|
« Jingle bells
Main |
January 05, 2004
Second thoughts at Canterbury
He didn't say it! The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, appears to have rewritten his Christmas Day sermon following the advance leaking of his remarks to the Sunday Times on December 21. According to that paper, he was planning to use his sermon to criticise the detention without trial of Muslims in Guantanamo Bay and in British prisons, on the grounds that this sent a bad signal to Muslims that their faith was being targeted. This provoked your diarist, among others, to blow a gasket the following day in my article, 'Moral Confusion at Canterbury', on the grounds that the ABofC was effectively appeasing terrorism. But when he actually delivered his sermon, he said nothing about this at all. The furthest he went on the Muslim front was to regret the French ban on Islamic headscarves, while he made no fewer than three references to current antisemitism. So what gives? It's possible, of course, that the Sunday Times got its sermons in a twist, but given the specificity of the remarks it reported, this seems improbable. It is more likely that he or his minions floated those remarks to see what kind of reaction they'd get; and when they felt the fire on their faces, they retreated sharpish and rewrote the thing. Certainly, by the time he got to his new year address the ABof C had done a 180 degree turn from his Sunday Times position. This is what he said: 'The continuing threat of terrorism makes us constantly fearful. We don’t know where the enemy is – and it is an enemy who is skilful and merciless and willing to risk everything. We may grumble at the constraints and checks - but part of us knows just why we move in this atmosphere of suspicion. Once you see the dreadful results of terrorism at close quarters, you can begin to appreciate why'. In other words, he appeared to be actually endorsing the curtailment of civil liberties since 9/11. What a difference the new year appears to have made! But for those appeaseniks who fear the church may be going hard in the head at long last, never fear. The Bishop of Durham, Dr Tom Wright, has said Messrs Bush and Blair acted 'like a bunch of white vigilantes going into Brixton to stop drug dealing'. And the Archbishop of York, Dr David Hope, said Tony Blair would have to answer to 'a higher authority' for his decision to invade Iraq. So it's business as normal for the CofE. Posted by melanie at January 5, 2004
Comments
Welcome back, Melanie! Hope that you had as lovely a Holiday as we did across the pond despite airport terror delays. --- Perhaps this opinion (below) from the Arab League on terrorism will clear up the issue for the Archbishop. It all depends on what the word "terrorism"— is. . . or isn’t! "Arab ministers: Freedom fighter aren't terrorists" Resisting foreign occupation can't be considered terrorism, interior ministers from Arab nations agreed Monday, wrapping up a security conference in Tunisia. In a final declaration, the group of 19 ministers from the Arab League said they strongly condemned terrorism in any form. However, they stressed "the need to make a distinction between terrorism and peoples' right to fight occupation and foreign aggression. . . . . . . The statement also said officials "categorically refused any attempt to place the blame for terrorism on Arabs and Muslims." . . . . . . The ministers were in the seaside city of Tunis for two days of talks about terrorism, the drug trade and people-smuggling. Some were to stay a third day to visit Tunisia. " --- Right, it's the all a Zionist-entity plot: Islamic terrorism, drugs and people smuggling. Those Jews are responsible for Muslims growing opium, enslaving people and blowing themselves up in pizza parlors. "Strengthening cooperation, the ministers made amendments to their charter on fighting terrorism, declaring that it is a crime to hold, print or spread documents promoting terrorist acts. . . " Well, then, that settles it! The Qu’ran and the hadith will be confiscated. Allah is all knowing and wise—and he KNOWS that Muslims are doing these things on instructions from the so-called “holy” Islamic books. Allah is going to make all those Arabs' moustaches fall out for lying. ;-) • "Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given ... and do not embrace the true Faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." (9:29) • "Slay those who believe neither in God nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what God and his apostle have forbidden, and who do not embrace the true Faith, until they pay jaziah out of hand and are utterly subdued Surah Al-Tawbah (Repentence), Ayah 29, . ." Lili I wonder when the Archbishop will show concern for the subjugation and terrible persecution of Christians in Islamic countries, rather then getting agitated at the real or imaginary slights that Muslims may have received in Britain. Melanie: "And the Archbishop of York, Dr David Hope, said Tony Blair would have to answer to 'a higher authority' for his decision to invade Iraq". Cherie? Posted by: Frank Pulley at January 6, 2004 12:39 AMGeorge Carey did speak out for the Pakistani Christians. Didn't do much good, but he made the effort. Posted by: Susan at January 6, 2004 01:34 AMIt does seem that the AoC are more concerned with everyone else but their flock. They are keen to meddle in politics, while their church is falling apart. Posted by: Andrew Ian Dodge at January 6, 2004 04:37 PMI'm an atheist but I often pray that a stray lightning bolt will strike down the Archbishop of Dhimmitude... Posted by: Murph at January 6, 2004 11:36 PM |
