Melanie Phillips looks squarely at the moral bankruptcy that has overtaken the Church of England, and set it firmly on the path to dhimmitude. (Thanks to Jonathan for the link.) Their new letter to the Prime Minister is a disgraceful display of double standards and moral myopia. Please read all that Phillips has to say, but here is the conclusion:
According to the Times, the Archbishops are worried by anti-Muslim feeling:‘One of their main concerns is the damage caused by the conflict to community relations in Britain between Muslims and non-Muslims. Some of the strongest advocates for the letter were bishops from cities with large Muslim populations, such as Bradford. They are concerned by a rise in Islamophobia and fear that the September 11 attacks have desensitised emotions so that the treatment meted out to detainees no longer causes the moral outrage it should.’
But what about the rampant Judeophobia now on almost daily display in the malevolent and mendacious campaign to delegitimise Israel, and the corresponding resurgence of libels and prejudice against the Jews? On this, the Archbishops are totally silent. The Times also tells us that:
‘On Israel, the archbishops were expressing concerns among the bishops that the new steps towards a settlement should not be on Israel’s terms only’.
But the only reason a prospective settlement is currently being proposed on terms laid down by Israel is that the Palestinians have not stopped waging genocidal war against it. If they stopped doing so and showed they were really prepared to live in peace with a Jewish state, negotiations would re-open tomorrow. But they refuse to do so. The Archbishops are effectively saying that the perpetrators of this war against Israel should be given an equal right to lay down terms for a settlement. What astonishing moral bankruptcy from religious leaders. The Church of England is now squarely supporting the enemies of the west. It is high time other Christians rose up to denounce it and reclaim their religion for truth and moral decency.
I'll be happy to be first in line.
Everyone should visit the 'God Box' in New York City, near Union Theological Seminary on the Upper West Side to see first hand religious policital correctness run amok.
1) We at NoJihad have collected ALL of Hugh's past postings and are putting them up on the site (with Hugh's blessings) along with a continually refined word index, to create an 'Internet Book' of the 'Writings Of Hugh'. Go to Hugh's JihadWatch Posts We are about 20% done, and falling behind all the time. Click here for Islam For The Perplexed, that execellent primer that should printed and given out on street corners. Feedback welcome at wwwnojihad@yahoo.com
2) We are issuing an open invitation to anyone who wants to contribute to our site by writing cogent essays or doing a bloggish thing (like I do). No need to be a scholar (after all there is only one Hugh), just well-read. Email me at questioningIslam@yahoo.com.
3) We are trying to put together a letter to be sent ON A SPECIFIC DAY, say, after the election, AND MONTHLY THEREAFTER, to the President and Vice President, along with the appropriate local congress-people stating the facts about Islam, our concerns about current policy and specific actions that we would like to be taken. IF 10,000 OR 100,000 OR 1,000,000 PEOPLE SENT EMAILS, our concerns cannot be ignored. If there is supposed to be 6-8 million Muslims in America and our federal government gets 10 MILLION emails PER MONTH, maybe someone will notice (and at least CAIR will go berserk!)It is one thing to preach to the converted, quite another to convert others to action. We should keep doing this until the government responds. We will be putting up a first cut of the letter soon, and any suggestions for the content of the letter can be sent to the above email address.
Ethelred Smith
Melanie Phillips notes the behavior of the English Anglicans. But Black African Anglicans, who have a longstanding, and personal acquaintance with Muslim attitudes and Muslim aggression, may be able to come to the rescue. For Black Africans, after all, who have been subject to Arab slavers -- Arab slave coffles, slave caravans, slave dhows plying up and down the coast of East Africa -- for centuries. The Arab slave trade began earlier, and lasted longer (indeed, to this very day) and claimed far more victims (with a much higher rate of mortality among those seized) than did the Atlantic Slave Trade.
Today, Black Africans are enslaved by Muslim Arabs in the Sudan, in Mali, in Mauritania. For the Arabs, and especially for Khaddafy, Black Africa has been a plaything. Arab bribes caused now this, now that, despot -- an Idi Amin, an Omar Bongo, a Jean-Bedel Bokassa -- to "embrace Islam." At present, the Arab Muslims of the north -- with the silent approval of all the members of the Arab League, have been killing black Christians in the Sudan for three decades, with formal approval of Muslim theologians. To these victims they have now added the "mawali" or non-Arab blacks in Darfur, who seem not to realize that in Islam, Arabs and mawalis are most definitely not equal. Ask Muslim Kurds or Muslim Berbers about their treatment at the hands of Arabs.
The etiolated Christianity of the Anglican Church as represented by these self-righteous and nauseating clergymen who clearly have turned their back on Israel, some out of malevolence (Rev. Stephen Sizer, in posh Virginia Water, the half-timbered Tudor estates with their ponds and their views, and their pseudo-Kentish oast houses, others out of a belief that if Israel is thrown to the wolves, Muslim mayhem and murder may be avoided (have these people bothered to study the history of Islam? to read the Qur'an? to read at least a thousand or so of the hadith? No? Well, then they should shut up.), may receive new vigor from its true inheritors, black Africans, or black Englishmen of African descent, who know a thing or two about Islam that these assorted clergymen do not know -- or deliberately do not want to know.
Being a Christian, first and foremost, begins in the heart. To be a true Christian, you must also demand your sovereign rights as one, and that cannot be accomplished by hiding within the walls of the church.
You as a Christian, ARE the church. So "the church supporting America's enemies" does not wash, if you have a Christian church.
How can the Church, Anglican, Protestant or Catholic, support any form of demonic Islam?
It can't. What this tells me is the Church(in England it seems) has become an institution, and it's members lost control of the gospel which guides it.
Christians need not stay silent, and just watch things pass by. Christians need to maintain a steady force, peaceful, reasoned, and support those who we elect. otherwise evil will win, through our own silence. It's up to us to give a damn and maintain our societies. We can't do it if we hide in a corner. What did Christ tell you to do?
And, if any Christian "clergyman" speaks out against jews, he's dead wrong.
Christ was a Jew, and founder of Christianity.
he didn't teach persecution, he taught Salvation. He brought this to the Jews specifically, and to pagans intentionally.
Before Christ, there was no salvation from sin.
Now there is. That offer extends to all Jews, all mankind. Islam hates Jews and Christians, because Islam is Satan's religion. Salvation is completely opposite of Islams teachings.
According to the Gospels, Jews will be reckoned with on the return (judgment,Armageddon what ever you interpret). It's part of his promise.
God taught freedom to choose, told us to enjoy life, be rightious. Salvation depends on your deeds.
For some reason, people want to nix this, and allow total corruption to rule. This is era is mentioned in gospel as well.
If you go to Melanie's website - you should, it's very good - and follow the link to The Times article, you will discover that Melanie has made a rare mistake. Not all the bishops have signed up to this letter. Indeed, we don't know how many actually signed up.
The article states -
"Britain
June 30, 2004
'Appearance of duplicity diminishes us'
From The Archbishops of Canterbury and York:
Dear Prime Minister,
During their annual meeting earlier this month, the bishops of the Church of England discussed recent developments in Iraq and the Middle East. It was the wish of those present that we should write to you to put on record a number of the points made during the discussion. "...
Note the lack of specificity. Not "ALL of those present", which would have great power but a generality. In short a majority - how large? Or even, the indefinable mood of the meeting.
Further, the article states,
"Within the wider Christian community we also have theological work to do to counter those interpretations of the Scriptures from outside the mainstream of the tradition which appear to have become increasingly influential in fostering an uncritical and one-sided approach to the future of the Holy Land."
Melanie rightly sees this as an attack on Christian Zionists. What she does not realise is that it also means those Anglicans who could be described as Zionist. Make no mistake, they also are under threat.
The letter is couched in vague, moralistic terms. No-one can protest about an objection to uncritical and onesided thinking. Yes, we all know what they really mean, but can we prove it? We know how these people duck and dive.
Finally, the condemnation of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay is perfectly reasonable to any Christian. The Bible is perfectly clear on the right to a fair trial, the right to face one's accusers and the need for several witnesses. It accords these rights to all: because all are made in the image of God, even if that image is terribly distorted. Either people are prisoners of war or terrorist criminals.
The USA's attempt to create a legal black hole is despicable and well beneath a great nation. We must not lower ourselves, even the smallest amount, to the standards of sharia law.
If our system is not better than theirs, which it usually is, what are we doing there?
Mr. Spencer, were it not for time zone differences getting me out of bed later than other posters here, I'd be second in line.
As a traditionalist Protestant Christian who both holds a non-Zionist theology and supports Israel's right to exist (questions of justice, honest representation of history, etc.), I have a few comments on both the Anglican bishops and Melanie Philips.
The bishop's are right when they say that the Dispensational "Zionism" of the Scofield Reference Bible and many popular books about Bible prophecy is a 19th century innovation.
The bishops err, however, in that their own embrace of the non-Western world's national socialisms is also without Scriptural warrant; and in many ways far more destructive than the existence of a Jewish state.
Like most other 20th (and now 21st) century people, the bishops are quick to hear who cries the loudest; and who more easily rallies a mob. Also, they hear without reference to whether or not the crying party may, in fact, have brought suffering on itself by wrong actions. They are not so quick to hear the needs of those responsible for maintaining public peace; and forgetful of history.
I will not say my brethren in my confessional circles are free of the anti-Semitic taint; but, at the same time, their theology does not demand this taint.
Non-Zionist Confessional Protestants (lots of Lutherans, Reformed, and Anglicans) sees the fulfillments of prophecy in Jesus Christ's coming, and receiving all authority in heaven and earth (Matthew 28:18); not the re-establishment of a Jewish state. Also, the Chosen People, are all those in Christ, whether Jews (a line of people from Christ and his apostles to numerous Jews who have become Christians through the centuries) and Gentiles alike (BTW, "Gentile" is NOT a synonym for "Christian": those mentioned in the NT originally worshipped idols). To us, Israel today is another nation among many; the Jews another people among many. While we wholeheartedly see Christians (understood as confessing and practicing; not s default sociological identity) as heirs of the Biblical promises and Abraham's seed through Christ (we think we follow Paul here), this gives us NO right to throw bricks and nasty epithets at the Jews.
Melanie Philips is absolutely right in calling attention to the attempt of Falastin Arab nationalism to exterminate the Jewish presence in 'Eretz Yisroel, and in faulting the bishops' for their unwillingness to face this.
So the archbishops are concerned that the Palestinians will have a settlement imposed on them on Isreal's terms only.Then they should have warned the Palestinians against waging a war they could not win.A rule of war is if you decide to wage war you had better win. Because if you lose you face the prospect of having a settlement imposed by the victor you might not like.The Palestinians decided to try to obtain through violence what they could have gotten at the negotiating table. Now that the Palestinians have lost they want a seat at the table. Palestinians do not deserve any concessions and I have no sympathy for them.