Monthly Archives: September 2010

Archbishop Douglas Hambidge is astounded

Posted on by
Reply

It doesn’t take much to astound him, though, according to this letter to the Anglican Journal:

As a former member of the Anglican Consultative Council and of its standing committee, I am astounded to learn the standing committee actually voted on whether or not to dismiss The Episcopal Church from the Anglican Communion. I wonder where it imagines it has the authority to do this.

The Anglican Consultative Council, and obviously its standing committee, does not have legislative authority. It is, by definition, consultative, as is the Lambeth Conference and the meeting of Primates. That is the nature of the church.

We do not have a central supreme authority; we do not have a Curia. We have disagreements, but what binds us together is greater than things that could drive us apart. We do not always get our own way in debate; not everyone agrees with everyone else. We are not that kind of church.

What we do have is a community held together not by laws and government, but by those “bonds of affection” that have always been the basis of Anglicanism.

Archbishop Douglas Hambidge
Delta, B.C.

When Archbishop Hambidge intones, “[w]e do not have a central supreme authority”, he is not far from the mark. The Anglican Church of Canada recognises no central authority, including God’s as revealed in his Word. Instead it wafts along blown hither and thither by every gust of pagan superstition and cultural vice it encounters.

The “bonds of affection” between Anglicans has long gone, with the vast majority of worldwide Anglicans having declared themselves in impaired communion with both the ACoC and TEC. This probably doesn’t impinge much on Archbishop Hambidge’s equanimity, ensconced as he is in the insular, increasingly insignificant, neo-colonial, North American oddity that thinks it represents Anglican Christians in the West.

Should prostitution be illegal?

Posted on by
3

Not according to the author of this article:

John Moore: Prostitutions foes are welcome to their moral offence. But hands off of the law, please.

People are squeamish about sex. So it’s understandable they’re going to be squeamish about those who have a lot of it and more so about the fact that some people trade sex for money.

Tuesday’s court ruling that the Criminal Code’s hodge podge of laws surrounding the otherwise legal practice of prostitution are unreasonable has left moralists who think their squeamishness should trump other people’s freedoms sputtering. Not only are they astonished that the law will no longer backstop their efforts to impose a state morality, but they’ve been stunned by the fact that some of the most articulate people in the debate are a bunch of out and proud prostitutes lead by an affable whip-cracking dominatrix known as Madam de Sade.

The article goes on to make the familiar argument that the state should not be imposing the values of “moralists” on everyone else, thereby limiting their freedom. The problem with this argument is that it can also be used against any law that limits freedom – and all laws do that.

Implicit in the article is the presumption that it is wrong to harm other people or to unnecessarily restrict their freedom – precepts which themselves are moral. If the state is not to “legislate morality”, what should it legislate: immorality? If harming another person is an immoral act – and it is – no-one would argue that the state should not legislate against it on the grounds that it is legislating morality. One might argue that the law’s preventing destructive acts such as murder are necessary to prevent social chaos: that is also a moral judgement, though, since it assumes order is better than chaos.

Our laws are based on a Judeo-Christian ethic: to legislate morality in some form or other is inescapable. The question is, is prostitution immoral? Christian teaching says that sex other than between a married man and woman is wrong; selling sexual intimacy is wrong. Prostitution is not a private act of immorality, it is one which requires society’s acquiescence in order to operate: it should be illegal.

What happens now Obama is no longer blaming George Bush for everything?

Posted on by
12

He is blaming Fox News:

“I think Fox is part of ….the (news) tradition that has a very clear, undeniable point of view. It’s a point of view that I disagree with. It’s a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world.

But as an economic enterprise, it’s been wildly successful. And I suspect that if you ask Mr. Murdoch what his No. 1 concern is, it’s that Fox is very successful.”

Leaving aside the obvious facts that every news network has a “point of view” and is run “as an economic enterprise”, how can anyone seriously claim that, in a nation that has free speech, a news network’s point of view is what is destroying US growth? Does it make policy, bail out banks, create trillions of dollars of debt?

No, it reports – as objectively as any other news outlet – news and peddles ideas; just like CNN and MSNBC. I think ideas are what ultimately change things for better or worse and if ideas from the right are starting to resonate, perhaps it is because when Obama chanted “change you can believe in” he didn’t have any of his own that actually work.

English as it is meant to be

Posted on by
Reply

No committees, no computers, no OED even: instead a language that is populist and subversive. A dictionary from an individual, Dr. Samuel Johnson:Add an Image

Lexicographer
A writer of dictionaries, a harmless drudge.

Oats
A grain, which in England is generally given to horses, but in Scotland supports the people.

From here:

On June 18, 1746, the bookseller and publisher Robert Dodsley held a breakfast at the Golden Anchor near Holborn Bar to celebrate the successful negotiation of a massive contract for a new dictionary of the English language. The prospective author of this project, Samuel Johnson, who signed his contract during the breakfast, was the arche-typal English amateur. A university drop-out, now aged 37, he had published some poetry and a lot of literary journalism, but had never attempted such exacting work before. Johnson’s story is symbolic of the populist and subversive spirit of English. No one present at the Golden Anchor could have imagined how significant this moment would turn out to be, though knowing the author they might have suspected something special. The trainee lexicographer was vigorous, fit, tenacious, independent and strong-minded. He would settle the importance of English in an intensely practical and typically Anglo-Saxon way — on his own terms. Rather than debate arguments about English vocabulary with a committee of experts, he would research and write the dictionary himself.

New Dean and rector of Christ Church Cathedral, Montreal is “liberal in ethics”. Nudge, wink.

Posted on by
5

What does being “liberal in ethics” while being supposedly evangelical and orthodox in other areas really mean in practice? Well, in this case it means that the new dean can live as an active homosexual, marry another man – that’s the “ethics” bit – and expect everyone to believe his claim to orthodoxy elsewhere.

The problem is that by adopting a code of sexual ethics – one that coincidentally benefits him – that runs counter to clear Biblical injunctions and 2000 years of Christian teaching, he invites scepticism about his real attachment to evangelical preaching, orthodox Trinitarian theology and fervent discipleship. When his alleged orthodoxy becomes less than entirely convenient what is to stop Father Kennington becoming as “liberal” in that – assuming he isn’t already – as he is in his tolerance for homoerotic liaisons?

From here (page 1):

The next Dean of the Diocese of Montreal and Rector of Christ Church Cathedral

Father Kennington, who was selected after a year-long search, succeeds Very Rev. Michael Pitts, who

retired last year after serving in the post since 1991 and who is also from Britain, although he was already serving in Montreal at the time of his appointment. Another point in common is that both men were in contact with Russia and Russian Orthodoxy in their early careers.

In a biographical note supplied to the cathedral, Father Kennington describes himself as “liberal in ethics, evangelical in preaching, catholic in liturgy and orthodox in his understanding of Trinitarian theology and Christology.” He “is passionate about mission and about helping people grow in faith to become fervent disciples of Christ so that the Christian Community can build God’s Dominion of love, justice and peace.”

Father Kennington also writes that he will enter into a civil partnership in May. His partner, Jonathan, will join him in Montreal shortly after that. Father Kennington has three adult children – a son and two daughters – from a previous marriage.

The article goes on to say:

Paul is highly qualified, is a man of faith, gives priority to pastoral matters, encourages lay ministries, understands the importance of liturgy and music in worship, is a wonderful preacher, lives a good Christian life, and is delightful to meet.

I’m sure he is a lovely bloke, but how did we get from the point where the qualifications for being a Deacon included “the husband of one wife” to “the ex-husband of one wife and now the husband of one man – but he lives a good Christian life; really, he does”. No wonder the Anglican Church of Canada is a laughing stock.

Strange policing in Wales

Posted on by
Reply

I used to live in a small village – called Machen – that is not far from the city of Newport in Wales. Machen was a sleepy little place planted on the side of a mountain and Newport, while not sleepy was a respectable middle-class city. Things seem to have changed since then:

Supt Julian Knight says it is better to work closely with those in the sex industry to enable proper monitoring.

He told BBC Radio Wales’ Eye on Wales that the law on prostitution created a dilemma, but he had to be pragmatic.

He spoke amid claims sex trafficking from abroad could rise around the Ryder Cup, which begins on Friday.

Supt Knight told the programme: “You have to be pragmatic about this.

“It is illegal.

“Society has a very Victorian moral code around this, as a result of which we find ourselves between a rock and a hard place”.

Society has a very Victorian moral code around this, as a result of which we find ourselves between a rock and a hard place”

End Quote Supt Julian Knight Gwent Police

The law on prostution [sic] says that while it is not illegal to sell sex for financial gain, certain activities relating to it are. These include two or more people selling sex from the same premises.

However, rather than closing such premises down, Supt Knight believes it is more effective to work closely with those involved.

The Gwent Police policy in Newport, which has been in place since 2004, is to visit brothels on an ad hoc basis, and to develop relationships with the individuals involved.

I can’t help wondering whether police are “working closely” with those engaged in other criminal activity: making sure burglars don’t cut themselves on broken glass, for example. And we wouldn’t want Victorian moral codes getting in the way of the occasional mugger who, after all, is only trying to make a living.

The Age of Aquarius dawns in Christ Anglican Church, London

Posted on by
17

I went to see Hair in London, UK in the 1960s. I wasn’t a Christian in those days and, while I enjoyed the general aura of comfortably rebellious hairiness, it still struck me as pretentious drivel. Even then I knew enough about Christianity to understand that “The Age of Aquarius” doesn’t belong in a church. Until now, that is; and where would it fit better than in an Anglican Church. Another fine production from Christ Anglican Church London:

I expect next year they will enthral the audience with a rendition of another Hair favourite: “Masturbation Can be Fun” – with actions if we’re really unlucky.

Why speak to Rowan Williams in Welsh?

Posted on by
2

From here:

FORMER Welsh Office Minister Rod Richards has called for the resignation of the Archbishop of Wales after he told the Pope that he sometimes spoke with the Archbishop of Canterbury in Welsh to stop others understanding.

Someone should point out to the Archbishop of Wales that having Rowan speak in Welsh to maintain privacy is not necessary: no-one understands him when he speaks in English.