Monthly Archives: September 2012

Emmanuel College, University of Toronto offers new degree in Muslim pastoral care

Posted on by
1

Emmanuel College is associated with the United Church of Canada. This becomes obvious when you enter the grounds and are greeted by a statue of a crucified woman.

What does an ostensibly Christian Theological College know about Muslim pastoral care? It’s pretty simple: whatever you do, don’t speak about Mohammed. If you are careless about the context of your remarks, fail to say “peace be upon him”, use poor inflexion, bad diction, stutter, giggle at the wrong moment or, Allah forbid, absent-mindedly doodle a Mohammed, the object of you pastoral care may decide to behead you.

Having learned that, you have earned your degree.

From here:

Emmanuel College at the University of Toronto has enlarged its Muslim Studies certificate program to prepare people for pastoral care in social agencies that serve Canada’s growing population of Muslims.

The new two-year program, offered through the Master of Pastoral Studies degree stream, grew out of the United Church of Canada theological college’s three-year certificate program, launched in 2010 to enhance interfaith dialogue between Muslims and Christians.

The new program will train students from various religious communities to specialize in pastoral care and serve as chaplains in facilities with clients of the Islamic faith.

 

The fall of America

Posted on by
25

My apologies to Nero for the comparison, but it begs to be made: Nero fiddled while Rome burned; Obama golfed while embassies burned.

The Roman Empire took about four centuries to fully disintegrate: the second sack of Rome occurred in AD 455 and Nero fiddled in AD 64.

I don’t think we have that long to wait before America falls: it is spending and aborting itself to death far too enthusiastically to totter on for another 400 years.

What both Rome and the USA have in common at the beginning of their disintegration is leaders who were callously indifferent to their citizens. Obama and his admirers go one step further: they blame the values of their own country – free speech in this case – for the vile deeds of their country’s enemies.

How long before the barbarian hordes are sacking North American cities? No-one knows, of course, but it can’t be too long: Islamists are strenuously testing the resolve of America – and they are finding that there isn’t any.

From here:

Last week, after issuing a statement at the White House about the murder of the American ambassador in Libya, President Barack Obama hopped aboard Air Force One and headed for Vegas. At a campaign rally to cap off his day, he spoke about the murdered ambassador and went on to say, “We are the one indispensable power in the world. And if we are going to see peace and security for our children and our grandchildren, then that means that this generation of Americans has to lead.”

As embassy after embassy is attacked, the United States does not look like an indispensable power. And it does not look like it because it has largely dispensed with its leadership in the Middle East.

[…]

The ability of protesters to attack with impunity American embassies, and for it to be taken in campaign stride by America’s leaders, is a sign of a new day in the Middle East. At the end of the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France extended their influence as custodians of the region. After the Second World War and the creation of the State of Israel, the United States took over as the protector — of Israel, and later of Egypt, of Kuwait, of Turkey and even of Afghanistan against the Soviets. That period is over, and a new era is being born. At the moment it is only a post-American order. Will it become an era dominated by militant Islam?

A new day begins with the dawn’s early light. It is already past dawn, but what the day will bring is unknown, and fearfully so.

Same-sex couples on the increase, Anglican Church of Canada rejoices

Posted on by
10

The Anglican Church of Canada has ruptured itself over the issue of blessing same-sex couples and, by doing so, has staked its future on attracting some of them to replace the conventional families who have fled its heretical clutches.

The ACoC is in luck: Statistics Canada has reported a 42% increase in same-sex couples over the last five years.

Unhappily for the ACoC, the percentage of same-sex couples is still only at 0.69% of the total number of couples. How many of them attend an Anglican church I wonder? Not many, and most of those who do are employed by the church as priests.

From here:

The face of the Canadian family is changing.

There are more common-law couples, single parents and same-sex couples heading households than ever before, according to the latest data released Sept. 19 from Statistics Canada’s 2011 Census of Population.

And while the traditional family structure—mother, father and children—still accounts for two-thirds of all Canadian families, the number of traditional families as a proportion of all families declined from 2006 to 2011.

The census counted a total of 9,389,700 families in 2011. Of these, 67 per cent consisted of married couples, down from 70.5 per cent a decade ago. In contrast, common-law couples increased by 13.9 per cent in 2011 and single-parent families rose by 8.0 per cent that same year.

The number of same-sex married couples “nearly tripled” between 2006 and 2011—the five year period following the legalization of same-sex marriage in Canada. The census counted 64,575 same-sex couple families in 2011, an increase of 42.4 per cent from 2006. (Statistics Canada later stated that the number of same-sex married couples may have been overestimated by as many as 4,500.)

Anglican Churches in Iran, Pakistan and Persian Gulf condemn anti-Islam film

Posted on by
3

They couldn’t find it in themselves to condemn the death and possible rape and torture of U.S. ambassador, J. Christopher Stevens, though. Funny, that.

From here:

TEHRAN – Members of the Anglican Church in Iran, Pakistan and the Persian Gulf issued a statement on Wednesday condemning production and showing of an anti-Islam film on the internet or on any other media outlets anywhere.
“Christians strongly believe in harmonious existence and understanding among people of all faiths especially among the people of Abrahamic faiths with their roots in believing in one God revealed in their Holy Scriptures,” said the statement a copy of which was sent to IRNA news agency.

It added, “In concordance with our Muslim neighbors in Iran, Pakistan and the Persian Gulf, we demand that international media leaders to develop a code of conduct which will stop hateful anti-religious views to be promoted, provoking the sentiments of millions of people across the globe.”

The statement also demanded that international bodies like the United Nations and the World Council of Church, “to expedite the formation of international laws prohibiting such moves and declaring them illegal and punishable crimes in the future.”

Update: The Episcopal News Service has joined in the chorus of those excoriating the makers of the inane little film while completely ignoring the murder of J. Christopher Stevens.:

Leaders across the Anglican Communion have spoken out about The Innocence of Muslims, a film containing anti-Islam content that has so far triggered protests, violence and death in countries like Libya and Egypt.

Both Anglican and Roman Catholic archbishops in New Zealand have condemned the film, its message and its promotion, alongside the Federation of Islamic Associations president and the city of Wellington’s Regional Jewish Council chairperson, Race Relations commissioner and local bishops.

In the Anglican world of indaba, Hegelian middle ground, compromise, a metaphysic without hell overseen by a mushy-love god who appears to be stoned most of the time, it’s remarkable just how judgemental bishop Pierre Whalon becomes when it suits him:

According to Whalon, those who planned and created the film would have much to answer for when they came before the judgment seat of God.

Conservative Anglican bishops call for limiting free speech

Posted on by
Reply

From here:

Four North African and Middle Eastern Anglican bishops have written to U.N. Secretary Ban Ki-moon urging the adoption of an international declaration against religious defamation.

Bishops Mouneer Anis of Egypt, Michael Lewis of Cyprus and the Gulf and assistant Bishops Bill Musk of North Africa and Grant LeMarquand of the Horn of Africa wrote to the U.N. leader on 15 Sept 2012 following the attacks on the U.S. embassy in Cairo and consulate in Benghazi on 11 Sept.  In the days that followed mobs demonstrated outside American diplomatic posts across the Middle East and attacked U.S., German and British embassies in Tunis and Khartoum, ostensibly in response to a Youtube video that attacked Mohammad.

The bishops wrote that in “view of the current inflamed situation in several countries in response to the production of a film in the USA which evidently intends to offend our Muslim brothers and sisters by insulting the Prophet Mohammed, and in view of the fact that in recent years similar offensive incidents have occurred in some European countries which evoked massive and violent responses worldwide, we hereby suggest that an international declaration be negotiated that outlaws the intentional and deliberate insulting or defamation of persons (such as prophets), symbols, texts and constructs of belief deemed holy by people of faith.”

They said such a declaration would not be a violation of the right of free speech, but would encourage people to be “responsible and self-restraining in expressing or promoting offensive or malicious opinions with regard to the religions of the world.”

I suppose this just goes to show that even theologically conservative Anglican bishops can do strange things when they stray uninvited into politics.
A few points:

First, if the bishops had appealed to fellow Christians to exercise restraint when tempted to mock Islam and its founder because it is a less than effective way of winning Muslims over to Christ, I would have no objection. That’s not what they have done, though: the letter was addressed to the Secretary of the U. N. – not exactly a Christian organisation.

Second, the bishops are clearly making a political point: make insulting Islam and Mohammed illegal. Why? Not because it would put off potential Muslim converts to Christianity, but because of the massive and violent responses worldwide. In other words it’s political appeasement, a willingness to submit to bullies, an act of poltroonery, a grovelling before the barbarian hordes.

Third, the bishops have said nothing that I know of to condemn – let alone call for the banning of – expressions of hatred for Christianity that are routinely displayed in western art – a crucifix immersed in urine, a Virgin Mary covered in dung, and so on – let alone the anti-Christian diatribes that flow with tedious predictability from the likes of Bill Maher. Nor, in the letter, is there any mention of outlawing the anti-Semitism with which Arab nations gleefully indoctrinate themselves and their children.

Fourth, many Islamic nations outlaw Christian proselytising; presumably this is just fine with the bishops since, after all, Christian evangelism offends Muslims.

The complete letter can be found here – until someone decides to outlaw it.

More on that film

Posted on by
5

The U.S. has responded to the murder of its diplomat and destruction of its property by hunting down and killing the murderers? By cutting off financial aid to the countries responsible? By treating the well organised invasion of its territory as an act of war and responding accordingly? By withdrawing embassy staff from unstable Middle–Eastern countries – those still living – and cutting off diplomatic relations? Not exactly. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s department is interviewing Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, maker of the film that is the latest flimsy excuse for Muslim hatred of the West.

Toronto Hindus are going to screen “Innocence of Muslims” at an undisclosed location amid heavy security. There is currently no estimate of how many viewers will die of boredom.

Muslims in Niger destroyed a statue of the Virgin Mary because they don’t like “Innocence of Muslims”. Western countries are on high alert in preparation for the inevitable violence from rampaging Catholics.

Muslims in London and Sydney are rioting in protest against “Innocence of Muslims”; none of them have actually seen the film, but they are all unemployed, have nothing better to do, and, riot or no riot, will continue to receive their welfare cheques, so why not indulge in a little recreational rioting?

Egypt’s PM, Hisham Qandil, sees it all as a series of “unfortunate events”: as Exodus 20:13 admonishes: “You shall not murder because it would be an unfortunate event”. Qandil goes on to note that it is unacceptable to insult our prophet – peace be upon him and that the West needs to curtail its unfortunate tendency to allow speech free enough to insult our prophet – peace be upon him. The thing is, the true identity of Muslims is that they are peace loving; unless you insult their prophet – peace be upon him – because then they will want to behead you. So we must put a stop to these films so that Muslims can live according to their true identity. For their prophet – who absolutely loved peace in the sparsely occasional moments he wasn’t at war. Peace be upon him.

“Innocence of Muslims” film maker identified

Posted on by
1

The film that has become the latest excuse for Islamist mayhem was, according to the FBI, created by Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, a character on probation for “financial crimes” living in California.

Watching the trailer is enough to convince any sane person that the entire film must be execrable tripe. Tripe or not, Islamist reaction to it was predictably demented and, even though he made a dismal job of it, it’s pretty clear that Nakoula intended his creation to inflame those eager to vent their righteous indignation by murdering people.

In the almost civilised West, one of the things we do is allow people to say insulting, aggravating things about anything they like – in public. It’s called free speech. The ludicrous thing about what has happened is that Islamists have been set off, not by the best we have to offer, but by an atrocious piece of drivel so badly executed that it should never have seen the light of day.

This is not so much a clash of civilisations as a clash of barbarities.

The clip is below for those with sufficiently numbed sensibilities.

From here:

Federal authorities have identified a Coptic Christian in southern California who is on probation after his conviction for financial crimes as the key figure behind the anti-Muslim film that ignited mob violence against U.S. embassies across the Mideast, a U.S. law enforcement official told The Associated Press.

The official said Thursday that authorities had concluded that Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, 55, was behind Innocence of Muslims, a film that denigrated Islam and the prophet Muhammad and sparked protests earlier this week in Egypt, Libya and most recently in Yemen. It was not immediately clear whether Nakoula was the target of a criminal investigation or part of the broader investigation into the deaths of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans in Libya during a terrorist attack.

 

The term “Anglican” is not a registered trademark

Posted on by
9

The Anglican Network in Canada church, St. George’s, is planning on a new building in Burlington.

From the Burlington Post:

The city’s planning and building department recommended that a 0.6 hectare piece of employment land at 4691 Palladium Way be rezoned to allow the construction of a place of worship.

The Post has learned it will be an Anglican church.

The site is located just west of Appleby Line, bordering Hwy. 407, in Alton.

Community development committee approved the recommendation.

It will go before council on Sept. 4.

Permission for the rezoning was granted at the September 4th meeting.

Notice that the Burlington Post reported that the new building will be for an Anglican Church. This does not sit well with the Diocese of Niagara, a self-proclaimed inclusive and affirming diocese. A number of its clergy lament that the word Anglican is not a registered trademark, so, much as they would like to, they don’t have exclusive – and I do apologise for my blatant and unfeeling use of the “e” word –  use of it in the Niagara region.

From here:

We want to clarify the new church is being proposed by the Anglican Network in Canada, a group that broke away from the Anglican Church of Canada in 2009 to protest our actions in favour of the full inclusion of homosexual persons and the affirmation of their committed relationships.

The six existing Anglican churches serving Burlington are all part of the Anglican Church of Canada. We are diverse, vibrant faith communities focused on welcoming all and making a positive difference in Burlington.

We know some of our parishioners were confused by the article.

The term “Anglican” is not a registered trademark and its usage is not restricted. Nonetheless, we hope future reporting of this story can make a distinction  between the two groups.

Stephen Hopkins, St. Christopher’s Anglican Church

Stuart Pike, St. Luke’s Anglican Church (Ontario Street)

Derek Anderson, St. Matthew’s Anglican Church

Bahman Kalantari, St. John’s Anglican Church

Jeff and Sue Ann Ward, St. Luke’s Anglican Church (Dundas Street/Bronte Road)

Jean Archbell, St. Elizabeth’s Anglican Church

The mobile phone as religious experience

Posted on by
Reply

Everyone needs to worship something: we were designed that way by God – to worship him.

In a secular age, what do creatures with a built-in urge to worship do with the urge?

They worship their mobile phones: the preferred altar for most worshippers is the high place of Cupertino, and the object of adoration, the iPhone.

Today, the iPhone 5 was introduced to the devout; here you can see Apple high priest, Tim Cook, in an attitude of ecstatic supplication before an icon of his god:

And below we have one of the senior monks, Jony Ive, waxing eloquent on the relationship he and his order enjoy with their iPhones.

I wonder if Richard Dawkins will buy one.