury now feels after championing many of the causes that todaythreaten society. In 'Rowan's Rule' [page 95] his 'change of heart' over women priests is recorded as: 'I had to change after looking around at my own side, and seeing the company I was keeping.'  If only he had kept different company! He may have led us to unity but, with the benefit of hindsight, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that ++Rowan has simply been used by many of those he has supported. Clearly he had the best of intentions but failed to realize that his integrity is not necessarily shared by others, even at the highest levels. He was ignored when he sought an honourable compromise for those who do not support the ordination of women and he has seen his authority rejected on the controversial issue of theAnglican Covenant .

And so it goes on with one minority group or another constantly chipping away at society, trading on traditional British values of fair play until only minorities rule. The British Sunday is now barely recognisable from any other day of the week. Soon there will be no difference after the Sunday Trading Laws arerelaxed for the Olympic Games leaving only the Friday Muslim day of prayer as having any religious significance and appearing to be the British norm. It is the silent majority of British citizens who are being rendered second class by those airing their second rate views, unable to see further than the confines of their own narrow self interest to the detriment of the rest of us.

Read More

How did we get here?

The General Synod of the Church of Ireland has passed a motion upholding marriage as a union between one man and one woman but for upholding tradition, the Church of Ireland Synod [is] blasted for 'homophobia'.

How did we get ourselves into the ridiculous position that those upholding tradition are pilloried as extremists? What was previously considered normal is now considered outrageous. In another example,Cranmer is beingpersecuted by the Advertising Standards Authority following "a number of complaints about an advertisement carried on behalf of the Coalition for Marriage". Same sex marriage is the latest trend in a movement, often in search of votes, that has brought the church to its knees, not to pray but by pressing fashionable minority, secular values on the church with no regard for tradition and scripture. In research carried out for the Coalition for Marriage, the majority of the 150 MPs who have declared themselvessupport equal marriage, a decision also taken by President Obama, perhaps sensing some electoral advantage in the decision.

While there is no excuse for unchristian religious extremism, the homosexual campaign for so called equality is in danger of turning away supporters of equal rights. Same sex couples deservedly have equal rights through civil partnerships but it is not homophobic to reject the notion of same sex marriage. Equality does not mean sameness especially when it dilutes the faith of the church. Unsurprisingly the champion of minorities (other than those who keep the faith), the Archbishop of Wales has already expressed his support for same sex marriage along with so called senior bishops of the Church in England. In a recent hard hitting article for Virtueonline the question was posed:What future for the Church of England: Is it too late to save her?  The Church of England is now a very short step from following precisely the same agenda as The Episcopal Church.Here a few paragraphs to give the flavour of the article:

 "The tragic facts are these: in order to maintain the illusion of a universal Church of England, inseparable from the state and its people, the Church's leaders have spent more than 150 years in trimming Christian doctrine so as not to "offend" anyone. Or to be "inclusive". Or to make the scriptures and Christian doctrine conform to the prevailing scientific fad of the day. Or, perhaps worst of all, in the truly misguided belief that by watering down the gospel they might be more successful in persuading unbelievers to come to Christ. They have compromised, with relative impunity, down the years, writing from the security of senior positions within the Church's establishment and protected by the national courts from any complaints which have come from concerned church members - but rarely, if ever, from the bishops who are supposed to be the guardians of Christian teaching. ... The Church of England has no effective mechanisms, either for guaranteeing orthodoxy of public teaching by its leaders, or for dealing with those who lead the way in subverting its witness to the gospel. Many of the leading revisionists have actually commenced their careers as teachers at the Church's seminaries. The outcome for the Church is constant drift in the direction of unbelief. Every novelty which is proposed has to be met halfway, with a compromise. The direction of movement each time is a step away from a recognisable faith in the gospel as the Church has received it, and the further alienation and exclusion of those within the Church who seek simply to be faithful to that gospel.

The catastrophic abandonment by the Church of England's bishops of their intrinsic role as guardians of Christian teaching concerning the Scriptures and the Creeds has been accompanied by a progressive relinquishment of their teaching authority in favour of voting on doctrinal and moral issues by the Church Assembly and latterly by the General Synod, whose members are not required to possess any qualification for judging such matters and who increasingly take their lead from media and politicians who want to see the Church redesigned in their own image.If it is possible for leading Anglicans to declare that there is no Hell, that there was no Incarnation and no Resurrection, and that there is no need for repentance and conversion in the universalist institution which the Church of England has become, then any appeal to the Scriptures for guidance as to God's will, or definition of morality, is met with blank looks and bafflement by many lay and clerical leaders for whom such an intellectual and spiritual universe is largely unknown."

So what hope is there for the Church of England? It was not encouraging to read that the Apostle of Faith by Fad has been elected to serve on the Crown Nominations Commission, the body that will nominate the next Archbishop of Canterbury, an honour he will no doubt regard as an endorsement of his secular creed.

The writing is on the wall.

Read More

So near, yet so far

The Agenda for the July 2012 General Synod has been published. As the news release succinctly puts it:  "The Agenda provides for the Synod to deal with the final stages of the major legislative process designed to make it possible for women to be bishops in the Church of England while also making some provision for those who, for theological reasons, will not be able to receive their ministry. If the legislation is approved, by simple majorities, by the House of Laity and the Convocations, the way will be clear for it to be presented for final approval on Monday 9 July. As with the women priests legislation in 1992, the whole of the morning and afternoon sittings has been allocated to the Final Approval debates."

'Some provision' just about sums it up. A mere nod towards those who were promised an honoured place in the church. WATCH has plotted their removal on just about every false pretext. Why? So long as traditionalists remain in the Church of England (and the Church in Wales) they are an embarrassing reminder that the Anglican church has separated itself from the historic faith which we affirm in our creed yet the feminist mitre is almost in their grasp, so near yet so far from the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church in which we profess our traditional belief.

If the liberal cause is just why has there been such a dirty campaign? It is no coincidence that the same weapon is being used to make people accept same sex marriage as has been used by those in favour of the ordination of women, deception. Regardless of their views, opponents of same sex marriage are described as 'religious hardliners and anti-gay'; homophobic bigots discriminating against homosexuals to deny them equal rights while ignoring the fact that many homosexual people oppose the move believing marriage to be the joining of a man and a women and what is being sought is not equality but a hastily ill-considered re-definition of marriage.

Despite the fact that thousands of woman petitioned against the measure, many of those in favour of the ordination of women accuse opponents of misogyny, homophobia, prejudice, discrimination and the brutalisation of women when in fact they simply disagree on theological grounds. Others try to read into the Bible anything that suits them. For example, much is made of Mary Magdalene being 'the Apostle to the Apostles' ignoring the important fact that what Mary did after she found the tomb empty was to run to tell the men, Peter and the disciple Jesus loved, the Apostles to whom Jesus entrusted His church.

Now the vote is said to be in doubt. Supporters of women's ordination threaten to vote against the measure just as they threatened to leave the church if they did not get their own way and have threatened again, even calling of strike action. There is a feeling by many that we have come thus far so just get on with it reminding me of the minister who suggested we raise the motorway speed limit to 80 mph because so many people ignored the law. The wider church is in no doubt, what is proposed is, in theological terms, unacceptable in the catholic church, Orthodox and Western. This is not about equality of opportunity in the work place.

There can be only one legitimate vote: NO.

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

The oppressor wins

The Gay Marriage cake                                                 Source: Metro

Christian bakers have been found to have discriminated against a gay man by refusing to make a cake bearing a pro-gay marriage jargon having lost their appeal against a previous ruling that they had breached equality legislation . Full report here.

The case was brought by a member of the LGBT advocacy group Queer Space who had "wanted a cake featuring Sesame Street puppets Bert and Ernie with the phrase ?Support Gay Marriage? For a private function marking International Day Against Homophobia".

According to the group's website their 'mainstreaming' operating practice is to strive to ensure respect for individuals and positive images of the LGBT community are integrated into everyday life of individuals, communities and organizations. They have failed on both counts.

Where is the equality in legislation which permits discrimination against what now appear to be minority Christian values?

It is no more 'homophobic' to oppose same sex marriage than it is to be 'Islamophobic' to be aware of the dangers posed by the Islamization of Europe.

Read More

The Victim

Women in the Church were victims, allegedly. Gays, lesbians and transgenders in the Church are victims, allegedly.

The true Victim was left hanging on the Cross. His words have been twisted to justify sectional interests to the detriment of the Church. The latest episode is witnessed by the LGBT campaign to have the high profile gay cleric Jeffrey John elected bishop of Llandaff.

Dr John says the bench of bishops is guilty of homophobia. This is the bench which wrote:

“Dear brothers and sisters in Christ,

We recognise that you have often been persecuted and ostracized by the Church for your sexuality, that you have been mistreated by the Church, and forced into secrecy and dissimulation by the attitudes of prejudice which you have faced.  We deplore such hostility, and welcome and affirm the words of the Primates that condemn homophobic prejudice and violence.  We too commit ourselves to offering you the same loving service and pastoral care to which all humanity is entitled, and we commit ourselves to acting to provide a safe space within the Church and within our communities in which you can be honest and open, respected and affirmed."

Jeffrey John claims in an open letter to the Bishop of Swansea and Brecon that his situation is exactly similar to that of the Bishop of Grantham who is also in a same sex relationship. It may be insofar as civil partnerships are concerned but I have found no record of Bishop Chamberlain supporting the Out4Marriage campaign, twisting the Bible to support his stance.

Dr John also suggests that same sex couples are no different to infertile couples, or couples who are beyond the age of childbearing. He is badly mistaken. Addressing gay people directly in his Out4Marriage video Dr John claims that "the official church doesn't speak with integrity... so frankly doesn't deserve to be listened to". That does not bode well for the mission of the Church or for bench collegiality. It is a  pick and mix form of Christianity which leads John to claim that "God is Out4Marriage too"!

In his letter to the bishop of Swansea and Brecon who is the Church in Wales' most senior bishop, Dr John said he had been told by "a bishop present at the meeting of the electoral college" that “a number of homophobic remarks were made and were left unchecked and unreprimanded by the chair”. [My emphasis - Ed.]

For members of the Electoral College to leak information is a serious breach of confidence but for a bishop? He or she should seriously consider his/her position.

Regular churchgoers are dying out, literally and metaphorically. Those who have not been pressured into leaving and battle-on are fed up with gays and feminists claiming to be badly treated when the Church clearly has so many women clergy and gay people in their midst.

In England Archbishop Justin Welby appears to have sold out to Women and the Church (WATCH) despite their shameless campaign against Bishop Philip North because he is an orthodox Anglican. Read the history of this sorry saga here.

In Wales Archbishop Barry Morgan led the bishops into battle against Church members promoting same sex marriage. At the same time he was desperately engineering the election of the first woman bishop in Wales before he retired. His candidate also complained of discrimination. On investigation it proved to be nothing of the sort. One stitch-up is one too many.

I hope that the Bench has at last come to its senses. People need to hear about Christ crucified not false claims of victimhood.

Postscript [21.03.2017]

Unsurprisingly given the gay men's chorus which is singing ever louder to Jeffrey John's tune, the LGB pressure class OneBodyOneFaith this morning published an open letter (here) expressing their "concerns" about the way the process to appoint a bishop for the See of Llandaff has been handled. One of the signatories is the Rev Jeremy Pemberton, Chair for the Board of Trustee. It was he who thumbed his nose to the Church of England over the gay marriage issue.

OBOF have only Jeffrey John's word for what took place. That is second hand. There is no context, merely accusation. "The reported unanimity of the Llandaff electors is a strong indication of what they wish to happen" they write. There are two points here. It was common knowledge that many in Llandaff were desperate to avoid a woman bishop. Their best hope of avoiding that eventuality was to support Jeffrey John. Also, given the strong gay presence in Llandaff, the impression given is that many if not all form part of the chorus demanding that Jeffery John should be the bishop-elect.

As we approach Passiontide  the baying crowd becomes louder. There are echoes of "Give us Barabbas". The crowd had it wrong. So does OBOF and the media. Pray that the Bench withstands the media onslaught.

Read More

Jeffrey John's gay chorus augmented by quartet

"Gay dean is in the running to become Bishop of Durhamdanquot; The Times 6 May 2013 Photo: Chris Harris

Harry Farley has reported in Christian Today that a second complaint has been lodged as "pressure builds" over alleged homophobia by the Church in Wales after a senior gay cleric was blocked from being appointed a bishop.

Where one wonders does Farley obtain his information? The hymn sheet is always the same. One sided, all singing in unison ?Homophobia, homophobia, homophobia ?. Who is the conductor?

In his Kiwianglo's Blog, an Anglican priest and LGBT advocate wrote a resume of the position of the Church in Wales as seen by the recently retired Archbishop Dr Barry Morgan. He emphasised "the Church in Wales has apologized unreservedly for its mistreatment of gay and lesbian people and strongly indicated it could allow or bless same-sex marriages in the future".

The Church in Wales is not homophobic, it is very gay friendly with LGBT chaplains. An over emphasis which is becoming all too obvious as the LGBT lobby tries to call the tune. There have been complaints from MPs, Cathedral Chapters and Electors with the list growing. Given the absence of any contrary view one suspects that the complainers are either gay themselves or sympathetic lobbyists. Much has been made of the weight of requests for John to be made bishop which merely suggests an orchestrated campaign. Others think it would be  a disaster but they were not asked for their opinion.

This is what one unpublished (anonymous) commentator had to say "I am assured by someone who was present that no homophobic remarks were made in the electoral college. (Already in the public domain so he felt he could concur.) Also that there are a lot of lies being told about what happened."

Jeffrey John has been rejected many times. Originally he had my sympathy but no more. Others dioceses have come to the conclusion that Jeffrey John would be more of a distraction than an asset. He claims that the Church does not speak with authority, advocates same sex marriage claiming that God does too and controversially interprets the Bible to suit his circumstances. Previously he threatened to take the Church of England to court after he was blocked from becoming a bishop contrary to 1 Corinthians 6:7 "The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated?"

Why not rather be wronged, indeed? Nothing good can come out of this. The diocese, the province and the Church are suffering for one man's ambition. If he were to succeed in his outrageous campaign everyone else would be the loser.

Postscript

From ECCLESIASTICALLAW

Electing the Bishop of Llandaff: Propriety and Privacy

"The Thinking Anglicans website relates that the objection ?Has now been referred to the Legal Sub-Committee, which is a body in the Church in Wales assembled to consider sah and governance matters?.

However, it is difficult to see what this Sub-Committee can achieve, however legally learned its members.  Absent proper authority from the Governing Body, it has no power under the Constitution to investigate the deliberations of the Electoral College.  And to be effective in practice, any investigation of the objection is bound to contravene the constitutional rule of privacy concerning the Electoral College meeting.  One procedural impropriety is remedied by committing another."

In full here .

Postscript [31.03.2017]

Two interesting letters have appeared in the Church Times.

The first from the Bench of Bishops of the Church in Wales, The Welsh Bishops on the Dean of St Albans and the see of Llandaff,responding to an"ill-informed, unbalanced" leader comment,

the second from the Rt Revd Dr Barry Morgan objecting to false allegations by the Dean of St Albans that Dr Morgan  blocked his nomination to the sees of Bangor and St Asaph in 2008 and 2009.

LATEST

Church's legal subcommittee advises that complaints are without merit and bishops can proceed with appointment. Details here.

Read More

Not another victim!

Bishop steps down after speaking of campaign forcing him to quit - Christian Today

The Ass Bishop of Llandaff is resigning after speaking of a "sustained campaign forcing him to quit". David Wilbourne, a strong supporter of gay cleric Jeffrey John, will step down on Easter Sunday after 'considerable and increasing pressure to relinquish' his post for the past 18 months.

The Ass bishop of Llandaff knows all about victims. Back in 2011 when he was justifying his appointment by the Archimporter of PC persons, Barry Morgan, he claimed that the ordination of women would rid the world of homophobia, misogyny, brutalisation of women in all situations including those in war zones.

The Church in Wales has since ordained sufficient women to illustrate the nonsense of his comment. With so many women now in place, accusations by Jeffrey John of homophobia must be absurd.

After his appointment vicars in Landaff  received a letter from Wilbourne instructing clergy how he was to be received. Suitable parking was to be provided and a bag carrier was to conduct him into church. Perhaps unsurprisingly his symbols of office were to be displayed on the Altar to emphasis his authority. It proved never to be obvious otherwise. In an unwise move the Ass bishop also let it be known that he would be honoured to made the diocesan.

Wilbourne mentioned nothing in his statement about a sustained campaign forcing him to quit, or of the alleged considerable and increasing pressure to relinquish his post for the past 18 months. He was brought in by someone with no scruples and supported a candidate with no scruples. He has been part of the say anything, do anything campaign to advance the liberal cause that has so damaged the Church.

Pray that the bench has the imagination to recognise the errors of the past. No more of the same please.

Going, gone, gone. Ass bishop Wilbourne and the briefly Dean Janet Henderson

with their appointer Archbishop Barry Morgan.      Picture credit; Church Times

Read More

Second best

The Dean of Liverpool Pete Wilcox to be Bishop of Sheffield   Source: Cranmer

As Wales awaits the name of the bishop-elect of Llandaff, news that the Dean of Liverpool is to be the next Bishop of Sheffield after Bishop Philip North withdrew following pressure from Women and the Church. In his blog Cranmer announcedSheffield gets its second best bishop – Pete Wilcox, Dean of Liverpool.

It was unfortunate that the former Archbishop of Wales Dr Barry Morgan chose to complement the new bishop of St Davids by referring to her as the best person to be a bishop. Llandaff therefore can also expect the second best, or worse, unless there is a translation.

Ironically the Guardian is carrying a exclusive article claiming that Jeffrey John has been "passed over seven times for promotion to bishop". Had St Davids not been a stitch-up presumably his name would have come up there. But it seems he was expected to get Llandaff.

What the powers to be fail to realise is that many people in the pews are fed up with cries of homophobia when the real issue is that it is same sex marriage in church that is not wanted.

Read More

Liberal drift to engulf Wales?

The Dean of Salisbury addresses Gay Pride marchers.       Source: Facebook

The above still from a gay pridevideo on Facebook last Summer shows the Dean of Salisbury, the Very Rev June Osborne, encouraging participants to be strong in difference, standing against "prejudice and hatred" and to march with pride in Salisbury after she gives the parade her blessing.

Lobbyists interpret 'dislike' as 'hatred' and 'disagreement' as 'prejudice'. Allegations which stick whether or not they are based on factual evidence. Charges of homophobia are used as a matter of course to stymie any discussion on the legitimacy of accusations that LGBT people are treated unfairly. Say it often enough and people will believe it without checking the facts. Introduce something and people will get used to it. That is the strategy and it has worked, hence the liberal drift of the Church.

When a senior church person speaks, people are expected to take note. The fact that senior church persons increasingly speak not for the Gospel but for the advancement of liberal values in the Church makes the dilema all the more serious.

Even though the implication is false, 'spread love not hatred' is a mantra that has become fully in tune with Anglicanism in the UK today as it drifts away from Christianity towards paganism. Love is all but the meaning of love has been twisted to mean acceptance of just about every desire. If you are not 'for' you are regarded as 'against'.

The image of the Dean of Salisbury at the gay pride march is considerably different from the image projected on the Church in Wales website where she is presented as a thoroughly competent woman who will take the Church forward. But forward to what? The irony of the 'homophobia' charges after Jeffrey John's rejection by the Electoral College will not be lost when the reality of another LGBT promoting appointment dawns on unsuspecting Anglicans in Wales. June Osborne previously lent her name to the suppressedOsborne Report on homosexuality which should have been published in 1989 and was finally published in 2012. Some think the Report damaged her chances of preferment in England.

The die has been firmly cast in Wales. Interviewed in Llandaff Cathedral on BBC TV News yesterday evening bishop John Davies candidly explained  that: "There is no truth whatsoever in the allegation that the bench of bishops or indeed the Electoral College of the Church in Wales is homophobic. I have said on countless occasions that homosexuality, participation in civil partnerships is no bar whatsoever to ordination in the Church in Wales whether that be to the order of deacons, priests or bishops."

The charge of homophobia was clearly absurd given the grovelling apology by the bench of bishops to the LGBT+ community for perceived errors. There followed the Changing Attitude, Iris in the Community propaganda film alleging homophobia while promoting the LGBT+ cause despite the  gay friendly stance of the bishop of St Asaph who not only has appointed a LGBT chaplain but has a transgender ordinand waiting in the wings. So at some stage there will be a 'she' at the Altar though she is he, preferring to be thought of as she.

All minorities are regarded as acceptable in the Church in Wales with the exception of orthodox Christians. After the stitch-up which saw the first woman bishop in Wales involved in MAE Cymru's 'Saints and Sparklers'event it appeared that things could not get much worse.

What has become known as the liberal drift in England is overwhelming the Church in Wales with seemingly no-one able to repel it. When the bishop designate said "I do want to be a bishop for absolutely everybody, [including] those who might have wished for another candidate", did she really mean everybody, including loyal, conscientious Anglicans who have found that their Church has left them without provision.

Para 346 of the Osborne Report will be of particular interest for traditionalists:

We believe that the bishops, as the focus of unity of the Church, need to affirm the catholicity of the inclusiveness of the Church. The bishops have an important role in helping the Church live with unresolved issues. The way to resolve the conflict and tensions between groups is not by exclusion of one or more minority groups.

Exclusion has been used as a weapon in the Church in Wales since the retirement in 2008 of the  Provincial Assistant Bishop. Every minority has been deemed worthy of inclusion except orthodox Anglicans. Are they not worthy of love?

This problem has become all the more pressing with the appointment of a second women bishop to the most Anglo Catholic and populous diocese in the Province. Many more Anglo Catholic clergy who have kept the faith find themselves with nowhere to turn. They deserve better.

I hope the new bishop of Llandaff along with the rest of bench will now consider the dire position of the orthodox minority in the Church in Wales. Many of these loyal Anglicans are now elderly, often lonely with little to sustain them other than their faith but after years of service they find that their church has left them.

The bishop designate claims that women can make a difference. To date that has been wholly negative resulting in a code of practice designed for exclusion. If women want to make a difference they can start by making arrangements to include all, not just all those caught up in the liberal drift.

Read More

And now the smears...

Source: Evening Standard

Many of us are used to smears if we hold an opinion contrary to the received wisdom. To misogynistic, homophobic and Islamophobic I can now add xenophobic and racist.

I was horrified when I read that the Polish and Social Cultural Association (POSK) in Hammersmith had beentargeted by vandals who had sprayed yellow paint on the front of the centre saying "Go Home".

Do these idiots not understand that after Poland was overrun by the Nazis in WW2 many Poles gave their lives fighting with the Allies and many of their pilots fought in the Battle of Britain?

In Prime Minister's Question Time today David Cameron assured the House that all possible steps will be taken to tackle the persoalan of a few extremists exploiting the Brexit vote but it does not help the situation when Ministers and others brand people as racists simply because they take a balanced view of immigration and the inherent risks to stability of an open-door policy which will bring further chaos to our over-stretched public services.

Writing in the Guardian Miqdaad Versi, assistant secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, writes "Brexit has given voice to racism – and too many are complicit". Self proclaimed Brexit defector and former Conservative Party chair, Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, cited "hate and xenophobia" as the reasons for changing her position. Tell Mama is devoted to "Measuring Anti-Muslim Attacks" inviting complainants to submit reports. The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) has compiled "over 100 incidents reported of hate crimes following the referendum result" according to figures on their web site. For a world view click here.

AsArchbishop Cranmer wrote: "Brexit may have spurred a few racists but the heartbeat of the nation is unity and tolerance". All violence is to be deplored, from whatever source. We are constantly told that Islam is a religion of peace and that extremists do not represent true Islam despite all the evidence to the contrary in Islamic states where the Dhimmi status of non-Muslims is thought acceptable.

From Archbishops down, or up depending on one's point of view, Islam is being affirmed as if it were an acceptable religion on a par with Christianity. Justin Welby hosted an iftar this week at Lambeth Palace - a breaking of the Muslim fast of Ramadan.  Addressing the Muslims there, he said: "Your faithfulness in observing Ramadan in this way has been an example of what it means to take faith seriously"!

When I first clicked on the Welby link there was a link to another page "Soldiers beheaded, churches destroyed and constant fear: Syrian Christian on life under ISIS in Raqqadanquot;. Will we ever learn?

Earlier I read a report that the WATCH 'F-word' advocate, now Rector of St James' Piccadilly "opens doors for Muslims, hosts grand Iftardanquot;. So much for theclaim that "there will be no repetition of the March 2015 Muslim prayer service held at St John?S Waterloo".

While Anglican clergy are busy affirming Islam, MCB and their supporters are busy playing the victim. Again from Cranmer: "There are undoubtedly some vile people out there who are abusing Asians, Muslims, Poles and Romanians, but it seems particularly crass for Remainers (including some senior clergy) to smear all Brexiters with the whiff of racism (not to mention stupidity)."

A sense of proportion please.

Read More

Twisted

Photo: cnsnews.Com

This photograph is displayed over a caption: "Human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell, right, demonstrates with others against the decision by Anglican Primates to punish pro-gay equality churches in North America, in front of the Canterbury Cathedral in Canterbury, England, Friday, Jan. 15, 2016. (AP Photo/Frank Augstein)".

Things have moved on, or should I say backwards. The photograph appears in an article "Anglican Church of Canada Adopts Gay Marriage, Endangers Future of Faith":

"At the General Synod of The Anglican Church of Canada, held July 7-12, a proposal to allow the Canadian Anglican ministry to solemnize same-sex marriages was voted upon and was reported to have failed by a single vote.  The next day, however, it was reported that there had been a counting error and that the measure actually had passed. Thus, by the closes of margins, the Anglican Church of Canada approved same-sex marriage". Full articlehere.

It is not homophobic to support the established definition of marriage which is "the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all othersdanquot;. Nor has it anything to do with equality. These twisted views have wrecked Western Anglicanism to satisfy the desires of the few at the expense of the many.

Read More

Nonpcopinionophobia

Left: Hundreds of people protested against the veil ban on Wednesday Source: BBC/AFP Right: Mary McAleese at Dublin Pride with husband Martin (right), son Justin (second left) and his husband Fionan Source: BBC/PA

"Denmark has got it wrong. Yes, the burka is oppressive and ridiculous – but that's still no reason to ban it." -Boris Johnson. The Telegraph (£)

Boris Johnson wrote his article in the Telegraph after the first woman was charged in Denmark for wearing niqab after theDenmark veil ban was introduced.

The law does not mention burkas and niqabs by name but says "anyone who wears a garment that hides the face in public will be punished with a fine".

Nevertheless, the Guardian headlined the event:Boris Johnson's burqa remarks 'fan flames of Islamophobia', says MP.

In the article Boris Johnson is accused of “dog whistle” Islamophobia by a former Conservative chair, Lady Sayeeda Warsi, who said the lack of action by the party over Johnson’s comments showed it was “business as usual.”

Sayeeda Warsi had previously called on the Conservative party to launch a “full independent inquiry” into Islamophobia in the party and warned the Tories were "pursuing a politically damaging policy of denial about the problem in its own ranks".

Back in 2010 she spoke out about what she sees as the rise of Islamaphobia in Britain. By coincidence in 2010 Sayeeda Warsi was "named one of the world's '500 Most Influential Muslims' by Middle East think tank the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre. She also topped the UK's Muslim women power list."

Also getting in on the controversy, "Labour demanded that the Conservative chair, Brandon Lewis, refer the former foreign secretary for mandatory equalities training, amid renewed calls for the party to open an independent investigation into Islamophobia in the party.

"In a letter to Lewis, the shadow equalities minister, Naz Shah, said Johnson’s comments were “ugly and naked Islamophobia” and said Lewis should abide by his word to give Tory members diversity training to combat Islamophobia."

While many people will agree that the Denmark veil ban is reasonable, Boris Johnson did not but he is accused of making Islamophopbic remarks.

Honest opinions are no longer acceptable unless they conform to the latest politically correct dictums so people at large are deterred from saying what they feel for fear of being condemned as Islamophobic regardless of the facts.

In 2011 I blogged under the heading Islamophobia:

"phobia /pho·bia/ (fo´be-ah) a persistent, irrational, intense fear of a specific object, activity, or situation (the phobic stimulus), fear that is recognized as being excessive or unreasonable by the individual himself. There is nothing irrational, excessive or unreasonable about the fear of Islam. In her University of Leicester speech today the Tory Party Chairman, Baroness Warsi, raises the now familiar cry of Islamophobia, warning that describing Muslims as either “moderate” or “extremist” fosters growing prejudice. If it is a question of either we would have to choose "extremist" because at the root of the Islamic ideology is a belief that Islam is supreme and that any means, including lying (taqiyya), are legitimate weapons to achieve world domination."

Constant claims of 'Islamophobia' regardless of the context is a device used to raise a political ideology to a level beyond criticism while religions such as Christianity are under constant threat. Perhaps the most surprising aspect of this phenomenon is its contradiction with feminist ideals of 'equality'.

Feminists have used similar tactics in the Anglican Church with their constant cries of misogyny and homophobia. After attacking Western Anglicanism their attention has turned to the Roman Catholic Church which is threatened from within as well as from outside.

Irish Church must confront issues to avoid 'decline into irrelevance' shouts the Tablet headline. "The Church needs to confront its teachings on issues like celibacy, female ordination, its theology on sexuality and its hierarchical structure, otherwise it will continue to decline into irrelevance, Fr Kevin Hegarty has warned."

In an obvious nod towards secularism he said, “People began to lose confidence in an institution whose teaching on this subject was so out of sync with their lived experience.”

Mary McAleese who was the Irish President of from 1997 to 2011 has condemned the Catholic Church's teaching on homosexuality as "evil" and was "hopeful the Pope would change the church's position on the issue".

No doubt the former President was influenced by that fact that she was the first recipient of the Vanguard Award at the Gaze LGBT film festival in Dublin. In June she became the first former Irish president to take part in the Dublin Pride parade when she marched with her son Justin and his husband Fionan.

If the Roman Catholic Church follows the example of Western Anglicanism, what hope is there for Christianity in the West?

Free speech must be maintained. If people disagree they must defend their position. Fair comment must not be silenced by unwarranted charges of phobias.

Read More