Someone can't spell practise as a verb.
Is Islamophobia In Europe A Growing Concern?
I am not a messy person but...
Gransnet forums
News & politics
Archbishop of Canterbury Easter message “ Rwanda is an affront to God”
(150 Posts)For those who want British and Christian values to be upheld in the face of an apparent onslaught from other faiths and values.
This is the head of the official church in the U.K. who speaks for British and Christian values
“This season is also "why there are such serious ethical questions about sending asylum seekers overseas", the archbishop will say.
His sermon continues: "The details are for politics. The principle must stand the judgment of God, and it cannot.
"It cannot carry the weight of resurrection justice, of life conquering death. It cannot carry the weight of the resurrection that was first to the least valued, for it privileges the rich and strong."
Mr Welby will say the plan "cannot carry the weight of our national responsibility as a country formed by Christian values".
"Subcontracting out our responsibilities, even to a country that seeks to do well like Rwanda, is the opposite of the nature of God who himself took responsibility for our failures," the sermon will say.
The archbishop's Easter sermon will also make reference to the "the greatest cost-of-living crisis we have known", saying that families across the country are "waking up to cold homes and empty stomachs".
He will say the struggle to pay for essentials is their first thought of the day and they feel "overwhelmed by the pressures".
"He hears the cry of the mothers in Ukraine, he sees the fear of boys too young to become soldiers, and he knows the vulnerability of the orphans and refugees.
Closer to home, he sees the humiliation of the grandparent visiting the food bank for the first time, the desperate choice of parents in poverty and the grief and weariness of the pandemic."
Sometimes I think I am going mad when I read some opinions on so many threads that seem to fly in the face that is decent and fair, but then I listen to people like Welby and my world becomes balanced again
In this case, the Church is not taking the moral high ground, its pointing out what anybody with any morals at all should be saying, whether they are religious or no
Hear, hear
And this.
123kitty
I agree with you Galaxy. I don't think any bishops should sit in the House of Lords as a right. I also don't think actors should hold an audience up at the end of a play to voice their political thoughts (Benedict Cumberbatch for example) - no more interesting than Ant and Dec's opinions would be as far as I'm concerned.
The point is 123Kitty the Bishops do sit in the house of Lords. We have long incorporated the Lord's Spiritual as part of the growth and changes to our central democratic institution, just as we have Law Lords in our Parliament.
I have seen no reasoned argument put forward, by party or group, to show the country has felt it doesn't want the Lord's Spiritual as part of the Government. I would support your right to work towards that change if you wanted to do that. However, we are where we are. Until we have such a change in our codified constitution, it's insulting to the Archbishop of Canterbury to suggest he is doing anything other than his duty, when he interprets the view of our Established Church to us and our democratic leaders.
The influence we request from the Church of this country in our Parliament will not change because of one person's unconstructive criticism but could be by reasoned argument.
I agree with you Galaxy. I don't think any bishops should sit in the House of Lords as a right. I also don't think actors should hold an audience up at the end of a play to voice their political thoughts (Benedict Cumberbatch for example) - no more interesting than Ant and Dec's opinions would be as far as I'm concerned.
Slow morning here, as I don't very often read anything to do with political matters on Gransnet - it's always an excuse for Tory Bashing.
I won't be the one trotting out platitudes about free will and man's choice and all that. My view is that God doesn't do anything to protect the lives of innocents because he's not there, he doesn't exist.
In this case, the Church is not taking the moral high ground, its pointing out what anybody with any morals at all should be saying, whether they are religious or not.
The Church doesn't have to provide an alternative to replace one that is wicked, discriminatory and illegal. Saying that is just a ridiculous way of trying to discredit them and anybody else who disagrees with the government's unacceptable course of action in this case.
The church takes the moral high ground but what alternative does it provide to a practical problem? As pce612 says, it is a pity this merciful and loving ‘God’ doing to protect the lives of innocents? And don’t trot out the rubbish answer that it is all man’s doing. God is represented as being all powerful so like any parent who would intervene to stop a wayward child and ‘God’ could do the same!
The Archbishop of Canterbury's message is, indeed, a Christian message. However, it is also in essence a humanitarian message that can and should be supported by people of every religion, atheists, agnostics and even people who don't think about religion at all. In total, it is a message to the entire population of the UK and, although I no longer live there, I believe it was the right message to send to his congregation.
I didn't know that, thank you growstuff
Callistemon21
^Not sure if you are talking about Johnson or the AoC. Lambeth Palace doesn't belong to Justin Welby^
If you're asking me:
I thought I was talking about the Archbishop but then I saw there was a reference to six children so realised the conversation had moved on to Johnson.
Both - as neither own the properties they currently inhabit, they are like tied cottages (but grander)
I don't know about Sunak.
The AoC has had six children, one of whom was killed in a car crash.
If politicians are steering the country in a direction that is inhumane, morally dubious, unsafe or likely to harm large sections of people then it's absolutely right that church leaders speak up.
This government is buying silence about too many things - Tory MP's too fearful of losing their positions to even speak up about the PM lying to Parliament and his cronyism.
We need all the churches, temples and synagogues to yell their disquiet about more things.
Coco51
The church should not interfere in political matters
Exactly where is the dividing line between Church and politics?
If there is one, then why are bishops in the House of Lords?
Should the Church not act as the moral conscience of the nation?
Coco51
The church should not interfere in political matters
At what point do you think its acceptable for the Church to no longer remain silent?
When we start deporting young men?
When we start putting them in concentration camps?
When we start gassing them?
The Church has a responsibility to call out immoral behaviour, and that's what the AoC has done. The fact that people think the church is just "interfering in politics" just shows how far we have sunk.
pce612
It's a shame that god isn't doing something about the Ukraine situation, not to mention the other iniquities going on in the world.
Well said pce612
The church should not interfere in political matters
To be fair to them both, they only occupy flats at these premises.
The DM slammed the AoC for owning a "second home in France" - but his home in France is not a second home, it's the only home he owns.
I know vicars who have bought a property ready for retirement as the next incumbent will move into the viarage/rectory/palace
GeorgyGirl
I am not getting into any arguments, I have stated my view, we will just have to agree to disagree, we are all entitled to our views and I do not wish to make any further comments as I find some comments on here rather inflammatory.
If you don't like the answer, don't ask the question.
Nancat
Volver. Cottage in the grounds maybe, but that's not opening his large houses to any. Only six children, not all living at home, so how many rooms does he need?
Do you realise that, as Downing Street is an administrative building as well has having flats for the PM and Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lambeth Palace is the administrative headquarters of the Anglican Church. It has many offices as well as the living quarters of the ABC. It also houses two religious communities and the archives of the Anglican Church.
I suspect that it is many, many years since an ABC had exclusive use of the whole complex (if ever).
Not sure if you are talking about Johnson or the AoC. Lambeth Palace doesn't belong to Justin Welby
If you're asking me:
I thought I was talking about the Archbishop but then I saw there was a reference to six children so realised the conversation had moved on to Johnson.
Both - as neither own the properties they currently inhabit, they are like tied cottages (but grander)
I don't know about Sunak.
Not sure if you are talking about Johnson or the AoC. Lambeth Palace doesn't belong to Justin Welby.
But Mr Sunak has 3 homes in the UK that he and/or his wife actually own. Any refugees there?
Actually I'm quite disappointed in myself for asking that question, because it doesn't really matter. Nobody, not you, me, nor the Archbishop of Canterbury, needs to keep quiet when they see injustice just because they don't house refugees. Its a silly idea, no doubt dreamt up by the right as a way of berating and belittling people who disagree with them. And then adopted by people who haven't actually thought it through.
Nancat
Volver. Cottage in the grounds maybe, but that's not opening his large houses to any. Only six children, not all living at home, so how many rooms does he need?
But these properties don't belong to him so it's not his decision to make.
And he'll need to have his own flat back soon to live in himself ?
Nancat
Volver. Cottage in the grounds maybe, but that's not opening his large houses to any. Only six children, not all living at home, so how many rooms does he need?
On that note, I wonder if Boris has offered his country pile to house some refugees - or Chequers, I doubt anybody in the country would object to that being used, as it’s only occupied very sporadically?
Volver. Cottage in the grounds maybe, but that's not opening his large houses to any. Only six children, not all living at home, so how many rooms does he need?
GeorgyGirl
I am not getting into any arguments, I have stated my view, we will just have to agree to disagree, we are all entitled to our views and I do not wish to make any further comments as I find some comments on here rather inflammatory.
No one is arguing; just trying to supply you with some facts and knowledge.
Novelist Michael Crichton is reported to have said, “If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree.” History teaches us not only about the leaves of existence; it teaches about twigs, branches, trunks and roots of life. History is important"
I can only agree.
Join the conversation
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »