By Councillor Ian Holt-Religion often takes an aggressive lead in mobilizing countries for war. “Even in our churches we have put the battle flags,” admitted the late Harry Emerson Fosdick, a Protestant clergyman.
And regarding the First World War, British Brigadier General Frank P. Crozier said: “The Christian Churches are the finest blood-lust creators which we have, and of them we made free use.”
Christian Religious bigot’s inc. Anglican and Catholic hierarchy and laity have always been and always will be puppets of the State. The World War II death toll ranged from 60 – 80 million and today, some 50 years after the war, the state Christian puppets belligerent reputation has changed little.
“If we ask whether we as Christians have indeed said a firm and convincing No to the logic of war and Yes to the love of Christ,” admits Dr. Roger Williamson, who works for the Church of England, “it is clear that we . . . still have much to confess.”
Although the World council of Churches declared in 1948 that “war as a method of settling disputes is incompatible with the teaching and example of our Lord Jesus Christ,” state Christian puppets, Williamson notes, have often contributed to “bigotry, intolerance, restriction of human liberty and hardening of conflicts.”
No wonder he concludes that “religion . . . often serves to exacerbate rather than end conflict.”
The war that ripped apart the former Yugoslavia is a case in point. Despite the injustices and cruelties that took place for years, the churches found it very difficult to take a united stand on the conflict in that country.
Dr. Williamson notes that despite their supposed Christian bond, Serbian and Croatian clergy were just as divided as their countries’ politicians. There and elsewhere state Christian puppets, whether Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant, act not as peacemakers but as “chaplains to their own side.”
Though more than 300 churches now belong to the WCC, Dr. Williamson admits that it is “surprisingly hard to find examples of churches actually making . . . peace.”
It is these very bigots that now consider British National Party membership to be incompatible with the principles of the “word of God”
So let’s just have a little look back at the Church of England’s compatibility with the principles of the “word of God?”
As long ago as 1987, The Church of England’s parliament, the General Synod, met to consider a motion that called on it to reaffirm that “fornication, adultery, and homosexual acts are sinful.”
The general secretary of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement declared: “If this motion were accepted it would wreck the Church, and the Archbishop of Canterbury knows it.
As a general figure, we believe between 30 and 40 per cent of Church of England clergymen are gay.”
Reporter Philippa Kennedy, writing in England’s Daily Express, October 29, 1987, said: “Margaret Thatcher’s attack on Church leaders for failing to give the nation adequate moral guidance will add spice to what promises to be one of the great clerical punch-ups of the decade. For it is not only the Prime Minister who believes that Bishops in general and the Archbishop of Canterbury in particular, are a bunch of wishy-washy wafflers.”
On November 11, 1987, the motion was debated, was found to be a pill too big to swallow, and was scuttled by a feeble amendment that passed overwhelmingly.
So it was not “one of the great clerical punch-ups of the decade.” It fizzled out. The bishops shadowboxed, ducked, weaved, feinted, and back-pedalled.
During the synod, Higton had presented a sensational dossier of evidence against the homosexual clergy. One was convicted of child molesting but was merely moved to another parish.
Another priest, convicted of gross indecency in a public toilet, was appointed to another diocese, where he was convicted of a similar offense—still not defrocked.
Homosexual Anglican priests in London, Higton reported, ran a church bookstall for “selling literature alleged to encourage homosexual promiscuity, the use of male prostitutes, and a variety of homosexual acts.” One book in the stall allegedly showed “a five-year-old girl in bed with her father and his male lover.”
So this is behaviour compatible with the “WORD OF GOD” is it? If this is the Church of England’s Synod view of today’s Christian understanding then I am sure that many will agree that the incompatibility lies within the HEART of the totally corrupted and corruptible State sponsored harlot that dares to call itself the Church of England.