Predictable Anglican reaction to Trump’s Jerusalem announcement

This is an early tweet from Canada’s establishment Anglican rag, The Journal, expressing “concerns” over Trump’s announcement today that the U.S. recognises Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and plans to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

The article referenced in the tweet warns that the recognition will cause “Irreparable Damage”. Only time will tell, of course, but a few things we can predict with complete certainty.

The liberal Anglican establishment – just about all Western Anglican clergy in other words – will roundly condemn the move because: Trump did it and they all hate him; it goes against received leftist dogma, the last remaining heresy in Western Anglicanism and, most important of all, it acknowledges the existence of an objective fact – the land of Israel has been home to the Jews for 3000 years – something entirely alien to liberal Anglicans who prefer endless reality-evading conversations.

Something that Anglican bishops don’t protest

Six of the seven countries in Trump’s executive order restricting immigration to the US ban Israelis from entering their country. Has any Anglican bishop anywhere even mentioned this, let alone complained about it? If so, do let me know.

From here:

Today, Arab states don’t ban Jews as such. They do ban Israelis. In fact, six of the seven states featured in Trump’s executive order ban entry of Israeli passport-holders: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. (So, too, do another ten Muslim-majority states.) Those same six states also won’t admit anyone whose non-Israeli passport includes an Israeli visa. I’m not aware that the international community regards this as a particularly egregious affront to international norms.

Standing Committee has developed a Bible toolkit.

From here:

Stephen Lyon began the day by sharing with the Standing Committee that the Bible in the Life of the Church’s project stage will come to an end in 2016. He hoped the project would leave the Communion a legacy of “a toolkit to do the Bible better”.

An anonymous source has informed AS that the primary “do the Bible better” item in the toolkit will be a pair of TEC supplied and paid for rainbow tinted glasses.

The Safe Church Network is launched

Until I read this, I had no idea what a safe church is: I thought it must be a church that dispenses condoms.

No: apparently it is a church that “vulnerable people” can attend and not be abused. Clearly, this is a slap in the face that is not quite hard enough for the burgeoning Anglican masochist community; where will they go to feel included?

The Anglican Communion’s newest network, the Safe Church Network, has announced it is planning a conference in Africa for 2014 around how to make churches safer for vulnerable people.

Australian Garth Blake, convener of the communion’s new Safe Church Network, said during a press conference on October 31, that many parts of the communion have begun talking about how to address the issue of creating a culture of safety in churches and are at various stages of response.

A very worrying piece of spam

I get a lot of spam email, so it is just as well I have an excellent spam filter. Nevertheless, the occasional spam email does slip through. Like this one:

Dear Customer David C Jenkins: Sexy dresses Under USD 12.99 and free delivery

What I find troubling about this is that the sender seems to know I am a Canadian Anglican and is catering to my demographics’ taste in men’s clothing accordingly.

Anglican clergyman agues for civil same-sex marriage before Australian parliament

The very Reverend Peter Catt reckons that same sex marriage doesn’t impinge on marriage at all, even though it unavoidably changes the Biblical definition of marriage from a divinely established covenant between a man and a woman to something arbitrary and man-made. Rev. Peter Catt is Dean of St. John’s Cathedral, so perhaps he hasn’t been able to find the time to read the Bible.

From here:

THE Anglican Church of Australia’s Very Reverend Peter Catt says a same-sex marriage Bill would not deny or denigrate the legitimacy of marriage.

Addressing the parliamentary hearing on same-sex marriage on behalf of the church’s social responsibilities committee, Dr Catt said civil unions instead extended the liberties of same or opposite-sex couples.

“I really don’t see that this impinges on marriage at all,” he said.

He said children were better off in a relationship with good values, which included gay couples, and said bad marriages actually did more to undermine the institution of marriage.

The Anglican Church wants to know what Anglicans think of the Bible

From here:

As part of the Bible in the Life of the Church project we are undertaking a Communion-wide survey of the way Anglicans understand and engage with the Bible. We rightly say the Bible is central to our life together but we also engage with it and interpret it in different ways. What are those differences? Why might there be differences? What can we learn from those who differ from us?

Naturally, instead of the starting position being that the Bible is God’s propositional revelation to man, making it the main way to find out what God is like and what he expects of us, the assumption is that the Bible is to be engaged with – whatever that means.

To that end, the survey asks such engaging questions as whether the following are true:

The Bible contains some human errors

Science shows that some things in the Bible cannot have happened

Christians can learn about God from the writings of other faiths

Some parts of the Bible are more true than others [what does “more true” mean? Is Anglican truth a mark on a sliding scale between Absolutely True and Absolutely False. Perhaps my view of truth has been conditioned by spending too long with computers – I thought true/false was a binary condition]

Jesus rose from the dead in bodily form

Jesus ascended into heaven

If I were an optimist, I would conclude that the survey is a surreptitious attempt to discover how far heretical rot has penetrated into the laity in order that drastic remedial steps could be taken. As it is, I’m not an optimist.

Hell Pizza

Hell Pizza is running a silly advertisement:

This has upset the  Anglican Church:

Hell Pizza, a chain in New Zealand, has angered the Anglican Church over its new ad comparing its limited time offer of hot cross buns, which is decorated with a Satanist symbol, to Jesus.

But St. Matthews Anglican church is not in the least perturbed and is displaying its own version:

Auckland Anglican church, St Matthews in the City, has put up a new billboard similar to the pizza outlets, advertising a hot cross bun with a pentagram symbol.

It says “Hell no, we’re not giving up pizza for lent”.

Priest in charge Clay Nelson says it’s about taking the mickey out of those Christians who complain about Hell Pizza’s “clever” ads.

He says people shouldn’t take things so seriously and go to war with secular society which doesn’t do Christianity any good.

If St. Matthews doesn’t take Hell seriously, what, I wonder, does it take seriously? Progressive Christianity, apparently, and the only thing it takes seriously is the act of not taking Christianity seriously.