Monday, May 14, 2012

ASA – His Grace responds

His Grace apologises to his readers and communicants for his brief absence from his cyber pulpit: he has been closeted with lawyers and advisers, and has downed one or two vodka-martinis (‘dirty’, two olives) along with sundry bottles of Rioja. It’s interesting how a request to comply with an official investigation and a demand to respond to a formal inquiry becomes distracting and all-consuming: the mere request is a formidable weapon of harassment in itself, sapping energy, time and money (vid. His Grace’s Collection Plate ‘donate’ button on the right: all solidarity contributions welcome).

In particular, apologies are due to those who objected to his use of the word ‘persecution’ in this context: certainly, he, being long-deceased and non-corporeal, is no longer risking life or limb in the proclamation of the gospel. But, with respect, none of those who judge are on the receiving end of the intimidation. In their correspondence, the ASA do not inform one of the limits of their powers: one is simply confronted with specific demands from an organisation styled ‘Authority’. And through all the hours spent consulting, considering and pondering, there is absolutely no clue as to the identity of these 10 complainants, other than that they include the ‘Jewish Gay & Lesbian Group' (though it is not clear if the complaint was made by individual members of that organisation or corporately on behalf of all members [if the latter, His Grace would dearly like to hear from any affiliated gay or lesbian Jews who place the freedoms of speech and expression above state-imposed moral uniformity]).

His Grace expresses his sincere gratitude to all those who have blogged supporting him in this matter (in particular those who disagree with him on so many issues, but most of all to Stuart James at the eChurch blog for monitoring widespread reaction). And His Grace also thanks those who suggested that he should respond to the ASA after the fashion of Arkell v. Pressdram. However tempting that may be for a fallen and sinful pile of ash, such profanities are unacceptable: the state possesses authority to which Christians are subject, and quangos and professional regulatory bodies are recognised by the state, even if independent or quasi-independent thereof. To those who think this investigation has something to do with His Grace being obliged to corroborate the statistics of a ComRes opinion poll commissioned by Catholic Voices, His Grace exhorts you to re-read his original post. To those who think the ASA is a tool of the state, His Grace exhorts you to research their origins and examine their purpose. This case is not aided by misreporting or misrepresentation. His Grace was asked solely to respond to the allegation that four screenshots (reproduced in the original post) were ‘offensive and homophobic’. His Grace has today responded to the ASA thus:

Dear Investigations Executive,

RE: Case No: A12-192907/JT

 His Grace thanks you for your email of 10th May, and for the attached bundle of pdfs and sundry other documents. Over the years he has endured some appalling persecution and had the most unpleasant encounters with smouldering faggots, so he begs your indulgence, compassion and understanding as you conduct your inquiry into the allegation that he is publishing/distributing images which some may find ‘offensive’ and/or ‘homophobic’.You asked him to keep the correspondence confidential, and he has done so. However, since he is constrained by no law from communicating with his advisers and legal counsellors, and there being no statutory upper limit on the number of those advisers and legal counsellors, he thought it appropriate to consult with his communicants (that is, his ecclesial blog community) because the Lord has been gracious to surround him with manifest and beneficial wisdom in abundance (along with a few nut-jobs). Some elements of your correspondence may therefore have been spread abroad (if not around the globe), which is regrettable but unavoidable.

If His Grace is to meet your deadline of responding fully to your questions by 21st May ‘at the latest’, he asks that you might be kind enough to clarify a few things before he does so, if possible within 48hrs. Specifically:

1) Your bundle included four screenshots of ‘evidence’ taken from His Grace’s blog apparently on 12th April 2012. They feature (left) a promotional photograph of the Parthenon of the Athenian Acropolis above a banner proclaiming ‘Peoples of Europe Rise Up’, and an advertisement (right) for the Coalition for Marriage. You say these frames elicited 10 anonymous complaints (but ‘including the Jewish Gay & Lesbian Group’); specifically that they found them ‘offensive and homophobic’. You informed His Grace that such complaint ‘falls under the harm and offence section of the British Code of Advertising, Sales Promotion and Direct Marketing’, and asked him to explain (by 21st May ‘at the latest’) why he thought the advertising was suitable for his readers and whether readers have complained to him directly. Could you please clarify whether their objection was to the promotional images of the Parthenon or to the C4M advertisement?

2) If your response to (1) above is that the complaint concerns the image of the Parthenon and His Grace’s promotion of classical Greek culture, he will provide a succinct report to justify his economic solidarity with the euro-oppressed Greeks and reasoning in support of a necessary and beneficial increase in Hellenic tourism. If, more specifically, a banner proclaiming ‘Peoples of Europe Rise Up’ might be considered an offensive slogan to those who recognise no such thing as a European demos, His Grace concurs, and will certainly incorporate that in his report. If, however, your response to (1) above is that the complaint concerns the Coalition for Marriage advertisement, it must be observed that the same advertisement appeared on numerous blogs (‘Internet [display]’), including Guido Fawkes (which you acknowledge) and ConservativeHome. You appear not to have troubled ConservativeHome at all in the pursuit of your enquiries, and your letter states that you have copied in Guido Fawkes ‘for information’ only. Ergo you appear to have singled out His Grace alone in the blogosphere (‘Internet [display]’) and made demands only of him to respond to Point 2 of the complaint, i.e., that the advertisement was ‘homophobic and offensive’. Why are you harassing His Grace alone in the blogosphere? Why are all blogs which displayed this advertisement not being treated equally? One presumes it has nothing to do with the fact that ConservativeHome is generously underpinned by Lord Ashcroft’s £millions, or that Guido Fawkes isn’t without the means to call in the lawyers or lacking the rottweiler tendency to tell you where to go. Why have you chosen to victimise and harass the weakest, lowliest, and most utterly insignificant of the blogs which carried this advertisement?

3) You state that 10 of the 25 complaints received deem the advertisement to be ‘offensive’ and ‘homophobic’. His Grace understands the plainest meaning and definition of the term ‘offensive’. But, since homosexuals and homosexuality are nowhere mentioned in the advertisement, could you please clarify how the term ‘homophobic’ is being used in this context?

4) His Grace understands that the 10 complainants must remain anonymous, but that you are obliged to be transparent about the involvement of the ‘Jewish Gay & Lesbian Group’ because of a possible or perceived antithetical (religio-)political agenda. Could you please clarify whether it was an individual member or multiple members of this group who complained, or whether the organisation did so corporately? If the latter, why have you assumed that their opposition to the Archbishop Cranmer blog is motivated by his decision to carry the C4M advertisement and not by his long-time support for the state of Israel?

5) Further to (4) above, why have you assumed that the complainants are gay or lesbian, and that sexuality is the true motive of complaint? Might it not be that some of the 10 individuals concerned are also motivated by an opposing (religio-)political agenda or contrary moral worldview to those held by His Grace, and that they seek to change the definition of marriage because of, say, a preference of bigamy, polygamy, paedophilia or incest? This being a possibility, should not their identities also be disclosed in order that such possible agendas may also be made transparent?

6) You state that you ‘intend to deal with the complaint as a formal investigation, which means it will be considered by the ASA Council’. You further state: ‘We will then draft a recommendation for the Council based on your response to us. Once the Council has made a decision, the adjudication will be published on our website.’ Could you please explain what alternative procedures you might have adopted to deal with this complaint? Since it appears that only a few hundred complaints out of some 26,000 per annum are selected by the ASA for such treatment, could you also please explain why this complaint was considered to be of such gravity that you saw fit to escalate directly to the status of ‘formal investigation’?

7) The above is significant in the context of your erroneous judgment in the matter of an advertisement entitled ‘The word of God Against Sodomy’ placed by the Sandown Free Presbyterian Church in Belfast in 2008. A High Court judge later quashed your adjudication that an advertisement which proclaimed sodomy to be an abomination was ‘homophobic’. Mr Justice Treacy held that your adjudication disproportionately interfered with Sandown Free Presbyterian Church's rights to freedom of expression. Article 10 of the ECHR protects not only the content and substance of information but also the means of dissemination since any restriction on the means necessarily interferes with the right to receive and impart information, and this includes words or images which might offend, shock or disturb. Since the Coalition for Marriage advertisement is manifestly pro heterosexual marriage (ie the law as it stands) and not anti anything, and since it neither shocks nor incites people to violence, could you please explain how its message is not similarly covered by those ECHR provisions protecting freedom of speech and freedom of expression?

8) You write: ‘We require you to explain your rationale for the ad and comment specifically on the points raised in the attached complaint notification...’ But none of the ‘complaint notification’ (excepting your email) was addressed directly to His Grace: indeed, His Grace appears to have to infer from your correspondence addressed to a third party precisely what it is you require from him. In light of this, it is not clear if your demand for ‘robust documentary evidence to back the claims and a clear explanation from you of its relevance and why you think it substantiates the claims’ is addressed to him or the other party. If the demand is addressed to him, could you please clarify what manner of ‘robust documentary evidence’ may be sufficiently (ie objectively) robust to respond to complaints of subjective opinion that the advertisement was ‘offensive and homophobic’?

His Grace looks forward to your most urgent response to these questions, for he is unable to commit to your imposed timescale should that response be delayed. If he is to avoid answering your questions in such a way as might incriminate himself, he considers it necessary to await your fullest response.

Yours sincerely,


Blogger someday said...

"unpleasant encounters with smouldering faggots"


14 May 2012 at 08:42  
Blogger bluedog said...

Absolutely brilliant, Your Grace. May the Lord be with you.

14 May 2012 at 08:43  
Blogger Marcus Foxall said...

"..downed one or two vodka-martinis.."

That's understandable.
His Grace may be a little shaken after the ASA stirred things up.

14 May 2012 at 08:46  
Blogger Youthpasta said...


An excellent riposte, Your Grace, to which we await their reply with baited breath.

I would almost say you were on fire, if it were not for the potential that this may be deemed offensive, or at least a little insensitive!

14 May 2012 at 08:52  
Blogger Effie Deans said...

Anyone who cares about free speech should support you. It is ridiculous that the ASA has been harassing you. Good luck and God be with you.

14 May 2012 at 08:58  
Blogger Ben Trovato said...

I await their full response with keen interest - not least as I am one of the many now running this advertisement (unpaid) in solidarity with Your Grace - and of course in support for he Law of this Land.

It would be extraordinary indeed if campaigning for and upholding the Law of the Land were to be deemed an an offence.

14 May 2012 at 09:01  
Blogger Fletch said...

They really are pathetic spineless creatures of the wrong thinking liberal elite who have caused untold damage to our society & nation.

Fight the good fight. !!!!!!!

14 May 2012 at 09:09  
Blogger David B said...

@ Youthpasta

Some of us do not bait our breath, preferring to bait our fishing hooks, and abhorring those who bait bears or badger.

While I eagerly await news of the response of the ASA, I don't intend to bate my breath until then, though you are welcome to try.


A tour de force of a reply to the ASA. A fine piece of writing.

Whatever differences of opinion there may be on religion or politics, I'd like to see people of good will from across the religious and political spectra supporting your right to be wrong, and to campaign for what you believe to be right, but which others (like myself) believe to be misguided.

David B

14 May 2012 at 09:09  
Blogger The Heresiarch said...

Well, I can see what you're trying to do. I wouldn't have done it myself (paragraph 8 is all that was required) but I suppose the ASA deserve it if only for their manifest incompetence. I almost feel sorry for the poor sod deputed to read your reply.

14 May 2012 at 09:11  
Blogger Belsay Bugle said...

If you have time, YG, you might have a look at the cancellation (reported in Sat's Telegraph) of the forthcoming Law Society lecture that was to have been given by Coleridge J on the damage divorce is doing to families.

It was cancelled because the Law Society (as you know I'm sure, the body that regulates solicitors) said it breached their 'diversity policy'. That is despite homosexual marriage being unlawful and heterosexual marriage being the only one there is.

14 May 2012 at 09:19  
Blogger Flossie said...

TWO olives, Your Grace?? Hmmm. I should watch that, if I were you.

But Bravo for standing up to these idiots. I see you haven't lost your sense of humour. But this just goes to show that if we don't stand up for our faith we give tacit 'permission' for our opponents to bully us, and next time around a precedent will have been set and the bullying will get worse.

By the way, I don't think it is just my browser as I have checked with a colleague, who says the same, but all the material which used to be on the right-hand side of your blog (including the Donate button)has now disappeared to the very bottom, underneath 'Older posts'. I had assumed you had deleted it. Am I doing something daft?

14 May 2012 at 09:20  
Blogger Angry Exile said...

Got as far as the line about smouldering faggots and fell about laughing. That was pure gold and I'm picturing the look on the face of some historically clueless Thought Constable reading it. Akubra doffed, Your Grace. Will read the rest in a min when I've stopped giggling.

14 May 2012 at 09:30  
Blogger dfordoom said...

His Grace might be interested to hear that the Law Society has decided that heterosexual marriage is too offensive a topic even to be discussed -

14 May 2012 at 09:31  
Blogger Darter Noster said...

Well said, Your Grace.

Were I to be in your ash-filled shoes, I would also direct their attention to the CAP Scope of the Code, section IV i and j, in which it states:

"i. the Code makes due allowance for public sensitivities but will not be used by the ASA to diminish freedom of speech unjustifiably

j. the ASA does not arbitrate between conflicting ideologies"

Since they take into account not just the ad itself, but also the broader context of the website it is on, they may give that as justification for singling Your Grace out; that, and the fact that they may not have received complaints about anyone else which, if true, would suggest that it's not the ASA but the "complainants" who pick their targets carefully.

Best of luck


14 May 2012 at 09:33  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


14 May 2012 at 09:41  
Blogger graham wood said...

A superb reply. Short, pithy, straight to the issue, sweetly reasonable, courteous to the point (almost)of obseqiousness, had we not known you better, and, not to put too fine a point on it - a poke in the eye for the ASA.

As for the demand for ‘robust documentary evidence to back the claims', all I noticed on the ad was a sea of happy smiling faces, from many delightful brides and grooms who graciously, and of their own free-will, donated these momentos of their wedding days.
These appear to be both "robust" and "documentary" to me - or am I missing something?

Let the curmudgeonly kill-joys in the ASA in their miserable den chew long and hard on their mean diet of 'homophobia', while the rest of us enjoy our free speech on the blogosphere - courtesy of Cranmer

14 May 2012 at 09:42  
Blogger William said...


"His Grace might be interested to hear that the Law Society has decided that heterosexual marriage is too offensive a topic even to be discussed"

Is this a case of institutional heterophobia?

14 May 2012 at 09:44  
Blogger Youthpasta said...

@DavidB - I would apologise, but given that it is a fairly minor infraction from a dyslexic I really can't be bothered to even take it with any humour (even if some were intended).

14 May 2012 at 10:01  
Blogger Derek said...

'Jewish Gay & Lesbian Group'

Where's Moses when you most need him?

14 May 2012 at 10:15  
Blogger Derek said...

'Jewish Gay & Lesbian Group'

Where's Moses when you most need him?

14 May 2012 at 10:15  
Blogger Preacher said...

Two olives Dr Cranmer? Were they stuffed olives, or get stuffed ones?.

Carry on blogging!!!.

14 May 2012 at 10:38  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

If this was all done by email, presumably avoiding the hassle of getting the blog owner's identity from blogger, then has it occurred to anyone else that the request may been a spoof from someone other than the ASA? It would be a spectacular windup if so.

14 May 2012 at 10:48  
Blogger Antiochean said...

On fire again!!!

14 May 2012 at 10:53  
Blogger William said...


A number of your communicants have expressed concern that you may be over doing it. Might I suggest that you stick to one olive per martini for a period? A little temperance from time to time can have a wonderful regenerative effect.

14 May 2012 at 10:58  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

14 May 2012 at 11:03  
Blogger graham wood said...

"If this was all done by email.... someone other than the ASA?.... It would be a spectacular wind-up"

Good point.

LEARNED ADVOCATE: 'No case to answer M'Lud.'

14 May 2012 at 11:04  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

An excellent point made re the historic support for the State of Israel and stand against anti-Semitism.

Perhaps the Board of Deputies should be approached to examine the negative activities of the JGL Gaystapo, with respect to the potential detrimental consequences of alienating the Jewish communities from erstwhile longstanding allies.

14 May 2012 at 11:07  
Blogger Anabaptist said...

'...smouldering faggots...'

Your best ever turn of phrase, Cranny.

14 May 2012 at 11:18  
Blogger William said...

Also YG

Take care that any smouldering faggots don't come into contact with the vodka. They tend not to mix well together.

Health and safety first.

14 May 2012 at 11:24  
Blogger Anoneumouse said...

You do realise that the Chairman of the ASA, is Lord Smith of Finsbury. He is also the vice-president of the Campaign for Homosexual Equality.

14 May 2012 at 12:13  
Blogger Joe Daniels said...

Well done- keep up the good job!

14 May 2012 at 12:14  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

No response will be received, and the ASA will proceed forthwith to adjudication. No doubt the proceedings will be fair and impartial. I understand that a Mr Yezhov will stand for the plaintiffs in this case.


14 May 2012 at 12:20  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Some elements of your correspondence may therefore have been spread abroad (if not around the globe), which is regrettable but unavoidable.

The C4M advertisement itself has sprouted all over the blogosphere, 29300 web pages now covering the case with thousands of comments plus Twitter traffic etc.
The ASA can scarcely have had so much negative publicity for their Orwellian system of anonymous denunciation.

Does a free man not have the right to face his accusers? Is he to be found guilty in absentia by some faceless panel? This whole process stinks of Corpus Juris. Guilty unless you can prove yourself innocent. The malignant influence of european "justice" that radiates from the EUSSR.

14 May 2012 at 12:22  
Blogger William said...

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

14 May 2012 at 12:22  
Blogger William said...

Anoneumouse @12:13


14 May 2012 at 12:30  
Blogger SadButMadLad said...

Look up Shirlene McGovern of the Alberta Human Rights Commission and how she tried to use "authority" with the backing of the state to decide what a small publisher could say. The publisher being Ezra Levant who printed those Muhammad cartoons.

He had to spend thousands of dollars to defend himself but his accusors didn't spend any money at all.

Watch the YouTube vides and watch as Ezra demolishes Shirlene.

14 May 2012 at 12:53  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

It could very well be a nasty little windup from a bunch of smouldering faggots who know His Grace.
And His Grace has quietly spotted it and cleverly used it to his advantage. Great reply.

14 May 2012 at 13:21  
Blogger Peter said...

Anoneumouse said...
You do realise that the Chairman of the ASA, is Lord Smith of Finsbury. He is also the vice-president of the Campaign for Homosexual Equality.

If not, beyond the author, we are now.

I wonder if such a thing might be considered germane, or dropped quietly by various 'news' entities these days more notorious for their 'selective' editorial that mainly serves as propaganda backed by censorship.

I think they know who they are, even if many readers/viewers/fellow twitterati may not be, or even care.

14 May 2012 at 13:23  
Blogger Judy W. said...

Here's a word of support from the U.S., where we see this kind of persecution coming eventually. In fact, there's been persecution in states which have legalized same-sex "marriage," like forcing photographers, bakers, etc., to supply their services for same-sex weddings. Here in Maryland, the legislature passed a same-sex marriage bill a couple of months ago. But in this state we have a referendum process in which citizens can petition to put a bill on the next election ballot to be decided by the voters, and we're doing this with the same-sex marriage bill. In this overall-very-liberal state, the petition is wildly popular across party, color, and ethnic lines.

14 May 2012 at 13:33  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

You had me at the first line of that letter. Genius.

14 May 2012 at 13:34  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Who are the nut-jobs?

Answers on the back of a postcard please.

14 May 2012 at 13:35  
Blogger William said...

Judy W

A referendum on same sex marriage? Now there's a good idea. I'm surprised our political elite haven't thought of it. It's probably not a conservative value - not like redefining marriage anyway.

14 May 2012 at 13:46  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...


"Who are the nut-jobs?

Answers on the back of a postcard please."

Dear fellow.

One only has to visit even some of the 'liberal' blogs supporting Cranmer's stance regarding this advert malarkey to see communicants of the 'crunchy fruit and nut cheerio' type, to make His Grace's statement about 'his own' seem like a gross miss-exaggeration, in terms of definition?!

Even the nuttiest here expresses the wisdom of Solomon compared to Harry's Place, etc etc.

Got out quick before I was 'lovingly' assaulted and given 'Be'atch' status by the 'queens' and 'flaming fairies' there.


14 May 2012 at 13:56  
Blogger Flossie said...

Anoneumeuse: 'You do realise that the Chairman of the ASA, is Lord Smith of Finsbury. He is also the vice-president of the Campaign for Homosexual Equality.'

Brilliant piece of sleuthing, Anon. We Brits remember Lord Smith when he was plain Chris Smith MP, former culture secretary, the first serving MP to 'come out' as gay. I have a vague memory of the revered Ken Livingstone hosting a party for him (at a cost to the taxpayer of some £10,000) to 'celebrate' an anniversary of this event. He also has HIV, which he was very keen to tell us, at a further cost to the taxpayer (according to stats from Avert this is currently between £22,775 and £48,000 per patient per year) which is quite aside to the suffering caused, which I don't feel is a cause for celebration.

The best antidote to the £1 billion annual cost of STIs and the £42 billion annual cost of family breakdown is - guess what - marriage! But are we allowed to promote that? Not according to Mr Smith's organisation.

14 May 2012 at 14:01  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dear Experimental Theology

"The cross is the devil's mousetrap." courtesy of echurch quote of the day;

St. Augustine once preached "Crux muscipula diaboli." He was WRONG!

How did the cross save us from the Devil? The cross, Augustine claims, is like a mousetrap.

How so?

The idea goes like this. From the beginning of Jesus's ministry Satan tries to thwart Jesus. But failing to get Jesus to fall into sin Satan ultimately decides to kill Jesus, to just get rid of the guy. (Recall that Satan enters Judas's heart suggesting that the death of Jesus is Satan's idea and plan.) Satan, we know, eventually succeeds and Jesus is killed. Thus, Satan, who possesses the keys to Death and Hades, now "owns" Jesus and has him locked up in Hades.

Satan has taken the cheese.

Because what Satan doesn't 'know'(Ernst emphasis) is that Jesus isn't just another human being. Jesus is God Incarnate. In this Jesus is sort of like a Trojan Horse. So when Satan takes Jesus to Hades--Surprise!--he finds that the enemy has entered the gates. There in hell Jesus takes the keys of Death and Hades from Satan, binds him, and then releases the captives. In Christian theology this is called the Harrowing of Hell.

The mousetrap snaps." Wrong!

Matthew 4:3

And when the tempter came to him,
he said, (If) thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.

'If' here and elsewhere in the gospels regarding Satan's testing of Jesus is expressed in Koine Greek as 'If..and you are/Since you are/Because you are!

So Satan's cohorts stated ;

"What have you to do with us, O Son of God? Have you come here to torment us before the time?"—Matthew 8:29

"What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are—the Holy One of God."—Mark 1:24, Luke 4:34

"You are the Son of God."—Mark 3:11

"You are the Son of God!" But he rebuked them and would not allow them to speak, because they knew that he was the Christ.—Luke 4:41

"What have you to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg you, do not torment me."—Luke 8:28, Mark 5:7

Therefore Satan was completely oblivious to this but lower level spirits know, yes?.

Secondly, Satan did everything in his power to try to stop Jesus reaching the Cross by death prior, attempted stonings, etc.. He was scourged and buffeted viciously, His whole beard plucked from His face, in the hope He would die before reaching Calvary..The Cross was an Triumphal Achievement, not a satanic tragedy!

Stop experimenting and read God's Word, not mens pathetic interpretations despite the opposite being the truth!

E S Blofeld

14 May 2012 at 14:25  
Blogger Sackerson said...

Is it possible to lodge a complaint against a quango, and if so, how? Would the suspicion of personal bias and influence of a senior manager of that quango constitute sufficient grounds for a complaint requiring independent investigation? Who would or could undertake such an investigation?

Perhaps His Grace's servant could clarify these matters via his MP.

14 May 2012 at 14:37  
Blogger Atlas Shrugged said...

It would seem that the unstoppable juggernaut of World Revolutionary Marxism/Fascism is gaining momentum.

Did not liberal democracy win the Cold War?

No it did not, it LOSE BIG TIME, the very day the Berlin Wall apparently fell all by itself, and for no logical, or even speculated upon reason.

Far from Marxism falling it has over the last 20 years or so taken hold of even places like The USA.

As Marx correctly predicted, when free-market capitalism is PURPOSEFULLY destroyed in the Western worlds economies, the entire worlds will systematically follow suit.

IMO, this is now happening before our very eyes, while all other political, economic and social agendas are predicated upon the assumption of the virtual imminent demise of western civilization as we have come to know it.

The destruction of 'normal' family life has been a long term act of sabotage enacted, propagated, and sponsored by our own establishment.

This is why this agenda, and many others are given the help of the full force of law entirely at the tax payers expense.

Like in the case of The BBC, we are paying for our own destruction, indeed our own mind control, eventual mass murder, and resultant funeral expenses.

Never in the horrendous history of genocidal slavery itself, has the utter piss been taken out of so many, by so very few, and that includes 1930's Germany.

Your Grace, you have my deepest sympathy, however please understand that you are fighting powers that you cannot ultimately defeat.

Powers that are not new, are so well established that they long since became the establishment in all but name, and have been controlling this particular country since it first became one, and possibly much longer then that.

These people NEVER lose; the only bit of good news is that they can be forced to take a backward step every now and again, but only if you solicit the assistant of a shit hot, and usually extremely expensive lawyer.

14 May 2012 at 14:46  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

It is time for the fruit cakes to be 'outed' on the blog! The problem is difficult to find more than one or two that isn't!

14 May 2012 at 14:53  
Blogger Daddy said...

Your Grace,

Not for the first time I must welcome you to my world.

If you challenge the tyranny of the weak, you will encounter this. Their only weapon against you is your own willingness to give up, or conform and submit.

Keep going. May God strengthen and sustain you.

Love from Daddy

14 May 2012 at 15:24  
Blogger non mouse said...

Flaming Brilliance, Your Grace. Wonderful conservation of ashes, especially in the signature.

Templum domini est cum hominibus

14 May 2012 at 15:39  
Blogger Oswin said...

May I suggest that His Grace's communicants contact the 'Jewish Gay & Lesbian Group: to politely express their sadness and concern, that their group, or certain members of their group, have attacked His Grace, via the ASA; His Grace having been consistently at the forefront of Anglican support for both Jews and the State of Israel etc.

Emphasis being on the 'polite' - as the best approach here, I feel.

14 May 2012 at 15:56  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

"Emphasis being on the 'polite' - as the best approach here, I feel."

Oh grief. You've done it now Oswin. I'm sure the JGLG will thank you when it gets a stream of "politeness".

It's like sticking a cookie jar in front of a very naughty child and asking them not to eat one.

14 May 2012 at 16:39  
Blogger Oswin said...

AnoninBelfast.B @ 16:39 :

There's little point raging and railing against those already expecting abuse - 'deaf ears' etc. After all, they might even thrive upon it; folk being a queer lot, n'all.

'Politeness' is difficult to block-out, the 'receiver' being almost obliged to register what it is, that they would rather ignore.

If only I might follow my own advice more often! :o)

14 May 2012 at 17:03  
Blogger Oswin said...

Besides, the 'Jewish Gay & Lesbian Group' site (they seem a welcoming, friendly bunch) has a ''Get in Touch'' page; it's a shame not to use it, wouldn't you say?

14 May 2012 at 17:14  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Breaking news…

Gays topple Farmers from top spot as Country’s Biggest Whingers !

After a concerted attempt to have Cranmer burnt for the second time in half a millennium, Gays have finally reached number one as the UK’s biggest complainers. A stunned farmers’ spokesman said, “This is distressing. We’ve ALWAYS been the biggest malcontents in the land, ever since the dawn of agriculture, and that’s earlier than 14,000 BC.” Picking up another gassed badger corpse, he continued, “Even during the Black Death we still held top position, and that’s with half the population dropping dead. That’s how good we were.”

Meanwhile Gays were coming to terms with their accolade. We contacted a gay organisation, but were told no one was available as they were all at the clinic having their monthly health check. However, the cleaner agreed to speak to us, after being assured we were nothing to do with Immigration. “They’s delighted,” she drooled. “They’s put a lot of time and effort into this and it’s paid off handsomely. Is that you Inspector ? They out to get you next, hon”

But the farmers are not taking this lying down . “We’re planning a Summer Spectacular Moan, or SSM”, a spokesman said, confusingly. “Not sure what all the multi topics will be, but you can bet the drought will be there, along with the price of milk, and those bloody badgers”. Walking away, he then mumbled, “That will see those gays people off. Mess with the farmers would they”.

This is the Inspector, knee deep in bullshit, at Animal farm for Cranmer News

14 May 2012 at 17:19  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I hope they shut you down.

14 May 2012 at 17:28  
Blogger Oswin said...

OIG: is that you badgering gays again?

Ah hem, farmers have a lot to put up with you know; reality-based whinging helps to keep down the suicide rate; not that anyone ever really listens...

14 May 2012 at 17:31  
Blogger Mark In Mayenne said...

Go for it! High five!

14 May 2012 at 17:34  
Blogger William said...

Derek T Northcote

"I hope they shut you down."

Yes. That is becoming more and more apparent.

14 May 2012 at 17:36  
Blogger Oswin said...

Derek T Northcote: oh dear, you almost make me regret my call for 'politeness' - but hey, you've heard it all before, and so have we.

Come to think of it, you've never knowingly 'been polite' since you first surfaced. I'd wager the JGLG wouldn't want you as a member, even supposing you were Jewish!

14 May 2012 at 17:39  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Marie: "It could very well be a nasty little windup from a bunch of smouldering faggots who know His Grace."

The blog owner used that term with wit, unlike you. I suppose you'll be off to talk about pakis and niggers elsewhere shortly with your BNP and EDL mates.

14 May 2012 at 17:40  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

It’s true Oswin. The Inspector just can’t take these dirt shunters seriously – It’s being a proper man, you know. No time for them. Ah look, Northcote turned up. Perhaps a gay relation of Tingey don’t you think ?

14 May 2012 at 17:41  
Blogger Oswin said...

OIG: now then, now then, you do Tingey a great wrong. Old Greg has NEVER indicated that he wishes to suppress free speech. Indeed, he's a leading exponent of the medium!

Ps. Should you decide to contact the JGLG, please indicate that you are NOT an Anglican. ;o)

14 May 2012 at 17:50  
Blogger Oswin said...

DanJo @ 17:40 : before you get entrenched in any internecine communicant-war stuff, any chance that you might contact the JGLG with your own, inimitable 'take' on the matter in hand?

14 May 2012 at 18:05  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...


"Ps. Should you decide to contact the JGLG, please indicate that you are NOT an Anglican. ;o)"

Priceless! *Sniggers + Chortles*


14 May 2012 at 18:19  
Blogger OldSouth said...

A brilliant, reasoned, and to your persecutors, a humiliating response. This will, of course, enrage them, therefore you have not heard the last of them.

OS, from his cabin in the Colonies, has just dropped a few coins in the collection plate, and hope they assist you with the legal bill these sorry so-and-so's have just created for you in the past few days.

OS will also be reposting your brilliant response, and urging his legion of readers to visit you and donate to your collection plate as well.

Just as the hysterical response to the voters of North Carolina has demonstrated, once again we see that 'liberals' in fact are anything but. In the quest for the outcome desired, any weapon at hand will do.

It is time to repeat, calmly but firmly: Marriage is an institution, ordained of God, recognized by the state. It is not a Civil Right, such as the Right to Vote, the Right to Assemble, or any of the other Rights our wise Founders here took care to enumerate.

Stand fast.

Illegitimi non carborundum. (Don't let the bastards grind you down.)


14 May 2012 at 18:34  
Blogger Annie said...

Excellent! :)

14 May 2012 at 18:44  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I expect that the reply will go along the lines of: not in the public interest to pursue the complaint.

I saw faggots on sale at the butchery counter in Tesco on Saturday. I did wonder to myself how long it would be before some humourless moron complains.

14 May 2012 at 19:20  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Your Grace,
Words fail me as to the eloquence of your response. Magnificent!

Anoneumouse @12:13 beat me to asking if there were what might be called undesirables in the decision making process at the ASA. Clearly there is.

I can’t understand how they brought the complaint to you rather than C4M?

14 May 2012 at 19:21  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Your Grace,
For a couple of days I have not been able to see the right side of your Blog. I don't know if anyone else is experiencing this. I have tried refreshing a number of times to no avail. If this is widespread it will prevent you communicants from reaching your offering plate.

14 May 2012 at 19:26  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

14 May 2012 at 19:26  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Your Grace,
It is not unsurprising that I failed to find any reference to this case in the Evening Standard this evening. Considering the exposure on the Blogosphere, (there was a letter from a Civil Ceremony couple questioning why anyone would want to emulate Heterosexual marriage) but nothing regarding his grace.
Peter@13:23 said 'dropped quietly by various 'news' entities these days more notorious for their 'selective' editorial that mainly serves as propaganda backed by censorship.'.
We will wait and see.

14 May 2012 at 19:45  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

You are a very naughty man, Bish, but we all love it! Go get 'em.

14 May 2012 at 19:50  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Mr Integrity,

Three or four are apparently experiencing this: His Grace has no idea why. His blog appears perfectly on Firefox and IE9. It may be your own browser settings. His Grace has narrowed the two columns. Does the problem still appear?

14 May 2012 at 19:54  
Blogger Oswin said...

Right-hand column now appearing elsewhere, in linear form, at the base etc.

14 May 2012 at 20:01  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

The missing areas appear at the bottom of the page in IE. It's all fine in Chrome.

14 May 2012 at 20:01  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

No problem from the Inspector’s steam lap top contraption, and can view beyond 200 now !

14 May 2012 at 20:04  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If to promote marriage between a man and a woman is 'Homophobic' then there must be sweeping changes to our Society.

The Bible must be banned,Families consisting of a man married to a woman should never be seen out in public,the Media should not be allowed to present male /female relationships as 'normal', in fact our whole Society must be drastically altered to remove any reference to the union in marriage between a man and a woman( which is the the very bedrock of our [rapidly] disintegrating Society.)

14 May 2012 at 20:05  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

I could never be as witty and funny as the blog owner and wasn't trying to be. I was greatly amused with his cracking reply.

The BNP are so passé now, I would have voted for them a few years ago but they have shown themselves to be a total shambles with too many primitive elements. And it's funny all that rhetoric about buy/employ British, support British manufacturing etc.. A lot of their promotional merchandise is made in Bangladesh. As for the EDL, just a bunch of thugs. I've told you before I never was a member of either party.

Niggers? Well aren't they hard working people? Jean Paul Guerlain retired perfumer at my favourite perfume house of Guerlain said so on French TV in 2010. He has been prosecuted and fined 6000 euro in March this year for his racist statements. He said his choice of words was common in his generation. How sad being convicted for saying he worked like a nigger when creating the fragrance “Samsara”.

14 May 2012 at 21:47  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Thank you Your Grace,
It is good in Firefox but still not in Explorer.

14 May 2012 at 21:56  
Blogger Flossie said...

I have IE9 and still can't see the right hand column.

14 May 2012 at 22:07  
Blogger Chris said...

I scribe as a gay man who is rather in favour of same-sex marriage. However, I also believe in the freedom to disagree and methinks that your response to the ASA is amusing, erudite and pithy. Well done. As with several others, I completely failed to restrain my laughter when reading about your encounter with smouldering faggots.

14 May 2012 at 22:08  
Blogger SCHEDULE 2 CD said...

As a Christian, I do not believe in obeying the ASA. The Biblical requirements with regard to submission to authority do not apply just because a group call themselves an "authority"; they flow from Jesus' "render to Caesar" speech. The "magistrates" who 2 Peter and Romans 13 teach obeying, if those verses are even applicable today, were those chosen by the Emperor to enforce and apply the law of the land, which are Parliament and the courts [plus some EU/international authorities so long as the UK is a member thereof] under the sovereignty of the Crown in our system.

ASA is a voluntary body. They have no legal status except with regard to television and radio advertising where the 2003 Communications Act requires advertising be cleared to be transmitted on Ofcom licensed services and an ASA judgment that "the ad must not be shown again [in its current form]" is equivalent to revocation of that clearance.

They decided for themselves last year to "extend their remit" to the Internet without any law of this land whatsoever to support them. Therefore we cannot have a Scriptural duty to obey them in ANY case. The fact they describe themselves as a "voluntary" regulator (which they are) is enough to show this.

Besides, supporting biblical marriage is one of the things in which our freedom comes directly from God- marriage is God's creation and not rendered to Caesar- and we would be justified in disobeying a government who tried to muzzle the Truth [see Acts 5 and Jesus' disobeying of unjust Pharisee-derived laws, even as he told Jews to obey while the Pharisee judges were "in the seat of Moses" which has now been nailed to the Cross.)

Your Grace- DO NOT remove or edit anything from the Web because of an ASA decision! The law and Scripture do not require that AT ALL. Particularly when you are defending a principle expressed in scripture

14 May 2012 at 22:48  
Blogger Hughie said...

Is it anywhere explained whether or not these purported complaints were dealt with by a member of the ASA staff of a homosexualist bent?

The seemingly official/offensive communication which you have received seems so bizarre one can but only presume they were. Transparency is surely called for here? Should Your Grace not demand a straight answer?

14 May 2012 at 22:56  
Blogger Atlas Shrugged said...

len said...

The Bible must be banned,Families consisting of a man married to a woman should never be seen out in public,the Media should not be allowed to present male /female relationships as 'normal', in fact our whole Society must be drastically altered to remove any reference to the union in marriage between a man and a woman( which is the very bedrock of our [rapidly] disintegrating Society.)

14 May 2012 20:05

You may have written the above with tongue in cheek, however what you have stated is simply a logically inevitable extension of current policies.

Our establishment is MARXIST in all but name. Marx made perfectly clear what his attitude towards marriage and the family was, and it can be summed up thus, COMPLETE DESTRUCTION of both.

Fabianism, is Marxism by slow incremental steps.

As you know, and others simply can't get their heads around, however much evidence daily confronts them, it is not just marriage, and bible believing Christianity which is on the establishments to go list.

Virtually everything but DEATH and TAXES are to be abolished, or radically changed at some time in the not too distant future.

In the future sex between men and women with the intention of procreation will be subject to license, and marriage as we now know it, made highly illegal.

Other forms of sexual contact will be taxed, and/or licensed and/or only possible or practical within government or establishment owned brothels, as is already the case in many parts of Communist China.

If you want to see your fabian style future look no further then to Communist China, a copy of 1984, Animal Farm, Time Machine, Brave New World, or your local crematorium.

Our establishment may be 30-40 years behind schedule, but they will undoubtedly catch up sooner or later.

15 May 2012 at 00:47  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...


You and little pope len make such perfect bedfellows. Both so pessismistic!

Do you know despair is sinful?

15 May 2012 at 00:56  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

The layout in IE seems good again.

15 May 2012 at 06:00  
Blogger bluedog said...

Hughie @ 22.56, his Grace has tweeted, 'Ah, the Chairman of the ASA is Lord Smith of Finsbury, who happens also to be a vice president of the Campaign for Homosexual Equality...

Perhaps the ASA will shortly issue a declaration of interest by Lord Smith of Finsbury and any similarly inclined ASA functionaries. Should such a declaration of interest be forthcoming, it would be appropriate for the individuals who 'out' themselves to stand aside from any involvement in the ASA prosecution of Case No: A12-192907/JT in order to eliminate any possible suggestion of bias.

15 May 2012 at 07:31  
Blogger G. Tingey said...

You are WRONG on your attitude to homosexuals.
You also have the right to express your opinion.
I was revolted by an RC advert over Eostre, glorifying their particularly revolting version of the christian Death-Cult.

The ASA are out of order, and a pox on all your houses, if you see what I mean?
Actually, do they have any actual powers?
Why not just tell them to take a hike?

15 May 2012 at 08:00  
Blogger Flossie said...

Lord Smith of Finsbury has previously been named by Pink News as being in the top 30 of the most powerful homosexual people in British politics. Who'd have thunk it?

Website layout seems back to normal on IE9. Hooray.

15 May 2012 at 08:27  
Blogger Nowhere man said...

Sorry Your Grace for not having time to read your entire missive before commenting but it does seem styrange that demands can be made of you before your accusers are required to prove their accusations.

It is typical of the way justice is conducted in the UK now that the mere accusation of homophobia,racism, sexism, "hatred" or harassment can result in the acute harassment of people who mostly subsequently found to be entirely innocent (I being one of them...) .

Good luck in your fight. It will be one more brick in the wall against the Soviet style denunciation industry that has sprung up in our so-called democracy.

15 May 2012 at 08:29  
Blogger Jim McLean at Acoustic Village said...

Ben at 9:01 sums it up nicely when he says
"It would be extraordinary indeed if campaigning for and upholding the Law of the Land were to be deemed an an offence.".

Living in an age where it is sufficient to show any image on TV as long as it is preceded by "Some viewers may find this offensive", where Frankie Boyle's disgusting jokes on disability are considered clever, and where the press culture is determined to belittle anything that resembles a conventional lifestyle, it does indeed seem strange that this has escalated to this extent.....

15 May 2012 at 09:08  
Blogger Roy said...

His Grace has tweeted, 'Ah, the Chairman of the ASA is Lord Smith of Finsbury, who happens also to be a vice president of the Campaign for Homosexual Equality.'

Would it be surprising if the key to getting promoted in the ASA is a demonstrable commitment to "diversity"? Even if I am doing Lord Smith an injustice to suggest such a thing, it is doubtful that a bit of ostentatious diversity mongering will do anyone's career prospects any harm.

15 May 2012 at 09:24  
Blogger William said...

An excellent piece in the Huffington Post by Max Wind-Cowie (a gay man):

Frankly, if I were a gay man, I would be absolutely livid at the way the radical elements of the gay movement and the government are trying to stream-roller this issue - all in my name.

15 May 2012 at 09:49  
Blogger FrankFisher said...

What in hell does this have to do with the ASA?

I will be contacting C4M asap asking them if they wish to advertise on my site, for free of course. It's based in the US, the ASA can go piss up a rope.

15 May 2012 at 09:51  
Blogger joearmitage said...

As it says on the ASA's website "The ASA is a non-statutory body so we do not have the power to fine or take advertisers to court." They claim their most 'detrimental' power is negative press for a company which refuses to comply with a ruling.

Their only power is therefore intimidation, they purport the vast majority of their orders are adhered to - such are their tactics. I don't think His Grace is remotely worried about a spot of 'bad press' because if anything, this whole fiasco has led to increased popularity.

15 May 2012 at 10:20  
Blogger Arden Forester said...

These quangos should all be put on a pile of smouldering faggots and we should all be supplied with a fine set of bellows.

Your reply to these jelly-brained liberals was superb.

15 May 2012 at 11:12  
Blogger JGLG said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

15 May 2012 at 11:25  
Blogger William said...

There seems to be an awful lot of confusion. Perhaps it's time for the Chairman of the ASA to make a statement, to clear the air so to speak.

15 May 2012 at 11:37  
Blogger JGLG said...

The Jewish Gay & Lesbian Group can confirm that we have never called for the censorship of this blog and believe that this has been done in our name and without our knowledge or agreement. We have also placed a statement to this effect on our website.

15 May 2012 at 11:38  
Blogger William said...


Would the Jewish Gay & Lesbian Group care to comment on whether they have complained to the ASA about the C4M advertisement carried by this blog on the grounds of causing offence and/or homophobia?

15 May 2012 at 11:50  
Blogger Corporal Jones said...

The Committee of Advertising Practice code which the ASA says it is enforcing says:

i. the Code makes due allowance for public sensitivities but will not be used by the ASA to diminish freedom of speech unjustifiably

j. the ASA does not arbitrate between conflicting ideologies

They seem to have lost the plot.

15 May 2012 at 11:50  
Blogger JerryEm said...

The ASA was set up to arbitrate on the competing claims for the crunchiest breakfast cereal or the cheapest car-wash in town, but it now has an ideological bent which is only to obvious. It said there was nothing wrong or offensive about adverts for abortionists on TV, for instance, a view described by pro-life campaigners as "Illegal, indecent, dishonest and untruthful" (see But what are ASA's powers? Essentially, none. It can't fine you, it can't take you to court, it can't ban you from advertising - though it can virtually do so, because publishers/broadcasters nearly all adhere (voluntarily) to its dictats. The only serious threat they weald is of referring an advertiser to the Office of Fair Trading, that most mellifluously named of Whitehall's palatial groves - who will take you to court for ripping off consumers or illegal pyramid schemes, but for homophobia? I doubt it. I was interested to see that SCHEDULE 2 CD says that they are regarded as a vetting agency by OFCOM - I gather its their offshoot Clearcast that does this - the ASA is busy devolving itself into a hydra of sub-groups. They are certainly trying to worm their way into the media-policing system: their partners BCAP have a commission from OFCOM to draft the codes of practice that the Communications Act requires OFCOM to write.
All the while, advertising becomes more salacious (sex clubs, condoms, violent films, innuendo), and the ASA does SFA.

15 May 2012 at 11:59  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

15 May 2012 at 12:26  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Clearly the ASA should be censured for acting ultra vires. What next ASA vetting of slogans on tee-shirts?

15 May 2012 at 12:30  
Blogger JGLG said...

In response to William I can also confirm that JGLG has not complained to the ASA about the
C4M advertisement on any grounds.

15 May 2012 at 12:46  
Blogger Ruari said...

His Grace will, I'm sure, be disappointed to learn that his blog is no longer the most humble and obscure to carry the ad, for I have reproduced it on my own.

In order to save the Jewish Gay and Lesbian Group the trouble of seeking my blog out and complaining about it, I have complained to the ASA myself. In my own interest, I am seeking counsel from the learned readers of and correspondents to His Grace's blog in determining how I should respond to the ASA's decision.

The Agency has turned down my complaint, and I am desolated. The principle reason they gave is that "...we can’t deal with your complaint because it doesn’t relate to claims made in an ad but to your own views and beliefs."

How should I respond to this? Would it help the ASA in their deliberations if others were to complain about it?

If anyone feels so inclined they can find my blog at

It is an very 'umble thing but don't let that stop you complaining about the advert.

15 May 2012 at 12:48  
Blogger William said...


How strange! Many thanks for the clarification. It seems that a statement from the ASA is ever pressing.

15 May 2012 at 13:02  
Blogger martin sewell said...

May I thank and express admiration for those who do not share His Grace's views but nevertheless stand with all of us who assert freedom of speech against the mini-tyrants.

Be assured that most of us would stand by them were the roles reversed.

15 May 2012 at 13:30  
Blogger martin sewell said...

May I thank and express admiration for those who do not share His Grace's views but nevertheless stand with all of us who assert freedom of speech against the mini-tyrants.

Be assured that most of us would stand by them were the roles reversed.

15 May 2012 at 13:30  
Blogger tory boys never grow up said...

The ASA needs to develop some commonsense. The other side of this coin is that ASA receive a constant flurry of complaints about Stonewall and abortion clinics from those wanting to grind their religious and political axes. Of course anyone if they look hard enough can find something that they find is offensive or dishonest in any advert ( my pet gripe is all those buy one get one free adverts – as nothing is free its price is just reduced), but there has to be some threshold set based on what normal people see as acceptable. If the ASA follow up the claims of one vexatious nutter, they have little alternative to do the same for all such nutters. Better that they just send a standard reply, in green ink if necessary, to all the nutters and if they are really rude not even that

15 May 2012 at 13:35  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your Grace -

Given the JGLG's denouncement of the action being taken in their name, Utar would recommend demanding of the ASA who has raised the complaint in there name, be it a rogue member or an unrelated individual.

Anonymity is not a reasonable defence in this instance.


15 May 2012 at 13:55  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The complaint to the ASA is beginning to look like a conspiracy by people impersonating the JGLG in order to conceal their identities.

Anyway, it is not the C4M advertisement that has caused the offence. It is His Grace's ministry, the daily bread that he serves to his readers and communicants.

The homophobic charge is a front. Nothing but a cowardly attempt to ruin and bully him into retirement.

His Grace recently drew our attention to the plight of a Lay Reader who had lost his licence to preach. Who would have thought that so soon afterwards the Archbishop himself would be required to justify the thunder from his pulpit.

15 May 2012 at 14:01  
Blogger Dr Evil said...

Have you e mailed Jack of Kent for his opinion? Might be worthb a try.

15 May 2012 at 14:09  
Blogger Preacher said...

So let's get this straight folks.
The ASA are a bunch of hot air blimps with big plans & lots of Gold Braid on their caps. Pretending to be around the world yachtsman, but only on the local pond. ROFL, Carry On Admiral!.

15 May 2012 at 14:23  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Old Ernst was intrigued by the ASA so visited their site.

I was greeted with the strap line ..50 years - Legal Decent Honest and Truthful.

We may find out shortly if they can live up to this claim as they do not appear to be able to discern between 'A bona fide complaint from an specific organisation and a bunch of Vexatious Complainers who are not from or have authority to complain on it's behalf'..i.e Ernst is a member of The Labour Party (Never!) but he and 7 other members complain to ASA and it is taken up as a formal complaint by The Labour Party..On what basis of authority have we (the 8) therefore to complain and for it to be recognised and acted on.
Was the complaint done on official letter headed paper that alluded to this organisation and their positions in the organisation to show they had authority to action this, on it's behalf?..Is this an official statement of concern and complaint from The Labour Party and would it agree with this if contacted formally, prior to sending latters to the 'supposed' abuser of the code.

Questions need to be asked and answered by ASA..PRONTO!


15 May 2012 at 14:43  
Blogger Pétrus said...

The English language is a fine thing. When one has mastered it then it allows such wonderful comments as "smouldering faggots".

I would like to invoice His Grace for a new keyboard as mine has coffee on it. Where can I send the invoice?

15 May 2012 at 15:00  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...


Strap line from JGLG .


Perhaps they should be asking ASA the very questions Ernst has suggested to ascertain who exactly these complainers are and being notified specifically as bringing their organisation into public disrepute and by what authority the ASA recognised from this contact and acted upon..Someone it seems is telling porkies and all decent folk would like some answers ASAP.

kol tuv ve lech l'shalom


15 May 2012 at 15:03  
Blogger Derek said...

I see that according to Ed West, the National Secular Society is also supporting His Grace.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

15 May 2012 at 16:14  
Blogger Bluepanic said...

You can't defend free speech by labelling your opponents 'bigots' and 'extremists'


15 May 2012 at 16:31  
Blogger Oswin said...

JGLG @ 11:38 & elsewhere: Thank you for your prompt response and clarification.

Sorry about all the emails, but I'm sure you understand our concern; as you must too, be equally concerned at the misuse/misrepresentation of your name/title etc.

Doubtless His Grace will keep you informed of any further developments.

Again, many thanks.

15 May 2012 at 16:35  
Blogger Oswin said...

Has Your Grace considered a plot rather closer to home?

I mean, you have rather erred towards UKIP of late. 'Creatures of the Night' or similar, out to 'spike your guns' perhaps?

15 May 2012 at 16:44  
Blogger William said...

Utar Is right. If the individuals are prepared to lie about the organisation they profess to represent, then surely that calls into question the genuine nature of their complaint.

15 May 2012 at 16:59  
Blogger Oswin said...

William: it is as you say.

Now that the fraudulent use of JGLG's authority has been exposed, then it would wise for the ASA to withdraw. Supposing, that is, they are 'on the ball' and not hidebound by their own bureaucracy. If they have any sense they'll drop it like a hot brick!

15 May 2012 at 17:24  
Blogger Oswin said...

Perhaps now we might all of us complain directly to the ASA site, citing the recent revelations from JGLG; after all, the ASA site is very much geared towards 'complaint' - it could not be easier!

I'm off now, to 'do my bit' Tally-ho; have-at-them!!

15 May 2012 at 17:40  
Blogger William said...

Indeed Oswin. But even if the complaints were genuine, I still don't understand what business the ASA has in singling out Cranmer to provide all that information about the advertisement. It is deeply sinister to me.

15 May 2012 at 17:47  
Blogger Flossie said...

There is a simple answer to that, William. If the ASA is as politically motivated as they appear to be under Lord Smith, they - and I suspect most gay activists - would like to close this site down.

Cranmer is a major threat to them, with his with his thoughtful, careful and entirely reasonable,(and popular!) posts. If he was a ranting right-wing bigot they probably wouldn't bother. But he is influential; he has been known to change hearts and minds. A thorn in their flesh, in other words.

15 May 2012 at 18:03  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...


The Jewish Gay and Lesbian Group appear to have no such denial upon their website. Can anyone assist? Or have they retracted their denial?

15 May 2012 at 18:09  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...


They have 'updated' their denial. Anyone got a screenshot of their original denial and rebuttal?

15 May 2012 at 18:12  
Blogger Pubcrawler said...

At 18.11 BST, the JGLG site carries this:


15 May 2012 at 18:12  
Blogger William said...

If that is true Flossie then one would hope that a question might be raised in the House to clarify what the exact purpose of the ASA is. It certainly doesn't appear to be doing "exactly what it says on the tin" at the moment, which is rather unfortunate for an advertising standards authority!

15 May 2012 at 18:17  
Blogger Oswin said...

William @ 17:47: I agree. Best though, to first remove the threat, before digging further.

The ASA site 'complaints' procedure is fairly straight forward. Where they ask for info' regarding the 'advertisement' I merely substituted (in the box provided) 'not ad' but ''unfair attack'' and cited the ASA themselves, as the perpetrators etc. It's all a bit tedious, but hey.

What harm can it do, to show 'em the whip; albeit it ever so 'politely'?

I reckon a couple of dozen 'complaints' might just get passed 'upstairs' to those decide stuff.

We are private individuals, and His Grace has not asked us act upon any request of his own. We do what we can etc.

15 May 2012 at 18:26  
Blogger Oswin said...

It remains, that the 'individual' member of the JGLG appears to have falsely recorded his/her complaint, as being part of, or representing, an organisation; and NOT as an individul. Either that, or the ASA made a mistake in determining him/her as being so.

15 May 2012 at 18:50  
Blogger William said...


Ernst copied the original denial by JGLG in his comment at 15:03

15 May 2012 at 18:51  
Blogger Ruari said...

Put crawler - I was going to point out the semantics of their denial. They beat me to it!

15 May 2012 at 18:58  
Blogger William said...

So someone (who may or may not represent JGLG) makes a complaint about the legality of an advertisement in a magazine and the ASA sends various requests to Cranmer asking him to justify an advertisement on his blog. Makes perfect sense to me.

15 May 2012 at 19:10  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Mr William,

The magazine may well have been asked to respond to the complaints (one certainly has). His Grace is, however, the only blog which has been asked to do so.

15 May 2012 at 19:21  
Blogger Tim said...

I see the ASA have a statement up on their website about denunciations by right thinking people on this issue. Personally I am offended by their using the words coalition for marriage on their site.

Oh no, now I've gone and said it. I shall expect the storm troopers tomorrow at dawn.

15 May 2012 at 19:29  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

ASA statement on Coalition for Marriage ads

We would like to clarify that the fact that we are investigating complaints about ads by the Coalition for Marriage does not mean we will necessarily ‘uphold’ them, leading to the ad being banned.

One would expect that to ban the ad would require a meeting of the full soviet...

15 May 2012 at 19:44  
Blogger FrankFisher said...

ASA now appear to be simultaneously back-peddling and arse-covering - a nice trick if you can do it - I'd say Your Grace has neatly spiked their guns.

15 May 2012 at 20:08  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Chin up dutchlionfrans1953. The Inspector can detect the definite smell of freedom in the air. It’s ours for the taking, all we have to do is fight for it.

Inspector greatly impressed with communications as of late. Jolly good show chaps – there’s hope yet...

15 May 2012 at 21:46  
Blogger Flossie said...

Well this takes the biscuit! The Daily Mail has now taken up this story, from which we read that 'We (the ASA) have long found it useful to ask, in confidence, publishers of ads subject to ‘offence’ complaints for their views, because they can give us a valuable insight into whether or not their readers are likely to be offended'.

So there you have it, Your Grace. They are only persecuting you in the interests of gaining 'insight'.

I bet you are relieved at that!

15 May 2012 at 22:08  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Your Grace,
Hang on a minute, things are getting a bit out of hand.
On the Mundabar Blog, he calls you a 'well-known XVI century heretic'.
Dash it all, thats a bit much.

15 May 2012 at 23:29  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

I think we should all hold off doing anything and await the ASA response to Dr Cranmer's very reasonable requests for clarification.

It should be very amusing. Don't spoil the fun just yet by frightening them off!

Slowly,slowly, catchyee monkee, as me dad, God rest his soul, used to say.

16 May 2012 at 00:19  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Showing God's love and grace whilst standing against your enemy is not easy.. but that's our calling I suppose. I do think His Grace is right to respond with a nice hint of derision, for it this ASA action is worthy of it. Hopefully, they will see just how ridiculous they are being and quickly whack this enquiry on the head! God be with His Grace!

16 May 2012 at 01:59  
Blogger Houseman said...

Permit me to draw Your Grace's
attention to paragraph 2.12 on
page 9 of HMG's own consultation
document on same-sex marriage:

"We are also aware that the
doctrines of many faiths hold the
view that marriage can only be
between a man and a woman, and
this belief is contained within
the teachings of their faith.

We are clear that no one should
face successful legal action for
hate speech or discrimination if
they preach their belief that marriage should only be
between a man and a woman

Perhaps Your Grace would care to
point out to the ASA that such a
noble ideal ought at least to be
permitted to survive the
consultation stage.

The document in question may be viewed here:

16 May 2012 at 03:37  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Flossie: "Well this takes the biscuit! The Daily Mail has now taken up this story [...]"

Ha. Excellent! I like it when a bit of people pressure puts a shot over the bows of an unsuspecting bureaucratic organisation used to calling the shots.

16 May 2012 at 05:56  
Blogger Flossie said...

The ASA's statement:

The ASA’s decision to investigate complaints about a series of ads by the Coalition for Marriage that are appearing in the press and online has prompted some comment in the media, the blogosphere and in other social media. We would like to clarify that the fact that we are investigating the complaints does not mean we will necessarily ‘uphold’ them, leading to the ad being banned. We are not at that decision-making stage yet and will, as always, take into account the responses we receive. The right of advertisers responsibly to express their views will undoubtedly be an important factor in our assessment of whether the ads are likely to cause serious or widespread offence. We are also looking at whether the ads are misleading.

One of the bloggers on whose blog the ads appeared has raised concerns about us contacting him as part of our investigation. We have long found it useful to ask, in confidence, publishers of ads subject to ‘offence’ complaints for their views, because they can give us a valuable insight into whether or not their readers are likely to be offended. They are not the subject of our investigation, as we have made clear to them in this case, and they are not compelled to respond. Many of the adjudications published on our websites bear that out. Here are examples of ASA rulings where publishers have responded and we have agreed with them that the ads under investigation were acceptable, where some have regretted publishing the ad in question and where the publisher has declined to comment.

We cannot comment further on our ongoing investigation before we reach a decision, but we will very carefully assess the issues at hand before we publish our findings.

16 May 2012 at 07:09  
Blogger Flossie said...

They have supplied a couple of links, so here is the link to the above:

(Sorry, haven't mastered hyperlinking)

16 May 2012 at 07:11  
Blogger Philip Wolgang Bulgakov said...


As you know, christians have historically made smouldering faggots of those who dissent...

Your namesake was himself made a smouldering faggot for his crimes.

Of course, no authority will ever seek to silence you with fire for standing up for what you believe. On paper, at least, the ASA appear to be no match for your wit.

Let us all give thanks then, to those pesky liberal attitudes. But for them, speaking our minds may result in a truly horrific end.

19 May 2012 at 08:28  
Blogger Naomi King said...

PROV 3:1 My son, forget not my law; but let thine heart keep my commandments:

PROV 3:2 For length of days, and long life, and peace, shall they add to thee.

PROV 3:3 Let not mercy and truth forsake thee: bind them about thy neck; write them upon the table of thine heart:

PROV 3:4 So shalt thou find favour and good understanding in the sight of God and man.

PROV 3:5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

PROV 3:6 In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.

PROV 3:7 Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil.

PROV 3:8 It shall be health to thy navel, and marrow to thy bones.

PROV 3:9 Honour the LORD with thy substance, and with the firstfruits of all thine increase:

PROV 3:10 So shall thy barns be filled with plenty, and thy presses shall burst out with new wine.

PROV 3:11 My son, despise not the chastening of the LORD; neither be weary of his correction:

PROV 3:12 For whom the LORD loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

PROV 3:13 Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, and the man that getteth understanding.

PROV 3:35 The wise shall inherit glory: but shame shall be the promotion of fools.

PROV 8:32 Now therefore hearken unto me, O ye children: for blessed are they that keep my ways.

PROV 8:33 Hear instruction, and be wise, and refuse it not.

PROV 8:34 Blessed is the man that heareth me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at the posts of my doors.

PROV 8:35 For whoso findeth me findeth life, and shall obtain favour of the LORD.

PROV 8:36 But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death.

PROV 9:6 Forsake the foolish, and live; and go in the way of understanding.

PROV 9:7 He that reproveth a scorner getteth to himself shame: and he that rebuketh a wicked man getteth himself a blot.

PROV 9:8 Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.

PROV 9:9 Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be yet wiser: teach a just man, and he will increase in learning.

PROV 9:10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.

PROV 10:22 The blessing of the LORD, it maketh rich, and he addeth no sorrow with it.

19 May 2012 at 19:57  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older