christian brexit
European Union

Welby wants a Christian Brexit, led by “someone that is trusted”

Justin Welby has been in Africa, but no one really cared much about that. He went to inaugurate the new autonomous Anglican province of Sudan and to highlight the plight of a million refugees. But there has been scant reporting of that. What made the news here were his comments on same-sex marriage, and his musings on Brexit. Which is a bit of a pity, because we all know that the former is an intractable cause of division in the Church of England, and the latter an intractable cause of division in the whole country; and, actually, the plight of the starving, sick and homeless refugees in Sudan is of far greater concern to Jesus…

“The chances of getting (Brexit) done in 18 months is infinitesimally small,” the Archbishop of Canterbury told the BBC R4 Today programme. It’s helpful to set that comment in its full context. He said:

You’ve got to remember on Brexit that there are literally thousands of separate agreements to come to, in order to process through the treaties and the agreements and all the things that need to happen. If each one of those has to be argued as a point of confidence on the floor of the House of Commons, the chances of getting this done in what’s now roughly 18 months are infinitesimally small. There has to be the political leadership that says, ‘We have major questions that are political, huge political decisions the obvious ones the single market and customs union but there are thousands of other decisions that can be made.’ Can the politicians not put at the front of their minds the needs of the United Kingdom to come out with a functional, working system for Brexit, and agree that certain things are, is it were, off the political table, and will be decided separately in an expert commission or a commission of senior politicians led by someone that is trusted in the political world?

So Justin Welby’s solution to the intractable problem of Brexit is to place “certain things” into the hands of an elite “expert commission”, which must be “led by someone who is trusted in the political world”.

He doesn’t specify what these “certain things” must be; nor does he elaborate on the constitution of this “expert commission”; nor does he identify a possible candidate for the role of universally-trusted leader. But let us imagine that these “certain things” which are taken “off the political table” include the UK’s continuing membership of the Single Market and Customs Union; and that this “expert commission” includes such names as Peter (Lord) Mandelson and Neil (Lord) Kinnock and Michael (Lord Heseltine) and Kenneth Clarke and Nick Clegg and a bishop or two, such as “Brexit nightmare” Andrew Watson ” (+Guildford) and “roots down, walls down” Paul Bayes (+Liverpool). And let us imagine this universally-trusted leader is…

Well, who exactly? Who possesses the charisma, the exceptional qualities and the force of personality by which all factions may be united? Who possesses the extraordinary virtue around which they may all coalesce? Who is this supernatural superhuman?

It can’t be any partisan PM emeritus, such as Tony Blair or John Major or David Cameron, for such names ring with division and echo of discontent. Indeed, it can’t really be a politician of any party colour, for, by definition, they cannot be trusted in and by the whole political world; that is to say, eyes of suspicion will glare and opposing minds will mouth their sectarian grievances. So who is this unifying supreme commissioner to be?

Does it not occur to the Archbishop of Canterbury that the process of securing cross-party agreement on the leader of such a commission may be as intractable as corralling agreement on same-sex marriage across the Anglican Communion? That aside, does it not occur to him that his proposal has the potential to stoke the Brexit fires of division hotter still, or even foment civil unrest?

What he is proposing is that a self-appointed group of elected ministers – let’s call them the Brexit Council – gather together and determine which “certain things” shall be taken “off the political table” and conferred upon a higher authority – let’s call it the Brexit Commission – which will be politically independent. Together they will determine which Commissioner will preside over all Brexit deliberations with supreme apolitical authority. Each Brexit Commissioner might hold a specific portfolio of expertise – economic, environmental, social, agricultural issues, and suchlike. Together they will consider (in camera) Brexit complexities, issue Brexit proposals, implement Brexit decisions, and manage the day-to-day business of Brexit. Of course, the Brexit Commission will be accountable in theory to Parliament, but its partisan politicians will be expected to rubber-stamp whatever directives and decrees are issued because the Brexit Commission exists to carry out the duties prescribed by Parliament for the common good; to protect the people; perhaps even bound by an oath of office to represent the general interest of the UK as a whole rather than serve their own political ends.

Does that approach ring any bells?

When you replace dynamic democracy with centralised bureaucracy, you negate equality, hinder accountability and deny justice. The ‘experts’ of special qualification and elite privilege determine what is good and what is best, while the oppressed democrats rail against the unaccountability of the officialdom to which they are subject and expected to show allegiance. If an election cannot change policy, people will seek alternative means to effect the reformation they desire. If the referendum ballot box simply exchanges one aloof and unaccountable commission for another – even in the name of the common good and “the needs of the United Kingdom” – we ought not to be surprised if conflict ensues between democratic tendencies toward self-realision and the iron cage of bureaucratic specialisation in which the people are confined.

No, Archbishop, with enormous respect, the Brexit vote expressed a desire for levelling: it was a vote by the small cogs against the vast combined mechanisms of oligarchy, autocracy and bureaucracy. It was a vote against a seemingly indestructible system of social, economic and political domination. It was a vote against the infallible administrators of immutable policy heading inexorably toward a pre-ordained destination. It was a vote for liberty, democracy and accountability. It was a vote for reformation, for greater justice, for the UK to look to and move with confidence in the wider world, rather than be bound by the myopic interests of a half-Europe narrow collective.

The bureaucratic instinct is to centralise further and strengthen its own powers; to replace its own officials with like minds; to control all means of communication between the government and public to convey stability, reliability, precision, discipline and ensure the calculability of enlightened outcome. It all sounds so very Christian, and the Archbishop of Canterbury obviously wants a Christian Brexit of love, peace and reconciliation.

But in a healthy, functioning democracy, there is dispute, division, deception, emotivism and intractable dilemma. It is messy and murky, painful and bothersome, and it’s meant to be. There is no matter of public policy which can be taken “off the political table” for the sake of expedience, or “decided separately in an expert commission or a commission of senior politicians” just because time is running out, for this rigidity reduces the political autonomy of the mass of the population, hampers their progress and kills their dreams. And that makes them victims. And that way lies revolution.

  • The ‘universally trusted leader’? Who else but Nigel Farage?
    Works for me.

    • Manfarang

      Since when was he universally trusted?

    • Father David

      I think you missed off the prefix “mis” from trusted.
      Only trying to help.

      • Watchman

        Why is he mistrusted? You’ve been reading too much lib/left MSM.

  • Anton

    “The chances of getting (Brexit) done in 18 months is infinitesimally small”: thus saith the Archbishop. But actually it’s going to happen in 18 months, as the EU was notified 6 months ago and its own process automatically kicks us out out two years after that, ready or not. This fact is starting to become a blessing as traitorous ministers and civil servants impede the process. Who cares about a little chaos in 2019-20 as the cost of getting away from Brussels?

    Justin Welby should seek rather to prevent a different exit, namely that of the Church of England from the Church of Jesus Christ.

    • Linus

      Millions care about “a little chaos” in 2019-20 and well beyond as it will directly affect their livelihoods.

      When jobs start to bleed out of the City, industrial output tumbles due to lack of finance and the imminent threat of trade barriers with your major markets, agricultural production takes a sizeable hit due to a lack of unskilled labour to harvest crops and the pound nosedives because of all the economic uncertainty, leaving the average British family marooned in a cold and wet Blighty over the summer holiday period, then we’ll see what happens to Brexit.

      • You nasty remoaner talking b******s.
        Most of our agriculture has become and is continuing to become automated.
        One doesn’t need to pay into a club to be able to trade with another country.
        The EU will have to refund us our share of the value of the assets we paid for. That should be around 200 billion Euros at least.
        We should be tying up trade deals with other countries outside of the EU now ready for final signing on the 30th March 2019.

        • Linus

          You nasty xenophobic Brexit biatch.

          If you think automation is the answer to falling agricultural output, don’t be too surprised to see the price of fruit and vegetables skyrocket over the next few years as farmers seek to pass on the enormous costs to consumers.

          Not all will be able to afford the investment, of course. Many UK farmers are already scaling back their plans for sowing next year’s crop on the basis that the workforce available to harvest it will be much reduced. Cereals and other crop futures are rising as uncertainty hits the markets. British consumers will pay the price.

          I wonder, being the bitter, twisted old termagant you are, might it not be possible that you struggle along on a fixed income? When the price hikes come and you can’t afford a few basics, your rumbling stomach might teach you the consequences of your Brexit folly. A well-deserved own goal. But looking on the bright side, if you’re like the average British woman, you can probably stand to lose a few pounds. Or tens of pounds…

          And as for your other ridiculous statements, the EU doesn’t need to refund anything to the UK. You’re choosing to walk out. By doing so, you abandon your right to a share of the EU’s assets. You’re leaving us, remember. We’re not leaving you. Our courts will decide what belongs to whom and as the treaties are very clear and make no mention of departing countries being able to pick and choose what they take with them, all EU assets will remain EU property.

          If the UK demands anything, the only consequence will be no Brexit agreement and a solid tariff wall going up on the day you leave. Who’ll trade with you then? When your products are priced out of the market and no European retailer will touch them anyway given the massive lead times as new customs regulations are put in place and lead to chaos. British shipments will be blocked in European ports for who knows how long? Look at what happened when the new non-Schengen passport rules came into force last week. When people are waiting in a queue, they shout and are eventually let through. But when containers are waiting, they just wait. And wait, and wait…

          So you’d better get busy signing trade deals with other countries, hadn’t you?

          Come on, what’s stopping you? OK, so the Indians want free and unfettered immigration as the price of their trade deal. What’s the problem with that? And the Chinese keep telling you that of course they’d love to sign a deal, but they just have to sort things out with the EU first, so can you please wait your turn? And as for the Americans … saddled with a president who can’t get anything through Congress and whose administration staggers from crisis to crisis, I doubt you’ll be getting a trade deal signed any time soon.

          Oh well, there’s always Australia and New Zealand. All 30 million of them are so rich and prosperous and gagging for British products, they’ll just soak up all the stuff you used to send to Europe and keep you in the style you’ve become accustomed to. Won’t they? WON’T THEY…????

          • bluedog

            ‘British shipments will be blocked in European ports for who knows how long?’

            And the consequence of that?

          • Little Black Censored


          • A termagant! I don’t think so. Speak for yourself you demented old queen.

            The conditions the EU have put us under have driven us to leave. We have no choice, if we stay we’ll lose everything along with our dignity. Self preservation of the UK is the driving factor for leaving.
            The EU are an unreasonable and oppressive organisation that we can no longer be part of. We are owed a sum of money in settlement of our share of the assets which we helped to pay for. Of course they will still remain the property of the EU. Without our money they would not have been able to achieve as much as they have done.

            There are plenty of countries around the world to trade with, not just the Commonwealth that would want our products, and we can get reasonably priced proper organic produce from Russia if our farmers cannot deliver.

      • Anton

        Haven’t you forgotten a tidal wave and a typhoon as well?

        • Linus

          If you mean the tidal wave of unemployment, the typhoon of social unrest and the financial earthquake that will follow Brexit – if it actually happens – then no, I haven’t forgotten them at all.

          I don’t think you have either. You’ve often mentioned your desire to see the Western economic system crash and burn. You seem to think that if the foundation of people’s lives crumbles beneath them, they’ll turn to your ludicrous religion. And when it comes to the less educated layers of society, you might even be right.

          A post-Brexit economic collapse is therefore something you must be praying for. And yet you try to lull us into a false sense of security by refuting the possibility of it ever happening.

          You have a very Machiavellian idea of what constitutes faith, don’t you? You lie in order to reassure while praying for the downfall of your fellow man. You actively want him to suffer so that he’ll turn to you as some kind of saviour.

          The moment he cries out for your help will be your greatest vindication. At last, after years of being scoffed at, you’ll be taken seriously. Your true religion of Antonism (loosely explained as the doctrine that Anton is so amazingly smart, salvation depends upon acknowledging this and falling to one’s knees in awed veneration of him and his towering intellect) will at last be revealed.

    • Watchman

      Anton, I think the Synod has already put Article 50 in the post.

  • Peasant Farmer

    Ahem, Jacob Rees-Mogg?

    • Manfarang

      Ahem,“I like cake, I like eating it, I like having it”

  • ardenjm

    Only in the short and medium term are the starving of more concern to Our Lord than gay ‘marriage’ and the whole LGBT social-experimentation of the last few years – part of what Benedict XVI correctly identified as the “Dictatorship of Relativism”.
    If you’re homosexual yourself it might be uncomfortable to have to acknowledge the Sign of the Times that is the gay agenda – inimical to family life and thus to the common good of a healthy society. So whilst feeding the hungry is indeed a duty so too is witnessing to the truth of God’s original covenant with humanity in the bond between Adam and Eve. But the question of marriage has never sat easily within the Church of England, for obvious reasons…

  • Manfarang

    “the UK to look to and move with confidence in the wider world”
    Not a lot of that at the moment.

  • David

    Thank you, Your Grace for an insightful and wise article.

    “It was a vote for liberty, democracy and accountability”

    Exactly !

    Removing significant decisions to outside the democratic process is the route to elitist, statist intolerance which eventually leads to tyranny, followed by revolution, as history so amply demonstrates. The American colonists cry of “No taxation without representation” still resonates down the ages within, not just Anglo-Saxon breasts, but also within those who embrace its culture of freedom and the rule of law, laws made by the democratically elected, not by self-appointed groups of “experts” !

    Welby who is now tolerating if not condoning anti-Christain practices within the C of E, has little wisdom either in the things he is charged to defend and promulgate, which is the Church, or the areas like politics where he has no more authority than any other citizen, and certainly less wisdom than many. The people of this fine country are sick and tired of this top down, we know best, arrogance. We want and demand our democratic right, which is a full return of all sovereignty ceded to the EU, and nothing less.

    • Anton

      Notice though that the American colonists were requesting representation, not independence.

  • IanCad

    A Christian Brexit??!! We have our marching orders: “….Come out of her my people, that ye be not partakers in her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues”
    As in yesterday’s OP where I lamented the rotten treatment Farage has received, so let us not forget poor David Davis as he struggles within the nest of vipers that is the Tory party leadership.

    • Anton

      But who are “my people”? The British today? I don’t think so…

      • IanCad

        “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” Micah 6:8
        There is a remnant Anton – granted – fewer today than in times past when the distractions were not so many, life was simpler, the mind focused on the essentials of life.
        Neither, should I add, does this verse have import to only those who acknowledge God, for there are those without the law whose hearts are kind and love the right.

      • Linus

        So the British aren’t your people, yet you felt justified in voting them out of the EU? How’s that for a betrayal of the nationalism you claim to be motivated by?

        So if you’re not British, what exactly are you? I’m still convinced you’re an Afrikaaner or something similar, but who knows what colonial remnant you descend from? Whatever it is, it certainly isn’t British. That’s for sure.

        • Anton

          “My people” refers to the church, not any nation.

          You want my home country? The kingdom of heaven.

          • Linus

            Two questions:

            1) Does the sky pixie have any say in your salvation, or does your mere declaration of it make it a done deal? As he’s just a sock puppet with your hand rammed up his rear end, I suppose you can make him say whatever you want. But an admission of this would demonstrate some intellectual honesty on your part. I won’t hold my breath though.

            2) So are you British-born or not? I tend to think not. The way you use the English language demonstrates non-British origins. I think English is your mother tongue, but I’m having trouble pinpointing exactly which dialect of English, which probably means you’ve lived in the UK for a number of years. My best guess is that you’re an Anglicized South African, but I could be wrong.

            Oh, and a third question too…

            If you are a foreigner, why won’t you admit it? Scared that the Brexiteers will demand your immediate deportation, eh? (I suppose that’s a fourth question…) So you don’t want to incriminate yourself. Fair enough, but now that your cover’s been blown (because if you really were British, you’d be crowing it from the rooftops), can you give us some insights into the psychology of the dirty immigrant who demands a stop to all immigration because dirty immigrants are spoiling Britain? (Fifth question…) This I would love to hear.

    • youhavenewmail

      Oh good, I can continue my reply re Farage and his speeches here:

      In case you missed his Mississippi speech, here it is: (Near the end, at 5:24 or so, he memorably says, “You can beat the pollsters, you can beat the commentators, you can beat Washington”)
      For what Trump says before he introduces Farage, here is another link: (15 mins only)

      That was in August 2016, by the way!

      • David

        I watched it again – brilliant !
        Let the bell of liberty ring out loud and clear, forever !

  • len

    I sometimes wonder if Brexit will happen at all?.
    The EU was created by deception and the agenda was to get Countries so entangled ,so enmeshed that escape would be extremely difficult if not impossible.And those behind the EU did a pretty good job of creating this monster which is consuming Europe.
    As our society disintegrates and fallen man pushes the boundaries further and further one can only wonder what the end result will be?.

    One could imagine that if the instinctive drive in a colony of bees was suddenly removed total chaos would result.Each bee would be doing what it assumed to be’ the right thing’ but it would not be in accord with any other bee.
    The same thing happened when man rejected God and decided to go his own way and to do his own thing.The result is chaos, and chaos will reign until Christ comes back and assumes His Rightful Position.

    • HedgehogFive

      Countries so entangled ,so enmeshed that escape would be extremely difficult if not impossible.
      Brings to mind how Stalin hacked off Nagorno-Karabakh, populated by Armenians, and handed it to Azerbaijan.

    • dannybhoy

      “The EU was created by deception and the agenda was to get Countries so entangled ,so enmeshed that escape would be extremely difficult if not impossible.”
      I don’t think that was the case in Europe Len. They knew what they wanted to achieve. I think it was more a case of our own people not telling us the British people the whole truth..

  • Mike Stallard

    Your Grace, this is not a case of personalities: it is a case of choosing alternatives.
    1. We can just leave the EU. In which case,at midnight on 29-30th March 2019, we will simply be cut off from any European trade. This will be because the computer system (aka Non Tariff Barriers) will no longer operate. The Remoaners will be proved more than right.
    2. We can remain in the EU in which case we will have to join in the Eurozone eventually as the EU converges into the United States of Europe as it clearly states in the new constitution written by the Spinelli-Bertelsmann group.
    3. Associate Membership means that we lose all representation, except for concessions, and are simply forced to accept Directives over which we have no control. We also pay as much as we are told. We are not on the Council of Europe or in the Parliament or the all important Commission.
    4. We can remain in the European Economic Area (aka Common market) if we join EFTA along with Norway and Iceland. Immediately we are no longer members of the CFP, the CAP, the ECJ, and we have a waiver for immigration. But – hey – this is off the table!
    Whoever is in charge, this is it: there are no other choices.

    PS The long term? We want total independence. The medium term is the four choices.

    • Sybaseguru

      Option 1 First sentence is correct. Remainder is a non sequitur. I don’t need a computer system to visit France and sell my wares. Sure I might have to pay a few percent import duties, and might have to get my product tested by a German testing house, but I would have done that in advance. Seems project fear lives on in some people.

      • Linus

        Your wares will face cheaper European competition from suppliers who are much easier to deal with. Lead times will be shorter with no holdups in customs. There will be no exchange issues and no dealing with dubious foreign banks.

        I’ll certainly be buying European from now on. There are few things produced in Britain that can’t be got elsewhere at a more competitive price with far less hassle.

        • Sybaseguru

          Bizarre. I didn’t realise we were in Euro. So what’s different from a currency point of view?

          • Linus

            Sterling’s recent volatility, which Brexit can only make worse.

            To offer competitive prices you’ll be forced into ever-more pricey hedging that will cut your profit to the bone, if not beyond.

            And once you’re no longer European, why would Europeans buy from you? If faced with a choice between product from a loyal EU country and faithless Britain, I know what I’ll choose.

            British products used to be regarded as cool. Now all your flag stands for is backwards-looking nationalism. The Union Flag means xenophobia and isolationism. Good luck trying to sell that as a concept.

          • Anton

            Sterling is getting weaker. Excellent news for our exporters.

          • Linus

            And terrible news for your importers, most of whom are also your exporters.

            Britain is resource poor. Most of your manufacturing companies rely on imported raw materials, the price of which is skyrocketing due to Sterling’s weakness.

            All these costs will have to be reflected in your selling price, which even taking into account a lower Sterling rate, will not be competitive once tariffs are added.

            Devaluation is a very weak weapon in a globalised economy.

          • Mike Stallard

            In the Spinelli-Bertelsmann constitution of the European Union, plans are laid out for the Eurozone to dominate the rest of the continent.

            Those outside it will not be at the centre of decision making.

      • Mike Stallard

        Until the witching hour, you are all right. After that all the international agreements with the EU simply close down as we leave the EEA/Single Market. In theory, everything will have to go through customs. In practice, the relevant customs to enter Europe at Dunkirk and Shannon will simply not cope. That is what I mean. I am not, and never have been, a Remoaner, by the way. I am a firm believer in Brexit.

  • bluedog

    The mind boggles, Your Grace, and the possibilities spawned by ++Welby’s sortie into the Sudan seem as endless as the questions raised. Are we witnessing the emergence of GAFCON as the lineal successor of the British Empire? Just as the institutions of the Roman Empire morphed into the Roman Church, into The Curia for example, will we now see the institutions of the British Empire transplanted into the CoE and thence to the province of Sudan? Will there be a degree of nativism so that the Archbishop of the province is better known as the Arch-Khedive? One has visions of ++ Welby being rowed down the Blue Nile in a triumphal barge similar to Gloriana, propelled by Nubian tribesmen. One trusts that the arch-episcopal mitre will be replaced by a fez, consistent with the rulings of Synod.

    • David

      You are right in that the British Empire which spread Anglicanism, as well as other Christian denominations, around the globe, now has an echo of the C of E’s former outward missionary energies in Gafcon. It is rapidly becoming the home of many traditional Anglicans, including those like myself attached to a very Biblically observant local church of the C of E.

  • vsscoles

    It is time to abolish the House of Lords and the patrician attitudes which it continues to foment.

    • Linus

      Bravo! My sentiments exactly.

      Can you get rid of the monarchy at the same time? Then we might see an end of public interest in the Diana saga.

      Latest revelation: Charles talked to Camilla while installed on the only throne he’s ever likely to occupy, given the Struldbrug tendencies of his mother.

      I’m not sure what’s more shocking: the fact that he talked to his mistress whilst defecating; or that he forgot to lock the door so that his vengeful wife couldn’t catch him at it. Red-handed, as it were. Or brown…

      Either way, one hopes he passed a Wetwipe over the handset before slinging it at his valet for recharging. Or perhaps the valet is used to it and carries rubber gloves wherever he goes.

      In any case, wouldn’t it be better for everyone if these evolutionary “maladaptés” were put out of their misery?

      • IrishNeanderthal

        Concerning your last sentence:

        A cultivated Conservative friend of mine once exhibited great distress because in a gay moment I once called Edmund Burke an atheist. I need scarcely say that the remark lacked something of biographical precision; it was meant to. Burke was certainly not an atheist in his conscious cosmic theory, though he had not a special and flaming faith in God, like Robespierre. Nevertheless, the remark had reference to a truth which it is here relevant to repeat. I mean that in the quarrel over the French Revolution, Burke did stand for the atheistic attitude and mode of argument, as Robespierre stood for the theistic. The Revolution appealed to the idea of an abstract and eternal justice, beyond all local custom or convenience. If there are commands of God, then there must be rights of man. Here Burke made his brilliant diversion; he did not attack the Robespierre doctrine with the old mediaeval doctrine of jus divinum (which, like the Robespierre doctrine, was theistic), he attacked it with the modern argument of scientific relativity; in short, the argument of evolution. He suggested that humanity was everywhere molded by or fitted to its environment and institutions; in fact, that each people practically got, not only the tyrant it deserved, but the tyrant it ought to have. “I know nothing of the rights of men,” he said, “but I know something of the rights of Englishmen.” There you have the essential atheist. His argument is that we have got some protection by natural accident and growth; and why should we profess to think beyond it, for all the world as if we were the images of God! We are born under a House of Lords, as birds under a house of leaves; we live under a monarchy as n()s live under a tropic sun; it is not their fault if they are slaves, and it is not ours if we are snobs. Thus, long before Darwin struck his great blow at democracy, the essential of the Darwinian argument had been already urged against the French Revolution. Man, said Burke in effect, must adapt himself to everything, like an animal; he must not try to alter everything, like an angel. The last weak cry of the pious, pretty, half-artificial optimism and deism of the eighteenth century came in the voice of Sterne, saying, “God tempers the wind to the shorn lamb.” And Burke, the iron evolutionist, essentially answered, “No; God tempers the shorn lamb to the wind.” It is the lamb that has to adapt himself. That is, he either dies or becomes a particular kind of lamb who likes standing in a draught.

        G.K.Chesterton, The Empire of the Insect.

      • Little Black Censored

        Gosh, you are disgusting.

      • Anton

        Come off it, have you never found yourself on a mobile phone in those circumstances?

  • dannybhoy

    “When you replace dynamic democracy with centralised bureaucracy, you negate equality, hinder accountability and deny justice. The ‘experts’ of special qualification and elite privilege determine what is good and what is best, while the oppressed democrats rail against the unaccountability of the officialdom to which they are subject and expected to show allegiance. If an election cannot change policy, people will seek alternative means to effect the reformation they desire. If the referendum ballot box simply exchanges one aloof and unaccountable commission for another – even in the name of the common good and “the needs of the United Kingdom” – we ought not to be surprised if conflict ensues between democratic tendencies toward self-realision and the iron cage of bureaucratic specialisation in which the people are confined.”
    Great paragraph and outlines exactly what is wrong in our country.

    Let’s take Dunkirk as an example..
    “…With the entire front collapsing rapidly, the decision was reached at home to evacuate our forces from the Continent. But the only port from which to evacuate the British Expeditionary Force was Dunkirk, and that was already being seriously threatened by the Germans. Taking stock of the predicament, Churchill said in The Second World War. ‘I thought—and some good judges agreed with me—that perhaps 20,000 or 30,000 men might be re-embarked. The whole root and core and brain of the British army… seemed about to perish upon the field, or to be led into ignominious and starving captivity.’ All therefore seemed about to be lost.

    But Britain had a godly Sovereign. Seeing this situation developing, His Majesty King George VI requested that Sunday, 26 May should be observed as a National Day of Prayer. In a stirring broadcast, he called the people of Britain and of the Empire to commit their cause to God….”
    We not only had leadership, we had Godly leadership with integrity, calling the nation to prayer. Winston Churchill famously said,
    “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat”
    These were men of moral stature, willing to step up to the plate and take responsibility.
    Today’s pygmies offer us committees and collective blame avoidance….

    • Royinsouthwest

      The Lords used to contain many peers who were independently minded and who often had a great deal of knowledge of the subjects on which they chose to speak – in marked contrast to those members of the Commons who say and do what the party whips tell them.

      Now, thanks to Blair’s reforms, it is stuffed with hacks from the three main parties.

      • dannybhoy

        We’re lost in the land of Lilliput!

      • Dreadnaught

        I think the number of Peers should not be in excess of the number of seats in the Commons and be for a maximum of five years; not a pension fund for political flunkies and rejected MPs.

        • Sarky

          Or bishops.

          • Dreadnaught

            The Bishops have to go – their Church has no primacy over any other now thanks to their overt welcome of Islam as an equal religion. No bishops no Imams.

          • bluedog

            We need to keep the imams out at all costs. A weak personality like ++Welby could easily be dominated by some aggressive Muslim firebrand who thinks on his feet. Sentamu may yet have his day in that regard, like Nazir Ali, he seems to have a more robust approach to Islam.

          • Dreadnaught

            I don’t think Welby should be the targeted fall-guy; there is a malaise in society in general that unwittingly feeds into the larger Islamic agenda to embed itself as deeply as possible throughout Europe. We can no longer discern let alone discriminate against an alien culture that ultimately will dominate unless stopped. And the Country doesn’t seem to have the backbone to recognise this, let alone contain this group.

          • bluedog

            You are quite right. The entire political class is captive to the post-modern orthodoxy and utterly incapable of resisting Islam. Welby should be in the vanguard, and he has made a few cautiously critical remarks. But in a recent post in His Grace’s blog it was clear that the CoE priesthood in the Midlands is psychologically defeated by Islamic aggression. They will do anything but confront Islamic ideology and are totally emasculated by multicultural relativism. One would like to think Welby read that post and the subsequent comments and sent somebody to discipline and stiffen the troops. Somehow, fat chance.

          • Watchman

            He should, perhaps, adopt the stance of Elijah when faced with the Prophets of Baal. After all there is some evidence that Allah is, in fact, Baal

          • bluedog

            One scarcely imagine ++ Welby hosting a competitive barbecue which leads to the slaughter of 450 imams. Certainly an interesting idea, though.

          • Watchman

            No, bluedog, one really can’t imagine it. But at the moment it looks as though it’s the equivalent of Elijah saying “come on lads, lets not fall out, why don’t we form a multifaith committee and sing around the campfire”

    • David

      You have stated my beliefs and ideals exactly.

  • Maalaistollo

    Welby’s proposed solution merely demonstrates how much he is a part of the problem.

    • David

      Nicely put !

  • Demon Teddy Bear

    I suppose a smug appointee is going to like government by smug appointees. I’m beginning to think the French Revolutionaries had a point with “a la lanterne”…

  • Merchantman

    The way things are progressing hopefully we are likely to see CExit where the progressives come up against the wall of biblical truth and anger in the pews and camp off in some redundant churches in Norwich, Liverpool, Guildford, Oxford and Southwark while the rest of us get on with salvaging the real thing.
    Apologies this should have been published Good News Friday.

  • CliveM

    In many ways Brexit should be a done deal, but it needs to happen in a properly planned manner. It needs to be got right, to do so will be fiendishly complicated and to maintain the support of the majority of the people who voted for it, it needs to be done and be seen to be done, competently.

    At the moment headless chickens spring to mind. The government is in a mess and seems to be running very hard to fail to catch up. May has to get over the shock of the election and show leadership or go.

    However let’s be clear, a ew percent of duty, or goods stuck for months or even years waiting formal approval or months of chaos because Brexit has happened and nothing has been concluded isn’t a trivial matter. Those directly affected by loss of jobs, loss of home etc will in the main not see it as being a price worth paying and they will feel betrayed. Economic recovery from such a situation will take years.

    Trivialising the problems doesn’t make you a better Brexiteer. Sacrificing other people’s futures doesn’t make you more patriotic.

    Yes we can make new trade agreements but these won’t all happen at one time, they will take years. We cannot simply write off the European market.

    For those who say that Europe has more to lose from a trade war, you misunderstand what is happening . For Europe this isn’t about trade, or GDP, this is about a project that the political class has invested a huge amount of effort into, believes in implicitly and will not let the UK leaving threaten.

    If this is got wrong the UK will be damaged for years ahead. We need a bit more competence at the top.

    • dannybhoy

      Totally agree. I had high hopes for David Davis, but that is rapidly draining away.
      What Mrs May should be concentrating on is getting her cabinet to discuss and agree a list of British aims and objectives re our leaving the European Union. It was a Conservative government that called the referendum and it should be a Conservative government that formulates the divorce settlement.
      But I would like to see us Brits have the opportunity to submit our own list of priorities first, before the government finalises its plans.

    • Sarky

      Is brexit in chaos??
      Or is it a coincidence that stories regarding it are coming from europe and remainers. Remember the predicted collapse hasnt happened so there is an awful lot of face saving going on.

      • CliveM

        The Government is in chaos. They are the ones charged with managing Brexit.

        A government that appears not to know what it wants, members brief against other members of it to the press and seems to be at war with itself is unlikely to make a good job of the negotiations.

        It’s not to late, but it soon will be.

        • Sarky

          Its not the government that does the majority of the work, its civil servants and they will keep doing it no matter how chaotic things get.

          • CliveM

            Yes but in what direction? If the Minesterial head is unable to give proper guidance, what is the civil servant meant to do? They are unable to make up their own policy and even if they did why do you think they’d be after helping Brexit and not actively trying to scupper it?

      • Manfarang

        Have you looked at the rates for Sterling recently?

    • bluedog

      A good post, and you highlight the obvious problems that unwinding forty years of economic and political integration entails. Can this be micro-managed in eighteen months? Almost certainly not, if ever. The only thing government can do is create a broad framework within which the economic interests of the two parties can be continued with minimum disruption. This is in the mutual interest of both the EU and the UK. The EU has to realise, and seems to realise, that it is primarily their political project that is the sticking point. The British government is disinterested in EU internal politics and the EU must stop its reflex of trying to impose the sovereignty of the ECJ on Britain.
      We know from the failure of the USSR that centrally planned economies do not work. In the context of Brexit, the market offers the best hope for the British economy, and there will be winners and losers as always. The government must provide a safety net for the losers while they pick themselves up and rebuild their lives. Unfortunately there is a large cohort of very articulate EU apparatchiks whose entire purpose in life is now invalid. They will never forgive and forget and their complaints will be a permanent feature of politics for years to come.

  • ecclesiaman

    Read Christopher Story about the EU. Videos on you tube and PDF’s on line. He was a Christian and a genuine patriot with the courage of his convictions. It will then become obvious that the whole EU deal is corrupt and anti-Christian, and part of a plan to destroy Nation States. It’s not a conspiracy but a fact. Don’t be deceived.
    I am far from convinced that we will actually leave the EU. Unless strong action from the top, i.e. Mrs Dismay, is adopted we will be scuppered. She is most unlikely to deliver this. Is there a politician willing and able to act on the referendum mandate? Could they even be elected? A fragile mandate to be sure, but it is one delivered by a system we have accepted as a country for a long time.
    I am deeply sceptical that things will work out well for the UK. Revolution? Is that a possibility?

  • David

    Instinct tells me to distrust the “news” from the left-liberal pro-EU media. So is our progress to leave the EU a mess, or is this merely what the BBC and its equally treacherous accompaniment of establishment servicing media acolytes want us to think ? Are they hoping that in our despair at all their bad news they can water down and obfuscate the whole matter, thereby keeping us to all intents and purposes trapped within the undemocratic, sticky web of the EU ? I am not sure But I am sure that’s it is wise to never trust the lying mainstream media.


    Poor ++Justin. CoExit happening. Does he not realise that the church exists to fulfil his commission of preach, making disciples baptising etc.
    Went to a CoE on holiday, not something a Baptist does too often, to find out after a lot of cutting and sicking and some thoughtless choruses, that the key to salvation lies in clearing up the beach and throwing away my car.
    who would have known, that repentance and faith towards God is no longer mandatory!!!
    Having said that the Baptist World is also experiencing its own congregational Exit, and we need to put our own house in order too.

    • Dominic Stockford

      I can name a few CofE congregations which are ‘safe spaces’ for conservative evangelicals, but none in traditional holiday destinations come to mind. Last time I went to one that i hadn’t managed to pre-vet the male vicar walked out just as things began in order to go somewhere else, leaving us with a couple of pretty useless non-male non-vicars. The young people I was with spent the rest of the day pointing out the Biblical flaws in the ‘sermon’.

      • Martin

        I believe that the minister at what was my parents local Anglican church, on the south coast, is quite good, for some reason tho’ they wouldn’t let me go to any of his services. He was berated by the local press for not allowing yoga in his church hall and wanting parents of children to be Christened to be married.

      • David

        Sounds as if you know some very good “young people”.

  • Dominic Stockford

    Give me a sheet of paper with all these difficult decisions on them and I’ll make them for you. It’ll take a couple of hours but the job will be done. Some people will whinge about one decision, some will be delighted, and the picture will swop around for others. But it’ll be completed. Job done. Simples.

    • CliveM

      Come on Dominic you know it’s not that simple.

      • Watchman

        One one man can achieve with God’s wisdom is far greater than any number of politicians and bureaucrats with only the wisdom of men.

        • This is true but in Jack’s experience God’s wisdom is more often than not accompanied with at least a smattering of humility.

          “Who is wise and understanding among you? Let them show it by their good life, by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom.
          (James 3:13)

          • Watchman

            This is true, but in this case we have nothing to worry about, Dominic, like Moses is the most humble of men and I would trust him to see us into the promised land.

          • You might think that, Jack couldn’t possibly comment.

          • Watchman

            What, Jack lost for words! I couldn’t possibly comment.

          • Sometimes, just sometimes, Jack considers discretion to be the better part of valour.

          • Watchman

            I think there are probably volumes to be read into this particular discretion and I’ll give you credit for it.

          • Are you ex-Navy, Watchman?

          • Watchman

            Let’s just say I’ve seen a lot of sea time. Why do you ask?

          • It was your last comment. It had a seafaring ring to it. My son is a member of the Royal Navy, a Petty Officer, and one of his maxims is that for a peaceful ship one should avoid heated discussions of religion, politics and football, especially if they look like they will become personal. Occasionally, Jack remembers this advice.

          • Watchman

            It’s true that in a close-knit community working purposefully cheek by jowl the cameraderie is not helped by intense opinions about anything whatsoever. A ship is a very small space and there’s nowhere to escape to.

          • Yes and the United Kingdom is a small island and leaving the EU requires both decisive leadership and, given current circumstances, great political skill; not a divisive “take it or leave it” diktat thrown together in a couple of hours by a man on what appears to be an ego trip. (There, Jack said it …. ) There are powerful forces against leaving and they will leap on any and all signs of a clumsy imposition.

          • Watchman

            As well as being an ideological war these negotiations are also a spiritual war. If God now wants us to be free from this Satanic (and I use that word advisedly) empire He should be asked to be with our negotiators through this process. There seems to be little spiritual difference between Hitler’s Third Reich and Merkel’s Fourth Reich.

          • Watchman

            Thanks, Hannah, I enjoyed that. It was written as a recruiting song to entice young men to a life of glory. They recruit rather differently now but probably no more honestly.

          • Kennybhoy



          • Kennybhoy


          • Kennybhoy

            “…smattering of humility.”

            lol 😉

    • IanCad

      No difficult decisions Dominic. There is one overriding problem though – we have an administration that is not acting towards its promise.
      Solution – sack May and Hammond. Sideline Boris; Appoint Davis as PM, bring in new blood – Rees-Mogg, David Davies, John Baron. We need a cabinet capable of acting with vigour in loosing us from the maw of the Uniformitarians. That’s it! All else is small beer.
      Oh! BTW, We need to create a Commission on Statues and Monuments to decide where to place a great edifice to honour the man whose efforts secured our liberty; and while deciding that, grant him a quick Lordship.

      • bluedog

        ‘where to place a great edifice to honour the man whose efforts secured our liberty’ Heavens, would you place an equestrian statue of Farage on the fourth plinth? Let’s hear it for Lady Hamilton, gazing longingly at Nelson’s Column.

        • IanCad

          Nothing less!! bd. For, to persuade a people where half can scarce distinguish slave from free, to declare their independence, deserves the highest honour.

          • bluedog

            Pity, then, that Farage resigned after Brexit leading to the implosion of Ukip. At one point he seemed to be the messiah and he certainly out-thought Cameron. But Farage’s performance after the election of Trump, when he all but appointed himself British ambassador in Washington, was a disgrace.

          • IanCad

            We had an administration which actively attempted to undermine the integrity of the US political process by vigorously supporting Hilary Clinton. We disgraced ourselves – Farage at least tried to patch things up.

          • bluedog

            If we get through Trump’s presidency without a nuclear conflagration I’ll consider the possibility that it may be necessary, somewhat grudgingly, to agree with you under certain conditions.

          • IanCad

            Not sure how the N. Korean problem will sort itself out. Stout Kim must have the demise of Gaddafi at the centre of his mind. More so that, just a short time before December of 2003 Gaddafi agreed to give up on the Libyan nuke program. A lesson indeed!!
            America must give up its role as policeman of the world. Leave the East to the Easterners, rethink the Middle East, and above all, quit poking Ivan.

          • bluedog

            Update. Trump has raised Kim by playing ‘Fire and Fury’. Does this trump ‘Shock and Awe’? Will Trump make history by tweeting a Declaration of War? Watch this space while you can.

    • A revealing comment, saying more about you and your dictatorial tendencies than the process of leaving the EU.

  • Martin

    I’m afraid that until Welby puts the CoE in order he is the last person anyone should ask for advice on how to run anything , aside from the proverbial in a brewery. Or am I being too harsh?

  • Inspector General

    Can’t understand Welby at times. Is it because he is made of soft stuff.

    Only one thing matters in eighteen months’ time. And that is we continue to trade with the EU under the existing arrangement if necessary. Not to is unthinkable – a blockade by the EU would be tantamount to a declaration of war! So let’s not even think about it, because it’s not going to happen, what!

    Welby, and all you other faint hearts. You need to bone up on our history, when better men than you were around. Start with the 39 45 war, when we were really up against, and stop blubbing!

    • CliveM

      What the Second World War tells us , is that if you don’t have clear objectives and the right strategy you get your ass kicked and innocent people die. In the case of WWII, in their millions.

      It could have been stopped in ’39.

      Yes Churchill and others helped preserve western civilisation and British independence, but it would have been better if they hadn’t had to.

      • Inspector General

        The country didn’t have any clear objectives until Churchill was made PM. The cost of those objectives he told us, and can be read on the back of a 5 pound note.

        Remember, Clive. We had no choice in the matter as in 1939. It was beyond our influence then as now. The EU like the Third Reich was un-reformable.

        • CliveM

          I think you’ve misunderstood my point. With the right strategic objectives and firm leadership, Britain and France could have dealt a fatal blow to the Third Reich. Maybe even toppled it.

          Getting the strategy right at the start makes everything a whole lot easier.

          • Inspector General

            No. The nightmare memories of the Great War would not have allowed that. Even the Germans were taking a massive risk and they knew it. Blitzkrieg in the West was a plan on paper. Could they make it fact. They were very unsure. To top it all, the majority of the German army was still horse drawn.

          • CliveM

            All of which maybe true, but doesn’t change the truth of what I said.

          • Inspector General

            Stop whimpering Clive. All we are doing is leaving the hopeless EU. Not rescuing the British Army from Dunkirk, again…

          • CliveM

            Actually at the moment we are making a balls up. Surprised you can’t see the difference and understand why the government needs to get its act together.

          • Inspector General

            Right. That’s it. To your room, boy. There’ll be no more Cranmer for you tonight..,

          • CliveM

            I take it you concede the argument.

            Anyway I do have an early start tomorrow so I will retire .

          • Inspector General

            Yes, you do that. Scamper off. Did you like the Inspector’s display of masculine authority? Poofs love it. They can’t get enough {Ahem}

          • CliveM

            What was that wheezing sound and crack of arthritics that I heard?

            I’m sure you impress your ‘friends’ with your masculinity.

          • dannybhoy

            Don’t you think though that the reality was that no one outside outside of Nazi Germany wanted to believe there was going to be a war, didn’t want to believe it and were reluctant to engage?

          • CliveM

            Absolutely. It’s not that I don’t understand why the wrong decisions were made, but it was the Inspector who called on the example of WW2. I’m simply pointing out that these bad decisions (understandable though they maybe) had disastrous consequences and that we need to learn from.

            If we don’t get the strategy right, it will be bad both for Brexit and the country.

          • Manfarang

            The Japanese had started fighting in 1937- the Marco Polo Bridge Incident.

          • IrishNeanderthal

            That incident was included in Michael Wood’s recent series on China (quite an excellent series, I thought.)

            One other thing he mentioned was Shandong being given to the Japanese in the post WW1 carve-up. The logic behind this you can read in A friend betrayed – EUROPE (China Daily).

            Eventually, this worked out badly for Japan also. Have you ever seen the Japanese film Grave of the Fireflies?

          • dannybhoy

            Okay, but I was referring to Europe and Great Britain in particular..
            (sticks tongue out…)

          • Little Black Censored

            Did you really mean Britain and France?

          • CliveM

            Yep. The problem with France wasn’t the bravery of its soldiers, but the dire state of its leadership both politically and militarily. If France had moved battalions of soldiers into Germany after they declared war, Hitlers gamble in invading Poland could well have failed, fatally undermining his leadership. During the invasion of Poland Germany came to within two weeks of running out of ammunition and France invading would have Forced Hitler to divert forces west.

  • jsampson45

    A Brexit led by someone who is trustworthy, Christian or otherwise, we need but are not going to get.

  • Welby, another one who doesn’t really want Brexit.
    We’ve got a Brexit team, they might need a little help and advice from Mr Farage though.

  • betteroffoutofit

    It’s his eyes – in the picture – that get to me, Your Grace.
    Dead? Or merely “astonied”?
    At least, not living, or hopeful, or inspired with Christian Hope and Faith; or so it would seem . . .

  • Watchman

    What a coincidence! I was hoping for a Christian Church of England led by someone we could trust. If Jesus’ Kingdom is not of this world, why is the archbishop fiddling around in the politics of this world rather than being engaged in bringing more lost souls into the Kingdom.

    He could perhaps treat this situation as another Dunkirk and persuade our Monarch to call for a day of prayer to rescue us from the aggression of our Continental enemy – the situation is not dissimilar.

    • Manfarang

      Salvation includes works on this earth
      24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

      • Watchman

        By taking this verse out of context you have made it appear counter to the rest of scripture. James is saying that just as Abraham’s faith made him righteous that faith was dead until he offered Isaac as a sacrifice so is our faith is dead unless we are obedient by exhibiting good works as a result of that faith. Salvation is not dependant on works but the faith that led to salvation must produce fruit, a change in the way that we live otherwise it is a dead faith.

        It is difficult to believe that the archbishop’s utterance is as a result of his faith; but more a result of his politics!

        • David

          James, an usual letter that one. So very well explained.
          “by their fruits ye shall know them”.

          • Manfarang

            If their behaviour is not pious, one should not expect their words to be.

      • IanCad

        Sticking your hand in a hornet’s nest you are, Manny. Some verses are more equal than others. Nothing gets otherwise good Christians more exercised than to suggest that they have to get off their duffs and do something as well as to believe. The Sermon on the Mount makes that quite clear.

        • Manfarang

          And stop using human frailty as an excuse for the failure to live a Christian life.

  • Richard B

    Justin needs to put his part of the Lord’s church in order FIRST, especially as it’s fulfilling Jesus and Paul’s prophecies on Days of Noah & Apostasy ( Therefore, none of C of E leaders knew the Lord’s mind on EU – am aware of nearly 2 dozen prophecies FOR Brexit since 2001! NEXT Justin should correct the F&CO on its Christophobic and anti-biblical stance.

    • Watchman

      Well said, Richard. End times prophecy seems to be a taboo subject to most of the church and yet to those who know the signs of the times it is a stark reality. Whether or not we leave the EU is peripheral to the church being prepared for the rapture and tribulation to follow and yet only independent, Biblically sound churches seem interested.

      • Richard B

        Thank you and I make that point in one or other blog on the ‘Sex-Sin-nod’ failure to know the times and so prepare the Bride!

        • Watchman

          Love your website, Richard. I’ve just subscribed!

          • Richard B

            Many thanks and a very warm personal welcome my friend

      • IanCad

        Let me point out that many Christians do not subscribe to rapture (Dispensationalist) theology. Invented by John Darby of the Plymouth Brethren and picked up and run with by Hal Lindsey and others; it is considered by its opponents to be a mish-mash of inconsistency and inventiveness.

        • Watchman

          Thank you for pointing that out Ian. Do you mean that they don’t subscribe or they haven’t examined it ciosely enough and are not really interested. There must be a basis for not subscribing yet we don’t much hear the counter arguments, they are very quiet about their exegesis of the scripture from which these views are taken.

          • IanCad

            What a delight you are Watchman! A wonderfully courteous response which should be a lesson to all of us – sometimes not so Christians – on this blog.
            It does seem to me, what with all the Left Behind movies and books, that Dispensationalism has entered the mainstream. A reflection no doubt on the sincerity of the beliefs of those who embrace the doctrine. I do not accept the teaching – suffice it to say that, along with most Christians, the teachings of a rapture prior to the Resurrection appears unbiblical.; As do some of the eschatological events also seem – dare I say? – creative.

          • Here’s a succinct Catholic summary of objections to “dispensationalism”.


            It notes: “the vast majority of dispensationalists are either actively opposed to, or are very suspicious of, the Catholic Church. Many of them believe the Catholic Church will play a central role in a coming one world apostate religion.” Is this true?

            In Jack’s view, it’s novel, manmade, pseudo-Biblical guesswork that would have horrified orthodox Christians during the 1900 years before its invention.

          • Watchman

            Yes, it is true, Jack. The Catholic Church is identified as the New Babylon. If you read Revelation carefully it is difficult, nay impossible, to identify any other candidates.

            I’ve read the article in your link; I couldn’t bear to read it a second time and my impressions were that there are two pillars on which the arguement stands. I can’t comment on the Tim LeHaye and Hal Lindsey books as I haven’t read any of them, I prefer my Bible.
            The two pillars are the tradition of the RC church and what we call replacement theology, that Israel has been replaced by the church; in Catholic doctrine by the RC church.

            The idea that tradition in any man made organisation could replace any of God’s Word would laughable if it hadn’t resulted in many millions been deceived into idolotary and making the RC church the wealthiest organisation the world has ever known by deceiving even the poor out of the little they had. The tele-evangelists have much to learn from your church on get-rich-quick methods.

            That Replacement theology is a falsehood is easily demonstrated by the recent history of Israel and the fact that it actually exists at all. God has not forgotten His Covenant with Israel and we can see Biblical prophecy, in this respect, being fulfilled in our lifetime. All end times prophecy depended on the Jews being returned to the land that God had given them and this has now happened. The confluence of prophetic signs has never been greater than it is today and we would be foolish to ignore them. What I find interesting is that in Israel they are interpreting their Bible, the Old Testament, to indicate that their Messiah in going to arrive shortly whilst Christians, who have the benefit also of the New Testament are expecting the same Messiah, but for a second time.

            All scripture was given to us for our understanding but that understanding is not given to us easily but by wrestling with God in prayer. The exegeses of many of these scriptures relating to the end times have been done by Godly men who have spent much time in prayer at the throne of God.

          • Richard B

            Maybe that dichotomy is exemplified in the RC and related churches in Jerusalem recent side with the PA in condemning Israel’s actions in trying to prevent terrorist attacks from the Temple Mount?

          • Richard B

            oops typo: pls read ‘siding with PA instead of ‘side with PA’

          • Watchman

            I agree, I didn’t realise until I read the article in Jack’s link that replacement theology was a doctrinal issue with the RC church. It explains a lot: the Catholic Church’s support of Hitler’s and the current pope cosying up to Islam, presumably wanting to be head of the one world church. It must feel to them as though they’ve bought a house and the current occupants won’t move out; in fact they are even more entrenched. Hasn’t it occurred to them that prophecy is not on their side and that the Jews are a “stiff necked people”. It also explains why Martin Luther remained vehemently anti-Semitic all through his life.

          • Richard B

            And Sept 2015 was significant regarding of the Pope’s meeting ‘pot-herb’ POTUS and then going to the UN – you may like to dip into that month’s schedule blogged on 2nd Sept with follow-up info >

          • Watchman

            Thanks for this, Richard. You’ve just shown me that I don’t take much notice of these signs and I really ought to.

            Acts 2:17-20 KJV
            [17] And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: [18] And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: [19] And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: [20] The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:

            It prompted me to read Joel again; a salutary reminder.

          • There is no “doctrinal ” position concerning “replacement theology” – and never has been. How did the article lead you to this conclusion? You read it through your own peculiar theological mind-set. And your other comments are filtered through this and a wilful misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the Church in history. The Catholic Church did not support Hitler, nor is it cosying up to Islam. How silly.

          • Watchman

            Jack, all I can do is offer the evidence of the pope’s behaviour preceding and during WWII.


            The evidence for the current pope’s relationship with Islam can be seen for yourself in numerous bits of YouTube, for example:



            There are plenty more.

            If this is not cosying up to Islam I don’t know what is!

          • The Catholic Church does not subscribe to “Replacement Theology”. Rather it understands Jesus fulfilled the Mosaic Covenant and that the People of God is now the Christian Church and she has inherited the promises made to Abraham. Based on scripture, notably Saint Paul, she also understands that God has not given up on His Chosen People and that Israel has a critical part to play in events before Christ’s return. Whether this is the present State of Israel is uncertain.
            Care to present evidence that the Catholic Church is the “wealthiest organisation the world has ever known”? This claim is just not true.

          • Watchman

            Jack, I took this from the Q&A section of a website called EWTN Global Catholic Network in response to a question on the Catholic Church’s position on replacement theology:

            “The Church teaches that the Jewish Nation was destined to give way to the Catholic Church as the fullment of God’s promise to Abraham that the whole world would be blessed through his descendants,the Jewish People. And that happened. It was through Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, all Jews, and through the Apostles, all Jews, that the Catholic Church began. Catholics today then are also descendants of Abraham, not in a racial sense, but in a spiritual sense.”

            This, to me, is replacement theology. To say that it is not is as deceptive as Islam saying it is the religion of peace.

            On the wealth of the Catholic Church there seems to be a lot of agreement that their wealth is unknown because of their unusual accounting methods.

            This is a typical article on the subject:


            There does seem to a lot of deception in your church, Jack, I wonder who motivates that?

          • So just what is scripturally inaccurate in that quote?

            Do you deny Christian Church is now the People of God? Or that the New Covenant in Christ fulfilled the Mosaic covenant? Unbiblical “Supersessionist” views would hold that God has abandoned the Jews and that by continuing to exist outside the Church they are holding back His return.
            Are you a supporter of dual covenant theology? That the covenant God made with the Jewish people through Moses remains eternally valid for them? That the Jews have their own path to salvation and do not need Christ or the Church?

          • Watchman

            There is a clue to God’s intentions to include gentiles in the covenant He is making with Abraham in Genesis 12 “I will bless those who bless you, I will curse those who treat you with contempt, and all the peoples on earth will be blessed through you.” Whereupon He make a covenant with Abraham and his descendants which is everlasting.

            In Jeremiah we hear that God will make a new covenant with His people

            “Look, the days are coming”-this is the LORD’s declaration-“when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. This one will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt-a covenant they broke even though I had married them”-the LORD’s declaration.”

            God has never had a covenant with the gentiles since the Abrahamic covenant and as Paul points out in Romans 11 and Galatians 3 the only way we can take advantage of the Abrahamic new covenant is by being adopted into the family of Abraham.

            Galatians 3:6-9
            “Just as Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him for righteousness, then understand that those who have faith are Abraham’s sons. Now the Scripture saw in advance that God would justify the Gentiles by faith and told the good news ahead of time to Abraham, saying, All the nations will be blessed through you.So those who have faith are blessed with Abraham, who had faith.”

            It is better to read the whole chapter to get the full impact of what Paul is saying.

            As God has no covenant with us and we are saved through the covenant that God had with Abraham and his descendants how can we assume that the inheritance is now passed to the gentiles. We should merely be grateful that we have been blessed by His largesse and not try to usurp the position the Jews have with God.

          • “As God has no covenant with us and we are saved through the covenant that God had with Abraham and his descendants how can we assume that the inheritance is now passed to the gentiles.

            A strange comment for a Christian to make! The New Testament depicts Jesus as the fulfilment of the covenants of the Old Testament. God’s covenant plan reaches its conclusion in Jesus Christ.

            Jesus is the new Adam, bringing about a new creation, restoring humankind to the paradise promised in the beginning. He is a new Noah, bringing about a flood that saves, the waters of Baptism. He is the new son of Abraham, in whom all the nations of the world will find blessing. He is the new Moses, giving God’s chosen people a new Passover, the Eucharist, and leading a new exodus, a deliverance from sin, by His Cross and Resurrection opening up the promised land of heaven.

            “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” (Matthew 1:1)

            The New Testament is the book about the new world created by Jesus, the Messiah, the promised son of David, in whom God fulfils His promise to Abraham – that in his descendants all peoples will be blessed. Gabriel tells Mary that God will give to Jesus “the throne of David His father, and He will rule over the house of Jacob forever and of His kingdom there will be no end.”(Luke 1:32-33) In Mary’s Visitation of her kinswoman, Elizabeth, we again the promises of salvation history. Mary cries out in song that Jesus’ coming is God’s answer to all Israel’s prayers, a fulfilment of “His promises to our fathers, to Abraham and to his descendants forever.” (Luke 1:55) Her son will fulfil God’s covenant promise to Abraham – that “in your descendants all the nations of the earth shall find blessing.” (Genesis 22:18) Zechariah declares, God has “raised up a horn of salvation within the house of David…mindful of His holy covenant and of the oath He swore to Abraham.” Simeon sees in Jesus, the “salvation promised by God. The promise Simeon sees fulfilled is not only for the chosen people Israel. It is a salvation that is both “glory for Your people Israel” but also “a light for revelation to the Gentiles”, a beacon for all the peoples of the world. Simeon is invoking here the worldwide promises made about David’s kingdom – that the restored kingdom of David would be an international empire stretching to the ends of the earth and embracing all nations and peoples (see Psalm 2:8; 72:8,11).

            These are just some of the passages. The whole New Testament reaffirms that Jesus is the fulfilment of all the promises of God.

            Just as Solomon appointed 12 officers to rule his kingdom (1 Kings 4:7), Jesus appoints His 12 Apostles to positions of leadership in His kingdom (Matthew 19:28). He appoints, one, Simon, to a special post, changing his name to Peter. Peter is from the Greek Petros, which means “rock.” Jesus tells him, “On this rock I will build my Church.” (Matthew 16:18). This may be a reference to Solomon, who built the Temple, the house of God, on a large foundation stone (Isaiah 28:16). The Church is the name that Jesus gives to the Kingdom He has come to announce. And Jesus gives Peter supreme authority in His Kingdom, His Church. He gives Peter the “keys to the kingdom of heaven” and the powers to “bind and loose.” The only other place in Scripture where such “keys” are mentioned is in a passage about the Davidic kingdom found in a prophecy from Isaiah (Isaiah 22:15-24). There, Isaiah prophesies God’s transfer of “the key of the House of David” from a corrupt “master of the palace”, Shebna, to a righteous servant, Eliakin. Of Eliakin, the prophet says: “He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the House of Judah. I will place the key of the House of David on his shoulder – when he opens, no one shall shut; when he shuts, no one shall open.”

            This sounds a lot like what Jesus says to Peter: “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” In the Davidic Kingdom, the king appointed, in effect, a prime minister to handle the day-to-day affairs of the Kingdom. He was called the royal “vizier” or “major-domo”, the “superintendent” or “master of the palace.” He is considered, as Isaiah said, to be “a father to the inhabitants” of the Kingdom (1 Kings 4:1-6; 16:9; 18:3; 2 Kings 15:5; 18:18,37;19:2; Isaiah 22:22).

            Jesus appoints Peter to be “prime minister” of the restored Kingdom of David, the Kingdom of Heaven that Jesus proclaimed, the Church He called His own. The “keys” are a symbol of the King’s power, authority, and control (Revelation 22:16; 3:7; 1:8). Jesus’ reference to “binding” and “loosing” alludes to the authority of rabbis in Jesus’ time. The rabbis had the power to make “binding” and “loosing” decisions about the interpretation and enforcement of the Law – they could declare what is permitted and what is not permitted according to the Law.

            The Passover marked their birth as a people of God in the covenant He made with them at Sinai. That covenant was ratified by the blood of animals offered in sacrifice. Sprinkling them with the blood, Moses said: “This is the blood of the covenant which the Lord has made with you” (Exodus 24:8). Jesus had all this background in mind at His Last Supper, which was eaten as a Passover meal. It was celebrated on the night before His “exodus.” Jesus tells the Apostles that the bread is His body and that the wine is “My blood of the covenant” (Mark 14:24). Jesus is making a direct quotation of Moses’ words at Sinai (Exodus 24:8). In Luke’s account of the Last Supper, the cup is called “the new covenant in My blood” (Luke 22:20). In explaining the Eucharist, Jesus compared it implicitly with the Passover celebration – saying that people must “eat My flesh” as the Israelites had to eat the flesh of the Lamb (John 6:53-58). In telling His Apostles to “do this in memory of Me” (Luke 22:19), Jesus was instituting the Eucharist as a memorial of a new passing over and a new covenant. The “passover” of Jesus takes place in His Passion, death and Resurrection.
            Jesus identified as both the Passover lamb and the priest who offers the lamb in sacrifice.

            How does Jack know all all this? How can he be sure that this is the right interpretation of what was really happening on the Cross? Because the Church, building on the testimony of the Apostles, has told him so. How did the Apostles know? Because Jesus taught them how to find Him in the Scriptures. On the third day, when He rose from the dead, what was the first thing He did? According to Luke’s Gospel, He appeared to some deeply saddened disciples making their way to Emmaus. As He walked, He explained the Scriptures to them. “Beginning with Moses and all the prophets, He interpreted to them what referred to Him in all the Scriptures.” (Luke 24:27). When He was done interpreting the Scriptures to them, He celebrated the Eucharist. Notice the same pattern we observed in the feeding of the multitudes and at the Last Supper. At Emmaus, “He took bread, said the blessing, broke it and gave it to them.” (Luke 24:30). Later that first Easter night, He appeared to the Apostles. Again, He “opened their minds to understand the Scriptures.” (Luke 24:45). By Scriptures Luke means the books the of Old Testament. Jesus taught His chosen Apostles how to interpret the Scriptures. And as He promised, He sent them “the Spirit of truth” to guide them “to all truth.” (John 16:13) What they learned and continued to have revealed to them is inscribed on every page of the New Testament and in the Liturgy of the Church.

            Jesus’ Ascension to heaven is described as a royal enthronement – He is taken up to heaven to be seated at the right hand of God for all eternity. (Acts 2:22-36) Seated on the throne of David, Jesus rules His Kingdom (Acts 13:22-37). More than a heavenly king, Christ is “a great priest over the house of God” (see Hebrews 10:11) The Davidic Messiah, we recall, was expected to be “a priest forever” (Psalm 110:4) And now Jesus is enthroned in the temple and sanctuary of heaven – “a high priest who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven.” (Hebrews 8:1; also Hebrews 7)

            Jesus reigns now as King and High Priest over a kingdom that is both on earth and in heaven – a kingdom that is both temporal and historical and spiritual and eternal. It is a kingdom that was begun among the children of Israel, but now is to extend to the ends of the earth. We see this in the Acts of the Apostles. The progress of Acts shows the Church extending from Jerusalem (Acts 1-7), north to restore the former Northern Kingdom (Acts 8), and from there fanning out to all the nations beyond Israel (see Acts 10-28).

            This Kingdom is the Church. And the Church is the destiny of the human family. In sending His Spirit down upon Mary and the Apostles at the Pentecost (see Acts 1:14; Acts 2), God announces the crowning of all His mighty works of salvation history.

            The Jewish feast of Pentecost called all devout Jews to Jerusalem to celebrate their birth as God’s chosen people, in the covenant Law given to Moses at Sinai (see Leviticus 23:15-21; Deuteronomy 16:9-11). The Spirit given to the Church at Pentecost seals the new law and new covenant brought by Jesus – written not on stone tablets but on the hearts of believers, as the prophets promised. (Jeremiah 31:31-34; 2 Corinthians 3:2-8; Romans 8:2)

          • Watchman

            Jack, many thanks for you lengthy response. I was about to respond back when I received a command from high authority that I had to take a clutch of grandchildren to the zoo. Knowing how these things pan out it may be tomorrow before I free to write. Be patient. Bless you.

          • Enjoy your grandchildren, Watchman. They are gifts from God and nurturing them is far more important than debating with Happy Jack.

          • Watchman

            Jack, it is not merely unlikely but impossible that you and I will ever agree on subjects which involve you accepting the Catholic traditions and doctrines and I accept only the Bible as God’s final Word to mankind and that every doctrine, belief and teaching must be substantiated by His Word. There are not such gaps between the two that we can go hammer and tongs at each other and both merely get frustrated at the intransigence of the other one.

            It seems illogical to me that Jesus would pass the government of His Church to mere men when he is alive and still Head of His Church. I see Him as being usurped by those wanting political power and wanting to build a kingdom for themselves on this earth when Jesus specifically said that His Kingdom was not of this earth.

            Our direct relationship with God the Father was guaranteed by the death of Jesus indicated by the veil in the temple being torn in two, a sign that access to the Holy of holiest was confined to the high priest but was open to all.

            It seems fruitless going through your post when the positions we take seem irreconcilable. I have twice pointed out to you what I believe is the error in calling Peter “the rock” and in any event there is not a hint of apostolic succession anywhere in the NT; neither do I see any hint of the need to form any central organisational structure when Jesus was Head Of each local ekklesia. The edicts issued by the church itself leave the position of the Holy Spirit in difficulty as it was His role to remind us of Jesus’ teaching:
            John 14:25-2
            “I have spoken these things to you while I remain with you. But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit-the Father will send Him in My name-will teach you all things and remind you of everything I have told you.”

            Jack, it seems to me that the whole of the doctrine of your church is to keep people ensnared by it and loyal to it by the threatening posture it takes on salvation: that salvation is only available through the your church. The evidence is that the Holy Spirit is living and working in Christians of all denominations and none for God knows the heart of men, all men, whether or not they give their allegiance to a particular denomination, sect or

          • Watchman, we both know it all comes down to authority to interpret scripture and to develop teachings as the truth is revealed to successive generations. Individual men, who differ and hold an ever widening range of “understandings”, or a teaching authority appointed by Christ and guarded by the Holy Spirit. And it seems imminently sensible to Jack that Jesus would establish a visible, authoritative Church until His return to do just this – to lead, feed and guide His people.

            If you read Jack’s post (did you?) the scriptural basis for Apostolic authority is there, also in Acts and in the history of the early Church. The Catholic Church does not “keep people ensnared by it and loyal to it by the threatening posture it takes on salvation: that salvation is only available through the your church.” This is an inaccurate protestant myth which Jack has addressed several times on here.

            As you say, the gap between us is too and throwing scriptural quotes at one another serves little purpose.

          • Watchman

            Jack, I must say that I am a little upset by your comment doubting that I had read your post. I did several times but countering every one of them seemed unnecessary as I believe your interpretation to be faulty. I find it interesting that in Galatians 2 Paul admonishes Peter. If Peter had all the authority how could Paul admonish him?

            No I do not think we need an authority for interpretation of scripture, that is the job of the Holy Spirit as we all seek to grow in grace and in knowledge and prescribing doctrine as phrases of mindless repetition does not commend itself to spiritual growth.

            I found this article which left me totally confused I think it is intentionally confusing. The gospels and epistles make it quite clear what is necessary for salvation and it is a simple acceptance of the redeeming sacrifice of Jesus on the cross; no more and no less.

            Bless you Jack, I’ll offer you a couple of YouTube presentations by people far more knowledgeable and eloquent than me.




          • Then Jack apologies, Watchman. He does not know you and given your earlier comment about it being unbearable for you to reread an article he posted, he wondered if you had skimmed. Again, apologies.
            As Christians, we will have to agree to differ. Our differences will not be sorted this side of the grave. Perhaps in Purgatory?!

          • Watchman

            I’m never very clear as to whether your reposts are based on your humour or your stubbornness. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and regard it as the former.

            May god bless you Jack.

          • And God Bless you too.
            Jack is resolute, not stubborn. At time he is humorous. And there are times he can rude and insulting – a failing on his part.
            Btw, that article in the Catholic Herald seems clear to Jack. Put simply, it means that if, through no fault of your own, you are not a member of the Catholic Church but a baptised Christian with faith in Christ, then you may be saved. Being a Catholic doesn’t guarantee salvation either. The Church holds a similar position in respect of other non-Christian faiths. We are all saved by Christ.

    • Sarky

      If justin puts the church in order would that stop the prophecy being fulfilled??
      If prophecy is like a runaway train and cant be stopped, then why should he bother??
      If it can be changed, then isnt the whole idea of prophecy pointless??

      • Richard B

        Good points, yet involve 3 ‘If’. We could chat ‘til cows come home on this huge topic had we free-time! Free-will and determinism, even pre-destination, are major philosophical areas. My ‘off-the-cuff take’ on this probably won’t satisfy you Sarky, but here goes:

        First your last point: biblical prophecies exist and have proven accuracy (eg not only on Jesus’ birth but also that of state of Israel). So they’re not pointless. Their purpose may be to warn us and prepare us, as well as encourage us to change for the better – and to confirm there is a God to whom we’re all accountable.

        Maybe Jesus didn’t give a time-frame for the many End-time prophecies to allow full flexibility in playing them out through the activities of human free-will, with its immense variety of actions? Into this mix our Father has oversight and sovereign interaction.

        IF the CofE were ‘put in order’ the same wouldn’t happen for everyone in our very diverse society. So, such prophecies would follow through in due course.

        Just why should Justin bother? Imho, to get believers into being practising followers of Jesus Christ without worldly claptrap. Thus people would see Him in them, and prepare themselves for their optimum post-mortem status.

        The whole issue is one of being and thus seeing the End from the Beginning, which we’re not and can’t!

        • Sarky

          The problem I’ve got is that if the end is written in stone then that destroys the free will argument.
          A predestined ending doesnt allow for a choice of journey.

          • Richard B

            Or, why not think of it as we choose how we end up? Our own chosen journey to whichever ending we get is our decision; hence free-will and destiny may meet – and permit variety – and thus makes it uniquely personal.

          • Sarky

            I dont think that’s how it works.
            The following makes more sense to me :-
            ” The Christian God is defined as a personal being who knows everything. According to Christians, personal beings have free will.
            In order to have free will, you must have more than one option, each of which is avoidable. This means that before you make a choice, there must be a state of uncertainty during a period of potential: you cannot know the future. Even if you think you can predict your decision, if you claim to have free will, you must admit the potential (if not the desire) to change your mind before the decision is final.
            A being who knows everything can have no “state of uncertainty.” It knows its choices in advance. This means that it has no potential to avoid its choices, and therefore lacks free will. Since a being that lacks free will is not a personal being, a personal being who knows everything cannot exist.
            Therefore, the Christian God does not exist.”

          • Richard B

            ?? doesn’t make any sense to me – and is quite amusing as you obviously still need an encounter with Him like I had. It made me rethink my whole philosophy of life as I’d been anti-christian! (When we chatted along these lines some years ago I think you thought I was deluding myself.)

        • Watchman

          Richard, over 35 years ago I heard a prophecy, from someone who still has a prophetic ministry, of the demise of the Church of England. I remember this because it seemed so ridiculous at the time, but events now provide the efficacy of the prophecy.

        • “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, but My Father only. But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be………..’ (Matthew 24:36-37).
          It is not our job to speculate on the end times, but to be faithful in doing God’s will.
          A browse through Matt. 24:36-51 and Acts 1:6-8 may be helpful.

          • Agreed, but we should be able to discern the “signs of the times”.

          • I think that if you read the text carefully, you will see that the “signs of the times” referred to the destruction of Jerusalem. The Return of Christ will come “like a thief in the night,” when the Sarkys and Linuses of this world are saying, “Peace and Safety!” (1 Thessalonians 5:2-3). Christians are called, not to mull over newspaper and TV reports to discover when the world will end, but to be ready at all times (Mark 13:33; 1 Thes. 5:5-8)

          • Well, yes, Jack agrees we shouldn’t speculate about the time of Our Lord’s return. It’s a growing industry in these deluded times. However, that said, the visible Church lives in this world and has to rise to the temporal and spiritual challenges and threats she and her members face. Trust you agree. Isn’t that what Shepherding is all about?

          • Richard B

            Yes Martin but although our Lord foresees that destruction I think I’m right in saying the rest of His discourse hasn’t yet been fulfilled and is thus eschatological. That is, there were far more ‘signs’ to come! Agree re our preparation but noting prophetical relevance of current events as they happen isn’t about guessing those dates but in prompting that readiness – and validating the Bible as the prophetic word of God.

          • Richard B

            Many thanks Martin as those were the verses I had in mind for my third para as I know them well, but didn’t refer as know addressee is unappreciative of scripture.

    • David

      Richard, I just read, fairly quickly, the sections of your website relating to the EU and brexit.
      To put my final paragraph in context, note this. Once I, as a traditional, conservative Bible believing Christian realised that the very constitution of the EU denies the undoubtedly Christian past, and therefore heritage, of Europe I grasped that it was an anti-Christain construct. That stared me off looking and digging deeper. The more I researched the more convinced I became that it was an evil, domineering secularist and anti-Christain political empire. So immediately I became involved in the campaign to get us out, working with Ukip for about five years, as a member, and in the run up to the referendum with both Ukip and Vote Leave. The nature and type of the opposition I encountered continued to strengthen my belief that the EU is against God.
      One of the points you make on your site in favour of leaving the EU made great sense to me. You say, if leaders of this country sought to realign the UK’s laws with Biblical guidance they would only be able to do so, outside the EU. So leaving creates one of the essential conditions for returning our laws to God’s path. That was a helpful point and not one I’d though through myself or encountered elsewhere. Thank you.

      • Richard B

        Thanks for dropping by David and so interesting to learn of your experience. (Have just noticed my links seem to have gone wrong, unless it’s my I/Explorer playing up). I was blessed to have several contributors on EU and Brexit material so think that point may be one of theirs.

      • Richard B

        David – you and others may like to consider the 6th fulfilment of contemporary prophecies about corruption in and fall of the EU as in my latest blog at

    • “Motus in fine velocior”“Things accelerate toward the end.

      The expression is commonly used to indicate the faster passing of the time at the end of an historical period. We are living through an historical hour which is not necessarily the end of times, but certainly could be marked as the end of an era.

      No one knows the date and time of the end, and we can’t do much about global or cosmic events anyway. Therefore, in good times and in bad, we are called to be faithful. We are called to live local and love local – to do what we can where we are, with what we have …and let God be in charge of the big stuff.

      • big bwana

        I agree with you on this Jack. I believe events will accelerate towards the end and the return of the Lord Jesus and we need to be careful that we are not caught out. The Lord had much to say on this.

        • The End Times or the end of the Christian era?

          The church will become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning.

          She will no longer be able to inhabit many of the edifices she built in prosperity. As the number of her adherents diminishes . . . she will lose many of her social privileges. . . As a small society, [the Church] will make much bigger demands on the initiative of her individual members….

          It will be hard-going for the Church, for the process of crystallization and clarification will cost her much valuable energy. It will make her poor and cause her to become the Church of the meek . . . The process will be long and wearisome as was the road from the false progressivism on the eve of the French Revolution — when a bishop might be thought smart if he made fun of dogmas and even insinuated that the existence of God was by no means certain . . . But when the trial of this sifting is past, a great power will flow from a more spiritualized and simplified Church. Men in a totally planned world will find themselves unspeakably lonely. If they have completely lost sight of God, they will feel the whole horror of their poverty. Then they will discover the little flock of believers as something wholly new. They will discover it as a hope that is meant for them, an answer for which they have always been searching in secret.

          And so it seems certain to me that the Church is facing very hard times. The real crisis has scarcely begun. We will have to count on terrific upheavals. But I am equally certain about what will remain at the end: not the Church of the political cult, which is dead already, but the Church of faith. She may well no longer be the dominant social power to the extent that she was until recently; but she will enjoy a fresh blossoming and be seen as man’s home, where he will find life and hope beyond death.

          (Joseph Ratzinger; “Faith and the Future”; 1969)

          We are now standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has ever experienced. I do not think that the wide circle of the American Society, or the whole wide circle of the Christian Community realize this fully. We are now facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-church, between the gospel and the anti-gospel, between Christ and the antichrist. The confrontation lies within the plans of Divine Providence. It is, therefore, in God’s Plan, and it must be a trial which the Church must take up, and face courageously.”

          (Cardinal Karol Wojtyla – Saint John Paul II – 1976)

          • Richard B

            Thanks for all these most pertinent and interesting quotes Jack

          • big bwana

            Jack, thank you for taking the time to put up these two excerpts; do you know what Pope Francis’s take is on this matter?

          • He has alluded to similar concerns too back in 2015 when he invoked Mark, Chapter 13, as a warning that we may be approaching the end times. He suggested that what he has seen appears to fit the end times as described by Jesus.

            Pope Francis mentioned that dark times do pass, but he also told the crowd to be ready. He referred His to a Global World War III having started and that the end times should be taken seriously. He also reminded us that even if the Second Coming of Christ is not at hand, it is wise for each person to be ready to go at a moment’s notice, for illness or accident still overtake thousands of souls per day.

  • michaelkx

    I quote ” Well, who exactly? Who possesses the charisma, the exceptional qualities and the force of personality by which all factions may be united? Who possesses the extraordinary virtue around which they may all coalesce? Who is this supernatural superhuman?” How about the ant-Christ ?

    • bluedog

      Do you mean Sadiq Khan?

      • michaelkx

        No. you may thank that, but I can not comment.

    • Richard B

      Perhaps it (A/C) may be using the whole socio-politico-religious situation as a ‘test-run’ to check its strategy for circumventing its eventual doom?

  • IanCad

    I am often guilty of commenting with gusto, but only occasionally acknowledging the source of our excuse for raucous disputation. This is truly an excellent OP YG. I’m sure I speak for all in thanking you for such consistent, hard work.

  • So who is this unifying supreme commissioner to be?
    There’s only one person to lead us to Brexit, Nigel Farage.

    • Royinsouthwest

      Perhaps we should ask the Archbishop of Canterbury to anoint Farage in the cathedral.

  • Richard B

    Some weird delusion to have completely turned my life around and never gone back to my old ways in 28 years – but I’m not alone as it’s nothing exceptional. I’m sure you’d like God if you’d want to get to know Him and then find HE loves you unconditionally and died for you to get to meet Him. But then you know all that anyway and chosen not to know. (I did same for 30 years only to find was badly mistaken – a real encounter changes everything!!)

  • We’re not facing an evil that is exclusive to the EU. It’s present in the United Kingdom and let’s not kid ourselves leaving will solve our ills. It might help; it might not.

    Here’s what Blessed John Henry Newman observed over a century ago:

    “Is there not a vigorous and united movement in all countries to cast down the Church of Christ from power and place? Is there not a feverish and ever-busy endeavor to get rid of the necessity of Religion in public transactions? …

    An attempt to educate without Religion? – that is, by putting all forms of Religion together, which comes to the same thing…

    An attempt to make expedience, and not truth, the end and the rule of measures of State and the enactments of Law? An attempt to make numbers, and not the Truth, the ground of maintaining, or not maintaining, this or that creed, as if we had any reason whatever in Scripture for thinking that the many will be in the right, and the few in the wrong? …

    An attempt to supersede Religion altogether, as far as it is external or objective, as far as it is displayed in ordinances, or can be expressed by written words – to confine it to our inward feelings, and thus, considering how variable, how evanescent our feelings are, an attempt, in fact, to destroy Religion?
    Surely, there is at this day a confederacy of evil, marshaling its hosts from all parts of the world, organizing itself, taking its measures, enclosing the Church of Christ as in a net, and preparing the way for a general Apostasy from it.”

  • not a machine

    Your graces article and last 2 paragraphs was most thought provoking ,I perhaps point out to my archbishop ,if he ponders the EU is more gifted in outlook in brexit ?? The tragic truth of re moaners and former pm Daves pre opportunity to get a deal , was that the EU thought we wouldn’t do it and so sent him back with nothing, and when he came home we knew , he had nothing to give and rather than lie down and take a doggy biscuit , those of us that think the EU is a bit of a well paid , unreality device , had our referendum and the vote was to leave the EU. In fairness , I mostly thought we wouldn’t be sat on the station this long, but ze rules say 2 years to sort it out .I might also remind the archbishop that a bunch of pros (including EU ones) got us into a right old financial mess , which still isn’t really over. I don’t know what the Archbishop is suggesting or indeed what a Christian brexit is , I don’t know if the Cof E can issue episcopal bulls ,but we have this process to go through , and the EU has also to sort out what they are going to do ,I don’t see an change in the EU think , so cannot see what the remoaners think is so good about the sirens appeal , I mean Greece , was the proof for me that and and when inebted countiress were lending to each other (not really the sort of thing a currency union should be doing) .I don’t deny I am interested in some EU matters ,and don’t mind needing a visa , I am not all blowing cold , but the EU has caused a lot of problems of its own making .My archbishop could at least recognize the EU may have been responsible for me voting the way I did , In that Its wasn’t going a good direction.
    Any how I am in a hot sweaty room with some people who cant decide , if biochemistry is un-American and the hoardes of evil , with my KJv and a rosary , wondering if green house gas measuring is er a little late .However for my climate thinkers across the Atlantic , if you had a 500mw coal burning power station that lasted 50yrs and 1 acre of conifer absorbs (over a 50yr life span to harvest on average) 20 tonnes , how many acres of conifer would you need to plant , to absorb the CO2 ???
    Bexit Chinchilla out 🙂

    • not a machine

      Oh well as our sino friends term , the little fat boy has one toy too many ,its the bigliest

  • Merchantman

    If I recall the expert God called upon after previous experts had all been rejected by the lawyers, priests and other specialists and the crowd was none other than His only Son. After they had dealt with Him also, he was succeeded by a Fisherman and 11 other little people supported only by The Holy Spirit.
    How would this arrangement have measured up with the bureaucrats?
    Somewhere it says the Foolish things are destined to confound the Wise. Such in my book at least is the result that so pains the Remoaners.

  • Royinsouthwest

    If the Archbishop of Canterbury had been assisting Samuel when the prophet was looking for someone to replace Saul as King of Israel I wonder what sort of candidate he would have had in mind?

  • Brigham

    Who elected him to pontificate.