Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Coronation Street producers deem a cross IN A CHURCH to be offensive

Cranmer does not know who Tyrone is, or Molly. And neither does he care. He cannot recall the last time he watched a soap opera, not least because both politics and religion are infinitely more entertaining: both have their great storylines and larger-than-life characters - there is a sense in which Annie Walker is Margaret Thatcher, Ernest Bishop is Iain Duncan Smith, Mike Baldwin is Tony Blair, and Stan Ogden is John Prescott. His Grace will not go on (though communicants may). He is simply content to observe that religion and politics provide a daily dose of angst and trauma - interspersed with rare moments of joy - which eclipse any soap opera.

But Cranmer does know that Coronation Street is considered one of the great British institutions. He also knows that it has won a myriad of awards, and is widely considered abroad (unfortunately) as the ‘essence of England’ – or ‘up North’ at least. Certainly, Cranmer can recall some sporting bid being called into question when Manchester was symbolised by the depressing rooftops, interminable rain and dreary theme music of the show’s opening sequence.

But Cranmer is more than a little irritated – in fact, he is rather angry - that the show’s producers decided that a cross in a church had to be removed before it was considered a 'suitable' setting for ‘multi-cultural’ Britain. They insisted that the bronze cross on the altar of a 14th-century church - which was to be the location of Tyrone’s and Molly’s wedding – should be covered over because ‘it might offend viewers’.

The Revd James Milnes, of St Mary's Church in Nether Alderley, Cheshire, said the producers originally asked for it to be removed entirely, but they compromised on it being concealed behind candles and flowers.

He described the request - made during the filming of Molly and Tyrone's wedding scenes - as a disgrace.

The ‘during the filming’ is important, for it is down to the show’s producers to find suitable locations before filming, and, having agreed with the vicar of St Mary’s that his building was to be used, they ought to have had the courtesy to make the request in advance.

He might then have told them where to go, and forfeited his £4000 fee.

In fact, Cranmer would have told them where to go anyway, and stuffed their cheque down their throats. And Cranmer is not given to bouts of violence. He would certainly not have concealed the cross behind flowers and candles, and ‘disgrace’ isn’t the half of it.

Christianity is the religion of England established by law. The Head of State is Supreme Governor of the Church of England. The cross is intrinsic to and inseparable from English history. Without the cross there would be no church. Would these idiots also ban the flag of England, lest it cause offence? Would they ban the Bible, lest it cause offence? Would they prohibit all mention of the name of Jesus, lest it cause offence?

This is just part of the war of attrition against the essence of England and Englishness. And the producers of one of England's greatest television institutions are evidently complicit in that offensive process of identity 'tranformation' which in reality is eradication.

If they wish to film in a church, what on earth do they expect to find? Has anyone ever filmed in Westminster Abbey and demanded that it be 'cleansed' of all its Christian symbolism? Or the Vatican and demanded that all crucifixes and popes be removed? Would the producers insist that the crescent symbol be removed from mosques? Or the menorah from synagogues? Or the khanda from a gurdwara?

A cross is what one would expect to find at a Christian wedding in a church. But in modern Britain, preachers dare not talk of hell for fear of offending; or of Muslims for fear of inciting; or of homosexuality for fear of discriminating.

And God forbid that one might enter a 14th-century church and find the symbol of a cross.

It is an offence to all who are not being saved.

Which must include the producers of Coronation Street.

26 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm as disgusted as you are. The centrepiece of any Christian Church is the cross.

They'll be burning churches next because they are offending people!

Time for Christian Action!

14 January 2009 at 18:52  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I suggest everyone that feels let down fills in the complaint form at the BBC.

BBC Complaint Form

14 January 2009 at 19:09  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Anonymous,

You establish why His Grace cannot be bothered with anonymice.

Coronation Street is Granada.

You cannot blame the BBC for everything.

14 January 2009 at 19:16  
Blogger McKenzie said...

It is an appealing idea though, and not a million miles away from the truth. But I blame the devil and technology. There is not one single piece of technological innovation which has reduced man's fallen state from grace, and I see the TV as the cumulative mutation of Satan's plan to keep us away from the Almighty. And if you speak to Coronation Street fans, you will see how actively successful, and how brilliantly in touch with the masses Satan really is.

14 January 2009 at 19:44  
Blogger len.allan said...

When the cross is preached in full context of victory over and emancipation from the world, the flesh and the devil,it is to be expected that by hook or by crook the intelligent forces of evil will stop at nothing to silence it, and will stir up every cause of offence which can be laid to the account of the Cross.
No wonder that this message is repudiated or misrepresented,since it is Gods solution to the problems of fallen man.Crucifixion is a harsh end , it reveals Gods repudiation of everything that belongs to the old creation. To the believer however, the Cross as presented in the gospel is the power of God unto salvation.
(From The Offence Of The Cross by T A Sparks.)

14 January 2009 at 20:02  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Coronation Street was created around Violet Carson in 1960 - it has become simply a soap opera produced by airheads in modern times without any roots.

The problem is half wits in media who think they have the Zeitgeist and are themselves amoral and simply cannot comprehend Christianity....it is they who do not want church to symbolise anything other than a TV prop....but their programmes are as hollow as they are

14 January 2009 at 20:09  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A strange observation of likeness: This photo, and the picture of Cranmer in His banner.

14 January 2009 at 20:12  
Blogger Ayrdale said...

As a Pom, born in Preston but now a very happy Kiwi, I am angered and saddened at the level of self-hatred and apathy displayed by citizens of the UK.
This sort of story is now routine...and where's the public backlash ?
If there is there such a thing as a Broadcasting Standards Authority, shouldn't Granada have to prove that broadcasting the crucifix would cause offence ?

14 January 2009 at 20:53  
Blogger Christian-Jedi-Alliance said...

A Kiwi Pom born in Preston? I sense a disturbance in your Force.

But there is a public outcry in the form of a political party, but it is engaged in all manner of struggle with arcane Vaders of the Dark Side.

14 January 2009 at 22:02  
Anonymous Rivers of Blood said...

"While Europeans occasionally dare to speak about a Muslim problem, they won't for long. If you let the cockroach problem in your house get bad enough, you stop having a cockroach problem, and the cockroaches start having a people problem. Soon enough Europe won't have a Muslim problem, Muslims will have a European problem... and if anyone wonders how they will take care of it, a short look at the way Sudan, Indonesia, not to mention most of the Middle East have taken care of their Christian problem should answer that question. Men may have qualms about killing cockroaches, but cockroaches have no qualms about killing men."

More at WHATEVER YOU DO, DON'T UPSET THE MUSLIMS.

14 January 2009 at 22:03  
Blogger Man in a Shed said...

Not only could it be worse, but in Scotland it actually is. The Rev Mahboob Masih was disciplined for defending Christianity on the radio programme he helped host. Not only did the radio station make him read out an apology, but they insisted he read one out to the central Mosque in Glasgow ( at which point he refused ).

This is all now in the courts.

14 January 2009 at 23:04  
Anonymous Cranmer's Curate said...

Brilliant piece Sir!

I hope it is not impertinent of a curate to suggest that now might be the time to think about breaking out of anonymity. Or at least to talk the matter through with a Christian peer you respect.

With all Christian good wishes,

Julian Mann

14 January 2009 at 23:15  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You cannot blame the BBC for everything.

That is clearly so. However I personally blame the BBC for so close to everything that is totally messed up in the entire world, if may just as well be everything.

There are many reasons why all aspects of our ENTIRE MSM are indistinguishably awful from each other. Whether apparently state or privately owned.

This is because the entire MSM and therefore all of the production companies are owned or controlled by the same small group of very very rich and incredibly influential individuals, one way or another.

But please rest assured and do not let your own perfectly understandable personal paranoia get the better of you.

These people are not out to get Christians, or Jews, or Muslims, or Hindus. They are out destroy all of them, preferably at more or less the same time.

Atlas Shrugged

14 January 2009 at 23:38  
Anonymous non mouse said...

I never could stand Coronation Street - 'orrible place! I think, at one time, some northerners felt they could identify with it; though how that might work nowadays I can't imagine.

In any case, the present-day producers are obviously more ignorant than the original characters ever could have been; and as for a vicar who would accept money to cover up a cross for money....

I admit to not wearing a cross at work because the chief of our Marxist Commissariat takes it as a personal insult if I do - and he believes I need to learn something called Respect. He also teaches: "Marxists consider Christians to be their enemies." So here we are again, back on the Marxist-Caliphate frontline.

Say, what was that song the populace were belting out at the Proms? Did they understand the words? So why don't all Christians make a point of agreeing to wear Crosses - out in the open, all the time...no matter what anybody says? They don't have to be valuable ones....

15 January 2009 at 04:48  
Blogger ENGLISHMAN said...

Yes they are trying to ban the ENGLISH flag,have you not noticed,but it is good that you are angry,we must all get very very angry,remember where we left our spines,and destroy our enemies,when did "being nice" ever win any battles?

15 January 2009 at 12:03  
Blogger John MacLeod said...

Steady, Your Grace. It is by no means impossible that poor Granada were actually anxious lest they offend Christians; even today, there is still TV sensitivity - for instance, the Vicar of Dibley was never shown actually baptising an infant or celebrating Holy Communion.

Much more seriously, not only is there no Biblical warrant for the use of the Cross or any other physical symbol of the Most High (such as images of Jesus)in worship, it is expressly forbidden in the Ten Commandments. 'Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them...' (Exodus 20: 4,5.)

This explicit prohibition is abrogated nowhere in Scripture and the use of such symbols even in the Church of England is a very modern development; certainly, the use of a brazen cross as an altarpiece dates only from the 19the century Oxford Movement.

I feel you may be jumping to conclusions about what happened in this church and that you may not share the informed and intelligent Protestantism of the best Anglican thought. Christians are people of the Word, not of idols, ikons and superstitions; and the Protestant tradition is one of thought, discourse, and propositions, not of the visual aids of a mediaeval illiteracy.

15 January 2009 at 12:32  
Anonymous Psychological Repression and Abuse said...

Next time your grace and his flock watch these subversive programess like coronation street and Eastenders they might like to notice how many scenes are positive and how many negative ( IE fights and Squabbles,subterfuge, as opposed to tenderness and love, honesty, integrity, decency etc )
after totting up, they might like to ponder what would be the result of putting such overwhelming negativity in front of Millions of British People (and their children ) year after year after year.

They may also like to consider whether these programmes reflect our reality or shape it.

Your Grace has probably noticed that BBC Audiences and shows and News programmes are positively teeming with Ethnic Minorities, whilst the hideously Subversive and Poisonous Anti British show, the Jeremy Kyle show only ever has Indigenous Britons on.

Your grace might like to consider that when David Cameron then starts to say things like 'perhaps we in britain shoud embrace islamic principles'

whether this is yet another example of Problem Reaction Solution and if it has anything to do with the Popes Aid saying that, 'Attempts to Islamify Europe cannot be denied. or the Swedish and Dutch MEP's who sad we should be nice to Muslims so that when they become the Majority, they will be nice to us.

http://bfbwwiii.blogspot.com/2007/10/frankfurt-subversion.html

15 January 2009 at 13:24  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

"This explicit prohibition is abrogated nowhere in Scripture."
The prohibition was abrogated by the incarnation. Look at the decision of the 7th Oecumenical Council.
Before that, representation of God, the Saints, Biblical events, etc in painting and sculpture went back to the primitive Church.

15 January 2009 at 13:53  
Anonymous Preacher said...

Well said Your Grace, I understand that the stories depicted of late on this long running soap have included murder & adultery, quite a different scenario to the original concept of homely people coping with the ups & downs of day to day life. Or maybe we should view this as a comment on how depraved society is becoming in a short space of time?
With reference to your observation that in modern Britain preachers dare not talk of Hell, or preach the gospel regardless of who may take offence or be honest in stating that GOD regards homosexuality as an abomination I would like to state that I preach all the above as a warning to unregenarate man to repent before it is to late. I feel a warning delivered with truth but love is essential to save the lost & that a lack of courage in many that presume to preach has been responsible for many lost souls. I may not be popular but thank God I'm not not looking for votes just souls.

15 January 2009 at 14:00  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your Grace - I cordially refer you to the timeless Basil Fawlty in that time-hallowed scene whereby the lady guest objected to the view from her room. His reaction, almost shouted, I recollect (owing to client deafness) was, "What did you expect? Herds of thundering wildebeast? This is Torquay, madam."

The parallels are more than apparent, it seems to me. It's a church. What DID they expect? Relics from the Taj Mahal, perhaps? (and which wouldn't be nearly as "offensive?", maybe?)

15 January 2009 at 17:55  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When Jesus shall return to earth at the end of the age along with the Mahdi or twelfth Imam, according to some Shiite (Muslim) teaching, he will convert the world to Islam and REMOVE ALL CROSSES. What a blasphemy against the Christian faith that teaching is. But it seems that some people can't wait for the end of the age but want to get on with it now - and not just Muslims, apparently. Why assist them in their destruction of western beliefs, culture and civilsation ?

15 January 2009 at 18:00  
Anonymous Preacher said...

Let us all not forget that the Cross IS an offence, to all who have not embraced it as Gods answer to mankinds vileness and sin. Thank God that it is a constant reminder to humanity of the Judgement to come. It seperates the lost from the saved, the proud from the humble, it is a veritable stark signpost standing at the crossroad of life & death, pointing either to Heaven or to Hell. If all the crosses in all the churches were removed the true cross would still remain, its history is unchanging, it will ALWAYS be there as the sign of Gods love of humanity & judgement of sin. It will constantly offend the lost but bring comfort to the saved.

15 January 2009 at 18:32  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

What is also a disgrace is the fact that the £4,000 fee is not being used to clothe the naked, or feed the hungry but to buy a useless piece of ecclesiastical accessory ... a silver procession cross.

A plague on both their houses.

15 January 2009 at 22:04  
Blogger ZZMike said...

I'm no longer surprised by this sort of thing coming out of Formerly Great Britain.

They won't let prison guards wear Cross of St George pins; a local school decided to drop the word "school" from their name, because it might have negative connotations; those are just two of another thousand things they do to kill the heart and soul of a once-great country.

But it really started a long time ago. C. S. Lewis, in "Abolition of Man", ends part 1 with

"We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful."

England has too long been ruled by black-umbrella men who sit on councils and commissions and decide what's best for you.

I wish I could feel that there's still time to save the nation, but I fear it's far too late. The England of Pitt, Disraeli, and Churchill; of Nelson, Kitchener, and Montgomery has passed into legend. Its story will be told by those who sing the sad death of kings, but there may be none left to understand.

Alas, poor England; I knew ye well.

16 January 2009 at 00:13  
Blogger Alan Douglas said...

Your Grace,

A cross in a church does not offend me.

REMOVAL of a cross "for fear of offending" DOES offend me, and I'm not even a Christian !

Alan Douglas

16 January 2009 at 01:15  
Anonymous no nonny said...

And another thing... I suppose they're going to change all the place-names that include the word 'cross'? You know, e.g: Charing Cross, Neville's Cross, King's Cross.

By the by: the Church began to practice Cult of the Cross in England c. the seventh century - though it had begun in Rome and Constantinople before that (Emperor Constantine, and his Ma, Helena, who discovered the relics of the True Cross).

16 January 2009 at 01:56  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older