Steven P. Barrett"The archbishop has lost the plot," says Tory MP, quoted in Islam On Line
July 21st 2008 17:01
By Steven Barrett
I was very harsh on the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams' mishandling of the Gene Robinson situation and the ordination of women as bishops. But what's to follow is an even greater outrage by this man because it touches upon the very essential doctrinal touchstone of Christianity itself: The Trinity.
I've cited www.islamonline.net/ for my primary link, but I've included some other very interesting stories and articles about this abject surrender.
Anglican Head: God Doesn't Need Violent Protection
Really Long Link
Archbishop bridges Muslim divide
Really Long Link
Christian doctrine offensive to Muslims, says Archbishop of Canterbury
Really Long Link
Even Robinson's pride, and Katherine Schori's inept handling of her rapidly crumbling American branch can't top this for an archbishop (of all ranks) of a branch of the Church that calls itself "one, holy, catholic and apostolic church" and part of an episcopal lineage claiming antiquity. Of course that was broken thanks to Henry VIII and Elizabeth I. And even though Pope Benedict XVI's trying valiantly to keep Williams shaky communion in one piece, it's probably because he doesn't want to be blamed for being the one who pushed the whole edifice over. Of course not, since Williams is doing a wonderful job on his own.
I found lots of stories about Williams' recent remarks commenting how "offensive" the Trinity -- the very description of God Himself -- as Christians view Him -- must be to Muslims. But ironically enough, one of the best and fairest stories I've come across appeared in Islam On Line. You read that right -- straight from the recipient's of Williams' remarks in hands, pens, cells and keyboards.
Can Canterbury and Lambeth get any zanier? Can the radical Muslims in the UK and throughout the rest of Europe be laughing any louder?
Surely, I understand Muslims take umbrage at the Christian Trinity. But one has to look at Arabic culture as it was in Muhammed's time and remains to this day, far more patriarchal than anything we westerners who do not live under Sharia and have developed a far more civilized codex of laws. That these laws are constantly being tweaked one way or another demonstrates a vibrancy in the western mindset that is not contained in Islam. Yet Williams and his minions supporting him on this theological and cultural appeasment overlook this -- and on purpose. How else could be since Williams himself was at NYC's Trinity Church right next to the WTC when it was attacked and collapsed. He was there! And still remains blind to this day about what offends us about Islam's extremists own misinterpretation of the Koran.
What has Williams done? He turned the tables on his own faith, his branch of Christianity and western civilization itself through his efforts to bring Islam and Christianity closer together for all the wrong reasons and by the worst possible means: Surrender of any defense of his faith.
I'm not calling for any crusades, but dammit man, you have a pulpit! Hit it, loud, hard and declare your faith in Christ if that's really Who you believe in and why you believe in Him. And curiously enough, his lack of spine in the pulpit will not make life any easier for Muslims to come into British society as time passes.
If Britain, and other European nations cannot or worse, will not defend their Christian European religious and cultural beliefs and heritage -- it'll be gone and these people will be living under a theocracy of the likes they haven't seen in hundreds if not thousands of years. Not even all Muslims have the slightest notion of what a society governed and adjudicated by Sharia would be like. They're used to the benefits of living in a western democratic state with a secular justice system designed to provide equal justice for all. Of course sometimes injustices happen, but by and large western governments provide the best form of ordered societies ever designed.
Sharia won't be pleasant, especially for any remaining loyal Christians, Protestants, Catholics or Orthodox. They'll be living in dhimmitude under Sharia law: second class citizenship where their freedoms, what left they have over, remain at the sufferance of the government, not the other way around as we enjoy it here. It'll surely invite civil war and make the Troubles in Belfast look like skirmishes. And if Christians and lovers of western rule of law should lose out in Europe, be they believers or not, God help the planet.
Guess who'll be left standing alone north of the Rio Grande? Don't even count on Canada.
For all our's and NATO's efforts to keep the worst of the worst religious extremists at bay, and hopefully eliminated in Iraq and especially Afghanistan, we stand at risk of losing everything if we don't wake up to the dangers of vascillation and handwringing for past wrongs. Look, I'll agree with any historian saying horrible things were done in the name of Christianity.
But I won't buy into a lopsided history or a newly re-written theology, or even any form of unbalanced concept of Scripture, be it the Christian Bible, the Koran, or the Torah that says God must be defended by humans in combat. Nobody has been even that dumb to think an almighty Creator needs puny man to defend Him. No, we -- all three of the major faiths claiming Abraham as their (earthly) father recognize that we can at best defend the rights of our fellow co-religionists to live in peace without fear of violence.
For a man so enamored with dialogue, etc. he foolishly undercut any chance of a substantive dialogue by entering into it by caving in on the very principles he only needed to defend in a spirit of love as it would be displayed in a gentlemanly discussion. Saying what we disagree with or might offend the other side doesn't automatically make the two sides instant or longtime enemies. Doesn't this man believe in standing up for anything; perhaps even in his own home?
As soon as one of us or for that matter any differing religious groups in other parts of the world cross that line, and commit openly hostile acts as the respective histories of Northern Ireland, the former Yugoslavia and Darfur -- not to mention the millenial battles of the Middle East -- have shown, a viscious cycle starts all over again.
But for WIlliams to engage in selective blaming -- and against his own faith, no less! -- as if being overly accommodating will buy "peace in our times" much like Neville Chamberlain, he's digging the Church of England's grave even deeper than I originally thought possible.
This sad old man has almost dished all of whatever he had left to be proud of during this past month. His episcopate is a shell and his reign has been a sham.
Time to go Rowan, in the name of God, go. Collect your unmerited government pension and find what you seemed to have lost long, long ago.
I was very harsh on the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams' mishandling of the Gene Robinson situation and the ordination of women as bishops. But what's to follow is an even greater outrage by this man because it touches upon the very essential doctrinal touchstone of Christianity itself: The Trinity.
I've cited www.islamonline.net/ for my primary link, but I've included some other very interesting stories and articles about this abject surrender.
Anglican Head: God Doesn't Need Violent Protection
Archbishop bridges Muslim divide
Really Long Link
Christian doctrine offensive to Muslims, says Archbishop of Canterbury
Really Long Link
Even Robinson's pride, and Katherine Schori's inept handling of her rapidly crumbling American branch can't top this for an archbishop (of all ranks) of a branch of the Church that calls itself "one, holy, catholic and apostolic church" and part of an episcopal lineage claiming antiquity. Of course that was broken thanks to Henry VIII and Elizabeth I. And even though Pope Benedict XVI's trying valiantly to keep Williams shaky communion in one piece, it's probably because he doesn't want to be blamed for being the one who pushed the whole edifice over. Of course not, since Williams is doing a wonderful job on his own.
I found lots of stories about Williams' recent remarks commenting how "offensive" the Trinity -- the very description of God Himself -- as Christians view Him -- must be to Muslims. But ironically enough, one of the best and fairest stories I've come across appeared in Islam On Line. You read that right -- straight from the recipient's of Williams' remarks in hands, pens, cells and keyboards.
Can Canterbury and Lambeth get any zanier? Can the radical Muslims in the UK and throughout the rest of Europe be laughing any louder?
Surely, I understand Muslims take umbrage at the Christian Trinity. But one has to look at Arabic culture as it was in Muhammed's time and remains to this day, far more patriarchal than anything we westerners who do not live under Sharia and have developed a far more civilized codex of laws. That these laws are constantly being tweaked one way or another demonstrates a vibrancy in the western mindset that is not contained in Islam. Yet Williams and his minions supporting him on this theological and cultural appeasment overlook this -- and on purpose. How else could be since Williams himself was at NYC's Trinity Church right next to the WTC when it was attacked and collapsed. He was there! And still remains blind to this day about what offends us about Islam's extremists own misinterpretation of the Koran.
What has Williams done? He turned the tables on his own faith, his branch of Christianity and western civilization itself through his efforts to bring Islam and Christianity closer together for all the wrong reasons and by the worst possible means: Surrender of any defense of his faith.
I'm not calling for any crusades, but dammit man, you have a pulpit! Hit it, loud, hard and declare your faith in Christ if that's really Who you believe in and why you believe in Him. And curiously enough, his lack of spine in the pulpit will not make life any easier for Muslims to come into British society as time passes.
If Britain, and other European nations cannot or worse, will not defend their Christian European religious and cultural beliefs and heritage -- it'll be gone and these people will be living under a theocracy of the likes they haven't seen in hundreds if not thousands of years. Not even all Muslims have the slightest notion of what a society governed and adjudicated by Sharia would be like. They're used to the benefits of living in a western democratic state with a secular justice system designed to provide equal justice for all. Of course sometimes injustices happen, but by and large western governments provide the best form of ordered societies ever designed.
Sharia won't be pleasant, especially for any remaining loyal Christians, Protestants, Catholics or Orthodox. They'll be living in dhimmitude under Sharia law: second class citizenship where their freedoms, what left they have over, remain at the sufferance of the government, not the other way around as we enjoy it here. It'll surely invite civil war and make the Troubles in Belfast look like skirmishes. And if Christians and lovers of western rule of law should lose out in Europe, be they believers or not, God help the planet.
Guess who'll be left standing alone north of the Rio Grande? Don't even count on Canada.
For all our's and NATO's efforts to keep the worst of the worst religious extremists at bay, and hopefully eliminated in Iraq and especially Afghanistan, we stand at risk of losing everything if we don't wake up to the dangers of vascillation and handwringing for past wrongs. Look, I'll agree with any historian saying horrible things were done in the name of Christianity.
But I won't buy into a lopsided history or a newly re-written theology, or even any form of unbalanced concept of Scripture, be it the Christian Bible, the Koran, or the Torah that says God must be defended by humans in combat. Nobody has been even that dumb to think an almighty Creator needs puny man to defend Him. No, we -- all three of the major faiths claiming Abraham as their (earthly) father recognize that we can at best defend the rights of our fellow co-religionists to live in peace without fear of violence.
For a man so enamored with dialogue, etc. he foolishly undercut any chance of a substantive dialogue by entering into it by caving in on the very principles he only needed to defend in a spirit of love as it would be displayed in a gentlemanly discussion. Saying what we disagree with or might offend the other side doesn't automatically make the two sides instant or longtime enemies. Doesn't this man believe in standing up for anything; perhaps even in his own home?
As soon as one of us or for that matter any differing religious groups in other parts of the world cross that line, and commit openly hostile acts as the respective histories of Northern Ireland, the former Yugoslavia and Darfur -- not to mention the millenial battles of the Middle East -- have shown, a viscious cycle starts all over again.
But for WIlliams to engage in selective blaming -- and against his own faith, no less! -- as if being overly accommodating will buy "peace in our times" much like Neville Chamberlain, he's digging the Church of England's grave even deeper than I originally thought possible.
"The archbishop has lost the plot," Tory MP Philip Davies told the UK Express on Thursday, July 17.
"Dr Williams should be proud of his Christian beliefs."
"Dr Williams should be proud of his Christian beliefs."
This sad old man has almost dished all of whatever he had left to be proud of during this past month. His episcopate is a shell and his reign has been a sham.
Time to go Rowan, in the name of God, go. Collect your unmerited government pension and find what you seemed to have lost long, long ago.
| 82 |
| Vote |
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief