Wishing you a Happy Christmas is now an insult

Posted on by
Reply

And could possible be obscene. That means I will be doing a lot more of it this Christmas.

Wishing people a Happy Christmas could be seen as an “insult” or even an “obscenity” as not everyone is in a position to celebrate, a bishop has warned.

The Right Reverend Humphrey Southern, the Bishop of Repton, said it was a “hollow” greeting to make to those who were suffering.

People should not “simply make a cocoon of happiness for ourselves and our loved ones” at Christmas, he said.

Writing in the monthly Derby diocese newsletter, he said: “This is the ‘Happy Christmas’ month. Yet to many that greeting will be hollow, coming as an insult, or even an obscenity.”

Trust an Anglican clergyman to come up with such an innovative idea: let’s make everyone feel miserable at Christmas.It appears to have eluded the Right Daft Reverend Humphrey Southern that Christmas is a celebration of the incarnation of the Son of God who came into the world to save us from our sins; this is something that should make us happy.

I am starting to suspect that mainline churches are becoming ashamed of Christmas. Driving home this evening we passed a United Church which brazenly advertised a Holiday Jingle, while a school almost next door had a sign for its Christmas Concert.

 

Heterosexual couple want to play at being homosexual

Posted on by
Reply

I suppose it was inevitable at some point: in the name of equality, a heterosexual couple want a gay wedding:

A STRAIGHT couple battling to have a “gay” civil partnership in the name of sexual equality are to have their case raised in Parliament.

Civil servants Tom Freeman and Katherine Doyle, of North Road, Holloway, feel “alienated from the patriarchal traditions of marriage” – but because they are heterosexual they are banned from having a civil partnership under UK law.

The couple, who have been together almost four years, filed an application for a so-called “gay marriage” but were turned down by the registrar at Islington Town Hall, in Upper Street, on Tuesday.

Mr Freeman said: “It’s been very worthwhile. We’ve attracted a lot of interest from lawyers who obviously think we have got a case.

Finally lawyers have found something useful to do.

Teenage criminals no longer called “youths” in the UK

Posted on by
2

In the UK teenage criminals must be called “young persons”, not “youths” – to avoid offending them.

It is not a word usually associated with causing offence, even when those referred to have broken the law.

But ‘youth’ has been banned from guidelines on the treatment of criminals aged 16 and 17 – because ministers think it is too demeaning.

Instead, offenders must be referred to as ‘young persons’ in the latest code for prosecutors. The newly fashionable phrase is used 101 times in the document.

I have a better idea. How about calling them:

inchoate hooligans

scelestious yahoos

pimply purveyors of turpitude

flagitious degenerates

iniquitous ingrates

delinquent desperados

benighted bastards.

There, I feel better now.

Diocese of Niagara gloatfest

Posted on by
2

Some friends were at a meeting in Oakville that included local churches from all denominations. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss how better to help the poor in Oakville – astonishing as it may seem, there are poor people in Oakville. A member of an evangelical church opined that we should not just be feeding people, but sharing the gospel of Christ with them, that he is way, the truth, the life and the only way to the Father. Whereupon the representative of Oakville’s Diocese of Niagara posh Anglican parish stood up and said: “we don’t believe that; we believe there are many ways to God”.  I know this is as surprising as saying the sun rises in the east, but the evangelical church representative was a little taken aback.

After my friend identified her church as “St. Hilda’s ANiC”, Rev Cheryl Fricker – the once diocesan priest-in-charge at St. Hilda’s – planted herself firmly in front of my friend displaying a ghastly smile; she didn’t have “we won” written in indelible marker on each of her teeth, but she might as well have.

As the DoN website says:

In Vancouver, the Supreme Court of British Columbia has ruled against four parishes who have broken away from the Anglican Diocese of New Westminster and had filed suit seeking to keep the church buildings. The four are part of a wider radical group, including four parishes in Niagara, who left the Anglican Church of Canada. This is very good news.

We are now anticipating moving this legal case forward here in Niagara and to have this matter settled so that we may continue in our mission and ministry.

I can almost hear Michael Bird purring.

Bishop Michael Ingham: let's make a deal

Posted on by
3

Michael Ingham is holding out a carrot to ANiC parishioners:

Dear Friends in Christ:

By now you have probably heard that the Supreme Court of British Columbia has ruled clearly in favour of the Diocese in the matter of parish property ownership.

This is the outcome of a law suit brought by the leaders of four congregations who have sought to take church property away from the Anglican Church of Canada.

The Anglican Church in this country and throughout the world is a big tent. We have a long history of welcome and respect for all people. What unites us is a strong commitment to Jesus Christ and the Christian faith, a tradition of beautiful and sacred worship, and a compassionate response to people in many kinds of need and hardship.

I intend to invite these congregations to remain in the buildings where they worship and to move forward together with us in the Diocese as one people under God. I intend to appoint new clergy who will respect and continue the worshipping style of the congregations, who will also work cooperatively with me and the Diocese.

My prayer is that we might all put this sad conflict behind us and get on with the mission of Jesus Christ. No good is served by bitterness or triumphalism. The decision of the Court is clear. And the purpose of the Church is equally clear. We are here to serve the mission of God and the well-being of all God’s children.

This is a day when we pray “to put away the works of darkness and put on the armour of light.” May it be so with us. Be assured that, whoever you are, you are welcome here.

Kindest regards,

The Right Reverend Michael Ingham

Bishop

I can’t help noticing that no invitation has been made to ANiC clergy, including J. I. Packer. So Ingham’s offer to the congregations is, abandon your priests, come home, learn to live with new cooperative priests that I will choose and will be loyal to me – and you can keep your buildings.

I have this eerie sense of déja vue. Ah, yes, the third temptation of Christ: “Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to him, “All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.”

And Jesus replied, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, “‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’ ”

Good answer.

ANiC loses buildings in New Westminster court battle

Posted on by
3

The judgement is here

No doubt lawyers will be dissecting the judgement over the next few weeks, but the following statement from the judgement seems fairly clear:

A parish does not have authority to unilaterally leave the Diocese, and it is consequently ultra vires for it to pass a resolution purporting to do so. Additionally, while parish corporations may hold title to real property, the effect of s. 7(4)(a) is that that property effectively remains within the Diocese unless the Executive Committee and Bishop agree to mortgage, sell or otherwise dispose of it. In using the church properties for purposes related to ANiC, the parish corporations are using them outside the jurisdiction of the Diocese, and, indeed, the ACC. In my view, this is sufficient to bring the properties within the ambit of s. 7(4)(a) such that the consent of the Executive Committee and Bishop is necessary. As that consent is obviously not forthcoming, the properties remain with the Diocese.

A not particularly surprising view by a secular judge.

Another section says:

The evidence is clear that the ACC remains in communion with the Anglican Communion: the ACC remains in Communion with the See of Canterbury; it was invited to send its bishops to the Lambeth Conference in 2008 and those who were able to attend, did; it continues to participate as a full member in the Anglican Consultative Council; and, it continues to participate in Primates’ meetings. I observe, as well, that the Archbishop of Canterbury affirmed in February 2008 that his “office and that of the Anglican Communion recognize one ecclesial body in Canada as a constitutive member of the Communion, the Anglican Church of Canada”.

Clearly Rowan Williams’ reluctance to discipline heretical Canadian and TEC dioceses has not helped ANiC’s case. It will be interesting to note how far this judgement is seen as a green light for the ACoC to chart new waters of apostasy in its General Synod of 2010.

I imagine this does not bode well for any of the ANiC parishes who are legally contending for their buildings.  But, as Primate Bob Duncan says, “And we’ll have the souls and they’ll get the stuff. We’ll get the future, they’ll get the past. I’d rather have the souls and the future.”

For my part, I think that is not such a bad deal; if – as seems not unlikely – my parish family ends up being thrown out of its building, as far as I am concerned it will be a time to stiffen the spine, be firmly united, look to the future, trust in God, and rejoice in the reality of the salvation that Jesus offers through his atoning sacrifice on the cross.

Coincidentally, this Sunday is St. Hilda’s 50th anniversary celebration; I have a feeling that it is going to be a wonderful time of worship because, regardless of the plans of man, God will be there.

Another cartoon controversy

Posted on by
Reply

The cartoon was published by Newsday and people have been protesting:

NEW YORK Picketers demonstrated outside of Newsday’s offices in Melville, N.Y., on Wednesday to protest a cartoon that appeared in Sunday’s paper. About 20 people carrying signs that read “Boycott Newsday” also demanded that Editor John Mancini be fired for allowing the cartoon to be published.

The protesters were upset about a syndicated “Mallard Fillmore” cartoon drawn by Bruce Tinsley that was published a week after the one-year anniversary of the death of Ecuadorian immigrant Marcelo Lucero. They were also picketing in protest of a recent story and column about Lucero’s murder.

Authorities allege that seven teenagers stabbed Lucero to death last year, and one has pleaded guilty to first-degree gang assault and fourth-degree conspiracy.

The cartoon causing the controversy was titled “Liberals: The Early Years,” and featured a small dinosaur being chased by a larger one who said, “I’m not chasing you because you’re a pachycephalosaurus … I’m chasing you because you’re delicious,” to which the smaller dinosaur responded, “Oh, thank goodness. I was worried that this might be a hate crime.”

Here’s the cartoon – no laughing, now:

Add an Image

 

The Global Warming Scandal

Posted on by
Reply

Some naughty scientists have been fudging the figures on global warming:

Last Friday it was revealed that someone as yet unknown had hacked into the computers of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) in Hadley, U.K. The CRU — or Hadley as it is often referred to — is the source of one of the four main temperature records used by the United Nations and environmentalists to claim that the Earth is on the verge of a global meltdown. It is also home to some of the most prominent climate researchers in the world.

Stolen and then released were over 1,000 emails and 3,000 research files that appear to show that those at the CRU and other equally well-known climate scientists around the world have been working together for years to “cook” the data about climate change. The emails seem to suggest that much of what the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change claims is “settled science” is based on data manipulated to confirm assertions that man is dangerously altering our climate. Recent decades may not have been exceptionally warm. The planet may not be warming as fast as these scientists have claimed publicly — and it looks as though they may have known it and tried to hide it.

If the emails are correct, CRU scientists also took glee in the death of a prominent skeptic and did their level best to keep those who disagreed with them from being published in peer-reviewed journals or invited to contribute to IPCC reports. There is even one exchange in which some of the CRU scientists and their colleagues elsewhere tried to have fired the editor of a peer-reviewed journal that dared publish contrary research.

One of the interesting aspects of all this is the light it sheds on the dishonesty of the scientists. Scientists tend to portray themselves as the High Priests of a secular culture: only they have the specialised expertise needed to make sense of our world: lesser mortals are enjoined to trust the findings of science – via the ministrations of a priestly intermediary – on the path to enlightenment. Richard Dawkins in particular exudes this kind of fanatical rabbinical piety in his dogmatic excursions into the meaning of existence; while attempting to smite Christians in the name of science, he himself has become the victim of an irrational fundamentalist religion – scientism. I wonder what we would discover if someone hacked into his emails.

What has become apparent is that scientists are fallen human beings just like everyone else: their besetting sin in this case has been to hold an ideological position with little regard for facts – and lie to protect it.

And did those feet in ancient time

Posted on by
5

William Blake posed the question and a new film claims to have the answer:

Jesus may have visited Glastonbury with his uncle, according to new film.

A new film suggests that Jesus may have come to Britain, as described in the hymn Jerusalem, its director said today.

The documentary, And Did Those Feet, explores the story behind the legend which survives in the hymn, for which William Blake wrote the words.

The legend claims Jesus visited several places in the West Country, such as the Roseland peninsula and Glastonbury, with his uncle, Joseph of Arimathaea.

It should be self-evident that if Jesus had come to the British Isles, the last place he would have visited would have been Glastonbury: he would have gone to Wales.