Now that a very high number of English bishops are not only tolerating gay priests setting up home with same sex partners but, in many cases, giving them their blessing, sometimes quite openly (I could cite examples but I'm not going to), does this mean that straight clergy can shack up with their straight partners without getting married and without facing any disciplinary actions from their bishops?
Either gay sex in a faithful, life long relationship is wrong or it is right. If it is righteous then there is absolutely no reason why same sex couples can't get married just like straight couples and become subject to the same expectations of behaviour. If it is righteous but the Church of England continues to bar gay couples from matrimony then the Church has to allow straight couples to have sexual relationships without getting married.
Saturday, 19 May 2012
NUDGING A MONKEY*
Thank you J, Dorothy, Timothy, Suzanne, Krystn and Janis. Your generation donations over the last couple of days have increased our laptop appeal total to an amazing...
£495
We do need to increase this figure quite a bit if I am going to be able to purchase the items I need to turn OCICBW... and Saint Laika's into sources of entertainment, education and enlightenment worthy of your continued patronage.
All monies raised from this appeal will go towards my online ministry.
None of it will be spent on me.
Full details of the appeal can be found HERE.
And here is the button you have to click on to make your donation.
If you really don't like using PayPal, then email me and I will suggest other ways of making a donation.
* Just send money.
* A "monkey" is English slang for £500.
£495
We do need to increase this figure quite a bit if I am going to be able to purchase the items I need to turn OCICBW... and Saint Laika's into sources of entertainment, education and enlightenment worthy of your continued patronage.
All monies raised from this appeal will go towards my online ministry.
None of it will be spent on me.
Full details of the appeal can be found HERE.
And here is the button you have to click on to make your donation.
If you really don't like using PayPal, then email me and I will suggest other ways of making a donation.
AND DON'T
FORGET
Everybody who sends in a donation receives a copy of
THE BEST OF MADPRIEST
2011
completely and absolutely FREE*
* Just send money.
* A "monkey" is English slang for £500.
MADPRIEST'S HOME TOWN'S GOT TALENT
I don't watch talent shows, or anything that has anything to do with Simon Cowell for that matter. But as Pudsey and Ashleigh come from my home town I checked it out on YouTube. I've seen better freestyle but never from someone so young and never with such a cute dog. Well done, you two!
WHAT'S THE WORD IN JOHANNESBURG?
From NEWS 24 (South Africa):
The Anglican cathedral parish of St Albans in Pretoria has closed its doors because of death threats, confrontations, disruptions and allegations of corruption against its bishop. One priest who feared for his life had already resigned.
The church leadership under Bishop Johannes Seoka wrote to parishioners informing them of the closure and suspension of all forms of worship with immediate effect on Thursday. On Friday, members of the cathedral vowed to fight the closure and urged parishioners to come and worship outside the premises. Members were also consulting with lawyers to seek an urgent court order to force Seoka to reopen the church gates before Sunday.
The bishop was accused by church members of misappropriation of cathedral funds, dishonesty, breach of trust, corruption and fraud. The accusations were contained in a letter signed by two priests, two church wardens and a parish councillor and sent to Anglican Archbishop Thabo Makgoba. They alleged that Seoka had used R500 000 of the Diocese of Pretoria to pay for a mortgage bond for him and his wife. They also claimed that Seoka had misappropriated R162 000 to be used to fund legal representation against a church dean.
Seoka said the allegations had nothing to do with the closure.
The Anglican cathedral parish of St Albans in Pretoria has closed its doors because of death threats, confrontations, disruptions and allegations of corruption against its bishop. One priest who feared for his life had already resigned.
The church leadership under Bishop Johannes Seoka wrote to parishioners informing them of the closure and suspension of all forms of worship with immediate effect on Thursday. On Friday, members of the cathedral vowed to fight the closure and urged parishioners to come and worship outside the premises. Members were also consulting with lawyers to seek an urgent court order to force Seoka to reopen the church gates before Sunday.
Seoka said the allegations had nothing to do with the closure.
JAM TODAY
From THEMETHATISME:
In Iceland, the people has made the government resign, the primary banks have been nationalized, it was decided to not pay the debt that these created with Great Britain and Holland due to their bad financial politics and a public assembly has been created to rewrite the constitution. And all of this in a peaceful way.
A whole revolution against the powers that have created the current global crisis. This is why there hasn’t been any publicity during the last two years: What would happen if the rest of the EU citizens took this as an example? What would happen if the US citizens took this as an example.
This is a summary of the facts:
2008. The main bank of the country is nationalized. The Krona, the currency of Iceland devaluates and the stock market stops. The country is in bankruptcy.
2008. The citizens protest in front of parliament and manage to get new elections that make the resignation of the prime minister and his whole government. The country is in bad economic situation.
A law proposes paying back the debt to Great Britain and Holland through the payment of 3,500 million euros, which will be paid by the people of Iceland monthly during the next 15 years, with a 5.5% interest.
2010. The people go out in the streets and demand a referendum. In January 2010 the president denies the approval and announces a popular meeting. In March the referendum and the denial of payment is voted in by 93%. Meanwhile the government has initiated an investigation to bring to justice those responsible for the crisis, and many high level executives and bankers are arrested. The Interpol dictates an order that make all the implicated parties leave the country.
In this crisis an assembly is elected to rewrite a new Constitution which can include the lessons learned from this, and which will substitute the current one (a copy of the Danish Constitution).
25 citizens are chosen, with no political affiliation, out of the 522 candidates. For candidacy all that was needed was to be an adult and have the support of 30 people. The constitutional assembly starts in February of 2011 to present the ‘carta magna’ from the recommendations given by the different assemblies happening throughout the country. It must be approved by the current Parliament and by the one constituted through the next legislative elections.
So in summary of the Icelandic revolution:
- resignation of the whole government.
- nationalization of the bank.
- referendum so that the people can decide over the economic decisions.
- incarcerating the responsible parties.
- rewriting of the constitution by its people.
Have we been informed of this through the media?
Has any political program in radio or TV commented on this?
No!
The Icelandic people have been able to show that there is a way to beat the system and has given a democracy lesson to the world.
Wow! All that and babes like Bjork, as well.
In Iceland, the people has made the government resign, the primary banks have been nationalized, it was decided to not pay the debt that these created with Great Britain and Holland due to their bad financial politics and a public assembly has been created to rewrite the constitution. And all of this in a peaceful way.
A whole revolution against the powers that have created the current global crisis. This is why there hasn’t been any publicity during the last two years: What would happen if the rest of the EU citizens took this as an example? What would happen if the US citizens took this as an example.
This is a summary of the facts:
2008. The main bank of the country is nationalized. The Krona, the currency of Iceland devaluates and the stock market stops. The country is in bankruptcy.
2008. The citizens protest in front of parliament and manage to get new elections that make the resignation of the prime minister and his whole government. The country is in bad economic situation.
A law proposes paying back the debt to Great Britain and Holland through the payment of 3,500 million euros, which will be paid by the people of Iceland monthly during the next 15 years, with a 5.5% interest.
2010. The people go out in the streets and demand a referendum. In January 2010 the president denies the approval and announces a popular meeting. In March the referendum and the denial of payment is voted in by 93%. Meanwhile the government has initiated an investigation to bring to justice those responsible for the crisis, and many high level executives and bankers are arrested. The Interpol dictates an order that make all the implicated parties leave the country.
In this crisis an assembly is elected to rewrite a new Constitution which can include the lessons learned from this, and which will substitute the current one (a copy of the Danish Constitution).
25 citizens are chosen, with no political affiliation, out of the 522 candidates. For candidacy all that was needed was to be an adult and have the support of 30 people. The constitutional assembly starts in February of 2011 to present the ‘carta magna’ from the recommendations given by the different assemblies happening throughout the country. It must be approved by the current Parliament and by the one constituted through the next legislative elections.
So in summary of the Icelandic revolution:
- resignation of the whole government.
- nationalization of the bank.
- referendum so that the people can decide over the economic decisions.
- incarcerating the responsible parties.
- rewriting of the constitution by its people.
Have we been informed of this through the media?
Has any political program in radio or TV commented on this?
No!
The Icelandic people have been able to show that there is a way to beat the system and has given a democracy lesson to the world.
Wow! All that and babes like Bjork, as well.
THE HAPPY LIFE
When I had a job, Mrs MP would have her hair done at a posh city hairdressers, once a month, during her lunch break from work. Now, due to our somewhat more impoverished circumstances, she goes to the hairdresser in the village. This is great for four main reasons.
1) She gets to catch up on all the local gossip.
2) It's a third of the price.
3) The hairdressers in the village are a lot better at their job than the city hairdressers due to decades of achieving the impossible for the local lasses demanding to look exactly like the latest pop diva.
AND MOST IMPORTANT:
4) Even I can remember where my wife has gone for an hour on a Saturday morning and can be ready with, "Wow! That looks nice. They've made a really good job of it this time. It makes you look so much younger."
This results in there being a much more pleasant atmosphere in the MadPriest household than the one that pervaded following the comment inevitably delivered by my wife a day or so after her visit to the posh hairdressers in the city, "You didn't even notice that I had my hair done!"
Look! Being a man isn't easy. We need all the help we can get.
1) She gets to catch up on all the local gossip.
2) It's a third of the price.
3) The hairdressers in the village are a lot better at their job than the city hairdressers due to decades of achieving the impossible for the local lasses demanding to look exactly like the latest pop diva.
AND MOST IMPORTANT:
4) Even I can remember where my wife has gone for an hour on a Saturday morning and can be ready with, "Wow! That looks nice. They've made a really good job of it this time. It makes you look so much younger."
This results in there being a much more pleasant atmosphere in the MadPriest household than the one that pervaded following the comment inevitably delivered by my wife a day or so after her visit to the posh hairdressers in the city, "You didn't even notice that I had my hair done!"
Look! Being a man isn't easy. We need all the help we can get.
JAM TOMORROW
I received the following comment, from SUI JURIS, yesterday in response to my post I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT.
There is an argument for the policy you're advocating, but it's not a policy which solves problems for free. There aren't any policies that solve problems for free: it it were that easy...
I'm only an amateur, but I'll have a go. For a start, if mobile phone companies paid substantially more taxes (let's not quibble about whether they owe them anyway) they would have less money for their shareholders and creditors. That would mean a lot of pension funds and banks more unstable than they are now, and therefore (political reality being what it is) more likely to receive government money, either directly in the form of bailouts or indirectly in the form of higher welfare payments compensating for income losses. So the government might increase its revenue, but would also increase its liabilities. This is the infamous "trickle-down effect", not that consumer spending by the rich trickles down (that effect is negligible and inefficient), but that investment by the rich (rich institution, mostly) props up the whole system.
The government could cut free of that whole system, but only by ceasing to rely on people having money to lend to it. But for the government to stop borrowing would need an instant cut in spending to levels most people would now find intolerable; and even if a lower level of government spending were desirable, the speed of the cuts would be a serious economic shock. That is the situation that Greece, and possibly now Spain, find themselves in (involuntarily): they have got into a situation where no-one will lend to them, or rather they fear that that could happen at any moment. The dramatic consequences, mostly in the total lack of control which results, are frightening.
Of course, Greece and Spain have the added disadvantage that their currency is (forcibly) over-valued for their economies. We have the luxury of controlling our own currency, which gives us some more leeway. If we interpret the government's monetary policy charitably the Quantative Easing programme is designed to push down the value of our currency so as to make it more attractive for rich institutions to lend money to our government. That is, of course, what the government mean by "keeping interest rates low": they mean keeping interest rates low for the government so they can carry on borrowing money to fund government spending. The balancing act comes because QE not only reduces interest rates (helping government to spend more) it also raises inflation (effectively reducing consumer spending).
There is an interesting moral hazard here. The government's interest rate strategy (I know it's technically the Bank of England's strategy, but let's not be naive) is to make lending to the government more attractive. Unfortunately that makes lending to other businesses correspondingly less attractive, and thus government borrowing makes rich institutions comparatively warier of investing in growth opportunities.
If I may be allowed a digression, there is, however, one source of apparently unlimited credit, which is Chinese savers. If Western governments don't like the tyranny of the money market they can also escape it by borrowing from Bejing. (We can, I mean: the Greeks don't have a hope - Chinese investors aren't stupid.) Financially borrowing from China makes Keynesian sense, in a recession. China has lots of cash to lend, and if we assume that we can grow eventually it makes sense for us to borrow it now. But politically it seems to me to be putting ourselves into the power of some people even more worrying than the bankers, and my hunch is that we have gone down that road far enough. Better the devil you know, perhaps.
All of this maybe true (it is certainly the argument for maintaining the status quo that is put forward by politicians from all the main political parties). But it is a state of affairs that is the result of our adoption of unrestrained capitalism. There are other economic systems. Perhaps we should give one of them a try as capitalism is eating itself. As the commenter points out, the trickle down effect is miserly and it is getting worse. More and more of the world's wealth is becoming the property of fewer and fewer people and they are getting greedier and greedier. These people are far less efficient at spending their wealth than those with average and low incomes and, as economic growth is dependent on spending, the economy is becoming stagnant. We are destined to a continuation of boom and bust with the booms becoming less booming and the busts becoming longer and more hard hitting.
So, we have to ask ourselves, do we want to continue down this unjust and economically suicidal path or do we want to go through a lot of pain now whilst we sort out the mess our greed has got us into and create a fairer economics where none are extremely rich and none are extremely poor? Just saying that this is how things are and there's nothing we can do about it is a cowardly and hopeless attitude to take. It is certainly not Christlike. Jesus had a simple answer to the inequalities in the distribution of wealth in his day. He advocated that the rich give their money to the poor. Of course, he knew that the rich would be extremely unwilling to do this which is why he placed his hope on the coming kingdom of God. But the kingdom of God cannot achieve anything on its own. It is down to the citizens of the kingdom of God, with the help of its ruler, to bring about the changes Jesus desired. Personally I believe it is about time we took our citizenship seriously and started to trust in God and his crazy, beautiful, life enhancing economics rather than listening to the defeatist weasel words of the satan in the wilderness.
There is an argument for the policy you're advocating, but it's not a policy which solves problems for free. There aren't any policies that solve problems for free: it it were that easy...
I'm only an amateur, but I'll have a go. For a start, if mobile phone companies paid substantially more taxes (let's not quibble about whether they owe them anyway) they would have less money for their shareholders and creditors. That would mean a lot of pension funds and banks more unstable than they are now, and therefore (political reality being what it is) more likely to receive government money, either directly in the form of bailouts or indirectly in the form of higher welfare payments compensating for income losses. So the government might increase its revenue, but would also increase its liabilities. This is the infamous "trickle-down effect", not that consumer spending by the rich trickles down (that effect is negligible and inefficient), but that investment by the rich (rich institution, mostly) props up the whole system.
The government could cut free of that whole system, but only by ceasing to rely on people having money to lend to it. But for the government to stop borrowing would need an instant cut in spending to levels most people would now find intolerable; and even if a lower level of government spending were desirable, the speed of the cuts would be a serious economic shock. That is the situation that Greece, and possibly now Spain, find themselves in (involuntarily): they have got into a situation where no-one will lend to them, or rather they fear that that could happen at any moment. The dramatic consequences, mostly in the total lack of control which results, are frightening.
Of course, Greece and Spain have the added disadvantage that their currency is (forcibly) over-valued for their economies. We have the luxury of controlling our own currency, which gives us some more leeway. If we interpret the government's monetary policy charitably the Quantative Easing programme is designed to push down the value of our currency so as to make it more attractive for rich institutions to lend money to our government. That is, of course, what the government mean by "keeping interest rates low": they mean keeping interest rates low for the government so they can carry on borrowing money to fund government spending. The balancing act comes because QE not only reduces interest rates (helping government to spend more) it also raises inflation (effectively reducing consumer spending).
There is an interesting moral hazard here. The government's interest rate strategy (I know it's technically the Bank of England's strategy, but let's not be naive) is to make lending to the government more attractive. Unfortunately that makes lending to other businesses correspondingly less attractive, and thus government borrowing makes rich institutions comparatively warier of investing in growth opportunities.
If I may be allowed a digression, there is, however, one source of apparently unlimited credit, which is Chinese savers. If Western governments don't like the tyranny of the money market they can also escape it by borrowing from Bejing. (We can, I mean: the Greeks don't have a hope - Chinese investors aren't stupid.) Financially borrowing from China makes Keynesian sense, in a recession. China has lots of cash to lend, and if we assume that we can grow eventually it makes sense for us to borrow it now. But politically it seems to me to be putting ourselves into the power of some people even more worrying than the bankers, and my hunch is that we have gone down that road far enough. Better the devil you know, perhaps.
All of this maybe true (it is certainly the argument for maintaining the status quo that is put forward by politicians from all the main political parties). But it is a state of affairs that is the result of our adoption of unrestrained capitalism. There are other economic systems. Perhaps we should give one of them a try as capitalism is eating itself. As the commenter points out, the trickle down effect is miserly and it is getting worse. More and more of the world's wealth is becoming the property of fewer and fewer people and they are getting greedier and greedier. These people are far less efficient at spending their wealth than those with average and low incomes and, as economic growth is dependent on spending, the economy is becoming stagnant. We are destined to a continuation of boom and bust with the booms becoming less booming and the busts becoming longer and more hard hitting.
So, we have to ask ourselves, do we want to continue down this unjust and economically suicidal path or do we want to go through a lot of pain now whilst we sort out the mess our greed has got us into and create a fairer economics where none are extremely rich and none are extremely poor? Just saying that this is how things are and there's nothing we can do about it is a cowardly and hopeless attitude to take. It is certainly not Christlike. Jesus had a simple answer to the inequalities in the distribution of wealth in his day. He advocated that the rich give their money to the poor. Of course, he knew that the rich would be extremely unwilling to do this which is why he placed his hope on the coming kingdom of God. But the kingdom of God cannot achieve anything on its own. It is down to the citizens of the kingdom of God, with the help of its ruler, to bring about the changes Jesus desired. Personally I believe it is about time we took our citizenship seriously and started to trust in God and his crazy, beautiful, life enhancing economics rather than listening to the defeatist weasel words of the satan in the wilderness.
Friday, 18 May 2012
DON'T BLAME MADPRIEST,
BLAME THAT WICKED, WICKED NUN
It was a pretty serious auto accident. Because he wasn't wearing his seat belt, Sean smashed his face into the windshield. In a strange twist of fate, he wasn't seriously injured, but the cracked glass pinched his right eyelid and, when he bounced back, ripped the eyelid off. Unfortunately, the tissue wasn't saved for reattachment.
At the hospital, plastic surgeons weren't sure how to repair it. Skin grafts wouldn't do the trick, since plain skin isn't thick enough for the job. Then one of the surgeons noticed Sean wasn't circumcised. The thick, elastic skin there would be just the ticket!
Sure enough, the operation was a success and the new eyelid works just as intended. But the TRUE measure of success in any plastic surgery is: how does it LOOK? It's not quite perfect, doctors say. While it works perfectly, Sean will forever be a little cockeyed.
At the hospital, plastic surgeons weren't sure how to repair it. Skin grafts wouldn't do the trick, since plain skin isn't thick enough for the job. Then one of the surgeons noticed Sean wasn't circumcised. The thick, elastic skin there would be just the ticket!
Sure enough, the operation was a success and the new eyelid works just as intended. But the TRUE measure of success in any plastic surgery is: how does it LOOK? It's not quite perfect, doctors say. While it works perfectly, Sean will forever be a little cockeyed.
MAKING THE BISHOP OF YORK
APPEAR A BIT STUPID
This is going to sound rather snobbish, but I am rather proud of the high standard of intellectual ability my readers display, both on their own blogs and in the comments they leave at my place. Proud and happy because there is nothing that impresses me more than well crafted rhetoric.
Yesterday I received a couple of comments to my post, YOU WOULD THINK HE WOULD UNDERSTAND, that were of a particularly high quality and which made points that added to and illuminated my original post. I replied at the time I received them that I would publish them, and so here they are. The first is from Doctor Primrose (who is always good value for money).
In 2008 the California Supreme Court held that it violates equal protection to give opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples essentially the same rights and obligations but calling the relationship different names, "marriage" for the first and "domestic partnership" for the second:
"First, because of the long and celebrated history of the term 'marriage' and the widespread understanding that this term describes a union unreservedly approved and favored by the community, there clearly is a considerable and undeniable symbolic importance to this designation. Thus, it is apparent that affording access to this designation exclusively to opposite-sex couples, while providing same-sex couples access to only a novel alternative designation, realistically must be viewed as constituting significantly unequal treatment to same-sex couples. ...
"Second, particularly in light of the historic disparagement of and discrimination against gay persons, there is a very significant risk that retaining a distinction in nomenclature with regard to this most fundamental of relationships whereby the term 'marriage' is denied only to same-sex couples inevitably will cause the new parallel institution that has been made available to those couples to be viewed as of a lesser stature than marriage and, in effect, as a mark of second-class citizenship. ...
"Third, it also is significant that although the meaning of the term 'marriage' is well understood by the public generally, the status of domestic partnership is not. While it is true that this circumstance may change over time, it is difficult to deny that the unfamiliarity of the term 'domestic partnership' is likely, for a considerable period of time, to pose significant difficulties and complications for same-sex couples, and perhaps most poignantly for their children, that would not be presented if, like opposite-sex couples, same-sex couples were permitted access to the established and well-understood family relationship of marriage." In re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal.4th 757, 845-46 (2008).
The second was from superbbluewren who, I guess is Antipodean, probably lives near the den of the Head of the Family Firm and a member of the small, but courageous, group of Christians who live in and around Sydney who face constant oppression by the local self-worshipping gnostics. But I could be wrong about all that.
At the Senate inquiry into amending the Marriage Act here in Australia, I responded to a question on whether civil unions would be adequate. I responded that the existence of a 'whites only' drinking fountain and a drinking fountain for others was inherently discriminatory even if they deliver identical water from identical pipes.At the Senate inquiry into amending the Marriage Act here in Australia, I responded to a question on whether civil unions would be adequate. I responded that the existence of a 'whites only' drinking fountain and a drinking fountain for others was inherently discriminatory even if they deliver identical water from identical pipes.
I could have gone on to say, that riding in the back of the bus will get you to your destination as surely and with the same level comfort as riding in the front...
I could have gone on to say, that riding in the back of the bus will get you to your destination as surely and with the same level comfort as riding in the front...
Yesterday I received a couple of comments to my post, YOU WOULD THINK HE WOULD UNDERSTAND, that were of a particularly high quality and which made points that added to and illuminated my original post. I replied at the time I received them that I would publish them, and so here they are. The first is from Doctor Primrose (who is always good value for money).
In 2008 the California Supreme Court held that it violates equal protection to give opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples essentially the same rights and obligations but calling the relationship different names, "marriage" for the first and "domestic partnership" for the second:
"First, because of the long and celebrated history of the term 'marriage' and the widespread understanding that this term describes a union unreservedly approved and favored by the community, there clearly is a considerable and undeniable symbolic importance to this designation. Thus, it is apparent that affording access to this designation exclusively to opposite-sex couples, while providing same-sex couples access to only a novel alternative designation, realistically must be viewed as constituting significantly unequal treatment to same-sex couples. ...
"Second, particularly in light of the historic disparagement of and discrimination against gay persons, there is a very significant risk that retaining a distinction in nomenclature with regard to this most fundamental of relationships whereby the term 'marriage' is denied only to same-sex couples inevitably will cause the new parallel institution that has been made available to those couples to be viewed as of a lesser stature than marriage and, in effect, as a mark of second-class citizenship. ...
"Third, it also is significant that although the meaning of the term 'marriage' is well understood by the public generally, the status of domestic partnership is not. While it is true that this circumstance may change over time, it is difficult to deny that the unfamiliarity of the term 'domestic partnership' is likely, for a considerable period of time, to pose significant difficulties and complications for same-sex couples, and perhaps most poignantly for their children, that would not be presented if, like opposite-sex couples, same-sex couples were permitted access to the established and well-understood family relationship of marriage." In re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal.4th 757, 845-46 (2008).
The second was from superbbluewren who, I guess is Antipodean, probably lives near the den of the Head of the Family Firm and a member of the small, but courageous, group of Christians who live in and around Sydney who face constant oppression by the local self-worshipping gnostics. But I could be wrong about all that.
At the Senate inquiry into amending the Marriage Act here in Australia, I responded to a question on whether civil unions would be adequate. I responded that the existence of a 'whites only' drinking fountain and a drinking fountain for others was inherently discriminatory even if they deliver identical water from identical pipes.At the Senate inquiry into amending the Marriage Act here in Australia, I responded to a question on whether civil unions would be adequate. I responded that the existence of a 'whites only' drinking fountain and a drinking fountain for others was inherently discriminatory even if they deliver identical water from identical pipes.
I could have gone on to say, that riding in the back of the bus will get you to your destination as surely and with the same level comfort as riding in the front...
I could have gone on to say, that riding in the back of the bus will get you to your destination as surely and with the same level comfort as riding in the front...
LOUD FRIDAY
There's a garage rock revival going on at the moment, which is good news for those of us who like loud, raw rock and roll. Unfortunately, a lot of it is just pastiche and you might as well buy the original 1960s stuff that these young bands are aping, which is much better. However, this bunch of young (just about) musicians are the real thing. Their music holds together because of the enthusiasm and energy of the band rather than anything professional or contrived. The result is down to earth, honest, American garage rock that you know would be heaven on earth if you were in that bar with them when they were playing, with a pint of something malty, hoppy and alcoholic in your hand. I love it.
BAND'S MYSPACE PAGE
PURCHASE FROM AMAZON USA
PURCHASE FROM AMAZON UK
I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT
The TV at the moment is broadcasting important people talking about the terrible state of our economies and wringing their hands over what we are going to do about it, twenty four hours a day.
But, if the rich and their companies just paid the taxes they owe we could pay off all our national debts immediately. There would even be lots of money left over for our governments to kick start our economies again.
Heck, in Britain, if just the mobile phone companies paid the taxes they have somehow (with government help) managed to avoid paying over the last few years, we would be out of recession.
WHY ARE WE SO STUPID?!
But, if the rich and their companies just paid the taxes they owe we could pay off all our national debts immediately. There would even be lots of money left over for our governments to kick start our economies again.
Heck, in Britain, if just the mobile phone companies paid the taxes they have somehow (with government help) managed to avoid paying over the last few years, we would be out of recession.
WHY ARE WE SO STUPID?!
A DUMMIES' GUIDE FOR THOSE
WHO ARE TOO BLIND TO SEE
SOCIALISM IN A NUTSHELL:
Take all the money, that they don't actually need,
from the rich and give it to the poor who do need it.
THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS CHRIST IN A NUTSHELL:
Take all the money, that they don't actually need,
from the rich and give it to the poor who do need it.
It ain't rocket surgery.
It's the "plain truth."
Take all the money, that they don't actually need,
from the rich and give it to the poor who do need it.
THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS CHRIST IN A NUTSHELL:
Take all the money, that they don't actually need,
from the rich and give it to the poor who do need it.
It ain't rocket surgery.
It's the "plain truth."
CAPITALISM SUCKS
When Mrs MP and myself were evicted from our home of eight years by the Church of England, the only place we could afford to live was a former mining village in County Durham with a "bad reputation" that keeps accommodation prices down. I was a bit worried but it turned out to be a great place to live. Everyone's friendly and everyone is in the same boat. Because we are a "rough neighbourhood" we have the privilege (not normal for a village of our size) of having a couple of excellent community police officers stationed here and I have seen far less trouble, and feel far safer, than I ever did in the middle class, Newcastle neighbourhood where we previously lived.
However, there are hidden costs to being poor. I have just got round (eventually) to changing the address for my car insurance policy. The bloody insurance company want a considerably higher premium from me because I, allegedly, live in a "rougher" neighbourhood. Now, I have no idea if there is more car crime in my village than in High Heaton (although within a month of our move to Newcastle, ten years ago, Mrs MP had her car stolen and dumped in the River Tyne). However, it strikes me as incredibly unfair that because poorer people have to live in areas where crime is more widespread because of the poverty of the inhabitants, they have to pay more money for protection from crime than people who can afford to live in posh neighbourhoods. The rich can afford higher premiums. The poor cannot.
Basically, capitalism is not content to simply create unfair wealth distribution. It also insists on kicking its victims when they are down.
My name is MadPriest and I'm an out and proud socialist
(just like Jesus was and is and will be for ever).
However, there are hidden costs to being poor. I have just got round (eventually) to changing the address for my car insurance policy. The bloody insurance company want a considerably higher premium from me because I, allegedly, live in a "rougher" neighbourhood. Now, I have no idea if there is more car crime in my village than in High Heaton (although within a month of our move to Newcastle, ten years ago, Mrs MP had her car stolen and dumped in the River Tyne). However, it strikes me as incredibly unfair that because poorer people have to live in areas where crime is more widespread because of the poverty of the inhabitants, they have to pay more money for protection from crime than people who can afford to live in posh neighbourhoods. The rich can afford higher premiums. The poor cannot.
Basically, capitalism is not content to simply create unfair wealth distribution. It also insists on kicking its victims when they are down.
My name is MadPriest and I'm an out and proud socialist
(just like Jesus was and is and will be for ever).
GOD BOTHERING 18TH. MAY 2012
The prayer list for today is now up at SAINT LAIKA'S. If you have a moment, please pop over there, say a prayer and do light a virtual candle as it shows those we are praying for that we do care.
If you have a prayer request that you want including on tomorrow's prayer list, please let me know in the comments to this post, go to St. Laika's and leave it on the Our Prayers forum or drop me an email at madpriestx@sky.com.
If you have a prayer request that you want including on tomorrow's prayer list, please let me know in the comments to this post, go to St. Laika's and leave it on the Our Prayers forum or drop me an email at madpriestx@sky.com.
Thursday, 17 May 2012
PARANOIA STRIKES DEEP
Some songs are timeless. They speak to every new generation.
Or perhaps it's just that in our world, no matter how many gods get
themselves killed, some things never change.
What a field-day for the heat,
A thousand people in the street,
Singing songs and carrying signs,
Mostly say, hooray for our side.
DON'T BLAME MADPRIEST, BLAME MARK
"A man and his wife were celebrating 50 years together. Their three kids, all very successful, agreed to a Sunday dinner in their honor
"Happy Anniversary Mom and Dad," gushed son number one... "Sorry I'm running late... had an emergency, you know how it is, didn't have time to get you both a present."
Not to worry," said the dad.."the important thing is that we're all here together today."
Son number two arrived and announced, "you and Mom still look great, Dad just flew in from L.A. and didn't have time to get you a present... Sorry."
"It's nothing," said the father, "Glad you were able to be here."
Just then the daughter arrived, "Hello both of you, Happy Anniversary! I'm sorry, but my boss is sending me out of town and I was really busy packing... so I didn't have time to get you guys anything."
Again the father said, "I really don't care, at least the five of us are together today." After they had all finished dessert, the father put down his knife and fork, looked up and said, "Listen up, all three of you, there's something your mother and I have wanted to tell you for a long time. You see, we were very poor. Despite this, we were able to raise each of you and send you to college. All through the years your mother and I knew that we loved each other very much but... we just never found the time to get married."
The three kids gasp and said, "You mean we're bastards?"
"Yep," said the dad..."and cheap ones too!"
YOU WOULD THINK HE WOULD UNDERSTAND
Earlier this year Dr Sentamu received racist abuse after he became the Church of England’s first senior cleric to speak against the controversial plan. Now the Archbishop has reiterated his position, pointing out that civil partnerships already offer “same-sex couples rights and responsibilities identical to marriage”.
He added: “If the rights of Civil Partners are met differently in law to those of married couples, there is no discrimination in law, and if Civil Partnerships are seen as somehow ‘second class’ that is a social attitude which will change and cannot, in any case, be turned around by redefining the law of marriage. It may even make social attitudes go in reverse gear. So I submit that to use the law to redefine marriage when there is no legal inequity involved is a misuse of the Statute. It must never be used to give comfort or reassurance but to remedy an injustice.”
I'm just a humble, unemployed priest who left school at the age of sixteen and who cannot hope to keep up with the reasoning of intellectual giants of the stature of the bishop of York. So, I'm a bit worried about asking the following questions in case I come across as incredibly stupid. But heck, I'm going to ask them anyway.
If there is no difference between a civil partnership and marriage what is John's big problem with gay people marrying each other? Is he really alienating most of the population of England from the Church of England over a matter of semantics? Surely not! That wouldn't be very clever, would it?
He added: “If the rights of Civil Partners are met differently in law to those of married couples, there is no discrimination in law, and if Civil Partnerships are seen as somehow ‘second class’ that is a social attitude which will change and cannot, in any case, be turned around by redefining the law of marriage. It may even make social attitudes go in reverse gear. So I submit that to use the law to redefine marriage when there is no legal inequity involved is a misuse of the Statute. It must never be used to give comfort or reassurance but to remedy an injustice.”
I'm just a humble, unemployed priest who left school at the age of sixteen and who cannot hope to keep up with the reasoning of intellectual giants of the stature of the bishop of York. So, I'm a bit worried about asking the following questions in case I come across as incredibly stupid. But heck, I'm going to ask them anyway.
If there is no difference between a civil partnership and marriage what is John's big problem with gay people marrying each other? Is he really alienating most of the population of England from the Church of England over a matter of semantics? Surely not! That wouldn't be very clever, would it?
WE HAVE LIFT OFF!
Thank you Alison, Jay, Susan, Christine, Shelley, Ellie, Ian,
Wade, David, Chris, Kenneth, Elizabeth, Jay and Daryl.
Wade, David, Chris, Kenneth, Elizabeth, Jay and Daryl.
Due to your enormous generosity, and after only forty eight hours,
THE OCICBW... AND SAINT LAIKA'S LAPTOP
(and other stuff I need to carry on)
APPEAL
has already reached a total of a staggering
£410.00
Truly amazing, but we're not there yet. I need more of you to donate to the appeal if the OCICBW... and Saint Laika show is to hit road this year and provide you all with an uninterrupted service.
All monies raised from this appeal will go towards my online ministry. None of it will be spent on me.
My wish list is as follows:
Laptop
Renewal of podcasting licence
Upgrading of computer hard drive
Microphone
Podcasting software.
Full details of the appeal can be found HERE.
And here is the button you have to click on to make your donation.
If you really don't like using PayPal, then email me and I will suggest other ways of making a donation.
AND DON'T
FORGET
Everybody who sends in a donation receives a copy of
THE BEST OF MADPRIEST
2011
completely and absolutely FREE*
* Just send money.
WORSHIP AT SAINT LAIKA'S
I attended a Church of England primary school. It didn't differ from the state schools in my town other than the fact that the local vicar would turn up once a week to tell us about God for ten minutes during assembly. But we did enjoy one perk the other schools didn't. On Ascension Day every year we would get half a day off our classes so that we could go to the Ascension Day service at the parish church. This was compulsory but better than lessons. Let's face, to a seven year old child anything, bar a dental appointment, was better than lessons.
So, I've always regarded today's feast as special and nowadays I try to celebrate it in style. Therefore, I have cobbled together and extravaganza of words and music for you today. There's loads of music of all different types, so there should be something for everyone. The liturgy is considerable different to normal and I've replaced the sermon with a poem. Basically, there's no reason why you should not download it immediately ready to enjoy at your leisure later on.
All are welcome to join me in taking communion.
The order of service is posted beneath the audio file so that you can join in with the service. The words in bold type are the ones we say together.
If you want to physically partake of communion you will require a small piece of bread and a small amount of drink (preferably made from grapes and containing alcohol). How you view the nature of this part of the service is completely up to you.
The order of service is posted beneath the audio file so that you can join in with the service. The words in bold type are the ones we say together.
Click on the arrow on the player to stream.
MP3 File
CLICK HERE for order of service and credits
(page opens in new window).
So, I've always regarded today's feast as special and nowadays I try to celebrate it in style. Therefore, I have cobbled together and extravaganza of words and music for you today. There's loads of music of all different types, so there should be something for everyone. The liturgy is considerable different to normal and I've replaced the sermon with a poem. Basically, there's no reason why you should not download it immediately ready to enjoy at your leisure later on.
A SERVICE OF HOLY COMMUNION
ASCENSION DAY
All are welcome to join me in taking communion.
Download via the MP3 icon below the player.
Download podcast via iTUNES.MP3 File
CLICK HERE for order of service and credits
(page opens in new window).
Wednesday, 16 May 2012
WHERE DID THEY BURY THE BODY?
I'm listening to the book, "The Key" by Simon Toyne at the moment. It's the follow up to his debut, Sanctus," and is a ripping, conspiracy yarn about the evil Roman Catholic hierarchy and its misogynist agenda and financial skullduggery. Like Dan Brown's stuff it sounds a bit far fetched at first. That it is until you read news reports of real life within the Vatican corridors of economic power and exposes of abuse cover ups. Then fiction seems a lot less stranger than life.
From ROME NEWS-TRIB
Forensic police swarmed the crypt of a Roman basilica on Monday to exhume the body of a reputed mobster as part of an investigation into one of the Vatican's most enduring mysteries: the 1983 disappearance of the teenage daughter of one of its employees. Medical experts took samples from the remains of Enrico De Pedis and also took boxes of old bones from the nearby ossuary, according to a De Pedis family lawyer, as part of the investigation into whether Emanuela Orlandi may have been buried alongside him. Orlandi was 15 when she disappeared in 1983 after leaving her family's Vatican City apartment to go to a music lesson in Rome. Her father was a lay employee of the Holy See. De Pedis, a member of Rome's Magliana mob, was killed in 1990. His one-time girlfriend has reportedly told prosecutors that De Pedis kidnapped Orlandi, and an anonymous caller in 2005 told a call-in television show that the answer to Orlandi's disappearance lay in his tomb.
Amid a new push to resolve the case, the Vatican said last month it had no objections to opening the tomb. On Monday, Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi said the inspection of the De Pedis tomb was "certainly a positive fact" aimed at carrying out "all possible steps so the investigation could be completed.
"The prosecutors' office can continue to count on the full collaboration of the church authorities," Lombardi said in comments to reporters.
Yes, we've heard that before. Somehow I'm not convinced.
From ROME NEWS-TRIB
Forensic police swarmed the crypt of a Roman basilica on Monday to exhume the body of a reputed mobster as part of an investigation into one of the Vatican's most enduring mysteries: the 1983 disappearance of the teenage daughter of one of its employees. Medical experts took samples from the remains of Enrico De Pedis and also took boxes of old bones from the nearby ossuary, according to a De Pedis family lawyer, as part of the investigation into whether Emanuela Orlandi may have been buried alongside him. Orlandi was 15 when she disappeared in 1983 after leaving her family's Vatican City apartment to go to a music lesson in Rome. Her father was a lay employee of the Holy See. De Pedis, a member of Rome's Magliana mob, was killed in 1990. His one-time girlfriend has reportedly told prosecutors that De Pedis kidnapped Orlandi, and an anonymous caller in 2005 told a call-in television show that the answer to Orlandi's disappearance lay in his tomb.
Amid a new push to resolve the case, the Vatican said last month it had no objections to opening the tomb. On Monday, Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi said the inspection of the De Pedis tomb was "certainly a positive fact" aimed at carrying out "all possible steps so the investigation could be completed.
"The prosecutors' office can continue to count on the full collaboration of the church authorities," Lombardi said in comments to reporters.
Yes, we've heard that before. Somehow I'm not convinced.
GOD BOTHERING 16TH. MAY 2012
The prayer list for today is now up at SAINT LAIKA'S. There is really good news and really bad news today - such is life. If you have a moment, please pop over there, say a prayer and do light a virtual candle as it shows those we are praying for that we do care.
If you have a prayer request that you want including on tomorrow's prayer list, please let me know in the comments to this post, go to St. Laika's and leave it on the Our Prayers forum or drop me an email at madpriestx@sky.com.
If you have a prayer request that you want including on tomorrow's prayer list, please let me know in the comments to this post, go to St. Laika's and leave it on the Our Prayers forum or drop me an email at madpriestx@sky.com.
JCF HAS A NEW FRIEND
JCF writes: This handsome boy is Buster: my new hiking buddy! His Pack Leader, Kathy, is my new neighbor and she needs our prayers. She is on a waiting list to receive a new kidney. Please pray that her health holds up until one is available.
MARRIAGE IS NOT ALL ABOUT SEX
But suppose there is no child; do they remain two and not one? No; their intercourse effects the joining of their bodies, and they are made one, just as when perfume is mixed with ointment.” (John Chrysostom, Homily 12 on Colossians)
Tobias Haller has an excellent post up at IN A GODWARD DIRECTION in which he riffs on the above quotation from The Church Fathers. It is, as always with Tobias, erudite, beautifully argued and complete in itself. I strongly recommend that you check it out. It certainly got me thinking and I am going to add my own two penneth to the debate.
Babies are (sometimes) made in the act of sex between a man and a woman. To state that procreation is the primary function of marriage is to state that marriage is primarily about sex. Anybody who claims this to be true is basing their morality upon the promiscuous paradigms of our time which are at variance with the teachings of Jesus Christ (in particular his words on adultery).
I am, and always have been, monogamous (the thought of being anything else scares the living daylights out of me). I have had a sexual relationship with three people in my life and I was madly in love (at the time, at least) with each of them. Furthermore, I did not enjoy sex with any of my partners until I was in love with them and had got to know them well. I am not the sort of person who can jump into bed with a stranger on a first date as I need to be comfortable and relaxed with a person before I can "perform" so to speak. I don't think I am unusual in this respect and it was certainly the way things where done when I was young and in my prime. In fact, I regarded myself as very modern and sexually enlightened because I had sexual relationships before marriage. My parents generation had usually insisted on marriage before penetrative sex.
Therefore, the traditional view of sex was that it was something that came after two people had fallen in love and had decided to spend the rest of their lives together forsaking all others. In other words, sex was secondary to both love and marriage - a bonus, in fact. Children were a bonus (ideally) of the bonus of sex. Therefore, anybody who regards procreation as a primary characteristic of marriage, rather than a possibility of marriage is placing the sexual act above love in importance and is, in essence, reflecting in their morality the promiscuous morality of modern, western, secular society.
However, such people can claim to have precedent for their moral beliefs in both history and scripture. In England, there was a tradition among our aristocracy of regarding procreation leading to a male heir above all other functions of marriage. In fact, if a male heir was not forthcoming from a marriage it has been known for a man to divorce his wife (my church owes its foundation to such an act of marital betrayal). Furthermore, as marriage was often entered into for political and procreative reasons, husbands (and sometimes wives) would seek love and loving sex outside of their marriage. In the Old testament there are examples of men having sex outside of marriage in order to make sure they have a male heir.
But are such traditions really what modern Christians regard as acceptable behaviour? I don't think so. I believe that promiscuity and casual sex are bad things because they can, too easily, lead to hurt being caused. I believe that two people should only move into a sexual relationship after they have fallen in love with each other. I believe this because of what I was taught when I was still a child by my parents and by Jesus Christ.
Ideally, love should precede committed relationship should precede sex should precede children. And the greatest of these is love. And the least of these is children.
It is only when we turn our backs on the immorality of both "the world" and those within the Church who see marriage as primarily functional rather than primarily loving, that we can make logical decisions regarding the morality of same sex marriage (and for that matter all childless marriages), decisions that reflect the teaching of our bridegroom, Jesus Christ, Son of the God who loves us even though he does not want to have our babies.
Tobias Haller has an excellent post up at IN A GODWARD DIRECTION in which he riffs on the above quotation from The Church Fathers. It is, as always with Tobias, erudite, beautifully argued and complete in itself. I strongly recommend that you check it out. It certainly got me thinking and I am going to add my own two penneth to the debate.
Babies are (sometimes) made in the act of sex between a man and a woman. To state that procreation is the primary function of marriage is to state that marriage is primarily about sex. Anybody who claims this to be true is basing their morality upon the promiscuous paradigms of our time which are at variance with the teachings of Jesus Christ (in particular his words on adultery).
I am, and always have been, monogamous (the thought of being anything else scares the living daylights out of me). I have had a sexual relationship with three people in my life and I was madly in love (at the time, at least) with each of them. Furthermore, I did not enjoy sex with any of my partners until I was in love with them and had got to know them well. I am not the sort of person who can jump into bed with a stranger on a first date as I need to be comfortable and relaxed with a person before I can "perform" so to speak. I don't think I am unusual in this respect and it was certainly the way things where done when I was young and in my prime. In fact, I regarded myself as very modern and sexually enlightened because I had sexual relationships before marriage. My parents generation had usually insisted on marriage before penetrative sex.
Therefore, the traditional view of sex was that it was something that came after two people had fallen in love and had decided to spend the rest of their lives together forsaking all others. In other words, sex was secondary to both love and marriage - a bonus, in fact. Children were a bonus (ideally) of the bonus of sex. Therefore, anybody who regards procreation as a primary characteristic of marriage, rather than a possibility of marriage is placing the sexual act above love in importance and is, in essence, reflecting in their morality the promiscuous morality of modern, western, secular society.
However, such people can claim to have precedent for their moral beliefs in both history and scripture. In England, there was a tradition among our aristocracy of regarding procreation leading to a male heir above all other functions of marriage. In fact, if a male heir was not forthcoming from a marriage it has been known for a man to divorce his wife (my church owes its foundation to such an act of marital betrayal). Furthermore, as marriage was often entered into for political and procreative reasons, husbands (and sometimes wives) would seek love and loving sex outside of their marriage. In the Old testament there are examples of men having sex outside of marriage in order to make sure they have a male heir.
But are such traditions really what modern Christians regard as acceptable behaviour? I don't think so. I believe that promiscuity and casual sex are bad things because they can, too easily, lead to hurt being caused. I believe that two people should only move into a sexual relationship after they have fallen in love with each other. I believe this because of what I was taught when I was still a child by my parents and by Jesus Christ.
Ideally, love should precede committed relationship should precede sex should precede children. And the greatest of these is love. And the least of these is children.
It is only when we turn our backs on the immorality of both "the world" and those within the Church who see marriage as primarily functional rather than primarily loving, that we can make logical decisions regarding the morality of same sex marriage (and for that matter all childless marriages), decisions that reflect the teaching of our bridegroom, Jesus Christ, Son of the God who loves us even though he does not want to have our babies.
Tuesday, 15 May 2012
COMPLETELY FREE - JUST SEND MONEY
The MadPriest Gang has not been on holiday, or had even a weekend away, since September 2010. But this July, thanks to the extreme generosity of a certain English gentleman of our mutual acquaintance, we are hoping to hitch up the caravan and take off to the wilds of Ayrshire in Scotland. We have cobbled together enough money to service and repair our caravan so that we don't fall through the floor. We have the money for the site fees and I'm saving like mad to get some spending money together. Basically, as far as the holiday is concerned, we've got it covered.
BUT...
Mrs MP is concerned.
She thinks that as OCICBW... and Saint Laika's are my only source of income and because I am self-employed, I cannot just close everything down for two weeks. Evidently, being self-employed comes with responsibility. It has to be admitted, she has a lot more commonsense than me. Let's face it, my dog, Glenna, has a lot more sense than me and she isn't the brightest of border collies.
So, here's the deal. Mrs MP thinks I should go mobile. This would involve me buying a laptop and I do not have the money to do that. Therefore, I am launching this special appeal.
But, contrary to the accusations of the trolls that hang around my blog, I don't believe in being given something for nothing and so I have spent the last week cobbling together a big juicy carrot.
YES! Everybody who donates to this appeal will receive a copy of THE BEST OF MADPRIEST 2011. A ninety eight page, PDF eBook containing all the best bits from last year's OCICBW... output. There are photoshops, jokes, piccies of the MadGang and even some serious stuff - all brought together in one file for your entertainment and enlightenment. A souvenir of my madness that you can keep for the rest of your life and hand down to the generations that will follow you. Will people be jealous? Of course, they will. In fact I suggest you bolt your computer to the floor of your house to stop it being stolen by covetous people too stingy to send the money to get their own completely free copy.
It doesn't matter how much you donate. Everyone's a winner!
Just click on the widget below and follow the instructions.
If your really don't like using PayPal, then email me and I will suggest other ways of making a donation.
THANK YOU, YOU ALL.
I LUVS YOU LOTS.
HIGHLY RECOMMENDED
"The older I get, the more I think that Paul Tillich was right. Christ came into the world not to found a new religion, but to end religion. The burden He promises to lift from our shoulders is not the burden of mortality, but the burden of religion. That is the Good News, no more tests, no more ordeals, no more purity codes, no more law books and legalism, no more prosecutors with halos, no more fickle temperamental deities, no more smoking altars with burning sacrifices, no more divine cops demanding to see our papers, no more mortification of the flesh, no more holy mountains to climb, no more spiritual heroism. Salvation is already accomplished for us, just as we are now."
(COUNTERLIGHT'S PECULIARS)
You can see loads more photos of Molly at BAILEY'S BUDDY.
(COUNTERLIGHT'S PECULIARS)
You can see loads more photos of Molly at BAILEY'S BUDDY.
Monday, 14 May 2012
FREE AND EASY
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH
My name is MadPriest and I'm an angry socialist.
HEADLINE OF THE DAY
That would be the Head of the Family Firm down in Sydney, I would guess. Although it could be his Roman Catholic counterpart, Cardinal Pell.
NONSENSE REMEMBERED
Saturday was the 200th. anniversary of the birth of Edward Lear.
Much has been said about the great wordsmith so I'll just post this silly bit of nonsense released by Jah Wobble back at the end of the 1970s.
FRANCE LEADS THE WAY
From THE TELEGRAPH:
The annual mass exodus from the French capital sees the city's inhabitants while away the August heat in the countryside. But this week many of the biggest earners across the Channel have been mulling a départ which could be rather more permanent. The toppling of Nicolas Sarkozy by François Hollande, the first socialist president to lead the country in 17 years, has sent ripples of fear through the wealthier arrondissements of Paris. Mr Hollande plans to implement a 75pc tax rate on earnings over €1m (£800,000), on top of a 45pc rate for people making €150,000 or more. He is also expected to raise "wealth taxes" on property assets and end his predecessor's tax incentives to lure bankers back home.
That's the way to do it. And I would suggest to the new president that all economic emigrants from his country should have their French citizenship and passport stripped from them. Alternatively, they could be tried for treason and book themselves a date with Madame Guillotine.
My name is MadPriest and I am a socialist.
The annual mass exodus from the French capital sees the city's inhabitants while away the August heat in the countryside. But this week many of the biggest earners across the Channel have been mulling a départ which could be rather more permanent. The toppling of Nicolas Sarkozy by François Hollande, the first socialist president to lead the country in 17 years, has sent ripples of fear through the wealthier arrondissements of Paris. Mr Hollande plans to implement a 75pc tax rate on earnings over €1m (£800,000), on top of a 45pc rate for people making €150,000 or more. He is also expected to raise "wealth taxes" on property assets and end his predecessor's tax incentives to lure bankers back home.
That's the way to do it. And I would suggest to the new president that all economic emigrants from his country should have their French citizenship and passport stripped from them. Alternatively, they could be tried for treason and book themselves a date with Madame Guillotine.
My name is MadPriest and I am a socialist.
G'WAN, BUY SAM'S BOOK!
Our good friend, Sam Norton, has received some excellent reviews for his new book, "Let Us Be Human."
At the Energy Bulletin review by Roy Smith "I would highly recommend this book to anybody seeking to explore the spiritual ramifications of the crises our industrial civilization faces. It is concise and well-written, and possesses the unique strength of being written by one of the few people I am aware of who has an equally solid grounding in Christianity and theology on the one hand and in the issues of resource depletion and the limits to growth on the other."
Jeremy Williams at Make Wealth History "If you move in mainstream Christian circles at all, you’ll know that Norton is swimming against the current here. In my experience at least, the church is no more aware of the growth dilemma than the general culture is. That’s a shame, because churches should be natural hubs for imagining an alternative lifestyle together – that’s pretty much what they’re for. Churches don’t build community, they are community. There’s a vital opportunity there if we can learn to see it, and Let us be Human deserves a bigger audience."
At Amazon.co.uk "In this brilliantly insighful book Sam takes us on a broad brush journey. He highlights the failings of our current culture and the failings of the Church to really engage with it... A definite 'Must Read' for anyone who wishes to be part of the emerging discussion surrounding what it means to be human and Christian in our time."
The Kindle edition of Sam's book, which can be bought through the second widget (UK) or the fourth widget (USA) is so damn cheap it's almost free. Just $4.14 in the USA or £2.63 in the UK.
Jeremy Williams at Make Wealth History "If you move in mainstream Christian circles at all, you’ll know that Norton is swimming against the current here. In my experience at least, the church is no more aware of the growth dilemma than the general culture is. That’s a shame, because churches should be natural hubs for imagining an alternative lifestyle together – that’s pretty much what they’re for. Churches don’t build community, they are community. There’s a vital opportunity there if we can learn to see it, and Let us be Human deserves a bigger audience."
At Amazon.co.uk "In this brilliantly insighful book Sam takes us on a broad brush journey. He highlights the failings of our current culture and the failings of the Church to really engage with it... A definite 'Must Read' for anyone who wishes to be part of the emerging discussion surrounding what it means to be human and Christian in our time."
The Kindle edition of Sam's book, which can be bought through the second widget (UK) or the fourth widget (USA) is so damn cheap it's almost free. Just $4.14 in the USA or £2.63 in the UK.
GOD BOTHERING 14TH. MAY 2012
If you have a prayer request that you want including on tomorrow's prayer list, please let me know in the comments to this post, go to St. Laika's and leave it on the Our Prayers forum or drop me an email at madpriestx@sky.com.
Sunday, 13 May 2012
QUOTE OF THE DAY
From THE TELEGRAPH:
Booker Prize-winning author, Hilary Mantel, was raised a Roman Catholic and educated at convent school. However, the 59-year-old writer said child abuse scandals involving Roman Catholic priests demonstrated the “cruelty” and “hypocrisy” of the church. Asked if she would call for a priest on her deathbed, Mantel replied:
“No. I might very well call for a Church of England vicar, but I would not call for a Catholic priest. I’m one of nature’s Protestants. I should never have been brought up as a Catholic. I think that nowadays the Catholic Church is not an institution for respectable people.”
Well that means our beloved KJ can't become a Roman Catholic. But the rest of you ne'erdowells are still okay to join.
Booker Prize-winning author, Hilary Mantel, was raised a Roman Catholic and educated at convent school. However, the 59-year-old writer said child abuse scandals involving Roman Catholic priests demonstrated the “cruelty” and “hypocrisy” of the church. Asked if she would call for a priest on her deathbed, Mantel replied:
“No. I might very well call for a Church of England vicar, but I would not call for a Catholic priest. I’m one of nature’s Protestants. I should never have been brought up as a Catholic. I think that nowadays the Catholic Church is not an institution for respectable people.”
Well that means our beloved KJ can't become a Roman Catholic. But the rest of you ne'erdowells are still okay to join.
MADPRIEST ON FOOTBALL
When I was a teenager, back in the 1970s, and was still going to football matches, when a team was winning their fans would chant, "We are the greatest!"
When Man City won the league this afternoon their fans all joined together and chanted, "We are the richest!"
Well, actually, they didn't. But they should have done.
I can understand why people would want to go to see a football match where the players on the pitch are of the highest standard and have been bought in from all over the world. It's like going to see the greatest ballet dancers or greatest opera singers. But I cannot for the life of me understand how you can get attached to such a team in the same way people used to when winning was not all down to which teams had the richest owners and the number of foreign players on a team was limited by the rules of the game. I mean, where is the connection?
Nowadays, when they interview football fans on the TV whose teams are having a poor season, instead of saying that the manager should try harder to inspire the players to victory they complain that not enough money is being spent on buying in better players.
Of course, all this means that we have the same teams in our premier league all the while as the successful clubs attract the most money and can then spend the most money and so remain successful. The only time a team can work its way up from the lower leagues is if some extremely rich person buys the club and pumps enough money into it to purchase players of a sufficient quality to climb up the leagues. This stupid situation is most stupid in Scotland where they only have two premier league quality football teams and the rest of the league is made up of teams that would be playing in the FA Vase in England. Of course, every year one of the two teams wins the league. How anybody can get excited about this is beyond me.
If I was in charge I would pass a law that would cap the salaries of all football players (at a reasonable but not obscene level) and would cap (at a very low figure) the cost of tickets for all football matches. I would also cap the amount of money that could be spent on new players and such money would have to come from ticket sales only. This would mean that good, but greedy, English football players would all go and play abroad. But that wouldn't really matter as all football clubs would suffer equally from the skill drain. The playing field would be level. Under my scheme, no player who isn't playing for an English club, would be allowed to play for the English national side. Therefore, players would have a choice - money or glory. And football fans would spend their hard earned cash on tickets to watch teams that they could support with integrity as silverware would be won through the skill of the players and the management rather than through the wealth of the club owners. Then the fans could go back to chanting, "We are the greatest," without having that niggling feeling at the back of their minds that the only reason their team won was because of the healthy state of some foreign, dodgy businessman's offshore bank account.
My name is MadPriest and I'm a socialist.
When Man City won the league this afternoon their fans all joined together and chanted, "We are the richest!"
Well, actually, they didn't. But they should have done.
I can understand why people would want to go to see a football match where the players on the pitch are of the highest standard and have been bought in from all over the world. It's like going to see the greatest ballet dancers or greatest opera singers. But I cannot for the life of me understand how you can get attached to such a team in the same way people used to when winning was not all down to which teams had the richest owners and the number of foreign players on a team was limited by the rules of the game. I mean, where is the connection?
Nowadays, when they interview football fans on the TV whose teams are having a poor season, instead of saying that the manager should try harder to inspire the players to victory they complain that not enough money is being spent on buying in better players.
Of course, all this means that we have the same teams in our premier league all the while as the successful clubs attract the most money and can then spend the most money and so remain successful. The only time a team can work its way up from the lower leagues is if some extremely rich person buys the club and pumps enough money into it to purchase players of a sufficient quality to climb up the leagues. This stupid situation is most stupid in Scotland where they only have two premier league quality football teams and the rest of the league is made up of teams that would be playing in the FA Vase in England. Of course, every year one of the two teams wins the league. How anybody can get excited about this is beyond me.
If I was in charge I would pass a law that would cap the salaries of all football players (at a reasonable but not obscene level) and would cap (at a very low figure) the cost of tickets for all football matches. I would also cap the amount of money that could be spent on new players and such money would have to come from ticket sales only. This would mean that good, but greedy, English football players would all go and play abroad. But that wouldn't really matter as all football clubs would suffer equally from the skill drain. The playing field would be level. Under my scheme, no player who isn't playing for an English club, would be allowed to play for the English national side. Therefore, players would have a choice - money or glory. And football fans would spend their hard earned cash on tickets to watch teams that they could support with integrity as silverware would be won through the skill of the players and the management rather than through the wealth of the club owners. Then the fans could go back to chanting, "We are the greatest," without having that niggling feeling at the back of their minds that the only reason their team won was because of the healthy state of some foreign, dodgy businessman's offshore bank account.
My name is MadPriest and I'm a socialist.
WHERE DOES HE FIND THEM?
SUNDAY GO TO CHURCH SPECIAL
It's been a long time since I posted a "Where Does He Find Them" monstrosity on these pages. No doubt, you will all have added plenty of days, if not years, to your afterlife in purgatory during that time. But fret not! Today's selection is so absolutely dreadful that I am offering a full 5000 days indulgence for anybody tough enough to get all the way through it.
MP3 File
Praise the Lord, indeed. It's finished.
WORSHIP AT SAINT LAIKA'S
A SERVICE OF HOLY COMMUNION
THE SIXTH SUNDAY OF EASTER
All are welcome to join me in taking communion.
Download via the MP3 icon below the player.
Download podcast via iTUNES.MP3 File
CLICK HERE for order of service and credits (opens in new window)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)