More than 50 years ago, a Dagenham vicar gave me some of the best advice I would ever receive. He knew I was a pretty tough lad — an East End boy from a working-class background who loved a fiercely-fought game of football — but he also knew that my relatively newly-acquired religious faith would be tested as never before when I joined the hurly-burly of National Service.

I was 18 years old and excited to be joining the Royal Air Force, but this wise clergyman knew that the joshing and banter of any barracks or training camp would exacerbate any existing weakness. So the man who had so warmly welcomed me to his church only a few years earlier sent me out into the world with this rallying cry.

‘Stand up for your faith, George,’ he said. ‘Don’t wait for people to mock you for it. Live it out, be proud of it.’

Read here

Leading bishops led calls to defend hospital chaplains in the face of a campaign to exclude religious influence from the National Health Service.

Secularist campaigners have demanded that the taxpayer should no longer fund chaplains at a time when the NHS is making cuts.
 
In an impassioned debate at the Church of England General Synod in London, bishops called for “every effort” to be made to preserve their position.
 
The Church faces a series of challenges to its official role. Today, the High Court will hand down judgment in what could prove to be a landmark case over the role religious worship plays in public places.
 
An atheist councillor from Bideford, Devon, launched a legal challenge over the practice of opening meetings with Christian prayers.
 
The National Secular Society, which supported the challenge, believes religion should no longer have a privileged role in a society where church attendance is in decline.
 
But Christians say secularisation could undermine the foundations of society.

Last year, the National Secular Society published a report singling out hospital chaplains. It argued that they cost the NHS £29 million a year for “no clinical benefit”.

Speaking in the debate, the Rt Rev Mike Hill, Bishop of Bristol, said hospitals would be “poorer” places without chaplains and patients would be denied comprehensive care if their services were removed.

Read here
 

SATURDAY APRIL 21st 2012.

‘First Things’, organised jointly by the Church of Ireland Evangelical Fellowship, New Wine Ireland, the Evangelical Fellowship of Irish Clergy and Reform Ireland, will be an opportunity for members of the Church of Ireland and of other denominations to come together to celebrate and affirm the essentials of evangelical faith in the 21st century. The two keynote speakers will be the former Bishop of Rochester, the Rt. Rev. Michael Nazir-Ali, who is now President of the Oxford Centre for Training, Research, Advocacy and Dialogue (OXTRAD), and the Bishop of Argentina, the Rt. Rev Greg Venables, formerly Primate of the Southern Cone.

The conference will be held in Lurgan, beginning at 2pm in the Jethro Centre. During the afternoon session, both bishops will address the conference, examining the issues of mission and evangelism and the uniqueness of Jesus in a pluralist society.

At an evening celebration in Shankill Parish Church, a panel including Bishop Nazir-Ali, will respond to questions addressing a range of issues which evangelicals are grappling with today, and Bishop Venables will preach on the importance of holding to ‘First Things’.

The celebration will be led by Bishop Harold Miller.

The conference is open to all and more details are available from the following websites:

There's something divine in the air. Agnostics and atheists are beginning to nod respectfully in the direction of the Almighty, while still, of course, maintaining that He's not there.

Just before he died, Christopher Hitchens expressed some generous sympathy for the Christian worldview, much to the evident frustration of his interlocutor Richard Dawkins. Then philosopher Alain "I'm not pretending to be an atheist" de Botton had his own transfiguration moment the other day when he proposed a "temple to atheism", because (I think) he acknowledges a human capacity for transcendance.

Now the venerable, agnostic natural historian Sir David Attenborough has confessed to Kirsty Young on Desert Island Discs that there might, after all, be a God: "I don't think an understanding and an acceptance of the four billion-year-long history of life is any way inconsistent with a belief in a supreme being."

Read here

Charles Moore reviews Religion for Atheists by Alain de Botton (Hamish Hamilton).

'The most boring and unproductive question one can ask of a religion,” says Alain de Bottonin the first sentence of this book, “is whether or not it is true.” Many believers will find this an unpromising start, but de Botton is not writing for them. His book is subtitled “A non-believer’s guide to the uses of religion”.

Veteran broadcaster says belief in evolution is not incompatible with religion

His award-winning programmes on the natural world follow evolutionary history and the teachings of Darwin.

Now, however, Sir David Attenborough has speculated that there may be a God – and insisted it would not be ‘inconsistent’ with the theory of evolution.

Speaking on Desert Island Discs, the 85-year-old naturalist told how recognising the possibility that God could exist meant he was an agnostic rather than an atheist.

Sir David was a guest on yesterday’s edition of the Radio 4 programme to mark its 70th anniversary. It was his fourth appearance on the show, having previously been a guest in 1957, 1979 and 1998.

He told presenter Kirsty Young: ‘I don’t think that an understanding and an acceptance of the 4billion-year-long history of life is in any way inconsistent with a belief of a supreme being. I am not so confident as to say that I am an atheist. I would prefer to say I am an agnostic.’
 
Read here

This is modern Britain, where a foreign-born paedophile cannot be put on a plane back to Pakistan but traditional Christians are arrested for disobliging comments on homosexuality — a triumph of intolerance over faith.

Between Christmas and New Year, the 70th anniversary of an event, which in no small way helped change the course of history, passed almost unnoticed. On December 26, 1941, less than three weeks after Japan had attacked Pearl Harbor, Winston Churchill addressed both branches of Congress in the United States. The prime minister, who was in Washington to agree military strategy with President Roosevelt, used the invitation from Senators and Representatives to excoriate the Axis powers and pose a simple question: “What kind of people do they think we are?”
 
This wasn’t Churchill’s finest oratorical effort, but it was clever. As well as denouncing the forces of darkness and the enormity of their aggression, it was an invitation to ordinary Britons, suffering the horrors of war at home, to reflect on the challenge ahead. He was, in effect, asking fellow citizens: “Of what are we made?”
 
Seven decades later, one wonders how the great man would view the kind of people the British have become. What has happened to the freedoms and independence for which he urged us to fight? It’s hard to imagine our wartime chieftain being anything other than dismayed by the erosion of sovereignty, capitulation to the “equalities industry” and enslavement by debt. We have lost control of domestic borders, ceded legal primacy to Europe and allowed the Storm Troopers of political correctness to stamp their corrosive version of right and wrong on British law.

Read here

The front page of Wednesday’s Independent is devoted to a story that chronicles the collapse of public and private morality in Britain.

[...]  The bottom line … the Independent article presents a classic example of a religion ghost in a secular news story. The topic under review — public and private morality — is inherently connected with religion, yet no word about religion appears in the story.

Should the Independent have noted the absence of religion in the public morality report? Is religious belief intrinsic to morality? Can the two be separated? Given Prime Minister David Cameron’s widely publicized December speech about Christian Britain — how could the Independent not touch upon religion in its report on collapsing public and private morals.

Read here

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

Prof Roger Trigg of Kellogg College, Oxford, said that judges increasingly “curtail” the religious views of people in favour of other “social priorities”.
 
After studying a series of judgments throughout Britain, Europe and North America, he concluded there was a “clear trend” of judges favouring equality and non-discrimination over religious freedom.
 
Prof Trigg, a member of the university’s faculties of theology and philosophy, argued this was proof of how religion was coming under threat from the judiciary as part of a “hierarchy of rights”.
 
Prof Trigg, the founding President of the British Society for the Philosophy of Religion, said that as a result the courts were “limiting human freedom itself”.
 
“Religious freedom and the right to manifest religious belief is a central part of every charter of human rights,” he said on the eve of the launch of his book on Wednesday.
 
“But in recent years there has been a clear trend for courts in Europe and North America to prioritise equality and non-discrimination above religion, placing the right to religious freedom in danger.

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

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

Read here

Newt Gingrich won the Republican presidential primary in South Carolina with the strong support of evangelicals. According to exit polls, two-thirds of voters described themselves as evangelical or born-again Christians, 44 percent of which voted Gingrich. Their support turned the first Southern primary from a close race to a runaway victory for Gingrich.

[...]  Gingrich won, in part, because he was able to win over both religious conservatives and those for whom religion is less important in the voting booth. Voters who said the religious beliefs of candidates mattered “a great deal” backed both Gingrich (45 percent) and Santorum (32 percent).

A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World's Christian Population

A comprehensive demographic study of more than 200 countries finds that there are 2.18 billion Christians of all ages around the world, representing nearly a third of the estimated 2010 global population of 6.9 billion. Christians are also geographically widespread – so far-flung, in fact, that no single continent or region can indisputably claim to be the center of global Christianity.

A century ago, this was not the case. In 1910, about two-thirds of the world’s Christians lived in Europe, where the bulk of Christians had been for a millennium, according to historical estimates by the Center for the Study of Global Christianity.2 Today, only about a quarter of all Christians live in Europe (26%). A plurality – more than a third – now are in the Americas (37%). About one in every four Christians lives in sub-Saharan Africa (24%), and about one-in-eight is found in Asia and the Pacific (13%).

Read here

It used to be said that the church shouldn’t stick its nose into politics. It seems to be accepted now that there is a legitimate role for church leaders to make political noises, though it is still thankfully off-limits to make party-political interventions.

The interesting thing is that it is now more usual for politicians, and indeed courts, to interfere with theology. I have a book coming out in February that looks at this phenomenon (We Don’t Do God by George Carey and Andrew Carey, Monarch). My view is that at a time when the doctrines of Christianity have less influence than ever before, secular doctrines are now being imposed upon us all.

The Labour MP Chris Bryant argued in The Independent on Monday that the Church’s attitude to homosexuality is simply absurd and should be abandoned (Chris Bryant: The Church of England needs to forget its silliness about homosexuality’, 14 October 2012).

The church’s teaching, he argued, “condemns people to a life without the joy of sexual intimacy – and all to placate a theology that is as misplaced and out of date as Christianity’s one-time advocacy of slavery. “Is it too much to hope that one day the Church of England will get this silliness out of its system,” he concluded.

Mr Bryant’s views should certainly be heeded by the Church but we should not be bounced by political or legal pressure. David Cameron has also taken to lecturing the churches on gay marriage, as have other MPs. On Monday, The Independent’s leader column suggested that since the Church of England was established it should adopt secular doctrines on issues like homosexuality.

Politicians, and it has to be said some judges, want a ‘tame’ Christianity that is palatable to the tastes of the metropolitan power elite. In The Lion, the witch and the wardrobe, that great apologist
CS Lewis rejects the notion that Aslan is a ‘tame’ lion. By this he means that Christ is not a comfortable or predictable figure, but constantly challenges us. And it follows that his disciples should not allow the State to domesticate the Christian faith.

This may lead to many more church and state clashes in the years ahead. There will also be legal challenges for the Churches if they are to maintain their distinctiveness in society. It is too soon to say where this will lead. The Roman Catholic Church has already had to abandon a long-standing role in providing adoption services under pressure from the state and it seems likely there will be further marginalisation of Christianity.

This year’s great difficulty will surround the government’s clear determination to legislate in favour of ‘gay marriage’. There is speculation about a substantial rebellion by Conservative MPs. The consultation begins in March and Christian people should ensure that their voices are heard. We
must continue to contribute to society in a loving and gracious manner. We should not be tempted to withdraw or disengage in a fit of pique. It is more important than ever that Christians constructively seek to make a difference and earn the right to be heard.
 

The Torah Declaration is a public statement signed by 180 Rabbis, Community Leaders, and Mental Health Professionals

Societal Developments On Homosexuality

There has been a monumental shift in the secular world’s attitude towards homosexuality over the past few decades. In particular over the past fifteen years there has been a major public campaign to gain acceptance for homosexuality. Legalizing same-sex marriage has become the end goal of the campaign to equate homosexuality with heterosexuality.

A propaganda blitz has been sweeping the world using political tactics to persuade the public about the legitimacy of homosexuality. The media is rife with negative labels implying that one is “hateful” or “homophobic” if they do not accept the homosexual lifestyle as legitimate. This political coercion has silenced many into acquiescence. Unfortunately this attitude has seeped into the Torah community and many have become confused or have accepted the media’s portrayal of this issue.

The Torah’s Unequivocal And Eternal Message

The Torah makes a clear statement that homosexuality is not an acceptable lifestyle or a genuine identity by severely prohibiting its conduct. Furthermore, the Torah, ever prescient about negative secular influences, warns us in Vayikra (Leviticus) 20:23 “Do not follow the traditions of the nations that I expel from before you…” Particularly the Torah writes this in regards to homosexuality and other forbidden sexual liaisons.

Read here

Read also:  Amsterdam’s chief rabbi suspended over gay cure declaration

The Republican Party’s remaining presidential hopefuls gave a fiery and rousing performance at the Myrtle Beach Convention Center Monday night that featured a first of the debate season: a standing ovation for a participant’s answer.

In the heavily evangelical state, the issues of religious freedom, family, abstinence education, and the rights of the unborn provided many of the forum’s highlights.

Reviving the theme of a prominent television ad, former Texas Governor Rick Perry stated, “This administration is at war against organized religion.” He said, “Catholic Charities cannot take money [from] the federal government…because this administration doesn’t agree with the Catholic Church on the issue of abortion.”

In September, the Obama administration denied millions of dollars in federal grants to the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops, because its top-rated program to assist victims of sexual trafficking will not refer women for an abortion. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee held a hearing on the issue in December.

Perry also slammed the administration for “going after churches” when it asked the Supreme Court to reject the “ministerial exception,” which allows religious organizations like Christian schools to appoint their own ministers. The Supreme Court unanimously rejected the administration’s argument last week.

“If that’s not a war on religion, I don’t know what it is,” Perry said to thunderous applause. “And this administration is out of control.”

Read here

[...]  The flipside of Catholicism’s attractiveness is the comparative intellectual instability within several Protestant denominations – particularly on matters of faith and morals. The Quakers, the Methodists and the Episcopalians have all embraced gay rights to varying degrees. The Episcopalians have even appointed lesbian and gay bishops. This flamboyant liberalism is all well and good for casual church goers who like to see their faith “move with the times”. But it is nothing less than a betrayal to millions of believers who adhered to a certain dogma all their lives, only to see it overturned on a whim. These Protestants have started looking elsewhere for moral leadership and they’re finding it within denominations that their parents once considered heretical. It was the Mormons who provided the money and manpower to ban gay marriage in California, and for the last forty years the Catholic Church has been unbending in its opposition to abortion.

[...]  Many commentators have attacked the Christian Coalition and other religious conservative organisations as peddlers of bigotry and prejudice. But while they have undoubtedly made life difficult for sexual minorities, they have also brought together people from divergent faith groups who once refused even to share the same room. It is one of the great ironies of American history that this exercise in divisive politics has also healed centuries old divisions. In this spirit, South Carolina might offer the Republican Party’s first non-WASP nominee. A stained glass ceiling is about to be broken.

Read here

[...]  Following his death, on Radio 4’s Saturday Live a resident poet wrote this obituary for Christopher Hitchens:

So long then Mr Hitchens,
Your perfect rage still burning bright.
Off to meet your maker,
Or maybe not, if you were right.

And that’s the problem, isn’t it? Christopher Hitchens was either right or he was wrong. Either there is a God or there is not. There is no ‘in between’ on this one, where we can agree to differ and both be right in our own way.

If he was right, and there is not, then in a sense he wins. But it is a Pyrrhic victory, for if there is no God we are all ultimately losers in the game of life. The one thing in that case that Christopher Hitchens will never be able to say to anyone is, “I told you so.”

But what if he was wrong? What if there is a God, and on Thursday last week Christopher Hitchens indeed went to meet his maker?

You see it isn’t quite right to describe Christopher Hitchens as an atheist. He described himself as an anti-theist. It wasn’t that he disbelieved in God, the way I disbelieve in leprechauns. He raged against God.

Read here

A thirteen year old boy is abducted from his home and for ten years forced to live and work with a gang of violent terrorists. To save his own life, he has to go along with atrocities. He will be brutalised and he will brutalise others. He will have to get used to killing – sometimes killing people he knows. He will be aware that return home is practically unthinkable, because he will be regarded as beyond redemption by most of his neighbours, even his family. He knows that there is nothing in front of him except the likelihood of an early death – a knowledge that he tries to blot out with the drugs that keep him more or less anaesthetised for a lot of the time from the reality of what he has to do.

In June of this year, I had the privilege of spending an evening with about thirty young men and women who had been through this nightmare experience. I met them in Bunia, in Eastern Congo; thirty or so youngsters, none more than the middle twenties, out of several hundred thousand across the globe who have been forced into becoming 'child soldiers.

Read here

Christianity is slowly, but surely losing ground in England and Wales, according to an official survey yesterday.

The number who declare themselves to be Christian has dropped by nearly 10 per cent in five years, while the number of non-believers is growing.

The state research into race and religion also showed that Christians are less than half as likely to attend a place of worship as followers of other traditions.

The Citizenship Survey showed that Christianity remains the faith of the great majority of the population. But its share dropped from 77 per cent to 70 per cent between 2005 and 2010.

Over the same period the numbers who say they have no religion went up from 15 per cent to 21 per cent.

Read here