Domestic violence seminar, Saudi style

Posted on by
Reply

The civilised world would expect a seminar on domestic violence to condemn it in all circumstances and explore ways that it can be avoided. Not so in Saudi Arabia, where men are encouraged to slap their wives for overspending on the black sheets their husbands force them to wear on their heads.

Just so we’re clear, a Saudi domestic violence seminar instructs men on when to be violent.

From here:

A Saudi judge said it is okay for a man to slap his wife for lavish spending at a seminar on domestic violence, according to a report from Agence France-Presse.

Jeddah judge Hamad al-Razine told the group a husband was justified in smacking his wife, using overspending on a high-end abaya, the black shroud Saudi women must wear in public, as an example, according to AFP.

“If a person gives 1,200 riyals (320 dollars) to his wife and she spends 900 riyals (240 dollars) to purchase an abaya from a brand shop, and if her husband slaps her on the face as a reaction to her action, she deserves that punishment,” Razine said, AFP reported.

The seminar was on the role of authorities in preventing domestic violence that was attended by activists and officials, including members of the National Family Safety Program.

While the judge recognized the country’s domestic violence problem, he said some of the blame must lie with the wives.

“Nobody puts even a fraction of the blame on them,” Razine said, AFP reported.

What is wrong with this picture

Posted on by
Reply

The fiasco at ACC-14 in Jamaica has been roundly criticised by so many people, it’s hard to select particular comments. Here are some:

Philip Ashey:

It is a deficit of leadership. With all due respect, whether his actions were disingenuous or simply inept, the Archbishop of Canterbury cannot lay the blame for today’s missed opportunities for healing, reconciliation and the failure to adopt a text for an Anglican Covenant on anyone but himself.

Jesus said “Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes’ and your ‘No’ be ‘No'” (Matthew 5:37). Such integrity is at the heart of Godly leadership. How sad that it is missing in the leadership of the Anglican Communion. Pray for the leadership of our beloved Communion.

Robert Lundy:

This is the state of affairs in the Anglican Communion. Wise, learned, and, capable people abound in the councils of the Church. But when the time comes for them to address critical issues including ones of doctrine, morality, the authority of Scripture, the uniqueness of Christ as Lord and saviour of all, and Christians suing Christians, they call for more conversations and delays, rather than action.

Charles Raven:

Throughout the Jamaica meeting it was clear that the revisionist leaning Lambeth leadership was determined to control the outcome. For instance, Philip Ashey, a Ugandan representative resident in the United States was not allowed to take his seat despite being validly selected under existing ACC rules and precedent, causing Archbishop Henry Orombi to write in protest to the Archbishop of Canterbury, describing the decision to reject Ashey as ‘nothing short of an imperialistic and colonial decision that violates the integrity of the Church of Uganda.’

Mark Thompson:

We have once again been shown how firmly apostasy and deception is embedded in the international structures of Anglicanism. There is no hope for the future there. Generous-hearted faithful Anglicans have been willing to keep trying for a resolution through those structures and once again they have been betrayed at the highest level. The goodwill of faithful men and women has been presumed upon and taken as a sign of weakness or a lack of resolve. We need to pray for those who have been so seriously disillusioned this week.

It goes on and on. However, the Canadian delegate has this to say:

Well, we did it! As most of you know, I’m a process person, and would have not believed it possible. But today we did superb work and ended up with the resolutions on both the Windsor Continuation Group and The Anglican Communion Covenant.

An assessment so radically different from almost everyone else’s, that it’s hard to believe she was at the same meetings. I fear it’s the euphoria that accompanies getting one’s own way: no 4th moratorium on the lawsuits, no teeth left in the Covenant draft – actually no Covenant at all. A monumental waste of time except for the ACoC and TEC delagates who, when this is over will write the victor’s history, a fantasy awash with delusion and hypocrisy – just like the churches they will be returning to.

Conveying truth through language

Posted on by
1

I once had a heated discussion with a person who had left the Dutch Reformed Church to form – with others – a new denomination because the Dutch Reformed variety was insufficiently Calvinist. As I recall, I pointed out to him that I was unimpressed since, by his own admission, he had little choice in the matter.

One of his idiosyncrasies was that he believed that the King James translation of the bible was the only reliable one; no argument could budge him from this. To the average Evangelical this might sound absurd; nevertheless, Malcolm Muggeridge used to claim that the beauty of the language of the Authorised Version was an inseparable part of the truth it conveyed: change the language and you damage the truth. Before I was a Christian, I was inclined to agree; less so now.

Rex Murphy seems to have a similar view:

I’m driven often to the Bible, both for its wisdom and its prose. Strange that the only text that seriously can be said to rival Shakespeare in trenchancy and power of expression should be a work primarily of religion, not literature, a compound book by many authors and, for English readers, a work of translation as well. The King James Bible is the only – as we say these days, though perhaps with some impiety considering my subject – standalone creation that can claim equal status, for its literary excellence, with the otherwise unmatchable harmonies of Shakespeare.

I think the apparent dichotomy between the powerful literate expression of reality found in the KJV and the more accurate to the original but prosaic ESV, for example, is that language does create an aesthetic truth of its own that can be captivating – or perhaps it uses aesthetics to drive home more effectively the truth it carries.

It is the Authorised Version that has insinuated itself into our language and, thus, into our psyche: “through a glass darkly”; “vanity of vanities; all is vanity”; “In the beginning was the Word”; “The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want”   – and so many more.

The Message tells us: “We don’t yet see things clearly. We’re squinting in a fog”;  “Smoke, nothing but smoke”; “The Word was first, the Word present to God”; “GOD, my shepherd! “I don’t need a thing.” Arresting perhaps, but hardly memorable.

Why I am an Anglican

Posted on by
2

In 1978 I became a Christian. A number of things conspired to push me over the edge: some who were close to me were healed after prayer; a nagging desire to make sense out of the universe refused to leave me alone; I had everything I needed or wanted, was not satisfied and yet the allure of more of the same held little promise. So after a week of wracking my brains on my place, if any, in the cosmos, I concluded that the question of whether Jesus is who he claims to be was somehow central to everything.

After another week of wracking my brains to decide if Jesus’ claims about himself held water, I decided to pray to a God whom I thought might not be listening to persuade me one way or the other. The next day I woke up convinced that Jesus is God and that he died for my sins; a conclusion based on the subjective, but I was as subjectively convinced of this reality as I was of the chair I was sitting on. I also woke up a non-smoker; I had smoked – anything that would ignite – for many years and had become an expert in quitting since I had tried so many times. This seemed to me to be an added seal of authenticity of the influence of someone outside myself; I awoke with no desire to smoke.

The closest church to my house was an Anglican church so I decided to talk to its rector. I was under few illusions about the Anglican church: in the light of my new-found fervour it seemed a tepid, pale imitation of what I was looking for. Nevertheless, St. Hilda’s was within walking distance, so I decided it was worth a look.

I made an appointment to see the rector and had decided that if he was too ecclesiastically sophisticated to be anything other than amused when I told him I had been born again, I would move on. He took me seriously, so I stayed.

Since then I have confirmed that much of the broader Anglican Church in the West espouses positions that I am diametrically opposed to. Social issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage; political views such as its anti-Israel stand and pro-left agenda; its pretence of inclusivity while excluding those with whom it disagrees; even its theological views on the resurrection, virgin birth, Christ’s atoning sacrifice and so on – in all these cases I have a differing view. In fact, we have reached the point where the Anglican Church has become a litmus test that assists me in coming to an opinion on current affairs: if the Anglican church agrees with something, I know I probably won’t.

I have been following the Anglican Consultative Council meetings taking place in Jamaica with some interest. Amongst the chaos, one thing is crystal clear: in spite of the pretensions of employing  consensus forming indaba groups, what is really going on are intense political machinations designed to impose a particular stamp on the Anglican future. Unsurprisingly, the TEC seems to be most adept at this; if they have their way, hyper-liberalism will dominate. As things stand now, I suspect the liberal juggernaut will thunder on in North America unimpeded, until it collapses in on itself and  disappears with a final whimper. Lawsuits, same-sex blessings, the ordination of gay clergy, the erosion of orthodox biblical Christianity will all continue for the moment.

When all is said and done, I have little interest in being Anglican. I have absolutely no interesting in church polity (a word that is now number 3 on my most detested words list), conversing with those who pervert the gospel to come to an agreed middle ground, diversity, inclusion, dialogue, discernment groups or indaba groups; all are vanity. I do have a great deal of interest in being Christian, even though I am a flawed and stumbling specimen. Nevertheless, the body of Christ I happen to find myself in is Anglican, I find the 39 articles are propositions I can, for the most part, go along with, I have come to appreciate the combination of structure and freedom to be found in the Anglican liturgy and finally, the Anglican Church of Canada has declared that ANiC is not Anglican.

Since I belong to an ANiC church, by the litmus test I mentioned above, I must be Anglican.

Heart surgery on a baby inside the womb

Posted on by
3

From here:

TORONTO — In what’s being called a Canadian first, Toronto doctors have successfully performed a heart procedure on a fetus inside the womb.

A team of doctors at the Hospital for Sick Children and Mount Sinai Hospital expanded one of the baby’s heart valves using a balloon catheter.

The device was inserted through the mother’s abdomen and then into the fetus to reverse heart failure before delivery.

Sick Kids Hospital says the procedure allowed the baby to remain safely in utero for a crucial extra month before her birth on April 15.

Even though this tiny life is called a “fetus” twice, the writer makes a refreshing politically incorrect slip in the last sentence and calls the unborn child what it is: a baby.

Diocese of Niagara honours the right person

Posted on by
1

I hate to rub the Diocese of Niagara’s nose in anything, I really do, but a photograph that I simply cannot ignore happened to come my way, so here goes.

The Order of Niagara is presented to lay people to honour their work in the diocese.

Paula ON

In the photo we see Bishop Ralph Spence presenting a person with the Order of Niagara on September 24, 2006. The recipient of this prestigious award from such a caring and loving diocese happens to belong to a parish that voted unanimously to join ANiC.

The recipient, Paula then went on to give numerous media interviews here, here, and here, among others, and appeared on the Michael Coren show (not wearing the medal, I notice) which you can watch here

An additional touch of irony was provided by the scripture reading – a reading which Paula used for inspiration in the trials that were to follow. It was read by Dean Peter Wall who, as far as one can tell, doesn’t actually believe any of it .

But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. 2 Tim 3:14-17

Paula would like to know if the medal can be modified by the diocese to read Order of Niagara, ANiC; Michaels Bird or Patterson, any thoughts on that?

Who wants to go to a heaven full of clerical flotsam?

Posted on by
1

I disagree with most of this article in the Irish times, but it makes some amusing points.

THERE IS no such thing as a Divine Being. So get a life, Dermot, or at least stop trying to foist your beliefs on everyone else.

I should apologise for that unseemly outburst: I’ve really no fixed view on whether or not there is a God, and neither could I care less one way or the other.

Which means, of course, if there is a Hell then I’m destined for it. And that’s fine by me. Who in their right mind would want to be stuck forever with the religious crowd anyway?

What could possibly be worse than having to spend eternity in the company of ayatollahs, archbishops, pontiffs, preachers, and their legions of glass-eyed, po-faced acolytes?

The big mistake the author is making, of course, is that the place he is happy to be destined for in the next life will probably be chock full of the clerical salmagundi he, understandably, wants to avoid in this.

I have a soft spot for Anglicanism, and not just because I’m a nominal member. It must be the only Christian denomination where, at least until recently, you didn’t even have to believe in God. Try to live up to the teachings of Jesus and nobody within the Anglican Communion cared whether you were a believer or not just so long as you didn’t make too much noise about it.

Anglicanism, the religion for the nominal atheist.

The Diocese of Niagara sinks to newly plumbed depths of infamy

Posted on by
5

As reported here, the diocese could not make up its mind on who to sue: ANiC parishes or the wardens of the parishes.

Last week they decided. In court their lawyer announced that the diocese is seeking over $200,000 in court costs from the wardens of the parishes: Bishop Michael Bird and his cohorts in this sordid villainy are out to punish church volunteers. It’s hard to envisage a more contemptible, pecksniffian, anti-Christian act, but I expect the scelestious Bird–Patterson duo will find one.

Oh, yes, they also want to chuck the rector out of his home.

Next month the lawsuits will stop

Posted on by
Reply

It says so here:

Healing and Reconciliation Month

Dioceses and parishes are invited to observe a “Healing and Reconciliation” month starting on May 26, the National Day of Healing and Reconciliation, and concluding on June 21, National Aboriginal Day.

Now the ACoC has stopped abusing native children, are they also going to stop using the courts to abuse fellow Christians who happen to disagree with them?

Bishop Michael Bird  – are you listening?

Allow me to introduce my Church, the Entity

Posted on by
1

The  ACoC house of bishops loves, with gracious restraint, to take a dig at ANiC. Here is the first one, wherein ANiC is not only an Entity, but an Entity that is given to Self Identification. The intent of using the word entity is to emphasise that the ACoC views ANiC as separate from the Anglican Communion, even though it isn’t; and self identify implies an identity that is not recognised by others – whereas ANiC is recognised by the majority of the world’s Anglicans.

In response to a call for clarification of the status of entities who self identify as being Anglican, it was noted that the Archbishop of Canterbury has stated in writing that his office and the Anglican Communion Office recognize one ecclesial body in Canada as a constitutive member of the Communion, The Anglican Church of Canada. We affirm this statement. We cherish our Communion with the See of Canterbury and remain committed to the life and witness of the Anglican Communion in the service of the Gospel.

Dig number two is:

The House, responding to a question from the National Cursillo Secretariat, discussed the relationship with the Anglican Network in Canada, particularly as it related to leadership in Cursillo. It was noted that diocesan bishops have the authority to decide who may serve on Cursillo leadership teams. The House, with regret, is of the opinion that clergy and laity who are members of the Anglican Network in Canada (ANIC) should not be given permission to exercise a leadership role in the Cursillo Movement of the Anglican Church of Canada.

An act of pettiness odd in its particular singling out of Cursillo.  Although I am not too familiar with Cursillo, my understanding is that other denominations are routinely allowed lead Cursillo groups.

These messages brought to you by the Ministry of Inclusion at the Anglican Church of Canada.