Douglas Alexander - religious liberty2a
Christian Persecution

Douglas Alexander champions a Global Envoy for Religious Freedom

 

“Yet, at this time of great peril, I deeply regret that the British Government seems to be stepping back, rather than stepping up,” writes Shadow Foreign Secretary Douglas Alexander in The Sunday Telegraph, as he juxtaposed the “no room at the inn” of the Nativity with the horrors being meted out on Christians in Nigeria, Syria, Iraq and Sudan. “Just like anti-Semitism or Islamaphobia, anti-Christian persecution must be named for the evil that it is, and challenged systematically by people of faith and of no faith,” he exhorted.

And he pledged that an incoming Labour government will establish a Global Envoy for Religious Freedom along with a multifaith advisory council on religious freedom within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office: “Supporting the newly appointed Global Envoy, this will help ensure a strong focus within the Foreign Office,” he assures. And he lauded Baroness Warsi for her commitment to faith and human rights and “the leadership she showed and the seriousness with which she took her responsibilities”, which was, he submits, “widely recognised”.

It was a mistake for the Minister for Faith to be “downgraded” from the FCO and for it to become “simply a role” within the Department for Communities and Local Government. None of this conveys any sense of the strong leadership required, he advises, insisting, too, that “this is an issue beyond party politics” (while taking a jaundiced swipe at Eric Pickles and hurling a manifestly warped appraisal of the achievements of Baroness Warsi).

The Archbishop of Canterbury was so impressed with this homily that he dared to tweet it out to his 68.3k followers, which caused alarm and dismay to some condescending Tories, as though Justin Welby were being indelicately partisan and unacceptably inattentive to the constitutional constraints of his Office. He didn’t endorse any specific content: all he said was that it was “good debate”, yet this is inexplicably deemed to be “poor judgment by Lambeth Palace” (though the Palace didn’t tweet it: the Archbishop did).

We’ve been here before, of course. Last Christmas the tweeting was uncharitably critical of the Archbishop for not being “disciplined” in speaking about Jesus, which was laughably unjustifiable. Justin Welby preaches Jesus before breakfast, before lunch, before tea and before dinner: he doesn’t save the Messiah for Christmas and Easter. This year the admonition is for being naively duped by a clever Labour trap. Good grief, hundreds of thousands of Christians across the Middle East are being systematically raped, tortured, crucified or slaughtered by Islamic Jihadists, and the concern is with petty partisan posturing and which politician really cares most about the expanding holocaust.

For the record, as Paul Goodman eloquently points out on ConHome, the idea for a Global Envoy for Religious Freedom was originally a Conservative one. What have they done about it in almost five years of government? A number of senior bishops have written to the FCO a number of times demanding action to help save the many thousands of persecuted and dispossessed Christians. What substantive response has been made? David Cameron delivers fine-sounding speeches about the evil Islamist ideology which threatens centuries of our Christian liberty. What has he done to bolster that liberty? How have his policies aided the Church in defence of religious freedom?

Under this so-called Conservative-Liberal-Democratic coalition we have seen Christian couples informed that they may not foster or adopt children; Roman Catholic nurses and midwives coerced into performing abortions; Christian preachers arrested for proclaiming that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; Christian employees sacked for displaying crosses; Christian charity volunteers ‘un-volunteered’ for upholding heterosexual marriage; and Christian schools branded ‘extremist’ for failing to inculcate the state doctrine of absolute equality.

Of course, Labour won’t repeal any of the malignant legislation which gave rise to this hostile spiritual terrain: indeed, they are mostly responsible for its genesis and propagation. But this un-Conservative, illiberal and undemocratic coalition has equally done little to reinforce freedom of religion as the nexus of civil liberty; nor has it done anything to reassure churches or Christian schools that they may preach and teach in accordance with their traditional beliefs and precepts. Indeed, even under a Conservative prime minister, the assertion remains that to hold an orthodox view of Judæo-Christian morality is to be ‘prejudiced’ and ‘un-Christian’ if not ‘bigoted’ and ‘medieval’.

Will a Global Envoy for Religious Freedom do anything to challenge the statist imposition of a postmodern political conception of religious freedom? No, of course not. But Christians aren’t being crucified in Maidenhead or Witney: the terror, torture, mass murder, genocide and ‘religious cleansing’ of Christians is happening in Northern Nigeria, Syria, Iraq, South Sudan and the Central African Republic. The Archbishop of Canterbury has previously called this “evil“. And not only is it evil, but “part of an evil pattern around the world where Christians and other minorities are being killed and persecuted for their faith”.

If Douglas Alexander is pledging a future Labour government to confront radical Islam and the malignant Saudi-backed Salafist strain of Jihadism, he should be commended and cheered for defending the freedom of Christians to manifest their religion and belief across the world. You may not believe a word he says or writes: you may think him a political hypocrite, spiritual charlatan or simply a cynical opportunist who has spotted a chink in Cameron’s coming election campaign. The Archbishop of Canterbury cares nothing for this political banality: his heart is with those who are suffering and dying for their faith in Jesus Christ. His prayers are with those who are being persecuted for allegations of heresy, apostasy and infidelity to the inviolable creed of Islamism. Your mind may be on the key marginals; his is on the principalities and powers of the spiritual realm, with a heart inclined toward peace and reconciliation.

We have in Justin Welby an Archbishop who knows that the greatest threat to the Judæo-Christian ethic is the Quranic Curtain of the Islamic State. It has descended and stretches from the coastal plains of the Maghreb to the Himalayan peaks of Pakistan. It is inimical to Western notions of politics, religion, morality and enlightenment, to the point that its adherents seek to cleanse the earth of all that impedes its path and obstructs its progress. If Douglas Alexander is promising to confront this evil, he needs upholding in fervent prayer and fully deserves the encouragement of the Archbishop of Canterbury and, indeed, of all Church leaders.

  • Graham Wood

    Douglas Alexander. Without any political party stance assumed – here is a politician who has his priorities right. Governments are elected primarily to defend and protect the liberty of the subject and life and limb. This conservative mish-mash of statist Marxist liberals has failed miserably in its primary obligation as Cranmer has so eloquently argued once again.l.

  • CliveM

    “David Cameron delivers fine-sounding speeches about the evil Islamist ideology which threatens centuries of our Christian liberty. What has he done to bolster that liberty? How have his policies aided the Church in defence of religious freedom?”

    But then doesn’t this sum up his Premiership? Fine words, little concrete action. If he had expended half the effort and political capital in this, that he did in SSM, how much could have been achieved.

    • Politically__Incorrect

      “..What has he done to bolster that liberty? How have his policies aided the Church in defence of religious freedom?”
      Good questions, and the answer to both is…. zilch
      I am glad to hear any politician speaking up for the freedom of Christians to live without persecution. I don’t care which party they come from as long as they are sincere.

      • CliveM

        When something as important as life and death is concerned, to get politically partisan would be a major mistake.

        HG’s questions are indeed pertinent.

  • Albert

    It’s coming to something when Christians find Labour more supportive of their freedoms than the Conservatives.

    • Shadrach Fire

      Regrettably in my life time I have observed an unreal support for Labour by Christians because of their ostensibly social policies. A curse on our political and social system that just wont go away.

      • Albert

        Traditionally, the Left in the UK was somewhat church based, particularly non-conformity. The shame for the Conservatives is that, although Conservativsm is supposed to be about freedom, it is only about some freedoms – the market perhaps, but not the conscience. Shame on the Tories!

        • Shadrach Fire

          The Tories have shot themselves in the foot.

          • Bit higher up, Jack suspects.

          • Albert

            Definitely. Under the circumstances, I might have voted Conservative, if only to keep out Miliband. Gay “marriage” prevents Cameron getting my vote – just as it prevents immigrants with traditional religious views, who have usually voted Labour from transferring to the Conservatives. Cameron’s failure to see this only adds to my sense that he lacks judgement.

  • Booboo Ababongo

    “Just like anti-Semitism or Islamaphobia, anti-Christian persecution
    must be named for the evil that it is, and challenged systematically by
    people of faith and of no faith,” he exhorted.

    Is he aware that by equating Islamophobia, and even anti-Semitism, with ‘anti-Christian prejudice’, he’s probably fuelling anti-Semitism and Islamophobia? And who thinks Labour’s hypothetical Global Envoy would achieve anything concrete to counter the systematic global persecution and eradication of Christians and Christianity by Muslims?

  • Philip___

    It’s Christmas, and presumably like Easter, it’s the time of year when politicians must say something sounding supportive of Christians. Even Red Ed is trying to sound reassuring. http://www.premierchristianradio.com/News/UK/Miliband-I-m-sorry-Christians-feel-marginalised

    Of course HG must be absolutely right that Labour won’t repeal any of the “malignant legislation”. Where it’s a choice between the demands of homosexual activists to impose their views and end all dissent, and the freedom of speech and conscience of Christians in particular, we know which side the ruling lib-left establishment (Cameron/Lib/Lab) can be expected to take. And when one adds to the HG’s list of evidence of ruling establishment hostility against Christians the cake bakers in Northern Ireland facing legal action as they’re unable on grounds of conscience and belief to bake a same-sex ‘marriage’ campaign cake, and that Mr Cameron in a PMQs answer to a DUP member pointedly refused to back freedom of conscience and religion, and we then add the B&Bs, we get to know the real position. And no-one believes the SSM churches ‘opt-outs’ will last.

  • carl jacobs

    a Global Envoy for Religious Freedom

    The United Nations is a tool of state policy. One of its useful functions is to provide a place for states to park problems that states don’t want to address. These would be problems that a particular state doesn’t want to be seen not addressing. Such problems can be dropped in the lap of the UN for earnest discussion. The UN can’t actually do anything about it except maybe create a resolution. But the individual state now has an answer to the question “What are you doing about that problem?”

    This would be the function of “a Global Envoy for Religious Freedom.” What would he do? He could attend conferences and hold earnest discussions. He could raise awareness and give interviews and make speeches. He could travel to others countries to coordinate with foreign “Global Envoys for Religious Freedom.” What would all this accomplish? It would allow the Gov’t to answer the question “What are you doing about that problem.” The Global Envoy is a parking lot.

    There are two and only two effective responses to what is happening to Christians in the Middle East.

    1. You can impose the rule of law by force.
    2. You can provide refuge to large numbers of refugees. .

    Neither of those are politically feasible. So what then? How about “a Global Envoy for Religious Freedom?” The perfect answer for that embarrassing moment when you won’t act but can’t be see to just turn away.

    • Uncle Brian

      Once the Global Envoy for Religious Freedom and the Multifaith Advisory
      Council are both up and running, the Foreign & Commonwealth Office will be able to tell the Islamic State, in no uncertain terms, that it must immediately reinstate full freedom of worship, schooling, etc., for Christians, Jews, and all other religions under its jurisdiction, on pain of incurring the severe displeasure of Her Majesty’s Government. That’ll stop them dead in their tracks!

      • carl jacobs

        Heh. Don’t underestimate the power of a stern finger-wagging.

        • I have every expectation that a Global Envoy for Religious Freedom would have much the same effect as a Middle East Peace Envoy (or whatever Tony Blair calls himself).

          • Uncle Brian

            Perhaps it’s Blair himself that they’re planning to honour with the GERF title, and Alexander Douglas is just the ventriloquist’s dummy.

          • DanJ0

            It’s a non-job to express concern but do nothing. It’ll also be well-paid, no doubt.

      • Dominic Stockford

        And that will just be in this country, imagine what they can do when they go abroad…

      • uppitynorth

        Whoever is appointed would do well to pair up with Mr Blair and take full advantage of his experience as ‘Peace envoy’-oh dear:very un-Christian thought but at one time we’d have been sending out two Gun boats not Envoys’

    • There are a couple of possible options, Carl.

      1. Attempt to build an alliance of non-violent Islam that reforms the religion to the realities of the modern world or at least keeps its worst manifestations under control. Democracy, as a political system, cant do it but the more totalitarian approach of Russia approach might.
      2. Impose economic sanctions on those Arab states in the middle east that fail to cooperate in subduing and removing extremism from Islam.

      Granted option 1. seems unlikely. Option 2. would damage Western commercial interests, unlike sanctions against Russia which promote them. So its unlikely the West will use this lever as the deaths of thousands of Christians, weighed against our economic wellbeing, are not sufficient – politically.

      • carl jacobs

        Jack

        1. Where is this non-violent Islam? ISIS is Islam. That’s the fundamental problem. It isn’t extreme. That’s where you begin with this problem.

        2. You want to impose sanctions on Syria? How is that going to work? The country you would have to impose sanction upon is Saudi Arabia. That country would also be the center of your ‘non-violent Islamic Alliance.’ There is a problem here.

        Sanctions mean “refuse to purchase oil.” Hence the problem with Syria. Unfortunately, oil is fungible. What happens. Mr X buys oil from the producer under sanctions and re-sells it to you at a mark-up. You don’t hurt the producer. You hurt yourself. The fungible nature of oil means you can’t tell where it comes from. You aren’t going to be able to make these sanctions work.

        By the way, Saudi Arabia is the anchor of your Middle Eastern policy. Are you going to impose sanctions on Saudi Arabia?

        • It is Saudi Arabia Jack had in mind. And he does not believe it would be impossible to impose effective sanctions on Middle East oil suppliers if we had a mind to. The problem is the cost to the West is too great when considered against preserving a Christian presence in the region. It would not be in our interests. And yet the greater threat is ignored to global peace.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Most of the ‘West’ isn’t really Christian at all, so would never even being to countenance the cost.

  • SidneyDeane

    God has abandoned the Christians in the Middle East.

    • Phil R

      Christians have abandoned the Christians in the Middle East.

      In so doing we may have abandoned ourselves.

      • SidneyDeane

        True. But so has God.

        • Mr Deane,
          If you knew your Bible even everso slightly, you would know that God has most certainly not abandoned Christians in the Middle East. If persecution were not happening, then the Bible would not be true (2 Timothy 2:12; Revelation 6:9-11 etc.). As a matter of fact, more Moslems (and indeed, people in general) are becoming Christians than at any time in history.
          What God has abandoned, temporarily at least, is this country, and you in particular (Romans 1:18ff).

          • Uncle Brian

            Once again I have the unexpected pleasure of finding myself in full agreement with you, Martin.

        • Phil R

          Think about it

          If we love God only because he does nice things for us. Then we never really loved him in the first place. Our love is nothing more than a contractual arrangement.

        • chiefofsinners

          Dear Sidney
          Some of these Christians have been quite aggressive towards you. You’re only expressing a thought that millions of people have: If God’s real, why doesn’t He protect persecuted Christians? People have given you the answer, but it might be obscured by the way they’ve given it. Typical blinking Christians, I’m afraid.
          Jesus promised His followers persecution. You may have heard the text: ‘If anyone would come after me he must deny himself, take up his cross daily and follow me.’ By suffering persecution Christians i) testify to the truth of our faith, ii) learn what it was like for Christ, iii) develop a fund of experiences with which we can help others and iv) have our characters remoulded for the better.
          Be a Christian. It aint easy but it’s worth it. And if you do become a Christian, be nice to the people you meet online and remember you used to think just like them.

        • Old Nick

          So let us pray to Him to show His mercy to them. Actually I am constantly impressed by the faith expressed in the various statements one gets from Oriental Christians – and that sort of faith can only be infused from Above.

    • carl jacobs

      Sidney

      You are too theologically illiterate to have a credible opinion on what God has or hasn’t done. And so you sound like nothing so much as a braying ass.

    • Doctor Crackles

      Go there and find out first hand.

      • SidneyDeane

        Seems pretty clear to me. He could intervene, but won’t.

    • The Explorer

      Sidney thinks like a Muslim. Good fortune is evidence of Allah’s favour. Misfortune is evidence of Allah’s curse. It’s why the Muslims can make nothing of the Book of Job. It’s why Islam denies the crucifixion.

      • carl jacobs

        Exactly.

      • SidneyDeane

        Christians thank god when something goes their way but refuse to blame him when something doesn’t.
        If what you say above is true then at least the muslim thought process make sense.

        • The Explorer

          Of course the Muslim thought process makes sense. It’s a human invention. Who would invent the Trinity? That’s why Islam rejects it.

          • SidneyDeane

            “Christians thank god when something goes their way but refuse to blame him when something doesn’t.”

            This position makes no sense.

          • The Explorer

            It does if you accept the Christian explanation that the world is not the way it was meant to be. Nature and human nature are alike “fallen”: and will one day be redeemed. As with Marxism and humanist social engineering, that requires faith in a future event.

          • carl jacobs

            Sidney

            This position makes no sense.

            See, this is what I mean by theological illiteracy. If you want to argue from inside our religion, you must presume the truth of that religion, and show how it leads to an internal contradiction. That means you must first understand what we believe. Now if you actually understood what we believe, you would never have asked the question in the first place. Your understanding would have been pre-empted the question.

            What you actually did was:

            1. Presume the existence of God.
            2. Impose upon God your expectations of how God should behave rather than how God reveals Himself in Scripture.
            3. Judge the truth of the Christian faith according to your external expectations.

            That’s nice. It guarantees that you can make your point. But it’s totally irrelevant to anything under discussion. Your expectations of God are meaningless to the truths of the Christian faith. If you want to argue from inside Christianity, go learn what we believe first.

          • CliveM

            I do love the way you turn a persons logic back in on themselves.

          • carl jacobs

            Clive

            I find that kind of argumentation annoying in the extreme. It comes across as “Ha ha. God has abandoned you. Too bad for you.” And the whole basis for the argument is a lie.

          • CliveM

            Their are undoubtedly a certain type of atheist who takes a delight in tragedy, as they appear to believe it strengthens their argument. A sort of gleeful ambulance chasing.

            It’s a pity they don’t take a moment to reflect on the victims instead.

          • But it’s a long held Christian position 🙂

            “Ye saints, who toil below,adore your heavenly King,
            and onward as ye go
            some joyful anthem sing;
            take what he gives
            and praise him still,
            through good or ill,
            who ever lives!”

            “Ye Holy Angels Bright” – Richard Baxter (1615-1691), 1681

            And it was held long before Christianity came on the scene

            ““Naked came I out of my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return thither. The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord.” – Job 1:21

          • Shadrach Fire

            It only makes sense to someone who believes that God is in control of all things. Our ways are not his ways.

          • Old Nick

            Foolishness to the Greeks…. God made the world good, that is why there is hope.

          • DanJ0

            I thought St Paul invented the Trinity.

          • The Explorer

            The concept is diffused through the New Testament. Partly in Paul’s epistles, but also John: gospel and first epistle. Also ‘Revelation’. Also ‘Acts’. Luke, in fact, may give the best instance with the parables of the woman searching for the lost coin, the shepherd seeking the lost sheep, and the father welcoming the lost son. God seeking the lost soul, expressed in three different ways.

          • The Explorer

            The NT gives the raw material. The actual doctrine of the Trinity was hammered out by the Church Fathers in combating the likes of Arianism.

          • Old Nick

            Doctrine of the Trinity is visible in action in Jesus’s baptism.

          • The Explorer

            Yes, that’s a perfect interactive example

          • Old Nick

            S. Paul is our earliest written evidence for Christianity.

    • Doctor Crackles

      Poor, sad Sidney, a message for you:

      http://bit.ly/1AYa8tJ

      Merry Christmas

    • Rasher Bacon

      I haven’t.

    • Dominic Stockford

      They don’t think so.

  • Shadrach Fire

    Your Grace,

    What does Douglass Alexander know about Religious Freedom?

    Whenever I have a question about an MP’s statement and wonder where he is coming from I check my SSM votes list and see where they voted. This tells me most of what I need to know.

    Douglass voted Yes, so for me, he has no perception of what allowing Christians to follow their beliefs should be. That action was a persecution of my Christian faith.

    Douglass wrote; anti-Christian persecution must be named for the evil that it is.

    Precisely Douglass. What you say is one thing but what you do is entirely another.

    • carl jacobs

      Well, let’s be honest here. Christians aren’t being persecuted in the West. We haven’t been required to resist unto bloodshed. Losing a political fight over SSM isn’t of a kind with having your house burned and your family killed.

      • Merchantman

        No that comes relatively a bit later.
        The left leaning BBC has to its credit just done a piece on the ISIS capture, rape, sale into slavery of the Yazididi women and 11 year old girls. They also mentioned that its OK by ISIS if they do the same with Jewish and Christian women.
        This apparently comes from the ISIS handbook on how to treat the conquered kafirs. The BBC don’t dare mention the source book for this jihad horror…. the Koran.

        • carl jacobs

          Merchantman

          Persecution won’t come from Islam. There will be a violent reaction to the growth of Islam before that can happen. Persecution is going to flow from the hand of whatever emerges to crush Islam. That force will sweep aside Secularism, Liberalism, Islam, and (what remains of) Christianity.

          • Shadrach Fire

            Where’s the source for this claim?

          • Dominic Stockford

            I wonder that too. Islam is already persecuting Christians I’m much of the rest of the world. And, unreported as it may be, they do so here as well.
            I’m sure that I’m not the only one who has already been informed by British Muslims that our presence needs to be ended because of the uncompromising presentation of the Christian faith that I have indulged in. Such a comment would certainly be regarded as persecution if made the other way round.

          • carl jacobs

            Shadrach

            It’s what I think will happen.

            You don’t have to fear ISIS taking over England. Do you honestly think there ever will be a Muslim majority in Britain? Threats produce their own reaction. Islam will therefore simply be a fuse. The explosive will be a combination of economic decline and existential fear. Secularism is the problem. All the difficulties you face proceed from that worldview. It will be singularly unable to meet the challenge. Liberalism is chained to Secularism and the two will sink together. Christianity could recover the situation but it is a spent force. So where do think people are going to go? Do you think they are just going to roll over and submit to the House of Islam? They’ll find a savior. And they will follow him into a New Order.

            The Assyrians are coming and for the same reason. They will be ugly and malignant. And they will come from within.

          • “Secularism is the problem.”

            “Liberalism is chained to Secularism and the two will sink together.”

            Agreed liberalism could never survive without secularism. However, can one have secularism without liberalism? Does accepting there is an objective and discernable moral code that should govern society, mean one religion gets to make all the decisions, all of the time, for people of different faiths or none?

          • carl jacobs

            No, it means that when Secularism goes down, it’s taking liberalism with it. It won’t be fair or logical, but that’s what will happen.

            Think Weimar.

          • Why can’t liberalism go down without secularism?

          • carl jacobs

            Because in this particular instance Liberalism will be blamed for the problems in order to create a new political order. I’m not making an essential point. I’m making a tactical point.

          • We also know from history that a strong, sustainable state requires a supporting and unifying ideology of some sort. It could be a theocracy or it could be an acceptance of one faith. More likely it will base authority simply on power and fear resting on some atheistic totalitarianism or a concocted theosophicism. The way things are heading, one way or another, some order will have to be imposed.

            On reflection, secularism probably contains the seeds of its own downfall by the pretence it is essentially indifferent to ideologies, including religions. Liberalism is its religion. It and liberalism are necessary bedfellows. For this Jack blames both America and France – and also the Protestant Reformation.

            Given what you’ve said above, why have you been so scathing of Putin’s Russia? Nominally a secular state, it is organising around Orthodox Christianity. A nationalist one, granted, but still it is taking increasing direction from Christian values in terms of laws, whatever the personal morality of its leaders. On balance, better Putin’s Russia or Communist China as a template for the future?

      • dannybhoy

        We haven’t Carl, but I believe it’s coming. It may come as part of Revival.

      • Shadrach Fire

        He’s not just talking about overseas places like the USA and their masked white hell raisers. Religious Freedom can be a problem in any part of society. SSM wasn’t a political fight, it was a fight for the freedom of Christianity and it was as important as any other battle to protect the Gospel and it’s believers.

        • DanJ0

          You don’t have the freedom to persecute other people.

  • The Explorer

    Agoraphobia. Fear of open spaces (other than politicians’ minds). Phobia = irrational fear of something harmless.
    Arachnophobia. Fear of spiders. A neighbour of mine had a brother who died of septicaemia contracted from a spider bite. Phobia = justified fear of something dangerous.
    Islamophobia. Irrational fear, or justified fear?
    After (in no particular order) 9/11, the shoe bomber, explosive liquids on planes, the London bombings, the guy with the explosive condom strapped to his leg, Drummer Rigby, the murders in Sudan, the murders and abductions in Nigeria, Mogadishu, the Nairobi Mall, the Beslane school killings, the killings in Peshawar…
    HInduphobia: arguably, unjustified fear. Hindus don’t make me wary about getting on a plane. Ditto Semitophobia. Ditto SIkhophobia. (That explosion involving the Akali Dal was years ago.)
    Islamophobia. Justified fear. I want the meaning of ‘phobia’ to be more rigorously defined.
    Apologies in advance for incorrect spellings of unfamiliar words.

  • Inspector General

    And they’re off…

    Labour slightly ahead at the start of the General Election Campaign 2015 Stakes (and hoping to pick up on Christian votes.)

    Conservative following hard, (…saying they had the idea first…), but being closely followed by Buggers’ Marriage Dream. Lib-Dem has retired from the race lame. The stables concerned are still in with a chance however with their recent acquisition Death At The Ballot Box which will at least get them placed. And here comes UKIP. They’ve just overtaken Same Old Cosy Setup At Westminster. Look at UKIP go. They’re now challenging Labour as Conservative falls behind. Oh my, Conservative has been brought down at the second to last fence by Buggers’ Marriage Dream, who has also fallen.Conservative’s owners were afraid that might happen. Same Old Cosy Setup At Westminster has fallen at the brook, and Labour’s in trouble. Hemmed in at the rail by Empty Immigration Promise and No EU Referendum At Any Time Ever. And now he’s been blocked in front by We’re Never Going To Change and behind with We’ve Heard It All Before. All of which means Labour is definitely out of the running! And now it’s UKIP all the way comfortably, and UKIP takes it, with New Way Of Doing Things coming in a brave second, and Death At The Ballot Box third.

    And here comes the champagne…

    Congratulating UKIP afterwards, your commentator asked them if they are interested in the problems Christians have abroad. “Abroad AND at home, dear boy. Abroad and at home. We are a Christian nation, our heritage is Judaeo-Christian, and so is our future. Anyone who disagrees and who wants us to be a godless secularist genderless society continually being colonised by non-Christians, just don’t vote UKIP. We are not for you. Yes, really, you heard it correct. We are not going to compromise on our policies to grub for votes from people who are not going to give us their votes anyway. That’s a new for a mainstream political party nowadays, is it not ?” And the crowd waved approvingly, and roared “God save England. God save the Queen !”. There will be no stewards enquiry after this, I can tell you.

    And don’t the feminine ladies look pretty in their hats too. Altogether, a marvellous occasion, and a splendid result, what !!

    Bit of late news coming in. Conservative’s jockey has broken his leg in the fall. Yes, it’s confirmed, he broke his leg but despite that has somehow managed to drag himself well away from the fallen beast. But vets acting for Conservative’s angry owners tracked him down anyway and finished him off with a single revolver shot to the back. Oh, three shots it was. How about that for a turn up, then !

    This is the Inspector handing you back to Cranmer in the studio….

    • dannybhoy

      I wouldn’t buy a new car from Labour!
      Shysters!
      Professional shysters and charlatans, as far away from their Christian roots in the world of the working man as it is possible to be..

    • David

      Excellent Inspector, you’ve missed your vocation in life.

  • ‘It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.
    It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in princes’
    (Psalm 118:8-9).
    It is certainly better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in politicians.

    • Shadrach Fire

      It is better to shoot yourself than put confidence in a politician. Wheres Integrity?

  • Rasher Bacon

    Here’s an idea. What can be done to help the dispossessed Christians of Iraq and Syria by the west as a whole? Better than that, never mind the government – in the same vein as Gillan’s recent food bank post, what can we do? What gifts have we been given on which a return might be required? Is donation to organisations such as Open Doors or Andrew White the best we can manage?

    How might the Archbishop himself contribute to such a debate, with the spur of embarrassment should he tomorrow be pitchforked into office?

    All options considered, negative and positive, personal, corporate (church), and governmental levels included.

    Here’s one for starters: when Hebrews were hunted out of Europe, a number of land purchases in Palestine (as Hadrian named it) were instrumental in establishing a safe place to live. Rothschild and others were not a government, but helped.

    What parallel is there for Christians?

    • Merchantman

      If the Western leaders were not spineless amoeba they would finish off ISIS in a couple of years. However Obama is on go-slow and one does wonder why.
      Anyhow the Christians could possibly relocate to Lebanon and settle down quietly and build themselves a strong place.

      • Rasher Bacon

        Thanks Merchantman – so under ‘Idea’ is: ‘Finish off Isis’ Practical requirements: Apache attack helicopters + a legal basis for using said hardware. Cost: At least £100m. I left out ‘Scriptural basis’… Love your enemies? Is that the sentiment expressed in Run, Baby, Run – “I’ll love them with a lead pipe?” Um…

        I did say all options considered!

        • CliveM

          Cost £100m. That wouldn’t even cover the costs of getting there. Your talking Billions.

        • Merchantman

          I wonder what the Centurions that met Jesus would do? These were the Caesar Arm that St Paul used to his advantage in his disputes with the Pharisees etc and Jesus did not shun. When the Law as we know it breaks down and is replaced by Satan’s rule, taking cover is a first option, but eventually you fight back or are lost.
          So I don’t subscribe to the pacifist at all costs school of Christianity which is seriously unscriptural.
          The only thing ISIS will understand is a Roman type campaign where their land is sown with salt.
          To do this we have to rid the West of the encumberances of our present PC leaders and their mental and legal inability to prosecute war on the scale and intensity required.
          Anymore questions anyone?

      • DanJ0

        It seems to me that there is an awful lot of geopolitics going on in that region at the moment, much of it out in the open. Some of it is being played out on the battlefield, and some of it is being played out in the oil market. Syria, Iran, and Russia seem to be the primary targets for various reasons, and the civilians on the ground appear to be expendable if they can’t be helped from the sidelines. Once Al Assad falls, I expect ISIL will be dealt with properly. In the meantime, Iran will be isolated and weakened, and Putin brought low or possibly replaced for his adventurism in Crimea.

  • Rasher Bacon

    In other words, I’ve just said to all the keyboard warriors on this blog, His Grace included, if we want something done properly, do it ourselves .

    What do we want done properly in this context for our brothers and sisters in the Middle East?

    – encouragement that Christian love is real
    – help spreading the gospel
    – food and clothing
    – a safe place to live
    – work for the adults that enables family life
    – education for children
    – freedom to worship

    Column headings are : scriptural basis / ideas / practical requirements / cost.

  • Dominic Stockford

    The only party leader to publicly state how important he finds the Judeo-Christian underpinning of the laws of this country is a certain Mr Farage. And the statement with which he said this was as clear as clear could be.

  • William Lewis

    I simply don’t believe him.

  • Inspector General

    The Inspector back again. Before he bids you goodnight, consider this. The Labour party is now somewhat ironically the party for those not used to work. To wit, career benefit spongers and non EU immigrants. It explains Labour’s silence during SSM. Don’t want to upset the Mohammedans, you see. And it does explain the strong showing for the party in South Wales, the North East and Scotland.

    The working types, including this man, now treat politics not as their fathers did, a party for life, but as a commodity, just like any other commodity at your feet.

    All a long way away from the likes of the late Eric Heffer. A real old Labour bruiser, and yet a High Church Anglican too !

  • Martin

    HG

    The greatest threat to the churches is not Islam but the churches own abandonment of biblical morality & doctrine. Until the churches act as the churches were warned to act in the letters to the seven they will not flourish, even where flourish means to stand firm under persecution. In particular they need to note the warnings to Sardis and Laodicea.

  • len

    ‘Multi faith’ seems to be the’ buzz word’ nowadays in our multi cultural no absolutes sort of society

    Of course one can put their faith in anything (and most do) faith in oneself, faith in Government (do people still do that?) faith in humanity solving all its problems by applying reason and science .
    It seems that in most religions(including secular humanism) one must work to save themselves and to be weighed in the balance if ones’ good ‘works outweigh ones’ bad’ works you have gained entrance into heaven or enlightenment or whatever the aim is.

    It appears that only Biblical Christianity has a saviour who has done all necessary to purchase salvation for His followers and this is granted to them by FAITH in him and what he HAS done….I believe this is the only Faith that works and is worth having…

  • Dreadnaught

    Lets cut crap – Islam is not under attack from any religion. Islam is not under attack from religion, atheism or the West on the contrary all religions, nations and philosophies not willing to accommodate Muslim demands ARE.
    I’m sick to the gills of all the lily-livered, pussy-footed, pandering by politicians on both sides the Left-Right divide toward adherents of this 7th Century code of violent intent, overtly wrapped up as a ‘faith’ but unacceptable anywhere in the 21st Century West.

    Its not another bloody QUANGO that will stop the Islamisation of the world; its a dose of bitter realism, forced down the throats these pompous puppets of spin and false promises.

    • Phil R

      Nobody will force anything down anyone’s throats.

      May be Russia is still man enough to do it but the West with its emasculated men will do nothing.

      No good looking in horror at the TV, throwing our teddies at the screen and attending some meeting.

      We brought our sons up to pretend to be women. Our daughters don’t really desire these half men and Islam laughs in our faces.

      Rant all you like. Unless we allow men to be men we are finished.

      • Dreadnaught

        Have you a point to make? If so get on with it when you have finished sewing sequins on your son’s underpants.

        • Phil R

          If we ever get to the point that the armies are equally matched

          who would you bet on winning?

          Ours of course.

          So did the Romans in the 5th C

          • Dreadnaught

            I don’t have a clue what you are on about or where you are coming from – just be a little cautious about throwing the ‘we’ about with such gay abandon,

          • Phil R

            Ok. Some of us Christians are concerned that that society now does not value such things as honour, commitment, self sacrifice and traditional gender behaviour. This may compromise the West’s ability to counter this threat.

            You seem to see these virtues as irrelevant. I do not

          • Dreadnaught

            You seem to see these virtues as irrelevant. Where have I expressed such a view and anyway, what is traditional gender behaviour?

            I thought the point of this thread was about a left wing politician piously courting prospective voters with the suggestion of establishing a global envoy for religious freedom. My point was that he was ducking the issue that Islam is the biggest threat to religious freedom: the rest is for some obscure reason from your own imagination.

      • DanJ0

        “Our daughters don’t really desire these half men and Islam laughs in our faces.”

        I’ll have the handsome ones if any are going spare. 😉

        • Phil R

          You are right

          Many may even choose the homosexual lifestyle

    • DanJ0

      Things are hotting up in Germany:

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11309449/Record-numbers-rally-against-Islamisation-in-Germany.html

      I’m not sure that’s the best place for it to happen, to be honest, despite their immigration numbers.

      • Phil R

        I do remember driving through Northern Germany a few years ago.

        One poster read Germany without Turkey Germany without Islam

        there were a number of them

  • Rasher Bacon

    Idea #3: Pairing western churches with a middle eastern ones. 4 joint services a year with dispossessed Christians, using Skype. Practicalities: translators, laptop, screen, projector. Teaching, worship, prayer and possibly communion together. Scriptural basis: Encourage each other as you see the day drawing near. If a man love not his brother who he can see on Skype, how can he say he loves God whom he has not seen?

    This may be something Open Doors is already doing, or the guys in the middle east may not be that interested.

  • Rasher Bacon

    Idea #4: Gas bottle stove factories in the UK or in other countries, as here: http://www.instructables.com/id/Gas-Bottle-Wood-Burner/

  • len

    I might have mentioned this once or several times before that there can be no vacuum in the material world or in the spiritual world.
    Islam is the antithesis of Christianity and Islam is advancing and filling any void that presents itself either through fear or ignorance of its true intentions.

    God does not have to judge us because we are judging ourselves either through rebellion, ignorance, or the failure of Christians to present the Gospel to a dying world.
    There is a way that’ seems right’ to man and that is the broad road to destruction (the multi faith path) there is but one narrow path that leads to Life the path walked by the Saviour and this is the path Christians must take .There is but One Way and Christ is it…

  • Legal protection of religous freedom is a pre-requisite for any State wishing to claim legitimacy. It is not a request that we submit to the State – certainly not to an illegitimate State such as ours.