Monday, April 13, 2009

Christian charity employee suspended for talking about... Christianity

It was concerning enough to learn that health workers may face dismissal for offering to pray with their patients, or that those in education may be suspended simply for asking friends to pray, or that wearing a small cross is strictly prohibited by a company which calls itself ‘British Airways’ while hijabs, turbans and karas abound.

But it seems utterly incredible – or perhaps in this godforsaken nation under Labour it is no longer so – that an employee of a Christian charity, whose patron is the Archbishop of Canterbury, might be suspended merely for answering questions about his faith.

Yet this is the fate of David Booker, aged 44, a committed Christian who has worked for the English Churches Housing Group (part of the Society of St James) for almost four years. The charity is funded largely by churches throughout Hampshire. The Christian Legal Centre reports: ‘On 26 March, whilst working an evening shift, he had a 35 minute conversation with a female colleague. The colleague asked him about his faith and beliefs. During the conversation he was asked the Church’s teaching on homosexuality and same-sex marriages, which Mr Booker explained. The conversation was free-flowing and Mr Booker clearly explained that he had homosexual friends and that he was not homophobic.’

Mr Booker was asked about his faith by Fiona Vardy, who patiently listened to his reasoned opposition to same-sex marriages and to homosexual clergy. She then complained to her superiors.

Readers and communicants may guess what happened next. Such is the Orwellian oppression and Marxist mindset of our lords and masters that now the mere holding of orthodox Christian beliefs has become a crime. Mr Booker had committed no crime: he had not discriminated against anyone; he had not preached hatred or incited violence; he had not transgressed a jot or tittle of equality legislation.

But the following day he was summoned by his employers and told that he was suspended for ‘events that happened last night’. On 30th March, he was given a formal suspension notice alleging that: ‘On 26 March 09, whilst on shift with a female colleague, you seriously breached ECHG’s (English churches House [sic?] group) Code of conduct by promoting your religious views which contained discriminatory comments regarding a person’s sexual orientation.

And so Mr Booker now faces dismissal for ‘gross misconduct’ under the charity’s ‘Culture and Diversity Code of Conduct’.

Tony Blair is now so busy ‘doing God’ all over the world that he has forgotten what a virulently secular and utterly Godless nation he helped to create back home. New Labour has stifled freedom of expression with political correctness, censored freedom of conscience with equality legislation, and eradicated centuries of freedom of religion under the guise of anti-discrimination regulations.

The prophet Orwell foresaw the time when a consensual and reasonable discussion on religion between two employees might be used to silence the Christian voice and freedom of expression. Re-education sessions are so prevalent that people have ceased to be able to discern truth.

But should not the continuing patronage of the Archbishop of Canterbury now be in doubt, for has he not confirmed the Church’s teaching on marriage, same-sex relationships and homosexuality? Surely this falls foul of the charity’s ‘Culture and Diversity Code of Conduct’?

Or is all this really coming from another place? Somewhere even more Godless? Somewhere more rabidly secular?

Dare one mention that the European Union has passed a resolution by the name of the ‘Equal treatment of persons irrespective of religion or belief, disabilities or sexual orientation’ directive?

The passage of this directive is directly attributable to a coalition of Communist, Liberal, Socialist and Green parties, and it paves the way for ‘interference in the social policies of member states and strengthens the hand of homosexual activists’. It was passed by the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs of the European Union (EU), and now awaits the stamp of the Council of Ministers.

Originally intended to serve as an equal treatment directive for the disabled by prohibiting discrimination with respect to accessing ‘goods and services, including housing’, the directive was expanded to include the categories of religion or belief, age and sexual orientation. The agenda was to combat ‘all forms of discrimination’.

But this insidious agenda has increasingly little to do with matters of human dignity, equality or justice, and everything to do with the imposition of one uniform moral code upon the diverse peoples of all EU member states. The Christian view of the family, gender, sexuality and the sanctity of life are all now subject to the EU’s amoral predilections which manifest intolerance in the name of tolerance. And as sure as night follows day, this will lead to coercion and persecution of not only those who venture to talk about their faith, but also of those who dare merely to believe.

36 Comments:

Anonymous Adrian P said...

That's not all they are ruling on, it looks like they want us all to Intermarry too, you must undertstand that this is for the greater good and will end discrimination.

EU rules stipulate that White is out of fashion

13 April 2009 at 10:23  
Blogger Witterings From Witney said...

Interesting - never heard of English Churches House Group (ECHG) but do know of English Churches Housing Group (ECHG) the latter being part of Riverside Housing. Also if you google the former you get the latter.

Maybe this confusion could be cleared up?

13 April 2009 at 10:44  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Witterings from Witney,

His Grace believes it to be 'Housing Group' and has referred to it as such, but could not presume to correct a sourced quotation which ostensibly comes from the charity itself.

He has added an interrogative 'sic'.

13 April 2009 at 10:50  
Anonymous len said...

The public are being herded like sheep by their masters in the E U. We are being channeled , manipulated,and controlled into a Godless,Orwellian nightmare.
They are trying to silence the true voice of christianity under a oppressive blanket of political correctness, human rights, and freedom of the individual( all these sound good but are merely constraints on free speech)
We are being entangled into a web that will see us being bound if we don`t become aware of what is happening!

13 April 2009 at 11:01  
Anonymous Maturecheese said...

Your Grace

I there any hope left for us as a Christian Nation? Just when one thinks that things can't get any worse, they do. Maybe there needs to be a revolution in the Anglican Church, clear out the current leadership and replace them with leaders that have spine. Lack of Moral courage seems to be a theme amongst all of our current leaders, Church and Country.

13 April 2009 at 11:11  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Has no one noticed that the EU directives work on a pick and mix basis so that any national government takes or leaves what suits them from the hail of such incomprehensible laws. The UK is the only nation that is likely to implement anything as draconian as the one you mention.
Try finding any European country that has so zealously applied the 'health and safety' laws, there aren't.
The EU gives ammunition to our government to implement its own agenda of enslaving its own people to its warped ideology.

13 April 2009 at 11:31  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 11.31,
That is the reason that the EU is so evil and should be conigned to the dustbin of history. It follows as well that our own politicians are complicit in this evil. The three main parties are all fully paid up members of the scam, which is why I cannot vote for any of them!

13 April 2009 at 11:43  
Blogger ultramontane grumpy old catholic said...

This sounds like a put up job to me. Madame Vardy asks a colleague about his beliefs, listens to him patiently then reports him to her superiors.

What a tawdry society we have become - reminiscent of communist East Germany.

With regard to your reporting of the EU resolution, the homosexual agenda seems unstoppable. Every time they wring a 'concession' they find a new point of leverage. I wonder when young people will be encouraged as part of their enhanced sex education to try a GLBT lifestyle as part of 'discovering their sexuality'. It is reported that Frankie Howard, a predatory homosexual, used to say to those who repulsed his overtures 'how can you say you dont like it if you havent tried it'.

13 April 2009 at 11:49  
Anonymous Preacher said...

The Church should immediataly threaten to withdraw funding from this group until this employee is reinstated. Your report states that the woman who complained instigated the conversation & asked his views, may one suggest that this would be entrapment for whatever reason? Perhaps the lady in question could do with a little investigating herself?.
We must continue to stand for the truth, no matter what the weak & the evil say or do. Acts 4:16-31.

13 April 2009 at 12:03  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Ultramontane Grumpy Old Catholic,

His Grace omitted to thank you for bringing the above EU reolution to his attention.

Blessings to you.

13 April 2009 at 12:07  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Folks! Before you run about tearing out your hair (I don't have any, so not a problem for me!)ask yourselves whether this fulfils God's purpose, affirming faith by fulfilling prophesy. This world was broken from the 'Fall', don't invest in a Heaven on Earth, but do stand firm and proclaim your faith - no matter what the authorities do.

13 April 2009 at 12:11  
Anonymous mckenzie said...

I don't know. I just don't know. Christianity is, and should be there for everyone, but God has made Himself clear.

NO QUEERS! No pedophiles, no robbers, no liars, no adulterers, the list goes on....REPENT, ASK FOR FORGIVENESS...DO NOT BRING EVERYONE ELSE DOWN INTO THE GUTTER. INSTEAD...YOU CLIMB OUT!

I wish that bitch would have asked me. ASK ME BITCH AND I WILL WILL TELL YOU WHAT I THINK OF QUEERS PREDATING THEIR PERVERSION INTO EVERY DECENT MORAL CORNER OF THE PLANET. Do it quietly, and don't go on about it: it gets more than boring, it gets repulsive.

Sometimes being abusive is the only option left open.

It is repulsive. It is, when it gets to the point of infiltration and the pressure starts to affect you, its predatory, REPULSIVE.

13 April 2009 at 12:39  
Blogger W. S. Badfellowe said...

mckenzie said...
... Do it quietly, and don't go on about it: it gets more than boring, it gets repulsive. ... It is repulsive. It is, when it gets to the point of infiltration and the pressure starts to affect you, its predatory, REPULSIVE.

I know! I Know! I hate the way heterosexuals flaunt it too. You'd think that they owned the establishment! Dirty mixed animals! If I see just one more law predicated on the assumption that everyone would like heterosexuality if only they tried it or that this perverse lifestyle of theirs is somehow intrinsically "better" or "the only right way" then I think, well, I'll peel and then crush a grape.

I'm sick of them going on and on about marriage and nuclear families and - ugh - the way they want to be able to hold hands in public! Makes me vomit! It is repulsive! It is, it is, it is!

Do you know they actually teach heterosexuality in schools? It's all over the place - you can't watch television or read a book without tripping across the filthy hormone-led animals grunting and grinding!

There must be some way that we decent folk can de-rail this sick heterosexual majority agenda and get back to dominating the planet, surely?

13 April 2009 at 13:29  
Blogger ultramontane grumpy old catholic said...

Your Grace

You are welcome. I am glad that it was of interest.

Happy Easter!

13 April 2009 at 13:39  
Anonymous mckenzie said...

W.S Badfellowe

REPENT!

13 April 2009 at 14:14  
Anonymous mckenzie said...

I am a sinner and I have to repent daily. I would not dream of trying to make some of my darker thoughts and behaviours part of normal society, especially in the church. and like Gordon Brown, when he says "there is no place for this sort of thing....., I also know that I will still continue with these things; its an on going battle. Me, he and you have our crosses to bear. The difference is I repent and am aware of the need to make changes, you and he are still in denial.

13 April 2009 at 14:29  
Blogger W. S. Badfellowe said...

mckenzie...

You'll need to elaborate. Repaint what exactly?

Apologies for the delay in noticing your post, those heterosexual sickos next door have been mowing their lawn so, naturally, I had to pop through the hedge and heckle.

Actually, McKenzie, since you're back I do have a problem you might be able to help me with. Whenever I voice a decent majority opinion I find that the spittle collects in my moustache - what do you use to get yours out?

13 April 2009 at 14:31  
Anonymous mckenzie said...

Seeing how you are out in the garden today, then maybe you can 'repaint' the fence or something. But don't bend down in front of that pain in the arse next door.

There is no resolving this, I know. All I can say is that I will see you at the gates, we can keep company on the way down to the furnace. It might be a majority opinion (that's the problem) but playing with another man's genitals is not decent and never will be in my world.

This isn't Damien Mc Poison trying to get revenge is it? If it is, I am BNP mate, not Tory! I could not give a rapid fuck what you think.

13 April 2009 at 14:53  
Anonymous mckenzie said...

Sorry about that slip of the tongue there, but its the language of politicians, I've seen it on TV, for sure.

13 April 2009 at 15:25  
Blogger W. S. Badfellowe said...

No apologies necessary Sir, English is a colourful language and, in the absence of minors and ladies, should be fully enjoyed as such.

Can I just clarify, because this is genuinely interesting, you do find yourself tempted non-heterosexually but on a conscious intellectual level (as opposed to a hormonal level) you are successfully resisting that temptation?

That's the way your earlier posts read.

Why would (your) god be so mean to you as to condemn you to eternal agony in Hell when you're doing the very best that you can?

I honestly don't understand that. If you are resisting what you regard as a temptation to stray from the heterosexual then I can't imagine that you would have deliberately chosen to have to do so. Why would you be heading to Hell for doing the best you can to resist something you didn't choose in the first place?

p.s., no I am not "Damien McPoison" - who the chuff is he and why would I be likely to be him?

13 April 2009 at 15:52  
Anonymous len said...

MacKenzie
Doing the best you can is not what satisfies God.If man could make himself righteous (in Gods eyes)Christ died for nothing.
The whole point of christianity is to rely on what Jesus Christ has done, and rely on the Holy Spirit (in the born -again believer) to produce righteousness.
Everything else ( in the corrupt, fallen nature) has been judged and condemned by God.

13 April 2009 at 17:05  
Anonymous the recusant said...

Mr Booker should contact the THOMAS MORE LEGAL CENTRE - Registered Charity No 1122184 (England and Wales)

Welcome to the Website of the Thomas More Legal Centre. We are an independent Legal Charity which exists to provide specialist free legal advice and assistance in cases involving issues of Religious Freedom or Religious Discrimination in England and Wales. We are a predominantly Roman Catholic Organisation in origin and ethos but we offer our services to all Christians in support of shared Christian principles and faith.

13 April 2009 at 18:38  
Anonymous mckenzie said...

W.S Badfellow

It did read like that, you are correct, but I am not homosexual though, I wish it was that simple. I am not heading for hell for any sexual deviations. If we do meet at the gates, I would appreciate a seat in the audience though.

Len, I am not trying to make myself righteous in the sight of God. I am being purely selfish, I just want to see a return to the old standards of moral decency. If God does not like this, then me and Him will have words: Him and I will be having words anyway, I have a list.

No, seriously though, God does not hate anyone. BUT I SURE AS HELL DO SO KEEP YOUR SEXUAL ORGANS AWAY FROM ME!

13 April 2009 at 19:07  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"to merely believe",your grace? A second split infinitive in as many days. Just because you live a shadowy existence and are thus answerable ultimately to nobody back here on earth, that does not provide you with the right to do naughty things with our great language

13 April 2009 at 19:41  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Still, to adorn his humble youth,
Nor wealth nor birth their treasures yield;
But he, who seeks the flowers of truth,
Must quit the garden, for the field.

13 April 2009 at 21:12  
Anonymous mckenzie said...

"to merely believe"

Is that like Mere Christianity?
I have just seen that one, but I am sure that I am not the only one in here who misses the point for about 95% of the time.

I still appreciate His Grace's compassion though, and I like to think HE, like C.S Lewis, intends to describe the Christian common ground. In Mere Christianity, Lewis aims at avoiding controversies to explain fundamental teachings of Christianity, for the sake of those basically educated as well as the intellectuals of his generation, for whom the jargon of formal Christian theology did not retain its original meaning.

Most experts on language now agree that the split infinitive is sometimes appropriate. Those who use it consciously may see it as a form of hyperbaton, and it has been employed to good effect by some major poets:

"to boldly go where no man has gone before"!

13 April 2009 at 21:56  
Anonymous mckenzie said...

MERE CHRISTIANITY. Complete book and audio file

really stretched the 'less is more' situation, so goodnight.

13 April 2009 at 22:13  
Blogger Gnostic said...

What the recusant said. Either people have the right of religious expression or they don't. NewLab can't have it both ways. Time to test this stupid and highly prejudicial piece of legislation.

13 April 2009 at 23:20  
Blogger tammyswofford said...

When freedom of speech is punished, human liberty ceases to exist.

*Personally, the whole thing looks like it was an elaborate set-up. The poor man was dead in the water before he opened his mouth.

A great American book on this topic, "Freedom For The Thought That We Hate" (A Biography of the First Amendment) by Anthony Lewis

Tammy

14 April 2009 at 03:46  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Most experts on language now agree that the split infinitive is sometimes appropriate.Most experts Do please elucidate...your polling sounds to have been extensive...

14 April 2009 at 06:19  
Anonymous mckenzie said...

Voyager:

Robert Allen, ed (2002). "Split infinitive". Pocket Fowler's Modern English Usage. Oxford University Press. pp. p.547. ISBN 0198609477.

14 April 2009 at 08:21  
Anonymous Hereward said...

Perhaps the outgoing Bishop of Rochester could have a word. . .

On the so-called split infinitive, one of many hundreds of examples written by accredited linguists and gramarians:

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=639

Or this from Otto Jespersen: 'To . . . is no more an essential part of the infinitive than the definite article is an essetial part of a nominative, and no one would think of calling 'the good man' a split nominative.'

It is a silly superstition.

14 April 2009 at 10:47  
Anonymous mckenzie said...

Hereward

Its pompous twatery, and that reigns supreme in here, but there is nothing as good a fishing in a well stocked lake.

14 April 2009 at 11:31  
Blogger Cranmer said...

The split infinitive is now corrected.

His Grace now hopes that communicants might focus on the more important matter of the subject of the post.

14 April 2009 at 16:59  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Excellent Post your Grace. To absolutely, unreservedly be commended for it.

14 April 2009 at 19:52  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This "story" so far consists of a press release put out by the fundamentalist "Christian Legal Centre", who are also behind an organisation called "Christian Concern for our Nation". They have a specific legal/political/religious agenda. Don't let these Muppets wind you up and, unlike our fundamentalist friends, don't believe everything you read ;o)

16 April 2009 at 19:51  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older