My fatwa is bigger than yours

Posted on by
Reply

Canada-based Dr Muhammad Tahir ul-Qadri has declared a 600 page fatwa against terrorism and was in London to speak about it:

He’s a man on a mission – a mission to state the obvious.

But for Dr Muhammad Tahir ul-Qadri it is the obvious facts that need stating loudest. Last week the Pakistani-born cleric took to a stage in London to declare his Islamic religious ruling, or fatwa, against terrorism.

There was a man from the other side of the world telling an audience that included Parliamentarians and other government officials what they had been wanting to hear. A clear, concise and quotable denouncement of al-Qaeda’s worldview.

Canada-based Dr Qadri spoke for more than an hour on his reasons why the Koran forbids the murder and mayhem of suicide bombings.

“This fatwa is an absolute condemnation of terrorism. Without any excuse, without any pretext, without any exceptions, without creating any ways of justification,” he said.

“This condemnation is in its totality, in its comprehensiveness, its absoluteness, a total condemnation of every act of terrorism in every form which is being committed or has been committed wrongly in the name of Islam.”

Will this convince anyone?  Probably not those who need to be convinced. As an as aside, in addition to writing 600 page fatwas, Dr. Qadri is adept at writing the word “Muhammad” in the clouds; I’m not sure if this reduces or increases his credibility.

Sex.com for sale

Posted on by
Reply

Malcolm Muggeridge noted that sex is the mysticism of materialism; things have degenerated considerably since he made that observation: we now have sex.com which is the mysticism of solipsism.

And it is for sale:

Sex.com, a popular domain name on the internet, will be auctioned off in New York this month after its owners defaulted on debt payments.

Boston-based Escom purchased the name in 2006 for a record $14 million US, but the name is not expected to fetch anywhere near that price when it goes on the auction block March 18.

Online bidding for the name starts at $1 million, according to the auction site David R. Maltz and Co. Inc., based in New York.

“We expect to have a very productive auction,” Scott Matthews, the lawyer handling the auction, told the New York Post.

Rowan Williams turning evangelism into “destinies converging” and other twaddle

Posted on by
9

Rowan Williams continues to astound:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has condemned evangelist “bullies” who attempt to convert people of other faiths to Christianity.

Dr Rowan Williams said it was right to be suspicious of proselytism that involves “bullying, insensitive approaches” to other faiths.

In a speech at Guildford cathedral, Dr Williams criticised those who believed they had all the answers and treated non-Christians as if their traditions of reflection and imagination were of no interest to anyone. “God save us form that kind of approach,” he said.

But he added: “God save us also from the nervousness about our own conviction that doesn’t allow us to say we speak about Jesus because we believe he matters, we believe he matters, because we believe that in him human beings find their peace, their destinies converge, and their dignities are fully honoured.”

In his address, titled “The Finality of Christ in a Pluralist World”, Dr Williams addressed difficulties modern Christians have with Biblical texts which suggest that Christianity is the only path to salvation.

Dr Williams admitted that in the past four decades, the problems around the classical interpretation of these texts had become more prominent.

He asked: “What about all those people who never had a chance of hearing about Jesus?”

He also asked about the generations before Jesus and the many cultures untouched by Christianity.

“Can we believe in a just God, who in effect punishes people, for not being in the right place at the right time?”

He raised a political objection to the claim that Christ is the final truth about God and the Universe, suggesting it had helped justify “wicked” things such as crusading and colonialism.

“What could we possibly mean by saying that a truth expressed in the Middle East 2,000 years ago was truth applicable to everybody, everywhere?” he asked.

Belief in the uniqueness or finality of Christ, in the way it has usually been understood, is something that “sits very badly indeed, not just with a plural society – whatever that means – but with a society that regards itself as liberal or democratic”.

In the Gospels, Jesus said: “No one comes to the father, except through me.”

Dr Williams said that in this context: “The father cannot be shown as an object in the sky, something abstract, something you can point to.” Instead, God should be understood in the first or second person, walking with Jesus towards the cross and resurrection.”

The Archbishop’s speech was an attempt to reconcile the claims of the Bible about Jesus and Christianity with the multi-faith societies in which Christians around the world must live.

The Gospels and the rest of the New Testament urge believers to spread the “good news” or evangelise, but the need for good relations with other faiths in the secular world militates against proselytism.

Dr Williams said: “When we sit along side the Jew, the Buddhist, the Muslim, Hindu, when we sit alongside them, we expect to see in their humanity something that challenges and enlarges us.”

The Archbishop quoted the Koran: “And God did not elect to make everybody the same. God has made us to learn in dialogue.”

On the question of whether Christians could legitimately believe that people of other faiths could be saved, Dr Williams said believers were too reluctant to leave this to God to sort out.

“We have often a vague feeling that God hasn’t read the proper books,” he said. “I’m very content to let God be the judge of how far anyone outside the visible family of faith is related to Jesus or has turned towards the father.”

According to Rowan:

  • Jesus is not the only way to the Father in the sense that Christians have understood him to be for the last couple of millennia.
  • The problem of what happens to those who have never heard the Gospel has suddenly become so prominent that all previous explanations are inadequate.
  • Christians should not evangelise aggressively for fear of hurting people’s feelings.
  • Getting on harmoniously with other faiths is more important than sharing the Good News (whatever that is).
  • The fact that evil has been done in Christ’s name means he can’t be the final revelation of God to mankind; and the meaning of the universe cannot be found in him.

To paraphrase C. S. Lewis, if Jesus is who he claims to be, he is of ultimate importance; if he isn’t, he is of no importance at all. The one thing he cannot be is what Rowan is determined to make him: moderately important.

Next month, Rowan will give a lecture on why the Western Anglican Church is disappearing.

Alcoholic wants religion free treatment

Posted on by
4

From the CBC:

A Winnipeg man who has struggled with alcoholism for decades says he has filed a complaint with the Manitoba Human Rights Commission over the lack of a treatment program that’s free of religious or spiritual elements.

Rob Johnstone said he has battled alcoholism for 40 years and can’t find a treatment program that doesn’t rely on religion or spirituality as part of the recovery process.

“I should not be forced to participate in someone else’s religious beliefs. I shouldn’t have to add to mine,” said Johnstone, who added he has been an alcoholic for 40 years.

“I have my own beliefs and I’m happy with them.”

Rather than yet another frivolously idiotic complaint to a human rights commission, perhaps Johnstone should exercise his human right to continue being an alcoholic – a consequence, one presumes, of his happiness inducing beliefs.

Arguing with atheists

Posted on by
2

An interesting article by the other Hitchens, Peter; read it all here

He [Christopher] often assumes that moral truths are self-evident, attributing purpose to the universe and swerving dangerously round the problem of conscience – which surely cannot be conscience if he is right since the idea of conscience depends on it being implanted by God. If there is no God then your moral qualms might just as easily be the result of indigestion.

Yet Christopher is astonishingly unable to grasp that these assumptions are problems for his argument. This inability closes his mind to a great part of the debate, and so makes his atheist faith insuperable for as long as he himself chooses to accept it.

One of the problems atheists have is the unbelievers’ assertion that it is possible to determine what is right and what is wrong without God. They have a fundamental inability to concede that to be effectively absolute a moral code needs to be beyond human power to alter.

On this misunderstanding is based my brother Christopher’s supposed conundrum about whether there is any good deed that could be done only by a religious person, and not done by a Godless one. Like all such questions, this contains another question: what is good, and who is to decide what is good?

It is striking that in his dismissal of a need for absolute theistic morality, Christopher says in his book that ‘the order to “love thy neighbour as thyself” is too extreme and too strenuous to be obeyed’. Humans, he says, are not so constituted as to care for others as much as themselves.

This is demonstrably untrue, and can be shown to be untrue, through the unshakable devotion of mothers to their children; in the uncounted cases of husbands caring for sick, incontinent and demented wives (and vice versa) at their lives’ ends; through the heartrending deeds of courage on the battlefield.

I am also baffled and frustrated by the strange insistence of my anti-theist brother that the cruelty of Communist anti-theist regimes does not reflect badly on his case and on his cause. It unquestionably does.

He has bricked himself up high in his atheist tower, with slits instead of windows from which to shoot arrows at the faithful, and would find it rather hard to climb down out of it.

I have, however, the more modest hope that he might one day arrive at some sort of acceptance that belief in God is not necessarily a character fault, and that religion does not poison everything.

Beyond that, I can only add that those who choose to argue in prose, even if it is very good prose, are unlikely to be receptive to a case which is most effectively couched in poetry.

Peter Hitchens makes the interesting point that an atheist world view – particularly that of Christopher Hitchens – is rooted in the emotional, or poetic, rather than the rational.

That is why having an argument with an atheist is a bit like this:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y&]

The Disintegration of the Diocese of BC

Posted on by
2

From the Bishop James Cowan’s charge to synod.

Woodpeckers are eating the cathedral:

For a variety of reasons, the initial design of the East End was modified. As a result, leakage has been a major problem in the East End ever since its completion. As well, some of the materials used for construction of the exterior east wall and transept towers have a lifespan of no more than twenty-five years. While that time is almost up, in fact the lifespan of that material has been considerably lessened, because woodpeckers seem to like it, and the repair of bird holes in the east nave wall and the transept towers has been an almost annual and costly event.

Even though many parishes will be closed, the cathedral will be fixed because it is – well, more important:

It may seem odd that in the midst of budgetary concerns, diocesan staff downsizing, and proposals about the disestablishment of parishes and the regrouping of parishes, there should be thought given to further development of the Cathedral.

Diocesan staff will be laid off:

There will have to be a major downsizing and re-alignment of the Diocesan Staff, and to that end I have consulted with the Officers of Synod, seeking their advice about what that downsizing and realignment might look like. The downsizing of Staff will take place regardless of the decisions which will be made during our consideration of the notices of motion which are before us from the Diocesan Transformation Team.

Parishes will be closed; parishioners will be angry:

I am aware of the anger that confronts us as these recommendations come before us for decision. For many years the buildings in which we worship and through which we minister have been a focus of that ministry and worship.

And the most interesting part: whole dioceses are candidates for closure:

Over the past thirty years, it has been suggested that there are too many Dioceses in the Anglican Church of Canada. We have talked about the extensive territory which exists in Canada and the reality of the great distances which separate the communities in which Anglican mission exists. Vast territories and a commitment to ministry in places where there are small numbers have been cited as reasons to let the status quo remain unchanged. The difficulty in bringing about change to the civil legislation which established most if not all of our Dioceses is also cited as reason to do nothing. And, as we continue to maintain our present structures the programmatic support which might be used to extend the proclamation of the Gospel is reduced, and reduced, and reduced.

Somewhere, somehow, this has to end.

The Diocese of Quebec is close to collapse; the Dioceses of Montreal and Toronto are in financial difficulty. So is the Diocese of Niagara, whose bishop has opined that the ideal size for a diocese is 35 parishes – Niagara currently has over 100 parishes.

Cowan seems to recognise that doing more of the same is not going to work:

A variety of sources have defined insanity as just that, doing the same thing while expecting different results. It did not work, it will not work, and the history of our denomination and of the Christian Church both here and in the rest of Canada over the past forty years, shows that working harder at doing the same things does not work.

And yet, although many of the ACoC bishops are feverishly rearranging Anglican trappings in things like Fresh Expressions, doctrinally they are continuing  to plod resolutely down the same road of theological liberalism, and that is – insane.

UK Tory leader competes in the “who has the most gays” contest

Posted on by
2

But first, let’s remember the animals:

A nationwide referendum is taking place in Switzerland on a proposal to give animals the constitutional right to be represented in court.

Animal rights groups say appointing state-funded animal lawyers would ensure animal welfare laws are upheld, and help prevent cases of cruelty.

Opponents say Switzerland does not need more legislation regarding animal protection. The Swiss government has recommended that voters reject the idea.

There is already one animal lawyer in Switzerland.

And now to David Cameron: there is no conservative party in the UK, but the party masquerading under that name is going after the gay vote:

In the latest development in his campaign to show how dramatically the Tories have changed, David Cameron has published the party’s first-ever official list of openly gay MPs.

The Conservatives say they have 20 openly gay candidates standing in the Election. Of those, 11 told party chiefs they were ‘happy’ to be named in the first authorised list of gay Conservative candidates.

It has led some to suggest jokingly that the Tories might change the party’s traditional blue colour to the rainbow flag of the gay movement.

Mr Herbert [a party spokesman] said: ‘A successful political party ought to look like the country it seeks to govern. If we were truly representative, we would have 99 women, 16 black or ethnic minority and ten gay MPs.’

Mr. Herbert, unwilling to be outdone by Swiss sapience,  went on to clarify that should the Tories win, to ensure fair representation the cabinet would include 5 dogs, 3 cats, a parrot (a stand-in for David Cameron) and a gaggle of geese in the back benches.

Apparently, size does matter

Posted on by
1

I recall walking into a chemist to buy my first packet of condoms in my reprobate youth; back in the middle-ages you could not simply pick them up from an easily accessible shelf, you had to ask for them. As fate would have it, I was confronted by an attractive young lady assistant who asked me “what size?” Not having done this before, I had to quickly assess whether she was referring to the size of the condom, the number in the packet, or whether she was simply having fun with me. In retrospect, I’m sure it was the latter. I played it safe and said “large” – after all, what self-respecting youth would admit to small; but, then, I wasn’t 12:

Twelve-year-old boys in Switzerland will soon be able to buy packets of extra small condoms, and the controversial contraceptives may soon be on their way to the UK.

The Hotshot condoms, manufactured by Lamprecht AG, have been produced after research by the Swiss Government revealed that an increasing number of twelve to 14-year-olds are having sex.