CoE Choice

So the discussions are under way.  The Crown Nominations Committee meet to thrash out who is the best of the motley collection lined up to replace the outgoing Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams.  Under the Law of England & Wales the Anglican (Church of England) is required to ask the Prime Minister to choose the Bishop and Archbishops of the church.  This is because the church is linked into the unwritten (and rightly) constitution of the country.  The Church of Scotland of course runs in a differing fashion.  The Nominations committee select two candidates and the PM gives his choice.  In the comedy 'Yes Prime Minister,' PM Jim Hacker is offered a choice of two, "I have to choose between an atheist and a Marxist?" he says.  The comedy was near the truth in many cases.  It is time I say that the connection between the church and state was ended.  No church should be interfered with by any government.  The church must look to the Lord of the church himself, not to political connections.  This may affect the constitutional situation, but that's too bad.  Past history has distorted both the church and the state.  The BBC have linked Five leading names for this job, and some brief details of their opinions on various subjects. I found it relevant that Jesus and their relationship with him and his word was not given a look in.  That says much about the BBC, the Anglican church and the men named.  Just what PM Cameron will think I could not say.  He will be too busy getting the same sex marriage bill through anyway.

.

The Archbishop of Canterbury

Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, has entered the Muslim debate in a big way. I wonder if he realised just how much antipathy would be engendered by his comments. Now I am sure he considered carefully what he had to say, he is after all an academic, but did he comprehend the emotions that would be stirred here? The very idea that Islamic Sharia law could be tolerated in some aspects in the UK in similar fashion to some Jewish or Hindu beliefs was possibly naive at best! It is only a few days ago the Bishop of Rochester was warning of 'No-Go' areas in Britain, and it leaves me wondering about the relationship between these two men. Surely the Bishop, born and raised in Pakistan, with Muslim relatives and a 'hands on' experience of the variety of Islamic teaching, would be a man Canterbury ought to learn from?

There is no doubt a radical Islam is at large in the world. Based not on one man but on a belief, with many variations, but which is looking for a showdown between what it recognises as 'two civilisations!' This will lead to much trouble in the days ahead, and some might be tempted to read into this an 'Armageddon' situation, especially Americans! While they might be right, and the end will certainly centre on the middle east, unless we have insight into this will cannot be sure.

The Archbishop, and Bishop remember just means 'overseer' or as some would put it, 'gaffer,' the Archbishop is truly attempting to find common ground and a happy result for all people. This is to be commended but does also appear to misunderstand the outcry from the tabloid media and of course plays into the hands of the 'Little Englander!.' Many will see this as allowing 'Johnny Foreigner' to dictate to the natives. To them this was fine in the nineteenth century when we told them what to do but it is not acceptable when they come over here and dictate to us! I mean it's just not right is it? Sharia Law would in my understanding be rejected by most Muslims in this country, and those who demand it will use this to push for more influence, not for Islam, but for themselves, and their cause. There are many elements of Islam that can happily continue in the UK, in fact the first Mosque was built in Woking in 1889 and has been so unobtrusive few know about it! It is therefore possible for Islam to survive in the UK with little difficulty. The problem is that amongst the two million Muslims a few radicals have influenced the younger generation, using the political ineptness of the West's handling of the middle east over the past hundred years, and engendered a possible terrorist force that, while inept, constitutes a very real danger to the nation.

We are in very real danger of polarising the UK into them and us. Unless common sense policies are introduced soon the fallout may be worse than an attack on an airport or a bomb here and there. For too long the left, in particular the Labour party, have indulged the immigrant causing a backlash from the indigenous white population who have been branded racist simply for objecting. Too often the home grown native is considered less than the incomer, and now we reap the reward, but possibly too late. Those from South Eastern Europe obtain homes before young married blacks and Asians and then who do we call racist? Problems aplenty in Luton alone through this.

It is time we considered people as 'people' and not 'colours,' 'races,' or' sex,' (sorry the left prefer to call it 'Gender' for some reason) or anything else. Better immigration controls, fairer housing policy as opposed 'Daily Mail' motivated ones, and a removal of all organisations concerned with 'equality,' as they encourage difference not 'equality.' Allowing Sharia Law would of course increase alienation and separation, allowing the radicals more opportunity, not less. Creating work for the young in Bradford and Oldham would lessen the appeal for many in those areas, and in my view removing non 'British' items such as veils would lead to a much more cohesive structure. Rochester may well be right, there are Muslim 'No - go areas, just as there are similar areas caused by gang warfare and religious divides, his Archbishop needs to listen to him, and possibly read his bible again as he appears to have forgotten what is written there, and take heed.