Saturday, October 22, 2011

Canon Giles Fraser loses St Paul’s £20k a day


Last weekend, when the Metropolitan Police began to clear the ‘Occupy London’ protestors from the steps of St Paul’s Cathedral, Canon Giles Fraser instead told the police to leave. In an act of Christian charity, he defended the rights of the demonstrators to protest (presumably because he agreed with them), and even invited them in to Sunday worship.

That was nice. But it's all backfired. For the first time in living memory, this great cathedral has been forced to close its doors. The Dean has written an open letter to the protestors advising them that there is no lawful alternative but to close St Paul’s Cathedral until further notice. The reason? ‘Health & Safety’.

You see, each tent has a stove of some sort, and with all this Calor Gas ‘there is a very clear fire hazard’ which constitutes a ‘public health aspect which indeed speaks for itself’.

Does it? One wonders how the Lord might ever have imparted the 10 Commandments if Moses, faced with a burning bush, had pleaded ‘Health & Safety’. Would he have said to God, with a very heavy heart, that it is simply not possible ‘in the current circumstances’ for him to fulfil his obligations to the hordes encamped at the bottom of Mt Sinai?

It is all very amusing in a way, for Canon Giles Fraser is actually the Canon Chancellor Giles Fraser – that is to say, like Judas (Jn 13:29), he guards the purse: he is in charge of St Paul’s Exchequer. And he writes very eloquently in such exuberant capitalist terms that the ‘Occupy London’ hordes might consider that the closure of the Stock Exchange last weekend was somewhat fortuitous and that they have stumbled upon a veritable den of unrepentant capitalists in the House of God. In his most recent report, the Canon tells us:
The number of paying visitors to the cathedral recorded a small increase and the global economy continued a recovery. Net assets at the year end increased to £19.0 million (2009 £15.3 million) after taking account of a decrease in the FRS17 pension deficit of £0.73 million.
And he goes on to talk of the cathedral’s key income generator being ‘the number of paying visitors’ which increased by 1% in the year to 820,000 (2009 812,000) yielding an income ‘on which the cathedral remains heavily dependent to enable it to sustain its work and mission’. We are told that the surplus amounted to £1.27 million (2009 £1.46 million) which maintains ‘a strong liquidity position’.

And reaching the full flight of capitalist-accountant mode, the Canon Chancellor goes on to talk about the strength of global financial markets; investment units; endowment funds; the valuation of the investment portfolio; low interest rates; dividends; Triple A Rating; investment and property portfolios; the valuation of the assets of the closed pension scheme; and the Church of England’s ‘ethical investment policy’. In total, we are told, the gross income from St Paul’s commercial activities, which included admission charges, the crypt shop and event income, increased by £0.66 million to £8.25 million.

This will be the reason that the Dean, the Right Reverend Graeme Knowles, is mighty annoyed with the Canon Chancellor. For if the gross income from commercial activities - including admission charges, the crypt shop and event income - amounts to £8.25 million per annum, for each day the Cathedral closes its doors, it is losing in excess of £20,000. In commemoration of the colossal folly of the Canon Chancellor Giles Fraser, who ushered away the police who were ushering away the protestors, His Grace has rewritten the lyrics of a song which was also set on the steps of St Paul’s. Enjoy:


Early each day to the steps of Saint Paul's
The Occupy hordes hoist their tents.
And the Canon Giles Fraser welcomes and calls,
"Come, gather at our great expense.
Come curse the capitalist world, show them you care,
And you'll be glad if you do.
As you queue for your Starbucks,
We’ll grant you a prayer;
Though our flock is kept out of the pew."

Feed the hordes, £20k a day,
£20k, £20k, £20k a day.
"Feed the hordes," that's what he cries,
While the Dean and Chapter are forced to economise.

All around the cathedral the saints and apostles
Look down as the protest grows.
But the doors are locked shut as the tourists all jostle
While the hordes force the cathedral to close.

Though his words are simple and few,
Listen, listen, he's calling to you:
"Feed the hordes, £20k a day,
£20k, £20k, £20k a day."

55 Comments:

Blogger Gary said...

A most amusing comment on the current situation. One slight quibble - Moses didn't receive the Ten Commandments from the burning bush - it is in Exodus 3, while the Ten Commandments are given after Israel has left Egypt in Exodus 20!

22 October 2011 09:56  
Blogger martin sewell said...

Nobody has yet put the name to the protesters abiding
"quality" - that of " self indulgence".

They enjoy the warm glow of the self righteous, whilst others pay the costs.

I suspect that the Canon too, is a little too wrapped up in his role as the Vicar of the Church which hosted the " Putney Debates" but fails to recall that at least Cromwell's
soldiers had fought their own war, dug their own latrines and confronted an enemy that fought back and placed them at daily peril.

All we see from the present "heirs" of the Levellers is a part time, often State Dependent, gathering with strongly hypocritical tendencies.

The original Levellers would have given a robust response to the politically correctness assailing protesters and authorities alike and would probably taken up arms against those obstructing Divine Worship - albeit that their worship would have been pitched somewhat " lower down the candle".

22 October 2011 10:11  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Whatever the issues here, I have to confess I was outraged at the ticket price when I was last there. In fact, I refused to pay it.

22 October 2011 10:23  
Blogger Arden Forester said...

I'm ver annoyed with the attitude of the chapter. They have come up with spurious reasons to defend closing the cathedral. Are they trying moral blackmail on the protestors? Telling them, in effect, that the loss of £20,000 per day is down to them. Plus blaming health and safety!

22 October 2011 10:41  
Blogger lester said...

YG
You denounce the inconsistency of ‘the canon chancellor’ going into ‘capitalist-accountant’ mode as though you yourself might propose a different position. Both you and the chancellor-canon are gripped by the same incoherence, each attempting to denounce the other whilst, inevitably, falling into identical terms. You then denounce the inconsistency of the protestors – queuing at Starbucks (copyright infringement!). If global capitalism is suited to explain the contemporary luxuries of a Café Latte, mobile tweeting etc. then it must also bare the weight of explaining the contemporary travails of broken families, sweatshops, the sex industry, drug cultures and creative stagnation.
If you would denounce the possibility of those with some material benefits (of capitalism) trying to draw attention to those who might be called the victims of capitalism, then you become obscene. Which I know you are not. (Louise Mensch on the other hand IS)

Consider your own previous words on the subject of capitalism: “it is not beyond the wit of man to devise a socio-cultural-economic framework which permits self-reflection.” This is your hope for a capitalist future?
Firstly, ‘the wit of man’ needs defining – is this a cumulative ‘wit’ or simply that of an elite party of intellectuals? Worse is to come. You hypothesize a framework that PERMITS self-reflection. That is the Humanist position – Dawkins’ position, and it is absurd. Again, you situate an abstraction as transcendent. If a framework (conceptual abstraction) is in a position to PERMIT (god help us) self-reflection, then it must first demonstrate the ability to EXPLAIN self-reflection. This is the socio-economic equivalent of Dawkins’ attempt to make genetics explain consciousness. No. The primary term must always be self-reflection itself. Surely this is obvious to a Christian – it designates, first and foremost, the primacy of individual conscience (and the freedom to act thereon). Frameworks are in no position to either permit or prohibit this primacy, for they cannot explain it. This is the duplicity and incoherence that capitalism (as indeed socialism) always falls upon. It is the ‘modern’ idiom, and it enslaves us all – right-wing bloggers, left-wing canons, and perhaps the protestors too. Self-reflection is primary; it explains the framework, as Christ explains the Church. Not the other way around.

Surely we’ve had enough of denouncing one another’s ‘frameworks’. Denunciation is not synonymous with problem solving. It addresses the wrong question in the worst possible terms.
The very presence of the protestors, love or loathe them (frankly irrelevant) poses a question that requires coherence, not the perpetuation of the same old vested absurdities.

22 October 2011 11:11  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

The Inspector has observed that these protesters seem to be rather well healed. The sons and daughters of the rich enjoying their gap years, (...before daddy finds them a position somewhere for which, thanks to global capitalism, they will be richly rewarded...).

The health and safety issue is probably that of St Pauls fine lavatories. When people start having wash downs at the sinks, it doesn’t take too much imagination to realise dysentery is just around the corner....

Finally, one can only hope that the less well healed hangers on to these delightful children have the grace to inform the benefits office that they are temporarily not available for work, and thus have their coffee money stopped....

22 October 2011 12:05  
Blogger Oswin said...

DanJo @ 10:23:

It's been awhile since I've visited any Cathedral. In my naivety, I'd assumed entrance was free of charge! Is there really no free access to those who wish to pray? If not, then I agree with your refusal; it's a damned dsgrace!

22 October 2011 13:15  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

Oswin

Providing your entering to pray or attend a service, admission is free. Not an option for you DanJ0 as an atheist. Mind you, one does feel somewhat embarrassed exercising this option and made to feel as if one is defrauding St Paul's plc or Westminster Abbey plc. Try it and see the reaction you get.

Being absolutely even handed about it, as I always am, no such 'devotional' option exists when visiting the Sistine Chapel - it's 15 Euros up front and includes full access to the Vatican Museum. Having said that, I've never asked if one is allowed free and gratis into the chapel to pray. May just try it next time.

Notre Dame is free, as are all other Catholic Cathedrals. However, one does get somewhat irked with all the Japenese tourists posing in front of the shrines and snapping away on their cameras.

22 October 2011 13:34  
Blogger non mouse said...

£20k a day,
£20k, £20k, £20k a day.

That's inflation for you, Your Grace. And I don't mean just in Julie Andrews' terms, either.
Just think what all Chaucers Mass-sellers and Pardoners (all hot from rome) could do with today's prices!

Mind you, if el papaseato were running the show today, perhaps the cathedral would still be open... who knows?

22 October 2011 13:41  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

non mouse

Today pardon is free at the point of delivery for all who ask Christ, even through the Ministry of the Church. Even indulgences are granted without charge. I know, I know, how unbusiness like!

Whatever has come over the Vatican? Before long they'll be dispensing aid to the poor and needy; funding hospitals; paying for the education of children; funding missionaries around the world; providing seminaries for free; and even offering support to women as an alternative to abortion.

Not the way to run a successful business. Mind you, they can depend on the generous contributions of fellow Catholics to keep them afloat and keep the devil from the door. Even so, the appalling loss of alternative revenue streams is disgraceful in today's economic climate.

22 October 2011 13:58  
Blogger Atlas shrugged said...

Whatever the issues here, I have to confess I was outraged at the ticket price when I was last there. In fact, I refused to pay it.

22 October 2011 10:23

I visited St Pauls only a few months ago after being given a free pass by my oldest daughter, otherwise I would also have deemed the admission charge extortionate, and so also would have refused to pay it. My daughter had received this pass from the Banking Corporation that she was working for at the time.

I can't remember exactly how much the admission charge was, but to my best recollection it worked out at £15 per person, or £32 for a family of 4.

I greatly enjoyed my visit, not least because it had cost be all but bugger all; however I told my wife and two youngest to make the best of it, for this would undoubtedly be the last time we will ever be coming to St Pauls Cathedral, unless I receive another free pass.

The restaurant makes those of Heathrow Airport seem like the most excellent value for money available.

I can also state that although I am often prone to bouts old fashioned prudence, I am not what most people might describe as Scrooge like, or indeed in any way poor.

However paying £15 simply to visit a glorified Church, which was built and payed for over 350 years ago, is no better then a tourist trap rip off, on a par with all of the many others in London. For example The Tower of London, and Hampton Court.

I do believe that some kind of charge should be made to help preserve the magnificent building, however something around £5 per head would seem to be more then enough for this purpose, judging by the amount of visitors.

Ever more it is found that the only way most children will ever get too visit many parts of their national and/or spiritual heritage is with their schools, rather then with their parents, or guardians.

It is true to say that at certain times of the week St Pauls is more then busy enough, even at these rip-off prices; however surely a system could be devised to make the cost more affordable for ordinary UK citizens/families, if the will was there to do so.

For example at least one free, or virtually free non-transferable pass, to be given to each BRITISH family of 3 or more per life time, to be redeemed at any time within a ten year period, and used during week days only.

I suggest the reason why The CofE does not even think of such a thing, is that The CofE does not consider itself to be British, or even English.

The CofE in common with its parent company The Roman Empires Church, considers itself the be a MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATION.

The Roman Catholic Church considers itself to be the first, and most foremost multi-national corporation, because it most undoubtedly is. As The CofE is no more then an important subsidiary company of The RCC, whatever our history books may claim to say.

Having said all of the above, if the 'bottom feeding' members of The CofE are content to allow there Church governors to act like a later day bunch of money grabbing money changers, they fully deserve to get ever more of what they are going to be given.

22 October 2011 14:01  
Blogger Arden Forester said...

Subsidiary company, eh? Not a very profitable one, as the business model keeps changing on a daily basis!

22 October 2011 14:10  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

Atlas

For the record:

The Roman Catholic Church, led by the Pope, defines its mission as spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ, administering the sacraments and exercising charity.

The Catholic Church is among the oldest institutions in the world. It is the one true church founded by Jesus Christ in circa 33 AD, its bishops are the successors of Christ's apostles and the Pope is the successor to Saint Peter.

The Roman Church and the English Church seperated some time ago due to certain irreconcilable differeces.

A multinational corporation is a an enterprise that manages production or delivers services in more than one country. So you are correct it does consider itself one of the first around. Judaism could make similar claims, as could Hinduism.

The British East India Company and Dutch East India Company are erroneously listed as the first and second multinational corporations in the world. I trust you'll write to the necessary authorities to put the records straight.

22 October 2011 14:25  
Blogger Atlas shrugged said...

Dear Mr Forester

If you seriously consider that The either The CofE or RCC are in anyway not profitable then please do some homework, and so think again.

For these two entities are rich beyond most peoples easy understanding. Rich, rich, and richer then rich, so God dammed rich that they can afford to pay Bishops far more a year then my own private manufacturing corporation as ever made myself, out of supposedly a few pence left on the chruch collection plate.

The Church of England has REAL assets worth countless BILLIONS, The RCC many more times as much and counting. Whereas national governments are all but bankrupt, and only stay afloat at all using enforced taxation simply to service the interest payments for their simply enormous debts.

The vast majority of these debts are to The Central Banks, who are backed by real assets, such as The Crown Estates, supposedly owned by the Royal Families of Europe, under license from The RCC, which are administered by what I usually call The Central Banksters.

The Worlds financial business model may have adapted to changing times somewhat, however at the more basic level it has not really changed since medieval times, and even less since the middle of the 17th century.

22 October 2011 14:32  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

@Dodo (13:34) & Danj0 (10:23)

One only hopes that atheists interested in the possibility of salvation have enough cash on them then.

AiB's attitude to church buildings is that if they can't afford to run them without making them into businesses, sell the bloody property, give the proceeds to the poor, and worship in a local sports hall or something.

22 October 2011 14:38  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Superb lavatories in St Pauls, well worth the admission charge on their own; thought you’d might like to know that...

Atlas perhaps we should get churchmen in to run the country, and your business. Free up your time so you can do some really serious whining on this site.

22 October 2011 14:42  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Belfast

Church buildings are part of our heritage. Do look that word up and familiarise yourself with it...

22 October 2011 14:46  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

Bernard Jenkin has just told the Any Questions audience that "Jesus never got involved in politics", the old standby of those whose political and economic views are incompatible with Christianity, as the views being demonstrated against outside Saint Paul's Cathedral certainly are.

Jenkin has probably been influenced by Enoch Powell's insistence on the utter otherworldliness of Christianity. But that position was, and is, wholly incompatible with Powell's own vigorous pulpit defence of bodily resurrection. Christianity is Incarnational and Resurrectional. Incarnation and Resurrection are not wholly otherworldly. And they are certainly not unrelated either to politics or to economics.

22 October 2011 14:49  
Blogger len said...

The Roman Church led by the Pope is a multi Billion Dollar business.

Perhaps they could give a few pointers to Giles Fraser,sell a few indulgences to make up the deficit?

22 October 2011 14:53  
Blogger Atlas shrugged said...

Mr Dodo

Who do you think really OWNES these companies?

Where do you think the financial backing came from?

You guessed it, the exact same place that all real investment came from at the time, as well as many years before.

It came from Jewish money lenders, who borrowed much, if not ALL of it from either The Vatican, or the Crown Princes of Europe.

Why do you think that many of the people of Europe died in their thousands to create Empires around the world, from which they had nothing obvious to gain?

The British Empire, Company or firm, was the first truly successful world trading corporation, not because it was in opposition to much, but because it was backed by the largest wealth of all, that of The RCC.

This fact may not be of the more well known variety, but it is still recorded in a documented treaty, between the British Royal Family, and the then Pope. The exact date and name of which escapes me for now, however the time was around that at which both of the above corporations were first incorporated.

The Vatican has long since operated within the world though 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th parties. In the past it used Jews, and still does today, however it has far more strings to its many bows then just vast amounts of very real ever appreciating assets.

22 October 2011 14:53  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

Atlas

And the evidence for this supposed network of multi national banks all run by the Vatican, is?

Or are they just too clever to leave an audit trail?

AiB

Good point about atheists just wanting to have a look around and consider Christianity as a possibility. DanJ0 could always make such a plea if he is genuine and see what happens.

On the other hand, he could pop down to the Catholic Cathedral in Victoria and spend time there for free.

22 October 2011 15:05  
Blogger len said...

Dodo, 'Spend time' is that like doing time?

22 October 2011 15:07  
Blogger len said...

Dodo,I think that underneath all the arrogance somewhere, hidden inside, you are probably an 'ok' fellow.Deceived , misguided but Ok (basically)

But that 'Inspector' is a different story........................ have you begun to suspect yet?

22 October 2011 15:17  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "Good point about atheists just wanting to have a look around and consider Christianity as a possibility. DanJ0 could always make such a plea if he is genuine and see what happens."

I was just interested in the building at that point. I'd have paid £5 for the privilege but not more. Regarding the bigger thing, I've made my plea and was completely ignored. I think one needs specific brain 'furniture' to imagine one hears a response.

22 October 2011 15:17  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "On the other hand, he could pop down to the Catholic Cathedral in Victoria and spend time there for free."

My skin blisters in those sort of places.

22 October 2011 15:19  
Blogger Gilly's Camera said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

22 October 2011 16:22  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

@OoIG:

I know what heritage is dear boy. I did say "sell" rather than "raze to the ground". Do try to keep up.

AiB merely asks why the Church should be spending its time on heritage issues if it impedes on its other missions.

22 October 2011 16:26  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Chap in Belfast

The Inspector accurately surmised your meaning immediately, don’t you know...

Churches are extremely important, part of the faiths presence, often in an otherwise commercially dominated environment. Gives people an idea there are other things apart from mammon in this world.

Assuming you too are a born again – how about leaving us our churches, and we won’t make you sell your tambourine. What !

22 October 2011 16:48  
Blogger Arden Forester said...

Dear Mr.Atlas,

The world is very heavy, I know, but to say that the CofE has "countless billions" is pure tosh. It may have large tracts of land, a large portfolio of architecturally interesting property, and some investments in THE CITY but it ain't holding "countless billions".

22 October 2011 17:21  
Blogger C.Law said...

" Net assets at the year end increased to £19.0 million (2009 £15.3 million)" ... GBP20K per day !

Sounds as though the protesters are in the right place.

22 October 2011 17:29  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

Arden Forester

Yes, wealth indeed, mostly nicked off the Mother Church by Henry VIII - ill-gotten gains, don't ya' know.

AiB

There are enough churches selling furniture and converted into flats. Some are now Mosques and Temples, for God's sake! Give them to local communities if they're surplus to requirement.

Inspector

I agree we should keep a selection of the old churches, especially the Saxon ones. How many though? The faith isn't dependent on mere buildings. Not sure about keeping the modern ones.

22 October 2011 17:59  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

C. Law.

Are you a Bolshevik by chance. If you are, why don’t you get yourself off to North Korea. Worker’s paradise there, so the Inspector understands. Your smart arse comments will be better appreciated by your comrades, but don’t get too carried away. They don’t like political agitators, and if you persist, you’ll soon find yourself up a against a wall !

22 October 2011 18:01  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Dodo. Any church built after 1945 will look like shite, with few exceptions. Austerity architecture – no soul and no spiritual worth, and amazingly often just unbearable reinforced concrete. Thank you modern architects and commissioners of building work, shame you couldn’t have done better....

22 October 2011 18:08  
Blogger C.Law said...

Inspector, such venom! Did I hit a nerve?

I'm a capitalist, in fact, unfortunately less successful of late due to the current financial turmoil - though according to Atlas I can blame that on the Church as well.

22 October 2011 18:31  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

C. Law

Apologies old chap, must be coming down with blog fatigue, all this defending of the main stream church, you know. Atlas in full ‘bitter old woman’ clothing, blaming everything on everybody, but conveniently missing out himself...

22 October 2011 18:49  
Blogger C.Law said...

Inspector, never mind, I quite understand.

However, defending the mainstream church is a thankless task and is particularly difficult when considering the buildings and the large sums of money and holdings of real estate and other assets they have amassed.

I have a proper appreciation of the heritage value, the beauty and magnificence of some churches and cathedrals (and, indeed, some mosques and temples of religion in other countries) but have always felt that the cost, in terms of the finance and the human toil, of building so many of them has been disproportionate. It is also not surprising that in these hard times people should be upset when confronted with the news of the accumulation of over GBP19M in respect of just one of them, as evidenced by some of the other comments on this thread.

22 October 2011 19:59  
Blogger The Gray Monk said...

Oswin, many cathedrals are still "free" entry and most of the City Parish churches are open for prayer as well. St Paul's admits visitors free to services of Evensong but you do have to accept that you are not then free to wander and "take a peek." The need to charge (I speak as an ex-church warden of a Greater Church with hordes of visitors) arises from the cost of maintenance and the wear and tear afflicted by the throngs. In a Parish Church we could not impose a visitors fee and so had to bear these costs ourselves - far from easy in todays atheist led society.

It seems the good Canon acted out of pastoral concern, forgetting the impact his action would have. The Dean, on the other hand, has to ensure the staff and any other obligations the Chapter may have, are paid. A nice clash between what the clergy are charged to do by the Gospel, and what is imposed by the need to keep these places of national heritage standing and in good repair without help from the government!

22 October 2011 20:10  
Blogger lester said...

C Law + Inspector
Even as an impoverished anti-capitalist;-) I can appreciate well enough the imperative of heritage, and the dilemma of its upkeep. (My initial background was in art history.)
And just to complete my demonic profile as an anti-capitalist, I am also a non-christian!! However I campaigned and petitioned strongly that our churches and municipal art collections should remain free to access.
There is something intuitively wrong about places of worship being reduced to a balance sheet. The mantra is so oft repeated that these buildings and these collections must be accountable to 'reality' that it becomes truly dispiriting. Even as a non-christian I can appreciate that the reality that a church embodies is infinitely greater than that of a balance sheet; so one wonders at the sickness of a society that would make such a mean reduction.
I appreciate you will take some convincing, but the 'step protestors' are not some natural enemy. In many respects they pose the same dilemma that curators and deans face on a daily basis: how did we arrive at such a diminuition of 'value' that everything must conform to a spreadsheet? as though spreadsheets had acquired divinity?

22 October 2011 20:49  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Good of you to be so decent C. Law, the Inspector hates to annoy good folk.

Of course, the wealth of the CoE can never be realised. It’s held in trust for the benefit of generations to come. Very important if you want the British way of life to continue, you know.
Must give Johnny and Jenny of the future something to love and cherish. And anyway, with a large organisation to run and pensions to pay out, 19 million seems quite modest.

When it comes to ‘hard times’, yes there’s a squeeze on, but it’s not anywhere as bad as the nineteen thirties or before. The Inspector will only recognise these days as such when the first government sponsored soup kitchens open...

22 October 2011 21:02  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Lester. Good chap you are to recognise the importance of churches, and not just as pretty buildings, but as an antidote to our consumer led lives the politicians have been providing for us for many years now. Whether you believe in God or not, I’m sure we all agree there’s more to life than shopping (...but don’t mention this to young ladies in shoe shops...).

Still feel that the protesters setting up camp at St Pauls had a lot to do with the excellent lavatories on site. Must be getting pretty smelly there right now if they’re locked out. Needless to say, mummy and daddy will be dropping off chemical toilets to their loved ones. Hat’s off to the young folk mind, giving up a gap year like this when they could be living like princes in the Far East...

22 October 2011 21:16  
Blogger lester said...

Inspector,
LOL
You must get out more, speak to a few anti-caps. I've seen all too many gap yah folk to be under any great illusions there. I've seen them both 'before' (frothing and indignant)and 'after', quietly anaesthetised by their graduate years. It takes a graduation to become truly empty of thought (and thus a useful 'citizen')..
Must see those lavs though.

22 October 2011 21:40  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Lester. Good point about ‘before’ and ‘after’ graduation. You have to be strong in thought to avoid being ‘grey suited’

22 October 2011 21:50  
Blogger Lakester91 said...

DanJ0

"My skin blisters in those sort of places."

Must be the holy water...

22 October 2011 23:33  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

DanJ0

I agree with Lakester. Do crucifixes have the same effect on you? An aversion to holy symbols that manifests physically is a worrying sign.

22 October 2011 23:52  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

DanJ0 You could do worse than embrace Christianity. The Inspector has no problem with you being gay, and is sure Christ won’t either....

23 October 2011 00:39  
Blogger Roxy Katt said...

What a bitter irony. The Church of Christ, faced with a movement dedicated to dethroning Mammon and his most assiduous servants, dedicated to reducing poverty, finds itself POWERLESS (or so it claims) even to STAY OPEN! Never mind, of course, active participation in the movement. That, it seems, is out of the question.

And people wonder why some sneer at those of us who are religious. This church is like a doctor who who is afraid of germs or a plumber who refuses to get his hands dirty.

23 October 2011 04:32  
Blogger CónegoZ+ said...

It is rare that I have read a response of such breath-taking inanity as that of 'Atlas shrugs', (a misquote of Ayn Rand's ode to ego and selfishness) with his comment at 14:53 (and I mean this in the nicest way). I shan't try to cover every point, but..

In response to 'Dodo' having written that, by at least one definition, to Roman Catholic Church could claim to be among the first multinational corporations, and that the C. of E. separated from the RCC some time later, due to irreconcilable differences, ‘Atlas' went after him. "Who do you think OWNES (sic) these companies?" Answering himself he says the money for founding them "came from Jewish money lenders, who borrowed much, if not ALL of it from either the Vatican, or the Crown Princes of Europe. Tosh.

The "Jewish money lenders" slander comes right out of the Protocols of the Leaders Zion", one of the anti-Semitic forgeries of the past century. Created by the Russian Tsar's Secret Police, it was published in Russia in 1905, and debunked by the London Times' in 1921, yet still appears in print and now on the internet.

That aside, these money lenders "borrowed much, if not ALL of it from the Vatican and Crown Princes of Europe"???

The Vatican is the administrative center of the RCC. 'Atlas' wants us to believe that the money lenders borrowed money from the Catholic Church in order to finance the founding of the Catholic Church? It'd be a neat trick if they could do it, but not nearly as neat as borrowing the rest from the Crown Princes of Europe-- at a time when there weren't any. Europe was still part of the Roman Empire, and the only crowned head was that of the Roman Emperor Tiberius.

‘Atlas shrugs' then asks, "Why do you think that many of the people of Europe died in their thousands to create Empires around the world, from which they had nothing obvious to gain?". Well, there was gold, silver, spices, slaves, jewels, timber, rice, teas, Indian cotton, agricultural land, chinaware, furs, tobacco, coffee and the like. Other than that, though…

I was yet more bemused to read of a "fact not of the more well known variety, that there is a "documented treaty" between the British Royal Family and the Pope, "signed at a time both the above corporations were first incorporated". Even making allowances for it being the English, vice British, Royal Family and the Pope (and neither registered as a legal corporation on being founded), it just won’t work.

The list of English monarchs usually begins with Egbert in 829, although other scholars say he was not truly Rex Anglorum, but only of Wessex, and King Aethelstan in 924 was the first king over all of England. The undisputed first Pope was Peter, from app. 32 AD until his martyrdom a quarter-century later.

This makes an 800 or 900 year gap between the dates of the two "corporations". When he writes "The exact date and name of which escapes me for now, however the time was around that at which both of the above corporations were first incorporated", I can understand why both the name and date escape him.

This continues to be of the most intelligent and well-researched blogs covering the Church of England and the world from the Church's standpoint. Some comments aren’t quite up to snuff.

Pax tecum, Your Grace!

23 October 2011 05:33  
Blogger CónegoZ+ said...

It is rare that I have read a response of such breath-taking inanity as that of 'Atlas shrugs', (a misquote of Ayn Rand's ode to ego and selfishness) with his comment at 14:53 (and I mean this in the nicest way). I shan't try to cover every point, but..

In response to 'Dodo' having written that, by at least one definition, to Roman Catholic Church could claim to be among the first multinational corporations, and that the C. of E. separated from the RCC some time later, due to irreconcilable differences, ‘Atlas' went after him. "Who do you think OWNES (sic) these companies?" Answering himself he says the money for founding them "came from Jewish money lenders, who borrowed much, if not ALL of it from either the Vatican, or the Crown Princes of Europe. Tosh.

The "Jewish money lenders" slander comes right out of the Protocols of the Leaders Zion", one of the anti-Semitic forgeries of the past century. Created by the Russian Tsar's Secret Police, it was published in Russia in 1905, and debunked by the London Times' in 1921, yet still appears in print and now on the internet.

That aside, these money lenders "borrowed much, if not ALL of it from the Vatican and Crown Princes of Europe"???

The Vatican is the administrative center of the RCC. 'Atlas' wants us to believe that the money lenders borrowed money from the Catholic Church in order to finance the founding of the Catholic Church? It'd be a neat trick if they could do it, but not nearly as neat as borrowing the rest from the Crown Princes of Europe-- at a time when there weren't any. Europe was still part of the Roman Empire, and the only crowned head was that of the Roman Emperor Tiberius.

‘Atlas shrugs' then asks, "Why do you think that many of the people of Europe died in their thousands to create Empires around the world, from which they had nothing obvious to gain?". Well, there was gold, silver, spices, slaves, jewels, timber, rice, teas, Indian cotton, agricultural land, chinaware, furs, tobacco, coffee and the like. Other than that, though…

I was yet more bemused to read of a "fact not of the more well known variety, that there is a "documented treaty" between the British Royal Family and the Pope, "signed at a time both the above corporations were first incorporated". Even making allowances for it being the English, vice British, Royal Family and the Pope (and neither registered as a legal corporation on being founded), it just won’t work.

The list of English monarchs usually begins with Egbert in 829, although other scholars say he was not truly Rex Anglorum, but only of Wessex, and King Aethelstan in 924 was the first king over all of England. The undisputed first Pope was Peter, from app. 32 AD until his martyrdom a quarter-century later.

This makes an 800 or 900 year gap between the dates of the two "corporations". When he writes "The exact date and name of which escapes me for now, however the time was around that at which both of the above corporations were first incorporated", I can understand why both the name and date escape him.

This continues to be of the most intelligent and well-researched blogs covering the Church of England and the world from the Church's standpoint. Some comments aren’t quite up to snuff.

Pax tecum, Your Grace!

23 October 2011 06:10  
Blogger len said...

'Peter was the first Pope' according to Catholic tradition would be a more accurate statement.

23 October 2011 08:10  
Blogger len said...

There are not any passages that support the Roman Catholic teaching of the supremecy of Rome, the divine leadership of Peter, the office of the papacy, the infallibility of it's head, or the succession of divine authority. That teaching does not exist in Scripture.

But hey don`t let that worry you!lets not confuse ourselves with the facts. We got traditions!

23 October 2011 08:16  
Blogger len said...

Catholicism has taught for centuries that Peter was martyred and buried in Rome and that all popes succeed him,but this is being disputed by recent archaeological finds and the evidence of the Scriptures.
Its much more likely that St Peter was buried in an ossuary found in Jerusalem with the inscription Shimon Bar Jonah - Simon son of Jonah - the Hebrew name for Peter.
The bones of Simon Bar Jona (St. Peter) were found in Jerusalem, on the Franciscan monastery site called, "Dominus Flevit. During their travels in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, Peter and his wife remained in the Orient, never entering Rome. One can verify this by the last chapter of the epistle to the church at Rome, written c. A.D. 60, in which Paul salutes 27 persons, never mentioning Peter. It would seem that Paul did not send him greetings simply because Peter neither was there nor ever had been. Those who hold that Peter governed a church at Rome must face the fact of Paul's omission of Peter's name: Had Peter been in Rome, the omission would have been a gross insult. Furthermore, it had been agreed at the Jerusalem Conference that Peter should go to the Jews and Paul to the Gentiles.

23 October 2011 08:56  
Blogger Gnostic said...

I wonder if the unwashed, miles off target and brainless mass...er..."protestors" realise that the church has an investment portfolio of billions? And is therefore a symbol of what they claim to be protesting against...

And still visitors must pay through the nose to enter God's house.

23 October 2011 09:15  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

weatsop len

We've covered this before. You know that 'theory' about St Peter's grave is speculative nonsense. A History Channel special based on the discovery of a tomb with the name Simon Bar Jona. A common name at the time.

Your obsession with attacking the history of the early church and its theology and using any source to do so, comes from where?

"Seek and ye shall find", indeeed! Truth is in the eye the seeker. If you look hard enough you'll come across 'valid evidence' that the earth has been visited by aliens since 2000 BC.

23 October 2011 10:19  
Blogger len said...

No theory Dodo! ( unlike yours)go and see for yourself ,before it hmmmm gets removed.

23 October 2011 11:23  
Blogger G. Tingey said...

Oh dear.

The “occupy” protestors, in London and elsewhere turn out to be entirely correct, but for completely the wrong reasons.

An impartial scientific study, based on methods used for studying ecological and biological systems has turned up some very disturbing results.
See here:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1107/1107.5728v2.pdf
and here, for a summary:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21228354.500-revealed--the-capitalist-network-that-runs-the-world.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news

What is really worrying is that all these small number of companies all appear to own each other.

In other words, it’s a closed, unelected Oligarchy.

Now what?

23 October 2011 14:19  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older