Recent statement by the newspaper’s Chair of Trustees:

“In October 2011, the Church of England Newspaper published an article by Alan Craig entitled “Confronting the Gaystapo”. The article was clearly identified as a personal opinion by a named individual. Its theme was that the gay rights lobby uses aggressive methods to advance its cause and should be confronted.

“The newspaper is a forum for informed debate on matters of Christian interest, of which gay rights is one. There is no topic that we regard as “too hot” for us to debate. In the following edition, the newspaper published responses taking a different view. The overall editorial policy of the newspaper is determined by a board of trustees of which I am the chairman.

“With the benefit of hindsight, it would have been better had Alan Craig’s article been written more gently and if he had avoided references to Nazism. However, even with that caveat, both his article and the subsequent responses are within the scope of the editorial policy of this newspaper.

“Certain members and supporters of the gay lobby responded vigorously, and even reported the newspaper to the police who have taken no action. By doing so, they have added credence to the main thesis of Alan Craig’s article.

“In the course of dealing with this organised agitation, a statement was made by the newspaper to one reader that appears to have gained some currency.

“Again with hindsight, we can see that this statement could be read as questioning Alan Craig’s status as a Christian, and suggesting that the newspaper supports gay marriage. It was not the intention of the editor to convey any such impression. For the avoidance of doubt, the trustees affirm that the newspaper does not support gay marriage. We regard Alan Craig, and those in the church who agree or disagree with his views, as brother Christians.

“We further acknowledge that Christians do disagree on many issues. These are best addressed by temperate debate.”

Read here

By Andrew Hough, Telegraph

The courts are endangering religious freedom because the judiciary are giving it a lower priority than equality, a leading philosopher has claimed.

Prof Roger Trigg of Kellogg College, Oxford, said that judges increasingly “curtail” the religious views of people in favour of other “social priorities”.

After studying a series of judgments throughout Britain, Europe and North America, he concluded there was a “clear trend” of judges favouring equality and non-discrimination over religious freedom.

Prof Trigg, a member of the university’s faculties of theology and philosophy, argued this was proof of how religion was coming under threat from the judiciary as part of a “hierarchy of rights”.

Prof Trigg, the founding President of the British Society for the Philosophy of Religion, said that as a result the courts were “limiting human freedom itself”.

“Religious freedom and the right to manifest religious belief is a central part of every charter of human rights,” he said on the eve of the launch of his book on Wednesday.

“But in recent years there has been a clear trend for courts in Europe and North America to prioritise equality and non-discrimination above religion, placing the right to religious freedom in danger.

“There should not be a hierarchy of rights, but it should be possible to take account of all of them in some way.”

He added: “No State can be a functioning democracy unless it allows its citizens to manifest their beliefs about what is most important in life.”

Read here

I have just spent four frenetic days in Kenya visiting Anglican Aid partners.

These wonderful partners are delivering the emergency aid programmes made possible by the generosity of Sydney Anglicans and their friends.

But I spent those days deeply conflicted, and the inner turmoil hasn’t subsided. For, only hours before boarding for Nairobi, I received two critical pieces of information.

Firstly, the Australian Government issued a travel alert for Kenya, warning people not to leave Nairobi for any areas where Al Shabaab have been creating havoc in the famine affected regions of the east and north east of the country. Even in Nairobi, extreme caution was advised.

Secondly, one of our partners, Canon Francis Omondi, the director of The Sheepfold Ministries (TSM) sent me an email urging me to come with him to Garissa, where his home is, where his wife and family are, and where he longed to extend family hospitality to me. His longing would be my longing if he were my guest in Australia.

But Garissa is five hours drive, north by north east from Nairobi, and only 100km from the Dadaab Refugee Camp, the largest in the world.

North, By North East

My heart wanted desperately to go with him. My head said not to contemplate it. I felt, and still feel the internal conflict. How can I (and we) empower him with the resources to lead convoys of lorries with life saving aid to make dangerous forays deep into the Horn and be unwilling to personally partner him in those dangers? I feel so western, so weak, so soft, so precious.

But I knew I mustn’t go. The colour of my skin would draw the attention of the wrong people who might then inform the wrong people. I would place my partners in greater danger, quite apart from the danger I would face. I would come home to such a deserved tongue-lashing from my archbishop, board chairman and wife that I feared every layer of skin being stripped from my muscular skeletal system. I wondered what would be the most life threatening!

Then, only hours after arriving in Nairobi, I received another piece of news. My mum had been admitted to hospital in a critical condition. Now I was dealing with another layer of personal conflict. Would she die? Would she pull through? Should I immediately head for home?

We spoke on the phone daily. Though pumped full of morphine, Mum spoke clearly and realistically. We reiterated the mutual love and final words we had been saying to each other for the last couple of years. Signs of improvement eased my inner turmoil and we resolved that I should press on, taking it day by day.

Our Kenyan brothers and sisters in Christ prayed constantly for my mum, and asked, it seemed, on the hour if I had further news of her condition. I knew I was in the hands of very caring extended family.

South, By South East

The Archbishop of Kenya, Eliud Wabukala, confirmed my decision not to travel into the north east of the famine and terrorist traumatised areas. But he encouraged me instead to travel three hours to the south and south east of the country where our second partner, the Directorate of Social Services (DOSS) of the Anglican Church of Kenya (ACK), under the leadership of Eliud Njeru, is involved in emergency famine relief and rehabilitation amongst very remote Maasai tribes.

This region, near the Tanzanian border is very isolated and beyond the reach of Al Shabaab insurgents, and, as it seemed to me, beyond the reach of the most minuscule drops of moisture.

The lives and land of these semi-nomadic agro-pastoralists were in deep trauma. We followed cattle tracks, dry riverbeds and through vast areas of dusty, dry wasteland. We passed occasional Maasai herdsmen who were droving weakened livestock in search of shallow water holes. We waved at young Maasai children leading water laden donkeys over large distances from shallow muddy water holes back to their villages.

We met and exchanged greetings with Maasai tribal chiefs and elders who showed us some of their diminishing water holes. They thanked us, through translation, for the help they have, are and will receive in the coming months through Anglican Aid’s partnership with the ACK’s DOSS in water security, food provision, herd restocking and school feeding programmes.

These Maasai people fascinated me. Traditionally, their food, clothing and shelter are sourced almost exclusively from the meat, blood, milk and hides of the animals they herded – that were fast diminishing as the animals were slowly dying.

Their clothing was a curious mixture of traditional dress; animal hides and local fabrics, but with polo shirts, caps and beanies emblazoned with Man. U, Chelsea and Liverpool logos. On their animal hide belts were hitched machetes and mobile phones. Their ears were adorned with jewellery, carved from bones, dangling from ear lobes with holes in the lobes as big as marbles.

One man caressed what seemed to be a cross between a machete and grandma’s prized carving knife for Sunday’s roast. I imagined the litres of animal blood that had been wiped from its blade. And I tried not to imagine the amount of human blood, through adult circumcisions and tribal conflicts, which had dripped over the decades from its proudly and carefully sharpened edge.

But these were no air-brushed, photo-shopped, popular culture images of the Maasai people, ecstatically bouncing on the balls of their feet around roaring fires, like those depicted in movies such as The White Maasai.

These people were in trauma, hungry and anxious about the future.

Yet, here I was with a team of aid workers from the ACK, with local clergy and lay people, bringing gospel hope and material help to people living with overwhelming need for eternal hope and daily bread.

This day, my last in Kenya, started at 5am and finished at 10pm as I sank into a steaming hot bath. The dust, sweat and tearstains dislodged from my grubby body to form a dirty thin film on the water and the side of the bathtub.

As I did so, I reflected on the words of one of my indigenous hosts. He told me of a saying his people had,

What I hear, I forget.

What I see, I remember.

What I do, I understand.

It was hardly radical educational theory. But shared with such gentle sincerity I was struck to the depths.

Submerging myself fully into the gritty, grey water I thought, perhaps, I was somewhere between hearing and seeing – and, by God’s grace, moving forward to the beginnings of some understanding.

Posted by Julian Mann at 00:03 0 comments

Please pray for the peace of Nigeria and the safety of the Christians

By Foluso Taiwo
http://www.anglican-nig.org/main.php?k_j=12&d=553&p_t=main.php?k_j=34

The Archbishop of Canterbury the Most Rev Rowan Williams has been in continuation of dialogue and mutual support, and sent his sympathy to his colleague the Primate of all Nigeria (Anglican Communion) the Most Rev Nicholas D Okoh on the national strike and the continuing dastardly acts and campaign by Boko Haram.

Speaking through the Rt Rev Justin Welby, Bishop of Durham, Dr Williams advocated the support of the government for those who have been displaced in Damaturu and all the troubled spots in the country including those who are living in fear of the ongoing violence. He prayed for normalcy to return quickly to the affected areas.

Most Rev Williams assured the Primate of his friendship, support and commitment to increase the faith in Jesus Christ by reaching the hitherto unreached, bringing the undiluted gospel of Christ to their doorstep.

He passed complimentary remarks on the Church of Nigeria Anglican Communion which he described as forthright and prayed that the social discomfort of the movement caused by Boko Haram will be a thing of the past.

The Rt Rev Justin Welby then presented Primate Okoh with a memorial Cross from the North East of England of the third Bishop of England in the late 7th century.

Responding, Primate Okoh thanked Bishop Justin Welby for travelling from a far distance in Diocese of Durham, this according to him, has shown solidarity amongst the Anglican community……He therefore made a passionate appeal to leaders in the country who can reach out to Boko Haram to dissuade them from dastardly acts of killing innocent Christian’s souls, asking them to dialogue with government if they have any axe to grind with her and leave the Church alone.

He said the attempt to drag Nigerians into militancy is something Nigerians must resist.

Read here http://www.anglican-nig.org/main.php?k_j=12&d=578&p_t=main.php?k_j=34

The “overarching theme” of the Bible is not “a preferential option for the marginalised and the need to offer them justice,” but “a preferential option for the repentant and the faithful, and the mercy to offer them salvation.”

Having been in this fight for so long, we sometimes forget – those of us who write about these things and those who read them – that our side of the debate is not obvious to everyone, and that from time to time we need to articulate our positions again, both because there are people who are open to considering them, and because we need to keep our skills sharp.

This interview with Winnie Varghese, a lesbian Episcopal priest at St. Mark’s in New York City’s Bowery district, reminded me of that. Two passages in particular, beginning with this one:

I was raised in the US in a very liberal Christian family, as my parents, who were young adults right after [Indian] Independence, grew up with an understanding of Christianity that was framed by the many Independence movements of the 20th century. The Bible is organised around the story of the Exodus, which is that God saves God’s people from slavery in Egypt, and we learn that God is on the side of the oppressed. In fact, the theme throughout the Bible, whether the Old Testament, or the New, is that of God redeeming people, not because they are good, or doing the right thing, but because they are marginalised.

It astonishes me that an ordained priest in a church that prides itself on rigorous religious education for its priests, actually has this understanding of the Bible; or if this is in fact not her understanding of it, that she would decide deliberately to push this nonsense as what the Bible is. Shorter version: This “priest” is either very ignorant about the Bible, or very duplicitous, although I suppose it could be both.

So off we go:

First, the Bible is not “organized around the story of the Exodus.” It is organized – as is, Christians believe, the whole of human history – around the birth of Jesus Christ, His revelation to us as God incarnate, and His role as our Savior and Redeemer.

Neither does Christianity teach that God redeems people “because they are marginalised.” What Christianity teaches is that God redeems people because they accept Jesus Christ as their savior. Why they should do so – because they are sinful and repentant – is almost secondary if one is looking for a single, simple lesson to take from the Bible. But it is most certainly not that redemption is offered because one is “marginalized.”

Here’s the second passage. In answer to the question, “What about the notion that homosexuality is a sin?” Varghese replies:

In the Levitical Code in the Bible, there are many acts that are prohibited, like wearing fabrics of two kinds in one garment or eating shellfish. These may seem absurd to modern people, but these were specific things that communities did to distinguish themselves from other communities, but which most Christians do not follow now. So it’s not difficult to take the Levitical Code — where a sexual moral code is discussed — and say that that’s from another time and another culture. The Code, for instance, says things like, if your child talks back at you, stone her. We don’t observe those practices now.

If we look at the Bible’s overarching themes, the most consistent one that runs through the text is a preferential option for the marginalised and the need to offer them justice, which is what people of a sexual minority need today, as they are marginalised and denied justice legally, and in terms of human rights.

This can be summarized as “the shellfish argument,” but the more complex issues of the Levitical codes aside, it never ceases to amaze me the simple failings of logic made by people who offer this “defense” of homosexual behavior.

The first failing is the notion that because items A, B, and C in a list are no longer applicable, then item D is therefore no longer applicable either.

To make my point, remove the list of prohibitions entirely from the context of Christianity, or even faith in general. Let’s say you’re writing a manual for automobile drivers, and the year is 1912. Your manual might very well include the following:

- Do not wear a veil to protect yourself against flying road debris; yea, verily I beseech thee, wear sturdy goggles.

- Do not attempt to start the motorcar with a crank made of wood; alas these will soon splinter, and cause you only grief.

- Do not honk your horn when approaching a horse-drawn buggy from behind; this may spook the horse and cause injury to the buggy’s riders.

- Do not operate your motorcar while intoxicated; it will impair your judgement and could result in serious injury or death to you and your passengers.

If I’m an advocate of the patently idiotic position that drinking and driving is a great idea, how seriously would I be taken if I insisted that, because cars now have windshields and thus no need for drivers to wear goggle; that cars are now started with keys and thus no need for cranks; and that horse-drawn buggies are virtually extinct, obviously the prohibition against drinking and driving is a quaint anachronism that can – and should – be reversed?

Why, then, does anyone take seriously people like Varghese, when their advocacy for homosexual behavior follows the same pattern?

The second failing is to offer the one example in Leviticus, make the case that it is “problematic,” and then proceed as if the case is closed – as if nowhere else in the Bible is homosexual behavior ever mentioned. Homosexual behavior is mentioned several other times in the Bible – Old Testament as well as New – and it is univocal in its prohibition of it as sinful.

The third failing is, again, a thoroughly incorrect characterization of the “overarching theme” of the Bible. It is most certainly not “a preferential option for the marginalised and the need to offer them justice.” Certainly the marginalized are lifted up, to the extent that by “marginalized” we mean the poor, the downtrodden, and the powerless; but the overarching theme of the Bible as regards the treatment of different kinds of people, is that no one of faith gets preferential treatment. The Gospel is the ultimate societal flattener: Repent of your sins and place your faith Jesus Christ, and you are saved, no matter your station in life or the magnitude of your sin.

So the “overarching theme” of the Bible is not “a preferential option for the marginalised and the need to offer them justice,” but “a preferential option for the repentant and the faithful, and the mercy to offer them salvation.” To focus more narrowly on sexuality, the overarching theme of the Bible, as Kendall Harmon has always reminded us, is one that repeatedly and pointedly prohibits sex outside of marriage, and one that very clearly defines and blesses marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Finally: As long as we’re brushing up on things like spotting flaws in the other side’s positions, it’s always a good practice to apply some simple math whenever you feel like you’re reading an explanation of the Bible and Christianity that just doesn’t seem to add up. For example, Varghese uses approximately 1,000 words to explain to a lay audience what the Bible and Christianity, at their core, are all about. So go to the linked article, open your browser’s “Find” tool, and count how many times the word “Jesus” appears.