The Archbishop Surrenders the Citadel
I've seen this floating about these here internets today: Rowan Williams welcomes pre-emptively surrenders to Sharia Law in Britainistan the U.K.:
The Archbishop of Canterbury says the adoption of certain aspects of Sharia law in the UK "seems unavoidable". Dr Rowan Williams told Radio 4's World at One that the UK has to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system. Dr Williams argues that adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law would help maintain social cohesion. For example, Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court. He says Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty".I suppose that by "maintain social cohesion," the Archbish is trying to politely say, "keep Johnny D'himmi from blowing up St. Paul's." Let me be absolutely brutal about this: It is a simple fact of history that a society which no longer believes in itself dies. Sometimes it simply withers away. Usually, it is devoured by another society that very much does believe it itself. Hint: there's no isolated withering going on here. As much as I admire much of what Britain has stood for over her history, when I read of this kind of tripe coming out of the mouths of her leaders (and Church politics aside, the Arch-Freakin'-Bishop of Canterbury is supposed to be one of the mainstays of that society), I'm not really sure any more that she isn't about to get exactly what she deserves. Once the Caliphate is established, we'll see just how much the new state will be willing to grant autonomy to those not willing to go along with its cultural mandates as well. My guess? It'll bring a whole new meaning to the policy of "hands off". Yips! (for first sighting) to TitusOneNine. WELL AT LEAST THE ARCHBISHOP DOESN'T THINK HE'S A COWGIRL YIPS from Steve-O:
Giddyup!
I guess papal infallibility doesn't extend to fashion choices, either. And yes, I'm going to pshop that picture together with Uma Thurman next time. The time after that? It's with Rosie. Them's the stakes. Weapons-Free Yips! back from Robbo: Well, I thought I'd made it clear that I was commenting on the collapse of Brit culchah, not stirring up the Ecclesiastic Authority debate again. However, as Steve-O has run up the black flag, you may fire at will. YEAH, I WENT THERE YIPS from Steve-O: Consider it nailed to the mast. Mr. Chekov, set phasers on "mirth" Puzzled Yips! Back from Robbo: No, folks, I dunno where he's going with that one either. And ironically, if you believe Mark Steyn's data on the shifting demographics and declining native populations across Europe, this clip becomes funny in a way perhaps not intended by its writers. BTW, and this has nothing to do with religious opinion, but I've never understood why people fall all over themselves about this clip. The idea is funny for about the first five seconds, but then the Team proceeds to drive it into the ground with a sledgehammer, a flaw notable in most of the humour in this movie.
Posted by: Robert at 12:44 PM
Comments
1
My Dearest Robbo,
Thank you for your post. Yes, I agree with as you have written, "It is a simple fact of history that a society which no longer believes in itself dies."
What seems to be lost here (from the news reports) is that the Archbishop of Canterbury, along with the most senior bishops of the Church of England make up that faction on Parlaiment that as been known since about the time of the English Reformation, as The Lords Spiritual. (the other Lords are the hereditary ones and the non-hereditary that are made Lords intheir lifetime for poltical donations) The ABC's position is two-fold - head vicar of the English Church and full voting member in Parlaiment. His two-fold role was precisely why our framers created separation of Church and State. If these comments he has made are examined in the ight of his true posish, the story of England's fall to certain 'acceptable' aspects of Sharia law (the law that advocates the beating of women) is a big one and most breathtaking.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, with his speech, has failed not only his flock, but England, and, most importantly, the God he undertook to serve.
Also compared to the Arfican Primates in his Church who have fought off sharia law in their own provinces, he must appear to be a joke.
Thank you for your post. Yes, I agree with as you have written, "It is a simple fact of history that a society which no longer believes in itself dies."
What seems to be lost here (from the news reports) is that the Archbishop of Canterbury, along with the most senior bishops of the Church of England make up that faction on Parlaiment that as been known since about the time of the English Reformation, as The Lords Spiritual. (the other Lords are the hereditary ones and the non-hereditary that are made Lords intheir lifetime for poltical donations) The ABC's position is two-fold - head vicar of the English Church and full voting member in Parlaiment. His two-fold role was precisely why our framers created separation of Church and State. If these comments he has made are examined in the ight of his true posish, the story of England's fall to certain 'acceptable' aspects of Sharia law (the law that advocates the beating of women) is a big one and most breathtaking.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, with his speech, has failed not only his flock, but England, and, most importantly, the God he undertook to serve.
Also compared to the Arfican Primates in his Church who have fought off sharia law in their own provinces, he must appear to be a joke.
Posted by: Mrs. Peperium at February 07, 2008 01:40 PM (uTaIH)
2
Right now Sir Winston Churchill is spinning in his grave.
And how in bloody Hell do you have social cohesion with differing legal systems for various citizens?
And how in bloody Hell do you have social cohesion with differing legal systems for various citizens?
Posted by: rbj at February 07, 2008 01:59 PM (ybRwv)
3
Steve 0- While I appreciate your continued contribution to this blog, I fail to see why the Pope in a "Cowboy hat" has anything to do with this.
The C of E has absolutely gone off the rails and turned on its parishoners in totality. What else to make of sponsoring Sharia law in any form? Is this the law of the C of E? What must the parishoners make of this statement?
The elites of British politics have capitulated to Islamic culture and law. It is now only the "flock" that needs to be guided... The whole thing makes me sick quite frankly and we are way past joking about it.
Again, I have no idea what you think the Catholic Pope has to do with this. You might want to explain.
The C of E has absolutely gone off the rails and turned on its parishoners in totality. What else to make of sponsoring Sharia law in any form? Is this the law of the C of E? What must the parishoners make of this statement?
The elites of British politics have capitulated to Islamic culture and law. It is now only the "flock" that needs to be guided... The whole thing makes me sick quite frankly and we are way past joking about it.
Again, I have no idea what you think the Catholic Pope has to do with this. You might want to explain.
Posted by: Babs at February 07, 2008 03:10 PM (iZZlp)
4
That hat? It's dead sexy.
He's got some great Mitres, too.
http://coo-eesfromthecloister.blogspot.com/search/label/Mitres
Me, I wish he's go back to the Papal Tiara, though. Just to see the press reaction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_Tiara
He's got some great Mitres, too.
http://coo-eesfromthecloister.blogspot.com/search/label/Mitres
Me, I wish he's go back to the Papal Tiara, though. Just to see the press reaction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_Tiara
Posted by: The Abbot at February 07, 2008 03:17 PM (b1/bF)
5
You don't have to Photoshop the Archbishop to show him next to a terrorist.
But as the Rev. is not given to dressing like a cowgirl, at least he won't adopt the shmata-head look along with the jihadist talking points.
When Prince Charles is crowned king the Church of England will have a head to match.
But as the Rev. is not given to dressing like a cowgirl, at least he won't adopt the shmata-head look along with the jihadist talking points.
When Prince Charles is crowned king the Church of England will have a head to match.
Posted by: Mark S at February 07, 2008 03:27 PM (207tw)
6
Over at the Telegraph's Holy Smoke blog, Damian Thompson weighs in with both barrels on the archbishop's latest:
This is the most monumentally stupid thing I have ever heard an Archbishop of Canterbury say, and I’ve heard a few. In fact, it’s more than stupid: it’s disgusting.
And then:
What will the Archbishop of Canterbury's fatuous remarks about Sharia do to his authority as head of the Anglican Communion? Pretty well finish it off, I should think.
This is the most monumentally stupid thing I have ever heard an Archbishop of Canterbury say, and I’ve heard a few. In fact, it’s more than stupid: it’s disgusting.
And then:
What will the Archbishop of Canterbury's fatuous remarks about Sharia do to his authority as head of the Anglican Communion? Pretty well finish it off, I should think.
Posted by: Mark S at February 07, 2008 03:54 PM (207tw)
7
Right you are, Abbot! Moreover, His Holiness has the shoes to match the hat. A very "fashion-forward" Pope is our German shepherd.
As to the Archbish, didn't he accept the status of being a "White Druid" a few years ago? Any Christian clergyman who would do so outside of a game of "Dungeons and Dragons" doesn't strike me as someone you can count on to stoutly defend Christianity against threats from any direction.
Of course, he is not the only leader of the CofE to lack apparent confidence in the Christianity. If I recall correctly, some CoE bishops have openly derided many elements of the Creed--e.g., the Virgin Birth.
As to the Archbish, didn't he accept the status of being a "White Druid" a few years ago? Any Christian clergyman who would do so outside of a game of "Dungeons and Dragons" doesn't strike me as someone you can count on to stoutly defend Christianity against threats from any direction.
Of course, he is not the only leader of the CofE to lack apparent confidence in the Christianity. If I recall correctly, some CoE bishops have openly derided many elements of the Creed--e.g., the Virgin Birth.
Posted by: Old Dominion Tory at February 07, 2008 04:23 PM (AmDb2)
8
Kinda sorta a druid.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,2763,769703,00.html
With a hat, er, headdress of his own . . .
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/08/06/ndruid06.xml
Although I think the coverage was probably overblown. Seems pretty harmless to me. Kind of like the whole native-American smudging thing in the American church. More silly than anything else.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,2763,769703,00.html
With a hat, er, headdress of his own . . .
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/08/06/ndruid06.xml
Although I think the coverage was probably overblown. Seems pretty harmless to me. Kind of like the whole native-American smudging thing in the American church. More silly than anything else.
Posted by: The Abbot at February 07, 2008 04:33 PM (b1/bF)
9
Abbot, ODT, here's a direct link to the Telegraph piece on the archbishop's induction into the Gorsedd of the Bards at the National Eisteddfod, which appears to be the druidic version of the Wizengamot. The BBC coverage also pictured him in his habit.
I would say that in mufti the archbishop has a fine taste in Panama hats, though that might lead to confusion over the term mufti. Then again, maybe that usage would be appropriate.
I would say that in mufti the archbishop has a fine taste in Panama hats, though that might lead to confusion over the term mufti. Then again, maybe that usage would be appropriate.
Posted by: Mark S at February 07, 2008 04:59 PM (207tw)
10
I would be interested in how the The Queen, and Prince of Wales regard the title "Defender of the Faith" ("D.F." on Her Majesty's coinage).....
Gold Stars to anyone who knows the irony of the title's origin...
Gold Stars to anyone who knows the irony of the title's origin...
Posted by: markdriscoll@cox.net at February 07, 2008 06:23 PM (3i2Pe)
11
The title, ironies of ironies, was bestowed on Henry VIII in 1521 by Leo X, as a result of the young king's efforts, both in books and on the battlefield, to turn back the Protestant heresy.
Am I right, professor?
Am I right, professor?
Posted by: Mr. Peperium at February 07, 2008 07:23 PM (S11oG)
12
I'm with Mrs P on the Defender of the Faith note.
And I should add, that I've always found that whole Python piece really really funny.
And I should add, that I've always found that whole Python piece really really funny.
Posted by: The Maximum Leader at February 07, 2008 07:54 PM (klbXs)
13
You guys realize that His Holiness got that hat second-hand from Irina the singing Russkie in Goldeneye, don't you?
"Stahnd by yoour maaahnnn...."
"Stahnd by yoour maaahnnn...."
Posted by: Robbo the LB at February 07, 2008 11:03 PM (QvCTU)
14
This picture with the cowboy hat is still my favorite . . .
http://asapblogs.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/06/13/pope.jpg
Is that a young Steve-O in the picture?
I also like the Grinch hat.
http://www.dangerouslogic.com/images/pope_grinch.jpg
http://asapblogs.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/06/13/pope.jpg
Is that a young Steve-O in the picture?
I also like the Grinch hat.
http://www.dangerouslogic.com/images/pope_grinch.jpg
Posted by: The Abbot at February 08, 2008 07:52 AM (QBuXz)
15
I see what you mean, Abbot, about the nature of this "white Druidism." Looking at the picture, however, I cannot help but think, "Behold, the White Rider!"
Posted by: Old Dominion Tory at February 08, 2008 09:48 AM (AmDb2)
Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.0133 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0101 seconds, 23 records returned.
Page size 15 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.