Tag Archives: Justin Welby

Justin Welby at GAFCON

Posted on by
6

Justin Welby refuses to take sides. He is continuing in the vein of Rowan Williams by attempting to maintain the fiction that the worldwide Anglican Communion has not already split, that Western Anglicanism’s god of self-gratification – preferably obtained through homoeroticism – can somehow be reconciled with the Cross. It can’t.

Perhaps what is worst of all is that Welby views the division in worldwide Anglicanism as something bad which should be resisted, rather than what it actually is: God separating the faithful from the unfaithful.

Read it all here (my emphasis):

“There is a need for new structures in the Anglican Communion, “the archbishop said, adding the issues that divide us are “simple and complicated.”

To address them “we need a new way of being in communion, not the colonial structures” of the past, he said. But it was unclear as to what the solution was as each province offered its own solution to the problem, yet “we must find a way to live together, so the world will see” Jesus is Lord.

The Anglican world must be a sign to the world of the power of Christ and must engage in a deliberate program of “witness, worship, evangelism, and a passion for the Holy Spirit.”

“The more seriously we take the Bible” the more effectively we will be able to deal with our divisions, he said.

How the Church of England should compete with Wonga

Posted on by
2

Wonga makes short term loans to people at exorbitant rates. The idea is that the loan is repaid on payday: it is a payday loan company.

Justin Welby wants to “compete Wonga out of business” by creating church assisted credit unions. The problem is, it will take ten years to accomplish; meanwhile Wonga is approving 10,400 loans a day and makes £1.2million a week in profit now.

After lending more than a £1billion in a year for the first time, it now plans to expand by encouraging customers to buy luxuries they would otherwise struggle to afford.

Its ‘Pay Later’ deal allows borrowers to buy ‘higher value goods’, such as furniture or a dishwasher, for up to £1,000, with an up-front charge of 7 per cent of the price.

The idea of buying luxuries we “would otherwise struggle to afford” was not a problem that afflicted my family as I was growing up. Post-war rationing made ½ a pound of butter a luxury, afford it or not; my parent’s lives were not so devoid of meaning that they felt the need to fill the emptiness with “luxuries they would otherwise struggle to afford.” Not so for many people today, I fear.

In trying to set up competing credit unions, the Church of England is foolishly engaged in trying to beat the world at its own game: for some reason, it will keep doing this – possibly because it has forgotten what its own game is – and it always fails.

If Justin Welby really wants to compete with Wonga, preach the Gospel – the real Gospel – and give people meaning and purpose in their lives so that they don’t have to yield to the impulse of attempting to fill their vacuous existence with luxuries that they don’t need, can’t afford and won’t satisfy.

The Anglican Church is drunk man staggering ever closer to the edge of a cliff

Posted on by
9

So says the Archbishop of Canterbury:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has warned that the Anglican church is tottering on the brink of disintegration amid disputes between liberals and traditionalists.

At last someone has noticed. Sadly, although the prognosis is probably accurate, the diagnosis isn’t.

The cause of the Anglican malaise has never been the fact that there are disputes between liberals and conservatives; the cause is simply that liberals have got it wrong.

Justin Welby went on to note:

In his most stark comments yet about divisions over issues such as homosexuality, the Most Rev Justin Welby said the Church was coming perilously close to plunging into a “ravine of intolerance”.

“Intolerance” isn’t the problem either; misrepresenting Christianity – and that’s what liberals in the homosexuality debate tend to do  – is intolerable.

Yet he added that many of the issues over which different factions in the Church were fighting were “incomprehensible” to people outside it.

Undoubtedly true; but the incomprehensibility of the debate doesn’t mean – as Welby seems to imply – that both factions must be incorrect.

“On one side is the steep fall into an absence of any core beliefs, a chasm where we lose touch with God, and thus we rely only on ourselves and our own message. On the other side there is a vast fall into a ravine of intolerance and cruel exclusion. It is for those who claim all truth, and exclude any who question.”

The first sentence is a suitable epithet for North American Anglicanism. The second is a sure sign that Welby has been conned by liberals into believing that conservatives are intolerant and that making any demands of anyone renders a church exclusive. The third appears to be a concession to contemporary relativism: truth is unknowable.

At least one thing is correct: we are staggering close to the edge of a cliff.

Wonga arrives in Canada to the sound of Justin Welby gnashing his teeth

Posted on by
7

I’d never heard of Wonga until today but, thanks to the free advertising provided by Justin Welby, I’ve not only heard of the company but discovered that it now has a Canadian branch.

The Archbishop of Canterbury – eager to set the world to rights, presumably because it looks easier than setting his church to rights – was furious to discover that, having denounced Wonga, the CofE has indirect investments in it; Wonga is a short term loan company with outrageous interest rates.

Investing in Wonga is, according to Anglican lights, not ethical, implying that Wonga itself is not ethical. The reason, I imagine, is Wonga’s interest rates: if you borrow $500 from Wonga and repay it in one month, you will have to repay $600 – 20% interest per month. That is atrociously high; but unethical? Surely it would only be unethical if the actual interest rate were concealed from the hapless borrower until it was time to repay.

When does an interest rate cross the threshold from ethical to unethical? A credit card company’s 1.5% per month is still high but it doesn’t seem to have met the Anglican criterion needed for ritual excoriation.

Justin Welby clearly doesn’t think charging interest on a loan is inherently unethical because he wants to set up credit unions in competition with Wonga. They will still charge interest but they won’t make a profit.

So profit – or capitalism, really – is the enemy.

Here we go again: another Archbishop of Canterbury who hates capitalism.

Justin Welby: diversity is a gift

Posted on by
Reply

If by “diversity´ in a Christian context, one means things like diverse styles of worship or diverse church architecture, then perhaps diversity is a gift.

If by “diversity” one means a multiplicity of religions such as Islam, Christianity and Hinduism, then diversity is an unwanted gift. If the claims of Christianity are true, then all other religions have, to a large degree, got it wrong; their followers are deceived and their good works, insofar as they don’t lead to salvation, in vain.

Unfortunately, Justin Welby appears to be using “diversity” in the latter sense.

From here:

Archbishop Justin told his audience that diversity was a “gift not a threat” and he did not want to live in a “monocultural” society. He said he “rejoiced” in the example of inter faith co-operation and community work he had witnessed in Southall.

Archbishop Justin was speaking after visiting St John’s Church, the Shree Ram Mandir Hindu Temple and the Sikh Gurdwara Sri Guru Singh Sabha, where 20,000 free meals are served every week in Southall. He also met Muslim leaders, currently observing the Ramadan fast, at the Central Jamia Masjid Mosque in Southall.

A contrast in responses from Justin Welby

Posted on by
5

Archbishop Justin Welby’s reaction to attacks on mosques following the murder of Lee Rigby by Muslims contains words like: “evil”, “unacceptable” (the PC version of “evil”), “inexcusable”, “scandal”, “terrible”. He had little difficulty in roundly condemning the attacks – quite rightly, since some of the foiled attacks used nail bombs:

Speaking at Featherstone High School in Southall, west London, the Most Rev Justin Welby described attacks on mosques in the wake of the murder of Fusilier Lee Rigby earlier this year as “evil actions”.

“The attacks on minority ethnic groups across the country that there have been over the last few weeks are inexecusable, [sic] unacceptable and a scandal to a tradition of hospitality in this country of which we should be deeply proud and which has contributed far more to us than it has taken from us,” he said.

He added: “I want, as I have already done, to acknowledge the pressure that our Muslim friends and colleagues have faced over the last few weeks.

“There have been terrible attacks, I know that the vast majority of those in this country and especially people of faith would join me in condemning utterly any act of violence against anyone because of their faith.

Contrast that with his official statement on Lee Rigby’s murder:

The Right Reverend Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury, said on Friday regarding Rigby’s murder that Christian and Muslim leaders in the United Kingdom have been helping to bring reconciliation. “I want to recognize the response of churches, mosques and other faith and civil society groups as well as those of brave individuals who have done so much to bring our communities together at this time,” said Welby.

“The strong response from the Muslim Council of Britain and many other organizations has rightly emphasized that these acts have no place in Islam.”

Welby also mentioned his involvement with the interfaith British organization the Christian Muslim Forum, which was founded in the 1990s and comprised of leaders from both faiths. “As Patron of the national Christian Muslim Forum I know that the Forum is offering support and encouragement for these meetings to happen and I continue to hold all those working in these efforts in my prayers,” said Welby.

The Right Reverend Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury, said on Friday regarding Rigby’s murder that Christian and Muslim leaders in the United Kingdom have been helping to bring reconciliation. “I want to recognize the response of churches, mosques and other faith and civil society groups as well as those of brave individuals who have done so much to bring our communities together at this time,” said Welby.

“The strong response from the Muslim Council of Britain and many other organizations has rightly emphasized that these acts have no place in Islam.”

Welby also mentioned his involvement with the interfaith British organization the Christian Muslim Forum, which was founded in the 1990s and comprised of leaders from both faiths. “As Patron of the national Christian Muslim Forum I know that the Forum is offering support and encouragement for these meetings to happen and I continue to hold all those working in these efforts in my prayers,” said Welby.

“This is very much a time for communities to come together.”

Notice the completely different emphasis here. Nothing about “evil”, “terrible”, “inexcusable” and so on; rather, the murder is a signal for reconciliation for us to come together to not blame Islam.

An act of ultimate wickedness – murder – is soft-pedalled because the murderers are Muslims.

Admittedly, imams were quick to denounce the murder and assure everyone that it had nothing to do with Islam; the murderers, we are expected to believe, shouted “Allahu Akbar” during the beheading due to a severe misunderstanding of Islam. Yet, there seems to be something inherent to Islam that inspires such violence, something absent in, say, Christianity; when was the last beheading performed in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost?

To maintain his credibility – with me, at least – the Archbishop of Canterbury would do better if he could bring himself to condemn, with equal conviction, crimes perpetrated in the name of Islam – according to the clear and vociferous declaration of their perpetrators – and crimes attempted against Islam.

Jettison the impulse to give every benefit of the doubt to the cultural influence of Islam, none of which would be afforded the heritage of Christendom.

Justin Welby and the sexual revolution

Posted on by
1

In his presidential address at General Synod, Justin Welby spent some time ruminating on the idea that Western society is in the middle of a sexual revolution. It’s amazing what the clergy notice when they put their minds to it.

Society has been in the middle of a sexual revolution since I was a teenager in the 60’s. Then it was all about having as much sex as possible with the opposite sex; later it was about having sex with members of the same sex; we are now at the point where it’s about having sex with many people of any sex, preferably simultaneously. The clergy are just catching up to the second point.

What is strange about Justin Welby’s address is his apparent surprise at the sexual degeneration rampant in what are probably the dying embers of Western Civilisation, the implication that the church is under some obligation to recognise it as wholesome, the idea that the church should be swayed by cultural norms and, perhaps most odd of all, the hint that one cannot be simultaneously opposed to same-sex marriage and the hanging of homosexuals in Iran.

Altogether, a rather outré performance:

The social context is changing radically. There is a revolution. It may be, it was, that 59% of the population called themselves Christian at the last census, with 25% saying they had no faith. But the YouGov poll a couple of weeks back was the reverse, almost exactly, for those under 25. If we are not shaken by that, we are not listening.

The cultural and political ground is changing. There is a revolution. Anyone who listened, as I did, to much of the Same Sex Marriage Bill Second Reading Debate in the House of Lords could not fail to be struck by the overwhelming change of cultural hinterland. Predictable attitudes were no longer there. The opposition to the Bill, which included me and many other bishops, was utterly overwhelmed, with amongst the largest attendance in the House and participation in the debate, and majority, since 1945. There was noticeable hostility to the view of the churches. I am not proposing new policy, but what I felt then and feel now is that some of what was said by those supporting the bill was uncomfortably close to the bone. Lord Alli said that 97% of gay teenagers in this country report homophobic bullying. In the USA suicide as a result of such bullying is the principle cause of death of gay adolescents. One cannot sit and listen to that sort of reality without being appalled. We may or may not like it, but we must accept that there is a revolution in the area of sexuality, and we have not fully heard it.

The majority of the population rightly detests homophobic behaviour or anything that looks like it. And sometimes they look at us and see what they don’t like. I don’t like saying that. I’ve resisted that thought. But in that debate I heard it, and I could not walk away from it. We all know that it is utterly horrifying to hear, as we did this week, of gay people executed in Iran for being gay, or equivalents elsewhere.

Justin Welby to meet Peter Tatchell

Posted on by
8

From here:

The new archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, will hold talks with gay rights leader Peter Tatchell on Thursday (April 18), less than a month after the Australian-born activist called Welby “homophobic” for his opposition to same-sex marriage.

“I applaud the archbishop’s willingness to engage in dialogue, all the more because he comes from the conservative wing of the Church of England,” Tatchell said in an interview. “I hope our meeting is not mere window dressing and good PR for the church. I’m expecting more than tea and sympathy.”

Tatchell, 61, said that his aim would be to persuade the new archbishop — who is also head of the world’s 77 million-member Anglican Communion — to embrace “a new historic compromise with the gay community.”

“Discrimination is not a Christian value,” he said. “The archbishop should therefore oppose all discrimination against gay people, including the ban on same-sex civil marriage.”

There is so much wrong with this, it’s hard to know where to begin; still, here goes:

Tatchell, the non-Christian has taken it upon himself to instruct Welby, the Christian, on what Christian values are:  “Discrimination is not a Christian value.” This is reported unquestioningly, as if it’s to be expected.

Tatchell, arbiter of contemporary virtues, magnanimously congratulates Welby on his willingness to engage in dialogue while giving an indelible impression that it is he, Tatchell, who is granting Welby an audience, not vice versa.

Rather than Welby, the Christian, evangelising Tatchell the homosexual activist, Tatchell is evangelising Welby: Tatchell, 61, said that his aim would be to persuade the new archbishop …. to embrace “a new historic compromise with the gay community.”

It’s transparently obvious that when it comes to claiming even a vestige of moral authority, the Church of England has thrown in the towel, preferring, instead, to seek approval and guidance from a homosexual activist who claims to be suffering from brain damage.

Justin Welby thinks the church must disagree gracefully

Posted on by
3

From here:

The Church of England must show it can manage disagreement “gracefully” over issues such as women bishops and gay marriage, the Archbishop of Canterbury has warned.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby said the Church faced a “challenge” to show the rest of society that its members can hold different views but still remain “gracefully and deeply committed to each other”.

“We need to understand reconciliation within the Church as the transformation of destructive conflict, not unanimity,” he said.

“It doesn’t mean we all agree, it is that we find ways of disagreeing, perhaps very passionately but loving each other deeply at the same time, gracefully and deeply committed to each other.

That is all very well for those who are adherents of the same faith and, thus, members of the same church. It is not the case for the division created by liberals who reinterpret the Bible to question the physical resurrection of Jesus, his virgin birth, his atoning sacrifice on the cross and, of course,  the accommodation of homosexual activity as something that can be blessed by the church.

Such liberals have established a new – or reanimated an old pagan – religion, one which they call “Christian” to deceive the unwary, but which, with its eco-babble, pre-eschatological utopia aspirations and sexual obsessions, has more in common with the Marxist-Leninist branch of a fertility cult than it does with orthodox Christianity.

With such, there is no disagreeing “gracefully.”

Justin Welby wants us to be reconciled reconcilers

Posted on by
7

 

Putting this into tangible and local terms: my parish, St. Hilda’s, left the Diocese of Niagara in 2008 because we could no longer go along with the theological drift of the diocese. As a result, the diocese sued St. Hilda’s and ended up owning our building; the building is now up for sale.

Justin Welby believes that “reconciliation” would entail the individuals from both sides “finding a way to love the person with whom you are dealing, quite probably not agreeing with each other but disagreeing in love.”

Is this achievable? Yes, I think so. Will it make any difference? None whatsoever.

From a practical perspective, St. Hilda’s will not return to the Diocese of Niagara because the theological differences have, if anything, increased not decreased. The Diocese of Niagara and, more broadly, the Anglican Church of Canada, could recognise ANiC as a legitimate expression of Canadian Anglicanism. But then their consciences would nag them to give the buildings back, something which would be an act of God akin to his creating a rock too heavy for him to lift.

So while we may end up “disagreeing in love”, we will do so at a respectable distance, making Welby’s brand of “reconciliation” little more than a damp squib.