Church of England

Church of England priest calls for the overthrow of Theresa May

Fr Christopher Woods is the parish priest of St Anne’s Hoxton. He is a Labour Party supporter, which is laudable, and also a member of Momentum, which isn’t so, but it’s a free country and clergy have every right to involve themselves in the murky morass of democracy. Whether it is sound judgment, of course, is another question. Momentum are the Corbynista revolutionaries who have seized control of the Labour Party, and Fr Christopher is positively evangelical about their virtues. ‘Check out Momentum. I just joined’, he announced on 16th June (there is no comparable ‘Check out Jesus’ tweet discernible over the past few months).

Momentum not only support Jeremy Corbyn, they are (despite the outcome of the General Election) coordinating marches and demonstrations with an abundance of placards proclaiming things like ‘May Must Go’, ‘Tories Out’, ‘Tories have got blood on their hands’, and ‘Defy Tory Rule’. So much for democracy. In conjunction with trade union leaders, they are planning a summer of discontent to pave the way for ‘Red October’, when Jeremy Corbyn will, they hope, enter No.10. The misery of the people caused by waves of strikes is of little consequence: the end justifies the means. This is a militant Marxist cult of ‘Solidarity, Class Struggle, Socialism‘: ‘Kick the Tories out’ is the stated objective, no doubt with ensuing riots and civil disorder (which, no doubt, Fr Christopher would eschew).

One of the ring leaders of this militancy is Owen Jones, who naturally believes, as Momentum state, that “the Tories have lost the consent of the people and cannot rule”. Theresa May and the Tories must go because the people have apparently changed their minds since the General Election a fortnight ago. ‘Someone who is now unable to appear in public can no longer remain Prime Minister. This disgraceful farce has to end’, Jones tweeted (despite May winning 55 more seats than Corbyn, and the greatest popular vote since… O, never mind). Fr Christopher Woods RT’d this tweet on 16th June, the day he gave his heart to Momentum.

Now then, Fr Chris (as he prefers to be known) might be a perfectly nice guy and a faithful parish priest, and it is a Twitter axiom that RT endorsement. But in this case it seems reasonable to judge that he RT’d this tweet because he really does support Owen Jones’s political objective. You only have to survey the rest of his Twitter feed to draw this conclusion. He clearly did not RT this tweet in order to increase attendance at the Hoxton Parish prayer meeting.

Is it appropriate for a Church of England priest to be calling for the revolutionary overthrow of an elected prime minister?

I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour… (1Tim 2:1ff).

This opening prayer is said daily in the House of Commons when Parliament is sitting:

Lord, the God of righteousness and truth, grant to our Queen and her government, to Members of Parliament and all in positions of responsibility, the guidance of your Spirit. May they never lead the nation wrongly through love of power, desire to please, or unworthy ideals but laying aside all private interests and prejudices keep in mind their responsibility to seek to improve the condition of all mankind; so may your kingdom come and your name be hallowed. Amen.

The Church Society gets the desired priestly/episcopal non-partisanship about right:

Most gracious God, we pray for the Prime Minister, members of Cabinet and Government and all elected to the Parliament and councils of this realm. Direct and prosper all their consultations to the advancement of your glory, the good of your church, and the safety, honour and welfare of the peoples of this land; so that peace and happiness, truth and justice, faith and godliness, may be established among us for all generations; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

But, alas, Fr Christopher Woods has determined instead to foment discord and agitate for the overthrow of Theresa May, which occurrence would doubtless lead to Momentum choruses of ‘unelected’ and ‘illegitimate’ for whoever succeeds her, thereby precipitating another general election, when Fr Chris and his fellow agitators hope to see JC come in glory and all his militant angels with him.

You may prefer to give Fr Chris the benefit of the doubt: the Jones tweet didn’t expressly call for Theresa May to be ousted or overthrown, so perhaps he is simply urging her to resign in a dignified and quiet ‘vicar’s daughter’ kind of manner for the good of the country.

Except Momentum aren’t particularly known for their gentle persuasion and benign beseeching. This is Momentum:

Momentum

And this:

Momentum 1

And this:

Momentum 2

And this:

Momentum 3

And this:

Momentum 4

And this:

Momentum 6

Masked and hooded faces, vulgar and obscene gestures, abusive and anti-democratic incitement, banners of division and dissent. This is what Fr Chris is urging his flock to join. You might think Jeremy Corbyn’s “new kind of politics” has Christian virtue, but it’s hardly a movement for peace and reconciliation. Is this really a righteous and justifiable association for a minister of the Church of England? When honourable Labour MPs like Ben Bradshaw and Frank Field and former MP Tessa Jowell denounce Momentum for causing “division, incitement, violence and intimidation”, why would a priest seek to sanctify such thuggery?

Some can see what’s going on:

Momentum hijack

Theresa May is the democratically-elected Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, albeit leading a minority party. Her task of government is extremely difficult; some might say impossible. But she merits the prayers and intercessions of all Christians, and especially of those who represent and lead the Established Church, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. She does not merit their public scoffing and scorn, that we might march in protest and incite anti-democratic revolution.

Perhaps instead of joining with those who call for the overthrow of the Prime Minister, Fr Christopher Woods might reflect on the virtue of the ballot box: it is the power reserved to the people in free and fair elections, and the means by which consent is given to those who rule. Until Christ returns, it’s the best we’ve got, and its judgments should be respected. Ye cannot serve God and the Marxist mob.

UPDATE (and correction), 21st June 2016:

Christopher Woods has complained to his 2,464 Twitter followers about the factual inaccuracies in this blog post, enlisting the support of Russell Brand (12.2million followers) to his righteous quest for justice.

Christopher Woods - Twitter 1a

Naturally, a good Christian would seek to correct all factual inaccuracies and apologise for any offence caused, so Fr Christopher was given the opportunity to amend anything and everything because we are all seekers of truth and truth is enlightenment. This is how the exchange went:

Christopher Woods - Twitter 2

To which he responded:

Christopher Woods - Twitter 3a

And that was it.

No wonder Russell Brand couldn’t be arsed.

Sincere apologies to Fr Christopher for giving the impression that he prefers to be styled ‘Fr Chris’: everything else clearly stands. On this Momentum-backed ‘Day of Rage‘ (“organised by the storm troops of the hard Left to bring London to a halt and help overthrow the Government”), one hopes that all right-thinking priests might exhort instead a Day of Prayer.

  • Richard Ramsay

    All the photographs show Socialist Workers banners who have nothing whatsoever to do with the Labour party.

    • But they do have a lot to do with Momentum. And so by extension with the Labour Party, which Momentum are trying to hijack.

      • Richard Ramsay

        Take your point Will. I know from my own experience Socialist Workers will latch on to and seek to hijack any protests for their own ends.I am a Labour party member of nearly 50 years standing and I deplore the influence of the so-called Momentum group.Also, since the Socialist Workers believe parliamentary democracy is a complete sham and they do not participate in elections why do they care who is Prime Minister?

    • Royinsouthwest

      I wonder how many “Socialist Workers” were also Labour Party members before Corbyn became leader and how many joined after he became leader? As for those who are not actually Labour Partly members would you hazard a guess as to which party they voted for in the General Election?

      • Richard Ramsay

        Probably none. My understanding is Socialist Workers consider Parliament to be a capitalist sham and that is why they do not stand in elections. So bearing in mind this view I can’t understand why they are bothered about who is Prime Minister and if they were true to their “beliefs” they would not vote at all!

  • Arden Forester

    St Anne’s Hoxton, consecrated in 1870, was an Anglo-Catholic church with all the right doctrines in place. It now sort of falls into some liberal ethos camp where bits of everything can be gleaned.

    The priest has every right to his own political opinions. But as a priest he should tread carefully I would suggest. He doesn’t want to elevate Corbyn to sanctified status and dump Mrs May in the banished sinners section. That would be perversely un-Christian.

    • The role of the priest is to teach and guide his flock through pastoral care, the sacraments and unfolding and teaching the Scriptures. The people can then, prayerfully and considering their Christian conscience, decide who to vote for. The priest should do the same and, as you say, is entitled to make his own choice.

      Where I begin to feel uncomfortable is when I see a priest overtly pushing one political party or organisation, for me it come close to an abuse of power from someone in an influential position. The only direction that a priest should be pointing people in is towards God.

  • David

    For all the reasons given in this article this priest is a disgrace.
    Theresa May is not responsible for the tragedy of Grenfell Towers. The chain of causes behind that awful event is a long one, involving many people. When we accuse people of being responsible for events which they are not responsible for, we incite injustice, in the pursuit of political goals. This is not worthy of any decent human being, particularly a Christian, and let alone a priest.
    We have just had an election and the party that gained the greatest number of seats should now, according to our constitution, be allowed to negotiate and form a government in collaboration with others. This is not new and has happened within living memory, with governments led by both the Labour and Conservative parties. Coalitions are normal in many european, democratic countries. Outright rejection and defiance of the normal operation of the constitution is to invite chaos and the inevitable injustice and misery that always follows in its wake. Such actions are deeply irresponsible.
    There is a destructive madness in the air. So the role of the Church, especially priests, is undoubtedly to point to truth, reason, and most importantly to pray frequently for calm, and wisdom for all in authority. Christians have done this since Paul’s exhortations to us. This priest is doing the very opposite. He appears to be blinded to the wider matters, which is the common good of the country, by his thirst for power for his broken and oftimes failed ideology – Socialism. But such is often the way with all utopians. The verse “by their fruits ye shall know them”, springs to my mind, but it is God who must decide whether it applies to him.

    • IanCad

      “There is a destructive madness in the air”
      Yes David! I sense that as well. Once they gain momentum, appeals to the lower orders, and the baser parts of our natures, rarely end without fisticuffs.

    • Hi

      “There is a destructive madness in the air. ”

      = Marist -Leninist- Socialism.

  • Anton

    Momentum are the Corbynista revolutionaries who have seized control of the Labour Party

    And also the Church of England. How many bishops voted for the Momentum-dominated Labour Party and how many voted Tory, estimated from their utterances?

  • Anita

    Some of those photos are possibly a bit misleading, I’m sure unintentionally. The people holding the ‘Class War’ signs are a group called er, Class War. The Socialist Workers Party placards could be held by anyone as they like to hand them out. Much as I dislike Momentum, it’s hard to know who is who in these pictures.

    Regardless of that, it’s disappointing to see a Priest tweeting things like that, especially in the current tense atmosphere.

    • HedgehogFive

      But have Momentum ever demonstrated openly as themselves, or worked behind the scenes? (Simply asking.)

      • Anita

        Well they organized the Corbyn rallies quite openly but as to other protests they may well be involved behind the scenes. I think the recent protests have SWP finger prints all over them and some people in Momentum would likely work with them, while others would not. Owen Jones, for example, has refused to attend events that had SWP involvement. I can’t think of any left wing feminist groups who will work with them either and Momentum do want to appear mainstream and link with other anti-cuts/austerity protests.

        That’s not to say Momentum isn’t planning anything of their own, and I don’t know what their links are (if any) to Movement for Justice by Any Means Necessary who are organising tomorrows demonstration. It’s likely that the Trots in Momentum would work with all of the above, but others less so. There has been a lot of Trot-related wrangling in Momentum and I don’t know how much influence the Trot types have.

        All these people are generally ghastly but in a variety of barely-different ways that matter a lot to them but less so to anyone else. I think whoever is organising things we are due a pretty grim Summer.

  • Anton

    Is it appropriate for a Church of England priest to be calling for the revolutionary overthrow of an elected prime minister?

    Back to late mediaeval England when some bishops would ally with potential usurpers, as in various Shakespeare plays!

    • Paul Greenwood

      It is however time for him to be removed as The Monarch appoints HER Prime Minister and she is Supreme Governor of the C of E

      • Anton

        Those are pious myths, although it is certainly time for this man to be removed.

        • Paul Greenwood

          Pious myths of not, they are the legal basis of the system

  • Coniston

    One cause of all this is that for two generations (at least) students have been taught in history lessons all about Hitler and the Nazis (quite rightly), but nothing about Lenin, Stalin, the fake trials, mass starvation, mass executions and gulags in Soviet Russia. Not to mention Mao’s China, Pol Pot, etc. etc.

    • Paul Greenwood

      Some do know about Stalin and Mao but Hitler is a Propaganda Issue essential to keep a myth alive that he was a) All Powerful b) Efficient c) a Nationalist d) Irrational. It is rarely considered that the economic and social situation in 1931 was significantly worse in Germany than in 1936 and that many of his policies were similar to those of FDR – though FDR was able to export weapons to UK and France for gold – to revive his economy and pressure Chamberlain in 1939 to provide a guarantee to Poland by threats.

      The purpose of “Reductio ad Hitleram” is to make you accept the Crackpot Society you live in

    • Watchman

      A poll last week suggested that 80% of teachers voted labour or lib dem so there is little wonder that the true fruits of leftism are omitted from the curriculum.

      • Chefofsinners

        Why, do you suppose, does teaching not attract more right leaning voters into the profession?
        Or, conversely, what are the experiences of teachers which lead them to vote for left wing parties?

        • Watchman

          If you read the objectives of the Frankfurt school and the modus operandi for introducing cultural marxism they suggested that the media and education were good places to have influence. Their success in the media is very evident when you examine the inherent bias in most, if not all, of the major broadcasting outlets. The evidence for education is in the fact that they have managed to manipulate recruitment towards left thinking students. Many years ago I had a friend who was chief solicitor in a county council. He told me that their Association had incontrovertible evidence that the teacher training colleges (as they were then) were recruiting left thinking teachers in order that they could then recruit left thinking students. This may sound too much like conspiracy theory but the fact is that it has come to pass.

          It goes further than simply teachers. Anecdotally, I had an interview for a post in a university (not in teacher training) and was astonished when the interview panel only seem to be interested in my political views, losing interest when they perceived me to be right wing.

          I could go deeper into this and look at how universities have controlled recruitment into social work, nursing etc rather than the agencies that employ them specifically to recruit those people into the public sector who are left leaning.

          Hope this helps and doesn’t sound too far fetched. I am old enough to have seen the changes and been close enough to them for them to be part of my reality.

          • betteroffoutofit

            Yes. This describes my own reality also. — and worse. If they really think you’re a threat then they’ll come after you: cause-stalking, in one name for the defamation campaigns they run to prevent competition.

          • Watchman

            I think the case of Felix Ngole, the social work student shows the extent to which the militant left will go to keep the purity of their religious fervour. Felix if you remember is the student who commented on Facebook that he upheld the biblical belief on marriage and was kicked off his course. We have almost reached the stage when all applicants for such courses will be sent a check list of lib/left orthodoxies and to fail on any one will make you unacceptable for certain courses and professions.

            Often it is not enough to simply acquiesce but to show positive enthusiastic missionary zeal for their mission.

          • betteroffoutofit

            Yes. I’ve seen several candidates for professorships give good lectures – only to be asked in ‘question time’ — “Are you a Marxist?” “Oh, yes. Yes. Absolutely a Marxist . . .” So they say – and ineveitably a Marxist gets the job.

          • Watchman

            A bit off topic but interesting and maybe prophetic, a Tracy Ullman sketch:
            https://youtu.be/B_jzDGv0KKw

          • Chefofsinners

            I don’t think you need to go deeper. Look for the more obvious.
            Teachers are working long hours for low pay. They do this because they want to give something to society. They see first hand the effects of cuts to government spending on children and they feel them in their wallets. They are abused by every politician who wants a cheap headline and they suffer the mismanagement that successive governments have refined to an art form.
            Those you repress you make your enemies.

        • Manfarang

          Because right leaning voters know they can earn more money in other jobs.

          • Chefofsinners

            And left leaning voters are ignorant of this fact? And right leaning voters have no other motivation to work than the income it generates? Not good enough.

          • Manfarang

            They don’t take any Tom, Dick, or Harry in the City.

          • Chefofsinners

            No, mostly Tarquins and Troys, but 13.7 million people voted Tory at the general election, so they can’t all have been in the top 10% of earners.

  • Dolphinfish

    You can’t destabilize a contented – or at least, reasonably stoic – population. People are angry, and it’s not a recreational emotion, like the funeral of Princess Diana. They’ve had enough of thirty solid years of Chicago School economics, a financial con job designed to suck every penny out of their pockets and funnel it in to the pockets of people who already have more than they could ever spend. And the Tories, the object of Cranmer’s adoration, have been hip deep in this rip-off since the days of the Blessed Margaret. They’ve been promising jam tomorrow and bleating “we can’t do nothin’ about notin'” for three decades, and people have been swallowing it. Until now. It’s not that trickle down economics don’t work. They do exactly what they were designed to do, steal from the poor. It’s just that the poor have finally copped it. Right now, it doesn’t matter whether the alternative is sound or not. The Tories are Judases, traitors, thieves, and that’s ALL they are, and all they ever were, and they’ve been found out. There has to be a reckoning.

    • I don’t remember things being much better under Blair and Brown. Most politicians seem to Judases, traitors and thieves, only the colour of the rosette changes.

      • Dolphinfish

        I’m sorry if I implied it WAS better under Blair and Brown, but if you took that inference, it’s indicative of an assumption – all too prevalent in today’s Britain – which says that if you’re not Tory, you must be Labour. In fact, Blair and Brown were monsters from the same fetid swamp as Toryism, and the sickness of one was the sickness of all. Corbyn never crawled through that swamp, and if what he stands for is of questionable value, it’s attractive because it isn’t the swamp. The choice people are looking at is either more of the same hopelessness under the same criminals, or the POSSIBILITY of something different, however vague and woolly that something might be. It says it all when so many are thinking, what’s left to lose?

        • I wasn’t entirely sure, but I didn’t think you were implying that things were better under Labour; I guessed you were more critiquing the Tory hero-worship attitude. I completely agree with you that Blair-Brown-Cameron were products of the same swap, and I’d hoped that might end when Cameron left. Sadly not. We, effectively, have a two party system after the coalition annihilated the Lib Dems and most people are, realistically, either Labour or Tory; nobody else can get a look in. As in the commercial world, a monopoly never really does anybody any good.

          I also think you’re right about Corbyn. He’s very much a product of the current state of British politics, I think. We’ve had decades of corrupt politicians lying and spinning their way to power and never giving a straight answer on anything, which shows a contempt for the electorate. Some of the things Corbyn stands for may be undesirable, but at least he stands for *something* and I can see the attraction in that. The whole system needs an overhaul.

          • Coniston

            Corbyn is, I think, just a puppet. What we have to fear are the hard-line Marxists behind him.

          • HedgehogFive

            Corbyn may well be naive like Stafford Cripps

            In 1946 Soviet jet engine designers approached Stalin with a request to buy jet designs from Western sources to overcome design difficulties. Stalin is said to have replied: “What fool will sell us his secrets?” However, he gave his assent to the proposal, and Soviet scientists and designers travelled to the United Kingdom to meet Cripps and request the engines. To Stalin’s amazement, Cripps and the Labour government were perfectly willing to provide technical information on the Rolls-Royce Nene centrifugal-flow jet engine designed by RAF officer Frank Whittle, along with discussions of a licence to manufacture Nene engines. The Nene engine was promptly reverse-engineered and produced in modified form as the Soviet Klimov VK-1 jet engine, later incorporated into the MiG-15 which flew in time to deploy in combat against UN forces in North Korea in 1950, causing the loss of several B-29 bombers and cancellation of their daylight bombing missions over North Korea.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stafford_Cripps#After_the_war

    • Anton

      Come off it mate, unbacked fiat currency is a con on the people perpetrated impartially by Left and Right.

      • Dolphinfish

        And what’s backing sterling? Even if it was 100% backed by gold (instead of the bare 5% it actually is) gold is still only a metal from the ground which men have chosen to give value to. ALL currency is fiat currency.

        • Paul Greenwood

          If it was backed 100% gold UK GDP would be around 20% of what it is today

          • Merchantman

            Gordon Brown sold off the Gold cheap remember. He was the leader of what party? Labour.

          • Paul Greenwood

            Not a relevant point. UK went off gold in 1931 because of the outflow to France. It had a Royal Navy Mutiny at Invergordon and the Government collapsed

        • Anton

          “Fiat currency” is universally understood to mean governmental fiat.

      • Paul Greenwood

        It was always unbacked….you are simply complaining that Note Issuance was nationalised instead of being courtesy of provincial banks until 1921

        http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/Pages/about/history.aspx

        • Anton

          I’m going a lot further back than that. Fiat currency is the government’s choice of exchange medium. Precious metals is the people’s choice. Government insists on their equivalence and can then confiscate precious metals and repay the people in paper.

          • Paul Greenwood

            Precious metals are NOT “the people’s choice”. Most of “the people” live on CREDIT

    • alternative_perspective

      You’re not wrong but the solution isn’t Marxism.
      We are being presented with two opposing poles to choose from (the majority at the GE selected one) whilst the left cling to the other, both to different extremes have been proven failures. GB tried nationalisation and socialism, it left us bankrupt and begging for handouts from the IMF in the 70s.
      Then we had Thatcher and that brought about a more balanced economy but the wealth, as you pointed out, hasn’t trickled down very far – compared to the very wealthy.
      Then along came Brown and Blair with their social democracy and promised to make all things new. What did they achieve? At a time of unsurpassed global prosperity they managed to engineer a system that could only raise the poor £1 above the official poverty line, and in doing so they spent an enormous amount of money and fostered the debt crisis we’re facing today.
      The people wised up to the aforementioned failings and voted in Cameron et al. who put the national debt on steroids to keep the economy going through the global crisis and embarked on austerity to keep the markets at bay. (If you want to know what real austerity looks like visit Greece).
      In all these governments we have taxed the wealthy more and more and they still get wealthier whilst the poor remain poor. I think Jesus said something about this. Perhaps we should learn from this that re-distribution doesn’t work. Moreover we have a tax policy now where we rely on 10% of the people to pay something like 75% of the taxes. Is it just that the wealthy by the simple virtue of being wealthy get wealthier…no. Is it just or right to take an ever increasing slice of their incomer … no. Is it even sensible to create such an unsustainable arrangement where the services we all rely on are held captive to the domiciling arrangements of 10% of the population…no.
      What can we conclude. Left and right are wrong about how the economy should be administered. Given this, what we do not need is revolution, overthrow and politically motivated violence.
      What we do need is a short term act of peace making and a long term re-engineering of the economy. In the short term we need conciliatory political systems that respects the democratic will of the majority but which doesn’t isolate, marginalise or ignore what is a large minority. In the longer term we need to re-think how our economic system works, the role of the state, the individual and regional democracy. And fundamentally we need a thorough re-appraisal of wealth creation and ownership in the UK.
      The status quo promotes private ownership and the radical individualisation of property. The left agitate for public ownership and nationalisation. Personally I would prefer a Mosaic model based on the Jubilee: recognising that God owns everything and that we as individuals, families, communities, regions and states merely have stewardship of what is God’s creation.
      Property is theft, whether it is the state or the individual who “owns” it, for all belongs to God.

    • Coniston

      I largely agree with you, but a major problem is that most people, and all governments, have got used to living beyond their means. We (as well as many other countries) are deeply in debt. ‘Austerity’ was aimed at reducing this debt – but people have got used to living in increasing debt, and start throwing their toys out of the pram because one party at least is aware that we are probably heading for another, even greater, financial crisis if we continue to live beyond our means.
      Most people, and all parties, imagine that we just have to get the economy expanding again, roaring away at full blast, and all our problems will be solved. But the idea that our – or the global – economy can expand for ever and ever on a finite planet with finite resources is delusional.
      The article mentioned above by Jonathan Sacks – http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2011/12/14/3390711.htm
      hits the nail on the head I think.

    • Chefofsinners

      No population is ever contented.
      We have just had a day of reckoning and, unless you use the Diane Abbott ready reckoner, the Conservatives won.

  • MoofBongo

    Am I the only one who can’t see the word “Momentum” in any of these photographs?

    • Watchman

      I can’t see Marx and Lenin but I’m sure they are well represented.

  • CliveM

    We live in disturbing times in this country. We are subject to continuing violence and have just been subjected to a damaging and devisive General Election, where the loser appears to believe they have won.

    We then saw the tragedy of Grenful Tower. Sadly the usual suspects didn’t see a tragedy, but spotted an opportunity to stir up hate and further entrench division. These people are attempting to overthrow a democratically elected Government. The hot heads will resort to violence. The atmosphere is febrile and what is needed now are cool heads, urging calm. Otherwise these is a serious risk that violence will indeed break out and people will die.

    But what about the organisations stirring it? Momentum, Class War and the like? What will be their moral responsibility if there are deaths? What about the supporters?

    What about a Church of England Priest? What will be his moral responsibility?

    These are dangerous times. This isn’t a Carnival but an attempt to usurp democracy. There is an immediate risk of violence and those caught up in it will all share the responsibility for any deaths.

    This Priest needs to consider his position.

    • Paul Greenwood

      Yes, but the people around Corbyn are well-versed in AgitProp. This is exactly how they toppled Yanukovich in Ukraine.

    • Merchantman

      Justin Welby should impose some order in the ranks. The Church of England isn’t supposed to support Momentum or any organisation that threatens to overthrow the state by intimidation and violence.
      There is a trend and slide towards violence emerging which is decidedly scary. Showing Weakness is an encouragement for bad people to up the ante.

      • CliveM

        It has long appeared to me that the ABC has all the responsibility but none of the authority to run an organisation.

  • Hi

    This is Britain, a respectable country. We do not tolerate socialist busybodies and riots on the streets here. At the most we give a tidal wave of polite indignation , so these wannabe che types should stop making a fuss, they didn’t win and should be quiet and accept parliamentary democracy . I mean what’s all this nonsense about ? Shouting and carrying on like this- it’s an absolute disgrace . This should be sorted over some tea. Who’s going to be mother?

    • Paul Greenwood

      This is the US Playbook and no doubt funded from the same Soros entities

    • HedgehogFive

      wannabe che types

      Should we love Che Guevara?

    • dannybhoy

      A respectable society is not built on clouds but on foundations. Neither is it built immediately, but line upon line, precept upon precept.. Isaiah 28.
      History teaches us that civilisations blossom and fade. The ideas that inspired them are either defeated or exhausted, and other groups subdue them and take their place.
      You Hannah, belong to the only people who are the exception to that rule, and that is of course because the Almighty continues to honour His covenant with His people Israel.

      • Watchman

        Hi, Danny, I recently came across this dated article/speech by Jonathan Sacks explaining the rise and fall of empires and economies. Worth reading if you ignore him sucking up to his hosts.
        http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2011/12/14/3390711.htm

        • dannybhoy

          It’s an article I can agree with, but it highlights a curious anomaly about human thought processes.
          Everything he says is eminently reasonable and based on historical truths. Yet..we are where we are, and the problems we now face are so much more real than the processes that brought us to this place.
          It’s almost as though we humans in time and space can only face the current consequences, rather than pause and reflect on the historical causes and repair the damage. History is linear, and we can only go onwards, never backwards.
          Does that make any sense?

          • Watchman

            Absolutely! But to me his diagnosis and treatment are still relevant. We seem to have gone beyond the crossroads from the narrow path to the broad path in a few short years. I do not want to be there when we get to our spiritual destination as a nation if we continue on this road. Come, Lord Jesus, come!

          • dannybhoy

            Ah, just got up, nice nap, nice cup of tea etc etc.
            Oh I agree, it’s absolutely relevant to us, but there’s a sense of inevitability in all this now, isn’t there.
            I believe in 2 Chronicles 7:14 with all my heart, but God will have His way..

          • Watchman

            So do I, but I prefer to read the whole chapter to get that verse into the context of a loving God wanting His best for His people and the consequences they heap upon themselves for their unfaithfulness
            “Then they will say: Because they abandoned the LORD God of their ancestors who brought them out of the land of Egypt. They clung to other gods and worshiped and served them. Because of this, He brought all this ruin on them.”

            The analogy stands, we have had the gospel of redemption that brought us out of Egypt yet we have rejected Him for a multitude of other modern gods. My guess is that the punishment will be the same. More than ever we need a praying nation.

        • Coniston

          A similar, rather shorter article by Jonathan Sacks about the rise and fall of civilizations:
          https://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/the_challenge_of_9_11

          • Watchman

            Thanks, Coniston, they are both so relevant to today. They both show that politicians in their short-sighted view are neglecting to address the root problem. One wonders whether Blair deliberately set out to destroy our sense of cohesion and identity with Frankfurt School ideology.

      • MoofBongo

        Is it built with due attention to fire regulations?

        • dannybhoy

          Jobsworth..

  • Paul Greenwood

    http://uk.linkedin.com/in/revdchris

    So he’s Irish married to a Registrar in NHS and seems to have flitted around the “religious sector” without leaving a footprint. Another flake.

  • betteroffoutofit

    Your Grace: “Fr Chris (as he prefers to be known)” . . . sad that. Talk about putting worldly ways before God’s!

    I wonder: Doesn’t he care what “Christopher” means?

  • Anton

    I expect Welby will take the sort of decisive action that has become his hallmark.

    • Politically__Incorrect

      ROFL

    • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

      Yes, even now he is rushing to put the kettle on…

  • Politically__Incorrect

    It makes you wonder why people like Christopher Woods bother going to theological college at all. Why not spare yourself the hassle of repaying tuition fees, skip uni, and go straight into whichever Marxist/Leninist organisation takes your fancy. No need to waste time studying, he could have painted his placard and joined the hoards of Commie oiks on the streets. If Justin Welby had any backbone on the matter, which he absolutely doesn’t, then he would either discipline those who place Karl Marx above God or expel from the CofE.

    • Watchman

      Doesnt it want you to have a conversation with him about his theology?

    • CliveM

      Is there a proper legal process that allows him to do so? Does anyone know?

      • TANFIELD

        I think I am right in saying that under the present CoE synod legislation Priests can be disciplined (which in extreme cases means removal) for expressing views or undertaking actions which are contrary to Christian Doctrine – as this must surely be. If I am correct then the Bishop of London should be urged to do what is necessary.

        • Watchman

          I think such action might, if taken to a logical conclusion, denude the CofE of many of its bishops.

          • Politically__Incorrect

            Not a bad idea

        • CliveM

          I think the chances of getting the current Bishop of London to do that, slight to say the least. Indeed considering the breadth of doctrinal belief in the CofE, where to start and where to finish!

        • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

          Oh Tanfield, dear Tanfield, the present (acting) Bishop of London is probably somewhere in the melee above, waving his own placard, next to the woman bishop who advocates the removal of crosses from churches and cathedrals and the installation of prayer spaces for Muslims. These are revolutionary times…

        • Fat chance of that. The Bishop of London (acting) is from the same stable.

        • TANFIELD

          Please forgive my ignorance of the current state of the Senior Clergy of the Diocese of London – fortunately I live in another Diocese with a much more orthodox Bishop !!. I believe that it might be possible to make a complaint direct to the ecclesiastical Court without the intervention of any of the local senior clergy – just a thought !!

    • Richard Ramsay

      Justin Welby does not have any backbone. He has facilitated private prayers sessions for Teresa May. I am sure he would do the same for Joe Bloggs! Point here is the Church of England have always been the Tory party in prayer-Christopher Woods is in the wrong organisation.

    • James M

      There was a “Red Dean” in the 1930s – so a “Red Vicar” is probably no big deal: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hewlett_Johnson

  • HedgehogFive

    Shouldn’t those media types and assorted artists who like Corbyn so much look to how much freedom their equivalents possess in Marxist oriented countries?

    As for any social democrats who may like Corbyn, they should consider what happened to the Mensheviks after the Bolsheviks took power.

    • Watchman

      Yes, Hedgehog, and they should also look at how many Marxist states have faired economically. China is an exception because it looked at how the western world operated and replicated it.

      • CliveM

        As you say, China is a one party state, but not a Marxist one. Long gave up any Marxist pretensions.

        • Watchman

          Clive , it’s actually more complicated than that. They had an academic study done on why the west was successful at commerce and the report came back that at the root of the success of the west was their Judeo-Christian value system. They adopted those principles by analysing what they were, and the rest is history.

          • David

            I am pleased that at least one other visitor to this site is aware of China’s study regarding the catalyst that made the west successful, and particularly the conclusion they reached – the Judaeo-Christian value system ! They are also very interested in Burkean conservatism I believe.

          • Watchman

            Some while ago Jonathan Sacks made the observation that while the economy of China was flourishing so was Christianity, but in the west the economy was in decline, as was Christianity. It takes a Rabbi to spot that sort of thing!

          • Manfarang

            Very interested in Confucianism.

          • Manfarang

            And when was this academic study? The Chinese are very good at business although they don’t do it in a western way. The mainland government got diaspora Chinese businessmen to set up shop in China and this led the way to China opening up to the world.

          • Watchman

            Sorry, I cant give you a date, it was something I read some years ago and I don’t have a reference for it. An article to which I gave a link mentions it – http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2011/12/14/3390711.htm.
            I knew about the study and the conclusions but not the strategy. Presumably, the diaspora businessmen were part of that strategy, particularly if they’d been involved in business the western way.

          • Manfarang

            Many of the businessmen (and maybe a few business women) were based in SE Asia where there are large Chinese communities. The way of doing business involves what is known in Chinese as ‘guanxi’ a kind of networking.

          • Watchman

            That’s interesting because I always associate that with the Jewish way of operating, they know someone who knows someone who owns him a favour etc. I spent a large part of my life among Jews and always envied the glue that held them together and where deals were struck informally, almost casually, but always honoured. As a goy I couldn’t play any part in this.

    • David

      They have little interest in a true freedom of expression, only in enforcing the contemporary brand of deeply illiberal liberalism. They also assume, foolishly, that after the revolution that they dream of, that the ruling group will still favour the present interpretations of acceptable behaviour and thoughts. Due to naiveté they fail to grasp that the narrative being pushed now may merely be the cover needed to grasp power, after which the story will change again; for in their universe power merely regards “truth” as the means to achieve power, as according to the doctrines of post-modernism “truth”, can be redefined when needed for the convenience of the rulers.

  • cybervicar

    My closet friend was brought in Czech soviet republic and is quite haunted by the great JC and his Momentum. This brings back too many overtones of Marxist revolutionary game playing. I fear tomorrow onwards a militancy is going lurch in mob violence for our government.

    • dannybhoy

      Closet friend – or closest?
      Avi’s family came out of Soviet Czechoslovakia. He will have some real insights as to where this is going.

      • cybervicar

        whoops – what a funny typo. Grim times indeed!

  • James Bolivar DiGriz

    “Fr Christopher Woods is … a Labour Party supporter, which is laudable”

    Why?

    What is laudable about being a member of a party that, when last in power, saddled the country with enormous debts, both actual and accruing for decades under PFI and a bloated public sector salary & pensions liability.

    What is laudable about being a member of a party that is blatantly anti-Semitic, but silent about the abuses committed by it’s Islamic component. Both the gross abuses (bombs, van & knife attacks) and the everyday (segregated meetings, FGM, etc).

    What is laudable about being a member of a party that in power does just everything it came to harm the future of the weakest & poorest in society; working against the traditional family, fighting to prevent quality education for all, and so on.

    • Watchman

      And what is laudable about being obsessed with the kingdom of this world when Jesus said that his kingdom is not of this world. His task is a spiritual one, not a temporal one.

      • James M

        I don’t think any NT book contains that second sentence…

        • Watchman

          Jesus did not die for the redistribution of wealth. He died to save sinners and to follow Him means, to the leaders of His flock, to enable others to live lives worthy of their calling. That is a spiritual task.

    • James60498 .

      Or a party that after giving NI its own Assembly planned to force that Assembly to accept Child Murder, aka abortion.

  • David

    It is ludicrous for us now to start a dangerous flirtation with Socialism. This century and the last has provided many examples of where it has failed disastrously, and brought about misery, poverty and tyranny, not to mention widespread death and destruction. Chavez’s Venezuela is the current and continuing proof that Socialism does great harm. So why do people push this agenda against all the evidence ? Is it because they need a cause, a faith to believe in, or is it just a thinly disguised lust for power ?

    • Coniston

      I agree that Socialism generally leads to disaster, but present-day capitalism is hardly any better. For the second time I would urge everyone to read the article by Jonathan Sacks mentioned above –
      http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2011/12/14/3390711.htm

      • David

        Thank you for the link. I have a high opinion of J. Sacks and find his writings very good indeed. All aspects of our society are suffering from the rejection of our Judaeo-Christian framework, including capitalism.

  • What a silly, silly man. No wonder he married a women specialising in children’s neurological ailments.

  • TIME to CTRL ALT & DEL

    If he and others spend as much time agitating for the Kingdom of God, and the overthrow of Satan’s kingdom, as he does in this cause….

  • Suddenly we are back in the 1970s.
    Does anyone remember the Peter Simple column in the Daily Telegraph?
    All the characters have suddenly popped out of his column and into real life.
    There was Bishop Spaceley-Trellis, the go-ahead Bishop of Bevindon; grenade-draped, 36 year-old Ron Frabb, perpetual president of the Stretchford University NUS, busily banning speakers who were anything but Marxist, and of course, Mrs Dutt-Pawker, the Hampstead thinker who could smell a South African orange at fifty paces so that she could boycott it- only now they’re Israeli oranges instead.
    .
    Today, we had Ed Miliband on Radio 2 standing in for Jeremy Vine, so of course we had to have a representative from Hate not Hope….sorry, Hope not Hate, telling us that we need to report anyone with right-wing views who might dare to express them down at the Dog and Duck (soon to be re-named the Jolly Socialist). Beware this organization and its members: they are deeply, deeply illiberal and hate-filled.

  • John

    Priests on politics. It’s like flies on sh*t.

  • Maalaistollo

    He’s an Irishman who’s seen a fight and wants to join in. Nothing unusual about that; just ask IG.

  • len

    If Fr Chris and others would spend more time preaching the real Gospel and less on the socialist ‘ gospel’ then perhaps we might see the Great Commission being fulfilled?.
    Well, here’s hoping anyway

  • One of the ideas that had survived (the French Revolution), perhaps the single most important idea, was the idea of a utopian society, the idea that we humans – or at least the enlightened revolutionaries among us – can create something very like a heaven-on-earth. This was to replace the traditional Christian idea of a supernatural heaven, a paradise that some of us will reach after death. The hope for a terrestrial utopia became a secularized version of the old Christian hope for heaven ….

    These ideas are alive and well in America today (and across the West). Where can we find them? In the hearts and minds of those folks who call themselves “progressives.”

    And what exactly are these ideas, the ideas shared by all present day descendants of the original Revolution of the late eighteenth century?

    (1) Equality – not just political and legal equality, but a classless society, that is, a rough equality of economic condition.

    (2) Personal liberty – the freedom to do, say, or be whatever you like, provided you do no obvious harm to your fellow humans.

    (3) Cosmopolitanism (the brotherhood of man) – the disappearance of all prejudice and discrimination based on race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sex or gender, sexual orientation; and of course there must be no national borders.

    (4) Immense prosperity – the result of an economic system based on justice and love, not the profit motive.

    (5) World peace – this follows automatically from #3 and #4.

    (6) Health – death will perhaps never be eliminated, but as long as we remain alive we must be kept in very good health.

    (7) Education – everybody will be educated to the limit of his or her potential.

    (8) Universal happiness – given #1 through #7, how could we not be happy?

    https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2017/06/16/our-utopian-revolutionaries/

    • dannybhoy

      “The hope for a terrestrial utopia became a secularized version of the old Christian hope for heaven …. ”
      “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.” 1 Corinthians 15:20
      All well meaning visions of Utopia seem to be corruptions of the Kingdom of God..

    • Linus

      The Revolution was over 200 years ago. Ideas have moved on since then.

      Of course the first post-Revolution generations believed in a secular paradise. The idea of paradise had been drummed into them by the Church. Modern secular thought however eschews such simplistic and unachievable ideas.

      Social and technological advances will enable us to improve and prolong our lives. But anyone who thinks they’ll transport us to an earthly paradise is off his head.

      There’s no such thing as paradise. Advances resolve old problems but create a whole range of new ones. Each generation has to cope with those problems. Those who spend their time dreaming about a future without problems are just as deluded as any religionist.

      Don’t place your faith in a secular paradise. Don’t place your faith in any promise of perfection and bliss. They don’t exist. The world is what it is and we have to live in it as it is. Understand that and you become truly free.

      • Chefofsinners

        Truly free to be completely miserable in a universe bereft of meaning, purpose or hope.

        • Linus

          Truly free to be as happy as anyone could reasonably be in a universe full of opportunity and endless fascination, you mean.

          As for your made-up meaning, futile purpose and false hope: who needs them? We’re all going to be a long time dead. Don’t waste your life trying to appease an imaginary deity designed to assuage your fear of oblivion to come.

          Oblivion is just that: oblivion. Why be afraid of it?

          • Chefofsinners

            You want to be as happy as anyone could reasonably be? Don’t bother with Christianity. If on the other hand you’d like to be happier than anyone could reasonably expect or have a right to be, then God has already paid dearly to give you the opportunity.
            We will, of course, not be a long time dead, we will be eternally alive – either with God or without. Oblivion is a lie of the Devil.
            You will remember Jesus’ parable of the rich man and Lazarus, in which the rich man in torment was told “Neither shall they be persuaded even if one should rise from the dead”. Perhaps you won’t be persuaded. But there is still time.

          • Linus

            Want to persuade me? Nothing could be easier. Show me some evidence your beardy sky pixie exists and is anything like the portrait painted of him in your holy book.

            Evidence. That means something which tends to prove or disprove a claim; ground for belief; proof.

          • Chefofsinners

            No-one can persuade you. You will either choose to believe or you will choose not to.
            If you choose to believe, then you will receive proof.
            If you choose not to believe, the proof will eventually arrive, but it will then be too late to believe.

          • Linus

            More evidence of Christian narcissism. For Christians, proof is something that is conjured up to support their pre-determined conclusions. If you believe, the material world will conform itself to your belief and provide you with proof. Why? Because the material world exists only to service you and your delusions.

            Muslims, Buddhists and most other religionists share that view and claim they have received proof that their religion, not yours, is the true one. The only problem is that, just like you, they can’t demonstrate the objective reliability of that proof to anyone else.

            Take the example of various statues of Mary that weep “blood” or “tears”. In cases where they have been tested, these liquids have proven to be either the blood of those making the claim, or various coloured liquids or dyes, or plain condensation. All the evidence points to human fraud.

            That’s what Christian “proof” amounts to. Fraudulent evidence designed to put pre-determined conclusions beyond question. It’s profoundly unscientific and profoundly dishonest. It’s religion: the triumph of delusion over reality.

          • Chefofsinners

            The objective reliability of material proof is immaterial. This is why Jesus said “Neither will they be persuaded if one should rise from the dead.”
            Those who choose to believe do so. That is what choice is. That is what belief is. You have a choice. Get over it and make yours.

          • Linus

            No, Jesus got that wrong. Or more precisely, whoever wrote Jesus’s character got it wrong.

            Raise someone from the dead by invoking some of your Christian mumbo-jumbo and I’ll certainly believe you’re onto something. What other explanation could there be?

            The experiment would need to be very precise. It would have to be conducted on a visibly necrotic corpse to eliminate the possibility of fraud, i.e. bringing a live body out of a catatonic state. Rotting flesh can’t reanimate by any known natural process. And you certainly don’t possess access to futuristic technology that could reverse the process of cellular decay. So if you managed to bring a putrid cadaver back to life merely by praying over it, I would be forced to conclude that something supernatural was going on.

            Of course, whoever penned Jesus knew a resurrection could never happen, so he had his imaginary messiah claim that unbelievers refuse to believe in miracles, which means there’s no point in performing any. He could if he wanted to of course (of course…), but why should he bother?

            Why indeed?. If the gullible individuals who believe in this imaginary god are ready to accept his claims without the slightest shred of evidence, there’s just no need to produce any, is there? The most outrageous claims can be made without ever having to be demonstrated.

            H.C. Andersen understood this aspect of religion. He wrote a story about it. The Emperor’s New Clothes describes well the human propensity to believe what we want to believe despite a total lack of objective evidence.

            What a fool, that emperor. What a fool, that Christian. You’re stark naked and in total denial about it.

            It really isn’t a very edifying sight.

        • James M

          A pretty good mock-up of Hell, or, how to be one’s own god.

    • len

      If there was a paradise on earth we would spoil it. Oh we did.
      Jesus gives us another chance, under His rule and Reign this time.

    • Royinsouthwest

      Progressives are not terribly keen on freedom of speech, at least not for those they disagree with and therefore their commitment to item 2 on the list – Personal liberty – is questionable.

    • IanCad

      Jack, Number 2 only applies to those who toe the party line; all else is blasphemy and the most severe punishment shall be visited upon all transgressors.

    • They of course fail to take into account that everybody’s idea of heaven on Earth differs, that people’s abilities differ, human nature, the hand of fate.

    • IrishNeanderthal

      Regarding cosmopolitanism, this was first published in 1908. In 1913, the Peace Palace was opened in the Hague. In 1914, let me think …..

      It is obvious that there is a great deal of difference between being international and being cosmopolitan. All good men are international. Nearly all bad men are cosmopolitan. If we are to be international we must be national. And it is largely because those who call themselves the friends of peace have not dwelt sufficiently on this distinction that they do not impress the bulk of any of the nations to which they belong. International peace means a peace between nations, not a peace after the destruction of nations, like the Buddhist peace after the destruction of personality. The golden age of the good European is like the heaven of the Christian: it is a place where people will love each other; not like the heaven of the Hindu, a place where they will be each other.

      G.K.Chesterton, http://www.gkc.org.uk/gkc/books/All_Things_Considered.html#FRENCH_AND_ENGLISH

  • The late Fr Richard John Neuhaus once quipped that the purpose of the Anglican Communion was to make irony redundant.

    Even more urgent today is the need for the Church of England to issue their own document Romanorum coetibus, by which they can welcome into their “ecclesial community”, all the dissident Catholics who, rebelling against the Magisterium, desire to keep their most treasured customs. There in the embrace of the Anglicans they can have their clay pot chalices and burlap banners, their ditties and rainbow stoles,free from the interferences of patriarchal oppression… or now fixed genders or sexes! Under Romanorum coetibus these folks could maintain their cherished 60’s music progress to the ordination of women and openly – more openly pray to the earthmothergoddess… all without the spirit-repressing domination of masculine and gender particular Rome! When everything is a moving target, then by golly it’s the C of E for you. What a great contribution those newly rechristened Anglicans could offer!

    http://wdtprs.com/blog/2017/06/the-church-of-england-whither-fr-z-again-offers-his-solution/

  • It is peculiar how CofE ministers are allowed – and proudly promote – an allegiance to the far left Momentum, but not the BNP.

    • dannybhoy

      Too, too vulgar…

      • David

        Vulgar ? So are this lot. The difference is that too many clergy confuse activities of a socialist state with Jesus’ compassion. How they do this defeats me since nothing is as cold, distant and unresponsive as Big State.

        • dannybhoy

          I have nothing to do with any extremist organisations. UKIP and the Zionist Federation are as extreme as I get, but what I was getting at is that ‘clergypersons’ are all too often polite people, who value compromise and outward displays of unity above all else.
          It ties in with the thread I saw recently somewhere here about the emasculation of men in the context of Christianity. There is no evidence that Jesus was a meek and mild milksop, but a red blooded man who was unafraid to show tenderness and compassion.
          Likewise the disciples were recognisably men, not mice.Bumbling and opinionated and quarrelsome. Quite where this bland, soft, timorous form of Christianity came from, I have no idea.

          • “Quite where this bland, soft, timorous form of Christianity came from, I have no idea.”

            The feminists and their supporters.

            Ignatius of Loyola advised his followers to steer clear of women: “All familiarity with women was to be avoided, and not less with those who are spiritual, or wish to appear so.” The militant Ignatius, a “new soldier for Christ,” understood something that we moderns in the West dislike admitting: A feminized Church is a weak institution. Why? It puts soft devotions and emoting ahead of the Cross. It stresses Mercy and ignores Justice. It’s the perfect partner for “progressive” ideology and its moral relativism.

          • dannybhoy

            Hmm.
            I have great respect for the best of womanhood and the qualities they display,
            From my experience of working with children and teenagers in care I have observed that women are often inclined to be placatory in the face of aggressive or threatening behaviour. They will look for conciliation and compromise so as to restore harmony, thus deflecting or avoiding the real issue of authority.
            Thus men and women ideally complement each other as in the parenting of children. Men are increasingly emasculated, and perhaps the ‘objectifying’ of women, the increase in porn and violence against women is a sign of this imbalance?

          • “They will look for conciliation and compromise so as to restore harmony, thus deflecting or avoiding the real issue of authority.”

            There you go ………….

          • dannybhoy

            There you go indeed, but that doesn’t mean we should steer clear of them! Men need women as much as women need men. The real issue is that of authority and for Christians and Jews that God given authority is invested in the man..
            Please share this with your wife….

          • CliveM

            My wife promised to love, honour and obey.

            She lied!

          • dannybhoy

            :0)

          • Chefofsinners

            Mine bought me a tree. Love, honour and a bay.

          • dannybhoy

            (groan..)
            Please leave.

          • dannybhoy

            As in “Bay”…

          • James60498 .

            I tried

          • dannybhoy

            :0) :0)
            Yes, but God is a God of order and design, so we husbands need our wives to work with us in assuming our God given responsibilities! So for example the Father secures salvation through the Son, and sanctification through the Holy Spirit.
            A man needs his wife and a wife needs her husband. God ordained that Adam should lead, but the Adam needs the willing cooperation of his Eve to make it work….

          • Cressida de Nova

            Sadly this was bad advice….keeping a group of men together without female connection of any kind has dire consequences…The Church has paid a price for this. I should imagine St Ignatius is still languishing in purgatory somewhere.

  • HedgehogFive

    In October will be the 100th anniversary of the Russian October Revolution. With this in mind, consider the following extract from

    The World Crisis, Volume IV: The Aftermath by Winston S. Churchill

    But the Provisional Government had to maintain the daily life of the nation, to keep order, and to produce military victory over the Germans, while the sole immediate aim of the Bolsheviks was a general smash.

  • Chefofsinners

    I have founded a new movement, called Dementum. I and my follower have clearly won the general election by an even bigger margin than Jeremy Corbyn, since I have no seats at all.
    Our party text is: “Come unto me all ye that can’t be arsed to labour, and I will give you the hard earned cash of the last few decent people in Britain.”
    The strategy is as follows:
    i) Chase ambulances trying to look compassionate.
    ii) Get lots of people to say on Twitter that I am going to be prime minister, then the BBC will report this, and then the Twitter fairy will make it come true. Hurrah!

    • Dominic Stockford

      No, no, no. I won the election, because people were very disappointed that I didn’t stand.

  • Dominic Stockford

    Is treason no longer a thing?

    • Pubcrawler

      It is. But this is more like sedition — which isn’t, thanks to Blair.

    • James M

      Bliar abolished it.

      • Pubcrawler

        No, he didn’t.

      • Anton

        He got away with it.

    • TANFIELD

      I believe that Treason still exists but Blair abolished the Death Penalty for it.

      • len

        That was a bit of foresight.

  • jsampson45

    The problem is that while we have free elections they are not fair. No party has won as much as 50% of the vote since World War II. We vote for MPs and perhaps a stable government will emerge, perhaps it won’t. We now have a very small party holding the balance of power. Few people knew much about the DUP until after the election, when their website crashed as a result of so many people wanting to find out. So how can one say that the people consented to rule by a DUP-Tory government? The only evidence for consent is the absence of revolution. The only justification for the public peace is the mercy of God.

    This does not in any way justify Fr. Chris (Call no man father) – revolution just brings the scum to the top more quickly than democracy does – or the Church of England retaining him as a pastor, though no doubt it will.

    • bluedog

      Life is unfair. ‘We now have a very small party holding the balance of power. ‘ Not really. The DUP are only going to ally themselves with an entity that they perceive shares their values. Of course, they are wrong in that assumption where the Conservative Party is concerned, but that’s another matter. If the DUP truly held the balance of power they would be canvassing an alliance with the forces of the dark side; Labour, SNP, Lib-Dims. But there is not the slightest chance of them playing the two sides off against each other. It’s the Conservatives or oblivion.

      • Chefofsinners

        Oblivion is often underrated, I feel.

  • Inspector General

    Good to see the Socialist Workers party are still around, what!

    One recalls these types from the 1970s. They, among others, were instrumental in arranging the ‘Winter of Discontent’ which brought down the Labour government of Callaghan and ultimately led to 18 years of Conservative rule.

    These blighters really are the kiss of death. Every large concern used to have at least one. Urging the workforce to strike for no other reason than to bring the company, and capitalism, down. Of course, these days, the workforce are much more informed, and are likely to kick seven shades out of such wreckers if they were still around, which they aren’t. Blacklisted, you see. Don’t think black lists on potential employees don’t exist!

    So if you meet a SWP man. Pat him on the back and buy him a pint. We conservative types need those firebrands about. But whatever you do, don’t mention said ‘winter’

    • Royinsouthwest

      Do modern socialist workers actually work?

      • Flyingwedge

        They are employed in the public sector, whether they work or not is another matter.

    • Manfarang

      The Trade Unions were instrumental in bringing about the ‘Winter of Discount’. Other than the NUT, the SWP was thinly spread.

      • Inspector General

        My dear fellow, one recalls the time well. Although,now, the SWP presents a picture of drug dependant badly dressed unemployable asocials, 40 years ago, they not only worked, but were enthusiastic trade unionists therein.

        • Manfarang

          I do remember one that went to work in the car industry but most of them were teachers. The SWP were very much a rent-a-mob. Where there was an industrial dispute they would descend upon it with their leaflets.More noise than strength.

  • About
    Momentum evolved out of Jeremy Corbyn’s 2015 Labour leadership bid to build on the energy and enthusiasm generated by the campaign.

    Momentum has over 150 local groups, 23,000 members and 200,000 supporters, united by their shared vision for a fair and equal society.

    Momentum supports the Labour party, and works to increase participation and engagement in the party to enable it to win elections and enter Government.

    Momentum believes in an open, democratic Labour party, powered by its members.

    What does Momentum want to do?

    Organise with communities across the country to put forward Labour’s ambitious plan for Britain and secure a Labour Government that:

    Redistributes wealth and power from the few to the many;

    Puts people and planet before profit and narrow corporate interests;

    Builds a society free from all types of discrimination;

    Invests to create high-quality jobs and infrastructure;

    Reverses the privatisation of railways, the energy sector and public services;

    Provides protection at work and strong collective bargaining to end workplace injustices;

    Provides decent homes for all in both the public and private sector.

    Transform Labour into a more open, member-­led party capable of winning elections.

    Bring together individuals and groups in our workplaces and communities to campaign and organise on the issues that matter to us.

    http://www.peoplesmomentum.com/about

    Sounds very noble and democratic.

    • Inspector General

      There will be objectors to Momentum. But then again, Momentum will come up with a specialised policing program to ensure those that are don’t interfere with the ‘peoples will’. Let’s call it the Cheka. Whomever controls the Cheka will be a very powerful individual…

      One imagines you, Jack, remembering your Communist Party of Great Britain days with deep affection…

      • bluedog

        There can be little doubt that Momentum will prove to be compatible with Islamic principles and beliefs. The worthy goal of the destruction of the bourgeoisie with its replacement by the proletariat will see the latter substituted by the ummah. We hear a great deal about Islamo-fascism, but Momentum promises a progressive development in the form of Islamo-Leninism.

        • Inspector General

          So long as Socialist Worker is around, and represented by tragic ill dressed druggies and crafty benefit surfers, society as we know it will continue…

      • Lol … Jack was an International Socialist whilst a student – not a member of the Stalinist Communist Party.

        • Merchantman

          Whatever the name it’s full circle to Happyland then. Student Coercion, Suppression of free speech, Nationalisation,Taxation till the pips squeak, Flying Pickets, Immigration, Inflation, Currency controls, CND, Strikes, Wage control. Red Robbo, Red Barrel.
          Add in Gay New World and Islamophobia and you are welcome.

        • Manfarang

          An IS boot boy eh?

          • Sandals in those days …. Jack was also a Hippy.

          • Manfarang

            Hippy Jack eh?
            I don’t remember many Trotskyist hippies.

    • David

      The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
      Socialism invariably produces poverty, misery and tyranny.

    • James M

      “Capable of winning elections” ? Just as well they don’t say how LOL. Morons.

  • Royinsouthwest

    It is easy to sympathise with Fr Christopher Woods. He was obviously wondering how on earth he could make the Church of England “relevant” and “modern” (the same problem faced by David Cameron when he became Conservative leader) but then Woods discovered Momentum and they introduced him to JC, the Messiah.

    • David

      And the more “relevant” the Church becomes to the zeitgeist the less faithful and useful it becomes to Our Lord Jesus Christ who commanded us to preach the gospel. In fact the increase in relevance to the gods of this age happens only in the deluded, weak heads of those church leaders leading the dilution and distortion of the gospel. For there is no evidence that following contemporary fads even increases bums on pews, indeed the fuller local churches are the traditional ones.

      • James M

        The devil is clearly no symbol to lefty vicars – for them, the Tories function as the devil. The Kingdom of Christ may pass away, but their aversion to the Tories shall not pass away, but shall flourish as the green bay tree for ever and ever, when the bay tree is no more upon the earth.

        Leftism in the C of E and and the CC in E and W needs Evelyn Waugh and Jonathan Swift to do it justice.

  • bluedog

    The Rev Chris Woods seems badly out of touch in his enthusiasm for the political assassination of Mrs May, Your Grace.

    Hasn’t he heard? If Mrs May had ever lost her political virtue by winning more seats in the Parliament than JC, she is now redeemed, and her piety both restored and enhanced. Surely the appointment of Mr Gavin Barwell, David Cameron’s gay rights supremo, as Mrs May’s chief of staff is grounds for re-appraisal.

    Indeed, one wonders if this appointment does not suggest the installation of a hot-line between Chipping Norton and Downing Street in order to defuse potential conflicts in times of emergency.

    • Royinsouthwest

      Although it would probably be unfair to pin the blame for the Grenfell Tower disaster on one man Gavin Barwell has been criticised for the lack of action when he was Housing Minister on a report into safety in tower blocks.

      Theresa May’s new chief of staff ‘sat on’ a review of fire safety in tower blocks like Grenfell Tower
      http://uk.businessinsider.com/gavin-barwell-under-fire-for-delaying-report-into-fire-safety-as-housing-minister-2017-6

      A coroner’s investigation into a much smaller fire in another tower block was published in 2013 and made several recommendations. The government did nothing at all about implementing those recommendations. Perhaps fire safety is regarded by modern politicians as a less urgent matter than “gay rights.”

    • HedgehogFive

      Barwell’s Wikipedia entry contains a lot of things, presumably factual, suggesting that he may be of dubious character, but nothing mentioning gay rights.

  • layreader

    I’m not sure why you should give this lunatic priest the ‘oxygen of publicity’ as the Blessed Margaret descibed it. Far better to report him to his diocesan Bishop and ask him to proscribe Momentum in the same way that they did to the BNP. Oops, alas that’s Bishop Pete, who’s probably been down the picket line shouting a few slogans himself.
    But then, outside a few square miles of chattering North London, who cares?

  • Murti Bing

    Perhaps he’s hoping to be the next Giles Fraser, that is after the present incumbent evaporates in a plume of his own admiration.

  • not a machine

    well I think today was one of the most fascinating insights into the world of ideas , rarely can a person actually say to a person with power and responsibility , that you have solved a number of elements to a problem , shake there hand , and then they vanish with enterage totally unaware they have just met the person who has the solution they are going to adopt and couldn’t stop to enquire as they were on schedule.
    Oh lord your ways are mysterious , the heatwaves mean nothing to them ,they amble when they should be saving ecosystems ,they meet the best solution and think it alien .
    sighs ….. should I be surprised my own country and it has to go through tedious filters rather than take it from impudent genius inspired by the lord .apparently we have no turbine maker ,they sold out to siemens .I weep I truly do weep .were going to be fried to a crisp by the time someone says in oh we really aught to do something .
    yours in frump , but in a way relieved …….

    • not a machine

      Note to self (in general Barnes Wallace edition or Sir Nigel Gresley take yer pick)
      following intimate liason with messers Jacobs Creek and messers Kopparberg well I think I deserve it other brands of srcummy fruit fermentations are available….. quite why the swedes should create the thing I had for so long associated as British other than mede ,improve a drink to near sex ,I don’t know , but its on my bucket list to visit Koppparberg ,just hope theres a B&B and and interesting tasting session afternoon pass , I never took to alcopops but this stuff is wicked ,on the blueberry and lime ,sublime …… and I always liked Belgian beers and Borolo wine ….
      decided politics is a players game , done my bit I hope , Hope I was on right side on best outcome etc ….love my country etc etc fed up of bugger yer countryman etc etc (but will probebely kiss wife and children and take up offensive position when it comes to it , (cos I think being a Christian country/Christian monarch is worth something).
      Have decided that game of prawns is well er tiring …. fighting with sticks (rubbish sticks at that )etc etc .So will now be looking for Mrs right to settle down with ,following deterioration of previous relationship and other relationship with women who was so much more intelligent and made life unbearable with constant psychoanalysis , when a kiss would have done nicely , however was correct with castigation of “worn out tools” , which in faireness is how most new relationships cover over previous peccadillos (not that women ever talk like drunk about previous partners,but not Ms Kirsty walks great enjoyment of line about flesh pots of Europe) .I think I am decent ,loyal, bit eccentric, bit traditional even ,want to see a few things , natural wonders and try traverseing pacific in yatch , farm and cook and a few other things , so if your a woman fairly well organized , can get along with Christianity … er re phrase probebely better if your Christian , can see when a man is ok being a man without sniggering , that nuture element of womans wisdom useually brings … , suggest coffee and walk without smart phone and relying on conversational discourse .ps if you shoot animals for sport or do heavy contact sport ,not really my type , nor body pierceings .Nor too twee … oh I don’t know go to have er spark lets call it that and not be alpha female because its in vogue , rather than reasonable argument … (its ok just making soundings …. best matarhari … no no that’s so 70s , must be my age confused ,I can remember (4 yorkshireman sketch) whent women used talk coy and kiss like bye heck , not sure if modern phyconalysis proffcicnecy and most recent uprgrade of rites and equality , before joyless snog is same thing , feel s like lobotomay to me …or newtering ..which is just as bad .
      so over to you jenny Murray … imagine me on the chaise long oiled up for live art class and not to a small a cloth for my modesty …….

      • not a machine

        additional hic …. burp stumble , but still …happy at genius status cock a doodle doo etc etc , carbon tax is f****ing useless , we are in situation where we do something or die , fed up financial ignoramuses ese ess whatever term is for collective …killing ecosystems is not same as , gay investment market position …..”oh look doodie is getting it bad” when will all feel something of proctologist finger of family guys “death” in this game of who pollutes the most…

        • not a machine

          I am trying to think of something else to comment upon , but too much kopperaberg , loverly stuff , (falls off chair into bed night night luv youu….)

      • David

        I can confirm, without hesitation, that you are a “bit eccentric” !

        • not a machine

          I know , it varies the landscape and no repetition !

  • James M

    The MP won the Election; the Tories increased their percentage of the vote; the logic that regards Nicola Sturgeon as legitimate FM in Scotland cannot deny that TM is even more obviously legitimate PM, since NS lost even more MSPs in proportion than TM did. If TM is not legitimate, NS has even less legitimacy. But no-one is calling for NS to go. Even though she lost 37.5 % of her MSPs – 21 out of 56 (Scotland has 59 MSPs). That is a colossal snub. So the MSM in England didn’t bother to report it – it would have ruined the “TM is useless and must go, because Our Lord and Saviour Jezza Corbyn is the winner” narrative.

    The Conservatives in Scotland had 1 MSP before the election – now they have 11. This is a far greater achievement than Labour, with its case of “the Trots”, can boast of. TM now has a legitimacy in Scotland that was often denled to her predecessors.

    The rabble of Neanderthals trying to dislodge the PM is only succeeding in showing its totalitarian contempt for the democratic process. Throwing a wobbly because Our Lord and Saviour Red(-handed) Jezza was denied by the evul Tory Brexiters is the kind of behaviour that is tiresome in a six-year old. In real life, “all must have prizes (but only if they are Reds)” does not apply.

    • Linus

      Nicola Sturgeon’s election losses still left her with an overall majority in the Scottish Parliament.

      In a democracy legitimacy rests on one thing only: a parliamentary majority.

      Ms Sturgeon is legitimate because she heads up a majority government.

      The Maybot does not.

      If she can persuade the DUP to support her then she’ll get a majority and as such be legitimate as PM. As of present however, she doesn’t have any formal assurance of that support. As such she’s vulnerable. And she knows it. And looks it too.

      In fact I’ve seen terminal cancer look significantly more confident and upbeat about their chances of survival. She looks like a dead woman walking because that’s what she is. And she knows it.

      • Hi

        “Nicola Sturgeon’s election losses still left her with an overall majority in the Scottish Parliament”

        “Ms Sturgeon is legitimate because she heads up a majority government.”

        FYI – that’s not actually correct. Sturgeon doesn’t lead a majority government as she lost her majority at the election . The SNP have 63 out of 129 and like the Conservatives at Westminster are a minority government.

        From the parliament website :

        http://www.parliament.scot/msps/12450.aspx

        • Linus

          In that case you are right. I was under the impression that Sturgeon still had a slim majority, but if she doesn’t then she has no more legitimacy than the Maybot.

          If she forms a coalition and gets the required number of votes to give her a majority, then she’ll be legitimate. Just like the Maybot.

          If…

          • James M

            Since an OP is helping out… If NS is in the same position as the PM, I think that calls for some revision in your comments on the PM. If the PM is a “dead woman walking”, on the ground of being in a minority (?) govt, then so, a fortiori, is the FM. Or maybe the PM’s position is rather less weak than supposed.

            Nothing can alter the fact that there are now a lot more Tory MSPs than before – a detail that greatly weakens the anti-TM narrative.

          • Linus

            The Maybot is a dead woman walking because she not only bungled an election that should have been easy to win outright, she then handled the fallout like a clueless amateur and lost any credibility she might still have been clinging onto by making a series of blunders that a politician worthy of the name just wouldn’t make.

            The opponent who gave her such a kicking was Jeremy Corbyn. Jeremy Corbyn! An unelectable joke politician. Labour’s answer to Mr Bean. Sturgeon’s opponent on the other hand was Ruth Davidson, a formidible contender by any standards.

            Yes, Davidson gave Sturgeon a whacking, but there’s no dishonour in being whacked by a serious opponent. The Maybot was whacked by Mr Bean. Now that’s humiliating.

            I don’t really follow Scottish politics so I don’t know in detail how Sturgeon is dealing with the fallout of her whacking. But I’d be surprised if she’s been making quite as much of a dog’s breakfast of it as the Maybot. The woman has shown herself to be wholly inadequate to the task of providing inspiring leadership throughout this election campaign. She’s now, as a result, no longer credible as PM.

            It’s only a matter of time before she falls. Slain by Mr Bean. What an epitaph!

          • Linus

            Stop press! Queenie shuns robes and ermine in favour of a dress and hat made out of the EU flag for the State Opening of Parliament.

            Talk about putting the boot in. She must reeeeally want rid of this government.

          • Inspector General

            Greetings, Linus! Are you attending ‘World Pride’ in Madrid in the next few days. You ought to. Even though it hasn’t happened yet, PN is warning of a mass outbreak of Hepatitis A there. It’s not at all pleasant (oh, you know, do you) and is spread in two ways: Consuming food or liquid polluted with contaminated faecal matter, or doing that business between 2 men that Leviticus warns about. You keep safe, you gay blade!

            http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/06/19/health-warning-for-gay-men-over-hepatitis-a-outbreak-at-world-pride/

          • Chefofsinners

            How refreshing. I had always thought the EU flag was completely useless, but I was wrong.

        • Royinsouthwest

          Nicola Sturgeon does have a majority in the Scottish parliament. The general election was for the Westminster parliament.

          • Hi

            Actually you are wrong. The link- from the Scottish parliament – I gave earlier on shows the SNP with 63 MSPs and everyone else at 66.

            Wikipedia summarises :

            “The Scottish National Party won the election and a third term in government, but fell two seats short of securing a second consecutive overall majority”

          • Royinsouthwest

            Yes, you are right – I apologise. I realised my mistake a couple of minutes before I got your reply and amended my comment accordingly.

        • IrishNeanderthal

          Mentioning the SNP leader by name calls to mind that “Zi Nicola” is the classic Abruzzese name for a donkey. Look at this YouTube (complete with “ee-aw’s”), and imagine a future with the locals rejoicing once she has been brought down:

          (though that really ought to be Za Nicola, since she is female.)

      • Watchman

        Sorry, Nicola Sturgeon is more of a tribal chief in a colonial outpost. The MSM let her shout a lot but it doesn’t increase her authority. The problem is that the British government gives her far too much pocket money which increases her self importance. She’s like an itch that we can’t scratch.

    • Paul Greenwood

      The only criterion for being PM is the ability to pass a Budget and legislate in The House of Commons.

  • IanCad

    So here we have another turbulent priest trespassing in realms that are Caesars. Daft, lefty, dangerous vicars are nothing new.
    I doubt if he will receive any public censure; My father was an acquaintance of Hewlett Johnson – the Red Dean of Canterbury – who, apparently, graced our humble home to plan the order of Aldermaston Marches. In fact, he could have been the reason why we children attended CofE services on a more or less regular basis. “You see” we were told, “After all, the teachings of Jesus broadly follow those of Marx.”
    It is just too bad this foolish man doesn’t attend to his knitting and stops flirting with the totalitarians.

    • Anton

      Those who trespass in Caesar’s realm risk sharing Caesar’s fate.

    • David

      A very useful comment Ian. Congratulations to you for escaping from your early instruction.

    • Paul Greenwood

      “After all, the teachings of Jesus broadly follow those of Marx.”

      Wel I suppose Marx was a resentful Jew who had “problems” with his father’s conversion to Lutheranism and retention of Jewish mercantilism and the wealth of his family and rabbinical lineage.

  • Robert Stevens

    On his website he is described thus… Our Vicar and Parish Priest is the Revd Christopher Woods. He has been our Vicar since October 2013. Since he is not due any respect and none has been earned I would never call him Father.

  • Alice Lindsay Irving

    I’m afraid you fundamentally misunderstand both democracy and Christianity if you think that it is undemocratic and unchristian to protest what you think is unjust.

    Nobody is suggesting a coup. Every person in this country is allowed to demonstrate against a government in power they do not like. Anyway, the Tories have not yet sealed the deal with the DUP, and a judicial review is pending which argues that any such deal would breach the Good Friday agreement. In a period of such ongoing uncertainty about the ability of the Tories to form a minority government, it makes perfect sense for those who want to see an alternative government to be protesting and hoping for an alternative. This is NOT undemocratic. Being undemocratic would include silencing protests because the ‘ballot box’ is the beginning and the end of any citizens’ legitimate political engagement.

    And certainly we have example enough in Christ in rising up against powers that be where they perpetuate social injustice.

    • Anton

      That Judicial Review will make amusing reading given that our constitution does not recognise political parties, only the results of binary votes in the House of Commons. If Sinn Fein don’t like it then their option is to accept the declaration of loyalty involved in taking their seats at Westminster and vote against the government. If they won’t do that, they have only themselves to blame.

      You are right in your first two paragraphs, of course. The freedom to demonstrate peaceably is vital. Even when it is extended to persons who would deny it to you, based on the posters they carry.

      PS Please define “social justice”.

      • Alice Lindsay Irving

        The judicial review argument is going to be that a state a signatory to a binding treaty that requires them to be rigorously impartial, the U.K. executive cannot conduct itself in a manner inconsistent with this by, for example, favouring the DUP. I’m not a constitutional law expert, so I can’t assess the likely success of that argument. I’m not sure many lawyers could tbh as it is not like anything else I’ve seen argued. I am a lawyer. Those bringing the claim obviously consider it feasible. The point is, there is a period of uncertainty here that isn’t being acknowledged in the article.

        I don’t see how the protests complained of silence others.

        Social justice is too big a topic for a box this big. Suffice to say my concern with the Tories is the ongoing impact of austerity on the most disadvantaged in our society. It is precisely those people Christ calls us to love and support, and so I cannot see an austerity agenda as consistent with my faith.

        • Alice Lindsay Irving

          *as a state who is a signatory

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            ‘…as a state that is’, surely?

          • Alice Lindsay Irving

            Any deal that favoured any of the NI parties might be a problem, whether it be DUP or SF. According to the argument.

            I’m not sure you understand a constitutional democracy if you don’t understand the role of the courts and the important counter baclancing role they play in every advanced democracy.

          • Royinsouthwest

            Are you a lawyer?

          • Hi

            It’s something the guardian reported. Apparently some unknown legal team are going to take this to court when or if there’s an agreement, like they did with brexit. They need crowd funding and what I would call a “stalking horse ” to take the case to court.

          • Maalaistollo

            Are the leathery wings of Mr Soros flapping somewhere in the background?

          • Alice Lindsay Irving

            Ah sorry my response was not to the grammatical correction but to another post I received notification of complaining about interventionist courts. I am on my phone so it is not easy to see the whole thread to ensure my comment is posting in the correct place. I’m not sure how helpful it is to immediately jump to lawyer bashing. Presumably we’re all here as Christians who care about the direction of our country. I’m not sure how personal attacks are fruitful in that context.

            To above comment asking if I’m a lawyer. Yes, I lecture at the University of Oxford.

          • Maalaistollo

            Oh dear! You’ll get a hard time on this blog. Good job Carl is quiescent at the moment. Most of the communicants are very keen on justice, but don’t quite see the need of lawyers to help achieve it.

          • Alice Lindsay Irving

            I’d be the first to admit there are plenty of things wrong with the law and lawyers, but there isn’t plenty of good and what I would consider necessary stuff in there too. If you really think ditching all lawyers is a good idea, I’d suggest sitting in on a few cases where, because of legal aid cuts, litigants are acting in person. Frankly, it’s generally a train wreck, wastes court time and resources and the litigants themselves rarely get a full and fair hearing.

            It doesn’t matter what you might think of lawyers anyway. I don’t intend to spend any more time on this blog. I’m only here because Father Christopher is my vicar and he’s a good man. If it weren’t for people like him I wouldn’t be in the church. I’m not sure what you think you’re achieving personally attacking clergy online who you don’t agree with. But as I’ve said before, I see nothing much productive about it, nor brotherly.

          • Alice Lindsay Irving

            * there is plenty

          • Maalaistollo

            I did not intend my comment to read as though I advocated ditching all lawyers; I’d be unlikely to do that, being one myself. I was merely advising you that on this blog (as is indeed generally the case elsewhere) lawyers are not regarded with especial favour. I’m not sure whether those who are most antagonistic have had unfortunate experiences with lawyers or, more likely, they’ve never been in a predicament from which they needed to be rescued by a lawyer.

          • Inspector General

            Ah, an Oxford type! Wonderful. Reader, are you? One muses at what it must be like to lecture a crowd of undergrads, with them hanging onto your every word. Well, one or two of them, maybe. Of course, being of the female doesn’t help. Man seems to be pre-programmed not to listen to them too much. And your sisters are of the same, come to that!

            You do realise you’ll get short shrift on this site. We tend to be of the Law of Common Sense, not what corrupt and feeble man has decreed sacred.

            Anyway, it will be good experience for you. This communion you’ll have with grown-ups. Keep it to yourself, mind. We don’t want the entire University staff coming on here too.

            Toodle pip!

          • Alice Lindsay Irving

            This is a pointless personal attack. You actually know nothing about me bar my job. It’s pretty remarkable to assume so much on that basis. This clearly isn’t a forum for anyone who doesn’t already agree with you. Have fun listening to yourselves at length.

          • Inspector General

            How splendid! You took the bait and first time too!

            You will be fun!

          • “This
            clearly isn’t a forum for anyone who doesn’t already agree with you.” Who is the ‘you’ in this statement? Whom are you addressing? Are you really one to judge a blog by the comments it attracts? If so, perhaps this might assist: http://archbishopcranmer.com/is-it-wrong-to-judge-a-blog-by-the-comments-it-attracts/

            And when you’ve read that, please consider that other members of your congregation are (rightly) appalled that the Rev’d Christopher is aligning himself to a group which is agitating for the overthrow of a prime minister who was elected just a fortnight ago. You may not agree, but that’s how our Constitution works.

            This isn’t about the right of Christians to protest, but the wisdom of clergy being so divisively partisan and thereby alienating if not offending members of their own congregation. But you doubtless agree with his politics, and therein lies an epistemological problem. So please heed a humble exhortation to reflect on your own political bias which, as is well known, is endemic at Oxford.
            Fr Christopher may indeed be decent and lovely: that does not put his personal temporal politics above scrutiny and criticism. If this seems like a “personal attack”, it is because he expressed his socialist views personally. Bless you for visiting.

          • Alice Lindsay Irving

            I don’t deny my own political bias, and you must own yours too. We will both be influenced in our view of this matter by our own political beliefs. You are no more neutral than I am.

            I do think you’re being a bit hyperbolic when you say “agitating for the overthrow of a PM who was elected just a fortnight ago”. As above, nobody is threatening a coup. We have a hung parliament, things are not stitched up yet, but admittedly are most likely to go the Tory way. Even if they do, then people are allowed to protest that they don’t want the PM who was elected to represent them. That is all consistent with our democracy and how our Constitution works. I still can’t see what is “antidemocratic” about what Momentum are doing, even if – full disclosure – I do not personally support Momentum myself (perhaps that surprises you?)

            The core of your argument seems to be that vicars should be politically neutral or, at least, not rock the boat too much politically? I don’t agree at all. But I’m not sure I’ve seen a good argument for your position, apart from some people find this offensive / alienating. That can’t be the metric for what is good or bad, given how offensive and alienating Christ was to many. There has to be more substance to the argument than that. I’m not sure that the excerpts you seek to rely on in the article get you much further. Anyway, it is not inconsistent for someone to wish for a change of government while praying for God to guide the government currently in power. To me, the baseline is that as a Christian I will seek a society that is just and fair for all, but particularly for the marginalised, who Christ himself showed particular care for. In following him, then, I seek to bring about His kingdom here, in my daily living and also in how I exercise my voting rights and my right to freedom of expression and protest.

            It’s also hard to take seriously that you care for preventing division, when the content of this blog is of itself so divisive.

          • Inspector General

            “It’s also hard to take seriously that you care for preventing division, when the content of this blog is of itself so divisive.”

            It’s called opinion, madam. You see, although you might object, we lowly types who congregate at it’s feet get to have a say here…

            Besides, care to define ‘divisive’. Perhaps your own agenda is divisive in view of the (right wing) government we will have.

          • Anton

            The core of Cranmer’s argument is that vicars need to remember that their flock is probably not far off 50:50 between Tory and Labour and not to alienate half of the local body of Christ. Wise vicars know how to set out Christian criteria, issue by issue, to their congregations ahead of elections that assist them in making that choice. Unwise vicars say “Vote Labour” or (occasionally nowadays) “Vote Tory”. There are a lot of unwise vicars today.

            I am more right-wing than the Tory party today but I have no problem keeping friendly relations in church with other Christians who are Labour voters. Christians are Christians first, and anything else – including political identity – second. That is why overtly political vicars (either way) are disastrous.

            Judicial Review is right on the border between the executive and the judiciary and it is correct that they squabble over it (regardless of one’s views over the issue at hand). Power should stay divided.

            I called you above on “social justice” because it is a flag phrase for leftists (which I respect your freedom to be but believe is an incoherent concept). Austerity is not half enough today, and that is nothing to do with any ideological wish to dismantle the Welfare State (although it badly needs re-principling) but simple economic reality. The debt we are building for our children is terrifying as elections have become auctions of unsustainable promises.

          • Royinsouthwest

            Don’t worry, the Inspector General is pretty robust in his comments on most things. There is probably nothing personal in it. Politically correct students (and perhaps some university staff) are often far ruder to those they disagree with.

            Similarly I did not mean any offence by my comments on lawyers but you may be unaware of just how fed up many people are with people who seek to overturn democratic decisions by appeal to the courts. We elect politicians to rule the country and if we are dissatisfied with what they do we can turn them out at an election. We do not elect judges to govern us and if we dislike their interference we cannot vote them out of office.

          • Linus

            Yes, they’re only interested in hearing their own point of view repeated back to them.

            But that doesn’t mean you have to oblige.

          • Cressida de Nova

            I can understand why you would not wish to return to this blog. There is a reason there are so few women commenters here .They are deliberately discouraged by ‘ men ‘ such as the Inspector who hurl abuse at them to drive them away. I must say he has been comparatively lenient with you. His diatribes are usually far more insulting. There is no reason why you should tolerate any unacceptable behaviour but if you could find the time occasionally to express an opinion it would be appreciated by a couple of women who comment here.

          • betteroffoutofit

            Speak for yourself, Cressida.

          • Inspector General

            I say Cressida! You certainly know how to bring a fellow down! One only wishes to do Christ’s work,..

            {Sniff}

          • Anton

            You will do Christ’s work when you acknowledge that he is God.

          • betteroffoutofit

            Christopher’s Alice: — Of course, CdeN speaks for herself (see her post below).

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            I presume this posting was really for me. Normally I avoid making personal remarks, but perhaps you will concede your post, misdirected as it was, appeared to be a judgement on my understanding of the constitution etc. Now I see from your posting here it was not so, and in that spirit I thank you for the clarification an apologise for my waspish remark about lawyers.

          • Inspector General

            No need for the vapours, Mrs Proudie, my good woman. The Inspector has been playing outside with young Alice. A rather delightful girl, but tends to take herself far too seriously and certainly more than is good for her. Perhaps she is an only child. We must be gentle. For now.

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            One must be fair, dear Inspector…

          • Inspector General

            You are a paragon of virtue, dear lady. Perhaps one day Alice will refer to you with the highest of affection, and call you ‘mother’.

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            Dear me no, I doubt it. I don’t think dear Alice has much time for a consertive lady of a certain age, too traditional for an Oxfordette. But I have tried to smooth a troubled brow somewhat.

          • Inspector General

            Mrs Proudie. Please give the Inspector assurance that you will be there for Alice should you ever be needed by her. He has observed first hand how younger women uncaringly cheek their elder betters, as indeed Alice has done, resulting in unhappiness between the two.. However, all is forgiven in the end, often when a ‘little one’ is unexpectedly on his way…

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            Dear Inspector, please remember Alice is a lawyer and litigation is her middle name, so all talk of unexpected little ones could see you before the beak.

          • Inspector General

            It would be wonderful if Alice was expecting, Mrs Proudie. If she be blessed with a boy, one cannot think of a better Christian name than ‘David’. David Irving. Something noble about that…

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            Naughty step…now!

          • Manfarang

            Don’t waste your money.

          • Hi

            I read the Venusian Guardian and the Martian Telegraph for political balance.

          • Manfarang

            You are lost among the stars.

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            My dear, I was pointing out a grammatical error…how you can ascertain my understanding of a constitutional democracy or the role of the courts and their counter balancing role in an advanced democracy from a substitution of ‘that is’ for your ‘who is’ when referring to ‘a state’ is nothing short of miraculous…but then I suppose as a lawyer you are trained to misconstrue…

          • Pubcrawler

            Some would insist on ‘which’, not ‘that’.

          • Anton

            I find myself using ‘that’ more, but there is always a place in prose for some deft whichcraft.

          • Pubcrawler

            I have a mild preference for ‘which’, as most style guides (those which express an opinion) recommend; there are, though, not a few peeverein (in John McIntyre’s wonderful coinage) who spill much ink insisting on it. A Lilliputian argument, it seems to me, and I learnt long ago not to care too much unless someone is actually paying me to do so.

          • Anton

            That which needs discussing, will be discussed.

          • Pubcrawler

            And God will restore them that are penitent.

          • IanCad

            That is a problem that I also have. That said, that what I have written contains far too many thats; and that’s that.

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            Some would…I debated on which or that before I posted…plumped for that but would be happy with which…

        • Royinsouthwest

          Are you claiming that if the Conservatives pursue an economic or social policies that are approved of by the DUP they would breach the Good Friday agreement but if they (or a possible future government headed by Jeremy Corbyn) pursue economic or social policies that are approved of by Sinn Fein that would not breach the agreement?

          In any case, the British people are getting utterly sick of money-grasping, power-grasping lawyers and judges interfering with our democratic rights.

        • Anton

          Whether the government is bound to conform to the results of a judicial review is not constitutionally clear. It’s an interesting and deep issue (deeper than the notion of “social justice” which is a thoughtless mantra).

          I didn’t say, or imply, that today’s protests silence others.

        • chiefofsinners

          Christ calls us to preach the gospel to sinners, not to love and support those who can’t afford the latest iPhone.

        • betteroffoutofit

          Do many people fall asleep when you’re in court?

          • chiefofsinners

            1 Cor. 11:30

          • Anton

            No longer cooking, Ch[i]ef?

          • Chefofsinners

            Just removing the hat in the presence of a lady.

        • Merchantman

          Jesus says these people will always be with us. No change there then. We will just have to rub along together.

        • Watchman

          Alice, you say “I cannot see an austerity agenda as contsistent with my faith”. Austerity is what we practice when we haven’t enough to buy all the things we need and as a nation we are overspending. Should a Christian be saying that we worship the god of this world in our quest to buy stuff or should we be like Paul who wrote to the Phillipian church
          “I don’t say this out of need, for I have learned to be content in whatever circumstances I am. I know both how to have a little, and I know how to have a lot. In any and all circumstances I have learned the secret of being content-whether well fed or hungry, whether in abundance or in need.”
          Isn’t this the message we should be giving rather than joining in worshiping the golden calf?

    • James60498 .

      Without the NI MPs, how does the alternative government get more seats than the Tories alone?

    • dannybhoy

      I agree but Christians have to be careful about whom they side with. We are in the world but not of it. God is a God of order. We are called to pray for those in authority over us. We cannot unite with those who are essentially lawless.

    • Watchman

      What is unjust and are you conflating what you regard as democratic with what is biblical?

  • Anton

    A prophetic song from 48 years ago…

    I think I’ve seen that look before
    somewhere somehow I can’t be sure
    Teresa.
    And though I see it everywhere
    I close my eyes it’s always there
    Teresa.

    From that expression you display
    I think there’s something you must say
    Teresa.

    So say it now it won’t take long
    it’s better over better done.
    Don’t leave me hanging around
    If you’re just about to tell me Teresa.
    I don’t care anymore.
    I think I’ll find somebody else just like I did before.

    Don’t look that way you’re always saying
    it’s not a joke a silly game
    Teresa.

    So you don’t care to look at me
    turn away but I can see
    Teresa.

    From that expression you display
    I think there’s something you must say
    Teresa.
    So say it now it won’t take long
    it’s better over better done.

    Don’t leave me hanging around
    If you’re just about to tell me Teresa.
    I don’t care anymore.
    I think I’ll find somebody else just like I did before.

  • Inspector General
  • Inspector General

    Fellows may have been alarmed to read there may be no formal tie up with the DUP after all. The cost for the envisaged cosy, the price demanded by them to be specific, is far too high. So it is said. Anyway, it’s of no consequence. The next 5 years must be about Brexit, and little else. As the Cadbury’s Flake advert used to put it, “nothing else matters”

    The DUP will do their bit in the votes to come. And they’ll do it for nothing too. Looking after their own interests, don’t you know. You see, had we stayed in the EU, and the invetiable breakup of the UK was to commence, (it would have been around 10 to 20 years from now), said EU can only only see 4 provinces in the British isles not 5. No points for guessing which country NI would be attached to (or should that be re-attached)…

  • sthildawasafeminist

    Why have you smeared this priest by using Socialist Worker and Class War posters and slogans for illustrations? He is a declared member of the Labour Party and of Momentum. SWP are an entirely different party, who turn up uninvited at all sorts of events.
    Momentum is not on the list of unacceptable organisations for priests in the Church of England. It is ridiculous to suggest Fr Chris is a militant Marxist on the basis of one retweet of Owen Jones.

    • Inspector General

      Do you know, you have a good point. One is sure His Eminence will come back to you…

      • Anton

        Cranmer was never a Cardinal.

        • Inspector General

          He could have been, if he’d kept his nose clean, and adhered to his holy orders as he agreed to. Not asking that much, is it?

          • Anton

            Shakespeare could have made a superlative play out of Thomas Cranmer’s waverings and ultimately doing the right thing, but it was all a bit too close to his own time.

          • Indeed he could and what a tale it would have been. Shakespeare, coming from a solid Catholic background, would have understood Cranmer didn’t do the “right thing”.

          • Anton

            *Everybody* came from a Catholic background in the mid-16th century. Fatuous comment. Can you prove Shakespeare was a Catholic based on the content of the plays and poetry?

          • Go read a good biography.

          • Anton

            I’ll take that as a No.

          • Google is your friend.

    • Some of the placards do indeed declare SWP; others do not. But how in that crowd do you distinguish the Socialist Workers’ Front from the Workers’ Front of Momentum? Do not political marches attract groups of the like-minded? Who marched on today’s #DayofRage? Could you sift one faction from another? Isn’t Momentum constituted of all manner of socialist strands, with no filter to expel what Kinnock and Blair might term ‘Militant’?
      John McDonnell supports Momentum. Only a few years ago he was praising street violence and lauding rioters for “kicking the shit out of Millbank”. He described them as “the best of our movement”. As you know, Momentum (which, incidentally, may include members of the SWP: there is no bar) is McDonnell’s and Corbyn’s movement agitating to unite and mobilise all anti-Tory forces, hence the inclusion of the quotes from eminent MPs Ben Bradshaw, Frank Field and Tessa Jowell (which you judiciously ignore).
      It isn’t simply the photographs: if they offend you, respond to the MPs. These three (amongst many, many other Labour voters and supporters) all consider Momentum to be a force for bad, if not evil. Perhaps the warnings of respected Labour politicians – two of whom are Anglicans – ought to be trusted by a priest over atheist pro-Corbyn militants like Owen Jones.

      • Inspector General

        There you have it, fellows. Cranmer at his most perceptive. It’s good enough for the Inspector, so it must, by reason, be good enough for YOU.

      • petej

        So why not illustrate your post with some picture of momentum (part of the Labour Party who recently won 40% of the popular vote) instead of pictures of the SWP (who did not)?

        Having said that, apart from possibly “tories out” I see nothing objectionable on the placards. I think an end to racism would be a good thing. I think justice for the Grenfell victims/survivors would be a good thing. I think treating refugees well would be a good thing. I think an end to racism and austerity would be a good thing.

        Don’t you?

        • betteroffoutofit

          Racism? What do you mean?

          Do you say that wanting to retain our own culture, in possibly the most wonderful country that ever developed on this planet, is Racism?

          Well . . . there’s no denying that we’ve known Racism in Britain. Until lately, it was the so-called “Class” Warfare – whereby the Marxist/Engels-driven Germanic ideologists pretended that we Celtic/Vikings – who had long been holding our own against earlier Franco-German invaders – should regard ourselves as ‘lower class and middle class”. The Franco-Germans got labelled “upper class”.

          Which, to put it mildly was pretty hypocritical of those alien Germanic ideologists.

          — And now, the same Germanic aliens have imported a different bunch of inimical Aliens to invade us and take everything from us completely. If we want our country back one more time, we will have to take some form of stand. Are we to understand that you want to stop us from defending ourselves? Do you claim by that is being “Racist” about the neu invaders?

          Well, maybe you’re as stoopid as the franco-germans think all we British are. Or maybe you’re one of the other aliens who think this is their country (lost their way in the desert, maybe).

          Or …. maybe you’re right. Are you you claiming that NONE of the invaders should eliminate the British races?
          But then, surely you understand that THEY, NOT we, are the “Racists” ?

          So can you help your placard holders to clarify that point?

          • petej

            I was agreeing with one of the signs that we should stand up to racism.

          • betteroffoutofit

            I guess I’m the not the only one who doesn’t know what you mean by racism.

          • petej

            It is very clearly displayed on the signs that the archbishop is objecting to.

            Racism usually refers to treating someone poorly because of their nationality or skin colour.

        • IanCad

          Could you be a little more specific as regards “Racism?” Try as I might, I find very little evidence of it in this land. Could there perhaps be some involved in the renting of the Grenfell Towers?? Can’t quite figure out why so many of the residents were foreign born – or seemingly so.

          • petej

            Some of the signs say “stand up to racism”. I’m agreeing that this is a good thing.

          • Dreadnaught

            Firstly you would have to define ‘race’, then ‘racist’ then ‘racism’; many have tried; few succeed.

          • petej

            Treating people poorly because of their nationality or skin colour is how I would define it, but I am not the author of the signs.

          • Dreadnaught

            Start with the definition of ‘race’ as the point of reference and you will find it virtually impossible to provide an answer that is wholly satisfactory. The Left use this emotive topic and others sheepishly fall in line lest they themselves are labelled ‘racist’, which in the public consciousness exists as something as equally reprehensible as being the progenitor of the ‘Final Solution’. That word and more especially the word ‘racism’ is overused and politically thrown about more than ever, to close down open discussion by stigmatising anyone of genetic European origins as an obvious evil-doer.

          • Inspector General

            Do you think we’ll ever see an end to black on white racism, which is the more violent version. Or is racism part of the human way. God given, perhaps.

    • Father Christopher has notified the blog owner he does not like being referred to as Father Chris. Show some respect!

    • betteroffoutofit

      “sthildawasafeminist” — Oh dear. You deeply insult someone I’ve always respected. Indeed, if I didn’t already know the inherent reputation of ‘Yorkshire’ women – as being ‘strong’ – you’d have me turning against my own sterner element.

      But … you see … my Whitby ammonite is beautiful in its geology, its legend, and its symbolism. It helps one to continue appreciating the moral fibre of Christian women in a warrior society. That is, those women who can manage and keep things* running while our men are occupied in fighting for the survival of our families, children, and cultures. In addition, such women are there to nurse and rehabilitate any – but especially men – who suffer injury from the fray. Thus we work together with our men – by filling the roles to which we are physically suited.

      Furthermore, if fortunate enough to be with our soulmates in this world, we even share identity. It’s always been enlightening, then, to claim that woman without man is wo[e]! And while also appreciating the OE etymology of “wiffman” (womanman), it’s worth remembering the Hebraic/Biblical (Genesis) concept of woman as being ‘out of,’ thus a part of, her man (and vice versa).

      And Hilda was a part of her warrior society – its time and its place; it’s still undeniable that God’s own country of Yorkshire owes a lot to her. However, neither you nor I will judge her. Judgement is God’s prerogative.

      So please … stop insulting her.

      ___________________
      *(governments, monasteries, schools, homesteads, farms, factories, etc)

  • petej

    Yesterday morning R4’s three top stories were

    A financial crisis in the NHS

    Police having to stop investigating child abuse because of the cuts in police numbers/prioritising counter terrorism

    Schools writing begging letters to parents to ask them to write to their MPs asking for more money

    The first is a return to the bad days of the early nineties and the second two, I think, are unprecedented. The government has no plan to deal with these crisises, although mercifully it has dropped plans to make them a good deal worse.

    People aren’t striking and protesting for no reason. This stuff really matters.

    • Inspector General

      Unrealistic expectations. Make good use of what you have. It can be done. Don’t expect more.

    • Paul Greenwood

      It is good the BBC specialises in “learned helplessness”. It deliberately fosters despair by generating clusters of disaster scenarios at key points of the day and propagating them

      http://www.verywell.com/what-is-learned-helplessness-2795326

      It is a fascinating example of Mass Psychosis designed to render the public pliable and yet incompetent so the agencies of power scan continue to loot and divide and rule.

  • len

    One should be careful that ‘righteous anger’ at injustices( whether actual or not l) does not open the door to a spirit of lawlessness.
    We see this spirit of lawlessness becoming apparent within those who are dissatisfied with the outcome of democratic elections.

    ‘For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way’ (2Thessalonians 2.7)

    ‘The secret power of lawlessness’.. Secret power?. Lawlessness can be ‘dressed up’ to make it appear ‘a good thing’. Does the end justify the means?. How many revolutionaries have believed this?.

    Democracy is the best thing we have got at the moment, but many are oppose this .

  • not a machine

    it was I think , but next day was a bit odd ,that cider is just so drinkable

  • prompteetsincere

    Unlike Nazareth, nothing good can come out Labour, especially these days, for nothing good has come out Marxism in any chapter of materialist history where it has left its bloody boot-print. Its current mode of tyrannical operation? Cultural Marxism: from now the tyrannical (once Biblical “Dominion” of+ Pslam 72) of) Canada; to the revived HRE of the EU + Daniel (2;8). Who’s who? Who is aligning with Germany:Scotland’s Red Emma; Canada’s Trudeau II/Obama North; Obama himself; $till Red China; the current Papacy; and the very pink CoE/WCC. Their warm relationship with Islam is but a mariage de convenance; for both – until the ordained ‘wife battery’ starts……as in Manchester.