Former Archbishop of Canterbury starts UK teabag movement - (Updated with Gledhill video)

I've never had much use for George Carey, even when he was Archbishop of Canterbury. On the death of his predecessor, Lord Runcie, I remarked that there were now no living former Archbishops of Canterbury and hoped that the shortfall would soon be remedied. George Carey allowed the 1998 Lambeth Conference to be hijacked by hate. While still in office, he did all in his power to advance the re-ordering of the Anglican Communion according to the alien ecclesiology of the Amero-African right.

Ever since being replaced as Primate of All England by the backbone deficient Rowan Williams, Carey has taken every opportunity to undermine his successor and stir the pot. I don't recall Robert Runcie ever behaving such an ass, nor Michael Ramsey. Geoffrey Fisher was apparently addicicted to inappropriate public attacks on his successor, so perhaps it's only the evangelical ex-Cantuars who feel the need to behave like prats.

In any event, the most recent bilge emerging from Lord Carey of Clifton should be sufficient proof that the man hasn't got the sense God gave a squirrel, nor the integrity God gave a stoat.

Sane people will have trouble believing what he said. In fact, he makes the average American teabagger sound the very exemplar of moderation and common sense.

According to George. Christians are being persecuted in the United Kingdom.

No, he seriously said that.

Really.

In a state where Christian churches are the official religion in the two largest of the four subsidiary countries; in a state where the head of state must, by law, be a member of one of those churches; in a state where 26 goombahs with silly hats are automatically accorded standing in a national legislative body on account of their seniority in their religious denomination; in a state where retiring bishops and retiring senior clergy from other Christian denominations are routinely appointed to the same legislative body; in a state where the national broadcaster is required by law to cover religious affairs; in a state where the national government makes significant financial contributions to the upkeep of several historic places of worship still used for that purpose; in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Christians are "persecuted."

Too rich, really. This is beyond satire.

Perhaps George would like to go to certain parts off the world where Christians are actually persecuted. Last week, dozens of Christians, including small children, were murdered in Jos, Nigeria. Not so long ago, Christian places of worship in Pakistan have been attacked. Likewise Christian neighbourhoods in Cairo have been attacked.

Then, perhaps George could just shut his festering gob and stop talking nonsense.

George, you are an embarrassment to the Church.

I can't figure out how to embed the video, but here is Times of London religion correspondent Ruth Gledhill saying much the same thing, albeit without quite so much contempt for George's foolishness.

Andrew Brown in The Guardian.

Stephen Bates in The Guardian.

Here's Ruth's video:

Scandals - and how to make them worse

The gospels don't describe very many occasions where Jesus directly interacted with children. There is the episode, recounted in all the gospels, where Jesus tells the Twelve to let the children come to him. But perhaps the more startling is the episode in the synoptic gospels where Jesus warns of dire consequences for those who cause the little ones to stumble.

‘If any of you put a stumbling-block

before one of these little ones who believe in me,

it would be better for you

if a great millstone were fastened around your neck

and you were drowned in the depth of the sea.'

.

That's pretty serious.

.

In recent weeks (and on occasion over the last several years), one is moved to wonder what folk in the Vatican think about that passage.

.

Or if they think about it at all.

.

I have no interest in claiming that my church or any other is without sin in this regard. The residential schools issue is a blot on all the major churches that existed at the time. The best thing to be said for Anglicans in that regard is that our then-Primate, Michael Peers, was the first to offer an apology for the abuse experienced by far too many children in those schools - and did so in the face of significant criticism from the Anglican right.

.

But for our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters, the scandal isn't even any longer the thousands of cases of sexual abuse of children from around the globe. As scandalous as that is, I don't think most reasonable people blame entire institutions for the actions of individuals. And, despite the overheated rhetoric in some quarters, there is no particular evidence to support that Roman Catholic priests are more likely to be sexual abusers or paedophiles than any other professional / vocational demographic.

.

While each act of sexual abuse - which is always an abuse of power - is undeniably scandalous, it isn't the acts of sexual abuse themselves that are fuelling the rage that many reasonable feel towards the Roman heirarchy. It is the perception that the institution has protected abusers, covered up abuse, placed additional children at risk and left victims to bear the brunt of an institution's failings.

.

The evidence does seem to suggest that, at least some of the time, the Roman heirarchy has been guilty of precisely that. Some evidence does seem to suggest that Benedict XVI may be implicated in some of those cases; one from when he was Archbishop of Munich and others while he was head of the Holy Office. The evidence isn't quite as clear as some critics would suggest, but it does seem to call for a response.

.

To no small degree, public anger has been exacerbated by Rome's own stupidity and incompetence in dealing with the issue. The institutional stonewall, from a public relations perspective, is stupid enough. To start whinging that any criticism of the Pope or the Curia is rooted in anti-catholicc bigotry is utterly idiotic. To compare these criticisms to mid-20th-century anti-semitism is simply evil. (The Pope still has the authority to silence troblesome preachers. Benedict would be well-advised to silence Raniero Cantalamessa, an embarrassment to the entire Franciscan tradition. Someone so manifestly ignorant of the gospel should not be preaching it.)

.

David Clohessy, who speaks for an organization of those who have survived priestly abuse, pretty much nailed the odiousness of Cantalamessa's vile spew.

"It's heartbreaking to see yet another

smart, high-ranking Vatican official

making such callous remarks

that insult both abuse victims and Jewish people.

.

It's morally wrong to equate actual physical violence and hatred

against a large group of innocent people

with mere public scrutiny of a small group of complicit officials."

.

As a PR professional, I'd give Benedict the same advice I'd give any client caught in scandal.

.

1. Stop digging yourself deeper.

.

2. Come clean.

.

3. Admit your mistakes.

.

4. Apologize. To victims. Directly.

.

5. Commit yourself to addressing the problems - not only the abuse, but the institutional mishandling of both abusers and abused.

.

6. Follow through on that commitment.

.

Or, if I can sum it all up in one point:

.

1. Do the right thing, finally.

Sarah Palin declares the teachings of Jesus "unacceptable."

The relevant piece begins at 0:54 to 1:02. Yet another example of how those who pretend to be Christians so manifestly hate the words of Jesus.

"If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also."

Matthew 5:39

The rest of the piece is simply further rejectionist spew.

Quo in capite Pu ac Porcellus venatum produent et paene vusillum captant

Porcellus in domo magnifica media in fago habitabat, fagus media in silva erat et Porcellus media in domo vivebat. Apud domum tabula quaedan fracta erat, ita inscripta: 'Transitus Ve'. Cum Christophorus Robinus Porcellum rogavit, quid hoc significaret, iste dixit, id nomen avi esse et per longum tempus in familia fuisse. Negavit Christophorus Robinus aliquem 'Transitus Ve' vocare posse, sed Porcellus in sententia perseveravit, quia scilicet avus suus ita vocabatur et erat 'Transitus Vehi' breviter complexus, quod erat 'Transitus Vehilius' breviter complexus. Avo duo nomina fuerant ne uno amisso innominatus eveniret - Transitus post patrem et Vehilius post Transitum.

'Etiam mihi,' dixit neglectim Christophorus Robinus, 'duo sunt nomina.'

'Ecce tibi, quod demonstrandum erat,' dixit Porcellus.

et cetera

Alleluia!

Having made, by his incarnation, an acting of stunning solidarity with our humanity; having lived a human life; having accepted to die in the most painful manner possible; Jesus, Emmanuel, God With Us experiences the depth of human despair. The stunning cry of the God forsaken God.

And having lived and died as one of us, he has risen from the grave, destroying the power of death forever.

Or, as Facebook would have it:

Jesus is online again. Alleluia!

Poisson d'avril

In case any of my Canadian readers haven't yet figued it out, the previous post was an April Fools prank - poisson d'avril.

Within minutes of posting the link on Facebook late last night, I had a response from a leading trade union figure in BC who had swallowed the poisson hook, line and sinker. In the morning, I had a panicked phone call from the NDP candidate referred to by name - who realized the date just as I was answering the phone. The spouse of the deputy leader of the party in another province spent the morning getting increasingly angry - until the poisson dropped. The news (though not the link) were forwarded to a federal NDP discussion list where incredulity reigned.

I didn't hear back from Lorne Calvert. Pat Atkinson thought it was great fun, and wondered what her father would say. (I imagine that it couldn't be printed on a priest's blog.)

Pundits' Guide, Canada's pre-eminent political data aggregator site, sent the story to Twitter, where it subsequently went viral. (I'm not sure if PG was fooled or was helping the fun to grow.)

I've received an email indicating that the Sun Media chain contacted Count Ignatieff's office seeking confirmation of the story.

Not a bad April Fools Day fishing for a Simple Massing Priest from Regina.

Lorne Calvert to run for Ignatieff Liberals

Just heard some appalling news directly from one of the people involved.

Federal Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff will be flying into Regina this morning to announce the appointment of former Saskatchewan NDP Premier Lorne Calvert as the Liberal Party candidate in the Palliser constituency. Calvert is originally from Moose Jaw, and had represented the city in the Saskatchewan Legislature in the days prior to becoming Premier. If successful, Calvert would be the third former NDP premier on Ignatieff's front bench, alongside former Ontario Premier Bob Rae and former BC Premier Ujjal Dossanjh.

This is a major blow to nominated NDP candidate Noah Evanchuk. The NDP had been targetted Palliser as one of their best chances in Saskatchewan, where the party of Tommy Douglas has been shut out for three straight elections.

From Regina, Ignatieff will proceed to Saskatoon to announce the appointment of former provincial NDP Minister Pat Atkinson as the Liberal candidate in Saskatoon - Rosetown - Biggar. Atkinson, who is still an NDP front bencher in the Saskatchewan Legislature has always been seen as a party stalwart, consistently hostile to overtures from the federal Liberals.

On this blog, there is little love for the Liberal Party in general, and even less for turncoats and quislings. Many will know that this blogger was very close to one of these individuals. The sense of betrayal is palpable. The Simple Massing Priest comes to this day with a wounded heart.