Tuesday, August 13, 2013

How would you like your Lamb of God, sir? Perfectly presented or on the bloody side?

From Brother Ivo:

So, you are stood in this trench next to a terrified 17-year-old who enlisted under-age for a bit of excitement and is probably going to be dead or maimed within the next three months. He looks at you in your Holy Joe dog collar with some disdain, but you need to break the ice somehow and you guess he is dying for a fag. You reach into your pocket and there is a packet of an addictive drug that may well kill him with cancer in 30 years, but maybe that doesn't matter so much as he needs to survive the next hour, and a fag might calm him down. You might even get to talk, so ask yourself the age-old question: "What the fuck would Jesus do?" The latter is, of course a modern rendition of what oft was thought but ne'er so well expressed in times of crisis.

That was all nearly a century ago, yet things do not change much.

Brother Ivo is blessed with a solid faith. This is a fact rather than a virtue and, put another way, only testifies to his good fortune that in his life to date he has yet to face any challenge to his Christianity that has not and, please God, cannot be resolved by aligning his life practices better with the teachings of Jesus. He is probably a weakling on whom the merciful Lord has not leaned too heavily.

That is absolutely not to say that he is a good person, still less a perfect Christian, for "If only you knew.." Yet God knows, and so far He has allowed Brother Ivo's faith to ride the challenges that life throws at everyone of us and hitherto there is no part of Brother Ivo's experience that has placed his faith in jeopardy. He has never been in the trenches.

He has had an easier ride than many, and is intensely aware that of those to whom much has been given, much is required. Happily, the worst he endures at present is some robust challenges from some of His Grace's communicants: unlike David Cameron, whom he sometimes criticises, his faith has not had to contend with the serious illness and death of a much-loved child, neither has he had to follow His Grace into the flames, so he is alert to the view that all our attempts at a Christian life both vary and are measured out in a variety of circumstances.

Few know the nature and variety of that challenge better than our clergy, both male and female, as they encounter fractured lives and feeble faiths today, with all the confused conflict between theological theorising and ministering to broken humanity. Sometimes that humanity needs a touch of the human before it is ready for the enormity of the divine.

It is from that perspective that Brother Ivo is able the cut a little slack in the debate about the Cambridgeshire vicar, the Rev'd Alice Goodman, who sports that sign on the back of her car - WTFWJD. Brother Alexander reflected on its significance recently and concluded that this was linked to her unreliable gender and the liberal hegemony. Improbably, Brother Alexander probably reached this intellectual position via another ancient chain of thought which owed more to that of the metaphysical thought of Greece than that of the more practical rabbinical traditions of Israel.

Put another way, those conclusions owed more to the intellectualism of Paul than the more practical life experiences of the Disciple-Apostles, especially the fishermen who might have done their share of cursing over rough seas and broken nets.

Paul, however, was blessed through his birth at Tarsus with early exposure to the wider cosmopolitan world than the more homely provincial Galileans. He had sat at the feet of the great Jewish scholar Gamaliel and, until reality in the form of the risen Christ hit him, had managed to reason himself to an understanding 180 degrees in the wrong direction when grappling with that vexed question "Who was Jesus Christ?" - which others then and now might render in saltier form.

Paul reasoned it wrong, yet his philosophical talents were not wasted as he eventually found himself sent on missionary journeys into the world of both Athens and Rome to render the teachings of an obscure Jew comprehensible to the more sophisticated classical world which proved an unlikely partner in world evangelisation.

Reason didn't cut it: he did not reason himself to faith; indeed, left to that particular device - reason - he would have been lost. Only the bursting in on his self-satisfied certainties by the living Christ was able to turn him around. Without such inconceivable good (ie redemptive) fortune, Paul would have remained a persecuting, stiff-necked intellectual who never risked beatings, stonings, ship wreck or execution, and never in those horrible experiences was challenged by the entirely human framing of the question "What the fuck would Jesus do?" - to which the correct answer is, of course, "Carry on preaching the Gospel of Salvation unto death."

Within the bumper sticker debate we have heard contributions of what this 'truly' means, so here is Brother Ivo's two penn'orth for which some will not give a fig (is that a euphemism?).

It is all about the tension between Athens and Jerusalem, Judaea and Rome, Cambridge and Calcutta.

How would you like your Lamb of God, sir? Perfectly presented or on the bloody side?

When one talks of a Messiah who is both Man and God, one is inexorably drawn into that tension. One can speak the metaphysical language of Greece with which Paul was especially familiar: it is the language of transcendent perfection, purity, and reason. There is assuredly truth within that language, practice and example by which one tries to describe what is going on in the mind of the consubstantial, co-eternal God who makes 'spotless oblation' - but the restrained linguistic analyses of the Oxbridge College does does not always hit the spot in the Dog and Duck or the inner-city housing estate where the theological dialect may need to be rooted in a much earthier reality. They wouldn't know an ontological entity if it bit them.

In that environment, more akin to the trenches than the theological college, it may not be the ethereal noli me tangere Christ that makes contact in crisis, but rather he of the sweaty feet; the friend of the swearing Peter under pressure in the Palace courtyard; the gasping, naked, bleeding failure whose nailed-up cadaver was supposed to be a warning, not an inspiration.

Christians will always be in tension over this. If one regards Christ from one perspective only, especially that of transcendance, one is unlikely to see the full picture, which is why such controversies can also be paradoxical. They can be damaging - an invitation to rant, and utterly futile. Or they can invite us to examine the fullness and complexity of faith in a more rounded way.

There is much beauty in the quietness of the Christian altar, whether in its simplicity within the non-conformist tradition, or the white-laced altar cloth incarnation of those higher up the candle.

Yet both are light years away from the bloody execution-bloc altars of the Temple which Jesus knew. They are are also significantly removed from the table of the Upper Room, or perhaps some of the other environments where Peter and Paul broke bread and shared wine.

The building of our Gothic cathedrals, our carefully ordered and negotiated liturgies or the composing of complex music which accompanies our worship, were almost certainly never the answers offered by Peter or Paul to the WTFWJD question.

We have not exactly stayed with our origins in any of this. Every generation is challenged and responds as it is, where it is. Our Living God enters relationships on a daily basis, and the agents of challenge will never be of our choosing and may not be heard or recognised by all. Only Paul saw the light on the Damascus road and heard his individual call. He did, however, respond to it, teach from it and live out its consequences, often upsetting friend and foe alike in the process.

So, one perhaps ought to be at least a little guarded in taking offence at the Rev'd Goodman's rather opaque bumper sticker, and certainly not extrapolate from this to wider questions of women's ministry. Many women have an experience of bringing new life in the midst of pain, blood, travail and tears: in that reality there is often uninhibitted language. Perhaps given such experiences we should not be surprised that they sometimes bring a new yet no less Christ-driven response in their outreach to those estranged or wholly ignorant of Jesus.

Some of our ministers will be and ought to be quiet, reflective, and, to a degree, other worldly. They will stand in our midst to challenge us all to be better than we are. They can and should teach us not to be conformed to the ways of this world. Yet alongside them we do also need those of a more recognisably human character of whom the Rev'd Geoffrey Studdart Kennedy was a perfect example.

It was he who handed out the cigarettes and kept a disillusioned soldiery in touch with God in those most challenging of circumstances. He was the much loved priest who shared trench life with the ordinary soldiers in the First World War and whose trade mark tool of outreach was the proffered cigarette. His ordinary humanity touched so many lives that the streets were lined with old soldiers at his funeral.

One of them stepped forward and laid a packet of Woodbines on the coffin. That would probably be regarded as wrong on many levels today - an impious offering of grave goods coupled with a bad public health message.

Yet in a curious way it was also a holy act: a remembrance of that through which Christ touched the lives of many in the midst of unimaginable horror. The shared cigarette was the means by which those in extremis were able to allow themselves to engage with the bigger picture, even as they railed and doubtless swore at the reality in which they found themselves.

Sometimes, like Woodbine Willie, our clergy have to get a little grubby and be in places far worse than Brother Ivo ever visits. They may be sharing geographically grim places or states of mind: all too often neither is a place of comfort. They may not seem proximate to those priests whose ministry is undertaken in more cerebral or refined cicumstances but they are the salt without which Christian ministry is far removed from engagement with the real world. Jesus himself seemed much more at home with the outcast than the Temple habitués.

So, if our clergy present as outside the common spectrum of expectation, we all ought perhaps to be slow to complain, especially those who love the language of traditional hymns such as God moves in a mysterious way His wonders to perform.

Brother Ivo is the Patron Saint of lawyers.


Blogger G. Tingey said...

"Belief without any evidence"
There ARE atheists in foxholes .... ( & trenches)

13 August 2013 at 09:31  
Blogger William Lewis said...

Thank you for shedding some light on the saltiness brother Ivo. A great post.

13 August 2013 at 09:39  
Blogger The Explorer said...

G Tingey:

Please give the evidence that belief without any evidence applies to all those who have faith.

Would you apply that definition to the faith of, say, John Lennox, William Lane Craig, C S Lewis, or Charles Colson?

13 August 2013 at 09:50  
Blogger Albert said...

Brother Ivo,

A nice post. The bumper sticker is crass, but probably tells us little about women's ordination. Male clergy do crass things too.

The building of our Gothic cathedrals, our carefully ordered and negotiated liturgies or the composing of complex music which accompanies our worship, were almost certainly never the answers offered by Peter or Paul to the WTFWJD question.

Why do you add the word "almost" to "certainly"?! Although that doesn't help us to engage in the question of whether they would have approved of these things. The opportunity to see them as an answer to the question didn't really arise in their day.

13 August 2013 at 10:23  
Blogger Albert said...


There ARE atheists in foxholes .... ( & trenches)

You're right. A WWII soldier told me that flat out. But he said that when a man is dying on the battlefield, he cries either for God or his mother. One of these has at least an outside chance of being able to do something about the predicament. But the cry to the mother, although understandable and beyond criticism, is an emotion and irrational response.

I wonder which cry atheists make on the whole.

13 August 2013 at 10:26  
Blogger David Hussell said...

Straying into the debate over whether to ordain females as priests was just plain irrelevant, silly, insulting even.

I take the point that like Woodbine Willy, the much loved WW1 padre, we have to learn how to reach people using plain language and by using genuine gestures, that make sense to them. Flowery language , athough beloved of theologians, is of little use for spreading the Gospel. However sermons are, in my experience, generally delivered in plain language, even from Rowan Williams !

But I am not convinced that , in our culture, England, resorting to vulgar language will work. It smacks of trendiness, showmanship , insincerity and well, desperation. However I am may be wrong and , as ever, the proof is in the pudding.

Now knowing these largely middle class villages just outside Cambridge as well as I do, I doubt whether this is the sort of language that will appeal. They are not exactly inner city slum areas, although there may well be spots of poverty and need tucked away within them. And again I may be entirely wrong.

Indeed I would be interested to be told that this technique for communication, if this is what it is, has worked and that people have been brought to Christ by this approach. We are after all on the same side and this is a question about technique, how to communicate, not the objective, which is shared.

13 August 2013 at 10:59  
Blogger Irene's Daughter said...

Even the great intellectual Paul knew that in order to reach people for Christ he had to walk with them.

I am become all things to all men, that I may by all means save some.
And I do all things for the gospel’s sake, that I may be a joint partaker thereof.
1 Corinthians 9:22-23

But I suspect that in his walk he would have highlighted the difference between following Jesus and continuing on their current paths. I'm not really sure that using the 'f' word or its ancient Greek counterparts would have been showing that difference. The difference would have been in walking with them and not using it.

But then, like Brother Ivo I have not been in a situation where it has been called for. Maybe if such a situation occurs I would do the same.

13 August 2013 at 11:39  
Blogger Demetrius said...

Well, well, today is Jeremy Taylor day and it is around the four hundredth anniversary of his birth. I have posted accordingly. Where in hell where you?

13 August 2013 at 11:40  
Blogger Albert said...


Well, well, today is Jeremy Taylor day and it is around the four hundredth anniversary of his birth. I have posted accordingly. Where in hell where you?

It's a little harsh to assume Jeremy Taylor must be in hell - even if he was a Protestant.

13 August 2013 at 11:58  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

A trifle worrying that the vicaress models herself on Dick Emery.

13 August 2013 at 12:05  
Blogger Irene's Daughter said...

I was trying to say that Christians should be a light in this dark world. To my simple mind Alice Goodman's sticker is an extension of the darkness.

Far better to ask the question 'Father, what do You want me to do in this situation?' - and then to do it!

13 August 2013 at 12:05  
Blogger Preacher said...

Brilliant Brother Ivo.
I believe it's a case of horses for courses, or as Paul said "Be all things to all men".
The Lord in His wisdom gave us a wide spectrum of believers & we should always work with our strengths not try to be something we clearly are not.
Armies have many divisions that cover different jobs & the catering corps are as important as the trooper as "An army marches on its stomach!".
It's not just the clergy that the Lord commissioned either. All believers should reach out to others with the gospel. In their own way, with their own words & their own culture. The blessing of seeing another soul saved is a joyful tonic for any Christian & often proves contagious to others to follow suit.

13 August 2013 at 12:05  
Blogger Lucy Mullen said...

@ Albert.
Do you think it would be appropriate if I, an Anglican were to go on a Roman Catholic site and suggest, albeit with a degree of humour, that one or two of their more admired Popes might now be in Hell for heretical beliefs? Or would you consider it an abuse of hospitality?

13 August 2013 at 12:08  
Blogger Albert said...


That's a little humourless. I did the opposite - albeit that I was deliberately misinterpreting a previous comment. Actually, Jeremy Taylor is someone I admire in many ways.

13 August 2013 at 12:13  
Blogger Gnostic said...

Brother Ivo,

You have vindicated my comment on the WTFWJD post. While I departed the church some decades ago (although I adhere to my Christian upbringing) it is encouraging that there are common sense, worldly wise Christians like yourself and His Grace at large in the world. That is a reason to have faith in itself. Even agnostics have to believe in something. :0)

13 August 2013 at 12:44  
Blogger Ros V said...

Something terrible has happened to a man in Scotland. We must all write to our MPs and protest. Write to Alex Salmond, write to the newspapers as well. Do not sit back and take this as normal because it is not.
EDINBURGH, Scotland, August 9, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Court of
Session in Edinburgh has fined a Scottish man £40,000 ($62,020 U.S.) in damages after he sent a message on Twitter calling a lesbian same-sex "marriage" advocate "a danger to children."
Lesbian Jaye Richards-Hill sued David Shuttleton, an antiques dealer from Barrhead, near Glasgow, for defamation because of his remarks about her homosexual activism.

> Shuttleton reportedly also sent messages to First Minister Alex Salmond and Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon relating his concerns about Richards-Hill, a teacher and adviser to Education Secretary Mike Russell,
Calling people who disagree with his anti-gay campaign [is it an ani=ti-gay campaign or an anti-gay-extremism campaign?]"normalphobes,"
Shuttleton told the Daily Record, "It’s an absolute scandal that homosexuals have got such power in our community. It’s an absolutely scandalous abuse of our laws."
> While the huge award may set a precedent in cases involving alleged "homophobia" in Scotland, Shuttleton stated that he will challenge the ruling, claiming that the judgment came "by default," because he failed to file his defense properly.
> "It's just a technicality,” Shuttleton said. “I put my defense in the wrong format so I’ve been working on it and it’s finished, but it’s just the case went through in the meantime.”
> The Scottish media are labeling Shuttleton a "delusional fool," "bigot," "lunatic," and "Christian fanatic racist homophobe." But news sources portray Richards-Hill as a "respected parent and teacher" who is a "leading campaigner for marriage rights for gay couples."
>[NB An irrational demand is described as a "right"]
> Richards-Hill reportedly "married" her lesbian sex partner Ruth in South Africa after staging a mock wedding during a same-sex "marriage"
> demonstration at the Scottish Parliament last year.
> She had no comment on the court decision.
> Contact:
> First Minister Alex Salmond
> Leader of the Scottish National Party
> Constituency Office
> 84 North Street Inverurie Aberdeenshire AB51 4QX
> Phone: 01467 670070
> Fax: 01779 474460
> Email: http://www.snp.org/email/236/field_person_email
> Education Secretary Mike Russell
> Constituency Office
> 81 Argyll Street, Dunoon, Argyll PA23 7DH
> Phone: 01369 702011
> Email: Michael.Russell.msp@scottish.parliament.uk

13 August 2013 at 13:08  
Blogger meema said...

Speaking from an American perspective and, more importantly, a mature Christian, a bit of history, for me, brings the bigger picture into focus.

The WWJD campaign was launched by a youth minister, Dan Seaborn, in Holland, Michigan in the 1990s. It was specifically aimed at Christian teens. The goal was implemented by stamping the WWJD logo into rubber bracelets that the kids wore to remind them that their choices should reflect what they had been taught about expectations for Christian behavior. Later another campaign added the bracelets with the acronym FROG–Fully Rely On God–as the response to WWJD.

Even when the WWJD phenomenon was all over the place, even in schools, which could not happen in today’s world, less than twenty years hence, there was something that seemed a bit shallow to me. But I understood the warfare involved. I knew then, as I know now, that we struggle against dark principalities for the hearts and souls of our young. They are pulled away from the faith by the glitter that is not gold. Thus, we have converted our worship service to shout louder than the siren call of the world in hopes of keeping the youth in the church with screeching, thumping, wailing rock and roll noise in place of reverent music. To make it more comfortable we have also replaced dignity with casual dress, casual language, even removing symbols like the cross from the sanctuary–all efforts to modernize and glam up Christianity in order to keep our young.

In effect, it seems to me that, in our sincere efforts to stay relevant and attractive we have simply compromised with the Devil. Vance Havner put it this way, “The devil is not persecuting Christianity nowadays – he is professing it.”

So, WWJD? I think the better question is, WGG - What Grieves God? If we do not know the answer to that we cannot begin to presume what He would do.

13 August 2013 at 13:52  
Blogger Naomi King said...

What an ugly picture the "Feminised" Church of England looks.

13 August 2013 at 14:20  
Blogger David Hussell said...


Thank you for that perspective and the wise conclusion.


To blame this bumper sticker vulgarity on a feminized Church is just plain daft. A man could have done this, especially I suspect an American man. Albert has it about right I think. The bumper sticker is crass but in no way reflects on female ordination. And I say that as an Anglican who is still pondering and questioning the theology behind female ordination.

This sticker was best left on the other side of the Atlantic. It is , in my opinion, inappropriate here. Knowing Cambridge and its surrounding villages well I doubt whether it is a useful and appropriate tool of communication for filling the churches and bringing people nearer to God, but as I said earlier, I may be wrong. Indeed I would be delighted to be wrong. But to say that this is a result of female ordination has no sense in it. Indeed to say that such a Church presents an "ugly picture" is not just a step too far, but downright insulting in fact.

13 August 2013 at 15:26  
Blogger ukFred said...

Unfortunately, this person does not give Scripture the final authority in her life, or she would take heed of Ephesians 5:4 which tells us "nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving."

What does take priority in her life, being a talking point because of her bumper sticker or obeying Scripture.

13 August 2013 at 16:36  
Blogger Peter D said...

Brother Ivo

Food for thought.

Look at the car she's driving! Hardly fit for the trenches, is it? Go about in an old jalopy on the streets of Brixton or Peckham handing out food parcels and maybe, just maybe, I'd agree with you. I see no harm in priests cussing anyways. I've known many who have. But driving around the countryside of Cambridgeshire in a flashy red convertible with this on her rear?

Nah, sorry. It don't cut it.

13 August 2013 at 16:38  
Blogger David Hussell said...

I see that Naomi has not yet seen fit to do the decent thing and offer an apology, mainly to the vicar, specifically, but also to the Anglican Church, generally.

Peter D.

A correction, comprising facts, throughly boring to most visitors to this site, but necessary to identify factual errors. A Subaru Legacy is a mid-sized saloon car of Japanese origin. Subaru are a specialized marque featuring a low slung "boxer" type engine and permanent 4WD, specialised technology much beloved by rally types, like me,. But certainly they are not particularly popular, stylish or considered smart or sexy in car terms in the UK. In fact they are generally plain and functional both inside and outside. The Legacy range features saloons and estate cars but not convertibles.

Do I sense an intemperate atmosphere developing around this item ?

13 August 2013 at 17:29  
Blogger clive holland said...

Who,pray, is Jeremy Taylor? I think we should be told.

13 August 2013 at 17:37  
Blogger Naomi King said...


I do not see any apology is required :-

1COR 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

1COR 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

13 August 2013 at 17:39  
Blogger Damian said...

On the previous post the headline was;

Christians are being slaughtered by Wahhabi Islamists all over the world:

I thought it might be interesting to join this post with the previous post and ask wtfwjd?

13 August 2013 at 18:01  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

13 August 2013 at 18:08  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Consider this a warning.

13 August 2013 at 18:11  
Blogger Peter D said...

Brother David

Thank you for the factual corrections. I stand corrected.

Of course opinions vary on the "luxurious Legacy range" currently retailing (with VAT) from between £26k to £30k. So hardly In fact they are not considered either "plain and functional both inside and outside" by their owners.

No matter my substantive point stands. Here's the vicar's 'Who am I to Judge? reply to her critics:

“ ... anyone who thinks it is inappropriate should get out a little more ... You want to say ‘for heaven’s sake - get a life.’”

Interestingly, the Rev David Thompson, director of the Centre for Advanced Religious and Theological Studies, said: “I think that it is rather childish myself, but it’s hardly a hanging matter. If only the initials are there, probably most people would not understand them anyway."
Which, if true rather defeats their purpose.

Who was publically most critical? You can guess it - a Muslim! Cambridge University academic Tim Winter, a lecturer is Islamic studies in the Faculty of Divinity, who is a Muslim, said:.

“I think Christians might not be offended these days" a sharp observation about our standards, adding: "Muslims will find it deeply distasteful. We do not like to see the name of God’s prophets associated in any way with obscenity.”

So there we have it. Christians think it okay to use the F word in the same sentence as the Son of God. Muslims, who regard Jesus as a Prophet would take offence.

We live in a funny, fucked up world, what?

13 August 2013 at 18:14  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Inspector you appear to have been censored.

13 August 2013 at 18:14  
Blogger David Hussell said...


Thank you for your response.

I understand your theological position and interpretation of those passages. That is your position and you are entitled to take it. I venture not into that area.

But it hardly justifies your unkind words, insulting ones in my opinion. Especially as there does not appear to any strong causal relationship between her sex and ordination and her perhaps, unwise use of the offending bumper sticker. Any person, of any sex, ordained or otherwise, could have bought and displayed that silly sticker. Or have you uncovered a strong correlation, statistically valid, between the use of such bumper stickers and, female, ordained persons ? And if you could prove that highly unlikely causal relationship, how does that feed into making a Church "ugly", whatever that rash broadside of a statement means. And on an Anglican website, Anglicanism being a broad denomination containing few believers who would embrace your theological position. I really see no sense in your outburst. It represents selfish bad manners. Sadly it brings discredit onto your theological position, which many respect as adhering, strictly, to tradition. You are in a very silly position indeed.
I rest my case.
Goodbye Naomi.

13 August 2013 at 18:21  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Indeed Mrs King. One will really have to contemplate his future on this site. If he has one, that is !

In the meantime, will leave you all to it..

Good evening.

13 August 2013 at 18:25  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

I think Jesus would say "OVSBST- IG -PTSHAW".

("Oy Vey,Stop being so Trivial..I'm god. Pass methe Smaltz Herring and Whiskey").

13 August 2013 at 18:27  
Blogger William Lewis said...


It was quite a cunning attempt to sashay over to your pet subject, but unfortunately it meant yet another comment on your pet subject.

13 August 2013 at 18:37  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ Peter D (18:14)—You quote Tim Winter as saying: ‘[Muslims] do not like to see the name of God’s prophets associated in any way with obscenity.’

An odd statement, as there can have been few prophets more obscene than Mohammed. A few examples from the records of his life:

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88. Narrated Ursa: The Prophet wrote the [marriage contract] with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 82, Number 795. Narrated Anas: The Prophet cut off the hands and feet of the men belonging to the tribe of Urainah and did not cauterize [their bleeding limbs] till they died.

Sirah ‘Then the Apostle went out to the market of Medina and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for [the Jews of Qurayzah] and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900.’

13 August 2013 at 18:50  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Don't go Inspector, you are such fun.

13 August 2013 at 18:50  
Blogger Peter D said...

Johnny R

Yes agreed ... but any examples of Mad Mo being obscene about Jesus or using an obscenity in the same sentence?

What would be the chances of Muslims having a sticker saying:


13 August 2013 at 19:12  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Just think how this Blog would be impoverished by the absence of the Inspector or DanJ0.

13 August 2013 at 19:21  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Damian @ 18:01

It would depend on whether you mean Jesus as man, or Jesus as God, which is why I personally find it a muddled question in the first place: not yours, but the one you are quoting.

Jesus as man: there are probably better models (military?/ political?) to follow.

Jesus as God becomes a question of theodicy: why does God allow his own to suffer? It also becomes a question of Providence. What is God's role in history, and where is history headed?

These are huge issues, beyond the ambit of a Blog. An excellent question, nonetheless on YOUR part.

13 August 2013 at 19:33  
Blogger Peter D said...

David K
You do know the vicar is a Reformed Jew who converted to Christianity? According to Avi, that makes her 'avodah zarah' and damned, subject to "rejection and revulsion ... shunned in extremis".

(And do remember when referring to Jesus or His references to His Father, its uppercase 'G' - I've pointed this out to you before, you Jewish troll, you.

You cannot separate the consubstantiality of Jesus as man and God. He was one - both God and man. So when if you ask WWJD it means - what would God as man do?

13 August 2013 at 20:01  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Peter D:

I accept the consubstantiality of Jesus. My problem is with those who don't: the 'Great Moral Teacher' (and no more) school. That is the issue I was trying to get at.

I'm fumbling a bit here - maybe you or Albert can help me - but isn't there a difference between the incarnate Christ and the Second Person of the Trinity? The difference, if you like, between the First Coming, and the Second; or the pre and post Resurrection body?

13 August 2013 at 20:27  
Blogger Albert said...


isn't there a difference between the incarnate Christ and the Second Person of the Trinity?

They are one and the same person albeit in different natures. The difference the natures make is that under each he acts according to the attributes of that nature (or form):

For each form does what is proper to it with the co-operation of the other ; that is the Word performing what appertains to the Word, and the flesh carrying out what appertains to the flesh. One of them sparkles with miracles, the other succumbs to injuries.

And as the Word does not cease to be on an equality with His Father's glory, so the flesh does not forego the nature of our race. For it must again and again be repeated that one and the same is truly Son of God and truly son of man. God in that in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God John 1:l; man in that the Word became flesh and dwelt in us. God in that all things were made by Him , and without Him was nothing made: man in that He was made of a woman, made under law Galatians 4:4 .

The nativity of the flesh was the manifestation of human nature: the childbearing of a virgin is the proof of Divine power. The infancy of a babe is shown in the humbleness of its cradle : the greatness of the Most High is proclaimed by the angels' voices. He whom Herod treacherously endeavours to destroy is like ourselves in our earliest stage : but He whom the Magi delight to worship on their knees is the Lord of all. So too when He came to the baptism of John, His forerunner, lest He should not be known through the veil of flesh which covered His Divinity, the Father's voice thundering from the sky, said, This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased Matthew 3:17 . And thus Him whom the devil's craftiness attacks as man, the ministries of angels serve as God.

To be hungry and thirsty, to be weary, and to sleep, is clearly human: but to satisfy 5,000 men with five loaves, and to bestow on the woman of Samaria living water, droughts of which can secure the drinker from thirsting any more, to walk upon the surface of the sea with feet that do not sink, and to quell the risings of the waves by rebuking the winds, is, without any doubt, Divine. Just as therefore, to pass over many other instances, it is not part of the same nature to be moved to tears of pity for a dead friend, and when the stone that closed the four-days' grave was removed, to raise that same friend to life with a voice of command: or, to hang on the cross, and turning day to night, to make all the elements tremble: or, to be pierced with nails, and yet open the gates of paradise to the robber's faith: so it is not part of the same nature to say, I and the Father are one, and to say, the Father is greater than I. For although in the Lord Jesus Christ God and man is one person, yet the source of the degradation, which is shared by both, is one, and the source of the glory, which is shared by both, is another. For His manhood, which is less than the Father, comes from our side: His Godhead, which is equal to the Father, comes from the Father.

I think CS Lewis is helpful on the specific question when he said that Jesus had not left open the possibility that he was a great moral teacher. I'm not sure though whether I'm really getting at the heart of your question.

13 August 2013 at 20:44  
Blogger Albert said...

Sorry, that long quotation is from Pope St Leo the Great. His famous "Tome".

13 August 2013 at 20:44  
Blogger The Explorer said...


Many thanks for that. I really appreciate the trouble you went to on my behalf. I hope you were able to cut and paste!

Still digesting it, but it seems to me to be addressing the mystery of Christ's dual nature.

My issue is slightly different. I can ask what Socrates would have said/done in a particular situation. I can experience Socrates via Plato. I can know him, but he can't know me; he's dead. It's one-way traffic.

My experience of Christ is of the historical figure, but also of the One to whom I pray daily; whom I encounter through the indwelling Spirit. I don't pray to Socrates.

So when we talk of Christ what do we mean? Christ as he was on Earth? Or Christ as he now is at the right hand of the Father, who shall come again to judge both the quick and the dead?

What would Jesus do? Which Jesus are we talking about? By framing that question I am not seeking to deny anything that Leo said.

13 August 2013 at 21:23  
Blogger Albert said...

It was no problem Explorer - only took a moment of cutting and pasting (and throwing in a few artificial paragraphs to make it easier to read!).

So when we talk of Christ what do we mean? Christ as he was on Earth? Or Christ as he now is at the right hand of the Father, who shall come again to judge both the quick and the dead?

I think that when I'm saying my prayers I am addressing Christ at the right hand of the Father - because that is where he is now. However, he is not a different person who died on the cross (fascinating I think that when Thomas finally meets the risen Christ, he does not say as we were expecting "Now I know you are risen from the dead", but "My Lord and my God" - which seems to me to mean "It really is you Lord who died on the cross"). You can still have devotions to Christ as a baby in the manger or hanging on the cross because this is all one Christ.

What would Jesus do? Which Jesus are we talking about?

Maybe Michael Ramsey has the solution to this when he said "God is Christ and in God there is no unChristlikeness at all." People sometimes try to say that Christ getting angry in the temple was showing his human nature. I think that's wrong. He was revealing his divine anger in his human nature. On the cross, although doing something he could not do in his divine nature, he was nevertheless revealing God's love to us.

So perhaps the issue is not which Christ are we talking about, but at what point (if at all) might Christ have acted thus. So for example, on earth he forgave sins. At the end of time, one and the same Christ will be the judge of sins.

So it's not perhaps a God-Man question, but a "When in the divine dispensation did this happen?" kind of a question. If so, you nailed it when you said:

The difference, if you like, between the First Coming, and the Second

13 August 2013 at 22:03  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

Peter D,

OK, ok, I'll be ecumenical and use the "G" not the "g"... and in the same spirit I'll not discuss the status of a 'reformed' Jew come Christian.

Except to note that, perhaps, this is to do with wanting to gain publicity for a Church which is trying to seem 'relevant' in Britain today, but alas seems to be having a 'dad on the dance floor' affect...

13 August 2013 at 22:06  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

PS- it was technically 'fake Jewish troll'... a bit like naming oneself after a battleship and getting the name wrong. Hum ho, I'm a Jew.

13 August 2013 at 22:08  
Blogger David B said...

Ros V above

Regarding the case you mention above, I have googled it, and it does not seen that the chap has been taken to the cleaners by the courts for taking a stance against SSM, but for openly calling an advocate of SSM a danger to children - which might be legitimately a matter or opinion, in the same sort of way as I might consider a person who pushes Christianity on children to be a danger to them - and there are also reports that he called her a paedophile. With what truth I don't know. Do you?

If I were to call, without evidence or good reason to believe it, some person, male or female, who was running a beach mission, shall we say, a danger to children, then I might expect to be taken to task for it and justify my position.

If, however, I were to call this person a paedophile, without good evidence to back it up, I could not be surprised if I were to be sued and the case to go against me.

The same, I would think, applies in this case.

It is not evidence of persecution of Christians, it is a simple libel, as far as I understand the case. Which seems to have been the view of the court.

As a little aside, I do not in the least wish to say anything unpleasant concerning the all too real persecutions of Christians and others in some predominantly Muslim countries, but I do wonder how many claims of Christian persecution comes from people who wish, for biblical reasons, to have license to beat their kids, or to use prayer instead of medicine for religious reasons - which all too often leads to tragic results.


13 August 2013 at 22:11  
Blogger Albert said...

David B,

Thank you. I've been arguing that same position today. The court was right, as far as I can see. This bit caught my eye though:

I do wonder how many claims of Christian persecution comes from people who wish, for biblical reasons, to have license to beat their kids

I'm just trying to think of an example of that. In fact, outside of the prosperity gospel movement, I don't see much evidence of Christians wanting to use prayer instead of medicine. I certainly don't see evidence of a connection with alleged persecution.

13 August 2013 at 22:16  
Blogger Albert said...


It seems Ros posted the same post on two different threads. Most of the discussion has taken place here:


13 August 2013 at 22:17  
Blogger David B said...

Albert, I was wondering about whether some claims of persecution come from child beaters and child neglectors following some of yesterdays posts, and I have been quite busy today, so have yet to look for examples. I do know that court cases in America have followed neglect, and I think I recall some beatings ones too, where part of the defence has been the issue of freedom of religion.

there have certainly been claims of religious persecution regarding Obamacare.

I take the view that those complaints, and any that may exist concerning the small number of (but still serious to the point of being a matter of life or death regarding the kiddies concerned) is to trivialise the very real examples of genuine religious persecution in some parts of the world.


13 August 2013 at 22:23  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ Damian (18:01)—According to this article on Ekklesia, Jesus preached ‘militant nonviolence’. He wasn’t to know however that, just seven hundred years later, a bloodthirsty prophet would fashion a new religion in his own image. If Jesus were reincarnated today, I like to think He’d be horrified at the loss of innocent Christian life brought about by his well-meaning but naïve gospel of nonviolence and that He’d take up arms against Islam.

13 August 2013 at 22:27  
Blogger Peter D said...

David B
" ... to trivialise the very real examples of genuine religious persecution in some parts of the world."

Then why are you raising it!!!

And you're on the wrong thread too.

13 August 2013 at 22:29  
Blogger David B said...

Roz 5 raised it, and sometimes discussion from one thread pours over to another.


13 August 2013 at 22:59  
Blogger Ros V said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

13 August 2013 at 23:04  
Blogger Peter D said...

Johnny R
"I like to think He’d be horrified at the loss of innocent Christian life brought about by his well-meaning but naïve gospel of nonviolence and that He’d take up arms against Islam."

I'm not sure Jesus actually taught non-violence. There are plenty of verses in the Gospels suggesting otherwise. Certainly the Christian Crusades were based on a different understanding of Scripture, as is the concept of a just war, self defense and capital punishment.

Would Jesus Himself actually take up arms? An interesting question. Well, we're taught when He returns in Glory things will change and could get messy.

Until this time world history isn't going to be an earthly paradise.

13 August 2013 at 23:12  
Blogger Ros V said...

I can't believe that anybody would defend a man being forced to pay £40,000 just for one unwelcome remark about a lesbian. I'm in disbelief here. It is so outrageous.
And here is another example of how unfree society now is in the grip of homosexual hysteria:-

A black American singer has been told he cannot perform at a civil rights commemoration event, why? because he decided he didn't want to be homosexual anymore. This has enraged the militant "gays" because apparently "gays" can't stand "ex-gays".

13 August 2013 at 23:23  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Well I hope Inspector continues posting, this place wouldn't be the same without him. OK he is sexist, racist, homophobic, but we all love him really (:

13 August 2013 at 23:32  
Blogger David B said...

It is strange to attribute to Jesus a doctrine of non-violence if you believe that the Bible is an accurate account of a historical Jesus in the light of Matt 10.34


13 August 2013 at 23:45  
Blogger David B said...

Hannah, I agree with you about the sexism, racism and homophobia, but I find it hard to love anyone with such un-endearing qualities, particularly, I must confess, someone of the same sex as myself.


13 August 2013 at 23:49  
Blogger Peter D said...

David B
You don't understand the difference between 'agape' and 'eros' then!

14 August 2013 at 00:00  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Ross V,

I think there is a difference between, say, having the opinion that same sex couples shouldn't bring up children to leaping to the conclusion that a particular individual is guilty (by definition) of being a child abuser, unwelcome remark or not.

I'd suggest watching 'Jeremy Kyle' for an equally compelling discussion on hetrosexual couples and children :

'am I the mother/father of these children'; 'I DID sleep with someone else but that was during our 'break', which lasted, oh, 3 days.

14 August 2013 at 00:07  
Blogger David B said...

Yes I do, Peter


14 August 2013 at 00:08  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi David B,

I am a great believer in 'freedom of speech', which is why I spoke up when Peter D was in the dog house (that and I have some sympathy with the underdog).

If wot Inspector says is offensive, then let's combat that with counter dialogue (and my sister does note that he is somewhat charming, in a funny kind of way).

As for 'love', I was not referring to a sexual love there. As I am sure you know, but just wanted an argument.

You Welsh bard you!


14 August 2013 at 00:11  
Blogger Peter D said...

"I find it hard to love anyone with such un-endearing qualities, particularly, I must confess, someone of the same sex as myself."

Really? The above suggests otherwise.

Personally, I'd sooner read the Inspector's rants, as disagreeable as some of them are, than many other commenters views and opinions. At least he states his point of view forthrightly and honestly and has a unique style.

14 August 2013 at 00:26  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ Peter D (19:12 on 13 August)—With Mohammed marketing himself as the last in a long line of prophets, it was in his interest to treat prophets of the Old and New Testaments, including Jesus, with respect. The theory was that association with the prophets would authenticate his new religion and encourage Jews and Christians to sign up for it. Islam’s violent streak stems in part from a reluctance among Jews and Christians to convert; Mohammed’s respect for Jesus did not extend to Christians.

14 August 2013 at 00:54  
Blogger David B said...

Peter D - what you say might also be true of Jim Davidson, but he is far from my favourite comedian.


14 August 2013 at 01:30  
Blogger Peter D said...

Johnny R
Who knows what goes on in the mind of a madman? You'll not find me supporting Mad Mo or the grip his misrepresentation of the Holy texts has on his Islamist followers today or those men and women of goodwill under its influence.

The question you posed was: would Jesus take up the sword against Islam? When He returns, the Bible teaches, He will defeat evil once and for all - temporal and spiritual. Honestly, before that time, I cannot imagine Jesus the Christ leading an army, sword in hand, against an earthly power. Victory would be, and is, guaranteed Him.

Until then we have to do our best.

14 August 2013 at 01:37  
Blogger Peter D said...

David B

Meaning? Do spit it out. Unlike you to be circumspect.

14 August 2013 at 01:38  
Blogger Nick said...

Ros V

I don't think the guy who was sued fir £40 k was the smartest person around. Most of us have found better ways of opposing the appalling cultural changes in this country

Having said that, anyone who denies there is a tendency for Christian-bashing in this country has been well and truly taken in by the propaganda of the media.

We don't know rhe full facts of the case, so for anyone to presume the lesbian is innocebt is being naive. It should also not detract from the many clear-cut cases of Christophobia involving the LGBT community

14 August 2013 at 08:04  
Blogger Nick said...

I too would be very sorry to see the Inspector leave this blog. I wouldn't say I always agree with his hyperbolic comments, but sometimes we need that kind of edge to keep a debate alive.

We are being gagged enough already by the media. We don't want it here too.

14 August 2013 at 08:11  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Albert @ 22:03:

I'm in agreement with all you say.

One further thought, if I may use David B as an example. (I'm sure he won't mind.) The word 'Jesus' is again a question of definition.

You and I have disagreed with David about the definition of 'secular' and 'faith' (Glad to see Feser tackles that one.)

David (or his equivalents) mean by 'Jesus' a human who lived a long time ago and was put to death. (With ongoing positive or negative effects according to taste).

You and I mean the Second Person of the Trinty who became incarnate and rose from the dead. Quite a difference.

14 August 2013 at 08:14  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Communicants will know that His Grace rarely deletes comments, not least because he simply does not have the time to herd cats. He also supports freedom of speech.

But He is sick of every thread being hijacked to a discussion of homosexuality, and the Inspector chose to do so (again) in quite vulgar and graphic terms. He has been asked politely to cease, and he chose to ignore it. He has now received a warning. This is not a ban: it is a mild rebuke.

14 August 2013 at 08:18  
Blogger Ivan said...

Muslims and their fake outrage on behalf of others are a tiresome bunch, displaying much of the same characteristics as homosexuals who hijack every thread about persecution to talk about themselves and thence dilute the message. Why aren't Muslims outraged about the persecution of Christians in all the 'stans? The ugly buggers could bring out thousands to protest against Google for something or other, but cannot find time to do anything decent.

The supposed respect that Muslims have for Christian beliefs amount to nothing. For Muslims Jesus is a mere prophet, a future spear-carrier for Mohamet who did not even die on the cross, Judas having replaced him at execution by some prestidigitation of Allah, for Allah is most merciful and wise. Thus the Muslims who think about it, regard Christians as the worst of fools: worshipping the traitor Judas on the cross, in the name of Jesus, son of Miriam.

Far better it is to get the straight no chaser from Talmudic savants, who have never made any bones about respect for the Hanotsri, conceived in menstruation, eaten by dogs and even now boiling in excrement as his eternal reward.

14 August 2013 at 08:55  
Blogger Albert said...

David B,

I do know that court cases in America have followed neglect, and I think I recall some beatings ones too, where part of the defence has been the issue of freedom of religion.

I must have missed this discussion. But people are always going to cling onto what ever legal thread they can. Abu Qatada for example, appealed to his universal human rights. But no one thinks he actually believed in those universal human rights.

there have certainly been claims of religious persecution regarding Obamacare.

I was under the impression that the religious objection to Obamacare was in relation to state (tax-paying) abortion and the requirement that Catholics must provide artificial contraception. No one who believes in basic freedom would support Obama there. But that does not mean that the case is about wanting prayer rather than medicine.

I take the view that those complaints, and any that may exist concerning the small number of (but still serious to the point of being a matter of life or death regarding the kiddies concerned) is to trivialise the very real examples of genuine religious persecution in some parts of the world.

I've been watching the use of the word "persecution" recently. In other contexts, it does seem to be used in quite "soft" circumstances. The dictionary definition that comes up is as follows:

1. To oppress or harass with ill-treatment, especially because of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or beliefs.
2. To annoy persistently; bother.

At that level, I think we can rightly speak of secular persecution of religious people. I'd prefer not to, because I would prefer to reserve the word to the more serious stuff, as you do. But it seems to fit the definition. By the same token, that fellow yesterday who was sued was a Christian persecuting a homosexual.

14 August 2013 at 08:59  
Blogger Albert said...


David (or his equivalents) mean by 'Jesus' a human who lived a long time ago and was put to death. (With ongoing positive or negative effects according to taste).

You and I mean the Second Person of the Trinty who became incarnate and rose from the dead. Quite a difference.

Yes, we would say that a person Jesus of Nazareth, who was not simultaneously the Second Person of the Trinity, did not exist.

14 August 2013 at 09:00  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Just as well Hannah decided against her conversion to Anglicanism and becoming a vicar..she too could have ended up looking like this!

14 August 2013 at 09:03  
Blogger Peter D said...

Now that was very naughty. Bad girl Cressida!

14 August 2013 at 11:12  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ Peter D (01:37)—I hope the Bible turns out to be right. Speaking as someone who is not religious but to whom the goodness of Christianity is evident, it pains me to see the attacks on the faith and its followers, whether launched in the name of Islam or by government in the name of equality and diversity. Christianity seems to me to cower in the face of the attacks and Christians in the West even seem to welcome a bit of light persecution as a test of their steadfastness. If Christianity continues to drift along, buffeted by forces it chooses not to resist, by the time Christ returns there’ll be no Christians left.

14 August 2013 at 11:19  
Blogger Peter D said...

Johnny R

Oh there will be Christians, Johnny. How many and in what state the world will be, is another question entirely.

"Christianity seems to me to cower in the face of the attacks and Christians in the West even seem to welcome a bit of light persecution as a test of their steadfastness."

In end to agree, in part. We do seem to have gone soft and are adopting an approach of appeasement to worldwide Islam and adopting the role of 'victim' in the West.

The Church needs to 'Man Up' at home and abroad and start with our leaders teaching the good, old fashioned Christian message!

14 August 2013 at 13:02  
Blogger Sister Tiberia said...

When I first saw the photo I actully thought that it was Alan Rickman as Severus Snape.

On second glance, that was somewhat unfair to Mr Rickman...

14 August 2013 at 13:37  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

My sentiments too JohnnyR.

14 August 2013 at 18:01  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Rev Cranmer,

I apologise as I didn't realise how offensive Mr Inspector was in his comments. And I agree 100% that every thread turning to the issue of homosexuality is like too much and wearisome.

14 August 2013 at 18:43  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Cressida ,

Just as well that my bro's like you, otherwise they'd be another cat fight and of course I wouldn't want to hurt you anymore!

Apparently, my various brothers say that the French count among the 'sing songy' peoples of the world, i.e. those accents that are, like a song, along with the Welsh, Irish, Indians and the Latin parts of the world. Men! Always take in by siren voices....

14 August 2013 at 18:46  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Battleship,

(I always thought it was dreadnought).

Oh please!

Atheists have as much contempt for Islam as they have for Christianity or Judaism or any other religion. I think a fellow atheist said on one of these threads religion in total was like 'Cyrus the virus' from 'con-air'.

*Cough*,*Cough*, I have the virus of religion.

14 August 2013 at 18:50  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

You find a fellow most definitely contrite tonight. He accepts he has disgraced himself, and has accordingly been doing a bit of self analysis with the assistance of an open bottle and whiskey tumbler. Anyway, here are his findings. He believes when he concocts a warm greeting (…or dark unpleasantry, depending on your point of view…), he is still unconsciously seething with anger from viewing Pink News. It’s all been a bit too much lately with the blighters trying to hijack Russia with a view to turning the place into a gay pride posturing predators’ playground. (or GPPPP, as acronyms are in vogue lately). So, to obtain relief, one has taken to opening the front door of an evening and shouting down the street, to passers by and animals - anyone who will stop and listen.

Anyway, to even less happier news. The office needs a coat of paint, and there is only him to do it. (…It’s at desperate times like this that a chap misses having a wife about the place…), so will be restricting himself on here until further notice.

Keep up the good work, you jolly types.

And don’t forget - Onwards and Upwards, what !

14 August 2013 at 19:13  
Blogger Peter D said...

Sister Tiberia said...
"When I first saw the photo I actully thought that it was Alan Rickman as Severus Snape.

On second glance, that was somewhat unfair to Mr Rickman..."

Lol ... bad, bad Tiberia.

I say, Sister, not terribly sisterly! You ladies can certainly get your claws out.


14 August 2013 at 19:52  
Blogger Peter D said...


Bearing in mind Sister Tiberia's cutting observation , <Cressida's comment could be interpreted as a compliment. An 'olive branch' even.

14 August 2013 at 19:55  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Inspector I read your Archbishop Cranmer removed comment and I thought it was sound in content. Be encouraged for your outrage at the homosexual take over of the world is well founded.

For a little more on what these heretics are doing in the Nation, Church of England and overseas, here are a few cases in point.

Salisbury Cathedral boasts of having 40 year old relationship with the Sudanese Church. However Archbishop Daniel Deng of the Sudan says, "This issue of homosexuality in the Anglican Communion has a very serious effect in my country. We are called ?infidels' by the Moslems. That means that they will do whatever they can against us to keep us from damaging the people of our country. They challenge our people to convert to Islam and leave the infidel Anglican Church. When our people refuse, sometimes they are killed. These people are very evil and mutilate and harm our people. I am begging the Communion on this issue so no more of my people will be killed."

"My people have been suffering for 21 years of war. Their only hope is in the Church. It is the center of life of my people. No matter what problem we have, no material goods, no health supplies or medicine; no jobs or income; no availability of food. The inflation rate makes our money almost worthless and we have done this for 21 years. The Church is the center of our life together."



And for more on the EU and it's love of homosexuality see



I notice that His Grace has not yet run a post on the Homosexual so called "marriage bill since it was enacted. Be encouraged Inspector, even if His Grace is frightened of Big Gay, as you so eloquently call this demonic monster, we do not need to be.

14 August 2013 at 20:16  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ OoIG—My mother always swore by magnolia. Come back to us soon.

14 August 2013 at 20:19  
Blogger The Explorer said...


Get that painting finished soon.

Pip, pip old chap!

14 August 2013 at 20:23  
Blogger Peter D said...


I hesitate to post this but it does seem relevant to the direction the thread has taken.

A great visionary in the 14th century, a mystic who endured the stigmata and died mysteriously at 33 years of age, Catherine of Sienna, received these words from Christ Himself about sodomy:

“They not only fail from resisting this frailty [of fallen human nature] . . . but do even worse as they commit the cursed sin against nature.

Like the blind and stupid, having dimmed the light of their understanding, they do not recognize the disease and misery in which they find themselves.

For this not only causes Me nausea, but displeases even the demons themselves, whom these miserable creatures have chosen as their lords.

For Me, this sin against nature is so abominable that, for it alone, five cities were submersed, by virtue of the judgment of My Divine Justice, which could no longer bear them. . . .

It is disagreeable to the demons, not because evil displeases them and they find pleasure in good, but because their nature is angelic and thus is repulsed upon seeing such an enormous sin being committed.

It is true that it is the demon who hits the sinner with the poisoned arrow of lust, but when a man carries out such a sinful act, the demon leaves.”

Certainly not politically correct and, it seems, the Inspector is troubled too by the enormity of this sin against nature.

Rest and, for the love of God, stay away from PN and read up on and strengthen yourself through the Christian faith lest you sink under all this.

14 August 2013 at 20:51  
Blogger Nick said...


I have some Russian vodka here. Fill your tumbler with your finest whisky, and we'll both drink to Russian success in resisting Western gay propaganda.

14 August 2013 at 20:55  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


It is quite clear to me that you have spent far too long 'behind the lines', are suffering from 'shell shock' and need to be recalled ASAP, in order to recover and come back even stronger!

It is clear you have accepted the mild rebuke with good grace and humility... You are not banned, so a fellow such as yourself should continue to post here.

14 August 2013 at 21:12  
Blogger Nick said...

I should have added "Down the hatch!" or "Поехали!", which I understand means something like "off to space" - a very suitable location for PN if I may say so

14 August 2013 at 21:12  
Blogger Sister Tiberia said...

Meow indeed.

Another fault against charity to notch up :P

14 August 2013 at 21:15  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Peter D,

Thanks for that, I hadn't read that..

Tiberia, are you admitting that comment was a dig at moi?

14 August 2013 at 21:22  
Blogger Sister Tiberia said...

Nope, Hannah, it was a dig at the very very unfortunate photograph of this lady that graces the top of the post. Just go and look up pictures of Severus Snape from the Harry Potter films and tell me I'm wrong :)

14 August 2013 at 21:25  
Blogger Peter D said...

Funny though ...

I'm sure your priest will chastise you severely once he regains his composure!

One of my dear mother's expressions was: "By the time we reach 50, we get the face we deserve."

14 August 2013 at 21:25  
Blogger Sister Tiberia said...

I think my parish priest wishes I wouldn't read these blogs anyway. Whenever I turn up to coffee after mass in a foul temper he just looks at me and says "Which one was it this time?" :)

14 August 2013 at 21:27  
Blogger Peter D said...

Ah, it's the photographer's fault!

I blame Bro Ivo. He should have been more discerning in the choice of picture. Men can be so insensitive.

14 August 2013 at 21:29  
Blogger Peter D said...


I implied no such thing. You're way to sensitive, my girl.

14 August 2013 at 21:33  
Blogger Peter D said...

Sister Tiberia

Blame the duck! I do.

14 August 2013 at 21:34  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Naomi King,

Your goading is childish, rude and offensive. Either retract and apologise or deposit £250 in His Grace's collection plate to commission the required article. Alternatively if this site disappoints you so profoundly, just leave and don't bother returning.

14 August 2013 at 21:35  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Sister Tibs,

I didn't think it was, given your usual intelligent and erudite comments here!

Peter D,

Well, you were (as I suspected) trying to stir the pot. No you didn't imply 'any such thing'.But you and I know what you were doing, but I forgive you for that!

14 August 2013 at 21:44  
Blogger Peter D said...


You are so wrong ...

14 August 2013 at 22:02  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Greetings fellows. Before the Inspector lights a cigarette next to an open tin of paint, he has this to say. That marvellous character Lavendon has it on the nail. “Permission to withdraw, Sir. One thought he could hack it, being a red bloodied male, but begs to be relieved. It’s all too much for a decent fellow”

Fall in chaps, a new volunteer is wanted...

14 August 2013 at 22:12  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Your Grace no disrespect, I find your blog and its commenters a great source of erudition and spiritual insight and I am thankful to you for your excellent work in bringing many challenging issues to our attention, a great number of which would otherwise pass by unnoticed.

You are an important institution.

I have been somewhat surprised that such a vital subject as Homosexual so called "marriage" has escaped your posts since it was enacted. As to "commissioning an article" I have not heard you make such a request before on any other subject however I will give it consideration and if your collection plate is empty I could also consider making a gift for general funds to be used at your discretion.

14 August 2013 at 22:16  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Naomi King,

His Grace has never made such a statement before. But neither has he been confronted by someone so rudely critical who demands a piece on a specific issue without any consideration of the fact that this is not a full-time news source and people feed upon His grace's daily bread gratis.

14 August 2013 at 22:26  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

And in case you haven't noticed. Egypt's churches are burning. The Copts couldn't give a fig for gay marriage.

14 August 2013 at 22:27  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Peter D,

"You're so wrong", OK, I am wrong. Which leads me to a song :

"I kissed a girl and I liked it
The taste of her cherry chap stick
I kissed a girl
I hope G-d don't mind it
It felt so wrong
It felt so right
Could it mean I'm in love tonight?
I kissed a girl and I liked it

It's not what, good girls do
Not how they should behave
My head gets so confused
Hard to obey...

It felt so wrong
It felt so right
Could it mean I'm in love tonight?
I kissed a girl and I liked it
I liked it

This girl is so magical
Soft skin, red lips, so kissable
Hard to resist so touchable
Too good to deny it
Ain't no big deal, it's innocent

It felt so wrong
It felt so right
Could it mean I'm in love tonight?
I kissed a girl and I liked it
I liked it"

14 August 2013 at 22:27  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Naomi,

I thought that Sudan had recently been divided between a Muslim North and Christian South?

In any case, is it wise to suggest that Christians should emulate their oppressors by following the dictats of the Koran,which means (I think) in places like Sudan the stoning of gay people? Is that a sure way of getting people back to the Christian faith there?

Also, I think that 'bread and butter' issues- literally- probably occupy the thoughts of most Christians there, like worrying about the next meal, rather than worrying over secular 'gay' marriage in the UK....

14 August 2013 at 22:42  
Blogger Peter D said...

Ah, the thrill of adolescent love, Hannah. I too remember the first time a kissed a girl and the sheer joy it inspired in my heart.

Adult, grown up, love is somewhat more complicated. Take Katy Perry, the singer of this song you've posted.

She has had "relationships" with Justin York, Matt Thiessen, Johnny Lewis, Travie McCoy, and Russell Brand. And since August 2012, has been in an on-again, off-again relationship with John Mayer.

As Saint Paul wrote:

"When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me."

14 August 2013 at 22:44  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

In any case I think His Grace is quite right- it is his blog, so he gets to choose what gets put up here.Anyways I think he is lovely and very clever, with his big gandolf type beard....

14 August 2013 at 22:46  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Peter D,

lol! In top patronising form I see!

So good of you to post Paul. I always wondered what the 'thorn in his side' actually was.Apparently some people think he was actually gay!

14 August 2013 at 22:51  
Blogger Peter D said...

"Fall in chaps, a new volunteer is wanted..."

Leave the PN alone. You're banned there, cannot comment and so your rage builds up.

You need to familiarise yourself with "St. Patrick's Breastplate" and consider the strategy and tactics of guerrilla warfare. When 'behind the lines' - the use of a small, mobile force against a large, unwieldy one.

14 August 2013 at 22:54  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

14 August 2013 at 23:04  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


By jingo, now yours is the sort of attitude we could do with a hell of a lot more of around here! Well done, I approve. Don't give ground and bite back every time. I've always said that to my rapscallions, that is what you need to run a commercial enterprise, government or estate, it doesn't matter which. Make sure you are the boss man every time you open your mouth. Or the bloody radicals and socialists will take over!

Now as for yourself good fellow, you need some critical R&R, to recover from your wounds!

14 August 2013 at 23:05  
Blogger Peter D said...


May one politely enquire where your avatar has gone? Some facial restoration, perhaps? I'm sure many other communicants miss your "big gandolf type beard" too.

14 August 2013 at 23:10  
Blogger Peter D said...


Of course Saint Paul was gay. He had the joy of Christ in his heart!

14 August 2013 at 23:12  
Blogger William Lewis said...

I didn't realise that His Grace took commissions. How interesting.


You've spent too long behind enemy lines. It's time to pull back and regroup. Having said that and given that you are repainting HQ, you might find that you have an eye for pepping up the soft furnishings at the moment. Just a thought.

15 August 2013 at 00:20  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Poor Sister Tibs. Your cherry pink lips and winning way has ignited the longings of our not so lucid humourless lesbian.More mindless pop verses coming your way. Father Orlears will no doubt look forward even more so to his morning coffees with you in the future:)

15 August 2013 at 05:57  
Blogger Sister Tiberia said...

Bear in mind, Cressida, that for three years at university most people thought I was a lesbian (since the definition of lesbian appeared to be anyone who had got to the end of the first year and hadn't slept with any member of the rugby squad. For some reason, the fact that I hadn't slept with any member of the women's rugby squad either didn't count in my favour) :)

15 August 2013 at 08:39  
Blogger Sister Tiberia said...

At the end of the third year, someone spotted me kissing my boyfriend and the tag was changed to "bisexual" :)

15 August 2013 at 08:40  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

HI Peter D,

Are you one of those dads that banned all pop music because it 'is of the devil?' I recall you not really liking the beatles, but they were good Catholics from Liverpool, weren't they?

'Let it be, let it be, words of wisdom from mother Mary, let it be'.

15 August 2013 at 11:37  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

15 August 2013 at 11:42  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Well I always thought the sports association at uni was a bit pompish and self appointed elite (partly because they weren't interested in swimming or fencing, my two sports).

15 August 2013 at 11:47  
Blogger Peter D said...


"Are you one of those dads that banned all pop music because it 'is of the devil?'"

Of course not you silly girl!

I placed no restrictions on the music my children listened to. Thankfully, they always showed good choice.

So far as the Beatles go, nowadays I enjoy their early music up to and including Rubber Sole. Thereafter, the occassional song here and there. 'The Long and Winding Road' and The Fool on the Hill', being two.

And I'm quite catholic in my tastes.

15 August 2013 at 17:04  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

William: "Having said that and given that you are repainting HQ, you might find that you have an eye for pepping up the soft furnishings at the moment. Just a thought."

Shouldn't laugh but ...


15 August 2013 at 17:09  
Blogger William Lewis said...

I'm glad it amused you DanJ0. I hope it tickled the Inspector too.

15 August 2013 at 18:52  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Soft furnishings, what the hell are those ? Incidentally, the Inspector did not view PN today and feels all the better for it. Senses poison leaving system, that kind of thing. Hope you are proud of him for that...

15 August 2013 at 19:33  
Blogger William Lewis said...

Very wise Inspector. Even the august Office of Inspector General has to rein itself in now and then.

15 August 2013 at 20:00  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

They do need keeping an eye on William. In the light of recent ‘problems’, perhaps a rota of Christian psychiatrists would be best. You might not realise the SSM fiasco is not yet over. There remains a survivors issue with pensions. This man has predicted they will get what they want, so it’s just a matter of time. As for what’s next on the agenda, one thought they would be heading off for the schools. But apparently not, they seem rather excited about suing people who criticise the lifestyle and receiving top dollar in compensation. So, an assault of freedom of speech is your next man...

15 August 2013 at 20:42  
Blogger Peter D said...


You have been mildly rebuked .... remember the reason?

The withdrawal symptoms should lessen and pass in time.

15 August 2013 at 20:49  
Blogger Peter D said...

Sister Tibs said ...
" ... the definition of lesbian appeared to be anyone who had got to the end of the first year and hadn't slept with any member of the rugby squad."

Sh*t! To think I joined the Cricket Club.

15 August 2013 at 22:02  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Quite right Inspector.

19 August 2013 at 07:31  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Dr Frank Turek is a leading and distinguished management skills expert, who has trained top executives for some of America’s biggest firms. He is also a Christian and he has written three books. “Legislating Morality”, “I Dont have enough Faith to be an Atheist” and most recently “Correct, not Politically Correct: How Same-Sex Marriage Hurts Everybody.”

“I was Googled, I was outed, I WAS FIRED, for being somebody who has a traditional marriage viewpoint.”


Frank says,

But now Christians are afraid to speak up. If we don’t start speaking up, we’re going to lose our ability even to make a living in this country. “

“We need to expose this intolerance, – it’s un-American to say that you have to have a certain political view in order to work in the United States of America. It’s unacceptable to say that you’ve got to have a certain political view in order to be able to work in the USA. I am willing to work with anyone. Real tolerance and diversity means that despite the fact that you inevitably might disagree with people about certain political and moral issues, you will work together with them in a very cordial and professional manner. That’s what inclusion and diversity should be – it’s not that way any more… If you don’t agree with this narrow view that same-sex marriage should be put into law, you’re called a bigot, you’re called a homophobe, you’re not even allowed to work. This is un-American and unacceptable… The founding fathers believed in liberty for all. They pledged their lives, their sacred honor for religious freedom. Many of them were killed for political and religious freedom!

19 August 2013 at 07:38  
Blogger Ivan said...

Twenty or thirty years ago nothing like this would have happened to Dr Frank. BoA's Italian founder would have laughed the degenerates pff. Corporate America or for that matter Corporate Britain is no longer by men such as Henry Ford and Andrew Carnegie. Hard men though they were, they were essentially patriots and loyal men who supported the traditional patria, which had proved to be the mainstay of capitalism. What we have now is a shell game, where the corporation is run for the benefit of the large investors, who are only interested in the bottom line, with a quick turnover of at most five years. To that end they have no time to be distracted by the a so-called defense of family values. In fact it the rich in America who provide the funding for all manner of perversions, from the self-declared geniuses of Silicon Valley to the vultures operating out of Wall Street.

That Corporate America is an effective vector for the spread of degeneration, without at the same time compensating for it by securing the jobs of Americans, has been apparent for some twenty years now. But they only have to scream "socialism!" and all the family-value Republicans scamper back to the corral.

19 August 2013 at 14:50  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Well said Ivan and is it surprising with Godless leadership of the likes of David Cameron and the False Prophet leadership of Barak Hussein Obama ?

On Dave Cameron it is worth remembering that only last year he admitted he has an on-off relationship with his Christianity. He said he was like "Boris Johnson", to quote Dave declared, "As Boris once said, his religious faith is a bit like the reception for Magic FM in the Chilterns: it sort of comes and goes." Is that cute or just plain dishonest ? The facts are however are that Cameron has to rely on a rival's words to express his faith, which shows his complete lack of any clear thought out conviction and show him as absolutely dishonest.




19 August 2013 at 19:28  
Blogger Ivan said...

Naomi, Boris has the virtue of being an honest man. He says what is on his mind at any moment. Cameron on the other hand may be the most dishonest man ever to have been PM in at least in the last 100 odd years or longer even taking Tone Blair. Has anybody else taken Christians to the cleaners in such a short time as our friend Cameron?

20 August 2013 at 07:38  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Ivan, we knew that it wouldn’t be long.

Yesterday the BBC published two pieces about polyamorous (it’s the new name for adulterous, though there doesn’t seem much adult about it). The first was a piece featured at the top of the homepage on the News website which you can read here


and then in the evening on Radio 4 they played a programme entitled “Monogamy and the Rules of Love” which you can listen to here


It’s at times like this that I wish I was living as a righteous prophet of God in Israel during the Old Testament, Come Lord Jesus, Come.

For the Church in Britain - Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up. James 4:9-10

20 August 2013 at 08:54  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older