Walking Cadavers Don't Eat Fish

This Sunday's reading is from John 21:1-19 in which Jesus appears for the third time to the disciples.

After these things Jesus showed himself again to the disciples by the Sea of Tiberias; and he showed himself in this way. Gathered there together were Simon Peter, Thomas called the Twin, Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two others of his disciples. Simon Peter said to them, ‘I am going fishing.’ They said to him, ‘We will go with you.’ They went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing.

Just after daybreak, Jesus stood on the beach; but the disciples did not know that it was Jesus. Jesus said to them, ‘Children, you have no fish, have you?’ They answered him, ‘No.’ He said to them, ‘Cast the net to the right side of the boat, and you will find some.’ So they cast it, and now they were not able to haul it in because there were so many fish. That disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, ‘It is the Lord!’ When Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put on some clothes, for he was naked, and jumped into the lake. But the other disciples came in the boat, dragging the net full of fish, for they were not far from the land, only about a hundred yards off.

 When they had gone ashore, they saw a charcoal fire there, with fish on it, and bread. Jesus said to them, ‘Bring some of the fish that you have just caught.’ So Simon Peter went aboard and hauled the net ashore, full of large fish, a hundred and fifty-three of them; and though there were so many, the net was not torn. Jesus said to them, ‘Come and have breakfast.’ Now none of the disciples dared to ask him, ‘Who are you?’ because they knew it was the Lord. Jesus came and took the bread and gave it to them, and did the same with the fish. This was now the third time that Jesus appeared to the disciples after he was raised from the dead.

 When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, ‘Simon son of John, do you love me more than these?’ He said to him, ‘Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Feed my lambs.’ A second time he said to him, ‘Simon son of John, do you love me?’ He said to him, ‘Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Tend my sheep.’ He said to him the third time, ‘Simon son of John, do you love me?’ Peter felt hurt because he said to him the third time, ‘Do you love me?’ And he said to him, ‘Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Feed my sheep. Very truly, I tell you, when you were younger, you used to fasten your own belt and to go wherever you wished. But when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will fasten a belt around you and take you where you do not wish to go.’ (He said this to indicate the kind of death by which he would glorify God.) After this he said to him, ‘Follow me.’

I once was derided by a Philosophy professor who was leading an adult Episcopal parish Sunday school class for believing that Jesus was resurrected and was alive to the disciples. "So, you believe in walking cadavers," he told me and the class.  I said, " No! I believe that Jesus was risen, was alive, and even ate fish."

I quit that class and joined the choir.

The elephant in the room

 I recently attended a series of required continuing education lectures pertaining to the health of citizens of our state. Among the various topics was bioethics and women's health. In looking at the goals of that talk, I saw that the question of personhood was to be addressed. It didn't take a genius to know what the elephant in the room was going to be during that one. 

When the speakers were introduced, I noticed that there was only one person on the panel, a female OB-GYN. There was no member of the clergy, no philosopher, and no ethicist. You can guess what direction the "educational" session took. The speaker went on an emotion ridden diatribe about "reproductive health" (meaning abortion), the enslavement of women by men, the "right to privacy," how the Dobbs decision will result in back alley abortions, women dying, and well meaning physicians being handcuffed and jailed, etc. 

The scientific, moral, legal, and ethical questions of personhood were not addressed although a brief description of fertilization, and embryology was included.

Judging by the silence during the Q and A session that followed, I believe that most of the audience was as shocked as I was at the way this was presented, but we endured because we needed the credit hours.

After her talk, I kindly corrected a few scientific facts that she had gotten wrong for which she thanked me. 

The next day she sat at my table. 

A great big elephant separated us. 

You can't argue with such as these.

Pray for them. 

Pray for the unborn. 

Witnessing at your own risk

This Sunday's reading from Acts 5:27-32 presents a powerful witness to the Gospel,

When they had brought them, they had them stand before the council. The high priest questioned them, saying, ‘We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name, yet here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and you are determined to bring this man’s blood on us.’ But Peter and the apostles answered, ‘We must obey God rather than any human authority. The  God of our ancestors raised up Jesus, whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree. God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Saviour, so that he might give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him.’ 

If Jesus had not been physically seen and touched after he had risen, would these men risk their lives for a lie? 

If these men had not been filled with the Holy Spirit, would they have the had the courage to testify?

That may be all the witness someone needs to come to the conclusion that the Gospel is true. 

Aiming to please: Did Francis miss the mark?

 The day after Pope Francis' death, this meme was circulated by some of my Episcopalian friends,

The Pope, bless his soul, was praised by "progressive" Christians for seeming to be one of them in many of his statements. This one in particular was one of the weakest theologically. It gives credence to the "all rivers flow to the same ocean" argument when it comes to the various religions to which he refers. He was not entirely inclusive in his list of religions however. I see that he did not include Wicca or other pagan religions. 

The following sermon was posted in 2014 by Rev Michael Chua, a Roman Catholic priest in Malaysia. I quote it in full,

“All Rivers flow into the Sea!” An oft-repeated analogy (or over-repeated), that may have had its origin in Hinduism, is used to describe that all religions have an element of truth in them and are thus, equally valid and parallel paths leading to salvation or liberation. Of course, no one bothered to consult a geologist or more specifically a potamologist, a person who studies rivers, to confirm the veracity of this statement. Surprisingly, not all rivers flow into the sea. For example, the rivers flowing south from the Tassili Mountains in North Africa disappear in the searing heat and scorching dryness of the Sahara. Others run into other bodies of water like lakes and even other rivers. So, not ALL rivers flow into the sea!

But say that we accept that most rivers, though not all, do indeed flow into the sea, can we similarly postulate that all religions equally lead to salvation? The equality of the salvific value of each religion is a fallacy, it contradicts logic, specifically the principle of non-contradiction. When one accepts a proposition to be true, one is automatically forced to believe that all statements to the contrary must be false; otherwise one cannot in reality believe what one claims to believe. This basic understanding is derived from the universal law of non-contradiction, without which nothing can be determined to be true or false. In the words of Aristotle, "One cannot say of something that it is and that it is not in the same respect and at the same time", e.g. the man is dead and not dead (at the same time and in the same respect), which is false. Or in the case of religious beliefs, if one religion maintains that there is no God, as in a Supreme Omnipotent Personal Being, and another religion maintains that such a Supreme Divine Being does exist, both cannot be equally true. Or given the gospel reading that we have heard, one cannot both maintain that Jesus is singularly and uniquely THE Way, THE Truth and THE Life as well as also accepting as equally valid that apart from him there are other Ways, other Truths and other sources of salvific Life.

But why would such a fallacy gain such widespread acceptance, to the point of being mistaken by many Catholics as a doctrine of the Church? We live in a free marketplace of religious options. It seems that nearly every belief subscribed to in the history of human civilization is available for us to believe. And so many people take a "mix and match" approach to religion. The New Age phenomenon attests to the fact that people actually attempt to create a "make your own" salad for the soul and there is no shortage of consumers in the market. But we are not saved by a human recipe — we're saved by the Truth. And if something is true, then it must be true for all people at all times or as Pope St John Paul II teaches, “Truth can never be confined to time and culture; in history it is known, but it also reaches beyond history.” Likewise, Pope Benedict reminds us that “truth draws strength from itself and not from the number of votes in its favour.”

Pluralism has become attractive today, especially democratic pluralism which allows for personal freedom and social cohesion of a multireligious and multiracial society. Doctrinal pluralism, however, poses serious dangers. There is a danger that social tolerance of difference becomes personal indifference to values; when the lowest common denominator of public life becomes the major determinant of personal identity; when unreflective acceptance of material values precludes a deeper vision of life. Thus, when trying to find the ultimate common denominator among people of different religious or philosophical leanings, one would necessarily have to preclude God, since some religions and individuals choose not to believe in him. Perhaps another prime example of this danger may be seen in the area of morality, specifically in the degradation and cheapening of sexuality and love.

The most popular of all objections against the claims of Christianity today comes from this field. The objection is not that Christianity is not true but that it is not THE Truth; not that it is a false religion but that it is only A religion, one among many. The world is a big place, the objector reasons; "different strokes for different folks". Thus those who speak of the uniqueness of Christianity or even of Christ are deemed narrow minded and intolerant. Critics of Christianity’s exclusive claims would often co-op God into their argumentation – “God just has to be more open-minded than this.”

In our obsessively politically correct world, many actually no longer worship God, but equality instead has become the New Fashionable Deity. The benchmark for this new deity and his religion is a level playing field, even if this means dragging God down to our level. It fears being right where others are wrong more than it fears being wrong. It worships democracy and resents the fact that God is an absolute monarch. One popular Catholic apologist, Peter Kreeft gives this humorous though damning illustration, “If you confess at a fashionable cocktail party that you are plotting to overthrow the government, or that you are a PLO terrorist or a KGB spy, or that you molest porcupines or bite bats' heads off, you will soon attract a buzzing, fascinated, sympathetic circle of listeners. But if you confess that you believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, you will find yourself suddenly alone, with a distinct chill in the air.” You may actually risk being labelled ‘fundamentalist’,   ‘fanatical’ or a ‘religious bigot’.

When people claim that all religions are principally the same, with merely insignificant and superficial differences, as open-minded as they may sound, it actually betrays a certain ideological superiority and ignorance. No one could ever possibly make this claim unless he is abysmally ignorant of what the different religions of the world actually teach. Certainly, there are similarities and analogous parallels, but there are also many differences and even contradictions between truth claims. It doesn’t take a genius to tell you that there’s a world of a difference when one religion that states that there is no God and another one that asserts it, and one could obviously not sweep this inconsistency under the carpet and term it as ‘insignificant’ or ‘non-essential.’ To ignore or to collapse every single difference and contradiction into a single voluminous salad bowl of beliefs is like thinking the earth is flat.

Christianity is not a system of man's search for God but a story of God's search for man. Throughout the Bible, man-made religion fails but God continues to reach down, in spite of our failure. There is no human way up the mountain, only a divine way down. Of course, if these roads to salvation were indeed man made, it would indeed be stupid and arrogant to absolutise any one of them. But if God made the road and the path, He must indeed be a fickle and schizophrenic deity who enjoys confusing his creation by creating contradictory alternatives. But if He made only one path – One Way, One Truth and One source of Life, His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ and the Church which he has left behind as that one certain path for all humanity – then it is humility and not arrogance to accept this one road from God, and it is arrogance, not humility, to insist that all our manmade roads are as good as God’s God-made one.

The Second Vatican Council took a position that distinguished Catholicism from both modernist relativism, that all religions are either the same or that they all have relative value, and fundamentalist exclusivism, which proposes that only the adherents of one religious position can be saved whilst others are damned. The Council taught that on the one hand there is much deep wisdom and value in other religions and that the Christian should respect them and learn from them. But, on the other hand, the claims of Christ and his Church can never be lessened, compromised, or relativised. The Church continues to proclaim that God intends the salvation of all, and he does so through the mediation of His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ, and the Church, which is His Body. And yet those who through no fault of their own do not know Christ or His Church, but who follow the dictates of their conscience as prompted by the Spirit, may also be saved. But their salvation too comes from Christ and never apart from Him.

Though the world may appear to be free market place of ideas, opinions, theologies and ideologies, where we are constantly tempted to come up with a recipe or salad of ideas, we Christians have already made our choice. There may be many rivers which may ultimately lead to the sea, but there is only one Way, one Truth and one Life that leads to Heaven, it is Christ, for He is both the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the Source of Life itself and its destined End.

Yes, Francis missed the mark with his statement, and many of my friends found false comfort in his words. 

We shall see what the next Pope has to say about the subject. 

Eastern and Western Easter!

Happy Easter everyone!

From Premier Christian News,

This year, all Christians will celebrate Easter on the same day – a rare alignment between the Julian and Gregorian calendars...

Both Western and Orthodox churches celebrate Easter on the Sunday after the first full moon following the Northern Hemisphere’s spring equinox - also known as the vernal equinox, and the autumn equinox in the Southern Hemisphere.

This method of calculating Easter was set by the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD.

In a joint statement, the Presidents of Churches Together in England (CTE) marked the occasion, calling it “a special blessing from God.”

The celebration also honours the 1,700th anniversary of the First Council of Nicaea, a foundational moment for Christian unity and belief. Held in 325 AD, the council sought a unified date for Easter and helped shape core Christian doctrine, including the Nicene Creed and discussions on the Trinity.

The CTE Presidents – representing Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Pentecostal, Lutheran, Anglican and other Protestant churches – said: “Often divided by our sins and arrogance, we now come together in unity, with one voice and one heart, as did those divinely-guided individuals seventeen hundred years ago to defend the Truth that has been entrusted to us. We come together to reiterate the message and truth of Nicaea.

“It is a special blessing from God that this year all Christians will celebrate Easter – Pascha – on the same Sunday. We are empowered by this and we draw strength to face the realities of our divisions with a new hope of reconciliation.”

Passiontide music: Passionsgesang

As we walk towards the cross this week, I present to you Passionsgesang by Rheinberger, a work that I had the honor of singing with our choral group this week. If your German is good, just listen. If not, read my translation as you listen.

To death on the cross they are leading my Jesus.

His pain cannot move them nor his composed mind.

They have even crowned his wounds with thorns,

felt no sympathy for him, but mocked him with scorn.

Can nothing bring him back, rescue him from intense suffering?

Oh, must he struggle with death, can no angel free him?

So flow, my tears, let me love my pain,

no comfort will I crave,  quietly my heart will grieve.

Ah! Bowed down towards the earth, he bears the guilt of mankind,

bleeding, he carries our sin, and carries on patiently.

The bindings are hardly removed when he suffers the pain of the cross;

oh pain of new wounds, oh suffering without end.

He calls out to seize the pain, surrounded by shame and ridicule: 

"Why have you abandoned me, oh Lord my God?"

But his complaints are short; he takes courage again.

He can bear it now, the Hand that rests on Him.

And he still has for his friends comfort in his breast;

He begs mercy for his enemies, who are unaware of their guilt.

To the most loyal of his brothers, who has not run away wailing,

he gives another mother to his mother he gives a son.

Look up, downhearted sorrow, your Jesus has accomplished it;

he lowers to soft sleep his head in death.

Darkness covers the sinful land, 

and in the night of horrors God's son is recognized.

Now clarity beams down; I turn my gaze 

back to my Father with joyfulness.

You have allowed me, my Saviour, to look up to him, with childlike trust. 

Forever, forever I thank you.

I thank you forever, I thank you forever!

 

Zum Kreuzestode führen sie meinen Jesus hin,                           

sein Schmerz kann sie nicht rühren, nicht sein gelaß'ner Sinn.   

Sie haben seine Wunden mit Dornen noch gekrönt,                      

kein Mitgefühl empfunden, ihn spottend noch verhöhnt!             

Kann nichts zurück ihn bringen, retten aus schwerer Pein?         

Ach, soll er sterbend ringen, kein Engel ihn befrei'n?                  

So fließet, meine Zähren, so sei mein Schmerz geliebt,               

nicht Trost will ich begehren, mein Herz sei still betrübt.            

Ach! tief gebeugt zur Erde, trägt er der Menschheit Schuld, 

trägt blutend die Beschwerde und wandelt in Geduld. 

Der Bande kaum entbunden, empfängt ihn Kreuzesqual; 

o Schmerz von neuen Wunden, o Leiden ohne Zahl!

Er ruft, den Schmerz zu fassen, 

umdrängt von Schmach und Spott: 

Wie hast du mich verlassen, o Herr, mein Gott! 

Doch kurz sind seine Klagen, er atmet wieder Mut! 

Er kann sie nun ertragen, die Hand, die auf ihm ruht. 

Und hat für seine Freunde noch Trost in seiner Brust; 

fleht Gnade seinem Feinde, sich keiner Schuld bewußt. 

Dem Treusten seiner Brüder, der klagend nicht entfloh'n, 

gibt er die Mutter wieder, der Mutter ihren Sohn!

Blick auf, gesenkter Kummer, dein Jesus hat vollbracht; 

er neigt zum sanften Schlummer sein Haupt in Todesnacht. 

Die Finsternisse decken das sündenvolle Land, 

und in der Nacht der Schrecken wird Gottes Sohn erkannt!

Nun wallet Klarheit nieder; 

ich wende meinen Blick zu meinem Vater wieder mit Freudigkeit zurück. 

Zu ihm hinauf zu schauen, 

gabst Du, mein Heiland, mir ein kindliches Vertrauen. 

Auf ewig dank' ich Dir!

Cloaks and palms

 In Luke 19:28-40 we see another reference to "Cloak Sunday,"

After he had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem.

When he had come near Bethphage and Bethany, at the place called the Mount of Olives, he sent two of the disciples, saying, ‘Go into the village ahead of you, and as you enter it you will find tied there a colt that has never been ridden. Untie it and bring it here. If anyone asks you, “Why are you untying it?” just say this: “The Lord needs it.” ’ So those who were sent departed and found it as he had told them. As they were untying the colt, its owners asked them, ‘Why are you untying the colt?’ They said, ‘The Lord needs it.’ Then they brought it to Jesus; and after throwing their cloaks on the colt, they set Jesus on it. As he rode along, people kept spreading their cloaks on the road. As he was now approaching the path down from the Mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples began to praise God joyfully with a loud voice for all the deeds of power that they had seen, saying,

‘Blessed is the king

   who comes in the name of the Lord!

Peace in heaven,

   and glory in the highest heaven!’

Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to him, ‘Teacher, order your disciples to stop.’ He answered, ‘I tell you, if these were silent, the stones would shout out.’

Why is it that we teach our children that it is all about the palms this Sunday? I think focusing on the cloaks would teach a more valuable lesson. It is a far greater honor to Jesus to sacrifice one's cloak to cover the nasty path for his ride, but for those without cloaks, palm branches would suffice.

 

 

Engaging Street Preachers

 I usually pass street preachers by because I have already answered the call, but I always wonder how many people are reached by their methods. The methods vary as evangelism should because what works for one person might turn another person off. What worked for me was receiving a New Testament from a Gideon and several books from Christian girl friends in college who had been touched by the Campus Crusade for Christ. What did not work was the man with a megaphone warning me of my impending doom. In a way, he was right, but his approach rubbed me the wrong way.

Over at the Catholic Herald, Heather Tomlinson wrote about this in a post titled, "In defence of US-style street evangelism: as seen on streets of Hull in rain or shine" that presents the central question we must ask ourselves when we see the street preacher, 

So, before any of us deign to criticise a street preacher for their message, manner or fondness for conspiracy theories, we might ask ourselves, Well, what I am doing to help people find faith in Christ, including those in our own society who have barely heard His name except as a swear word?

Street evangelism can help people come to faith. Once I met someone who was converted to Christian belief almost on the spot – from atheism – after merely listening to someone reading from the Bible on the street.

For those of us who have a quieter spirit, there are less overt means to reach people on the streets than megaphones. One such Catholic ministry has been out on those same Hull streets every month for eleven years, rain or shine.

This team of mostly women has a particular approach – smiling. Holding a picture of the Divine Mercy image alongside the offer “Would you like a free Rosary?”, this group of faithful Catholics aims for a gentle witness, offering prayer, miraculous medals and booklets to those who pass by.

“Do you have a faith?” they ask those who stop, and listen to the response rather than arguing with it.

It’s a subtler, more gentle approach that was part inspired by the network St Paul Street Evangelisation, which has nearly 200 groups listed across the US, though only a handful abroad.

Hull is not the easiest place to share the faith. The 2021 Census recorded that 49 per cent of the population considered themselves to have no religion, and the Yorkshire area has one of the lowest proportions of Catholics in the UK. Yet these friendly women meet little resistance in their non-confrontational approach.

I was there as an onlooker but I couldn’t help but compare the experience with these patient, listening ladies to my decade spent in Protestant evangelicalism, where I had taken part in many different methods of sharing the gospel: from gentle offers of prayer to street preaching, and even offering fruit (to symbolise the message of the fruits of the spirit being spread). 

The latter type of style was described as “street chaplaincy” by Protestant minister Chris Duffett, who took to the streets of the English city of Peterborough regularly with a gentle message of Christ using creativity. Once he brought a sofa to the city centre, and sat down with a sign: “I will listen.”

During all these experiences I was surprised how open and interested many of the passersby were. In Hull too, the offer of prayer was willingly accepted by many: those with health concerns, the worry etched in their faces; the bereaved, who shed tears; young children were interested in the colourful plastic rosaries; and many of faithful stopped to say hello and “well done” or “thank you”.

The next time I see a street evangelist praying with someone or offering a gentle, nonamplified call, I just may stop and give them a high five.

 

Nard Shampoo

This Sunday's reading is from John 12:1-8,

Six days before the Passover Jesus came to Bethany, the home of Lazarus, whom he had raised from the dead. There they gave a dinner for him. Martha served, and Lazarus was one of those at the table with him. Mary took a pound of costly perfume made of pure nard, anointed Jesus’ feet, and wiped them with her hair. The house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume. But Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples (the one who was about to betray him), said, ‘Why was this perfume not sold for three hundred denarii and the money given to the poor?’ (He said this not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief; he kept the common purse and used to steal what was put into it.) Jesus said, ‘Leave her alone. She bought it so that she might keep it for the day of my burial. You always have the poor with you, but you do not always have me.’

 I did a little shopping on Amazon and found that one can find nard in all sorts of products including shampoo. Mary figured that use out centuries ago.

KFC mocks baptism in an U.K. ad

All I can say about this is that I am glad that I cook at home and never stop at KFC.

From Premier Christian News,  

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has received close to 600 complaints over KFC's new advert, with some viewers accusing the brand of belittling Christianity and mocking baptisms.

The two-minute commercial, titled 'All Hail Gravy Part 2', is part of KFC's ongoing 'Believe' campaign in the UK., developed by the London-based advertising agency 'Mother'.

The ad has stirred controversy for depicting a man being submerged in a lake of gravy as part of a ritual, which some have interpreted as a parody of religious baptism practices. 

The commercial begins with a man encountering a chicken in a forest before following a group carrying a large golden egg. He is led to a lake where a woman immerses him in gravy, an act that transforms him into a chicken mini fillet.

KFC has described the ad as a “modern-day fable” intended to highlight the strong connection between KFC fans and the brand’s Original Recipe Chicken, as well as its signature gravy.

Monica Silic, KFC’s Chief Marketing Officer for the UK and Ireland, told Adweek that the campaign was designed to inspire "fandom" and bring "lightness and levity to the chaotic world" through the brand’s core products.

However, the ad has faced backlash for its disturbing imagery and perceived religious overtones.

Critics have expressed their discomfort, with one commentator on Marketing Beat calling the ad "disgraceful", accusing it of promoting “cultism, cannibalism, grooming" and describing it as "degrading and disturbing". 

The ad’s use of religious language, including billboards featuring a chicken dipper being "divinely dunked" into gravy, has further fueled controversy.

It comes on the heels of a previous KFC campaign in 2014 which also sparked complaints over a commercial that included a song with the lyric "all our stupid songs" performed by the KFC choir.

At the time, the ASA cleared KFC of any wrongdoing, stating the ad was a lighthearted commentary on the frustrations older individuals may feel towards carol singers.

Psalm 32

This Sunday's Psalm is number 32, Beati quorum. This is the way that I read it.

In the first two verses the psalmist (David) speaks to the congregation. 

1 Happy are they whose transgressions are forgiven, *

and whose sin is put away!

2 Happy are they to whom the Lord imputes no guilt, *

and in whose spirit there is no guile!

Next, he speaks to the Lord.

3 While I held my tongue, my bones withered away, *

because of my groaning all day long.

4 For your hand was heavy upon me day and night; *

my moisture was dried up as in the heat of summer.

5 Then I acknowledged my sin to you, *

and did not conceal my guilt.

6 I said, "I will confess my transgressions to the Lord." *

Then you forgave me the guilt of my sin.

7 Therefore all the faithful will make their prayers to you in

time of trouble; *

when the great waters overflow, they shall not reach them.

8 You are my hiding-place;

you preserve me from trouble; *

you surround me with shouts of deliverance.

Then the Lord answers him.

9 "I will instruct you and teach you in the way that you

should go; *

I will guide you with my eye.

10 Do not be like horse or mule, which have no understanding; *

who must be fitted with bit and bridle,

or else they will not stay near you."

Finally, we hear the psalmist sing to us,

11 Great are the tribulations of the wicked; *

but mercy embraces those who trust in the Lord.

12 Be glad, you righteous, and rejoice in the Lord; *

shout for joy, all who are true of heart.

"If it continues long enough, denial is deadly"

 Mark Marshall recently posted about the dangers of denial and used the Episcopal organization's history as an example. What he really points out is the problem with the pewsitters who may be in denial of the theological error, and the resulting tolerance of erroneous innovations, heresy, etc.

But first an old joke. It is probably better said than written, but goes something like this. One Sunday, Reginald and Regina Churchgoer go to their usual church and sit down in their usual spots as they had for decades. When it comes time for the service to begin, the procession includes pride flags and rainbow banners. Then the non-binary priest says, “In the name of our manifold-gendered God, the Creator, the Redeemer, and the Sanctifier along with all of your God-selfs, Amen. The Mother of us all be with you . . .” For the scripture lessons, the Koran is read for one and the Bhagavad Gita for another. But there’s more. When the time nears for the consecration, there is an even newer innovation. Drag queen liturgical dancers sprinkle milk on the communion table.

At that point, Reginald grumbles to Regina, “I swear, if they commit one more abomination…”

Of course, part of the joke is that the Churchgoers have watched their church go step by step into apostasy and abomination through the years and did nothing except keep going to that church, sitting down in that same pew, and dropping their offerings in the plate. Though of a conservative mindset and giving an occasional grumble, they never put their foot down or walked out and likely never will. They were used to that church and somehow felt safe continuing to attend there.

The Churchgoers could have been 20th and 21st Century Episcopalians. When Bishop Pike and later Bishop Spong espoused blatant and very public heresies, denying just about every basic tenet of The Faith, rank and file Episcopalians wrote them off — “That’s just one nutty bishop.” They might have preferred Pike and Spong be disciplined but were not that concerned when they were not. Episcopalians are open-minded after all.

Then when bishop after bishop and diocese after diocese made it difficult for orthodox parishes to keep orthodox by taking away their Prayer Books and then running off orthodox priests and ordinands, those in dioceses that were safer (for a time) said, “That is those dioceses. Our diocese is fine, and our bishop is a good man.”

The consecration of partnered gay Gene Robinson as bishop finally shook up the Episcopal Church and led many to leave and form the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). But many orthodox and somewhat orthodox still stayed. My parish, being the only non-TEC Anglican parish in town, expected unhappy Episcopalians to come our way. But few did. And Ephraim Radner was among those who insisted the orthodox should stay. And many, again, said, “That’s one bishop.” And, after all, perhaps their bishop did not approve of consecrating Gene Robinson.

But before long, it became close to impossible for a relatively orthodox diocese to elect an orthodox bishop and receive the necessary consents from the other bishops. And still some orthodox remain in The Episcopal Church, saying, “That’s not my parish.” And now there is even this Redeemed Zoomer character posting that orthodox Anglicans should return to TEC.

Denial upon denial upon denial. The results were:

Inaction or feeble action against apostasy while it was still feasible to combat it within TEC. When some finally did take action, it was already too late for The Episcopal Church. Many suffered as a result.

Once orthodox dioceses and parishes being overrun.

Resulting danger to souls accompanied by disobedience to the commands of Scripture to reject and evict false teachers from the church. (2 John 10, 11)

The death of a once august denomination.

In short, if it continues long enough, denial is deadly.

While I was never in denial and was never accepting of the innovations, the vast majority of my fellow pewsitters in my former parish were quite content to sit there in silent assent.

I have said before that tolerance leads to acceptance which leads to affirmation and eventually blessing.

Don't deny it.  

You have to wonder...

After reviewing this Sunday's reading from 1 Corinthians 10:1-13, I had to wonder what revisionist preachers and their pewsitters would be thinking about parts of Paul's advice. See if you can pick out what I am talking about.

I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our ancestors were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ. Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them, and they were struck down in the wilderness.

Now these things occurred as examples for us, so that we might not desire evil as they did. Do not become idolaters as some of them did; as it is written, ‘The people sat down to eat and drink, and they rose up to play.’ We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day. We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did, and were destroyed by serpents. And do not complain as some of them did, and were destroyed by the destroyer. These things happened to them to serve as an example, and they were written down to instruct us, on whom the ends of the ages have come. So if you think you are standing, watch out that you do not fall. No testing has overtaken you that is not common to everyone. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tested beyond your strength, but with the testing he will also provide the way out so that you may be able to endure it.

Of course it is the warning to not indulge in sexual immorality that caught my attention. In Paul's day this would involve things like adultery, incest, lust, and homosexual acts. Our culture and many churches have accepted most of these, with the exception of incest, as perfectly fine and in the case of homosexual acts, something to be celebrated.

These days our revisionist friends have not just redefined sexual immorality, they have removed it from the lexicon.

So, when confronted with those strange words of St. Paul, the revisionist preacher can conveniently ignore them or treat them as relics of an unenlightened age. 

Paul would call that putting "Christ to the test".

You have to wonder what people will be thinking when they listen to 1 Corinthians 10:1-13 this Sunday.

A God of the people, by the people, and for the people

It seems that the American increasingly favor a god of their own creation.

From Premier Christian News,

A study by the Cultural Research Center has revealed that 'Christianity' in America is becoming an increasingly vague term, as only 40% of Americans believe God exists and influences human lives.

Even for those who believe, an increasing number say they are hesitant to “develop intimacy” with God, or allow Him to impact their lifestyle choices.

Two-thirds of American adults identify as “Christian” – yet only 16% of those surveyed say that God is the “most important” element of their life.

Of those who believe in God’s existence, 30 million reject the notion that He is actively involved in every aspect of their life, whilst over 80 million admit they do not have an intimate, interactive relationship with Him.

When asked what the God of the Bible provides to them, a majority of believers said He supplies hope (72%), comfort (71%), love (70%), peace (65%), guidance (64%), compassion (60%), joy (60%), and mercy (58%)...

...Barna describes the figures as “shocking”, saying that the survey indicates a widespread version of ‘Christianity’ which has little to do with God – and more to do with nominal cultural markers.

Author and research director, Dr George Barna says: “When you put all of these insights together, we understand we have fashioned the God of the Bible to be a deity reconfigured into our own image in order to fit within our personal comfort zone.

“[Therefore], the trials and tribulations, as well as the multifaceted demise of the nation, come into sharper focus.”

A god of the people, by the people, and for the people huh?

How well is that working out for us?

A god that fits within your comfort zone is not the God of the Bible.  

So how do you keep God as the "most important" element in your life?

Jerusalem, Jerusalem

 

Jerusalem 2022 during our visit

This Sunday's reading is from Luke 13:31-35 in which Jesus foretells his entrance into Jerusalem, 

At that very hour some Pharisees came and said to him, ‘Get away from here, for Herod wants to kill you.’ He said to them, ‘Go and tell that fox for me, “Listen, I am casting out demons and performing cures today and tomorrow, and on the third day I finish my work. Yet today, tomorrow, and the next day I must be on my way, because it is impossible for a prophet to be killed away from Jerusalem.” Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often have I desired to gather your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! See, your house is left to you. And I tell you, you will not see me until the time comes when you say, “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord.” ’

Jesus knew what awaited him. We were lucky to travel there when the risk to our lives was relatively low.  

 

Endorsing blasphemy: What else would you expect from an old Marxist?

As if I needed any more reasons to disagree with U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, he added them this week.

From Ben Johnson at The Washington Stand,

Over the weekend, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the most popular Democratic presidential hopeful of the last decade, thanked a trans-identifying musician for belting out a blasphemous song that accused God of rape, demeaned the Crucifixion, and insulted the Virgin Mary.

The lead singer of the group Against Me! — a man born Tom Gabel, who now calls himself “Laura Jane Grace” — put the “punk” in punk rocker when he debuted his new single, “Your God (God’s D**k)” at the Bernie Sanders “Fighting Oligarchy” rally in Kenosha, Wisconsin, last Friday, March 7.

“Does your God have a big, fat [organ]? ‘Cause it feels like He’s f****** me!” grunted “Grace” gracelessly. The rest of the sloppy lyrics formed a litany of mishmashed heresy, LGBTQ fetishism, and anti-Christian bile attacking the Bible’s scientifically accurate view of biological sex. The song portrayed God engaging in sodomy and “other kinks,” mocked the Virgin Mary, and besmirched the Crucifixion by conflating Christ being hung on a cross with a slang biological term. (You can read more of the lyrics, if you have the stomach, here.)

Perceptive observers viewed this pro-trans, anti-Christian blasphemy at a socialist rally as a window into the far-Left’s deepest political fantasies which, like their sexual fetishes, they would like to normalize at the national level. 

Disgusting, but quite consistent with the old Marxist dream of a world without religion. 

Why did Bernie thank the singer? Remember when Bernie answered this question,

The following exchange took place between Anderson Cooper of CNN and presidential candidate Bernie Sanders in the March debate in Flint, Michigan:

Cooper: “Senator Sanders, are you intentionally keeping your Jewish faith in the background during your campaign?”

Sanders: “I am very proud to be Jewish, and being Jewish is so much of what I am. Look, my father’s family was wiped out by Hitler in the Holocaust. I know about what crazy and radical and extremist politics mean. I learned that lesson as a tiny, tiny child when my mother would take me shopping and we would see people working in stores who had numbers on their arms because they were in Hitler’s concentration camps. I am very proud of being Jewish, and that is an essential part of who I am as a human being.” (Christianity Today)

 But not essential enough for him to call out this blasphemous performance.

Lent 1

The reading for the first Sunday o f Lent is taken from Luke 4:1-13,

  Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the wilderness, where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing at all during those days, and when they were over, he was famished. The devil said to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, command this stone to become a loaf of bread.’ Jesus answered him, ‘It is written, “One does not live by bread alone.” ’

 Then the devil led him up and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And the devil said to him, ‘To you I will give their glory and all this authority; for it has been given over to me, and I give it to anyone I please. If you, then, will worship me, it will all be yours.’ Jesus answered him, ‘It is written,

“Worship the Lord your God,

   and serve only him.” ’

 Then the devil took him to Jerusalem, and placed him on the pinnacle of the temple, saying to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down from here, for it is written,

“He will command his angels concerning you,

   to protect you”,

and

“On their hands they will bear you up,

   so that you will not dash your foot against a stone.” ’

Jesus answered him, ‘It is said, “Do not put the Lord your God to the test.” ’ When the devil had finished every test, he departed from him until an opportune time.

As I began my Lenten cycle of fasting and prayer this week, I have already faced the temptation to rely on my own will power and not the power of the Holy Spirit. The first job is to recognize just who the tempter is. 

At least my priest assures me that I don't have to fast on Sundays. 

41 more days until Easter. 

 

 

Meanwhile, en France: Gynecologists must treat men who say they are women

From The Bridgehead which I quote in full, 

A French gynecologist has been suspended from practicing medicine for one month and penalized with an additional five months of probation by the French Medical Council for declining to treat a 26-year-old man who identifies as a woman.

In August 2023, a trans-identifying man and his partner showed up at Dr. Victor Acharian’s office in the Pyrénées-Atlantiques in the Pau region of southwestern France. Acharian, naturally, treats only women, and after several moments, his secretary told the man that Acharian wouldn’t see him. “I told her that I’m not competent, but I can guide you,” Acharian explained. “I can refer you to services that can take better care of you. But after I said that, things went south.”

The prospective patient began to insult the staff, yelling “You’re transphobic!” at Acharian, and stormed out with his partner, who left a Google review stating: “It was my trans partner’s first appointment. He refused to see her, his secretary threw us out coldly. I advise against [visiting]. Never again.”

Acharian responded in an attempt to defend himself:

SIR, I am a gynecologist, and I take care of real women. I have no skills to take care of MEN, even if they have shaved their beards and come to tell my secretary that they [have] become women. My GYNECOLOGICAL examination table is not suitable for examining men. You have specialized and very competent services to take care of men like you. Thank you for informing TRANS people to never come for consultation with me.

The trans-identifying man promptly sent a complaint to Conseil National de l’Ordre des Médecins (CNOM)—the regulatory body that oversees the medical profession in France—and the LGBT activist organization SOS Homophobie released a statement, tagging the French Minister of Equality between Women and Men and the Fight against Discrimination Bérangère Couillard: “We denounce the transphobic and discriminatory remarks of gynaecologist Victor Acharian in Pau. Transphobia is a reality with serious consequences, particularly in access to health. It affects the entire territory.”

The tactic worked. Acharian was summoned to appear before the disciplinary board of the French Medical Council on December 16th, 2024, where he was suspended from practice for the month of March, with an additional five-month probation. He was warned that if he “engaged in transphobia” or similarly denied treatment to a trans-identifying male during that period, he would be further disciplined. Acharian’s insistence that he lacked the expertise to treat such patients was ignored.

Acharian noted that he’d never had a “transgender” patient before and pointed out, with a hint of plaintive defiance, that: “Just because it’s a cavity doesn’t mean it’s a classic vagina.”

Reduxx noted that Acharian had previously responded similarly to a one-star review with the statement: “Dear Sir. I do not know you. You cannot know me, since I am a gynecologist, and I only treat women. As for your political militancy, that does not concern me.”

Acharian, like so many other ordinary citizens targeted by the transgender movement’s attempts to conform society to their ideology and force collective compliance, found out the hard way that trans militancy very much does concern him. Édouard Martial, the lawyer for the spurned trans-identifying man gloated about his suspension: “We are pleased to have confirmation that what happened that day was totally abnormal.” The suspension and probation weren’t enough for SOS Homophobie, which suggested that his actions were “also punishable by criminal sanctions.”

 He/She/it clearly intended to create a scene and get this doctor in trouble. This is similar to the tactics that the LGBTs have used against Christian bakers.

 This patient should have been referred to a psychiatrist. 

The French Medical Council needs a shrink too.

Don't tell it on the mountain

This Sunday's reading from Luke 9:28-43 tells the story of the Transfiguration,

Now about eight days after these sayings Jesus took with him Peter and John and James, and went up on the mountain to pray. And while he was praying, the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became dazzling white. Suddenly they saw two men, Moses and Elijah, talking to him. They appeared in glory and were speaking of his departure, which he was about to accomplish at Jerusalem. Now Peter and his companions were weighed down with sleep; but since they had stayed awake, they saw his glory and the two men who stood with him. Just as they were leaving him, Peter said to Jesus, ‘Master, it is good for us to be here; let us make three dwellings, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah’—not knowing what he said. While he was saying this, a cloud came and overshadowed them; and they were terrified as they entered the cloud. Then from the cloud came a voice that said, ‘This is my Son, my Chosen; listen to him!’ When the voice had spoken, Jesus was found alone. And they kept silent and in those days told no one any of the things they had seen.

They told no one.  

On the next day, when they had come down from the mountain, a great crowd met him. Just then a man from the crowd shouted, ‘Teacher, I beg you to look at my son; he is my only child. Suddenly a spirit seizes him, and all at once he shrieks. It throws him into convulsions until he foams at the mouth; it mauls him and will scarcely leave him. I begged your disciples to cast it out, but they could not.’ Jesus answered, ‘You faithless and perverse generation, how much longer must I be with you and bear with you? Bring your son here.’ While he was coming, the demon dashed him to the ground in convulsions. But Jesus rebuked the unclean spirit, healed the boy, and gave him back to his father. And all were astounded at the greatness of God.

The world was not ready to hear about the appearance of Moses and Elijah or the voice from heaven saying, "This is my Son, my Chosen; listen to him!" 

People would not listen to him until after the Resurrection proved him to be the Son of God. 

They still don't want to listen, and because of that they certainly won't tell it on the mountain.  

"Queer and bisexual" woman as "Jesus Christ Superstar"

Here's a production that I hope is going nowhere,

From Premier Christian News

British actress and Grammy Award-winning singer Cynthia Erivo is set to make history as the first black woman to portray Jesus Christ in a major production of Jesus Christ Superstar.

The decision to cast Erivo, who came out as queer and bisexual in 2022, has ignited strong reactions from both critics and supporters.

Erivo, best known for her role as Elphaba in Wicked, will take on the iconic role in a special production at the Hollywood Bowl, running from 1st-3rd August, 2025.

Screwtape is smiling.

So when the Mary Magdalene character sings "I don't know how to love him", what pronoun will be used? If Mary uses "her", then the play will have more explaining to do than just trying to justify a "queer and bisexual" female Jesus. 

I remember when "Jesus Christ Superstar" (JCS) first came out. We had to review the musical's songs for a religion class in school. I thought Herod's song  had the best tune and lyrics: "Prove to me that your no fool. Walk across my swimming pool." I don't think the priest in charge of the class ever pointed out the major flaw in JCS which is that there is no Resurrection. 

As St. Paul wrote,

And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised.  And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.  If in Christ we have hope[a] in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied. - 1 Corinthians 15:14-19 English Standard Version

I fully expect the Hollywood bowl to sell out for this performance. L.A. is not a bastion of orthodox Christianity. 

It just won't have the legs or the theological strength to make it in my neck of the woods. 

 

Loving your enemies

This Sunday's reading from Luke 6:27-38 contains instructions that seem to go beyond our human nature to follow.

‘But I say to you that listen, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also; and from anyone who takes away your coat do not withhold even your shirt. Give to everyone who begs from you; and if anyone takes away your goods, do not ask for them again. Do to others as you would have them do to you.

‘If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. If you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love your enemies, do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return. Your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

 ‘Do not judge, and you will not be judged; do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven; give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap; for the measure you give will be the measure you get back.’

How opposite of the world we live in is the world Jesus desires for us. 

Yet another reason why we need a savior. 

How U.S. Churches were profiting from illegal immigration

I have been receiving emails from the Episcopal organization bemoaning the fact that due to cuts by the Trump administration they are having to lay off 22 employees who were handling their illegal immigration (they call it "migration") ministry. 

 From The New York Post,

Episcopal Bishop Mariann Budde’s sermon to President Trump during an inaugural prayer service, coupled with her church’s advocacy for humanitarian immigration programs, reveals a striking hypocrisy — one that could be seen as self-serving and even a conflict of interest.

That’s because the federal contracting arm of the church, Episcopal Migration Ministry (EMM), is paid to bring in people on resettlement programs that Trump has temporarily paused and targeted for re-evaluation.

EMM budget figures for 2024 are not available yet, but in 2023 it earned $53 million from various taxpayer-funded government programs to resettle 3,600 individuals.

EMM “sponsored” 6,400 individuals from 48 countries in 2024. The leading nationalities were Afghans under a special humanitarian program, refugees from the Democratic Republic of Congo, and others in smaller numbers from seven distinct special resettlement programs.

In an wild understatement, a 2012 Government Accountability Office report quotes an official noting that “funding is based on the number of refugees they serve, so affiliates have an incentive to maintain or increase the number of refugees they resettle each year rather than allowing the number to decrease.”

Since EMM’s ability to lobby is restricted, the Episcopal Church itself, being a separate legal entity from EMM, lobbies in D.C. for more programs that benefit EMM.

EMM brings in LGBTQ refugees and asylees in a special federal refugee program started during the Obama administration called “Preferred Communities.”

This program pays a premium over standard refugee resettlement for contractors that resettle “refugees experiencing social or psychological difficulties, including emotional trauma resulting from war and/or sexual or gender-based violence; survivors of torture; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) refugees; refugees who are HIV positive; populations with physical disabilities or other medical conditions.”

”Of course, it is not fair to question the Episcopalians alone on this.

Add this from Crisis, 

According to recent numbers obtained from Complicit Clergy, the Biden administration granted Catholic non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and charities nearly $3 billion in immigration-related funding over the past four years. In comparison, Catholic charities received $0.8 billion during the first Trump administration. Since 2009, Catholic Charities and related organizations have received over $5.2 billion tax dollars by providing immigration-related services to the federal government. 

Churches had been facilitating illegal behavior and have likely passed along violent criminals into our cities. These "migrants" were not properly vetted entering the U.S.A. 

The money the NGOs got created more of an incentive for illegal entry as well as creating incentives for the NGOs to provide more services to more people.

Good for Trump for cutting off that gravy train of unaccountable dollars. 

 

 

Four Blessings and Four Woes

 This Sunday's reading is from Luke 6:17-26,

He came down with them and stood on a level place, with a great crowd of his disciples and a great multitude of people from all Judea, Jerusalem, and the coast of Tyre and Sidon. They had come to hear him and to be healed of their diseases; and those who were troubled with unclean spirits were cured. And all in the crowd were trying to touch him, for power came out from him and healed all of them.

 Then he looked up at his disciples and said:

‘Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. ‘Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you will be filled. ‘Blessed are you who weep now, for you will laugh. ‘Blessed are you when people hate you, and when they exclude you, revile you, and defame you on account of the Son of Man. Rejoice on that day and leap for joy, for surely your reward is great in heaven; for that is what their ancestors did to the prophets.'

‘But woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation. ‘Woe to you who are full now, for you will be hungry. ‘Woe to you who are laughing now, for you will mourn and weep.

 ‘Woe to you when all speak well of you, for that is what their ancestors did to the false prophets.'

Jesus is reminding us that there is good and there is evil, and we must be thankful and joyful even when things do not seem to going our way. This helps explain why Paul and Silas could sing after being beaten and thrown into prison.

The crowd joined in the attack against Paul and Silas, and the magistrates ordered them to be stripped and beaten with rods.  After they had been severely flogged, they were thrown into prison, and the jailer was commanded to guard them carefully.  When he received these orders, he put them in the inner cell and fastened their feet in the stocks.

About midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the other prisoners were listening to them.  Acts 16:22-25

I wonder if I would be able to do that. 

"Speechcrime" goes in one direction

I had not seen "speechcrime" (one word) in print before reading the post below, but "speech crime" (two words) is something that shares a commonality with "hate crime" legislation. Initially, speech crime was intended to restrict the incitement of genocide, or other horrors, but now we see speech crime being applied to other forms of expression.  

We are all aware that to burn a Bible in public will not land you in jail or cause you to go into hiding for fear of your life, but to burn a Koran...

From Spiked Online,

A man was arrested at the weekend after allegedly burning a copy of the Koran – no, not in Iran or in Saudi Arabia, but in Manchester, in the UK. Apparently, it can now be a criminal offence in 21st-century Britain to express your distaste for a seventh-century religion.

The arrest followed a livestream on social media that appeared to show a 47-year-old man setting light to the Koran, page by page, on Saturday. This was just two days after Salwan Momika, an Iraqi atheist, was assassinated in Sweden, seemingly as punishment for burning copies of the Muslim holy book in public.

You might have imagined that in a modern, liberal democracy such as Britain that blaspheming against a religious text would be none of the police’s business. After all, laws criminalising blasphemy against Christianity were officially repealed in England and Wales in 2008, with the last successful blasphemy conviction obtained in 1977. But the old crime of blasphemy has been slowly replaced with a new raft of criminal offences against so-called hate speech.

According to Greater Manchester Police, the alleged Koran burner was arrested under suspicion of a ‘racially aggravated public-order offence’. Assistant chief constable Stephanie Parker told GB News that police felt compelled to make a ‘swift arrest’, fearing the livestream could cause ‘deep concern… within some of our diverse communities’. The modern language of diversity and multiculturalism disguises the medievalism of the decree that’s being enforced.

The injunction to police so-called hate speech, especially when it comes to ‘Islamophobia’, has led British police forces to routinely do the bidding of Islamic reactionaries. In 2023, when four boys in Wakefield brought a Koran to school, and one ended up lightly scuffing it, police recorded it as a ‘non-crime hate incident’. Ten miles down the road, at Batley Grammar School, a teacher was forced into hiding in 2021 after showing a cartoon of Muhammad in his religious-studies class. He remains in hiding to this day, but no action has ever been taken against those who maliciously circulated his name or sent him credible death threats. If anything, in the eyes of the authorities, his hardline Islamist aggressors, whose religious sensitivities were offended, were the actual victims here.

The Europe-wide expansion of hate-speech laws to cover blasphemy against Islam means there is now an alarming affinity between the authorities and hardline Islamic conservatives and even violent Islamist extremists. It is striking that when Salwan Momika was assassinated last week in Sweden after burning the Koran, he was due to face trial for exactly the same alleged ‘crime’. Of course, the modern European state insists it is punishing hate speech, not blasphemy, and it does so with arrests, fines and prison sentences, not with violence or executions. But both our secular authorities and Islamist radicals agree that ridiculing Islam must be punished as a speechcrime.

Alarmingly, in Britain at least, restrictions on what we can say about Islam are only likely to get tighter. The Labour government is considering whether to impose a broad and controversial definition of Islamophobia on all public bodies, which would chill discussion on just about any issue that might touch on Islam or Muslims. Home secretary Yvette Cooper and security minister Dan Jarvis have both vowed to expand the recording of non-crime hate incidents to tackle Islamophobia. This would further entrench the role of the police as enforcers of Islamic blasphemy law.

In a modern, free society, the right to mock, scorn and reject all gods, prophets and religious texts ought to be sacrosanct. This new regime of speech policing, however ‘progressive’ and ‘inclusive’ it purports to be, represents a catastrophic step backwards.

Fraser Myers is deputy editor at spiked and host of the spiked podcast. Follow him on X: @FraserMyers.

As Christians, we are saddened when someone burns a Bible. They may be rejecting God, but they are in need of our love, and they cannot harm God or us by burning a book or by drawing a cartoon. The Word will live on.

C'mon Muslims, it is just ink on paper that is burning. Don't worship a book. Worship God.

"And So You Have Come to Believe"

In this Sunday's reading from 1 Corinthians 15:1-11, Paul testifies of the early witnesses to the Resurrection.

Now I should remind you, brothers, of the good news that I proclaimed to you, which you in turn received, in which also you stand, through which also you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message that I proclaimed to you—unless you have come to believe in vain.

For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 

Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 

Last of all, as to someone untimely born, he appeared also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace towards me has not been in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them—though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me. Whether then it was I or they, so we proclaim and so you have come to believe.

Paul mentions that most of the witnesses are still living, and that lends veracity to his testimony and to the historical truth of the Resurrection.  

 

Meanwhile, "en France"

I saw this at The European Conservative and thought I should re-post it here.

French TV Channel Fined for Calling Abortion the World’s Leading Cause of Death

Hélène de Lauzun — November 21, 2024

The French media regulator has fined the conservative channel CNews €100,000 for, during a Catholic programme, saying that abortion is the world’s leading cause of death. The episode reveals the extent to which the debate on abortion is deadlocked in France.

In February 2024, presenter Aymeric Pourbaix, during the Catholic programme “En quête d’esprit,” broadcast every Sunday on the conservative channel CNews, showed an infographic on the causes of death, ranking abortion as the leading cause, with 73 million deaths each year worldwide. That translates to 52% of annual deaths, far ahead of cancer (10 million) and smoking (6.2 million).

The journalist’s comments sparked a wave of indignation in the mainstream press, on the grounds that abortion cannot be considered a “cause of death” because the foetus should not be considered a living being.

Violent criticism was levelled at the CNews channel, owned by Catholic businessman Vincent Bolloré, prompting an investigation into the channel in the following weeks. The channel was accused of being dangerous and of broadcasting biased information—in other words, contrary to the canons of progressive thought. The alleged scandalous nature of the comments made by Pourbaix justified, according to the Minister Delegate for Health at the time, the inclusion of the right to abortion in the French constitution, which was achieved a few months later.

The violence of the attacks forced the channel to backtrack and apologise for what was presented as a handling ‘error’: the computer graphics should never have been broadcast on screen. On X, the channel was even asked to apologise “for the people who may have been hurt by this infographic.”

I consider that apology to be a spineless act of capitulation.  

After several months of proceedings, the French media regulatory authority Arcom has fined CNews €100,000 for this episode. According to Arcom, the broadcaster failed in its “obligation of honesty and rigour in the presentation and processing of information.” 

In the weekly magazine Valeurs Actuelles, Jean-Marie Le Méné, head of the Fondation Jérôme Lejeune, denounced the totalitarian nature of this decision, which proves the denial of reality that surrounds the practice of abortion in France:

Arcom writes: “Abortion cannot be presented as a cause of death.” Equating an aborted child with a dead person would make abortion a homicidal act. So that abortion can be carried out with a clear conscience, it is forbidden to say that abortion takes away life. Otherwise the keystone of the system collapses. But who believes this fiction?

He adds: “Abortion, the leading cause of death in the world, is unfortunately a fact, not an opinion.”

CNews and C8—also owned by Vincent Bolloré—are the only channels ever to have been subject to financial penalties in France.

Hélène de Lauzun is the Paris correspondent for europeanconservative.com. She studied at the École Normale Supérieure de Paris. She taught French literature and civilization at Harvard and received a Ph.D. in History from the Sorbonne. She is the author of Histoire de l’Autriche (Perrin, 2021).

The word police are out there. I wonder when hate speech laws will be applied here to anyone who even hints that an abortion "kills" a "living" human being. 

Truer Words

The next time an Episcopal bishop or priest says something about speaking truth to power, I want you to ask them if they included the words of this Sunday's psalm and Old Testament readings in their sermon/lecture.

 Psalm 71 In te, Domine, speravi

1 In you, O Lord, have I taken refuge; *

let me never be ashamed.

2 In your righteousness, deliver me and set me free; *

incline your ear to me and save me.

3 Be my strong rock, a castle to keep me safe; *

you are my crag and my stronghold.

4 Deliver me, my God, from the hand of the wicked, *

from the clutches of the evildoer and the oppressor.

5 For you are my hope, O Lord God, *

my confidence since I was young.

6 I have been sustained by you ever since I was born;

from my mother's womb you have been my strength; *

my praise shall be always of you.

Jeremiah 1:4-10

4 Now the word of the Lord came to me saying,

5 ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,

and before you were born I consecrated you;

I appointed you a prophet to the nations.’

6 Then I said, ‘Ah, Lord God! Truly I do not know how to speak, for I am only a boy.’ 7 But the Lord said to me,

‘Do not say, “I am only a boy”;

for you shall go to all to whom I send you,

and you shall speak whatever I command you.

8 Do not be afraid of them,

for I am with you to deliver you,

says the Lord.’

9Then the Lord put out his hand and touched my mouth; and the Lord said to me,

‘Now I have put my words in your mouth.

10 See, today I appoint you over nations and over kingdoms,

to pluck up and to pull down,

to destroy and to overthrow,

to build and to plant.’

God knows us before He forms us in the womb, and He is our strength even before we are born. Truer words have never been spoken.

Lord, save the unborn. Those are the words of truth that will never be spoken by those in power in the Episcopal organization. 

The Bishop and the President

After "Bishop" Budde lectured President Trump and Vice President Vance from the pulpit of the National Cathedral, I have witnessed reactions from many sides. My revisionist friends rejoiced and placed images of the Budde onto their social media posts while my Christian friends posted well reasoned responses to the "Bishop's" lecture like this one from Campbell. 

"Christians must speak about the conditions which exist in the world, and play our part in shaping society. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus tells us we are salt and light, the salt which prevents corruption and the light which pushes back darkness. We should act from a biblical standpoint, holding the world and its ways up to the bar of God’s judgement, not our own.

The pronouncements of liberal Christians like Bishop Budde make that task more difficult. She makes it easier for unbelievers to dismiss Christian intervention in social affairs as ill-thought-out regurgitation of progressive talking points garnished with a few Christian terms. If Christians are to speak out, we must do the serious and hard work of examining our world from a biblical perspective. Only then will we deserve to be heard."

The President and Vice President probably never thought a "Bishop" would put on such a performance as a "sermon". I was not at all surprised. I remember when Budde was elected, and she behaved exactly as predicted back then.

 

When I heard her speak I thought, "I've heard this before." 

Indeed I have from many a pulpit, and that is one of the many reasons why I am no longer an Episcopalian. 

I am glad that Budde has gotten so much publicity. She has shown the world what it takes to be an Episcopalian, and what you must believe if you want to join their club. While my die hard Episcopalian friends loved it, I think the majority of Christians saw it as a stark warning to avoid the Episcopal denomination.

Making it too easy

This Sunday's Revised Common Lectionary (RCL) reading is Nehemiah 8: 1-3, 5-6, 8-10. You may note that verses 4 and 7 are left out. I have re-inserted them below (highlighted in blue). After reading them, I can guess why they were omitted.

1 all the people gathered together into the square before the Water Gate. They told the scribe Ezra to bring the book of the law of Moses, which the Lord had given to Israel. 2 Accordingly, the priest Ezra brought the law before the assembly, both men and women and all who could hear with understanding. This was on the first day of the seventh month. 3 He read from it facing the square before the Water Gate from early morning until midday, in the presence of the men and the women and those who could understand; and the ears of all the people were attentive to the book of the law. 

4 The scribe Ezra stood on a wooden platform that had been made for the purpose; and beside him stood Mattithiah, Shema, Anaiah, Uriah, Hilkiah, and Maaseiah on his right hand; and Pedaiah, Mishael, Malchijah, Hashum, Hash-baddanah, Zechariah, and Meshullam on his left hand. 

5 And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people, for he was standing above all the people; and when he opened it, all the people stood up. 6 Then Ezra blessed the Lord, the great God, and all the people answered, ‘Amen, Amen’, lifting up their hands. Then they bowed their heads and worshipped the Lord with their faces to the ground. 

7 Also Jeshua, Bani, Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodiah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, the Levites, helped the people to understand the law, while the people remained in their places. 

8 So they read from the book, from the law of God, with interpretation. They gave the sense, so that the people understood the reading.

9 And Nehemiah, who was the governor, and Ezra the priest and scribe, and the Levites who taught the people said to all the people, ‘This day is holy to the Lord your God; do not mourn or weep.’ For all the people wept when they heard the words of the law. 10 Then he said to them, ‘Go your way, eat the fat and drink sweet wine and send portions of them to those for whom nothing is prepared, for this day is holy to our Lord; and do not be grieved, for the joy of the Lord is your strength.’

I have sat and listened as readers struggled with Old Testament names, and I suspect the editors had as well. Not wishing to scare away potential lay readers, the editors of the RCL decided to remove the list of those assisting Ezra.

We pewsitters should not be deprived of the pleasure of watching our friends struggle at the lectern with all of those names!

Pre-emptive pardons vs. pardoning sins

I for one had never thought about pre-emptive pardons as a constitutional power granted to a President of the United States. I always thought a pardon was issued for someone who has been convicted in a court of law.  

I guess for a revisionist President, the plain meaning of the Constitution is something to be ignored if it stands in the way of your agenda. Much like he must hold a revisionist view of the Bible where it comes to marriage and abortion, he feels free to make it up as he goes.

Fortunately, he is gone.

Still it makes me wonder how God, the only one who can pardon us, feels about pre-emptive pardons. 

Mark 2:3-12 comes to mind,

And they came, bringing to him a paralytic carried by four men.  And when they could not get near him because of the crowd, they removed the roof above him, and when they had made an opening, they let down the bed on which the paralytic lay. And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” 

Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts,  “Why does this man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”  And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they thus questioned within themselves, said to them, “Why do you question these things in your hearts?  Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise, take up your bed and walk’?  But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”—he said to the paralytic—  “I say to you, rise, pick up your bed, and go home.”  And he rose and immediately picked up his bed and went out before them all, so that they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, “We never saw anything like this!”

The man's past sins were forgiven, but what about the next sin he incurs?

As Anglicans, we beg for forgiveness every time we confess, and we confess a lot.

A pre-emptive pardon would seem to something that is given to those who have not confessed to any wrongdoing, but who probably could be convicted of such. 

Jesus' ministry began with a call to repentance, so I don't think God gives us a pre-emptive pardon in the same sense as these recent Presidential pardons even though He knows that we are going to sin again, and again. 

I'll have to think this one out a while longer.

The Injustice of the Revised Common Lectionary

This Sunday we have another example of how the Revised Common Lectionary (RCL) sanitizes the Bible. In Psalm 36, Dixit injustus, only verses 5-10 are to be heard by the congregation. 

5 Your love, O Lord, reaches to the heavens, *

and your faithfulness to the clouds.

6 Your righteousness is like the strong mountains,

your justice like the great deep; *

you save both man and beast, O Lord.

7 How priceless is your love, O God! *

your people take refuge under the

shadow of your wings.

8 They feast upon the abundance of your house; *

you give them drink from the river of your delights.

9 For with you is the well of life, *

and in your light we see light.

10 Continue your loving-kindness to those who know you, *

and your favor to those who are true of heart.

 That sounds so sweet. The pewsitters will never know the real context of the Psalm because they won't hear the introduction, 

1 There is a voice of rebellion deep in the heart of the wicked; *

there is no fear of God before his eyes.

2 He flatters himself in his own eyes *

that his hateful sin will not be found out.

3 The words of his mouth are wicked and deceitful; *

he has left off acting wisely and doing good.

4 He thinks up wickedness upon his bed

and has set himself in no good way; *

he does not abhor that which is evil.

And they won't hear the conclusion,

 

11 Let not the foot of the proud come near me, *

nor the hand of the wicked push me aside.

12 See how they are fallen, those who work wickedness! *

they are cast down and shall not be able to rise.

Important warnings are lost by these edits, and that is to the detriment of the pewsitters, most of whom will never in their lifetime hear the full messages and as a result will not know to heed their calls.

Now that is an injustice.

Shame on you RCL.

I Can't Imagine... Do We Need a "Funeral Channel"?

Garth Brooks and Trisha Yearwood singing John Lennon’s song, Imagine, at Jimmy Carter's funeral in the National Cathedral.

 Atheistic drivel at a funeral no less. 

I didn't believe it until I pulled up the video on YouTube. Interestingly, YouTube has turned off comments and "Thumbs Down" votes for this one. 

So much for free speech.

The National Cathedral is run by Episco-pagans, and Jimmy Carter's Baptist church tolerated his revisionist views, so I would expect no less from this service. 

I am glad that I didn't tune in.

This makes me second guess my proposed "Funeral Channel ™" (I added the little trademark) for television. Since people seem to love to watch celebrity send offs, I thought that endless hours of royal funerals, matinee idols' "celebrations of life", expert commentary with play-by-play analysis, cross cultural funerary programming, and advertising from casket makers, local funeral homes, and anti-aging remedy manufacturers would be a sure-fire money maker. 

It certainly would get some attention initially.

But would it have legs?

Maybe, if I could get Garth and Trisha involved.

Imagine that!

The Revised Common Lectionary: Use at your peoples' own risk

 This Sunday's reading from Luke 3:15-16,21-22 has another of those curious deletions found in the Revised Common Lectionary (RCL).

15 As the people were filled with expectation, and all were questioning in their hearts concerning John, whether he might be the Messiah, 16 John answered all of them by saying, ‘I baptize you with water; but one who is more powerful than I is coming; I am not worthy to untie the thong of his sandals. He will baptize you with* the Holy Spirit and fire.

21 Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heaven was opened, 22 and the Holy Spirit descended upon him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven, ‘You are my Son, the Beloved; with you I am well pleased.’

The deleted verses, 17-20, contain then bad news that the editors of the RCL felt should be withheld from the Sunday pewsitters.

17 His winnowing-fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing-floor and to gather the wheat into his granary; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.’

18 So, with many other exhortations, he proclaimed the good news to the people. 19 But Herod the ruler, who had been rebuked by him because of Herodias, his brother’s wife, and because of all the evil things that Herod had done, 20 added to them all by shutting up John in prison.

See what can happen when you proclaim the good news. You get locked up and beheaded.

Guess what happens when you don't proclaim the good news. 

John the Baptist tells us.

Chaff.

Musn't let the congregation hear that!

 

Oh Virginia!

 Those of you who are employed or in the wage-earning years of life should be wary of what you post on social media. I quote from CBN,

A Virginia realtor accused of "hate speech" for posting a Bible verse on Facebook has been found "guilty" of an ethics violation.

The Virginia Association of Realtors ruled on December 11 that Wilson Fauber of Staunton violated the ethics code that prohibits realtors from "certain religious expressions."  Fauber maintains he did nothing wrong and is expected to appeal. 

This started to come to light last year when the 70-year-old Fauber, a realtor and pastor, decided to run for Staunton City Council. Long before his decision to run, Fauber had reposted a scripture from Rev. Franklin Graham on his personal Facebook page in 2015. It stated that homosexual sex is a sin, based on Leviticus 18:22. Then last year, two Staunton realtors, including an openly gay man, filed a complaint with the Virginia Association of Realtors accusing Fauber of "hate speech." 

Sounds like a political hit job to me. 

When asked why he believes this is all coming out now in 2024, Fauber said, "Because the National Association of Realtors is woke. The leadership of the National Association of Realtors has made it very clear about their involvement in endorsing and approving of the LGBTQ community, and just recently, just a few weeks ago actually, in Charlottesville, Virginia, the National Association of Realtors provided funding for a Drag Queen Show." 

The Charlottesville Area Association of Realtors did host a Drag Show in November in the name of a "Fair Housing Symposium", which was reportedly funded in part by the National Association of Realtors' "fair housing grant." We contacted the N.A.R. for a comment and no one has responded to our request. 

Fauber's attorney sees it as a double standard that the N.A.R. can use realtor money to fund drag shows but Fauber can't post a Bible scripture on his Facebook page. "That's the position that's being suggested, correct," said Michael Sylvester with Founding Freedoms Law Center.

He tells CBN news that while this is a violation of free speech, there's a catch.  "So, it all changed in 2020 when the National Association of Realtors adopted a rule that prohibits anybody from speaking what they deem 'hate speech' against certain protected classes such as sexual orientation or gender identity. But what's incredible here is the post that Wilson made was in 2015, five years before that rule even existed. He simply was presenting his religious views about marriage that should not qualify for a hate speech charge," Sylvester said. 

For now, Fauber can keep his real estate license while pursuing a possible appeal. He says this "guilty ruling", however, sets a bad precedent and will likely affect other organizations, not just realtors. 

"Christians don't have rights, and this is just totally wrong. And the National Association of Realtors being the largest trade organization in America, they have set a precedent by adopting this policy. If I'm guilty because I post my religious beliefs in a meme or a scripture on my Facebook or social media accounts, and if that's guilty of "hate speech"… there are millions and millions of Christians that agree with my position, and we don't have a voice," Fauber said.

If the guilty verdict stands, Fauber could face fines as high as $15,000 and possibly lose his license which would likely end his real estate career. 

As Christians, we are called to spread the Gospel, even the parts that are offensive because it would be wrong to promise people a rose garden when Jesus never said it was going to be easy. 

To the homosexual realtor who was offended by Leviticus, I say, just wait until you read Romans 1.