Selective clerical compassion

The World Council of Churches is worried about Gaza:

A directors’ delegation from APRODEV – the Association of World Council of Churches (WCC) related Development Organizations in Europe – who visited Gaza during the World Week for Peace in Palestine Israel, have urged Ministers of Foreign Affairs in the European Union (EU) to also go there and “witness for themselves the denigrating circumstances in which the people of Gaza live.”

The World Week for Peace in Palestine intones:

The week calls participants to seek justice for Palestinians so that both Israelis and Palestinians can finally live in peace. It is now more than 60 years since the partition of Palestine hardened into a permanent nightmare for Palestinians. It’s more than 40 years since the occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza overwhelmed the peaceful vision of one land, two peoples.

So, as usual, the mantra is that Israel has created a nightmare for Palestinians.

The Canadian paradigm of left-wing Anglican political agitprop, Fred Hiltz oozes with compassion here:

We were deeply distressed to learn from the Near East Council of Churches in Gaza, that this church-run healthcare centre, which served approximately 10,000 families and has been co-funded by Canadians and the Canadian International Development Agency, was destroyed on January 10th by missiles fired from the Israeli Defence Force.

So, of course, we expect the WCC, Fred Hiltz and other Anglican apparatchiks to be equally voluble in their support for the Iranian people, who are being killed, tortured and imprisoned by their government.

Anyone hear anything anywhere?

Anglican inclusivity in action

Blackburn Cathedral in Lancashire presents itself as an inclusive welcoming church:

• We are committed to assisting the disadvantaged and the marginalised.

• We are delighted to engage with people of all faiths and world views.

• We are working to regenerate our community its buildings and its people.

• We are here for you.

In spite of being  delighted to engage with people of all faiths and world views, there is little enthusiasm for engaging with a member of the BNP:

Phyllip Cadwallader, 43, had called in to light a candle in memory of his late mother before competing in a running race.

He was dressed in a shirt, trousers and pair of brogues, but aroused attention because of he has a shaven head, tattoos and was carrying a bag.

Mr Cadwallader, a former autism support worker, was initially told to sit at the back of Blackburn Cathedral, before being told to leave by the Dean.

It turns out that the unfortunate Mr. Cadwallader was not a member of the BNP; but what if he was? I thought Jesus came not to call the righteous, but sinners.

Fresh Expressions

Fresh Expressions has been imported into Canada and seems to have been embraced by such stalwarts of Canadian Anglicanism as Primate Fred Hiltz and Niagara bishop Michael Bird, a fact that would make  even the most gullible suspicious. John Bowen, an evangelical whom I heard speak a week ago, is enthusiastic about Fresh Expressions. This article tends to confirm my initial impression that it is more concerned with delivery than content – a fundamental flaw: when content is mentioned we are given the usual non-gospel, liberal claptrap cause du jour:

The ideas for alternative-style worship are part of an initiative launched by Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, to appeal to the younger generation.

They are set out in a new book compiled by the Church’s Fresh Expressions programme, which aims to boost church attendance with more relevant and exciting services.

One Holy Communion service promoted in the book, called Ancient Faith, Future Mission, begins with the congregation being shown a video clip from the YouTube website about a United Nations anti-poverty campaign.

Worshippers are told that “our planet is messed up” and that “things are not right”.

They are then asked to approach the altar and rub sea salt on their fingers to represent tears, before walking around and meditating at eight “prayer stations” representing themes such as “gender equality” and “environmental sustainability”.

A psalm is recited in “beat poetry” style to the accompaniment of African Djembe drums, and prayers are said “for the corporate world, for influential CEOs who oversee billion-dollar industries”.

The prayers continue: “We pray for John Chambers of Cisco Systems, Bill Gates of Microsoft, Dr Eric Schmidt of Google Inc, H Lee Scott Jr of Wal-Mart Stores and others who have already made commitments to justice.”

Speaking for myself, I would prefer to have a root canal without an anaesthetic.

Among the alternative services explored in the book, which is co-edited by the Rt Rev Steven Croft, the new Bishop of Sheffield, are so-called “U2charists”, services in which the congregation receives communion but sings the songs of the Irish rock band U2 instead of traditional hymns.

The services, which include such songs as “Mysterious Ways”, “One”, and “I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For”, have been pioneered at St Swithin’s church in Lincoln.

This, of course, is proof positive that the Anglican church has deftly managed to emasculate anyone attempting to satirise it: who can compete with the self-ridicule of a church that willingly chooses to sing “I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For” as a hymn?

In chapter of the book, Archbishop Williams says: “The Bible is full of stories about God communicating through act and sign as well as language … Far from being bound to communication through clear information economically expressed in words, our society is still deeply sensitive to symbols and inclined to express important feelings and perceptions in this way.”

The Fresh Expressions initiative was launched by the Archbishop in 2004 to combat the significant drop in churchgoing that has been seen in Britain over recent decades. In the past few years the decline appears to have steadied.

Church leaders are particularly concerned about the loss of younger people, who are abandoning the pews at a greater rate than their older counterparts.

The Rt Rev Graham Cray, who heads the Fresh Expressions initiative, said that it was vital that the Church explored new ways of engaging with modern culture.

“We have to reconnect with a very large percentage of the population that has no contact or interest in traditional church,” he said.

Sadly, the Anglican church is ignoring something that actually works – expressing the unchanging Gospel with contemporary artistic forms – and prefers to convince itself instead that the medium is the message. The trouble is, it isn’t.

Duplicity

I watched the film Duplicity last night. I rather enjoyed it: it was all about who was being “played” and by whom. That is to say, taken for a ride, conned, stung, swindled, double-crossed, duped, suckered, bamboozled; the answer in the film is supposed to be a surprise, so I won’t give it away.

Which brings me to evangelical leaders in the ACoC: I think they are being played. I had the pleasure of attending an Essentials gathering today where the speaker was John Bowen, an evangelical who remains within the ACoC and is the motivating force behind Fresh Expressions in Canada.

I was curious as to how he manages to cope in the ACoC and also whether he had any sense of being paraded as a token evangelical; his answer was that being permitted to preach the true Gospel is what is important and he still has that leeway. An apparently reasonable answer.

But who is really being played here? I suspect that evangelicals who remain in the ACoC preach the gospel only within constraints that the ACoC places on them. As Malcolm Muggeridge used to say: like playing hymns in a whorehouse. There is a game afoot: evangelicals do what they think they can get away with and the ACoC gives them enough latitude to make them think they are a welcome part of the institution. But who is really playing whom?

Consider:
The ACoC is suing and persecuting those who can no longer put up with its antics. Those who remain within the ACoC are helping to finance the lawsuits.

The ACoC has its liberal agenda set, yet it wants to be seen as inclusive so it needs token evangelicals to flaunt at the appropriate moment. It has no interest in what the evangelicals have to say: it pretends to listen and goes its merry way unimpeded.

The ACoC allows programs like Alpha and Fresh Expressions, but its intent is to capitalise on the success of such programs by making use of the techniques while altering the content to something that fits the ACoC’s anfractuous view of reality.

So who is being played?

A Roman Catholic Priest is Welcomed into TEC

Father Alberto Cutié has been enjoying a little slap and tickle more than his call to celibacy it seems:

Father Alberto Cutié, the Roman Catholic priest who has been a cause of some international scandal since captured on film cuddling his girlfriend, now his fiancé, on a beach, has been accepted into The Episcopal Church in the US. It is likely he will go on to become an Episcopal priest. As The Lead reports, Father Cutié and his fiance were received into the worldwide Anglican Communion by the Bishop of Southeast Florida, the Right Rev Leo Frade, a fellow Cuban.

It is worth noting that when an Anglican priest moves to Rome it is on principle: one may not necessarily agree with the principle, but at least it is not merely self-serving and usually such a priest represents the best Anglicanism has to offer. When TEC welcomes a Roman Catholic priest into its midst it is because he has disgraced himself in his own church.

Damian Thompson reckons this will damage relations between Roman Catholics and Anglicans.

It’s difficult to damage something that has already been systematically pulverised into small pieces by the likes of the ACoC and TEC, though.

Rowan Williams’s unwanted political advice

Anglican Archbishops Rowan Williams and John Sentamu exhorted the British public not to punish avaricious MPs by voting for the BNP.

The Daily Mail conducted a poll that illustrates just how out of touch Anglican bishops are with ordinary people – or, at least with people who respond to Daily Mail polls.

Is the church entitled to tell people not to vote for the BNP:

Vote

Is Rowan Williams doing the BNP a favour?

Rowan Williams and John Sentamu are urging British voters to shun the BNP: by this time, everyone expects political peroration rather than spiritual insight from Anglican bishops, and this does not disappoint:

The Archbishop of Canterbury called on people to shun extremist parties and to use their vote positively in local and European elections on June 4. In an unprecedented intervention, Dr Rowan Williams joined forces with Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, and other religious leaders to condemn the “deeply disturbing” tactics of the BNP.

“Christians have been deeply disturbed by the conscious adoption by the BNP of the language of our faith when the effect of those policies is not to promote those values but to foster fear and division within communities, especially between people of different faiths or racial background.”

In a sense Rowan Williams is getting a taste of his own medicine: for decades liberal Anglican clergy have been twisting the language of orthodox Christianity to their own purposes. “What is the Spirit saying to the church” is one example of many; it is  uprooted from a biblical context (Rev 2) and used to legitimise just about anything a group of wayward clerics wishes to perpetrate. Their use of it has nothing to do with the person of the Holy Spirit, nothing to do with God’s revelation of himself and nothing to do with Christianity. So, deeply disturbed Rowan, welcome to the world of frustration of orthodox Anglicans.

The Telegraph astutely notes that the political meanderings of liberal clergy are liable to drive more people into the arms of the BNP; after Rowan’s sharia law debacle, one can only assume that the BNP is secretly paying him to come up with this stuff.

Even though Dr Williams and Dr Sentamu are not politicians, like most leading churchmen they have supported the liberal consensus on Europe, immigration and national identity, so there is a risk that their appeal may make matters worse. The sort of voters who take advice from well-meaning prelates are not the sort who would be tempted to vote BNP. Those most irritated by the pronouncements of church leaders, on the other hand, may be persuaded to do just the opposite of what the Primates suggest.

An agnostic bishop in the Anglican Church

Only one, I expect you are thinking; well, only one that has come out:

Richard Holloway says the worldwide Anglican Church has made room for “happy clapping” evangelicals, bells-and-smells Catholics, women priests and, in the United States, openly gay clergy and even practitioners of other faiths. So surely, he argues, it can find room for people like him – Christians who don’t believe in God.

Holloway, contrary to popular belief, has not left the Episcopal Church, as Scottish Anglicanism is known. He may have taken early retirement as Bishop of Edinburgh but the writer remains an ordained priest and consecrated bishop, who still preaches from the pulpit, performs baptisms and weddings and even presides at communion.

“I had a crisis in 1998 and I was in a kind of internal exile for a bit,” he told the Herald yesterday, while en route to Sydney, where he is a speaker at the Sydney Writers’ Festival.

“I am in a slightly mellower place with the church right now. I’ve still got my pilot’s licence, so to speak. They didn’t take it away from me.”

But Holloway has abandoned his belief in – or at least certainty about – God and the afterlife, and is now known as a “Christian agnostic”.

“I am not trying to persuade people in the church to adopt my angle,” he insists. “I just want space enough to be honest about my own convictions. The congregation I belong to in Edinburgh knows my position and is hospitable enough to include me.”

And inclusion is what it’s all about, after all.

The resonance with prevailing cultural conceits is evident: Richard wants space to be honest, the honesty is simply an angle and he has no interest in proselytising his particular angle. There is, of course, plenty of space in the Anglican church – mainly because there are plenty of other places other than churches where agnostics can congregate on Sunday; the question is, why doesn’t the retired bishop join them?

I have to give the man full marks for honesty, though: he admits he doesn’t believe in God, an afterlife, Jesus’ divinity, thinks the Eucharist is art and the church a social club. The average Canadian bishop believes as much but doesn’t have the guts to openly admit it.

The Anglican Church: finding the middle ground that upsets everyone

The Anglican church’s obsession with what it calls “social justice” inevitably translates into making pious political pronouncements rather than actually doing anything for itself. This is largely because, having abandoned its spiritual heritage for trendy pop-culture causes, it has withered into impotence and can do little more than stand on the sidelines and whine.

In keeping with its mealy-mouthed approach to everything, it can’t actually bring itself to come down definitively on one side or the other of an issue, preferring instead to find an ersatz Hegelian no-man’s land from which it can appear to be sympathetic to all and sundry.

The result is not appeasement but universal derision. The latest example is the ACC-14  pontification on the Middle East which has equally upset the left:

Palestinian rights deserve Anglican action

A obsession with even-handedness is stopping Anglicans taking a firm stand on Israel’s disregard for Palestinian rights.

At the 14th Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) meeting, held in Jamaica earlier this month, a resolution on the Middle East was passed, criticising the Israeli occupation. An original version of the resolution was originally submitted by the Anglican Peace and Justice Network (APJN), but as the language was felt by some to be too “strong”, a new resolution was put forward and adopted.

And right:

The Anglicans’ Ritualistic Denunciation

  1. The Anglicans, meeting in Jamaica for their international Consultative Council, ritualistically denounced “current Israeli policies in relation to the West Bank, in contravention of UN Security Council resolutions, [which] have created severe hardship for many Palestinians and have been experienced as a physical form of apartheid.”

Arab League pleas for peace were praised by the Anglicans, of course, while Israel was sternly instructed that it must “end its occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip,” “immediately” freeze all settlement activity in “preparation” for a Palestinian state, remove the “separation barrier,” end Palestinian home demolitions, and close all military checkpoints in the Palestinian territories.

And what did the Anglican elites demand that the Palestinians and their Arab patrons offer in return? Apparently nothing.

Compare all this Anglican fire against Israel with a nearly concurrent Anglican Consultative Committee resolution about Korea, whose regime in the North often makes the West Bank seem like Club Med. It urged Korean “reunification,” commended Anglican relief for the “starving population in North Korea” without explaining why they are starving, lamented that the “political situation” in the Korean peninsula had “worsened” without explaining how, implored that “all countries” “desist from confrontation,” and urged a “permanent peace.”

Is it any wonder, then, that when the Anglican Church makes one of its rare proclamations on spiritual matters, no-one listens.

Obama sounds like Rowan Williams

A modern foible is to take two irreconcilable viewpoints, either of which could conceivably be correct, and pretend to synthesise them into a middle ground which almost certainly is not. This is peddled as some kind of virtue: it’s common in the Anglican Church and appears to be an Obama preoccupation:

President Obama used the controversy surrounding his Notre Dame address Sunday as a lesson on the need to bridge cultural divides in America, as he urged graduates to seek common ground on issues, like abortion, that stir passion on both sides.

What common ground could there possibly be between those who believe life begins at conception and therefore should be protected, and those who believe a foetus is a cluster of disposable cells. This apparently:

On the specific issue of abortion, Obama urged the public to at least agree that it is a “heart-wrenching” decision for any woman, and that the country should work to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unwanted pregnancies and making adoption more available.

“When we open up our hearts and our minds to those who may not think precisely like we do or believe precisely what we believe — that’s when we discover at least the possibility of common ground,” Obama said.

Rowan Williams expresses similar sentiments in trying to bring together those who agree and disagree with same-sex blessings in the Anglican Church:

The challenge is, “how can those who share that cost, that sense of profound anxiety about how to make the Gospel credible, how are they to come together for at least some measure of respect to emerge, so that they can recognize the cost that the other bears and also recognize the deep seriousness about Jesus and the Gospel that they share?”

In both cases, the common ground has nothing to do with the actual issue, but is merely the intensity with which each side holds its belief. In reality this is little more than a sleight of hand on the part of liberals to pacify the opposition while the real agenda continues unimpeded.

Both Obama and Williams have placed a higher value on attaining a bogus middle ground than on truth: it explains how the West has lost its way and how the Anglican church – hot in pursuit – has too.