Extremism

England has defeated religious fanatics in the past, and will do so again

When in 1587 Pope Sixtus V began conspiring with King Philip II of Spain in ‘The Enterprise of England’, it was the world’s most powerful religious leader giving his blessing to the world’s most powerful military empire, the union of which would depose the heretic Queen Elizabeth I, wipe out the heresy of Protestantism and return England to the glorious and righteous Catholic fold. At least that was the plan. Spain’s ‘Invincible Armada’ was formidable and unsurpassed: 130 ships set sail from La Coruña carrying 2,500 guns, 8,000 seamen, and 20,000 soldiers. Little England was no match for this might, but ‘God blew and they were scattered‘, and the rest, as they say, is history. More than four centuries on, England (and the UK) is Protestant by law, and ‘The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this Realm of England’ (or, indeed, in the UK).

The journey from gunpowder plots, bombs, conspiracies and treason was not bloodless: the path toward reconciliation and social harmony is paved with some appalling acts of cruelty, vengeance and injustice meted out in the name of Jesus to the glory of God. You don’t get rid of religious fanatics easily at all. But centuries of incremental trust was repaid with cumulative liberties, and Babylon saw salvation. Roman Catholics are now free to hold great political offices of state and do all that any other man may do (except, of course, to become Supreme Governor of the Church of England, so the Throne is necessarily reserved). Religions morph and mutate; enmities subside; time heals; reason and perspective win out. Cardinal Vincent Nichols is not conspiring with Pope Francis to give contemporary effect to Pius V’s Regnans in Excelsis, by which Queen Elizabeth I was excommunicated and  “deprived of her pretended title to the aforesaid crown and of all lordship, dignity and privilege whatsoever”. But nor are we seeing under Queen Elizabeth II “impieties and crimes multiplied one upon another the persecution of the faithful and afflictions of religion daily growing more severe under the guidance and by the activity of the said Elizabeth”.

As Islamist atrocities sweep across the world, some are calling for Muslims to be stopped at the borders / interned / registered and monitored, or summarily deported. Quite where you’d have deported Salman Abedi is moot: the Manchester bomber was born in Manchester, so he was British. So, incidentally, were Richard Reid, Mohammed Sidique Khan and Omar Khan Sharif. Salman Abedi’s parents fled Gaddafi’s Libya, so should the whole family have been barred entry or deported before any crime had been committed? And how many generations back should we go? Do you intern thousands of Muslim grandparents on the basis of their grandchildren’s pre-crime a Minority Report approach to justice which would negate freedoms going all the way back to Magna Carta? Would the terrorists not then have won?

You can’t defeat religious fanaticism with strategies of politically-correct platitudes of open-hearted inclusion and oblique references to generic ‘extremism’ which treats Baptist and Methodist youthwork with suspicion: you have to home in on the offending religion, identify its unacceptable precepts, expound its error, name and shame its false prophets, and declare something unequivocal along the lines of: ‘Mohammed of Mecca hath no jurisdiction in this Realm of England’ (or, indeed, in the UK). Sure, it will cause grievous offence, and the cries of ‘racist’, ‘bigot’ and ‘Islamophobe’ will certainly pour forth. But religions morph and mutate; enmities subside; time heals; reason and perspective win out – eventually.

It is absurd that we must all pussyfoot around the name of Mohammed, as though his prophethood were beyond question and his example unassailable. It is offensive that we must all revere the Qur’an and set it on the highest shelf in our public schools and libraries, as though its lofty precepts were inviolable and its theology immutable. It is deplorable that we must bow and scrape to self-appointed ‘community leaders’ who dispense their infallible notions of sharia justice and pontificate to the media about how ‘Islamophobia’ must be stamped out – by which they mean any historical inquiry into Mohammed; any criticism of the Sunnah or his claims to prophethood; and any unauthorised theological exposition of the Qur’an or Hadith.

It isn’t that reasonable and enlightened British Muslims must daily/weekly/monthly repudiate Islamist atrocities like Manchester (/London/Paris/Brussels/Stockholm/Nice/Berlin/Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray…); it is that they must refute those of their Ummah for whom every dancing teenage girl is a whore; every portrayal of their prophet is blasphemous, and every scholarly question about the historicity and authenticity of their religion is deemed to be unacceptably offensive. This demands intelligent textual criticism; an understanding of context, culture and Sitz im Leben. Let us not just teach our schoolchildren to wash their hands before they touch the Qur’an or to be sure to place it back on the highest shelf in a place of honour, but how to analyse, critique and understand it, and then freely to assent to or repudiate every word of it. This is a basic freedom: Christians have had it for centuries, and those who seek to dwell in a liberal democracy must respect the source of its community morality. It has been said before, but it merits repeating:

We need urgently to develop a ‘Prophetology’ – after the fashion of our centuries of Christology – in order to investigate the true nature and person of Mohammed as recorded in the Qur’an and Hadith(s). Then we might discover, or come nearer to understanding – as we have with Jesus – who Mohammed was; to whom he was born and how he was raised; what manner of prophet he claimed to be; what his relationship was with Allah; and what he might mean not only to the diverse ‘Islamic world’ but to non-Muslims the world over.

Few Roman Catholics are now remotely bothered by a bit of residual anti-Catholicism in the British Constitution: Spain is no longer a threat, and the Pope is a little more conciliatory and latitudinarian. O, yes, one or two ‘robust’ sorts of Roman Catholic find it grievously offensive that one of their co-religionists may not marry the Monarch or sit on the Throne themselves, but moderate and enlightened ones thank God (at least at Christmas) for the light and grace of the heretic Queen Elizabeth II. If we could now move on from the self-censorious unwritten blasphemy laws which leap to defend anything Islamic (and that includes hurling ‘racist’ and ‘Islamophobe’ at every tentative inquiry), we might just beat the religious fanatics with a hefty dose of reason and enlightenment.

  • John

    Yes. The problem is of course that any move in the direction of subjecting Islam to the same critical analysis as Christianity, and in particular anything that can be interpreted as offensive, insulting or blasphemous, WILL result in atrocity. This is why so many people are so scared to say what they really think about Islam and its founder. “Keep your head down and hope it goes away.” If this is a war civilised society can actually win, it is one that will claim many, many casualties. Rivers of blood and all that…

    • Cressida de Nova

      We are raised to be charitable. We think that all cultures are basically decent regardless of belief systems that we are joined by more in common than differences but evidently it is not true. It would have been a very simple exercise to exclude any cultural group whose
      belief system violates the law of the land eg paedophilia and incitement to violence.
      The government officials who have perpetrated this crime against their own people for whatever reason …cheap labour force, self interest etc. will be made accountable on this side or the other. Preferably both.

    • Richard Hill

      The critical analysis proposal has much merit. How about an “Institute for the Study of Religious Texts”? Prince Charles could be the founder. Creating a prominent target for the haters, to draw fire, could be a good military tactic.

  • Sybaseguru

    Let us compare Jesus and Mo:-
    Jesus loved people, Mo killed them
    Jesus forgave the adulterer, and told her to sin no more, Mo stoned adulterers
    Jesus raised the dead to life, Mo had an army and put many to death
    Jesus forgave everyone, Mo killed offenders
    Jesus was single, Mo a paedophile (one of his wives was 9 at consummation, he was 53)

    There is nothing in common.

    • Cressida de Nova

      How could it be true? That Mohammed the prophet consummated a marriage at 53 with a nine year old girl. Do Muslims know about this? If this is true how could an educated person be a Muslim? Somehow I don’t think Muslims would believe this. Did Mohammed write the Qu’ran?Sort of like making Rolf Harris a consultant in child psychology.

      • Anton

        Certainly it is known to Muslims; it is in one of the hadiths (tales about Muhammad) regarded as most reliable (‘sahih’). I gather that ISIS explicitly mentioned this as a recruiting point – come and join us and you can have sex with young girls you capture.

        The young girl in question was Ayesha, and when Muhammad kept adding other wives to his pack as well, and justifying it with new verses to be added to the quran that gave him permission, she spoke a cutting riposte which is, remarkably, also preserved in hadith: “I feel your lord [ie, Allah] is quick to fulfil your wishes and desires.”

      • Sybaseguru

        Aisha bint Abu Bakr. It is based on a saying attributed to Aisha herself (Sahih Bukhari volume 5, book 58, number 234), and Muslims believe this to be a historically accurate account.

  • Typhoon Tina

    Unfortunately a person who is born in Britain does not necessarily make him British, any more than Jesus being born in a stable makes him a horse. Some groups never become ‘British’, never lose their preferred identity and loyalties, even after 50 generations. To think they might is naive. This is the danger of multi-culturalism.

  • Busy Mum

    It all comes down to the basic question of whether or not Jesus was – is – the Son of God, as He said He was.

    The West was built on the belief that He was.

    Islam was built on the belief that He wasn’t.

    Jesus said he was the Son of God.
    Islam says there is no son of God.
    If Jesus was correct, Islam is false – no Prophetology needed.
    If Islam is correct, Jesus must have been mistaken.

    In which case, why does Islam esteem Jesus as a prophet? And if one prophet was mistaken, why shouldn’t a later prophet also be mistaken?

    And why would Christendom look to somebody as its moral leader who, if He was not the Son of God, must have been a liar, or mad?

    • Anton

      In answer to one of your questions, Islam reckons that the gospel of Jesus, the injil, has been corrupted; just as it conveniently reckons that the Old Testament has been corrupted in the bits it doesn’t like. Theologically speaking they aren’t doing much that Arians and today’s church liberals haven’t already tried, frankly, in cherry-picking the Bible; but they are doing it from the outside and doing it with bombs.

      • Busy Mum

        Yes, I can see that – thank you.
        The speed with which Islam has become very much part of the national consciousness is incredible – it just wasn’t really on my radar until the new millennium. I don’t recall it featuring in RE lessons, other than a very minor topic, or assemblies when I was at school.

  • Anton

    Despite the bombs this is ultimately a spiritual battle for political power, Your Grace, and the two opponents are militant Islam and post-Christian secularism. My money is on the former, which I regard as divine judgement on the latter for the sins that have wrecked the Western family. In the coming struggle between the two, the committed Christian can expect to keep nothing more than his faith in Christ.

    As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see the River Thames foaming with much blood.

    • IanCad

      Enoch Powell had an over-fevered imagination. If I am correct, his speech was in reference to West Indian immigration – not Muslim.
      Rivers of blood – utter tosh! There are only about three million Muslims in this land and our knees are knocking? Maybe we deserve a good thrashing. Either that or brace up and acquit ourselves as men and apply the laws already existing.

      • Anton

        Time and demographics will prove one of us right. You, hopefully.

        • IanCad

          Thanks for the link Anton. The evening is glorious, the doves are cooing, the rabbits are hopping, Mommas gone shopping; Peace, peace, glorious peace. I shall make the most of it and sit in the shade of the Cork Oak Tree and savour the moment. It will be over soon enough.

          • Anton

            Thankfully there will be other fine evenings! Video records of parts but not all of Enoch’s speech seem to have survived, oddly.

        • Little Black Censored

          I hope Johnny Rottenborough will not mind my copying part of his comment on a later thread. In 1971 Powell said in a speech at Southall:
          It is by ‘Black Power’ that the headlines are caught, and under the
          shape of the negro that the consequences for Britain of immigration and
          what is miscalled ‘race’ are popularly depicted. Yet it is more truly
          when he looks into the eyes of Asia that the Englishman comes face to
          face with those who will dispute with him the possession of his native
          land.

      • Maalaistollo

        Only about 3 million?

      • CliveM

        As a nation we have always been slow to anger. I am sure prior to WW2, people were making the same disparaging comments about the state of British manhood as are made today.

        • Inspector General

          Unfortunately not. It gets worse by the day and we haven’t hit rock bottom yet…
          http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/05/23/britain-has-its-first-reported-genderfluid-police-officer/

          • CliveM

            I’ll not inflict pink news on myself Inspector (been there, done that) Suffice to say they won’t be representative of the whole nation.

          • Inspector General

            Clive, Big Gay is as big a threat as Big Islam. For God’s sake wake up to it. You don’t think transvestite police officers would survive without these awful people bullying everyone to accept them!

    • Dominic Stockford

      Militant Islam is unfrightened and prepared to murder. Post-Christian secularism is wet and weak, and doesn’t even believe in right and wrong. No contest.

      • IanCad

        Bonkers!!!

    • Anton

      I fear you are right. This does not mean Christianity is weak but rather it has always been the way of the cross; it is a steep and narrow road that leads to life.

      Islam and Secularism wish to conquer and shape the world; Christianity, rightly understood and lived, is composed of those who have died to the world. It is in the true sense of the term ‘unworldly’. It is a miracle of astonishing proportions that it has any adherents; that it covers the earth is beyond belief. Of course, that it does, is a witness to its authenticity.

      Other religions and philosophies appeal to the flesh (fallen human nature); nothing in biblical apostolic Christianity does.

      • Anton

        The church is portrayed in the New Testament as a persecuted minority called out of every nation and culture. And that is true in mediaeval Catholic Europe, Orthodox Byzantium and Established protestant England too.

  • IanCad

    Feeling lazy so I’ll take the liberty of C/Peeing an edit to Chef in the prior thread. On second thoughts it would make more sense to copy the lot:

    To take today’s (24th) post as an example. Those merry men waving banners inciting murder should be charged with such. Those others on the march alongside their more bloodthirsty brothers should be charged with the same. The maximum penalties should be applied and deportation to follow for those not native born.
    The message will get out. This nonsense must stop.

    Edit!!! I am making the assumption that the protest happened in the UK. I’m sure the statute of limitations for incitement to murder has not expired – Rolf Harris would be unhappy if it has. Thus those participating in the march should be arrested immediately. A trolling of pictures/videos of similar demonstrations should be a priority. A rich harvest of treasonous, bloodthirsty wretches could be garnered in a week or two.
    Forget troops in the streets, arrest these traitors now!!

  • Maalaistollo

    Religions may ‘morph and mutate’ but this particular one doesn’t seem to do so to any significant degree, not least because of the way it manages its theology. While its boundaries may sometimes contract (but only by means of the exercise of force by the infidel) at the moment they are expanding rapidly and its essential characteristics remain much the same as they have been for some 1,400 years. Its aim is total subjugation of all non Muslims and it has used deceit, terror, rape, enslavement and execution as the means to that end. How is this going to ‘morph and mutate’ into a milk-and-water ‘just be nice to everybody’ religion?

    • Merchantman

      It wont, its whack-a-mole.

  • Arden Forester

    “Quite where you’d have deported Salman Abedi is moot: the Manchester bomber was born in Manchester, so he was British”.

    That doesn’t follow. My son was born in Britain but the powers-that-be decided otherwise. Since 1948 the government has muddied the waters. I would say the young man was certainly no subject of Her Majesty.

    • Merchantman

      You could draw a distinction on what constitutes a crime that merits deportation and thereby being stripped of your nationality. This would probably be based specifically on facilitating or conspiracy to or making of an act of Islamic terror. To do this you would probably need some form of state of emergency or wartime law. You could follow the course envisioned in this article of engaging intellectually or theologically with Islam because unless you know what you are up against you are fighting in the dark. We need to be fighting in the daylight from a position of strength in the same way we did 1940-45. Omitting ’39 because we were at that time like now still leafleting our enemy on certain fronts and seeking a way out short of total war.
      To do all this would mean resetting the agenda in a meaningful and specific way. I see Jihad deniers having a special place.

    • He might have been British born but he wasn’t really British, he was more Libyan.
      It’s like Boris, he was born in the US but he’s not American.

  • Paul Greenwood

    Not sure the argument presented is coherent. Mohammed was a brigand who robbed caravan trains and was functionally illiterate. His succession caused a rift which is being readily exploited by UK. France and USA today as they suck on the Saudi teat and gorge on Qatari money hiring out their soldiers and renaming Sandhurst facilities in return for Arab gold.

    Iran has a population of 80 million yet the proxy war Saudi/Qatar/Israel wants UK/US/France to fight against Shias in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Iran has caused “The West” to topple every secular regime in the Middle East, every one where women had professions and public safety was ensured.

    Ghadaffi cut a deal with Blair in return for protecting his succession from Al-Qaeda but Cameron welched on the deal. Abedi’s parents sought refuge in UK in 1994 but now feel safe enough to return to chaotic Libya where black Africans are sold openly in slave markets and militias run riot. They retain a Housing Association home in Manchester however.

    Saudi funds mosques across the UK. EU funds provide computers for mosques “to run courses to integrate Muslim women into the workforce” !!!!!!! Anglican Churches in Bradford remove their attrapments and become “community centres” with Urdu and Arabic script to receive public funding.

    I find it peculiar that SAS, German, Norwegian, Jordanian, US, Czech and presumably Israeli soldiers are in Southeast Syria trying to stop Syrian Army from taking back their own territory and now Russian paratroopers and Spetsnaz are positioned to support the Syrians. SAS meanwhile is in Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan and no doubt Ukraine………….belatedly they are on alert inside England !!!

    Has this country ever waged so many wars simultaneously while pretending they are not happening ? Has it ever had such a heterogenous population with affiliations to the nations overseas under attack ? Has it ever been possible for immigrant populations to jet back to their home country………even more remarkable for those receiving asylum – and flit between “there” and “here” as if running along a corridor ?

    There is something “beyond belief” in what is going on. It is like watching a video-game – men sit at consoles directing drones – “Reaper” – to kill remotely overseas – sometimes even the correct target – but it is horrendous when a “remote agent” carries a suitcase full of explosives to “his target” in France or UK or US ……..Are we psychotic ?

    Islam was kept out of Europe at great cost and with good reason. It was why the US Navy fought Barbary Pirates in 19th Century; it was why Columbus had to sail west to go east to India; it is why Ferdinand and Isabella were happy to have liberated Spain.

    Only those imbued with no understanding of religion or contempt for religion could bring Islam into Christendom. Just as those people went to a concert in Manchester oblivious to the current state of the world, so Western society stumbles blindly oblivious to the grievances felt by many in the wider world who know history and resent. The old expression that “if you don’t take an interest in Politics, Politics has a habit of taking an interest in you” is a real warning to laisser-faire attitudes and narcissistic intoxication.

    • Typhoon Tina

      It’s makes sense once you realise that the UK and the political parties are ruled by a hostile and anti-Christian elite.
      http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2017/05/16/fake-jews-deceit-and-double-think-in-britains-hostile-elite/

      • Paul Greenwood

        Yes that piece of the puzzle would complete the picture

        • CliveM

          It’s only a piece of the puzzle for those who look for it to be.

          • Paul Greenwood

            Yes, one must be assiduous in completing jigsaws

      • CliveM

        I see, it’s all a ‘Jewish problem’. Why am I not surprised that would be your conclusion.

    • Anton

      It was actually the West that supported the toppling of a secular regime in Iran in 1979.

      • Merchantman

        The French.

        • Anton

          Jimmy Carter and the French, both part of the West.

          • Merchantman

            But it was the French who; just like the Kaiser sent Lenin in a sealed train to deliver that particular Bacillus to Russia in 1917; jetted the Ayatollah from exile to cause mayhem Iran and the Middle East and beyond. Both countries are still at it.

      • Paul Greenwood

        so true. France hoped to get contracts for Elf from BP

  • Let us not just teach our schoolchildren to wash their hands before they touch the Qur’an…but how to analyse, critique and understand it

    An Egyptian professor of Arabic, Nasr Abu Zaid, wrote over 20 years ago that the Qur’an should be analysed as a literary text. He was declared an apostate and ordered to divorce his wife. Eventually, ‘in the face of death threats and relentless public harassment he fled with his wife from Cairo to Holland’. Click here and scroll to just before half way down the page. It’s more than likely that British Muslims would be as incensed as their Egyptian brothers if ‘the idea that the Koran must be read literally as the absolute and unchanging Word of God’ were challenged.

    you have to home in on the offending religion, identify its unacceptable precepts

    Remove the unacceptable precepts from the Qur’an and you would be left with little more than the Bible stories Mohammed used to regurgitate when inspiration failed him. The idea that Islam can be reformed is attractive but forlorn.

    • Anton

      It’s more than likely that British Muslims would be as incensed as their Egyptian brothers if ‘the idea that the Koran must be read literally as the absolute and unchanging Word of God’ were challenged.”

      The quran is certainly not taught in school RE lessons as truth. Pupils are told that Muslims regard it as the truth, that’s all.

      • Busy Mum

        I find that RE lessons are delivered on the basis that there is no absolute truth.

        • Anton

          Of course! It is written from the point of view of a nontheistic faith system. But a faith system it is; how else do you decide which bits of whose scriptures are significant and are good or bad? Of course the teacher never states that the lessons are really bolstering a point of view that is never mentioned explicitly.

          • Busy Mum

            Which is why the majority of children emerging from eleven years of compulsory RE in either secular or CofE schools are atheists.

            One RE teacher (in a church secondary) admitted to me that ‘other faith’ schools do not take this approach and are quite clear about passing on to their pupils what they believe to be the truth.

          • Rhoda

            In which case perhaps it would be better if RE wasn’t a compulsory school subject?

          • Busy Mum

            Agree.

        • Sarky

          There isnt.

          • William Lewis

            Is that absolutely true?

          • Sarky

            Very good.

          • Busy Mum

            And why should that religion get a free ride?

          • Sarky

            No religion should get a free ride.

          • Busy Mum

            Yours is.

          • Sarky

            I don’t have a religion.

          • Martin

            Sarky

            Of course you do, in your religion you are its god and you worship yourself day and night.

          • Busy Mum

            Your statement that there is no absolute truth sounded like a dogmatic statement of your creed, to me.

          • Royinsouthwest

            How do you know?

          • Sarky

            Because anything we take to be true is revisable.

          • Martin

            Sarky

            If you are saying that there is no absolute truth then clearly there is no absolute truth that there is no absolute truth.

            Use your God given mind for once.

          • Sarky

            That there is no absolute truth that there is no absolute truth does not mean that there is an absolute truth. Two negatives don’t make a positive.

          • Martin

            Sarky

            If there is no absolute truth then that is absolute truth. You’re not too good at this, are you.

          • Sarky

            Neither are you.

          • Martin

            Sarky

            ROFL Better than you, clearly.

  • Jon Sorensen

    The Brits didn’t defeat religious fanatics in the 7th century, but fanatics pushed their religion onto others thorough the following centuries. Maybe Britain will be an Islamic state by 2100AD as religious preferences changes over time.

    • Maalaistollo

      2100AD? Bit of an optimist aren’t you? I reckon another 20 years will be enough.

    • Martin

      Ah, the religious fanatic speaks.

      • Jon Sorensen

        … another projection from Martin …

        • Martin

          Jon

          The fact is, your religion is the worship of yourself.

          • Jon Sorensen

            “your religion is the worship of yourself.”

            Religion has made you lose your sense of reality if you think this is true

          • Martin

            Jon

            Your religion causes you to pretend there is no God so that you can worship your own intellect. You imagine you can reason soundly, you can’t.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Yet another lie that you have convinced yourself. Sad so see one so delusional 🙁

          • Martin

            Jon

            So tell me, who is the most important person in your life.

          • Jon Sorensen

            This is a non sequitur which shows you are not thinking clearly. I don’t worship the most important person in my life. This is typical Christian bigotry to assume non-Christians are self-centred self worshipers. Shame 🙁

          • Martin

            Jon

            Of course you worship the most important person in your life. You trust without hesitation your judgement.

          • Jon Sorensen

            “The delusion is strong with this one”

          • Martin

            Jon

            Indeed, you are deluded.

  • Dreadnaught

    I am boiling over with anger and frustration and have deleted the post below out of respect for the blog owner.

  • Dominic Stockford

    Making the book ‘Not the same God’ (produced by Christian Concern) obligatory reading for all people in public office, and all students of the age of 16 and above would be a good start.

    Being ready to fight for our freedom once again would be another good move. Jaw-jaw isn’t working.

  • ecclesiaman

    I would sincerely like to believe that HG is correct in his hopes for the UK but at the end he inclines to an agnostic view, i.e. “We might just beat….”.
    I applaud his reasoned attitudes to the multifarious issues surrounding the difficulties with Mohammed, Islamophobia, sharia and local Imams etc., but we have as great a problem with all the political parties who either fail to see the real issues or choose to ignore them, apart from some UKIP members. In general the public are not so ignorant.
    We face a crisis which has been coming for years. Will our politicians defend the public who they are expected to represent, and are they prepared to stand against the tide? The omens are not good if the present campaign and manifesto’s are anything to go on.

  • Dolphinfish

    Nicely put, host. Your case made admirably, and those Catholics suspecting you were actually sticking it to the pope whilst keeping an innocent look on your protestant boat are surely misguided.

    • Inspector General

      Perhaps Cranmer is reminding us that we don’t want to go the same way we did half a millennium ago. When a band of protesting extremists high up took over the country and put many hundreds to death in the process as the hapless population were forced to live the way they were told to. Perhaps not.

      • CliveM

        The ‘hapless population ‘ were well use to being told how to live. It’d been going on for centuries.

        • Inspector General

          Chosen your Islamic name yet? Try and be a bit more imaginative than ‘al Britani’

          • CliveM

            Mustafa leak?

          • Inspector General

            You’re on detention for that.

          • Chefofsinners

            Urine detention too.

          • Cressida de Nova

            LOL

      • Royinsouthwest

        How many hundreds were put to death by those rulers who oppressed the people you called “extremists”?

        • Inspector General

          The original extremists are responsible for subsequent casualties. You can’t get away from that…

  • saintmark

    Islam means submission, Muslims submit to Allah, everyone else must submit to the Muslims. Good luck getting a compromise with that.

  • Anna

    “If we could now move on from the self-censorious unwritten blasphemy laws… we might just beat the religious fanatics with a hefty dose of reason and enlightenment.”

    Sadly, it is not so simple. Reason and enlightenment come with the knowledge of God. When the Christian nations of the West sought earnestly to serve God, they were set “high above all nations which He has made, for praise, fame, and honour”(Deuteronomy 26:19), so that they might be a light to the nations. In this age when people choose to turn away from God, and call “evil good and good evil… put darkness for light and light for darkness” (Isaiah 5:20), He leaves them to their own devices, so that they might become a warning to others. There is a lack the moral courage to stand up to evil and so “a thousand will flee at the threat of one; at the threat of five you will all flee away” (Isaiah 30:17).

    The moral corruption at the heart of Western civilisation is the problem, and unless this is remedied, the present threat will continue to grow, and images of people clutching their teddy bears and candles become the sad footnote to their so-called enlightenment.

  • England has defeated religious fanatics in the past

    The England that defeated religious fanaticism centuries ago had leaders who were worthy of the name and worthy of the people but, by bringing Islam and its violent creed to Britain, post-war Conservative and Labour governments have shown themselves to be the enemies of the people. However the Muslim question is resolved—whether by reforming strong and stable Islam to make it as weak and wobbly as Christianity or by expelling Muslims—the first requisite will be governments who work with the British, not against them. The French have recently squandered a golden opportunity to achieve just that.

    • Anton

      The French are not frightened and angry enough yet. Someday a European country will vote in a national leader standing on what might be called an anti-Sharia ticket. But who and when?

      When it happens, I look forward to trials for treason of various former national leaders.

      • @ Anton—But who and when?

        I don’t know who but I can tell you when. In the second round of the French election, 92 per cent of Muslims put their own interests first and voted for Macron. The day that 92 per cent of the indigenes of a European country put their own interests first will be ‘when’. Anything remotely close to 92 per cent would be a landmark achievement for people who have been lectured for generations that putting themselves first is racist.

      • Cressida de Nova

        Globally everyone has been indoctrinated with Marxist code. The French spirit has been diluted.Their teeth were good …once !

  • Inspector General

    This morning, a security officer spoke on the radio about the problem. There are 3000 individuals under observation. It goes without saying that these are only the ones known about, and the figure must grow, perhaps by the day.

    With this volume of cases, he suggests deportation, expulsion, repatriation – call it what you like – on merely the say-so of the security services. One has to agree with him. Further. One can see no reason why his immediate family shouldn’t go with him. Such is the high price that preventing murderous sedition demands. What must be done to ensure the safety of the realm. Needed to encourage such family members to go to the authorities on the slightest of suspicion.

    As he said himself, there’s going to have to be some withholding of so-called human rights on the way. You see, better a few thousand individuals and scoundrel lawyers who’ve attached themselves to each getting the hump when their clients are sent back to either where they came from or to their peoples country of origin, or damnable Syria for all one cares than regular explosions in the UK and loss of innocent and young life.

    We will of course have to leave that proven bastion of terrorists rights, the ECHR. Otherwise, you are going to have thousands of cases lasting years and each being awarded a million for hurt feelings at the end. Don’t worry about them, mind. There are plenty other of countries out there they can hand their satanic judgments to. They won’t go without.

    Gentleman. The Inspector commends this line of effectiveness to you.

    • Anton

      Yes, but the law must be changed first to differentiate religions whose scriptures command takeover by force from those which don’t. Otherwise most people who contribute to this blog will come into the category of “religious extremists”. Not all religions are the same.

      • Inspector General

        Nonsense!

        Islam is the target. Everyone knows that. Don’t do lawyer shite. As a scientist you’d be hopeless at it.

        • CliveM

          There is the rule of law in this country.

          Thankfully.

          • Inspector General

            ECHR Law. For now….

        • Anton

          That’s what I was saying, if you had taken the trouble to work it out.

  • Albert

    But centuries of incremental trust was repaid with cumulative liberties, and Babylon saw salvation.

    Surely not. It was nothing to do with trust or generosity. It was to do with the loss of power. And who are you calling Babylon?

    The reason this kind of Whig interpretation of history isn’t respectable any more is because it says more about the historians than about the history.

    • Royinsouthwest

      Do you think modern history books and journal articles tell us nothing about the values and political views of their authors?

      • Albert

        I agree with you. What difference does it make?

  • Inspector General

    We can all do our bit to halt the inevitable Islamification of the country, fellows. These are new British standards none of us want.

    Remember. A vote for Labour is a vote for Islam.

    There. One sits back as our priestly Marxists harangue Cranmer for allowing this piece of
    filthy blasphemy to remain on this site. You know who you are!

  • David

    Western culture is the result of Christianity strengthened by Greek analytical thought. Until we return to respect, honour and uphold that spiritual, intellectual and moral base the problem, which is of ourselves essentially, will grow.
    Of course politically, sooner or later a leader and government will be elected in one of the western democracies, that is serous about combating Islam. When that happpens the deportations and other policies, such as penal islands, will start. Essentially safety is achieved when we separate ourselves from Islam – a policy that our wiser, more realistic and more God fearing ancestors upheld for many centuries.

    • carl jacobs

      Of course politically, sooner or later a leader and government will be elected in one of the western democracies, that is serous about combating Islam.

      Yes, but what kind of Gov’t will it be? Do you think it will stop with Islam?

      When that happens the deportations and other policies, such as penal islands, will start.

      And then the practical implications will bring home the futility of those policies. You tacitly assume that Muslims are objects to be managed at will. They won’t want to be managed and they won’t passively await the fate you imagine for them. You would start a civil war based upon race.

      • Anton

        It’s possible that he’s aware of that.

      • Phil R

        I am not saying it is a good thing but the solution imposed by Turkey on Cyprus worked.

        Before 1974 they were throwing hand grenades into Christian/Muslim living rooms by boys on bicycles and murder was almost an every day occurance.

        I had a house in the south for 12 years until 2004 and I can say that both the Muslim North and Christian South were idyllic and virtually crime free.

        I once had to go to a police station in the south. On the wall was a list of cars stolen in the last 20 years.

        There were less than 30 cars on the list.

        • carl jacobs

          It worked in Serbia and Croatia as well. And it worked in Kuwait when several hundred thousand Palestinians were driven out. Separation of populations will work. It’s what you have to do to effect separation that is the problem. These mass movements are accomplished by the specter of murder and rape enforced by tangible examples. Terror is an effective means to move large populations.

          But when it comes to Britain there isn’t any place for Muslims to run. And do you want to unleash upon yourselves the instrument of that terror? Because it won’t go away once the Muslims are gone.

          • CliveM

            Also worked at Indian independence and its partition. Only a few million died through the chaos and inter communal violence.

            Certainly worked in the long term, only a few wars. Nothing much.

          • Phil R

            I sort of considered Scotland. The SNP seem rather keen on immigration and the men with the black gear and flags would nicely balance the rainbow flag boys north of the border. I am sure they would get on rather well.

            We also still have a wall. Perhaps not still up to the job but if we wanted it repaired etc we could always just ask your guy. He seems keen on walls.

    • I suspect, by the time this happens, it will be far too late.

      Not that I’m sure such a way of combatting Islam is either wise or right. Philosophically, it is anti-freedom of religion a policy with a sting in the tale for the very people who champion it. Politically, it is anti-democratic. The inherent difficulty with democracy is it gives political power to those who would destroy it. Biblically, persecuting people for their beliefs has no mandate.

      What is the only weapon open to the Christian to defeat false belief of whatever hue? The gospel. Preach the word.

  • len

    To be born in a democracy carries certain responsibilities.One is to obey the rule of law and to respect the rights and the freedom of others.
    To be’ born in Britain’ signifies nothing on its own.

    • Royinsouthwest

      It ought to signify loyalty to Britain. When you think about Blair or Corbin that is rather doubtful. I would be tempted to add Ted Heath to that list. It won’t because he did fight for this country in WWII.

      • len

        Which side was Ted Heath on?.

      • My first loyalty is not to Britain but Christ. And what does loyalty to Britain mean?

    • Busy Mum

      If we focused on the fact that this is actually a constitutional monarchy rather than a democracy, we might get somewhere!

      • len

        No democracy here then?…Sounds about right I suppose?.

        • Busy Mum

          I think the results of that constitutional monarchy have been the closest thing to democracy you are ever going to get.

          • Anton

            The idea of modern democracy (without slaves as in Athens!) came from the Puritans who decapitated their king!

          • Busy Mum

            …who, of course, wanted to be an absolute monarch, rather than constitutional one…..

        • Busy Mum

          p.s……

          “True it is that popular movements characterize the age, rather than the power of individual minds. It is an age of mobs. Democracy, not despotism, is the goal towards which civilization is tending. But democracy in its full development is one of the surest roads to despotism. First, the revolution; then, the plebiscite; then, the despot. The Caesar often owes his sceptre to the mob.”

          Sir Robert Anderson, 1895

  • len

    Man without God will stand defenceless against the forces of evil because the source of evil is spiritual.

    This simple fact will have to be experienced with much pain and heartache because man will not accept this easily.

    As God is removed evil will be unrestrained.

    • Inspector General

      Do you know, a muslim imam could say the very same. You really are unqualified to pontificate on anything on this site. There, a wonderful word to insult you with…

      • len

        I though you had gone…Still here then?

        • Inspector General

          There’s a thing. Shouldn’t you be boring us with the good news about those who are saved, and only those. To wit, your very smug self and the few fellow sandwich board mates you have….

  • Inspector General

    A tweet from Cranmer.

    “Homeless Hero Steve” has been offered a job. It is true so some say that homeless types are superb at holding a job down. They just needed a chance.

    So when he doesn’t turn up for work, try not to be too disappointed…

    • carl jacobs

      If a man wants to take a chance and be generous with his own money, that isn’t a bad thing. There isn’t any reason to assume the worst. Perhaps the man will make the most of his opportunity.

      • Inspector General

        It’s quite miraculous, from nuisance sponge on society to hero status. The Inspector is below hero status AND HE DESERVES BETTER for all his efforts in life. It was not to be. But, well done Steve!

        • Inspector General

          The Inspector contemplates retirement from this site. His wisdom is just dry dust here. He hands over to the likes of Homeless Steve. His is the voice of the future. The herd will eagerly hang on his every word. He is now in the public eye, you see. His opinions count as never before, and will be held fast.

          • CliveM

            This sounds suspiciously like you’re in a huff over lack of attention. Jealous even.

            There, there, tell me about your ‘higher understanding ‘!

          • Inspector General

            It’s not all bad news, Clive. Sarky will appreciate Homeless Steve’s thoughts. So long as he isn’t a Christian…

          • CliveM

            But what does homeless Steve know about the higher understanding?

          • Sarky

            I’ll sign your card and chuck a quid in.

          • Inspector General

            You don’t have to go that far, old friend…

          • len

            Wisdom??.When did that happen? Must have missed that?

          • carl jacobs

            What would we do without you, Inspector. Cranmer’s without the Inspector would be like a pub without beer.

        • carl jacobs

          A man deserves what he earns – no more and no less. If another man receives what he does not deserve, what is that to you? You did not earn it any more than he did. You are not more deserving of Grace simply because you see yourself as more deserving.

    • Don’t be so nasty, let him have a chance. He said he’s off the drugs. They might not be expecting much of him so if he turns up and does a good job they will be delighted.

  • Chefofsinners

    In 1984 WPC Yvonne Fletcher was shot dead by a Libyan from inside their embassy. The perpetrator was allowed to leave the UK protected by diplomatic immunity.

    In 1994 Salman Abedi’s parents left Libya and came to live in the U.K. to find safety.

    A week ago police told the family of Yvonne Fletcher that they knew who shot her but they would not bring a prosecution for “reasons of national security” and released the man. It was devastating for them.

    It would seem that we are very keen to protect Libyans. If only as much effort was put into protecting our own people.

    • Merchantman

      The Scottish Parliament released the Libyan Lockerbie bomber, in the USA Obama releases as many from Guantanamo as fast as he can, and many reoffend ; and so it goes on and on.

      • Chefofsinners

        That’s devolution for you. We should never have devolved power to the Americans.

  • bluedog

    ‘Astonishing how much bile and loathing this post has engendered.’ Tweeted His Grace.

    And, ‘As Islamist atrocities sweep across the world, some are calling for Muslims to be stopped at the borders / interned / registered and monitored, or summarily deported.’

    This writer proudly pleads guilty as charged. But not to bile and loathing, it’s shock, revulsion and fear about what the future holds. Is righteousness such that we have already forgotten the prescient words of Archbishop Emil Nona of Mosul in 2014? ‘Please, try to understand us. Your liberal and democratic principles are worth nothing here. You must consider again our reality in the Middle East, because you are welcoming in your countries an ever growing number of Muslims. Also you are in danger. You must take strong and courageous decisions, even at the cost of contradicting your principles. You think all men are equal, but that is not true: Islam does not say that all men are equal. Your values are not their values. If you do not understand this soon enough, you will become the victims of the enemy you have welcomed in your home.’

    Islamic atrocities such as that in Manchester are a political statement and mean that the politics of the Middle East are now the politics of Britain. Be warned.

    There’s more. ‘…the world’s most powerful religious leader giving his blessing to the world’s most powerful military empire, the union of which would depose the heretic Queen Elizabeth I’. A completely false analogy. There is no Muslim pope. The King of Saudi Arabia is not assembling an armada to invade Britain. The ‘armada’ is already here in the cities of Britain, ready to sacrifice for the cause. The distinction between threats from an external state actor and internal non-state actors is profound and clearly not understood. This is the danger. The nation state is configured to resist external threats, but does so on the basis of internal cohesion and trust. When a discrete demographic, determined by religion, contains individuals who will die to cause mass casualties amongst the host nation, we can see that the state is powerless.

    Be assured that the electorate will make its feelings known, and demand that the state is granted such powers as are needed to restore the Queen’s Peace, fine theo-philosophical arguments notwithstanding.

    • Dreadnaught

      Good post Blue.

    • David

      Spot on – well put.

    • ‘You must take strong and courageous decisions, even at the cost of contradicting your principles’

      For me this is precisely where the problem lies. I can see the danger Islam presents but the solutions I am being presented with don’t seem to me to to have a biblical mandate. All involve oppression of the other who threatens.

      • bluedog

        ‘All involve oppression of the other who threatens.’

        The idea that self-defence is ‘oppression’ is curious. That this should be the case is precisely where the problem lies.

        • We are talking of an ideology or belief. Is it right to banish this belief? Do we defend our beliefs by outlawing contrary beliefs?

          • Chefofsinners

            The ideology / belief in question is that other beliefs must be eradicated, through slaughter if necessary. It is therefore acceptable to fight this belief, and to outlaw it.

          • I don’t accept that outlawing a belief is the best way to fight it. Nor do I accept that FOR CHRISTIANS the way to oppose a belief is to forbid it or fight it. Where does the NT give us this authority? Where Christians have taken up the sword to subdue their opponents the name of Christ has always been defamed.

            My kingdom is not of this world else would my servants fight…

            We grant Islam freedom of belief in the name of Christ. and it removes our freedom of belief in the name of Mohammed. Therein, for the Christian, lies the way of the cross.

          • Anton

            Who is ‘we’? Secular Britain or the church?

            Your last paragraph would be equally applicable in 1940 if ‘Islam’ were replaced by ‘Nazism’ and ‘Mohammed’ were replaced by ‘Hitler’. Are you a pacifist?

          • The ‘we’ is the church. I am not a pacifist, or perhaps better I am not an unqualified pacifist. I believe the state has the God-given authority to defend itself from attack from within or without. However, I don’t think it is the business of the church to use the state as a weapon to attack belief systems that it (the church) disapproves. It is one thing to ask the state to defend the church from aggression but it is another to become the aggressor by inciting the state to outlaw belief systems we (Christians) find personally threatening.

            Where belief systems are not monolithic the state has a difficult task on its hands distinguishing between the different expressions of the belief system and tolerating those that from the state’s perspective are relatively benign while opposing those that are clearly malignant.

            If the state is itself seriously corrupt (nazi Germany) I do not think Christians have a mandate to overthrow it by revolution. Bonhoeffer was in my view wrong to try to assassinate Hitler.

            These are complicated issues to be sure but in my view Christians have to keep the big principles of their faith to the forefront. We need to remember that when reviled we don’t retaliate, when suffering we do not threaten. We love our enemies and do good to those who abuse us. We conquer through loving self sacrifice. We turn the other cheek. This is the spirit with which we approach those who oppose us.

          • Anton

            Your use of ‘we’ seems to me to shift inadvertently in this dialogue between “the British people” and “Christians in Britain”. I think that’s why I can’t make sense of what you are saying.

            Widow-burning (suttee) and ritual strangling (thuggee) were sincerely held religious beliefs in India.

          • Apologies for being unclear.

          • Anton

            I’m grateful for the courtesy but I wasn’t seeking an apology; I simply hope that further discussion can become clearer and hence more fruitful for us both.

          • Anton

            No, it is a political movement too.

          • Indeed it is. For Islam church and state are one. But Christianity is not a political movement, at least not in this sense. It has no pretensions to political power in this world for Christ’s kingdom is not of this world. Here we are aliens and foreigners not citizens. Our citizenship is in heaven. Here we have no city, no country. We have no mandate to impose a Christian culture in the name of Christ.

            Fear of this ‘weakness’ is what drives many of the more strident comments on this thread. We want political clout and security. We are even willing to attack others if we think this is under threat. But this is not the way of the cross.

          • Anton

            The question is what does a Christian wish his country (rather than his church) to do.

            Remember that terrorist outfits have been made illegal organisations in the past. Rightly so, too.

          • andrew

            You’re a prime example of a push over Christian. Britain needs orthodox Christians, not emasculated, left wing Anglicans.

          • Andrew

            I’m neither left wing nor Anglican. Britain needs biblical Christians. The fight is to resist emasculating the gospel, in terms of worldly power true biblical Christianity has pretty much always been emasculated. One great apologetic for the Christianity is that it flourishes despite worldly emasculation… that is, little or no political clout.

          • Inspector General

            What is this ‘way of the cross’ business? What has that instrument of torture got to do with our survival in our own land?

          • For the Christian the cross and what it means shapes how they think about the whole of life. It is an acceptance of death to self/sin/the world as the way of life. Christians conquer by embracing the weakness of the cross. It seems nonsense to anyone who is not a Christian.

          • Inspector General

            Doesn’t seem robust enough as a concept. Not these days. Not with Christendom’s proven greatest enemy inside the walls, and we are resisting back to back. Tell you what, give ‘St Peter’s Sword’ a go. See how you get on with that instead.

          • Yes. We have an increasing culture clash, and we must win it.

          • ‘We must win it’.

            Why? Is this what Christ said to his followers? Did he advocate the overthrow of pagan Rome who had invaded Israel? What kind of ‘winning’ did Christ contend for? And how was this winning to be achieved?

          • John Thomson

            Why???? Because we don’t want Britain reduced to another muslim hell hole that’s why.
            Not in so many words. Christ won over some hearts and minds but not all, and not those who were responsible for his death, and he didn’t have Muhammad to deal with. Islam hadn’t been invented!
            Rome was too big for Christ to overthrow.
            Christ’s method was to undermine the enemy/opposition by being nice, that does work in some cases, but not all. Sometimes the only language the opposition respects is a good clout.

          • I don’t want Britain to become a Muslim country either. But if the cost of preserving my Christian freedoms and privilege is oppressing others and denying them equal rights then I don’t want to support it. Rome, at points, was much more oppressive than Islam. Jesus’ reasons for not opposing Rome were not pragmatic. Political overthrow of those who opposed him was not his plan. Nor was his plan to be ‘nice’ to those who opposed him. He simply came preaching the arrival of the kingdom of God a kingdom not imposed by force and legislation but entered by faith and new birth.

            The weapons of his kingdom were not fleshly (political and military clout) but spiritual (faith, proclaiming the gospel, prayer).

            I am not here prescribing what the state must do, I am simply observing that Christians don’t defend their freedom by denying freedom to others or by advocating hostility towards them. They are to love their enemies and turn the other cheek.

            The most I can see Christians being free to do politically is to champion religious freedom for all unless and until that freedom threatens the freedom others. Even here, there are problems. Minority Report policing and preemptive strikes seem to me beyond what a Christian can advocate. I stress, I am seeking to express what I believe is the Christian response to the threat of Islam in our country, and only that.

          • bluedog

            Try to imagine how Islam would be treated if it did not masquerade as a religion. No need to banish the belief, despite it being an incitement to criminal acts. Simply jail those who preach Islam. Your comment suggests you cannot see beyond your conditioning that religion must be immune from censure or prosecution, even when it advocates practices that are offences under criminal law.

          • I don’t think religion should be immune from censure or prosecution. Where it breaks the law of the land it should be held accountable. Where there is incitement to criminal acts there should be prosecution.

            However, there are many facets of Muslim belief that do not incite to criminal acts. And there are many Muslims who do not incite to criminal behaviour. Should these be banned and outlawed?

            Should the Muslim faith be outlawed because it promotes a theocracy? Should individual Muslims be persecuted because they believe in a theocracy?

            Don’t misunderstand me, I don’t think a Muslim democracy is desirable, far from it. But do I have the right to forbid another to believe it is the best thing? Does the state have the duty to make such a belief criminal?

            There are real dangers to religious freedom when the state criminalises people for what they believe. Laws should govern what we do not what we think. Only when a belief specifically and clearly advocates harming others should it be silenced. Even here judgement and proportion is required for often convictions may be deemed to be harmful to others. Belief in an unfettered free market may be considered harmful and ruthless. Belief that homosexual practice is wrong may be considered harmful to homosexuals. Should these be outlawed?

            There are to my mind no easy answers here. I would suffer under a Muslim state but should I support and advocate the oppression of Muslims and the propagation of their faith because of this? It is the age old problem of how to deal with minority groups that look like they are becoming a majority. The story of history is persecution and civil war.

            From a Christian point of view, is this the right approach? In the interests of preserving our faith are we justified in oppressing persecuting others or even engaging in civil war? I don’t believe we are.

          • bluedog

            ‘I don’t think a Muslim democracy is desirable, far from it.’ It’s an oxymoron. Democracy is rule of man by man, and Islam preaches rule by Allah.

            ‘ I would suffer under a Muslim state but should I support and advocate the oppression of Muslims and the propagation of their faith because of this?’ Spend some time exploring dhimmitude and jizya.

            ‘It is the age old problem of how to deal with minority groups that look like they are becoming a majority. ‘ It’s not an age old problem, it’s very recent. Prior to the 1960’s, western societies exhibited organic population growth. No minority became a majority. The collapse in the birthrate to below replacement has lead western governments to import economic units from the third world to sustain national power and ensure economic growth on a nominal basis. As you may note, the social implications of this policy are catastrophic for the native populations.

            ‘In the interests of preserving our faith are we justified in oppressing persecuting others or even engaging in civil war? ‘ Your call. Failing to do so is a commitment to being a statistic rather than a survivor ..

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            Queen Elizabeth I did not seek to make ‘a window into men’s souls,’ but demanded outward conformity to the laws of the land. You cannot pass legislation to ban belief, but you can make judgements of actions taken, or indeed expressions of violence and sedition. One law to rule them all…to paraphrase Tolkien, for if not the darkness will engulf us all.

          • Anna

            Perhaps not outlawed, but heavily regulated. Bearing in mind that granting Islam unrestricted freedom to flourish in the West has produced such damaging consequences, this is not wrong. Jesus taught us to be wise as serpents, and innocent as doves. So Christians should continue to love Muslims at a personal level, but the state should be uncompromising when they demand special privileges.

            Specific measures to contain the influence of Islam would go further to include restricting migration from Muslim countries; limiting the number (and size) of mosques/Islamic centres/Muslim gatherings; vetting of Muslim preachers, and a ban on those from overseas; a ban on public (and foreign) funding of Islamic organisations; censorship of Islamic literature; no state (or foreign) funding for Muslim schools, and closing down mosques/centres/schools/institutes which accept funds or donations from overseas (too many British universities have received donations form Gulf nations – they should be forced to return the money).

            Such things are unthinkable in the West today, but all civilised countries applied similar restrictions in the past to alien cultures. These are sensible precautions, not a violation of human rights. Many right-thinking Muslims would even support some of these moves because few really want their children to end up as suicide bombers.

          • I understand these strictures. A big part of me emotionally agrees. Yet I ask myself how I would feel if such strictures were placed on Christian beliefs.

            I know we are not comparing like with like. We may argue Christianity is not a theocracy. Yet we have an established church. Christianity has been a privileged faith in our country, indeed Protestant Christianity has been the privileged faith. Other faiths have been tolerated but not privileged and often doors were closed because of their beliefs. Now there are shifts in power and dominant belief structures. Christendom as we knew it no longer exists. In many ways we are grateful to Christendom. It gave us religious liberty. But I wonder just how beneficial it was to the gospel.

            I’m a Christian, and my first concern ought not to be my personal well being but what advances and commends the gospel. Did Christendom do this? Will Christians calling for such sanctions as you suggest commend the gospel? Will they commend it to Muslims? Does the gospel itself ever suggest the power of the state and sword should be used to advance God’s kingdom? These questions cause me to step back from embracing your suggestions however attractive and persuasive they seem. We crave power and security of a worldly kind. The gospel calls us to the suffering of his cross, conformity to his death and finding our power and security in God.

            There is a radical otherworldliness in the gospel that we fear and shy away from.

          • Anna

            “Do to others as you would have them do to you”, is the Christian way, but the state has a duty before God ‘to bear the sword’, not to advance His kingdom, but to enforce laws which promote social harmony and justice. Rulers are being negligent if they turn a blind eye, when a group of people do harm to their fellow citizens.

            A Muslim is not being forced to give up his faith, but having decided to move to a non-Muslim nation, it is not too much to expect them to practise their religion without inconveniencing their neighbours. If a significant number among them choose to behave badly, and refuse to obey the laws of the land, or heed the counsel of their more moderate co-religionists, the state has the duty to step in and look into this matter for the benefit of all.

            I think it is important to understand how Muslims themselves see this situation. Having grown up in the ME, I sense that the fact that Europeans will not vigorously defend their culture and religious beliefs makes them lose all respect for the indigenous population. This combined with the current state of moral decadence in the West affects their willingness to integrate. Many peaceful Muslims, not to mention other minorities, who come to the West in the hope of enjoying its freedom and prosperity, are dismayed to find the governments so powerless to deal with their ‘thugs’.

            These are pragmatic considerations, yet the root problem, in my view, is not Islam, but people turning away from the God of their fathers. He set up leaders who lack discernment, and who have foolishly opened the doors to people who have no intention “of seeking the prosperity of the land where they dwell”. Unless there is true repentance, God’s hand of mercy will be withdrawn and the enemy will easily take over.

          • Excellent helpful comment. Thank you.

      • Anton

        The biblical precedent is that in ancient Israel the stranger within the borders was required to obey the (Mosaic) law of the land or be made unwelcome.

        • The NT counterpart to Israel is the church. In the church the only truth acceptable is biblical truth. But Britain is not a covenant people. A more biblical parallel is Israel in Babylon.

          It is a mistake to equate the civil requirements of a covenant nation with any other nation past or present. I know you don’t agree with me on this Anton for we’ve had this discussion before.

          • Anton

            The analogy isn’t exact, to be sure. How do you apply biblical principles to the present situation?

        • carl jacobs

          There are three million of them. Many of them are citizens. They have nowhere to go. They have no way to get there anyways. Making them feel “unwelcome” is a meaningless euphemism the definition of which is carefully being avoided. What it will quickly come to mean is “Kill them”.

          • Anton

            For the next two years they have the entire EU to go to.

          • carl jacobs

            Will you then make it illegal for Muslims to work? Will you beat them in the street and paint warnings on their windows? Will you burn their mosques and arrest their leaders? Will you destroy their property and seize their insurance? Will you strip them of their rights as citizens? Because the Germans did all these things in their quest to make Jews unwelcome and still couldn’t get 500,000 Jews out of Germany. And the Germans had the advantage of contiguous borders. Do you expect the unwelcome to walk across the English Channel to France & Belgium? Do you honestly think those borders won’t be sealed against you – EU or not?

            You are not going to export three million Muslims to continental Europe via the Chunnel, let alone boats or planes. This has only one endpoint. Do you really want to go there?

          • andrew

            Principles or none at all, without physical force, Muslims will literally take over European cities and the violence and persecution placed upon those who remain in their midst will, as history suggests, be vast. Allowing for the islamization of Europe becuase ‘values’ and ‘morals’ can only be described as the suicidal actions of a civilization in decline.

          • carl jacobs

            Western civilization has been in decline for a long time. But suddenly the consequences are visible.

            Your argument amounts to this:

            1. We are decadent.
            2. Therefore we are weak.
            3. Therefore we are vulnerable.
            4. Therefore Islam threatens us.
            5. Therefore we must kill Muslims or they will come and take our place.

            Maybe you should revisit the first link in the chain.

          • andrew

            So a decadent ppl deserve Islamic invasion and all that comes with augmenting Islamic populations? Please elaborate. I can’t force everybody around me to believe in Christ, but I can point out that allowing Islam into our continent is to the detriment of our future.

          • carl jacobs

            There is no “invasion”. You let them in. You gave them citizenship. You gave them liberty. You said they could live life in accordance with their own conscience. Most of the people you fear have broken no law. And yet you fear them. Do you fear the bomber? No. You fear the maternity ward. If this was an IRA bomb people would not be talking about banning the Irish. If there was no bomb you would still fear them. The West is filled with people who live a disdolute life and yet expect no consequences.

          • andrew

            ‘we’ did nothing of the sort. Establishment governments and leftists enabled Islamic immigration into our nations, thus helping to manufacture fifth columns from within. ‘we’ have been ignored, and in many ways condemned and arrested for speaking out against and refusing to placate the treasonous behaviour of those who force this hate upon over us.

            You know damn well there is no comparison between Irish republicans and Islamic conquest. I was brought up in Bradford, and I can provide you a 101 reasons why you must fear the augmentation of the Islamic communities within.

          • carl jacobs

            Sure, you have reason to fear. I understand that. But what you most fear is not the bomber. You fear the moment when Muslims become 50% plus one of the population. You fear that they will act within their lawful rights to form Gov’ts to their liking. If Europe hadn’t stopped having children 50 years ago – that’s five decades – you wouldn’t be in this fix.

            But Europe did stop having chludren. And the fact remains that these people have rights under the law which you can’t abrogate simply because you regret their presence after the fact. It was all done under the lawful authority of Gov’ts elected by the peoples of Europe. Whether you protested is of no consequence.

            If you wish to justify this then you must justify ISIS. You must justify the treatment of the Copts in Egypt. For this is no different.

          • andrew

            Correct. I fear their growth, and as I have seen in Bradford – I fear what they are capable of as they infiltrate our politics, education and many forms of our authorities and culture. I fear the moment my city becomes a majority Muslim cultural toilet, because I’m fully aware of what that really means beyond soulless celebrations of ‘diversity’ and multicultural street festivals.

            Yes many are decadent, but not all authorised this. Some of us have remained Christian and truly patriotic, and we have been met with open condemnation and legal prohibition. I fear that in my lifetime I’ll witness the complete eradication of Christianity in the ME and North Africa, serving as a prefiguration of what’s to come closer to home. And for that reason I believe we must be willing to fight. When the time arrives.

          • andrew

            Lastly, fighting to retain what is ours against Islamic adversaries can never be condemned. The copts suffer under Muslim rule, yet the copts are indigenous and were living as Christians before Islam conquered Egypt. When the ppl have woken up to the lies that their legal and political systems have conditioned them with, respect for a fake, treasonous law (in the name of fairness) and those who exploit us, will take a nose dive

          • bluedog

            Completely off topic but somehow topical, how is Trump’s Great Wall of America going? Will it be demountable?

            One’s reason for asking the questions is that the demographics of the US seem to be changing even faster than those of Europe, as the white American birth-rate slumps. It seems that much of south-western USA is becoming Hispanic, including of course, California and Texas. This development begs the obvious questions, which US state will be the first to see a Hispanic majority that votes to join Mexico, and how will Washington react?

            One suspects the Great Wall may prove to have been outflanked by demographics some time ago.

          • Ivan M

            The Japanese have the same problem with the maternity ward yet have no problems with Muslims since they have practically none.

          • Anton

            No it doesn’t.

            Muslims traditionally give conquered foes the option of conversion to their belief system or death. Not a bad precedent in some circumstances.

      • Maalaistollo

        Don’t all wars ‘involve oppression of the other who threatens’? The problem is refusal to recognise that we are at war, despite that war having been explicitly and repeatedly declared by our enemy.

    • Jonathan Tedd

      Turning the other cheek? Look where that got us – wiped out or enslaved. Good post. We need a crusade.

  • Rhoda

    Ramadan starts this weekend on 26th/27th May.
    ” Muslims fast as an act of worship, a chance to get closer to God and a way to become more compassionate to those in need. “- (Aljazerra- Ramadan explained)
    Time to pray that as they hope to get closer to God, they encounter Jesus our Lord and Saviour and find a peace that passes all understanding.

    • Manfarang

      The Prophet Isa

      • Anton

        Muslims agree that Isa/Jesus he is a prophet. The point is to call him the Creator incarnate.

        • Manfarang

          That the Holy Spirit finds in the Son belongs to the Christian gnostic idea of the pre-existent Redeemer who finally becomes incarnate in Jesus

          • Anton

            Wiser to admit that the Trinity is a mystery.

          • Manfarang

            Something influenced by Stoic philosophy.

          • Anton

            What is?

          • Manfarang

            Christianity

      • Ivan M

        Prophet Isa but born of Maid Mariam, Aaron’s sister. Stupid Hagaric mishmash.

        • Manfarang

          Among the Arabs it was that the heresies of Ebion, Beryllus, and the Nazareans, and also that of the Collyridians, were broached, or at least propagated; the latter introduced the Virgin Mary for God, or worshipped her as such offering her a sort of twisted cake called collyris, whence the sect had its name.

          • Ivan M

            Would not surprise me in the least. Cock and bull stories make a great impression on them. That and the desert heat that oppresses the brain make the susceptible to visions as noted by TE Lawrence.

          • Manfarang

            And it can get cold at night.

  • Tommy Robinson imparts some home truths:
    “Andy Burnham the Mayor for Manchester works and co-operates with Islamic radicals, how can he be claiming he’s going to solve the problem?”
    “The justice secretary for the Labour party took £5,000 off an Islamic radical group”

    Tommy Robinson in Manchester: “Politicians have sold us out”

    • Manfarang

      Fake news
      You mean Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon.

      • IrishNeanderthal

        Would you please provide a link, and an explanation, for that.

        • Manfarang

          http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Stephen_Lennon
          Caught travelling on friend’s passport to the US.
          Jailed on serval occasions

          • IrishNeanderthal

            Also a lot of detail about him on “ordinary” Wikipedia, which largely concurs.

            By their very existence and behaviour, EDL and similar types make it much more difficult to critique hostile foreign activists.

          • But I must say from his experiences in prison he enlightens us as to what really goes on inside. The sooner muslim terrorist prisoners get separate jails or prison wings away from the rest the better. It’s shocking what goes on.
            From about 11:00 mins in.

            https://youtu.be/weGxSWl5oA8

          • We know he’s been in trouble and in prison in the past, and that he’s no angel.

      • Not fake news. And yes his real name is already widely known thank you.

        • Manfarang

          The story can be regarded as Tommyrot.

          • “An investigation by The Times also found evidence that MEND is increasingly exerting influence on politicians, police, and prosecutors.
            The paper found the Labour shadow justice minister, Yasmin Qureshi, accepted £5,000 from Sufyan Ismail, the founder of MEND, without identifying him as the donor.
            It is also reported that the Charity Commission is questioning three charities about their funding for MEND events featuring radical Islamic speakers.”

            http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/04/10/labour-mp-vying-manchester-mayor-muslim-extremists/

          • Manfarang

            Politicians, police, and prosecutors have minds of their own.

    • Anton

      He’s right but he’s no Geert Wilders. The movement that understands the Islamic challenge in Britain needs a more solid leader than Tommy Robinson.

      • I agree he’s no Geert Wilders, but he’s the only one so far with the courage to publicly question Islam and the Koran.

  • Manfarang

    Talking about England. Conveniently forgetting sectarian conflict which persists until this day in Northern Ireland.

    • Anton

      Because it’s an ANGLICAN blog, and because Islam claims the whole world including where you live.

      • Manfarang

        The Anglican Communion is worldwide and it includes the Church of Ireland.

        • Anton

          Your point being?

          • Manfarang

            “Islam” can claim my neighbourhood all it wants. There are few if any Muslims there and that the way it is going to stay. There is a small church though.

          • Anton

            Your point was about Ireland but when you are challenged then suddenly it isn’t.

          • Manfarang

            There aren’t many Muslims in Ireland either.

  • David

    The nation needs to repent of its sins and return to God, the Christian God. Only then will safety be obtained, in obedience to Him, whilst striving to honour the good laws designed for our well-being.
    Apart from that realistic political, security and legal measures will help, in much needed practical ways, but they will only act as palliatives, not a long-term cure for our civilisation’s ailments.
    In WW2, when our backs were to the wall the King led services of national prayer, and God sent the extraordinary weather conditions that enabled the Miracle of Dunkirk. But we are as yet not frightened enough, and still too arrogant, to do that again. All true Christians must pray for a national revival, sincerely and daily, as well as work in practical ways.

  • len

    Reading through the comments it seems that nothing has changed, no one has changed , even those who started of as ‘moderates’ have now entered the fray in’ gladitorial manner’.People are’ taking chunks’ out of other people.
    What has happened , what is happening?.
    When some people did not welcome Jesus ,James and John wanted to destroy them.
    ‘When the disciples James and John saw this, they asked, “Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them?

    ‘5 But he(Jesus ) turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of’.(Luke 9 King James Bible)

    What manner of spirit are we on this blog of ? What manner of spirit am I of?.

    Time to reflect perhaps? .

    • Typhoon Tina

      The early Christians had to flee to Rome and elsewhere to escape persecution. They had that luxury.
      Had they not then there would’nt have been a Roman Catholic Church.

      • andrew

        Exactly. And way to take scripture out of context…. Responding to rejection of Christ with peace and good manners is one thing, which is what the scripture points to, but defending oneself from Islamic conquest is totally different from the scenario played out in the Gospel account.

      • len

        Flee to Rome?.Rome was the centre of persecution.

  • mollysdad

    We don’t need to investigate the true nature and person of Mohammed. What’s needed is a blasphemy law, if necessary with capital penalties attached, by which it would be an offence for a person to profess that this paedophile is a messenger of God or that the Quran is the word of God.

    • carl jacobs

      While you are hanging people for being Muslim, don’t forget to condemn the persecution of the Church in Islamic lands. Like when ISIS beheads people for being Christian.

      I know, I know. Totally different.

      • andrew

        You seem to amalgamate Christians engaging in ‘do or die’ self defense, with the mind boggling hatred and Quranic violence of isis and historical Islamic conquest. The two actions are not the same and cannot be conflated in anyway.

        • carl jacobs

          Hanging people for refusing to convert is not part of a “do or die” defense. That is exactly what ISIS does. Just sayin’ …

  • andrew

    ‘England has defeated religious fanatics in the past, and will do so again’
    Sorry, not as far as Islam is concerned. We’re not dealing with fanatical Christians here, we’re dealing with the most powerfully aggressive religion ever known by mankind – a religion which has conquered parts of Europe before. The only answer to Islam is war. There no democracy, negotiation or platitudes with an expectation of fairness where Islam is concerned.