Monday, February 13, 2012

Something Has Gone Badly Wrong With UK Equality Laws

Church of England clergy challenge civil partnership stance

Published by BBC News on 2 February 2012.

Secretary general William Fittall wrote that no religious premises would be allowed to host the registration of civil partnerships without written permission from the general synod - the Church's governing body.

The government said no religious group would be forced to hold ceremonies.

However, the Church's stance angered pressure groups and gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell urged clergy to defy the ban, which he called "dictatorial and homophobic".

The government will open a consultation on the issue of same-sex marriages - as opposed to civil partnerships - in March.

A consultation on the subject by the Scottish government ended in December.

On Wednesday, more than 50 people protested outside York Minster at comments made by the Archbishop of York on same-sex marriage.

Dr John Sentamu had told the Daily Telegraph that marriage must be between a man and a woman, adding it was not "the role of the state to define what marriage is".

Civil partnerships give same-sex couples the right to the same legal treatment across a range of matters as married couples but the law does not allow such unions to be referred to as marriages.

Bideford Town Council prayers ruled unlawful

Published by BBC News on 10 February 2012.

Action was brought against Bideford Town Council by the National Secular Society (NSS) after atheist councillor Clive Bone complained.

Mr Justice Ouseley ruled the prayers were not lawful under section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972.

However, he said prayers could be said as long as councillors were not formally summoned to attend.

The judgement was being seen as a test case which could affect local councils across England and Wales.

Mr Justice Ouseley ruled the prayers as practised by Bideford Town Council had been unlawful because there was no statutory power permitting them to continue.

The NSS, which said prayers had no place in "a secular environment concerned with civic business", argued the "inappropriate" ritual breached articles 9 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protect an individual's right to freedom of conscience and not to face discrimination.

However, the case was not won on human rights grounds but on a point of statutory construction of local government legislation.

Christian guesthouse owners lose appeal over ban on gay guests

Published by The Telegraph on 10 February 2012.

The challenge by the Bulls, who run Chymorvah House in Marazion, Cornwall, was rejected by three judges in the Court of Appeal in London.

They had appealed against a conclusion by a judge at Bristol County Court that they acted unlawfully when they turned away Martyn Hall and his civil partner Steven Preddy in September 2008.

Judge Andrew Rutherford ruled in January last year that the Bulls had breached equality legislation and ordered them to pay the couple a total of £3,600 damages.

The appeal judges heard that the Bulls thought any sex outside marriage was a ''sin'', but denied they had discriminated against Mr Hall and Mr Preddy, from Bristol.

Today's ruling was given by Sir Andrew Morritt, Chancellor of the High Court, Lord Justice Hooper and Lady Justice Rafferty.

During the hearing of the appeal in November, James Dingemans QC, for the Bulls, argued that the couple were entitled to hold "outdated" religious beliefs.

He said the Bulls operated a policy directed towards sexual practice not sexual orientation and said they believed that permitting unmarried people - whether heterosexual or homosexual - to share a double bed involved them in "promoting a sin".

Mr Dingemans said the Bulls were not trying to undermine the rights of Mr Hall and Mr Preddy and judges had to carefully balance all human rights involved.

Robin Allen QC, for Mr Hall and Mr Preddy, argued that his clients had a "lawful civil partnership" and the guesthouse should have been "open" to them in the same way it was to heterosexual married couples.

The judges heard that the Bulls were being backed by the Christian Institute and Mr Hall and Mr Preddy by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

After the ruling, John Wadham, the Commission's group legal director, said: "I have genuine sympathy for Mr and Mrs Bull, as their beliefs are clearly strongly held. We believe that this case will help people to better understand the law around freedom of religion. When offering a service, people cannot use their beliefs - religious or otherwise - to discriminate against others."

"As the discrimination ruling has been upheld, Mr Preddy and Mr Hall are entitled to the compensation ordered by the county court. However, the Commission has no intention of enforcing its entitlement to legal costs."

Simon Calvert, of the the Christian Institute, which funded Mr and Mrs Bull's appeal, said: "Peter and Hazelmary have been penalised for their beliefs about marriage. Not everyone will agree with Peter and Hazelmary's beliefs, but a lot of people will think it is shame that the law doesn't let them live and work according to their own values under their own roof. Something has gone badly wrong with our equality laws when good, decent people like Peter and Hazelmary are penalised but extremist hate preachers are protected."

Thursday, February 2, 2012

ALKITAB - 400th Anniversary Celebration‏

Picture taken from Free Malaysia Today.

In the year 1612, the translation of the Gospel of Matthew in the Malay Language was published. This was a very historic and significant publication as it was the earliest translation of the Bible in a non-European language ever published. In celebration of the 400th Anniversary of the Alkitab, Seminari Theoloji Malaysia, together in partnership with Bible Society of Malaysia, warmly invite you to join us in a specially organised 2-day conference discussing the issues, difficulties, and complications involved in the translation and distribution of the Alkitab, and to celebrate God's faithfulness in preserving the Bible for us. Details of the 2-day event are as follow:

1) Academic Conference:

Date: 2 March 2012 (Friday)

Venue: Seminari Theoloji Malaysia, Seremban

Registration Fee: RM20.00

Time: 9.30am-430pm

2) Public Event Celebrating 400 Years of Alkitab

Date: 3 March 2012 (Saturday)

Venue: Trinity Methodist Church, 6, Jalan 5/37, Petaling Jaya

Registration Fee: RM20.00

Time: 9.30am-4.00pm

Presentations will be offered by an outstanding group of speakers and scholars:

Dr Daud Soesilo, United Bible Societies

Dr Ng Kam Weng, Kairos Research Centre

Rev Dr Simon Wong, Bible Society of Malaysia

Mr Lee Min Choon, Bible Society of Malaysia

There will be Special Chapel and Thanksgiving Services celebrating 400 years of the Alkitab, testimonies from the translators of Alkitab, and a special event honouring the translators of the Alkitab. There will also be exhibitions by the Bible Society of Malaysia and RBC Ministries highlighting resources using the Alkitab.

Please note that admission to the events is strictly by registration only. The closing date for registration is 29 February 2012. For further information, please refer to the promotional flyer detailing the events and the registration form.

Friday, January 6, 2012

Church Leaders Led Round The Bush Again

Published by Malaysiakini on 5 January 2012. By Terence Netto.

Christian church leaders were once again led a merry dance around the bush when Prime Minister Najib Razak hosted a lunch for them yesterday.

The Najib administration, with 13 cabinet ministers including the deputy prime minister in attendance in an ostensible show of collegiality on matters affecting the community, gave vent to the usual saccharine assurances of solicitude for Christian concerns while leaving the deeper misgivings of the community unappeased.

The mainstream newspapers this morning gave the expected photo play to the occasion with accompanying articles that conveyed the point that Christian concerns were addressed by the PM’s assurances.

With a general election imminent, the objective of the lunch meeting was to assure Christian leaders and their followers that their concerns will not suffer from government neglect.

Najib assured them the government would consult with mission schools before deciding on the appointment of principals; that the teaching of the catechism of the faith would be allowed in mission schools after hours; and that tax exemption would be granted on monies raised by Christian charities.

None of these assurances is in any way new, though in recent instances, one or the other was honoured in the breach than in the observance.

Nothing of substance

Christian leaders who attended the meeting yesterday did not go in the hope of being reassured on matters they consider de rigueur; they had gone to raise concerns in which they had hoped to hear of decisive action taken to remove their tension-igniting causes.

A lunch meeting of church leaders with the PM in May last year was similarly laved in a public relations glow but issued in nothing of substance to tamp down growing tensions between Christians and the government.

In fact, last May’s meeting was followed by reports in Umno-supporting blogs and the Umno-owned newspaper, Utusan Malaysia, that Christian groups were plotting the dethronement of Islam as the official religion of the country.

Subsequent police investigations into the matter drew a blank. But reports of Christian proselytisation of Muslims did not abate.

Last August, Christian groups were reported by Jais (Selangor Islamic Affairs Department) to be attempting to convert Muslims through the provision of charity to poverty-stricken members of the faith.

Like the earlier reports of Christian plans to dethrone Islam, Muslim-led investigations did not unearth evidence in support of Christian proselytisation claims.

Anglican Bishop Ng Moon Hing, chairperson of the Christian Federation of Malaysia, had prepared a speech for delivery on the occasion of the PM’s hosting of the lunch yesterday.

He did not get to air it, for good reason.

The text alludes to matters - the need to build more places of worship, the need for burial grounds, the removal of a government ban on the use of the term ‘Allah’ in Christian publications, and the necessity of a ministry to handle matters concerning non-Muslim religions - that church leaders have raised in countless discussions with the authorities in the past, but with no discernible success.

The Muslim lady who spoke in church

There is mounting puzzlement in the Christian community as to why its leaders persist in believing that anything substantive would come from meetings between church leaders and Umno-BN top brass except as acknowledgment of the wisdom that it is better to “jaw-jaw” than to skulk in silence.

But this charade of periodic public expressions of Umno-BN solicitude for Christian concerns followed by covert indifference towards the same has disabused the Christian faithful of illusions their leaders may continue to suffer from as to the actual realities on the ground.

They know from long experience from which to distill an indisputable conclusion that Muslim leaders who think that they can run with the hares of inter-religious goodwill, when it suits them, and hunt with the hounds of Islamic supremacy, when that’s expedient, are not to be trusted.

They would prefer to place their trust in such Muslim leaders as the one who on Christmas Day, quietly slipped into a church in the Klang Valley and before the service started, was invited by the parish priest to briefly address the congregation.

She went up to the pulpit, wished the parishioners a blessed occasion, and spoke of what she intimated would be imminent deliverance of the country from the duplicity and chicanery of the powers-that-be.

Heartfelt applause resounded in the church as the tudung-wearing lady wafted out, like the angelic apparitions that greeted the shepherds two millennia ago on the birth of what Christians regard as the Prince of Peace.

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 5 — Datuk Seri Najib Razak should respect the law and start removing rules and policies that have seen Christians being victimised by the bureaucracry, a national group representing over 90 per cent of churches said yesterday.

In a strongly-worded statement, the Christian Federation of Malaysia (CFM) called on the prime minister to check the growing systematic religious attacks against Christians nationwide over the past one year.

http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=25726%3Achristians-must-come-out-of-their-fog-beware-the-two-headed-political-snakes&Itemid=2

Prime Minister Najib Razak has just promised national Christian leaders 'full consultation' over missionary school heads and Bible knowledge classes as well as tax-exemption status for qualified Christian organizations. But his largesse was just a bid to repair relations between the federal government and the local church authorities.

The New Year message which was to be delivered by Bishop Datuk Ng Moon Hing, chairman of the Christian Federation of Malaysia, as an expression of CFM’s concerns to the Honourable Prime Minister of Malaysia at a lunch hosted by the Prime Minister on 4 January 2012. However, Bishop Datuk Ng was not given the opportunity to present this formally at the lunch.

Link here: http://www.themicahmandate.org/2012/01/cfm-concerns/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+micahmandate+%28The+Micah+Mandate+%3A+Mandat+Mikha%29

Sunday, December 25, 2011

Merry Christmas!

Picture taken from http://communityoflife.net/bel.html

For unto us a Child is born,

Unto us a Son is given;

And the government will be upon His shoulder.

And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Of the increase of His government and peace.

There will be no end,

Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom,

To order it and establish it with judgment and justice

From that time forward, even forever.

The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.

Isaiah 9:6-7 NKJV

Saturday, December 17, 2011

Christopher Hitchens Has Died, Doug Wilson Reflects

How to think about the death of the outspoken atheist.

Douglas Wilson | posted 12/16/2011 12:00AM

Photo by Peter King

Editor's Note: Christopher Hitchens has died at the age of 62. A statement from Vanity Fair said that he died Thursday night at cancer center in Houston of pneumonia, a complication of his esophageal cancer. CT asked Douglas Wilson to weigh in on the life and death of the prominent atheist. (The image on our homepage features Wilson, left, and Hitchens in a mock arm wrestling match.)

Christopher Hitchens was a celebrity intellectual, and, as such, the basic outlines of his life are generally well known. But for those just joining us, Christopher Hitchens was the older of two sons, born to Eric and Yvonne in April 1949. He discovered as a schoolboy that probing questions about the veracity of the Christian faith were part of a discussion that he "liked having." His younger brother, Peter, followed him in unbelief. But unlike Christopher, Peter publicly returned to the Church of England, the communion where they had both been baptized.

Christopher spent some time in the 1960s as a radical leftist, but of course that was what everybody was doing back then. Somehow Christopher managed to do this and march to a different drummer, doing his radical stint as part of a post–Trotskyite Luxemburgist sect. He graduated from Balliol at Oxford, and soon became established as a writer, the vocation of his life, one in which he excelled. As a writer and thinker, he was greatly influenced by (and wrote about) men like George Orwell and Thomas Jefferson, while as the same time reserving the right to attack any sacred cow of his choosing—and the more sacred, the better. He is widely known for his scathing attack on Mother Teresa, and when Jerry Falwell passed away, he spent a good deal of time on television chortling about it.

But this was all part of Christopher's very public rhetorical strategy, not a function of an inability to domesticate a surly temperament. He was actually an affable and pleasant dinner companion, and fully capable of being the perfect gentleman. He was fully aware of the authority an enfant terrible could have, provided he played his cards right, and this was a strategy that Hitchens employed very well indeed. One man who delivers a terrible insult is banned from television for life, and another man, who does the same thing, has people lining up with invitations and microphones. In case anyone is wondering, Christopher was that second man.

A defining characteristic of his life was a willingness to break with the last group he was identified with. Whenever Orwell's "smelly little orthodoxies" began to develop, Christopher would be down the road. One of his books was Letters to a Young Contrarian, and that wordcontrarian appears to describe Christopher's approach to the desirability of not quite fitting in. After the attacks of September 11, he surprised a number of people with his full-throated support of the Iraq war, and he became a vigorous defender of the Western response to what he identified as "fascism with an Islamic face." As a result, he soon became identified with neoconservatives (who also supported the war), but he vigorously denied being a conservative of any stripe. At the same time, he found himself on the same side of a significant issue with George W. Bush, for example, while his former fellow leftists were most emphatically not.

I came to know Christopher during the promotion tour for his atheist encyclical, God Is Not Great. True to form, Christopher did not want to write a book attacking God and his minions only to have the release be a wine and cheese party in Manhattan with a bunch of fellow unbelievers, where they could all laugh knowingly about the rubes and cornpones down in the Bible Belt. So he told his publicist that he wanted to debate with any and all comers, and in the course of promoting his book, he did exactly that. I believe his book tour began in Arkansas, and the range of his debate partners included Al Sharpton, Dinesh D'Souza, and numerous others. In response to this general defiance he delivered to the armies of Israel, my agent Aaron Rench contacted Christianity Today to see if they would be willing to host a written exchange. They were, and when Christopher was contacted, he quickly agreed as well. That online exchange attracted some attention, and the debate was made into a small book (Is Christianity Good for the World?). The short promotion tour for the release of thebook was a series of debates that Christopher and I held in New York, Philadelphia, and Washington, which were filmed for the documentary Collision.

As a result of all this, we were thrown together in a number of situations. One time we shared a panel in Dallas, and I told the crowd there that if Christopher and I were not careful, we were in danger of becoming friends. During the time we spent together, he never said an unkind thing to me—except on stage, up in front of everybody. After doing this, he didn't wink at me, but he might as well have.

So we got on well with each other, because each of us knew where the other one stood. Eugene Genovese, before he became a believer, once commented on the tendency that some have to try to garner respect by giving away portions, big or small, of what they profess to believe. "If other religions offer equally valid ways to salvation and if Christianity itself may be understood solely as a code of morals and ethics, then we may as well all become Buddhists or, better, atheists. I intend no offense, but it takes one to know one. And when I read much Protestant theology and religious history today, I have the warm feeling that I am in the company of fellow unbelievers" (The Southern Front, pp. 9–10). Ironically, the branch of the faith most interested in getting the "cultured despisers" to pay us some respect is really not that effective, and this is a strategy that can frequently be found on the pointed end of its own petard. Respectability depends on not caring too much about respectability. Unbelievers can smell accommodation, and when someone like Christopher meets someone who actually believes all the articles in the Creed, including that part about Jesus coming back from the dead, it delights him. Here is someone actually willing to defend what is being attacked. Militant atheists are often exasperated with opponents whose strategy appears to be "surrender slowly."

G. K. Chesterton once pointed to the salutary effect that the great agnostics had on him—that effect being that of "arousing doubts deeper than their own." Christopher was an heir of the Enlightenment tradition, and would have felt right at home in the 18th-century salons of Paris. He wanted to carry on the grand tradition of doubting what had been inherited from Christendom, and to take great delight in doubting it. This worked well, or appeared to, for a time. But skepticism is a universal solvent, and once applied, it does not stop just because Christendom is gone. "I think, therefore I am. I think." We pulled out the stopper of faith, and the bathwater of reason appeared undisturbed for a time. But modernism slowly receded and now postmodernism is circling the drain. Our intelligentsia needs to figure out how to do more than sit in an empty tub and reminisce about the days when Voltaire knew how to keep the water hot.

Christopher knew that faithful Christians believe that it is appointed to man once to die, and after that the Judgment. He knew that we believe what Jesus taught about the reality of damnation. He also knew that we believe—for I told him—that in this life, the door of repentance is always open. A wise Puritan once noted what we learn from the last-minute conversion of the thief on the cross—one, that no one might despair, but only one, that no one might presume. We have no indication that Christopher ever called on the Lord before he died, and if he did not, then Scriptures plainly teach that he is lost forever. But we do have every indication that Christ died for sinners, men and women just like Christopher. We know that the Lord has more than once hired workers for his vineyard when the sun was almost down (Matt. 20:6).

We also know that Christopher was worried about this, and was afraid of letting down the infidel team. In a number of interviews during the course of his cancer treatments, he discussed the prospect of a "death bed" conversion, and it was clear that he was concerned about the prospect. But, he assured interviewers, if anything like that ever happened, we should all be certain that the cancer or the chemo orsomething had gotten to his brain. If he confessed faith, then he, the Christopher Hitchens that we all knew, should be counted as already dead. In short, he was preparing a narrative for us, just in case. But it is interesting that the narrative he prepped us with did not involve some ethically challenged evangelical nurses on the late shift who were ready to claim that they had heard him cry out to God, thus misrepresenting another great infidel into heaven. It has been done with Einstein, and with Darwin. Why not Hitchens? But Christopher actually prepared us by saying that if he said anything like this, then he did not know what he was saying.

This is interesting, not so much because of what it says about what he did or did not do as death approached him, and as he at the same time approached death. It is interesting because, when he gave these interviews, he was manifestly in his right mind, and the thought had clearly occurred to him that he might not feel in just a few months the way he did at present. The subject came up repeatedly, and was plainly a concern to him. Christopher Hitchens was baptized in his infancy, and his name means "Christ-bearer." This created an enormous burden that he tried to shake off his entire life. No creature can ever succeed in doing this. But sometimes, in the kindness of God, such failures can have a gracious twist at the end. We therefore commend Christopher to the Judge of the whole earth, who will certainly do right. Christopher Eric Hitchens (1949-2011). R.I.P.