Category Archives: bishops gone wild

Roman Catholics grovelling before the altar of Islam

Posted on by
2

It’s good to see Roman Catholics competing with Anglicans who, hitherto, have been hogging the Politically Correct pottiness spotlight.

The Archbishop of Birmingham, Vincent Nichols, has defended the use of a Catholic university college chapel for an event marking the birthday of Mohammed. Unbelieveable, I know. But here it is:

In a statement issued today, Thursday 12 March, Peter Jennings, Press Secretary to the Most Reverend Vincent Nichols, Archbishop of Birmingham, and the Archdiocese of Birmingham, said: “The chapel at Newman University College, Birmingham, was properly prepared for this event which consisted of two talks and a discussion of an interfaith nature.”

Mr Jennings added: “Christian/Muslin dialogue is an important part of the Catholic Church’s agenda. College authorities were fully aware of what was taking place.”

I am sure that Christian/Muslin dialogue is an invigorating undertaking, but what does allowing Islam use of a room dedicated for Christian worship have to do with dialogue? A necessary part of being a Christian is acknowledging Jesus’ divinity; unsurprisingly, no other religion is willing to do that. Therefore, from a Christian perspective, Islam is mistaken on this and all that logically follows from it.

The fact that the RC Archbishop of Birmingham is allowing a Christian chapel to be used for a celebration of Mohammed’s birthday can only mean that he thinks appeasing Muslims is more important than revealed Christian truth.

When will Muslims invite Christians to celebrate Christmas in a mosque? I think Archbishop Vincent Nichols should ask Anjem Choudary.

Canadian Primate, Fred Hiltz tells us what he thinks the Gospel is

Posted on by
7

Fred Hiltz makes much of the Five Marks of mission, both as it relates to Vision 2019 and elsewhere.

The first is to proclaim the Good News of the Kingdom. But what is the Good News, or Gospel according to Fred Hiltz and the Anglican Church of Canada?

It sounds like a simple question and one would think the answer would contain things like: every person has sinned and deserves to be judged by God; God loves us so much that he sent his Son Jesus to take our sin upon himself; on the cross Jesus bore our sin and was punished instead of us; he rose bodily from death and is now alive and with his Father; he offers to us the free gift of salvation so that, instead of judgement, we can experience eternal life with him. Whether you believe this or not, it is relatively straightforward and is the foundation of the Christian Gospel.

But is this what Fred Hiltz means when he talks about the Good News? Apparently not. On January 15th Fred Hiltz spoke in the Diocese of Niagara; during the question time, someone asked him point blank, “what is the Gospel?” After asking the questioner to repeat the question – Hiltz appeared stunned – and embarrassed laughter from the congregation, he said that the Good News is:

1.       Parishes having an excellent liturgy

2.       Parishes having preaching that is Christ centred

3.       Telling stories.

Here is the question and Hiltz’s answer:

Primate of Canada, Fred Hiltz is engaged in cross border intervention

Posted on by
Reply

As the Anglican Journal reports:

Delegates from the Anglican Church of Canada recently met with their counterparts from other Anglican Communion provinces for the first Conference of the Anglican Churches in the Americas in Mutual Responsibility and Mission in San José, Costa Rica.

Archbishop Fred Hiltz, primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, said, “It was just a wonderful opportunity for all of the provinces in the Americas to come together and talk about mission.” Primates from the provinces of the Anglican Church of Brazil, the Anglican Church of the Central Region of America (IARCA), The Episcopal Church, and the Anglican Church of Mexico were all in attendance along with other clergy and lay representatives. The primates of the West Indies and the Southern Cone of America did not come to the conference but gave their permission for individual dioceses to attend

The ultra-liberal Hiltz is visiting the Province of the Central American Region to disseminate his version of the five marks of mission, the first of which is to proclaim the Good News, something the Anglican Church of Canada has been actively suppressing in its own province for the last 30 years.

When Greg Venables showed up in Canada to have a chat with orthodox Canadian Anglicans who have taken refuge from the draconian legal antics of Hiltz and his minions, he was told by Hiltz to shove off.

THE Primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, the Most Revd Fred Hiltz, has protested strongly against a visit to Canada by the Presiding Bishop of the Southern Cone, the Most Revd Greg Venables, this week.

“Stop interfering in the life of this province,” are his blunt words to Bishop Venables, who is attending the Anglican Network in Canada (ANiC) conference in Vancouver.

Hiltz was invited to attend this meeting, of course; but then, Greg Venables was invited to Canada.

An example of Hiltz style Gracious Restraint.

Words that have become repulsive: Gracious Restraint

Posted on by
1

One comes to expect pharisaic phrases from the Anglican hierarchy, but none can set the teeth on edge quite as effectively as “gracious restraint”. It is one thing to bend words to make them convey something slightly different from their natural meaning; it is quite another to make them mean the exact opposite. “Gracious restraint” has become “graceless abandon”.

The bishop of Ottawa, John Chapman is the beneficiary of the usual liberal seminary indoctrination and has executed a perfect parisologist’s pirouette  to subvert meaning, make black white and apply Anglican Alchemy to make sense nonsense.

Thus, in a spasm of tangled antimony he manages to say:

I must be committed to honouring the church’s need to observe gracious restraint and as well, honour the prayer and discernment that has unfolded in the Diocese these last many decades. With these concerns in mind, I proposed to Synod 2008 that I would bring before the Canadian House of Bishops the following intention: That, we, in Ottawa, begin to explore experientially, the blessing of duly solemnized and registered civil marriages between same-sex couples, where at least one party is baptized.

Chapman is in the malodorous company of Ingham and Bird (whom, for Lent,  I have forsworn calling short) and I would be equally critical of all three, if it were not for an impulse to exercise gracious restraint.

Diocese of Ottawa: making wrong things right by doing them

Posted on by
6

The Bishop of Ottawa has decided to begin blessing same sex unions. The reason given is:

Just as the Church was not able to come to a clear mind regarding the benefits of the ordination of women to the priesthood until it experienced the priestly ministry of women, Bishop Chapman has taken the process of discernment with regards to same sex blessings to a place beyond discussion.  Bishop Chapman believes that moving forward in the spirit of experiential discernment will allow parishes and congregations to observe and learn; allowing the Church to be better informed moving forward in preparation of next steps at General Synod 2010.

“While the issues are many, the solutions complex and the timelines demand our patience, it is my intention to move forward in our ongoing spirit of discernment,” stated Bishop Chapman. “We must “experience” the issue as a Church before clarity of heart and mind might be attained” adds The Bishop.

This new piece of Angli-jargon,  experiential discernment, gives the game away: the Diocese of Ottawa has abandoned its Christian heritage in favour of mock existentialist soup.

An atheistic existentialist such as Jean-Paul Satre would claim that, since there is no God, humanity does not have a predetermined essence that controls what we are or conditions our views of right and wrong. Rather, through making his own free choices, a person creates his essence – and his own right and wrong – by what he does. We create our own nature; existence precedes essence.

This only makes sense if you assume there is no God; but that has not stopped the Diocese of Ottawa from using the same principle in “discerning” whether same-sex blessings are the right thing to do. Instead of looking in the bible to find out God’s design and plan for humanity,  the diocese is saying “we will create our own moral laws by engaging in a questionable practice until it seems right.” This goes beyond pragmatism: the pragmatist does things and is content if they work. An atheistic existentialist does things to create their “rightness”.

Yet more evidence to show that the Anglican Church of Canada has ceased to be a Christian Church.

The Anglican Church gets no respect

Posted on by
1

And it’s little wonder.

Michael Coren points out that:

Just as it’s usually only beautiful people who pretend that good looks don’t matter, it’s generally the rich who tell us that money isn’t particularly important. Well, it is if you don’t have any. And those drowning or swimming for their lives in the current economic storm know that unemployment, pay cuts and evaporating savings are more than mere dents in their hobbies. So when, for example, various Anglican and Roman Catholic leaders in Britain said recently that there were in fact “positive aspects to the recession” they were dismissed as religious clowns and out-of-touch dreamers.

And goes on to say:

The sudden realization that material wealth is transitory and that earning, spending and saving are as much symptoms as they are solutions should lead us to grapple for the greater and grander things in life. Such as God, faith, family, community, the spiritual and the knowledge that this is the land of shadows and that real life hasn’t begun yet.

Add an Image

Bishop of London impersonating Jack Nicholson

This is entirely true; such worldly enticements as wealth and power are a distraction from life’s important questions: why are we here and what happens when we die? Once the distractions are removed, we are often forced to confront that which we have been assiduously avoiding. Regrettably, the buffoons in charge of the Anglican Church are ensnared in the very net from whose clutches the vulgar masses have been freed – accompanied by a chorus of clerical rejoicing.  The bishop of London, Richard Chartres

is paid a stipend of £57,040 a year. However, he and his family live for free in the Old Deanery, a Grade I-listed Wren house next to St Paul’s Cathedral. The apartment was refurbished for him at a cost of £300,000 in 1995. At the time, Dr. Chartres, a father of four, said the accommodation used by his bachelor predecessor was inadequate and that he needed a larger residence fit for “a public person involved in public life”, rather than a “suburban villa” for an “office wallah”.

And with nary a blush had these words of comfort to offer the “office wallas”:

he suggested that some of those who lost their jobs “seem to be relieved to get off the treadmill” and to consider the other things in life. Dr Chartres suggested that the credit crunch could give Britons a chance to “reboot our sense of what a truly flourishing human life consists of”. The bishop, the third most senior figure in the Church, added: “It is difficult to know whether to sympathise more with those who have lost their jobs or those who are left carrying even greater loads with higher targets and fewer colleagues.”

The sooner the bishop of London is relieved of his ecclesiastical treadmill, the better. Perhaps he would gain some perspective.

Bruce almighty

Posted on by
3

The Venerable Bruce Bryant-Scott from the Diocese of British Columbia displays, once again, his tenuous grip on reality and shallow understanding of human nature in the latest diocesan newsletter.

Add an Image

Venerable Bruce, ESL Candidate

Nevertheless, a radical group affiliated with the Anglican Network persuaded a majority of the parishioners that they needed to leave the Diocese and the Anglican Church of Canada. They also were determined to take the property, which were and are owned by the Diocese of British Columbia.

All of this was unnecessary. While a number of conservative groups have left the Anglican Church of Canada, with some of them engaging in property issues, the majority of evangelical parishes remain within the body of the national church. They know that the Anglican Church of Canada remains an integral part of the Anglican Communion, and that it is the only part of the Anglican Communion recognized by the Archbishop of Canterbury as operating in Canada.

They know that the Canadian Church has always been a place where there has always been a diversity of opinion held, and that change under the canons, as an autonomous church, was always expected and authorized from the beginning of the Anglican experience in this country.

I’ve always thought that bad English is a sign of chaotic and illogical thought and the venerable Bruce appears to be determined to illustrate this principle.

First, the venerable Bruce is suffering under the delusion that ANiC, by holding to 2000 years of tradition is “radical” and the diocese of B.C. by breaking with it isn’t.

Second, the venerable Bruce claims that the Anglican Church of Canada is “an integral part of the Anglican Communion”. GAFCON represents the only part of the Anglican Communion that is not attempting to accommodate the demented fantasies of a civilisation that is on the brink of self-annihilation. By 2061 there will only be one person left in the venerable Bruce’s version of the ACoC; he or she will feel very isolated in the global Anglican Communion.

Third, the venerable Bruce claims that evangelicals are welcome in the ACoC: it is strange, then, that J. I. Packer, the most renowned evangelical theologian of the 20th century, is unwelcome in the ACoC. What he really means is that evangelicals who are willing to set loyalty to the ACoC over the truth are welcome. Others will be regarded as trespassers.

Fifth, the last paragraph is such meandering drivel, that the venerable Bruce should consider attending an ESL course as soon as possible.

Nazi war propaganda updated for today

Posted on by
1

Propaganda was a major component of fighting World War 2. The Nazis, for example, would drop leaflets on cities warning civilians that resistance was not only futile, but would make things worse. Here is an example that was used in the Netherlands:

Add an Image

It reads:

“Warning!

To the civilians of Holland!

Do not take part in sabotage against the German army!

You can’t stop the German Army!

Large parts of Holland are already occupied!

All resistance is of no use!

Do not take part in sabotage actions like destroying dikes, blowing up bridges, or making road blockades. These actions are of no use because the German Army has lots of technical means to avoid them.

Do not take part in a war that is not yours!

Do not destroy your own country, but stay calm!

Civilians, captured during sabotage actions will get DEATH PUNISHMENT!

Civilians of Holland, we warn you!”

The Anglican Church of Canada is waging a war against Christians who are no longer willing to go along with its agenda of making a god out of the Zeitgeist. The war is being waged largely through intimidation and in courts of law.

The Diocese of British Columbia has also begun launching propaganda salvos, similar in intent and tone to the example above: resistance is futile and is only making things worse. Here is an extract from a letter by the Venerable Bruce Bryant-Scott Commissary to the Bishop, Diocesan Executive Officer & Diocesan Archdeacon. The whole thing is here.

The Network has had a series of defeats in the courts in Canada. Recently our colleagues in the Diocese of Niagara received payment of $20,000 from the Network for the costs of the legal action there. The Diocese of Niagara will be in court again in March and are asking for costs of over $200,000, and I understand there is a reasonable probability that they will be awarded that amount. Donors to the legal fund of the Network should know that they are not only paying their lawyers’ fees, but those of the lawyers defending the dioceses of the Anglican Church of Canada.

First to set the facts straight, the Diocese of Niagara wanted $70,000 in costs but were awarded $20,000. They have now asked for over $200,000 in legal expenses: what they will be awarded remains to be seen. The contention that ANiC is further funding diocesan lawyers would only be true if ANiC finally loses the court cases.

Second, the clear purpose of this is to demoralise those fighting for what they believe to be right by insinuating that resistance is not only futile, but counter-productive. It is wartime propaganda.

We are undeterred by such nonsense because we believe what we are doing is right, even if pursuing it comes at a cost.

Raunchy RCs

Posted on by
Reply

h/t HolySmoke

The US Conference of Catholic Bishops has come up with a list of exciting ideas to perk up your love life:

(1) Plan a picnic. If the weather is cold, spread a blanket on the living room floor. Romanticize the occasion by adding some wine, a rose, and mood music.

(2) “Tech-free” night. Turn off your cell phones, computer, the TV, and the lights. See what’s left to do without electricity. Sing old songs, have a pillow fight, recount stories of how you met, plan for the future.

(3) Be a tourist. Pretend you’re a tourist in your own town. Visit a museum, a scenic overlook, or a quaint neighborhood. Discover something new together!

(4) Midnight bowling. It’s more than just bowling! Some places have special music, lighting and gimmicks. Even without these, it can be a lot of fun if you don’t take it too seriously.

It goes on, but I might get too worked up if I display any more.

The really exciting stuff is going on in the comfort of the cloisters:

Indian nun claims sex is rife within Catholic Church.

The book by the former nun reveals how as a young novice she was propositioned in the confession box by a priest who cited biblical references to “divine kisses”. Later she was cornered by a lesbian nun at a college where they were teaching. “She would come to my bed in the night and do lewd acts and I could not stop her,” she claims.

And apparently this is not only to be expected, but is perfectly normal:

Dr Paul Thelekkat, a spokesman for the Syro-Malabar Catholic church said he had some sympathy for sister Jesme, and respected her freedom to express her views, but he believed her claims were trivial. “How far what she says is well-founded I can’t say, but the issues are not very serious. We’re living with human beings in a community and she should realise this is part of human life

Now I know why so many Anglicans are converting to Rome.

Lies, damned lies and Fred Hiltz lies

Posted on by
3

Fred’s view of what happened in Alexandria at the Primate’s meeting is here.

My observation is that in those dioceses where resolutions have been passed requesting the authorizing of rites for blessing same-sex unions the Bishops have shown gracious restraint. They have called for continuing discernment in some cases through the drafting and testing of such rites in a limited manner and have advised the House accordingly.  I am of the opinion that while our church struggles to honour the call for gracious restraint in blessing same-sex unions, those who are the proponents of cross-border interventions have and continue to show no restraint. I have endeavored to address this situation since the Lambeth Conference and I regret to say that to date a conversation with the pertinent parties has not been possible. I am disappointed and dismayed. My feelings are grounded in my care and concern for the Bishops and dioceses most adversely affected by these cross-border interventions.

First: the reason that phrases like “gracious restraint” are used is that it is impossible to pin down exactly what they mean. Thus, Hiltz can say that the New Westminster, Niagara, Ottawa, Montreal and Toronto dioceses are exhibiting this quality – while obdurately doing what they have been asked not to do –  and bishops, clergy and others of a sensitive disposition do not swoon in horror at the audacity of the lie.

Second: Hiltz’s contention that the “proponents of cross-border interventions have and continue to show no restraint” is completely false: ANiC parishes have, to my certain knowledge, been restraining themselves for at least 30 years. During that time Hiltz and his predecessors have never deviated from their agenda of de-Christianising the Anglican Church.

Third: by using the phrase “proponents of cross-border interventions”, Hiltz is implying that people like Greg Venables are poaching in North American territory in order to expand their own empires. In assuming this, he makes the usual mistake of those whose life is given to grasping power: he cannot conceive that others might have motives that differ from his own. Venables wants to spread the gospel – at all costs; the parishes that have come under his jurisdiction wish to do the same.

Fourth: the “conversation with pertinent parties” is probably a reference to this, where Venables shrewdly asserts : ‘”I talked to Fred about this at Lambeth, but it never occurred to me that a private discussion would become public without us both agreeing first,” Bishop Venables told The Living Church. “It looks more like a publicity stunt than a serious desire for dialogue.’ Venables and Hiltz were at Alexandria together; if Hiltz was that keen on having one of his wretched “conversations”, I’m sure he could have.

Fifth: Hiltz mentions his feelings for “Bishops and dioceses most adversely affected by these cross-border interventions”. How about the people in the parishes that are being sued by the bishops that you have such feeling for, Fred? Again, the gospel is subservient to the power structure of the Anglican Church of Canada.

Malcolm Muggeridge used to say, ” you can have power or love, but you can’t have both”. Hiltz has chosen power.