Features

'The tide is turning': Justin Welby interviewed by Michael Gove

12 December 2015

9:00 AM

12 December 2015

9:00 AM

There was, of course, something very special about the House of Commons debate on Syria earlier this month. The moral challenge of how to face those who embrace evil without limits, the long shadows and sombre memories generated by military actions past, the divisions within parties and between friends, the wrestling with conscience that brought good men and women close to tears. The importance of what the House of Commons was being asked to authorise inspired outstanding speeches, most notably of all, Hilary Benn’s.

While I was listening to the shadow foreign secretary, I noticed a hunched figure in the gallery also held spellbound by the speech, his head occasionally nodding in silent and respectful appreciation.

The attentive listener had, himself, spoken earlier in the day. On the same question. Not in the Commons but in the Lords. Where he had explained, with great lucidity and authority, that Islamic State would not be defeated by military action alone. The temptations of religious and political extremism also needed to be countered with a more robust ideological response, and supporters of Islamist extremism, in particular in states such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia, had to be confronted.

That speech, just four minutes long, was remarkable for its intellectual depth and courage. What might seem more remarkable, to some, is that it was given from the bench of bishops. The Church of England — for so long caricatured as morally relativist, ethically vague, painfully politically correct and timorously unassertive — has found a new, clear, strong and resonant voice. And to the church’s great benefit, that voice belongs to the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Justin Welby may not appear, at first acquaintance, to be your archetypal Christian soldier. Slightly built, bespectacled and balding, he looks far more like a gentle clerk in holy orders than a turbulent priest. But he has shown, repeatedly, that he is willing to stand his ground and fight for Christian beliefs, taking on those who want to push faith to the margins of our society.

Most recently, he directed a blast of controlled derision towards the country’s cinema owners, who had banned a 30-second advert in favour of the Lord’s Prayer on the basis that a call to forgive our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us was dangerously inflammatory and might cause unacceptable distress.

When I met the archbishop earlier this month to discuss life and faith, he was still bewildered by the film industry’s decision, but inclined to see the positive side — the ad had generated millions of hits on YouTube.

But wasn’t the decision to ban the ad evidence that the church could be marginalised in a way that would have been unthinkable a generation ago? Wasn’t it proof, I asked, that in the contemporary clash of ideas Christianity was at a disadvantage?

The archbishop answered with a gentle but unflinching commitment to orthodox Christian belief: ‘No, because in the clash of ideas, Christians believe in the sovereignty of God. We are confident in the Victory of God which is seen — surpassing evil — in the events of the Cross, of the Resurrection and the Ascension.’

After decades of front-rank Anglican clerics trying to meet secular critics halfway by diluting traditional beliefs, there is something refreshing about the archbishop’s orthodoxy. But while that confident statement of Christian belief might have been a mainstream position for most of the past 2,000 years, aren’t we now in an age of retreating faith?


‘I think the tide is turning in this country. We are seeing many churches growing and particularly I would say that in the last seven or eight years one of the most exciting things has been that, in the aftermath of the Great Recession, we have seen the churches more active in social structures again, in the social events of this country, than at any time since 1945.’

That social involvement — from support for food banks to providing a welcome for refugees — has been interpreted by some critics of the church as evidence of a leftward political drift. But the archbishop adamantly rejects the idea that by following Jesus’s example Christians are endorsing any party political agenda.

‘As a Christian I don’t think you fall within the political spectrum. There was a very remarkable Roman Catholic bishop who once said, “When I work with the poor they call me a saint; when I ask why they’re poor they call me a communist.” ’

Acting to help the poor, the outcast, the forgotten and the vulnerable, the dispossessed and the despised is a Christian duty, the archbishop believes. But the Christian analysis of how to rescue those in need certainly doesn’t sit neatly on the left-right axis.

‘Catholic social teaching describes the family as the base community in society. If you say that, oddly enough, everyone thinks you’re on the right. But if you say we have to ask why, in a modern society, food banks are necessary on the scale that they are at the moment, then you are immediately on the left. Then you say, “I believe in an educational system that teaches eternal values” and they say, “Oh! He’s really on the right.” You don’t fit — so I’m not going to fit.’

One place where the archbishop did fit in was Holy Trinity Brompton, the capital’s — indeed the country’s — leading evangelical church. Sandy Millar, the charismatic vicar of HTB, who has been one of the most influential evangelical Christians of the past 30 years, helped prepare the archbishop for ordination. Evangelicals in the HTB mould tend to have traditional views, not just on theological issues, but also on sexual morality.

Few questions have so preoccupied the Anglican communion recently as the morality of sexuality — homosexuality in particular. Traditional Anglicans — whether in Nigeria or Nottingham — have been wary, at best, of the acceptance and welcome given to gay men and women and their sexual choices by secular society. It would be a challenge for any Archbishop of Canterbury to accommodate both the concerns of the traditionalists and the evolving views of the rest of British society. But when I ask this, Archbishop of Canterbury he doesn’t prevaricate.

If one of his own children were to be
gay and fell in love with another person of the same sex, and asked his blessing, how would he react? ‘Would I pray for them together? You bet I would, absolutely. Would I pray with them together? If they wanted me to. If they had a civil service of marriage, would I attend? Of course I would.’

But, I challenged him, conscious of what many evangelicals believe, wouldn’t you say to them that while you love them, their relationship was sinful or inappropriate?

‘I would say, “I will always love you, full stop. End of sentence, end of paragraph.” Whatever they say, I will say I always love them.’

Listening to the archbishop, you get the sense that he is never calculating who might be offended, or attracted, by his words. He is following what he believes to be the path that Jesus has called him to take.

But if that makes the archbishop seem austere and otherworldly, then I do him a disservice. He has an attractive, almost mischievous, giggle in his voice when talking about the peculiarities of living in Lambeth Palace, his love of CSI: Miami and the way in which the ban on his Lord’s Prayer advertisement made it an underground hit in the same way as Radio 1’s censoring of Frankie Goes to Hollywood made ‘Relax’ a surefire No. 1.

And discussing popular culture with the archbishop he lets slip that his favourite ever TV series — his ‘addiction’, as he puts it — is The West Wing.

Connoisseurs of the US political drama will recall that the pivotal episode in the series comes when advisers to President Bartlet, conscious that caution and timorousness in the face of the opinions of others has diminished his authority, urge him to be true to himself. ‘Let Bartlet be Bartlet’ is the demand.

For Justin Welby, the lesson appears to be clear. Don’t worry about what others might think, don’t tailor your views to the demands of the moment, don’t allow your conscience to be qualified or your heart to be misled. Constancy in faith is the great virtue.

I ask, on that basis, who are the archbishop’s heroes? From whom in history does he draw his inspiration? One name stands out. Revealingly, it is not an obvious name that sends a popular signal, but a figure obscure to most, not an Anglican celebrity but a Catholic martyr, not a European mover and shaker but a voice from the developing world, not a power in any land but a suffering servant.

‘Cardinal Van Thuan spent 13 years in a communist prison after the fall of South Vietnam. He was in solitary confinement. But he led his torturers to Christ. He converted, taught, and ordained priests in prison. He breathed in the presence of Christ.’

There aren’t many contemporary Christian leaders who are both energetic in their condemnation of the crimes of communism and robust in their analysis of the evil of Islamism, but Justin Welby stands out. There is something special about him. And his candour, commitment and kindness are gifts in which all can share this Christmas.

Subscribe to The Spectator Australia today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Subscribe – Try a month free


Show comments
  • Secular1Humanist

    ‘I think the tide is turning in this country. We are seeing many churches growing’.

    And yet, all the available evidence points to the contrary, while many people are leaving the Church of England, some are moving to other denominations, but most of them are leaving the religion altogether. Yes, other denominations are growing (a little bit), but I believe this is also only a temporary phase. It’s fueled mostly by recently waves of immigration from eastern Europe. As these new families assimilate into British culture, their children will most likely be less religious than their parents, and less likely to attend church, because there’s not that social pressure by society to be religiously observant and attend church services.
    Even the church’s own research that was just released recently saw more decline in all Christianity, since the last census in 2011.
    And even of those who call themselves Christian (57%) only 43% believe in the resurrection of Jesus, which for many people is one of the core tenets in being Christian.
    I do wonder what the church’s (and leaders of other Christian denominations in the UK) reaction will be when the results of the 2021 census is released and they find that Christianity is now followed, in any form or shape, by less than 50% of the population.

    • JonBW

      And I do wonder when the secularists will recognise that 57% is a majority of the population.

      And that if you add those adherents of other faiths, the evidence is that the majority of the country are Christian, with an even larger majority followers of a religion.

      Christianity is like Radio 4: for decades, researchers have been telling us that in 10 or 20 years time, nobody will be listening to it because its audience is primarily older people. And every time the research is repeated, they find that it still has a substantial audience. Because as people grow older, their views and preferences change and they start doing and thinking as previous generations did.

      Mind you, it’s a shame that the Archbishop seems so flexible in his attitude to Christian teaching.

      • Ken Batty

        Where is the Archbishop flexible… I hand missed that? Please can you explain.

      • Secular1Humanist

        “And I do wonder when the secularists will recognize that 57% is a majority of the population.”

        I just said as much in my comment. Did you miss it?

        And a ‘majority’ that has been rapidly declining by more than 1% a year, and is projected to continue to decline at a similar pace for the foreseeable future. It’s been predicted that by as soon as 2017, that 57% will fall below 50%. Hard to believe until you realize that it was as much as 72% just over a decade ago.

        “Because as people grow older, their views and preferences change and they start doing and thinking as previous generations did.”

        That’s not what studies have shown. They’ve shown that the non-religious by and large remain non-religious as they age. Sure, some convert to a religion, while others leave religion in old age.
        And it’s not just secularists saying it. All the Christian leaders are also saying the same thing. Yes, minority religions are rising a little, but this is largely due to immigration, and most small minority groups see a bit of growth as the mainline religions decline in numbers.

        • JonBW

          Historically, levels of religious observance have fluctuated significantly: religion appeared to be in decline at several points in the 19th and 20th century and then revived.

          The Church of England has proved remarkably resilient despite its often uninspiring leadership.

          And making assumptions about the future based on past trends in professed views doesn’t strike me as very rational: Labour’s electoral support grew from 33% in 2010 to 45% in 2011. On that basis, they should have won more than 90% of the popular vote last May. (They didn’t).

          And of course, the fact remains that secularists are in a minority in 2015.

      • Carl Pierce

        “And I do wonder when the secularists will recognise that 57% is a majority of the population”
        Secularism just means no privileges for any group. Whether you believe in magic gods or not it is a sensible position. Many religious people are secular.

        • JonBW

          Secularism confers privilege on those who believe that religion should have no place in civic life.

    • William Brown

      Religion often ignores contrary evidence. It’s how it survives in the hearts and minds of so many willing to believe in magic.

  • JonBW

    The core of Christianity is loving other people even if what they do is wrong theologically.

    However, that doesn’t mean that you say that what they have done becomes right.

  • rationality

    Our wonderful religion, the core of the British and European people’s moral and spiritual values, was purposefully destroyed and in its space the media successfully took over that role as the moral arbiter. We were deceived with its focus on progressive politics so that we should endlessly show ‘British values’ (all decided by the media and those in charge with an agenda) by taking in millions of people from the developing world and other ‘minorities’ such as women, gys and religions would be cast as victims. It was all a massive con as these ‘minority’ groups were given more rights through fraudulent morality to increase the voter base against the European people and effectively dispossess of our land and our culture. We know this and the Archbishop still panders to this nonsense.

    I increasingly turn to the Orthodox church which has not been infiltrated with this poison. I do not trust Welby one bit as he is more in tune with the deceptive media and not critical of Islm as a whole, just the ‘extremist’ part. I also never want to hear about the degeneracy of same sx marriage ever again. Michael Gove should know better.

    • Secular1Humanist

      If you need religious dogma to inform your moral attitude, then you’re not really a moral person. You’re just being obedient and following orders.

      Those of us without religion have managed to figure out, all by ourselves that murder, ra pe and theft is wrong. Without threats or coercion , or the promise of a reward.

      • Secular1Humanist

        Also, just because you don’t want to “hear it again”. Same s ex marriage is awesome, and now completely supported by the law. And long may it remain so. Your religion doesn’t get to dictate how the rest of us live out our lives.

        • rationality

          Marriage is the means for people in society to settle down and reproduce. Without it you wouldnt be here. Same sx marriage is an evolutionary dead end and when it comes to bringing up other peoples children then there are serious problems to their well being.

          Oh and you have to use ‘homophobia’ and ‘hate crimes’ as a means to defend a lifestyle that has never existed in human history and has no parallel in nature.

          • Secular1Humanist

            No. That’s your interpretation of marriage. The tradition of marriage is a social construct, it predates Christianity, and all other modern day religions. By at least 40, 000 years. Its definition has changed over time, in many different ways.

            Christians didn’t create, nor do they own the concept of marriage, or get to decide who counts as a married couple.

            You can determine what goes on inside your church, but you don’t get to decide who the government and the state recognizes as a married couple.

            “Oh and you have to use ‘homophobia’ and ‘hate crimes’ as a means to defend a lifestyle that has never existed in human history and has no parallel in nature.”

            Homosexuality has existed and still does exist, in every culture and every era. It’s also found in many other animal species. It has, and continues to benefit biological evolution, and not detrimental to it, as you have claimed.
            Homophobia, however, is common only in the human species.

          • rationality

            Its promoted by bad people who run things who use it as a weapon against the European people. You should know when you are being used. That is what this is about.

            How does it benefit biological evolution?

          • Secular1Humanist

            “Bad” in your opinion.

            In my opinion, it’s people who think like you who’re “bad”, although I wouldn’t use those words. They sound something like what a child would use.

            A tool against the European people? Oh my, that gave me a chuckle. Because homosexuality is only observed in Europe, among Europeans, right?

            How does homosexuality benefit evolution, you ask?

            Studies led by Andrea Camperio Ciani at the University of Padova in Italy (and others) have found that female relatives of gay men tend to have significantly more offspring than the maternal relatives of straight men. The results show strong support for the ‘balancing selection hypothesis’, which is fast becoming the accepted theory of the genetic basis of male homosexuality.

            The theory holds that the same genetic factors that induce homosexuality in males, also promote fecundity (high reproductive success) in those males’ female maternal relatives. Through this trade-off, the maternal relatives’ “gay man genes,” though they aren’t expressed as such, tend to get passed to future generations in spite of their tendency to make their male inheritors gay.

          • rationality

            Yes very ‘bad’ people. The people that promoted feminism, open borders, Islm, depraved sxual agenda did not do it for altruistic purposes. They did it to undermine Western society and done rather a good job. Unless you think Obama is actually doing a good job and his (or his owners) various agendas. These agendas would not be running if ‘minority’ groups were not given special privileges such as hate crime rights….

            ….and talking utter and complete bollox. I have read some rubbish in my time but if this wasnt given protected status due to fascist hate speech laws then this nonsense would be blown out of the water. Please dont discredit yourself with this very lame excuse for evolutionary benefits as any relatives maternal success is governed by environment and looking at the declining birth rate your theory is evidently nonsense.

          • Jethro Asquith

            For a man with the moniker ‘rationality’ you are almost certainly one of the most irrational people on this message board!

          • rationality

            Its utterly rational. Its irrational the nonsense we are supposed to put up with and you see the complicity of the government, the media and big business in all of this. It is rational to unlearn the brainwashing and propaganda we have been subjected to since birth.

            Try it.

          • Jethro Asquith

            Says the brainwashed one… ha ha ha ha ha ….

          • rationality

            I engage with you and I will beat you every time but not tonight I’m going out.

            I literally cringe when I see people think they know everything but don’t have anything to back up this claim which shows your utter ignorance. Please read more news sites.

          • JCF

            ^This.

          • Bluesman1950

            “Marriage is the means for people in society to settle down and reproduce. Wit out it you wouldn’t be here”
            So unmarried people can’t have children? Have you let the Daily Mail know?

          • rationality

            It wasn’t very common that married couples didn’t have kids. Also the birth rate was sufficient as not all couples can conceive. Decisions before marriage change.

            Doesn’t justify the purposeful degrading of the status of marriag . In the recent Ireland referendum why did Democrats, big business and banks fund the Yes vote? My views reflect the manipulation and purpose of progressive policies that on the surface look all cuddly and nice. But in reality are for sinister purposes, for attacking our culture.

          • Bluesman1950

            “It wasn’t very common that married couples didn’t have kids.”
            You appear to have led a very sheltered life.

          • rationality

            30 years ago it was rare that married couples did not have kids. It is due to the malignance of our elites that the birth rate has plummeted due to a combination of factors. All by design.

            Does it not bother you that they are bringing in as many Muslins as possible? In fact why don’t you give them a hard time? Or are you a coward?

          • Bluesman1950

            Perhaps not so many want to be just baby machines and have the means to control their fertility. Shocking feminism I know!

            As it happens, I think all religions are nonsense. Fortunately Islam has nothing
            like the influence that the CoE had and still has.

          • rationality

            You are spectacularly failing to understand that people in the West have been manipulated over the decades (mass media as new religion, declining Christianity, consumerism, individualism, guilt, feminism and sxual degeneracy) in to not having children. And at the same time encouraging Muslins. That is a real problem dont you think? We will lose control of our country and it wont be Britain anymore. Conquered in other words.

            Islam has more power than the busted, moral vacuum of the C of E. I mean look at whats going on in the world!

          • Bluesman1950

            Declining christianity, feminism, individualism and the decline of sexual prejudice and bigotry are bad things?

            Christianity and Islam are two elements of religious nonsense that have exercised negative manipulation for many centuries, Islam just being the most violent at present. We would be better off without any of them.

          • rationality

            Yes they are bad things to a society though on the surface those things look unobjectional. That is the deception of progressive politics. Our society is less happy, less productive, less cohesive and due to the decline of marriage many people are not in long term relationships. That is a society in decline and that doesn’t bother you.

            Religion keeps society ticking along. You fall into the trap of secularism sneering at religion and those stupid people for believing in a man in a sky but secularism is a religion too being guided by the bullsh1t moral values of the media. The people who run the media guide us like cattle to our detriment.

          • Bluesman1950

            “The number of live births and the total fertility rate (TFR) fluctuated throughout the twentieth century with a sharp peak at the end of World War II (Figure 1). Live births peaked again in 1964 (875,972 births), but since then lower numbers have been recorded. The lowest annual number of births in the twentieth century was 569,259 in 1977. The number of births is dependent on both fertility rates and the size and age structure of the female population.”

            “In most developed countries women have been increasingly delaying childbearing to later in life, which has resulted in increases in the mean age at first birth and rising fertility rates among older women. Although fertility rates for women aged 40 and over have been rising fast, fertility among women in their forties is still considerably lower than for women in their thirties. Women aged 30-34 currently have the highest fertility of any age group.”

            Both the above from the Office for National Statistics report Births in England and Wales 2013.

            Women wanting careers. Women wanting to have babies later rather than as soon as they are out of school. Women wanting to enjoy their lives before being shackled with a family. Economic factors pushing people to work longer in order to buy their own houses. Women being able to decide that they don’t really want children at all? Are these all part of some malign elite conspiracy?

            Society has changed from the ideal pushed in the Janet and John books of the 1950s.

          • rationality

            Women have a duty to society. Women have the means to make babies and that is our design. There are a number of factors leading to women not having children and mostly cultural Marxist in undermining Western society ONLY. If this was universal across the world, fine. European people have been targeted and manipulated into not wanting children and this has been exploited with the introduction of Islam who have more children and not prone to feminism. Do you not see the manipulation, hypocrisy and how wrong this is? Most people don’t know they are being manipulated. That’s how they get away with it. Though this Trump business is amazing as he handles the duplicious elites beautifully.

            If this was ten years ago I would agree with you. Our society is too weak and needs to be repaired. You need to see how bleak our future is.

          • Bluesman1950

            “Women have a duty to society. Women have the means to make babies and that is our design.”

            Fortunately, you don’t have the right to determine women’s ‘duty’ according to your ideas. Women are not ‘designed’ to make babies. It is how our mammalian species has evolved.

            Islamic women may or may not be attracted by feminism, but they know that this primitive mediaeval cult rejects most of its tenets with consequences varying between disapproval and death in the more homicidal versions.Fortunately, my experience of Muslim women in the UK is that there is a tendency, as the generations grow up in our society, to reject the stricter ideas of the religion and often the religion itself.

            “Though this Trump business is amazing as he handles the duplicious elites beautifully.”
            Seriously? You really believe that this ludicrous rabble-rouser, who appeals to the worst of the rednecks in the USA with his bare-faced lying xenophobic misinformation, supplemented by what he obviously believes is an hysterically funny impression of a disabled reporter, handles anything “beautifully”? Now that is almost as funny as his hahairstyle!

          • rationality

            You are clearly indoctrinated and brainwashed into accepting society being artificially engineered. You are parotting what they want you to say. You just don’t understand you are being manipulated against your better interests.

            So you don’t agree with Trump on Muslins? Working together with Putin? Stopping crazy wars in the Middle East? Stopping tax breaks for big banks? All those things if enacted benefit society and are a threat to the elites so they destroy him through their own media. You should not be so easily deceived by them. Your gullibility and virtue signalling is really sad. Its so hypocritical as not to be ‘xenophobic’ (why not, every non Western country is) yet you’re very colourful in your predictable smears on Trump. It really bugs me when non Europeans go on about his hair. Such hypocritical racism. I’m intelligent, well read, travelled etc and no redneck. I support Trump, we need a leader against the parasitical elites.

            If women don’t have children then society will die. We will lose our society to third world people where they don’t believe in what you think is a woman’s right above the rights of society. Our society, as discussed earlier, has been degraded purposefully. Don’t you see this decline? Does it not bother you?

          • Bluesman1950

            “I’m intelligent, well read, travelled etc and no redneck.”
            You could have fooled me!

            “You are clearly indoctrinated and brainwashed into accepting society being artificially engineered. You are parotting what they want you to say. You just don’t understand you are being manipulated against your better interests.”
            Paranoid rants like that make you sound like so many of the conspiracy theorists who accuse any who disagree with them as brainwashed ‘sheeple’.

          • So do genuinely passive “sheeple” exist who unquestioningly are led by the nose or who are blindly follow their perceived authorities?
            Maybe “sheeple” has no valid meaning. Your thoughts?

          • Bluesman1950

            Well, it might apply to lots of religions, although it’s not a term I would use.

          • I think of religion as an also-ran… but it’s very easily manipulated by political ideology

          • I find these quotes of interest. Perhaps not as interesting as their political implications.
            “Welcome be a religion that pours into the bitter chalice of the suffering human species some sweet, soporific drops of spiritual opium, some drops of love, hope and faith.”
            – Heinrich Heine
            “Religions are, for the most part, bad—but religion is not.” – mathematician Kurt Gödel

            Sorry for the interruption

          • rationality

            Yes because 100, 000s of military age men shouting ‘Allahu Ackbar!’ coming into Europe isn’t a major concern. Anyone who suggests that this is a conspiracy is a loon such as WMD in Iraq or what happened to David Kelly.

            People like me are the sort of people you work and drink with. I am honest and happily debate with people like you because we both know I know the score. Everything is not as seems. This is a link to a website you should get to know more.

            https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2015/12/11/stanley-kubrick-confesses-to-faking-the-moon-landings/

            I am not deceiving you. Many other people are.

          • Bluesman1950

            Islamic terrorism is a problem, best dealt with by security services than another religion.

            Women having full rights as people is not a problem, rather an advance from the position in which they were held back by religiously sanctioned prejudice.

          • rationality

            Is this satire? Where have you been living these past 10 years?

            If you have such faith in the security services then why did 9/11, 7/7, Charlie Hebdo, the list goes on, happen? Though in the mean time we get the less than 100ml liquid lunacy at airports, increased surveillance on the internet, CCTV everywhere. All in the name of security. No agenda there of course.

            And you think now is some sort of paradise for women? A lot of women past 40 who didn’t have children regret it. Pensions and social security is withering in provision and will collapse. Who will look after these women when they’re older?

            As I have said before progressive politics is not for the betterment of society despite the deception of ‘full rights’ and ‘equality’. You should think about consequences.

          • Bluesman1950

            I have lived in the UK for all my 65 years, including the 30 spent as a police officer.

            Of course the security services can’t prevent every terrorist attack, as has been shown all over the world. They do, however, prevent a great number as can be seen by the numbers prosecuted in the UK for preparation of acts of terrorism.

            Some religious crusade is likely to be far less successful and even more likely to promote bloodshed.

          • rationality

            Shutting the door would be the sensible answer but they dont and will never do that. Closing mosques, deporting trouble makers etc.

            Oh yes we are looking at the Bolshevik revolution part 2 and we’re the bourgeoisie waiting to be smashed. Theres only so much that the police can do.

            Please answer me this. The police know whats going on. When push comes to shove which side will you guys take if and when it becomes a civil war?

          • Bluesman1950

            “Oh yes we are looking at the Bolshevik revolution part 2 and we’re the bourgeoisie waiting to be smashed.”

            I really can’t have a discussion with someone who takes a paranoid conspiracy theory as a given truth.

            There’s not going to be a civil war. Go and have a little lie down.

          • rationality

            Really? So yesterday’s CONSPIRACY against Front National fills you with hope?

            They will never let a party who wants to close the borders in. We have millions of people from a hostile culture coming into Europe. We have severe problems in society now and its getting worse.

            To dismiss these concerns as a ‘conspiracy theory’ you demean yourself with your inability to see the consequences of actions taking place further into the future. As people this is what we are designed to do.

          • Bluesman1950

            That was not a conspiracy, that was politics!

            Just as when I joined the Labour Party in order to vote the idiot Corbyn in and thus effectively help scuttle any chance that Labour might win the next election!

            You are seriously expecting a Bolshevik revolution and civil war? Get real.

          • rationality

            It is a conspiracy to discuss how to stop another party coming in. Conspiracies are common as ‘conspiracy to commit a crime in x’ are a charge. You should know.

            The problem is our history has been airbrushed and the reality of the Bolshevik revolution isnt quite known. It wasnt an internal Russian event. It was an international conspiracy to control the European people. This time round it is with capitalist economics using the non Europeans as the proletariat.

            I dont think much of Corbyn but you should be observing the reasons he is getting so much grief. Its a media witch hunt and its the establishments favourite tool to get compliance.

          • Bluesman1950

            A conspiracy is a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.

            The forging of agreements between different political factions in order to advance their position, or frustrate that of their opponents is just part of politics.

            Corby is getting so much grief because he is a hypocritical old style Marxist who sympathises with bodies like the IRA and Al Quaeda and would leave our country defenceless. If anyone is Bolshevik it is him and his extremist cronies. His chances of starting the next proletarian revolution are, however, rather small!

          • rationality

            By the way you thought you were being really clever by smearing the lame ‘Daily Mail reader’ slur at me. Why does a Daily Mail reader have less of a valid reason than you? By saying something like that you are saying ‘I’m a Guardian reader!’ ‘I believe anything!’ ‘I’m really gullible and don’t question the really weird things going on!’

          • Bluesman1950

            Don’t be too embarrassed. I don’t read the Guardian Lots of people read the Daily Mail.

      • rationality

        And you’re not following orders? Who developed cultural Marxist/progressive policies? Your god and leaders are Gramsci, Brohnstein (Trotsky), Marcus and Alinsky. All pushed onto us by a malignant elite using deception and manipulation.

        Not people most of us really want to know let alone pay lip service to.

        • Secular1Humanist

          “And you’re not following orders? Who developed cultural Marxist/progressive policies?”
          Who says I subscribe to either one of those mindsets. Are you one of those theists who mistakenly assumes that all atheists are communists? Or that communism is a popular thing among atheists? Please, that BS died with the ‘red scare’. Try something new.

          • Ed  

            It’s not a “scare” if it’s the truth. You do realize that the Cambridge Five actually were spies, and that McCarthy was right…..

          • Secular1Humanist

            What does any of that have to do with the claim that most, or all atheists are communists?

          • Ed  

            I’m correcting your comment. Your question is tied to your own comment.

          • rationality

            I am not a theist, I am a cultural Christian recognising how my culture is being destroyed by an army of useful idiots such as yourself.

            You wouldnt be coming out with this stuff if the gy agenda wasnt promoted by those people and their descendants.

            I agree that gys have been around and has a value in society but not to the detriment of society.

          • Secular1Humanist

            “You wouldnt be coming out with this stuff if the gy agenda wasnt promoted by those people and their descendants.”

            You claim to know so much about me, before me telling you, what I believe, and what I don’t. Is this the only way you know how to have a discussion? To put your own words into your opponent’s mouth?
            This is what is known as a straw man. And when people resort to such pettiness, I lose interest in talking with them.

          • rationality

            A) You started on me first
            B) Deep down you know you are being used to fulfil a nefarious agenda.

            We’ve had enough radical theory shoved down our throats and welcome to the backlash.

          • Secular1Humanist

            A) I started the conversation. I didn’t pretend to know your particular position. That’s why I prefaced my statement with *IF*
            B) There you go again, pretending to “know” my position without first asking. Your assumptions are baseless. Not surprising.
            Backlash? Is this what you call a backlash? This is what I call boredom. You’ve offered no constructive criticism. Only straw men. You create a faux impression of your opponent’s position and then proceed to try knock it down.
            And that I just find intellectually lazy and undeserving of any more of my time.

          • rationality

            I’m at work so I am not giving my full intellectual thought. ‘If’ is a lame caveat by the way.

            I have no problem with gy people or yourself. I have a big problem at all causes that have seen a decline in my society over the past 20 years, most definitely the people causing it. The backlash is people that have had enough of having the fraudulent morality of ‘minorities’ shoved down their throat and fighting back. As we see with the likes of Trump and Fury getting hammered for speaking out against the narrative.

            That is my main concern. There are more important issues than this.

          • Bluesman1950

            Why do homophobes always talk about a gay (or “gy” if you can’t bear to spell the whole word!) agenda being “shoved down their throat”? Is it just a Freudian slip, or are you really obsessed with what other grown ups do in private?

      • Without God, your positions on morality are mere preferences, no more or less valid than their opposites.
        You deny faith, but you cannot express yourself without borrowing the language of faith.

        • Secular1Humanist

          And with a god, they’re just orders you’re following. You’re not moral, just an obedient slave to the make believe fairy in the sky.

          “preferences”? No, they’re well thought out, reasoned responses based on limiting human suffering and promoting well being.

          When you’re just following some tyrant’s orders, the words “good” or “bad” become meaningless. Whatever your god deems “moral”, is considered moral. regardless of the consequences. Be it drowning its creation in a worldwide flood. Instructing its followers to slaughter all the amalekites, or some other tribe. Bombing abortion clinics or flying planes into skyscrapers.

          “You deny faith, but you cannot express yourself without borrowing the language of faith.”

          Nothing in my statement belongs to “faith”. The concept of morality by far predates religion. We wouldn’t have survived as a species, if it wasn’t ingrained in us through natural evolution.

          • So if I choose to obey the law of the land, I am “an obedient slave”?

          • Bluesman1950

            Hopefully you don’t rape, murder, steal, etc, mainly because, like me, you think that they are bad things to do to other people. The laws are there to deal with those who don’t have the internal controls to stop them acting badly towards others.

            The moral act morally because that is how they are. It is the immoral who need laws or gods to instil fear of wrongdoing through punishment, either in life or in some fictional afterlife.

          • 2fishypoliticians

            Where do you get these values from? You have argued that values are subjective, yet assert that rape, murder and stealing are wrong. Your argument is inconsistent.

          • Bluesman1950

            Would I want it done to me or someone I care for? If the answer is “no”, it’s probably, to me, wrong.

      • Richard Baranov

        Not quite true. Where do you think your values came from, thin air?

      • Peter

        Not sure why the editor keeps removing my post. I’ll try this way.

        http://i.imgur.com/NLsyGIw.png

    • Richard Baranov

      Thoroughly agree with you. If I were a Christian I would also follow Orthodoxy. It seems to me to be the only form of mainstream Christianity that has not lost its true Christian soul. Compared with it, Western Christianity is a pathetic thing.

      • rationality

        Absolutely. The services are beautiful. Its what happens when a religion isn’t infiltrated by people who use progressive politics to degrade it. I hate them so much to what they’ve done to the C of E and Catholicism. P*ssy shlt.

        • Bluesman1950

          What is your aversion to vowels?

    • Bluesman1950

      To demonstrate a belief in an imaginary friend which apparently then justifies your homophobia, makes your screen name of ‘Rationality’ seem more than a little ironic!

      • rationality

        Blah, blah, blah homophobia! Bigot! How many other commie/cultural Marxist/made up meaningless words can you throw at me!

        If you cared to have scrolled down you would have read that I am a cultural Christian (no imaginary friend) and I have nothing against gys, only the society destroying agenda useful idiots like you deluded morons get sucked into.

        But don’t stop the virtue signalling platitudes. Makes you feel so self-righteous!

        • Bluesman1950

          Sorry, I missed the fact that you don’t have an imaginary friend. Just an irrational fear of homosexuality. That’s cleared that up then

          • SPW

            You are not perfect – why not? The world is not perfect – why not? Why do we want to live and yet death is the inevitability. You are hurt by people and you hurt them. Mankind is capable of extraordinary acts of kindness that transcend the animal and is capable of the exact opposite. We use language! We create art and song. We strive for meaning and understanding. This is not animal. We abort. We murder out of anger. We were not made to be so. We are broken creatures – everything attests to this – in a broken world. Fear, helplessness, hopelessness in old and young alike – this is good? We have an idea of good and bad, truth and lie. Your ‘unsubstantiated’ argument is too shallow. Design and meaning and thwarted purpose and dissatisfaction chime through this world at every level. This is a fallen world. To know why, and to learn of the wider context, one has to approach Biblical scripture and let it teach…

          • Bluesman1950

            Nonsense. We are animals, just the most advanced species.

            “Design and meaning” are simply illusions imposed on reality by people too simple to understand the forces which shape our existence.

            Centuries ago it was understandable that primitive humans attributed natural phenomena to gods and demons and punishments and rewards they doled out. Today we know that lightning is not a thunderbolt from the gods, that earthquakes are the result of tectonic plate movement, that disease and famine are not punishments for ‘sins’.

            Looking for some explanation of how the Universe works in a book of Iron age fables is just atavistic superstition.

          • SPW

            I don’t mind you disagreeing with me at all – but you do nothing but betray ignorance here. Soz.

          • Bluesman1950

            So, no argument to support your position. As you say “Soz”.

          • SPW

            Sorry – did that on my phone – had to be short. I’m not going to be drawn into the usual non-sequiter ‘can’t support’ malarky; it’s very tiresome. Suffice to say your comments about superstition betray your ignorance of the Bible. I can offer many reasons/examples, but please trust me when I say that your comment is not engaging realistically with the Bible.

            For example you relegate the Bible to superstition. In the gospel when Christ was on the water the disciples were superstitious initially; they thought they were seeing a ghost. When He revisited them after the resurrection they again thought He was a ghost. The Bible is not scared to present the disciples’ initial reactions as superstitious.

            Also as to God causing calamity – again Jesus debunks this. Take for example the Tower of Siloam in Luke 13. Jesus says this disaster is nothing to do with a vengeful God. These are tiny minor ottomh examples.

            My point is your comment betrayed ignorance of the very basic angle of scripture on the question of superstition. From Aaron and the golden calf to the resurrected Jesus, the Bible shows superstition for what it is and confronts it with reality.

          • Bluesman1950

            “I’m not going to be drawn into the usual non-sequiter ‘can’t support’ malarky”
            A convenient excuse to avoid actually justifying your position.

            There is no convincing evidence that I am aware of that the bible is at all based in fact.

          • SPW

            The position I was supporting was that your response demonstrated a lack of knowledge about the Bible. As to believing the Bible – that’s another matter. I wasn’t conflating the two.

        • Bluesman1950

          “commie/cultural Marxist”

          How many other made up meaningless words can you throw at me!

          • rationality

            At least I’m not the unpaid cucked drone working for the ‘elites’ agenda.

            I don’t use vowels as to avoid the censor.

        • adamski

          So I take it you are an atheist, yet you are complaining that left-wing Christians have ‘degraded religion’?!.
          If you have rejected Christ, then you have rejected the faith.

          • rationality

            There are so many things I have unlearnt to remove the conditions I have received all my life but not believing in God is something that is very difficult to replace.

            I defend our faith to the hilt. I am not your enemy.

      • Peter

        Jesus wasn’t imaginary and his word is alive and well 2000 years later.

        If you want to dismiss his testimony, that is your choice to do so. But if you think there is no higher purpose / plane for life after we depart this mortal place, then that is your choice and i wish you well.

        • Bluesman1950

          Jesus may, like many thousands of prophets, may or may not have existed.

          It is the claim the he is a god, or part of a god, and that there is some sort of existence beyond the real world, that is unsubstantiated.

          Thanks for your good wishes and I will get on with living my life without worrying about some ‘higher plane’.

          • Peter

            The evidence that Jesus existed is overwhelming.

            The resurrection testimony, hard to believe though it is, isn’t just a story based on words but by the actions of those around at that time, especially Paul. The fact that this Pharisee and persecutor of followers of Jesus actually converted to become a follower himself says a lot more than the words in his letters.

            You’re welcome.

          • Bluesman1950

            Lots of people believe the Book of Mormon and the doctrines of Scientology.

            Followers don’t prove the truth of what they follow.

        • Mary Ann

          Jesus was probably real, and if he had been born into the 21st Century he probably would have been a Buddhist. Don’t think he would have liked the religion of Abraham.

    • Mary Ann

      And because you go to Church once a week that makes you a good person so you can be as intolerant of others as you like. Not a bicycle rider by any chance.

      • rationality

        I would never be a bicycle rider.

        Well I see a lot of media outlets being intolerant of people like me. Very intolerant and massively hypocritical. If you don’t like it, tough. Grow a spine.

        You should be grateful that people like me are around. I challenge everything and its all for the benefit it of our society. If we don’t assert ourselves we lose everything.

  • Hippograd

    The tide is certainly turning. But not in the direction Gove or Welby will be pleased by.

  • NBeale

    Welby is superb – probably the most impressive leader in the UK today.

    • Zanderz

      Not sure if this is sarcasm…

  • jmjm208

    Welby is an apostate – he refuses to teach the truth concerning homosexual perversion.

    • Guglielmo Marinaro

      Welby wasn’t asked about, nor did he did he say anything about, homosexual perversion (or heterosexual perversion either, for that matter). He merely said how he would behave in the hypothetical case of one of his children being in a normal gay relationship.

      • jmjm208

        The Bible is clear – while we should love homosexuals we canot agree with them and must urge them to repent. They can be changed if they truly repent and accept Christ as Lord and Saviour.

        • Guglielmo Marinaro

          Agree with homosexuals about what? Urge them to repent of what? Changed into whom or into what?

        • Bluesman1950

          Which bit of the bible is that? The bit that tells us we shouldn’t eat shellfish or wear mixed fibres? I hope you stick to all biblical instructions.

    • Mary Ann

      So you support Muslims in their hatred of homosexuals as well?

  • Brad.80

    I have personally always viewed religion as being very left-leaning, it believes in a large state all right. One that controls what you eat, who you sleep with, how to raise our children, what we should dress like and how we should behave.

    There is no respect for individuality, it’s about what you can do for the community, rather than what you can do for yourself.

    • Peter

      Unfortunately many are indoctrinated into thinking the way you do.

      By that I mean you actually believe “religion” is a control set and being outside of it sets you free.

      For a start there are various religions, some quite different to others so your point doesn’t make any sense.

      Next there is the curse of communism in many parts of the world – where there is little or no religious impact at all but plenty of oppression.

      Then there’s the political correct world where people end up living their lives in fear of offending someone.

      Then there’s the celebrity world – where people, especially young girls, feel they have to live up to a particular “image” and have to be a certain weight and size in order to be accepted – many of whom end up with anorexia or depression.

      Currently suicide rates are at their highest since 2001 and a quarter of the UK will in the course of a year experience mental health issues. (I often wonder if this is linked to the fact many in the UK are turning away from Christ.)

      The idea that life is any more rewarding or joyful outwith Christianity is immediately shot down in flames. It might be for some but certainly not all.

      But your last comment is quite telling:

      *There is no respect for individuality, it’s about what you can do for the community, rather than what you can do for yourself.*

      Turn that around it looks like “I’m alright Jack” and “Look after number 1”. If that’s the opposite of Christianity, then we can certainly agree on that. But I can tell you that there is indeed plenty respect for the individual.

      • Brad.80

        My comment was more or less actually aimed at one religion in particular, Islam.

        While I still believe certain denominations of Christianity are rather expansive and controlling (Mormonism for example) with regard to peoples lives, there are many others that are very much opposite (Quakers for example) and allow people to live freely.

        Islam on the other hand seeks complete and utter control of the entire lives of it’s worshipers, it certainly isn’t for free people.

        • twowolves

          I think you have missed the very revolutionary genesis of Christianity.

  • Carl Pierce

    That prayer ‘incident’ was manufactured outrage. The church knew they would get publicity by creating that silly advert. By the way we know prayer does nothing it was tested to destruction back in 1348. They should be done for false advertising.

  • milgrim

    He seems like an extremely intelligent, honest and accomplished man for someone whose entire life has been centred around talking to an imaginary friend.

  • john

    Welby is the classic CofE educated duffer. His church is in a death spiral and nothing will save it.

    • adamski

      Well, there are some encouraging signs in the CoE in terms of growth in new ‘Fresh Expressions’ of Church. The growth in these new churches is almost offsetting the trend of decline in the mainstream inherited churches, hence Welby’s comment, ‘I think the tide is turning in this country. We are seeing many churches growing…’

  • Richard Baranov

    ‘Cardinal Van Thuan spent 13 years in a communist prison after the fall of South Vietnam. He was in solitary confinement. But he led his torturers to Christ. He converted, taught, and ordained priests in prison. He breathed in the presence of Christ.’

    I notice he says absolutely nothing about the fact that the Catholic Church and Catholic government were so oppressive toward the 99% of the population that were Buddhist that they ended up setting themselves on fire, their persecution by Catholicism was so desperate. His Cardinal was no ‘saint’ but quite happy to participate in the machinery of oppression while his wonderful ‘presence of Christ’ stopped short if you were not Catholic.

    • Peter

      My friend, please do not speak of a Catholic government oppression whilst promoting the union flag because if truth were to be told, Britain has oppressed and looted many nations for many centuries.

      You could almost say “you could write a book about it” but one book wouldn’t be enough.

      Every nation and every entity has crimes of the past and many Catholics have been on the receiving end too.

      #balance

      • quotes

        Don’t end comments with #hashtags if you want to be taken seriously

      • Richard Baranov

        We are not talking about secular government and its misdeeds here. We are talking about whether it is worth taking advice from religious that have a metaphysic so pernicious it justifies oppressing and murdering people. We are talking about contemporary history here, not some distant past and the Roman Catholic government of Vietnam simply demonstrated that under all the talk of love and peace, there is an iron fist of intolerance in Catholicism that, given the opportunity, will behave as appallingly as Islam. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_crisis

        • Peter

          OK but I would suggest that any Catholic government who would commit terrible acts are not actually Catholic at all but apostates. They may actually be known as Catholics but they certainly aren’t acting according to the word of Christ. That is obvious. You must accept that surely?

          I’m certainly not going to defend many of the terrible things that have happened within the Church and I am certain that many people have used the Church and their position within the Church for their own political ends, but I in no way accept that if you find a bad apple in one place then that represents the rest of the tree all over the world.

          So I reject this notion of an “iron fist of intolerance in Catholicism” because quite simply there is nothing within my belief system or Church teaching that would want me to do anything to harm any other human being. It really is that simple.

          You want to compare it to the Quran, go right ahead but you’d be wrong.
          In their book it actually tells them to kill the apostate and the unbelievers.

          Where as a Catholic would I ever want to do that?

          Where am I told to do that?

          So, yes I accept there are many bad Catholics (lust like everyone else) and many bad things have happened but they do so of their own accord, not because their religion tells them to and definitely not due to any instruction from Jesus.

          • Bluesman1950

            “…that any Catholic government who would commit terrible acts are not actually Catholic at all but apostates.”

            No True Scotsman fallacy!

          • Richard Baranov

            Your church has killed people for centuries, it didn’t’ bother with scripture to justify it and it simply does not do to pretend that these sort of people are apostates. It runs through the history of Roman Catholicism from start to finish and it is highly disingenuous to pretend it has nothing to do with R.C. teaching that is, unless, you are going to disown the likes of St. Theresa of Avila or St. John of the Cross Both advocated the murder of “heretics”. I can throw in most of the Popes too, for that matter. The list is practically endless.

          • Peter

            As I said in my very first post, you want to talk about historical crimes but only point the finger in one direction then you’re just a hypocrite.

            You were born in Germany.

            Should I be like you and label “your country” for certain crimes and include you in it?

            “Your country sent 6 million Jews to the gas chambers with full support of the people?”

            No, that would be silly. I’ll leave that kind of thing to you.

          • tompiper

            Peter, I admire your commitment, courage, honesty and intelligence. I wish that I had just a little of yout patience.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Six million, no that’s incorrect. It was eight million.
            Ok, sent eight million Jews to the gas chambers.
            No it was ten million …
            Same old BS.

          • EUSSR 4 All!

            Right … Is your name Milner, and did you go to Northfield Comprehensive School in Billingham?! Go on!

        • Peter

          Not sure if you edited your post or perhaps I missed a part of it.

          But i’d like to respond to this:

          “To be quite blunt with you. I would take advice from the Orthodox Church but never from the Roman Catholics …. Roman Catholics are not sincere at all and are only interested in being “open” in order to convert”

          That’s an example of bigotry and intolerance right there but I respect your bluntness, I hope you will respect mine.

          Proof, if ever it was required (it isn’t) that intolerance most definitely not confined to (any one) religion.

          • Richard Baranov

            No, it is not an example of bigotry, it is a matter of fact. The Orthodox are up front and honest. ‘We are not interested in converting you because you are all wrong and will return to us eventually because we have the truth’, end of. The Catholic position is just what I have described above, it is deceit with a view to conversion, insincerity from start to finish. A hard and, I might add, a disappointing lesson, learnt from many years of experience and many years of waste dialogue.

          • Peter

            My friend, here is the lesson.

            You have heard the word and the Gospels, it is up to you whether you choose to accept or reject them.

            Matthew 10:14

            (in relation to spreading the news and converting)

            “And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words: going forth out of that house or city shake off the dust from your feet as a sign”

            That’s my totally up front and honest position.

          • Richard Baranov

            Sorry but like most Buddhists, I’m not for converting. Why should I convert to a view that Buddhists refer to as: “A primitive view about reality.” And what is it with you people that you find the necessity to convert? Is it because it silences more rational opinions and ideas. That you lack the confidence of surety in what you think Because, I have to tell you as a Buddhist, it certainly appears that way and, I would suggest it is because you hold beliefs entirely in conflict with reality.

          • Peter

            I think you misunderstood my point. I don’t care if you convert. I think to base your life (or at least try to because it’s a hard act to follow) on the teachings of Jesus is the right thing to do, but it’s your choice.

            Jesus said right from the start – follow me and become fishers of men. His whole ministry was to convert people and his instructions were for his followers to do the same.

            However you obviously didn’t understand the meaning of the passage I quoted.

            “And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words: going forth out of that house or city shake off the dust from your feet as a sign”

            Go and tell people the message but if they don’t want to hear it, leave and shake the dust from your feet. In other words, you’ve told them – they decided to reject it, move on.

            Regarding your last part – no I don’t lack the confidence of what I think. But I think a lot of atheists do because it seems to me that the people who want to do the converting now are atheists, not Christians.

            If Jesus’ message was simply of peace then he’d be hailed as a hero to every nation but because he comes with a stark warning, many atheists hate him or his Church or his testimony. It comforts many people to believe it’s “all a fairytale” or talk about “imaginary friends” because, indeed, this helps them with their insecurity that what Jesus said might actually be true.

            I’m quite happy with my beliefs but do admit there is much (very much) we do not know about and probably never will.

            So for the last time, try and understand this if you can, I ain’t trying to convert you. You’ve heard the Gospel, you reject it, i’m shaking the dust off my feet. OK?

          • Mary Ann

            Matthew 10:15 KJV: Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgement, than for that city.

          • Soho-Knights

            There is a difference between the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church. The Orthodox Church is unchanging. It is there to worship God our Father and not! to worship the whims of man.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        The Union Flag. Aka the butcher’s apron.

        • EUSSR 4 All!

          Is your name Milner, and did you go to Northfield Comprehensive School in Billingham?!

    • Terry Field

      The Cardinal is obviously a million miles away from the Church of England.

  • William Brown

    There is nothing, absolutely nothing, about religious orthodoxy which is in any way refreshing. It is the unflinching belief in orthodoxy which ultimately resulted in Hilary Benn’s speech, to which this “hunched figure in the gallery”, was seen to occasionally nod “in silent and respectful appreciation”. It really is time to grow up.

    • Soho-Knights

      And this is your opinion. Research Orthodox Christianity and you may be surprised?

  • mumble

    the country’s cinema owners, who had banned a 30-second advert in favour of the Lord’s Prayer on the basis that a call to forgive our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us was dangerously inflammatory and might cause unacceptable distress.

    I assume that, like universities, cinema owners are under pressure to provide “safe spaces” free from “microaggression”.

    Or maybe the ad failed to provide a sufficiently comprehensive “trigger warning”?

    • Mary Ann

      Cinemas have always banned religion, most of their customers don’t want it pushed down their throats, if you want to listen to the Lord’s prayer you can always go to church. Or do as Jesus did, God is all around you, nothing to stop you saying it when you feel like it, although in a public place it makes more sense to say it to yourself.

    • Bluesman1950

      If cinemas don’t show religious propaganda, I won’t come into your churches and eat a bucket of popcorn.

  • Nexialist

    If the CofE is in an unstoppable death spiral caused by multiculturalist reductionism, i.e. we are all God’s children, who must turn the other cheek to our Muslim overlords, and the Catholic Church in a death dive into the abyss of child abuse and peeeedofilia, then where is the iron-jawed, muscular faith of our time, a faith which can confront Islam on the battlefield and win? Take a look at what is happening in Russian Fed: 200 plus new R Orthodox churches being built, a bulwark against islamic inssurgency, no mosques, no madrassas, no Muslim schools, no sharia zones, no sharia courts, etc. only prayer mats on the ice. Verily, Putin knows how to confront and manage the RoP and its supremacist agenda. No space, no special privileges or entitlements, nowhere to spread the cult of death.

    • Bluesman1950

      The “unstoppable death spiral” of the CoE is more likely due to far fewer people being taken in by religious nonsense, that the strengthening of other superstitions.

      • twowolves

        My church is full on Sundays. Guess you live in a city.

        • SPW

          My two churches are full too – and I live in a city. So much so that we have in one of them had to double up services now for the last 8 years. The congregation is 75% student out of around 500+. Fairly traditional service, no gimmicks – just God’s word taught.

          • twowolves

            fantastic news. Thank you for the update.

          • Mary Ann

            Why do Christians want to recruit more Christians?

          • twowolves

            Read the New Testament and find out for yourself.

          • Bluesman1950

            I had to when I went to a Catholic school. That and the rest of the Bible is what left me an atheist

          • Mary Ann

            I decided that god sounded too much like Father Christmas in school assembly.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Santa teaches kids one thing: Adults lie.

          • Ken Campbell

            i’ll tell you what. I’ll read the New Testament (again) and you read a good atheist book of my choosing.

          • twowolves

            I answered a question in good faith with a book reference, I’m not trying to proselytize. If you have read the NT as you claim you could answer that question, its a cornerstone of the faith.

          • Ken Campbell

            Actually I jumped in to the wrong spot. The question was from Mary Ann

          • GoJebus

            It, plus the OT are the only two cornerstones of the faith. No wonder the building is falling down; it’s only got two corners, both of them seriously askew.

          • Soho-Knights

            Because we have one Father. As such you are my sister. Why wouldn’t I want to share with you the Good News (Gospel)?

          • Ken Campbell

            That is an interesting perspective. However, you may note that when it is an atheist suggesting that you give up theism, it is describes as ‘pushing atheism’. Funny that!

          • King Kibbutz

            Not funny really. We all do it. It’s just that atheists get really nasty, really early.

          • Ken Campbell

            Not me….I’m a rational atheist. If someone wants to be rational, I’m always up for discussion

          • King Kibbutz

            Keep the faith.

          • King Kibbutz

            You hear a piece of music that makes you feel great, you want to share it with others, pass-on the pleasure.

          • Bluesman1950

            Good luck to you, but you are still, as churchgoers, in a tiny minority of the population.

          • Tom Burroughes

            I am off to a service in Pimlico this weekend. It will be packed and not simply because it is Christmas. I think there is an upswing of interest in Christian belief and even unbelievers who are concerned about moral relativism will be encouraged, I think. I also take the view – shared even by Richard Dawkins – that Anglicanism is part of the mental heritage of an English person. I feel this country, if it loses that, will be greatly diminished.

            Bgrds.

        • Bluesman1950

          I live in a village, but don’t go into the church so I wouldn’t know how many do. I do know that, nationally, CoE churches are packed out with less than 2% of the population.

  • Terry Field

    ‘The temptations of religious and political extremism also needed to be countered with a more robust ideological response, and supporters of Islamist extremism, in particular in states such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia, had to be confronted.’

    Truly a fantasy sentence. Britain under Hague was hand in glove with Al Jazzy and Quatar in spreading the Muslim brotherhood message, which group has spread radical murder across vast swathes of territory. We provided trucks to Syria that were then third-party fitted with heavy machine guns -and this sort of cynical manipulation is continuous. Britain has watched ISIS attack Assad until recently with quiet indifference. The murderous condition of the levant has been caused in large measure by the left wing ideologues who peddled the i.e. that the ‘threat was overseas’, and domestic muslims are quiescent. Tell that to those slaughtered on 7/7.
    The monstrous tacit acceptance of dangerous islam by leftwing clergy until recently is truly nauseating. The hypocrisy of these dreadful people is beyond breathtaking.

  • sebastian2

    If you ever want to see classic affronted piety and the silent, snooty indignation that stiffens cassocks, try telling a mainstream CofE minister that mohammedism is NOT a religion, let alone one of peace.

    It’s priceless.

    • Shorne

      What is it then? I’m sure we will get an authoritative answer despite the fact that there is no such word as ‘mohammedism’
      and the obsolete word Mohammedanism is defined as ‘the doctrines and practices of the religion founded by the prophet Muhammad and set forth inthe Koran

      • sebastian2

        Well there is now. Just as once there was no word like internet – but there is now. So forget about semantics. Words are just there to mean things that need to be meant.

        As for what it is – opinions differ. Mohammedans believe the quran is the infallible word of al’lah (the god) delivered to a temporarily reclusive illiterate, though sharp, trader, (an employee), by an angel (Gabriel), un-witnessed, in a cave, in Arabic (though possibly something closer to Aramaic). It cannot be changed or “reformed”. It cannot be challenged. You cannot leave it if you either opt in to it or are born into it. …….. you will know the rest. Mohammed, by the way, is revered as the perfect man. He is an idol. In this sense, mohammedism is idolatrous.

        It was years before it was composed from fragments and memorised accounts.

        Other see it as a triumphalist ideology – a manifesto for conquest, subjugation and the appropriation of territory and wealth. They see it as contradictory. They see it as violent in its most “theologically” authoritative sections. They see it as a compilation of plagiarised texts (psalm 94: “For in Your sight a thousand years are like yesterday that passes by, like a few hours of the night.” – quran chap Al Hajj v 47 “And verily, a day with your Lord is as a thousand years of what you reckon.”) from existing ideas and beliefs of which there were many at the time. There’s little about it, some will argue, that is original. There may have been several versions. Some question the status of al’lah – whose word this is supposed to be – as the god of Abraham, seeing it instead as perhaps a tribal lunar deity (who had three daughters) from mohammed’s own community, with the hajj and the kaaba as remnants of those ancient, pagan ceremonies where, among other things, stones were worshipped (There’s a stone set in the kaaba’s eastern corner that devout mohammedans stretch to touch and kiss. Orthodox Jews may describe mohammedans as “stone worshippers”.). Others still, speculate on the hidden presence of a hindu linga buried deep within this cube.

        In general, there is much to question and investigate for the truth’s sake – but this is often prohibited, especially if doubt is then cast on the entire matter. This can invite violence or assassination. Under sharia, it is judicial execution.

        As for IS and the RoP – mohammedans are in chronic disagreement, and this is because their so called sacred texts are saying both this and that. One thing and another. As such, it is entirely possible to cite quranic authority for what IS does and in this sense, they are “real” mohammedans who take quite literally the quran’s ordinances and who follow, as literally, mohammed’s example.

        Whether or not it is a religion will always be a matter of opinion I guess but there are many who see it as an ideology – this is because there is no demarcation or separation between the “religion” and all aspects of personal and civic or community life. It tells you what to do and how to do it. It is intensely political. Clerics rule. It therefore may be seen as an ideology masquerading as a religion and claiming deference, respect and much exemption from critical and other thinking on “religious” grounds. We are foolish to grant it such.

        • Shorne

          So it is a religion as far as its adherents think which is what matters, though no doubt as you think you can make up words you probably think you can make up facts.

          • sebastian2

            Maybe. Maybe not. In any event, it has to be worth believing in, and open to scrutiny and intelligent critical thinking. Mohammedism fails these common-sense tests.

            It’s impossible to make up facts. They either are, or are not.

          • Shorne

            No religion is open to intelligent critical thinking.

          • Mary Ann

            Buddhism isn’t too bad at least it doesn’t have a deity, although re-incarnation is pushing it a bit too far.

          • sebastian2

            Those that are not will find themselves opened – eventually.

          • Soho-Knights

            When the Koran is academically and critically examined, and of course the prophet himself, it is obvious that there is nothing!!! in the Koran that had not been said in the Holy Bible. The behaviour of the prophet is the blue print for all that is going on today. The dress code of the men is exactly that which christian ascetics have been wearing for hundreds of years before the prophet was even borne. The childish innocence that leads its followers to believe that they will receive sexual rewards (72 eternal virgins for the men and dark skinned slaves with large mother of pearl saucer like eyes for the women) is so sad.

          • Shorne

            Yes, the Virgin Mary is mentioned more times in the Koran than in the Bible. Without wishing to trivialise the matter I’ve always been puzzled by the fact that the three religions that have their origins in the Middle East make such an issue of women’s hair being covered, I include Christianity because of the traditional Nuns habit

          • freddiethegreat

            Because in the Roman world at least, prostitutes ‘advertised’ by uncovering their hair (so you could get a good look at what was on offer).

          • rob232

            I believe ( writing from memory) that it was St. Paul who said that women’s hair should always be covered in church and for that reason women were required to wear hats or scarves in church.

          • Hamburger

            Not only that, Jesus is mentioned more than Mohammad.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Any criticism of Islam in the grounds of illogicality invites similar criticism of Christianity for the same reason.

          • Soho-Knights

            Jack you are so right! And I would defend your right to disagree! As we all know, Christianity has been ridiculed and disparaged for centuries. Christ has been ridiculed and used as a blasphemy. Islam denies Christ, and yet true Christians turn the other cheek, and would be the first to help the opposition if necessary. Can you not see the difference here. In Islam there is Islam where there is paradise and there is Islam where there is war! We live in Islam where there is jihad!

          • rob232

            Sad? Certainly more imaginative than playing a harp for all eternity!

          • King Kibbutz

            By that measure, media and political claims that the acts of ISIS ‘are nothing to do with Islam’, cannot stack up. According to your scheme, if ISIS think they follow that religion, then that’s what matters.

        • Soho-Knights

          Excellent! The law of abrogation must be used when reading. An eminent High Court judge once said that if? Islam stood in the dock before him, he would send it straight to prison. For lying, inciting and duplicity! The key is the prophet, what was he like? read the hadiths!

          • sebastian2

            That’s one cool High Court judge.

    • Jacobi

      Islam is a heresy. It is a pagan/Judeo/Christian heresy dreamt up by a deranged mind.

      • sebastian2

        That’s an interesting perspective. Thanks. Add to that its militancy and global imperial delusions. It then becomes a bellicose, absolutist heresy intolerant of doubt or challenge.

        This is dangerous.

        • Jacobi

          I has been a bellicose absolutist imperial heresy from the start in the seventh century when it nearly overan all of Europe, eliminated without trace the great North African Christian civilisation of Hippo, occupied Spain for hundreds of years assaulted Europe again 1453, Constantinople, 1565, Malta, 1571, Lepanto and Vienna, 1683.
          It is now back again!

          • sebastian2

            You’ve got it. And there was what’s now Afghanistan (formerly Buddhist), and Northern India (now Pakistan) which was predominantly Hindu. Over-run. Places of worship desecrated. Slaughter and forced conversion, or jizya.

            And they call it the religion of peace.

      • Hamburger

        It certainly was regarded as a heretical Christian cult at the beginning, and theologically speaking must be seen as on today. There cannot be two truths.

        • Jacobi

          It remains as such today.

          • Hamburger

            It does not see itself as such today and it’s theology is so diverged from Christianity that I would not describe it as such. Also the question of Christian heresy has become very muddled to an outsider. What is heretical to a Roman Catholic is not necessarily heretical to an Orthodox Christian.

          • Jacobi

            The theological differences between Catholicism and Orthodoxy are small. Resolving these is where the future of Christianity lies, however sensitive the issues!

          • Hamburger

            True, not as small as between Anglicanism and Catholicism but smaller than the difference to Lutheran or Calvinist Protestantism. We must keep working on solutions.

    • Scorpion DeRooftrouser

      I agree. It was a weapon for Prince Mohammed to regain his patrimony.

  • Nexialist

    In reply to Bluesman1950, yes I agree to some extent about the spread of public scepticism towards ‘religious nonsense’ in a far more secular “BakeOff’ age of overconsumption and media manipulation. But conversely, more and more people are filling the churches these days, it seems, and Islam continues to attract many middle class leftie nutters and depressives, who seek the certainty of their own submission and an intolerant grievance culture to destroy the decadent West. Where is the political figure in the UK who will light a fire under the established churches and get them to wage war on Islam in defence of Western values?

    • Bluesman1950

      “But conversely, more and more people are filling the churches these days, it seems…”

      Actually, all church attendance in the UK has been declining steadily for decades, despite a rising population, from just over 5 million in 1980 to less than 3.5 million now.

      It is the security services we need to fight religious extremism, not another religion.

      • Meepestos

        “church attendance in the UK has been declining”
        And in Canada also so much so that many Churches have been turned into condos. offices, and galleries. : )

        • Bluesman1950

          There is a very nice restaurant in Godalming which was a church, now put to good use.

      • southerner

        And what will we use to fight the ever-declining moral and cultural decline and Islamification of our society? More spooks?

      • Scorpion DeRooftrouser

        Attendance is increasing in our church. I think the Archbishop is right – a tide has turned. Historically , periods of great liberalism have been followed by a swing back to puritanism. I sincerely hope that doesn’t happen, but I suspect it might.

  • john

    I am already suffering from palpitations ahead of the waterfall of unctuous religiosity we will be force fed by the CofE as Mrs W passes on to her just reward and King Chuck 1st and his lovely Queen are anointed.

    • King Kibbutz

      Poor you. Take a pill.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      King Chuck III.

  • sebastian2

    “The temptations of religious and political extremism also needed to be countered with a more robust ideological response, and supporters of Islamist extremism, in particular in states such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia, had to be confronted.”

    Well ………. yes. So what IS the robust ideological response to the so called “final testament” and its implacable slaves? The following might give a lead:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsyZ0WgrwPY

  • Nathan Crofton-Bond

    The CoE advert was not “banned.” The advertising agency chose not to transmit the advert based on their policy of not supporting religious and political ideals. The whole fiasco has been entirely blown out of proportion and the CoE has used it to their advantage. They knew exactly what they were doing when they posted the video on YouTube.

    • samhol

      Good on them

    • King Kibbutz

      At last then: Christian clergy doing what needs to be done to survive!

  • Jacobi

    Evil is a reality. Islam, particularly the Saudi/Sunni/ISIL version of it, which as we see now includes Turkey, is evil. As such I think it cannot be defeated only suppressed for a while. That is our objective in the war in which we are now engaged.

    And good for Welby. Christianity, thanks to the Islamophile “Luvvies” is increasingly under assault, not just from Islam, but from Secular society. As a Catholic I see the silence of the Catholic Church as deplorable, so Welby, splendid!

    And this silence must stop. Christianity is one of the essential four props of our Western Civilisation. If it goes, Islam and universal suffering prevail!

    • pobjoy

      The silence must stop, but there is a reluctance in the Vatican to end it. The Vatican is ‘brother’ to Eastern Orthodoxy, and Orthodoxy shares significant religious similarities with Islam, fasting being the most obvious example. More importantly, all three faiths began as types of volkskirche, identification of society with believers. That is not the polity that made Europe what it is today, the springboard for prosperity, health and luxury wherever it exists in the world, in contrast with medieval conditions. So, while Islam needs to be resisted because it seems incapable of change, perhaps Catholics need to discover just what it is about their faith that makes it a necessity for them. Are they Catholics because they genuinely rely on the certainty of divinely inspired teaching of the Vatican? Or are they Catholics merely because they dislike Protestantism?

      • Jacobi

        You must not lump the three together. Islam appeared more than six hundred years after Christianity. That is like going back to circa 1400, lets say the death of Richard II, a long time. Islam has nothing to do with whatever Western Civilisation is.
        And Catholics are not inspired by the Vatican. It is the other way round. The Vatican reflects the inspiration of Christ. As for Protestants they are just Christians who have got a few things wrong – but they are Christians and therefore of Western thought.

        • pobjoy

          You must not lump the three together.

          See the precise reason why they should be lumped together, regarded as mere variations on an outdated theme. That sort of thugs’ language is that of the Paris attackers, too. It is precisely the contemptibly violent reaction that induces people to think that Catholics should be turned out of Europe, along with Muslims.

          Islam appeared more than six hundred years after Christianity.

          More lies, more thuggery. The poster ‘Jacobi’ knows very well that European civilisation could never have developed while feudal polity, that was developed even by the Roman Empire, and of which Catholicism was an integral part, remained in place. Europe is built on the certainty that papalism is falsity; one cannot say that deity is represented on earth by one person and simultaneously disregard that person. Three hundred years after Christianity began, Constantine and his advisers realised the ‘necessity’ of recognising it, because persecution for two and half centuries had not worked. So the West had its uniform, false religion, by command, later dividing into ‘Orthodoxy’ and ‘Catholicism’. And that vile desire for an end of democracy resides in the vile mind of ‘Jacobi’, whose interests remain purely carnal, and parasitic. Other Catholics should disregard his views, and consider very carefully how they should proceed, because things will not be the same in the future.

          How to explain Islam? Arabs looked west, and saw how effective brute force could be in suppressing the good and the honest in society. So they devised their own expression of it. Open your eyes, decide whose side you are on, reader, and take the consequences.

          • Jacobi

            I am not talking about papalism, whatever that is, but the Truth of the Risen Christ.
            And don’t be so daft, well I had better say naïve or prejudiced. Constantine was a hard man, his own boss.
            I shall, leave rude expressions to such as you, showing your true colours, more quickly than I thought you would. But then such as you always do sooner or later when confronted with Truth.
            Ta ta !

          • pobjoy

            I am not talking about papalism,

            Thugs never like to be called thugs. Bullies are always cowards.

            but the Truth of the Risen Christ.

            That truth which totally ruined your early plan to screw as many people as possible. You’ve never got over the shock. And that’s just while you’re in your present body. You ain’t seen nuthin’ yet.

          • Jacobi

            Now , now, pobjoy, you are getting a bit abusive so calm down and stop being so silly.
            I like your word “vile” I mean it rhymes with so many others so am composing a little ditty about you. To the tune ” and the band played on “, I think. Now “thug” is quite good too, but one at a time!.
            OUT!

          • pobjoy

            Abusive? That’s a bit rich, from one whose criminal outfit would be closed down if justice was administered. In fact, poster, you could be arrested at any time for incitement to violence. So mind your manners, or it might happen.

          • Jacobi

            And threats, oh dear, that had to come didn’t it?. Applies both ways you know, rights and equal opposite rights! We could all end up together, you, me and the Archbishop! That would be fun?
            Now this time definitely switching channel, so OUT.

          • pobjoy

            threats

            Where? Another so predictable, vile, thuggish lie.

          • Hamburger

            Your view of European history, as well as the history of the early church is simplistic.

          • Soho-Knights

            Your views are pathetic and bigoted! You are the first person that I have said this to. You have no understanding of the Christian faith, or the cut and paste job that is Islam and used by the self proclaimed prophet for his own benefit. You are a danger to society!

          • pobjoy

            You have no understanding of the Christian faith

            Then I await your sagacity.

      • Hamburger

        Your last sentence is silly.

        • Soho-Knights

          Thank you! I did not want to start on him!

    • sebastian2

      This is broadly correct. I’m sure you, like me, recognise that there are many good mohammedans, but still regard that idolatrous cult as highly dubious indeed and must be resisted, challenged, and show up as the flawed and belligerent doctrine it is. It is not perfect. It is highly imperfect.

      Its greatest fallacy is its claim to perfection. It is up to us to unmask it as otherwise.

      • Jacobi

        Agreed. Some of my best friend are Muslims, or at least Almadiyyas, if I remember correctly. I knew them well when I was in Pakistan. They have since moved to the UK. I wonder why?

      • Soho-Knights

        Well put!

  • “Most recently, he directed a blast of controlled derision towards the country’s cinema owners, who had banned a 30-second advert in favour of the Lord’s Prayer on the basis that a call to forgive our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us was dangerously inflammatory and might cause unacceptable distress.”

    Obviously such persons shouldn’t be allowed in a cinema, nor anywhere else in a public setting, but should be swaddled in a protective binding garment at the closest asylum for the insane! Interestingly, during the early Church Christians themselves behaved mentally unhinged. In one account a mob of three-thousand Christians marched to the Roman Governor of Asia’s residence and demanded that the governor martyr them! How times change, now it’s the atheists who behave mentally unhinged at the sound of mere words!

    The following is a discovery I made in April regarding the fake collapse of the USSR, and what that fraudulent collapse proves about the institutions of the West…

    When Soviet citizens were liberated from up to 74 years of horrific Marxist-atheist oppression on December 26, 1991 there were ZERO celebrations throughout the USSR, proving (1) the ‘collapse’ of the USSR is a strategic ruse; and (2) the political parties of the West were already co-opted by Marxists,* otherwise the USSR (and East Bloc nations) couldn’t have gotten away with the ruse.

    ZERO celebrations, as the The Atlantic article inadvertently informs us…

    http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2011/12/20-years-since-the-fall-of-the-soviet-union/100214/

    Notice, however, the Kremlin staged anti-government demonstrations that took place in Russia (and other Soviet republics) in the years immediately preceding the ‘collapse’, yet ZERO celebrations after the ‘collapse’!

    For more on this discovery see my blog…

    https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/

    The above means that the so-called ‘War on Terror’ is an operation being carried out by the Marxist co-opted governments of the West in alliance with the USSR and other Communist nations, the purpose being to (1) destroy the prominence of the West in the eyes of the world, where the West is seen (i) invading nations without cause; (ii) causing chaos around the globe; and (iii) killing over one-million civilians and boasting of torture; (2) close off non-Russian supplies of oil for export, thereby increasing the price of oil, the higher price allowing oil exporting Russia to maintain economic stability while she modernizes and increases her military forces; (3) destroy the United States Armed Forces via the never-ending ‘War on Terror’; the ultimate purpose of the aforementioned to (4) bring about the demise of the United States in the world, opening up a political void to be filled by a new pan-national entity composed of Europe and Russia (replacing the European Union), a union ‘From the Atlantic to Vladivostok’; which will (5) see the end of NATO.

    The political parties of the West have long been co-opted by Marxists, otherwise the USSR (and East Bloc nations) couldn’t have gotten away with the ‘collapse’ of vanguard Communism ruse.

    Now you know how Bolshevik Russia survived in 1917; how the West ‘lost’ China to the Communists in 1949; why the Eisenhower administration turned a deaf ear to the anti-Communist Hungarian uprising in 1956; why the Eisenhower administration in 1959 was indifferent to the Castro brothers’ Communist fidelity, actually used the CIA to overthrow the Batista government; why the Nixon administration abandoned Taiwan for Communist China, and signed treaties/provided economic aid to the USSR; why the Nixon administration refused to tell the American People that over 50% of North Vietnamese NVA regiments were actually Chinese People’s Liberation Army soldiers (attired in NVA uniforms, and proving that the Sino/Soviet Split was a ruse, as KGB defector Major Anatoliy Golitsyn told the West back in 1962), thereby (1) ensuring the Vietnam War would be lost; (2) destroying the prominence of the United States abroad and at home; (3) breeding distrust between the American people and their government; and (4) securing Communist victories in Southeast Asia. Working in the background within the political parties of the United States and Great Britain were Marxist agents doing their best to (1) ensure the survival of Communist nations when they popped up; and (2) sabotage any policies that would bring down a Communist nation. That’s why after the fake collapses of the East Bloc nations and USSR there was no mandatory Western verification process to ensure the Communists weren’t still in control.

    Now you know why not one political party in the West requested verification of the collapse of the USSR, and the media failed to alert your attention to this fact, including the ‘alternative’ media. When determining whether the ‘former’ USSR is complying with arms control treaties, what does the United States do to confirm compliance? Right, the United States sends into the ‘former’ USSR investigative teams to VERIFY compliance, yet when it’s the fate of the West that’s at stake should the collapse of the USSR be a ruse, what does the United States do to confirm the collapse? Nothing!

    The fraudulent ‘collapse’ of the USSR (and East Bloc) couldn’t have been pulled off until both political parties in the United States (and political parties elsewhere in the West) were co-opted by Marxists, which explains why verification of the ‘collapse’ was never undertaken by the West, such verification being (1) a natural administrative procedure (since the USSR wasn’t occupied by Western military forces); and (2) necessary for the survival of the West. Recall President Reagan’s favorite phrase, “Trust, but verify”.

    It gets worse–the ‘freed’ Soviets and West also never (1) de-Communized the Soviet Armed Forces of its Communist Party officer corps, which was 90% officered by Communist Party members; and (2) arrested/de-mobilized the 6-million vigilantes that assisted the Soviet Union’s Ministry of the Interior and police control the populations of the larger cities during the period of ‘Perestroika’ (1986-1991)!

    There can be no collapse of the USSR (or East Bloc nations) without…

    Verification, De-Communization and De-mobilization.

    The West never verified the collapse of the USSR because no collapse occurred, since if a real collapse had occurred the West would have verified it, since the survival of the West depends on verification. Conversely, this proves that the political parties of the West were co-opted by Marxists long before the fraudulent collapse of the USSR, since the survival of the West depends on verification.

    Conclusion:

    The West will form new political parties where candidates are vetted for Marxist ideology, the use of the polygraph to be an important tool for such vetting. Then the West can finally liberate the globe of vanguard Communism.

    ————————-

    * The failed socialist inspired and controlled pan-European revolutions that swept the continent in 1848(1) taught Marxists and socialists a powerful lesson, that lesson being they couldn’t win overtly,(2) so they adopted the tactic of infiltration of the West’s political parties/institutions. In the case of the United States…(continue reading at DNotice)…

    https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/now-you-see-me-now-you-don-t

  • mistermcfrugal

    “But, I challenged him, conscious of what many evangelicals believe,
    wouldn’t you say to them that while you love them, their relationship
    was sinful or inappropriate?

    ‘I would say, “I will always love you, full stop. End of sentence,
    end of paragraph.” Whatever they say, I will say I always love them.’”

    OH, so if your kid asks if you will bless his marriage to a homosexual, you won’t answer the question, you’ll just say, “I love you” and refuse to say not one more word.

    How do you get high profile religious jobs and not have to have any beliefs yourself?

    • dupledge

      And we all know silence is acquiescence and acceptance of
      the crime/sin

    • Mark M

      And surely, if he has bothered to read the bible (I sometimes wonder nowadays), he’d know his kids wouldn’t make it into heaven if they are committing biblical sins. Wouldn’t that depress him?

  • Giuseppe Cappa

    As Christians we love homosexual as every other human being, and it is our moral duty to tell them homosexual acts are wrong [Rom 1:24]. Either St Paul is wrong or Justin Welby is wrong — tertium non datur. Between the two, I would know which one to follow.

    • GoJebus

      What a tiny field of candidates.

      In the UK
      h*mose*uals (to get past the Spectator censor) were still being executed in the 19th century, imprisoned up
      until the 1950’s and discriminated against for many decades
      subsequently, all with the sacred blessing of the of the Christian
      congregation. Even today post-Equality Act, the impact of that
      religion-inspired era of intolerance continues to make itself felt, and
      under an unreformed Islam you can catch a glimpse of how Christianity
      was not so long ago.

      Well Giuseppe, I hope you are proud of your
      Christian heritage. You just keep reminding people how moral you are
      while you drum into small children that without Jebus they’ll burn in
      h*ll forever (and the many other atrocities the Bible teaches).

      People
      ought to be reminded of how wildly the Christian moral compass swung
      when the law allowed you to get away with it, and understand why your
      hideous book ought to be consigned now to a museum and your beliefs to
      history.

      • Giuseppe Cappa

        It seems you are emotionally against God and Christianity. Pointing at those who called themselves Christians but did not follow the Gospel does not disprove Christianity. Why don’t you set your hostile feelings aside and check, for instance [Gal 3:28; Mk 12:30-31; Mt 5:44]? Blessings.

        • GoJebus

          Well since we are cherry picking from your favourite book why don’t you remind yourself of Num 31:17-18 (and countless others). Unfortunately for you, your golden, happy-clappy cornfield is on closer inspection racked with blight.

          • Giuseppe Cappa

            Apart from the fact that the teachings of Jesus are more than what you find in the Old Testament [Mt 5:17], you need to read the Bible with the right background knowledge and in context. There is no molasses in Christianity — see St Bernard of Clairvaux’s “De laude novae militiae”, for instance. Have a Merry Christmas.

          • GoJebus

            As I said, like picking cherries out of a cow pat.

          • Giuseppe Cappa

            As I said, you seem to nurture an irrational hatred towards God. I modestly suggest that you look into yourself first [Jas 1:18-21]. Blessings.

          • GoJebus

            Not an irrational hatred of God as it doesn’t exist except as a fiction created by man, but a rational response to the professing of a belief in monstrous (e.g. Deu 13:2-18 et al) sham deities via a text that is so full of contradictions my cat can point them out (and my goldfish, although his memory fades badly).

            Modesty will get you nowhere.

          • Giuseppe Cappa

            Insulting believers in God will get you nowhere.

          • Mark M

            Religion might well be man-mad, but it is very stupid to say that God is man made. None of us really no where we came from or what is out there.

          • GoJebus

            Not stupid, rational. If you invent a god and then decide to pray to it,
            that may be seen as slightly demented. In opposition to that a search
            for the truth which does not immediately propose a deity is rational (in
            my opinion anyhow). I ask you, do you say the pixies stole your watch,
            or do you turn the house upside down looking for it first? I guess you
            might go with the pixies if your father told you you’d burn in h ell if
            you didn’t

  • MaSek12

    Welby is a lunatic and belongs in an isolation unit in a mental asylum.

    • Steve Challenger

      We no longer have “insane asylums” and in the most restrictive psychiatric hospitals we have there are no isolation units.

  • Ancient Mariner

    Archbishop Welby is an impostor.

  • GoJebus

    ” ‘No, because in the clash of ideas, Christians believe in the
    sovereignty of God. We are confident in the Victory of God which is seen
    — surpassing evil — in the events of the Cross, of the Resurrection and
    the Ascension.’ ”

    There we have it ladies and gentlemen, this is a man who believes that a Y chromosome-missing, male (curiously) child of a deity born to a virgin was crucified, restored to life, and rose into the sky to sit with Zeus. He gets his only steer on this matter from a widely discredited, and grotesquely barbaric and anachronistic book almost certainly made up by carbon-based fellow beings.

    This ridiculous hogwash is also believed by many of the front bench of the ruling party in this country (Gove, Cameron et al) and dripped into our children’s heads via state-funded faith schools. In addition, 26 of the mitre-wearing nincompoops sharing the same beliefs in our unelected second chamber are free to interfere in our political system simply by virtue of their religious affiliation and rank.

    I’m happy for anyone to believe this tripe if they want to in their own homes and in their own special clubs and vigorously defend their right to talk about it, advertise it and offend me with it. I am deeply against the purveyors of the tripe being allowed to influence our laws and infect our children’s minds with it.

    • Hamburger

      I hope that you are not assuming that a world filled with atheists would be better. There is nothing more ridiculous than a person who believes that they are the pinnacle of all.

      • GoJebus

        Yes I am, and that is definitely where we’ll end up as we further evolve, though not in my lifetime, unfortunately. This is about developing a more rational world view where people have ceased to murder each other, or sneer at each other, or preoccupy themselves with people’s s*x organs, food, dress and behaviour in the name of one of many competing, fictitious Gods. Religious peoples have nothing good to offer the world that the non-pious cannot also offer, but the former also seem to thrive on death and witchcraft – while advertising love and peace.

        • Hamburger

          I cannot remember who said ‘people who stop believing in God start to believe in any old rubbish. ‘ He was right. Didn’t we try, at the beginning if the 20th century to build a rational world? It went a bit wrong. We are not rational creatures.

          • dupledge

            Chesterton

          • Hamburger

            Thank you.

          • GoJebus

            “I cannot remember who said ‘people who stop believing in God start to believe in any old rubbish. ‘ He was right”

            Well if it was G.K. Chesterton, then hardly surprising given the times he was writing in and the fact that he was erm…a Catholic. He was held up as a genius of his time, but having just read his ‘Why I am a Catholic’, I can see that there was a part of him in thrall to fairies, just as he was reputedly in thrall to Ouija boards and the talking dead (like religious indoctrination – widely discredited as charlatanism of the worst kind).

            And you are correct, there are a lot of irrational, fearful, brainwashed people out there who still cling to the fairy myths, but living without them is possible. All that’s required is to prevent priests and pious individuals getting hold of our children before they’ve had a chance to think for themselves and block them from teaching tripe as truth. In addition, we must remove the priests and the pious from our politics and our tax payer funded education system.

          • Hamburger

            You still won’t supress our innate superstitions.

          • Soho-Knights

            Oh! dear! just like they tried in Russia? North Korea and China?

          • GoJebus

            This is about church/state separation, not about implementing state communism, amazing as that sounds.

          • Mark M

            On the other side of the coin, a lot of people in politics, education and the media are also trying to turn our kids into bisexual politically correct athiest robots who aren’t alllowed to have opinions on anything. Personally I’ll stick to my own beliefs – that it is possible to believe in God or a superior being without affiliating with any specific man made religion. And, also, that if people are allowed to do what they want, then we should also be allowed to SAY what we want without the current fear that we could be arrested or lose our job over it.

          • GoJebus

            I agree with some of that, especially the point you make about the freedom to offend (which the pious mainstream are keen to see put to death), and I certainly support your right to believe in a deity of your own choosing (I myself am a lapsed pastafarian). I take issue with your conflation of the terms bisexual, politically-correct, and atheist. I’m sure the non-pious and the pious are about equal in numbers on that one.

        • Soho-Knights

          If you check it out, more wars are started over everything else , but! religion.

          • GoJebus

            Maybe, maybe not, but generally speaking dogma will be at the heart of it and that’s where the common ground is between the pious and the communist/nazi/et al.

    • ConofChi

      ‘ridiculous hogwash’ really! Death will have the finally string………

      • GoJebus

        “Death will have the finally string………”?

  • WarriorPrincess111111

    I disagree with any religious leader becoming involved in Politics in any instance, in Parliament especially. Having said that – Justin Welby is a very experienced tactical conversationalist that equals many a Politician, while defending his calling.
    He neither justifies nor condemns the attacks in the Middle East and while responding to a view that the Christian religion is retreating – Welby denies this – stating that man will turn to his beliefs in God – just as every religious believer will, in any religion. With a bit of a twist, he uses the fact that Churches have become more active of late – implying that more believers are returning to the Church while the fact is that churches are very centrally placed public establishments that lend themselves for the purpose of Food Banks and other services for the poor. Of course many more people will be attending the building.
    Justin Welby also treads lightly over the ‘gay issue’ neither agreeing nor disagreeing.
    The above report may have intended to be an interview on the views of a notable religious person – but just as every a politician’s interview – has enightened the reader with absolutely sweet nothing.

  • trobrianders

    Welby’s jealous of Daesh fervour. Sickening really.

  • outlawState

    “If they had a civil service of marriage, would I attend? Of course I would.”

    So Welby does not love Christ more than his family, per Luke 14:26? I think this says it all. The guy does not have the type of faith required by Christ. What faith does he have? The faith that is happy with being praised by men.

Close