• George Pell: cardinal found guilty of child sexual assault | Australia news | The Guardian


    George Pell: cardinal found guilty of child sexual assault

    Vatican treasurer, the third most senior Catholic in the world, convicted on five charges in Australian court case
    • Follow live updates on the reaction to Cardinal George Pell’s conviction
    • Five times guilty: how Pell’s past caught up with him
    • Journalists accused of breaking suppression order may face jail

    Melissa Davey

    Tue 26 Feb 2019 03.41 GMT
    First published on Mon 25 Feb 2019 23.58 GMT

    Cardinal George Pell, once the third most powerful man in the Vatican and Australia’s most senior Catholic, has been found guilty of child sexual abuse after a trial in Melbourne.

    A jury delivered the unanimous verdict on 11 December in Melbourne’s county court, but the result was subject to a suppression order and could not be reported until now.

    A previous trial on the same five charges, which began in August, resulted in a hung jury, leading to a retrial.
    Cardinal Pell guilty: Vatican treasurer convicted on child sexual abuse charges – live
    Read more

    Pell, who is on leave from his role in Rome as Vatican treasurer, was found guilty of sexually penetrating a child under the age of 16 as well as four charges of an indecent act with a child under the age of 16. The offences occurred in December 1996 and early 1997 at St Patrick’s Cathedral, months after Pell was inaugurated as archbishop of Melbourne.

    He is due to be sentenced next week but may be taken into custody at a ple

    #viol #catholicisme

  • War of words : my battle to correct Wikipedia | The Spectator

    I signed up some years ago as a Wikipedia ‘editor’, thinking that, as I knew a little about some subjects, I could help to straighten out the online encyclopaedia a bit. Heaven knows, it needs some help. Its worst failing, much like BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, is to portray subjects that are racked with unresolved controversy as if they were settled.

    But I soon found out why nobody else had managed to put this right. Almost every significant article is guarded by powerful forces that appear from nowhere if you dare to make changes. Unless you have unlimited time, and a squadron of determined helpers, they will simply remove any alterations you make, and put things back the way they were.

    La controverse porte sur des accusations de pédophilie sur un évêque anglican. La version actuelle semble factuelle et équilibrée. Et compatible avec celle que déclare avoir défendue l’auteur.

    George Bell (bishop) - Wikipedia

    In September 2015 the diocese paid compensation to the woman and Martin Warner, the Bishop of Chichester, issued a formal apology to her the following month.

    This led to a major controversy, as people who respected Bell’s legacy found the claims to be incredible, and found the Church’s apparent acceptance of them to be unjust.

    Due to the controversy, in February 2016 the woman spoke publicly for the first time under the pseudonym “Carol”, in an interview with the Brighton Argus about being sexually abused from the age of five until her family moved away when she was nine.

    In June 2016 the Church of England announced that it would hold an independent review of the procedure used to investigate the church’s handling of the allegations (not the truth of the allegations themselves) and in November it announced that Alex Carlile, a QC and a member of the House of Lords, would be the reviewer. Carlile submitted his report to the Church of England in mid-October and on 15 December 2017 the church published it.

    Carlile found that “there was a rush to judgment: The church, feeling it should be both supportive of the complainant and transparent in its dealings, failed to engage in a process which would also give proper consideration to the rights of the bishop.” The report also found that the available evidence did not suggest there would have been “a realistic prospect of conviction” in court, the standard that prosecutors in England and Wales use in deciding whether to pursue a case.

    The Church of England released a statement with the report, in which it apologized to Bell’s relatives for the way it investigated child abuse claims made against him, acknowledged the mistakes highlighted by the report, and promised to implement all except one of its recommendations. Archbishop Welby rejected calls to state that the investigation had cleared Bell’s name and said that the allegations were handled as a civil matter, not a criminal one.

    In March 2018, the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse began examining the handling of allegations of sexual abuse in the diocese of Chichester, including this matter, which it said would unfold over two years.

    Wikipédia propose un (long) article sur l’auteur, Peter Hitchens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Hitchens où la controverse n’est pas mentionnée. Article plus court, en français.

  • 21 Books You Don’t Have to Read | GQ

    C’est bone liste pour la Californie. Et pour la France, l’talie, le Sénégal, le Cameroun, le Congo, l’Égyte, la Russie, l’Inde et la Chine ? Et pour l’Allemagne ?
    Une fois ces listes réunis je me prends un an de vacances avec des amis et on se traduit et s’explique mutuellement le pour et le contre des livres.
    On commence là sur #Seenthis ?

    We’ve been told all our lives that we can only call ourselves well-read once we’ve read the Great Books. We tried. We got halfway through Infinite Jest and halfway through the SparkNotes on Finnegans Wake. But a few pages into Bleak House, we realized that not all the Great Books have aged well. Some are racist and some are sexist, but most are just really, really boring. So we—and a group of un-boring writers—give you permission to strike these books from the canon. Here’s what you should read instead.

    1. Lonesome Dove by Larry McMurtry
    Instead: The Mountain Lion by Jean Stafford

    2. The Catcher in the Rye by J. D. Salinger
    Instead: Olivia: A Novel by Dorothy Strachey

    3. Goodbye to All That by Robert Graves
    Instead: Dispatches by Michael Herr

    4. The Old Man and the Sea by Ernest Hemingway
    Instead: The Summer Book by Tove Jansson

    5. The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho
    Instead: Near to the Wild Heart by Clarice Lispector

    6. A Farewell to Arms by Ernest Hemingway
    Instead: The Great Fire by Shirley Hazzard

    7. Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthy
    Instead: The Sisters Brothers by Patrick deWitt

    8. John Adams by David McCullough
    Instead: Destiny of the Republic: A Tale of Madness, Medicine and the Murder of a President by Candice Millard

    9 & 10. Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain
    Instead: Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave by Fredrick Douglass
    Instead: The Adventures and Misadventures of Maqroll by Alvaro Mutis

    11. The Ambassadors by Henry James
    Instead: The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William L. Shirer

    12. The Bible
    Instead: The Notebook by Agota Kristof

    13. Franny and Zooey by J. D. Salinger
    Instead: Death Comes for the Archbishop by Willa Cather

    14. The Lord of the Rings by J. R. R. Tolkien
    Instead: Earthsea Series by Ursula K. Le Guin

    15. Dracula by Bram Stoker
    Instead: Angels by Denis Johnson

    16. Catch-22 by Joseph Heller
    Instead: The American Granddaughter by Inaam Kachachi

    17. Life by Keith Richards
    Instead: The Worst Journey in the World by Apsley Cherry-Garrard

    18. Freedom by Jonathan Franzen
    Instead: Too Loud a Solitude by Bohumil Hrabal

    19. Gravity’s Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon
    Instead: Inherent Vice by Thomas Pynchon

    20. Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut
    Instead: Veronica by Mary Gaitskill

    21. Gulliver’s Travels by Jonathan Swift
    Instead: The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman by Laurence Sterne

    #USA #littérature #société

  • The Rise and Fall Of the Watusi - The New York Times
    En 1964 le New York Times publie un article sur l’extermination imminente des Tutsi. C’est raconté comme une fatalité qui ne laisse pas de choix aux pauvres nègres victimes de forces plus grandes qu’eux. Dans cette optique il s’agit du destion inexorable du peuple des Tutsi arrivant à la fin de son règne sur le peuple des Hutu qui revendique ses droits. L’article contient quelques informations intéressantes déformées par la vison colonialiste de l’époque.


    FROM the miniature Republic of Rwanda in central Africa comes word of the daily slaughter of a thousand people, the possible extermin­ation of a quarter of a million men, women and children, in what has been called the bloodiest tragedy since Hitler turned on the Jews. The victims are those tall, proud and graceful warrior­aristocrats, the Tutsi, sometimes known as the Watusi.* They are being killed

    *According to the orthography of the Bantu language, “Tutsi” is the singular and “Watutsi” the plural form of the word. For the sake of simplicity. I prefer to follow the style used in United Nations reports and use “Tutsi” for both singular and plural.

    Who are the Tutsi and why is such a ghastly fate overtaking them? Is it simply African tribalism run riot, or are outside influences at work ? Can nothing be done?

    The king‐in‐exile of Rwanda, Mwamni (Monarch) Kigeri V, who has fled to the Congo, is the 41st in line of suc­cession. Every Tutsi can recite the names of his 40 predecessors but the Tutsi cannot say how many centuries ago their ancestors settled in these tumbled hills, deep valleys and vol­canic mountains separating the great

    Nor is it known just where they came from—Ethiopia perhaps; before that, possibly Asia. They are cattle folk, allied in race to such nomadic peo­ples as the Somali, Gatlla, Fulani and Masai. Driving their cattle before them, they found this remote pocket of cen­tral Africa, 1,000 miles from the In­dian Ocean. It was occupied by a race of Negro cultivators called the Hutu, who had themselves displaced the ab­original pygmy hunters, the Twa (or Batwa). First the Tutsi conquered and then ruled the Hutu. much as a ??r‐man ruling class conquered and settled

    In the latest census, the Tutsi con­stitute about 15 per cent of Rwanda’s population of between 2.5 and 3 mil­lion. Apart from a handful of Twa, the rest are Hutu. (The same figures are true of the tiny neighboring king­dom of Burundi.)

    For at least four centuries the Tutsi have kept intact their racial type by inbreeding. Once seen, these elongated men are never forgotten. Their small, narrow heads perched on top of slim and spindly bodies remind one of some of Henry Moore’s sculptures. Their average height, though well above the general norm, is no more than 5 feet 9 inches, but individuals reach more than 7 feet. The former king, Charles III Rudahagwa, was 6 feet 9 inches, and a famous dancer and high jumper—so famous his portrait was printed on the banknotes—measured 7 feet 5 inches.

    THIS height, prized as a badge of racial purity, the Tutsi accentuated by training upward tufts of fuzzy hair shaped like crescent moons. Their leaps, bounds and whirling dances delighted tourists, as their courtesy and polished manners impressed them.

    Through the centuries, Tutsi feudal­ism survived with only minor changes. At its center was the Mwami, believed to be descended from the god of lightning, whose three children fell from heaven onto a hilltop and begat the two royal clans from which the Mwami and his queen were always chosen. Not only had the Mwami rights of life and death over his subjects but, in theory, he owned all the cattle. too — magnificent, long‐horned cattle far superior to the weedy native African bovines. Once a year, these were ceremonially presented to the Mwami in all their glory — horns sand‐polished, coats rubbed with butter, foreheads hung with beads, each beast attended by a youth in bark‐cloth robes who spoke to it softly and caught its dung on a woven straw mat.

    “Rwanda has three pillars.” ran a Tutsi saying: “God, cows and soldiers.” The cows the Mwami distributed among his subchiefs, and they down the line to lesser fry, leaving no adult Tutsi male without cows.

    Indeed, the Tutsi cannot live with­out cattle, for milk and salted butter are their staple food. (Milk is con­sumed in curds; the butter, hot and perfumed by the bark of a certain tree.) To eat foods grown in soil, though often done, is thought vaguely shame­ful, something to be carried out in private.

    THE kingdom was divided into dis­tricts and each had not one governor, but two: a land chief (umunyabutaka) and a cattle chief (umuuyamukenke). The jealousy that nearly always held these two potentates apart prompted them to spy on each other to the Mwami, who was thus able to keep his barons from threatening his own au­thority.

    Below these governors spread a net­work of hill chiefs, and under them again the heads of families. Tribute — milk and butter from the lordly Tutsi, and

    Just as, in medieval Europe, every nobleman sent his son to the king’s court to learn the arts of war, love and civil­ity, so in Rwanda and Burundi did every Tutsi father send his sons to the Mwami’s court for instruction in the use of weapons, in lore and tradition, in dancing and poetry and the art of conversation, in manly sports and in the practice of the most prized Tutsi virtue —self‐control. Ill‐temper and the least display of emotion are thought shameful and vul­gar. The ideal Tutsi male is at all times polite, dignified, amiable, sparing of idle words and a trifle supercilious.

    THESE youths, gathered in the royal compound, were formed into companies which, in turn, formed the army. Each youth owed to his company commander an allegiance which continued all his life. In turn, the commander took the youth, and subsequently the man, under his protection. Every Tutsi could appeal from his hill chief to his army com­mander, who was bound to support him in lawsuits or other troubles. (During battle, no commander could step backward, lest . his army re­treat; at no time could the

    The Hutu were both bound and protected by a system known as buhake, a form of vassalage. A Hutu wanting to enter into this relationship would present a jug of beer to a Tutsi and say: “I ask you for milk. Make me rich. Be my father, and I will be your child.” If the Tutsi agreed, he gave the applicant a cow, or several cows. This sealed the bargain­

    The Hutu then looked to his lord for protection and for such help as contributions to­ward the bride‐price he must proffer for a wife. In return, the Hutu helped from time to time in the work of his pro­tector’s household, brought oc­casional jugs of beer and held himself available for service

    The densely populated king­doms of the Tutsi lay squarely in the path of Arab slavers who for centuries pillaged throughout the central Afri­can highlands, dispatching by the hundreds of thou­sands yoked and helpless hu­man beings to the slave mar­kets of Zanzibar and the Persian Gulf. Here the explor­er Livingstone wrote despair­ingly in his diaries of coffles (caravans) of tormented cap­tives, of burnt villages, slaugh­tered children, raped women and ruined crops. But these little kingdoms, each about the size of Maryland, escaped. The disciplined, courageous Tutsi spearmen kept the Arabs out, and the Hutu safe. Feudalism worked both ways.

    Some Hutu grew rich, and even married their patrons’ daughters. Sexual morality was strict. A girl who became pregnant before marriage was either killed outright or aban­doned on an island in the mid­dle of Lake Kivu to perish, unless rescued by a man of a despised and primitive Congo tribe, to be kept as a beast of burden with no rights.

    SINCE the Tutsi never tilled the soil, their demands for labor were light. Hutu duties included attendance on the lord during his travels; carry­ing messages; helping to re­pair the master’s compound; guarding his cows. The reia­tionsiiip could be ended at any time by either party. A patron had no right to hold an unwilling “client” in his service.

    It has been said that serf­dom in Europe was destroyed by the invention of the horse

    UNTIL the First World War the kingdoms were part of German East Africa. Then Bel­gium took them over, under the name of Ruanda‐Urundi, as a trust territory, first for the League of Nations, then under the U. N. Although the Belgian educational system, based on Roman Catholic mis­sions, was conservative in out­look, and Belgian adminis­trators made no calculated attempt to undo Tutsi feudal­ism, Western ideas inevitably crept in. So did Western eco­nomic notions through the in­troduction of coffee cultiva­tion, which opened to the Hutu a road to independence, by­passing the Tutsi cattle‐based economy. And Belgian authori­ty over Tutsi notables, even over the sacred Mwami him­self, inevitably damaged their prestige. The Belgians even de­posed one obstructive Mwami. About ten years ago, the Belgians tried to persuade the Tutsi to let some of the Hutu into their complex structure of government. In Burundi, the Tutsi ruling caste realized its cuanger just in time and agreed to share some of its powers with the Hutu majority. But in Rwanda, until the day the system toppled, no Hutu was appointed by the Tatsi over­lords to a chief’s position. A tight, rigid, exclusive Tutsi aristocracy continued to rule the land.

    The Hutu grew increasingly

    WHEN order was restored, there were reckoned to be 21,­000 Tutsi refugees in Burundi, 14,000 in Tanganyika, 40,000 in Uganda and 60,000 in the Kivu province of the Con­go. The Red Cross did its best to cope in camps improvised by local governments.

    Back in Rwanda, municipal elections were held for the first time—and swept the Hutu into power. The Parmehutu —Parti d’Emancipation des Hu­tus—founded only in October 1959, emerged on top, formed a coalition government, and after some delays proclaimed a republic, to which the Bel­gians, unwilling to face a colonial war, gave recognition in terms of internal self‐gov­ernment.

    In 1962, the U.N. proclaimed Belgium’s trusteeship at an end, and, that same year, a general election held under U.N. supervision confirmed the Hutu triumph. With full in­dependence, a new chapter be­gan — the Hutu chapter.

    Rwanda and Burundi split. Burundi has the only large city, Usumbura (population: 50,000), as its capital. With a mixed Tutsi‐Hutu govern­ment, it maintains an uneasy peace. It remains a kingdom, with a Tutsi monarch. Every­one knows and likes the jovial Mwami, Mwambutsa IV, whose height is normal, whose rule

    As its President, Rwanda chose Grégoire Kayibanda, a 39‐year‐old Roman Catholic seminarist who, on the verge of ordination, chose politics in­stead. Locally educated by the Dominicans, he is a protégé of the Archbishop of Rwanda whose letter helped spark the first Hutu uprising. Faithful to his priestly training, he shuns the fleshpots, drives a Volkswagen instead of the Rolls or Mercedes generally favored by an African head of state and, suspicious of the lure of wicked cities, lives on a hilltop outside the town of Kigali, said to be the smallest capital city in the world, with some 7,000 inhabitants, a sin­gle paved street, no hotels, no telephone and a more or less permanent curfew.

    Mr. Kayibanda’s Christian and political duties, as he sees them, have fused into an im­placable resolve to destroy for­ever the last shreds of Tutsi power—if necessary by obliter­ating the entire Tutsi race. Last fall, Rwanda still held between 200,000 and 250,000 Tutsi, reinforced by refugees drifting back from the camps, full of bitterness and humilia­tion. In December, they were joined by bands of Tutsi spear­men from Burundi, who with the courage of despair, and outnumbered 10 to 1, attacked the Hutu. Many believe they were egged on by Mwami Ki­geri V, who since 1959 had been fanning Tutsi racial prideand calling for revenue.

    THE result of the attacks was to revive all the cumula­tive hatred of the Tutsi for past injustices. The winds of anti‐colonialism sweeping Af­rica do not distinguish be­tween white and black colo­nialists. The Hutu launched a ruthless war of extermina­tion that is still going on. Tut­si villages are stormed and their inhabitants clubbed or hacked to death, burned alive or herded into crocodile‐infest­ed rivers.

    What will become of the Tutsi? One urgent need is out­side help for the Urundi Gov­ernment in resettling the masses of refugees who have fled to its territory. Urundi’s mixed political set‐up is rea­sonably democratic, if not al­ways peaceful (witness the assassination of the Crown Prince by a political opponent

    In a sense the Tutsi have brought their tragic fate on themselves. They are paying now the bitter price of ostrich­ism, a stubborn refusal to move with the times. The Bourbons of Africa, they are meeting the Bourbon destiny—to be obliterated by the people they have ruled and patron­ized.

    The old relationship could survive no longer in a world, as E. M. Forster has described it, of “telegrams and anger;” a world of bogus democracy turning into one‐party states, of overheated U.N. assemblies, of press reports and dema­gogues, a world where (as in the neighboring Congo) a for­mer Minister of Education leads bands of tribesmen armed with arrows to mutilate women missionaries.

    THE elegant and long‐legged Tutsi with their dances and their epic poetry, their lyre­horned cattle and superb bas­ketwork and code of seemly behavior, had dwindled into tourist fodder. The fate of all species, institutions or individ­uais who will not, or cannot. adapt caught up with them. Those who will not bend must break.

    For the essence of the situ­ation in an Africa increasingly

    NOW, not just the white men have gone, or are going; far more importantly, the eld­ers and their authority, the whole chain of command from ancestral spirits, through the chief and his council to the obedient youth are being swept away. This hierarchy is being replaced by the “young men,” the untried, unsettled, uncer­tain, angry and confused gen­eration who, with a thin ve­neer of ill‐digested Western education, for the first time in Africa’s long history have taken over power from their fathers.

    It is a major revolution in­deed, whose first results are only just beginning to show up and whose outcome cannot be seen. There is only one safe prediction: that it will be vio­lent, unpredictable, bloody and cruel, as it is proving for the doomed Tutsi of Rwanda.

    #Ruanda #Burundi #histoire #Tutsi #Congo

  • AMEU - #Apartheid #Israel

    It has been left to knowledgeable observers, such as South Africa’s Archbishop Desmond Tutu, to point out that the situation for Palestinians under occupation is, in fact, worse than that suffered by blacks in the former South Africa. In Tutu’s view, Palestinians under occupation suffer from something more extreme than apartheid – what we might term “apartheid-plus.”

    There is a notable difference between the two cases that hints at the nature of that “plus.” Even at the height of apartheid, South Africa’s white population understood that it needed, and depended on, the labor of the black majority population. Israel, on the other hand, has a far more antagonistic relationship to Palestinians in the occupied territories. They are viewed as an unwelcome, surplus population that serves as a demographic obstacle to the political realization of a Greater Israel. The severe economic and military pressures Israel imposes on these Palestinians are designed to engineer their incremental displacement, a slow-motion ethnic cleansing.


  • Atallah Hanna, the Archbishop of Sebastia from the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate in occupied Jerusalem, said, “The Israeli arrest campaign carried out against a number of national figures is a threatening message which will not deter us from serving our people and calling for justice in this sacred land”. https://english.palinfo.com/news/2017/12/13/Hanna-Israeli-arrest-campaign-will-not-scare-us

  • Jerusalem’s Greek Orthodox Church sacks Palestinian archbishop – Middle East Monitor

    “Patriarch Theophilos and his Holy Gathering decided today to stop the salary of Archbishop Attalla Hanna,” the statement said, noting that Hanna is the only Palestinian archbishop in the Greek Orthodox Church.

  • Pulse nightclub shooting and tragic history of violence at LGBTQ clubs in U.S.

    The mass shooting at Orlando’s LGBT nightclub Pulse, which left at least 50 dead, is only the latest chapter in a long history of violence at LGBTQ bars and clubs in America. In fact, for as long as LGBTQ people have been congregating in their own social spaces, these spaces have been the target of vicious homophobic and transphobic violence.

    Until the Pulse massacre, the most notorious act of violence against a gay bar was the burning of the UpStairs Lounge, a New Orleans gay bar, in 1973. An arsonist set fire to the bar, killing 32 people in less than 20 minutes. The vast majority of politicians declined to comment on the arson, and the Catholic Archbishop of New Orleans did not offer support to the victims. (The Archdiocese apologized for its silence in 2013.) Many news outlets ignored the story; some of those that did cover it mocked the victims for being gay. No one has ever been prosecuted for the crime. When asked about identifying the victims, the chief detective of the New Orleans Police Department responded, “We don’t even know these papers belonged to the people we found them on. Some thieves hung out there, and you know this was a queer bar.”

    In 1997, “Olympic Park Bomber” Eric Robert Rudolph bombed the Otherside Lounge, a lesbian nightclub in Atlanta, later explaining that he believed “the concerted effort to legitimize the practice of homosexuality” was an “assault upon the integrity of American society.” He described homosexuality as “an aberrant sexual behavior,” and wrote that “when the attempt is made” to “recognize this behavior as being just as legitimate and normal as the natural man/woman relationship, every effort should be made, including force if necessary, to halt this effort.” In his confession, Rudolph railed against the “homosexual agenda,” including “gay marriage, homosexual adoption, hate-crime laws including gays, or the attempt to introduce a homosexual normalizing curriculum into our schools.”

  • My plea to the people of Israel: Liberate yourselves by liberating Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu, in an exclusive article for Haaretz, calls for a global boycott of Israel and urges Israelis and Palestinians to look beyond their leaders for a sustainable solution to the crisis in the Holy Land.

    By Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu Aug. 14, 2014 Haaretz


    The past weeks have witnessed unprecedented action by members of civil society across the world against the injustice of Israel’s disproportionately brutal response to the firing of missiles from Palestine.

    If you add together all the people who gathered over the past weekend to demand justice in Israel and Palestine – in Cape Town, Washington, D.C., New York, New Delhi, London, Dublin and Sydney, and all the other cities – this was arguably the largest active outcry by citizens around a single cause ever in the history of the world.

    A quarter of a century ago, I participated in some well-attended demonstrations against apartheid. I never imagined we’d see demonstrations of that size again, but last Saturday’s turnout in Cape Town was as big if not bigger. Participants included young and old, Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, agnostics, atheists, blacks, whites, reds and greens ... as one would expect from a vibrant, tolerant, multicultural nation.

    I asked the crowd to chant with me: “We are opposed to the injustice of the illegal occupation of Palestine. We are opposed to the indiscriminate killing in Gaza. We are opposed to the indignity meted out to Palestinians at checkpoints and roadblocks. We are opposed to violence perpetrated by all parties. But we are not opposed to Jews.”

    Earlier in the week, I called for the suspension of Israel from the International Union of Architects, which was meeting in South Africa.

    Subscribe to Haaretz for the latest on Israel, the Mideast and the Jewish World

    I appealed to Israeli sisters and brothers present at the conference to actively disassociate themselves and their profession from the design and construction of infrastructure related to perpetuating injustice, including the separation barrier, the security terminals and checkpoints, and the settlements built on occupied Palestinian land.

    “I implore you to take this message home: Please turn the tide against violence and hatred by joining the nonviolent movement for justice for all people of the region,” I said.

    Over the past few weeks, more than 1.6 million people across the world have signed onto this movement by joining an Avaaz campaign calling on corporations profiting from the Israeli occupation and/or implicated in the abuse and repression of Palestinians to pull out. The campaign specifically targets Dutch pension fund ABP; Barclays Bank; security systems supplier G4S; French transport company Veolia; computer company Hewlett-Packard; and bulldozer supplier Caterpillar.

    Last month, 17 EU governments urged their citizens to avoid doing business in or investing in illegal Israeli settlements.

    We have also recently witnessed the withdrawal by Dutch pension fund PGGM of tens of millions of euros from Israeli banks; the divestment from G4S by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; and the U.S. Presbyterian Church divested an estimated $21 million from HP, Motorola Solutions and Caterpillar.

    It is a movement that is gathering pace.

    Violence begets violence and hatred, that only begets more violence and hatred.

    We South Africans know about violence and hatred. We understand the pain of being the polecat of the world; when it seems nobody understands or is even willing to listen to our perspective. It is where we come from.

    We also know the benefits that dialogue between our leaders eventually brought us; when organizations labeled “terrorist” were unbanned and their leaders, including Nelson Mandela, were released from imprisonment, banishment and exile.

    We know that when our leaders began to speak to each other, the rationale for the violence that had wracked our society dissipated and disappeared. Acts of terrorism perpetrated after the talks began – such as attacks on a church and a pub – were almost universally condemned, and the party held responsible snubbed at the ballot box.

    The exhilaration that followed our voting together for the first time was not the preserve of black South Africans alone. The real triumph of our peaceful settlement was that all felt included. And later, when we unveiled a constitution so tolerant, compassionate and inclusive that it would make God proud, we all felt liberated.

    Of course, it helped that we had a cadre of extraordinary leaders.

    But what ultimately forced these leaders together around the negotiating table was the cocktail of persuasive, nonviolent tools that had been developed to isolate South Africa, economically, academically, culturally and psychologically.

    At a certain point – the tipping point – the then-government realized that the cost of attempting to preserve apartheid outweighed the benefits.

    The withdrawal of trade with South Africa by multinational corporations with a conscience in the 1980s was ultimately one of the key levers that brought the apartheid state – bloodlessly – to its knees. Those corporations understood that by contributing to South Africa’s economy, they were contributing to the retention of an unjust status quo.

    Those who continue to do business with Israel, who contribute to a sense of “normalcy” in Israeli society, are doing the people of Israel and Palestine a disservice. They are contributing to the perpetuation of a profoundly unjust status quo.

    Those who contribute to Israel’s temporary isolation are saying that Israelis and Palestinians are equally entitled to dignity and peace.

    Ultimately, events in Gaza over the past month or so are going to test who believes in the worth of human beings.

    It is becoming more and more clear that politicians and diplomats are failing to come up with answers, and that responsibility for brokering a sustainable solution to the crisis in the Holy Land rests with civil society and the people of Israel and Palestine themselves.

    Besides the recent devastation of Gaza, decent human beings everywhere – including many in Israel – are profoundly disturbed by the daily violations of human dignity and freedom of movement Palestinians are subjected to at checkpoints and roadblocks. And Israel’s policies of illegal occupation and the construction of buffer-zone settlements on occupied land compound the difficulty of achieving an agreementsettlement in the future that is acceptable for all.

    The State of Israel is behaving as if there is no tomorrow. Its people will not live the peaceful and secure lives they crave – and are entitled to – as long as their leaders perpetuate conditions that sustain the conflict.

    I have condemned those in Palestine responsible for firing missiles and rockets at Israel. They are fanning the flames of hatred. I am opposed to all manifestations of violence.

    But we must be very clear that the people of Palestine have every right to struggle for their dignity and freedom. It is a struggle that has the support of many around the world.

    No human-made problems are intractable when humans put their heads together with the earnest desire to overcome them. No peace is impossible when people are determined to achieve it.

    Peace requires the people of Israel and Palestine to recognize the human being in themselves and each other; to understand their interdependence.

    Missiles, bombs and crude invective are not part of the solution. There is no military solution.

    The solution is more likely to come from that nonviolent toolbox we developed in South Africa in the 1980s, to persuade the government of the necessity of altering its policies.

    The reason these tools – boycott, sanctions and divestment – ultimately proved effective was because they had a critical mass of support, both inside and outside the country. The kind of support we have witnessed across the world in recent weeks, in respect of Palestine.

    My plea to the people of Israel is to see beyond the moment, to see beyond the anger at feeling perpetually under siege, to see a world in which Israel and Palestine can coexist – a world in which mutual dignity and respect reign.

    It requires a mind-set shift. A mind-set shift that recognizes that attempting to perpetuate the current status quo is to damn future generations to violence and insecurity. A mind-set shift that stops regarding legitimate criticism of a state’s policies as an attack on Judaism. A mind-set shift that begins at home and ripples out across communities and nations and regions – to the Diaspora scattered across the world we share. The only world we share.

    People united in pursuit of a righteous cause are unstoppable. God does not interfere in the affairs of people, hoping we will grow and learn through resolving our difficulties and differences ourselves. But God is not asleep. The Jewish scriptures tell us that God is biased on the side of the weak, the dispossessed, the widow, the orphan, the alien who set slaves free on an exodus to a Promised Land. It was the prophet Amos who said we should let righteousness flow like a river.

    Goodness prevails in the end. The pursuit of freedom for the people of Palestine from humiliation and persecution by the policies of Israel is a righteous cause. It is a cause that the people of Israel should support.

    Nelson Mandela famously said that South Africans would not feel free until Palestinians were free.

    He might have added that the liberation of Palestine will liberate Israel, too.

  • On the brink of genocide: Understanding what’s happening in the Central African Republic | Groundup


    via @fil

    “The Central African Republic stands on the brink of genocide; some would say it has already commenced,” said Archbishop Desmond Tutu in April.

    He warned that over the past year, the country’s struggles for power and control over its resources, predominantly diamonds, had “degenerated into anarchy, hatred and ethnic cleansing.”

    The minority Muslim population have increasingly been targeted by Christian militias since the forced resignation of Michel Djotodia, the country’s first Muslim president, in January. Tens of thousands of Muslims have been forced to flee their homes, into neighbouring Cameroon and Chad.

    #centrafrique #génocide (peut-être en cours #massacre

  • Ghanaian preachers say the darndest things

    Ghanaian preachers are attracting international press for peculiar reasons. It is not uncommon the world over for religious figures to wade in on political issues and find themselves considered as a respected authority on a given matter. The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, often gave his opinion on social and political affairs and Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s disdain for the current incarnation of South Africa’s ruling ANC party is well known. Ghanaian preachers are no different. And now, after years of finding (read advertising) themselves in the pages of national newspapers they too have reached the global stage. Albeit for less noble (...)

    #JOURNALISM #Cardinal_Peter_Turkson #Cedi #Ghana #Isaac_Owusu-Bempah #John_Atta-Mills #John_Dramani_Mahama #Nicholas_Duncan-Williams #Uganda

  • The Day #Jacob_Zuma Lost Control of the Party?

    One way of looking at Anglican Archbishop #Desmond_Tutu’s words at the end of the farcical #Nelson_Mandela’s memorial service is that of an angry patriarch embarrassed by the actions of errant adolescents. The other is that the archbishop was stepping into a void that used to be filled by the larger-than-life figure of Nelson Mandela. In the absence of the towering Madiba, and the presence of little mutinies that wouldn’t be doused by the drizzle, the diminutive clergyman showed that South Africans are not a rowdy bunch, misbehaving apropos of nothing.

    #POLITICS #African_National_Congress #South_Africa

  • Mayor Boris & police endorse event with extremist clerics | Peter Tatchell Foundation

    Mayor Boris & police endorse event with extremist clerics
    posted by Peter Tatchell ... on Fri, 22/11/2013 - 15:26

    Speakers say blasphemers, adulterers & apostates should be killed

    MPs, City of London police & top BBC official support GPU

    London, UK - 22 November 2013

    “People who have sex outside of marriage, blasphemers and Muslims who leave the faith should be killed, according to some speakers at this weekend’s Islamic Global Peace & Unity (GPU) conference in London. The conference website says the event is backed by the Mayor of London, the City of London police commissioner, MPs, the former Archbishop of Canterbury and a senior BBC official,” reports Peter Tatchell, Director of the human rights organisation, the Peter Tatchell Foundation.

    On the assumption that the GPU website is accurate:

    “It is appalling that the Mayor, City of London police and prominent public figures are endorsing an event that promotes at least seven speakers with bigoted, violent views. It’s the equivalent of supporting an event with BNP and EDL hate speakers.

    “How can the mayor and police justify giving their approval to a conference that hosts speakers who advocate discrimination and violence?

    “On the GPU website there are messages of support from the Mayor of London Boris Johnson, the former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, Labour MP Stephen Timms and Labour peer Lord Parekh. Noam Chomsky is also listed and quoted under “Supporters.”

    “Speakers named on the GPU website include the Commissioner of the City of London Police Adrian Leppard and his Assistant Commissioner Wayne Chance, Tory MP Rehman Chishti, BBC commissioning editor Aqil Ahmed and Muslim Council of Britain leader Farooq Murad.

    “I have written letters of protest to the Mayor of London and the Commissioner and Assistant Commission of the City of London police, urging them to withdraw their support for the conference.

    “The seven extremist preachers have variously expressed opinions such as:

    “In their view, homophobia is praiseworthy, women should stay in the home and blasphemers and apostates should be killed.

    “They stir anti-Semitism and say that people who have pre-marital or extra-marital sex deserve flogging and stoning to death.

    “Opposing social integration and community cohesion, some clerics advocate a form of religious apartheid: Muslims should not associate with non-Muslims and Muslim parents should not send their children to non-Muslim schools.

    “Freedom of religion is condemned as a blasphemous ideal and Ahmadiyya Muslims are said to deserve persecution.

    “There are at least seven extremist preachers listed to speak at the GPU on 23 and 24 November at ExCel London.

    “They are: Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri, Sheikh Muhammad Al-Ya’qoubi, Sheikh Shady Al-Suleiman, Iman Abdul Wahid Pedersen, Sheikh Said Rageah, Sheikh Muhammad Al Shareef, and Sheikh Yasir Qadhi,” said Mr Tatchell.
    Quotes from the seven extremist GPU speakers (with links to sources):

    Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri

    He has defended Pakistan laws that impose the death penalty for blasphemy and are used to persecute Ahmadiyya Muslims.


    Sheikh Muhammad Al-Ya’qoubi

    He believes: Freedom of religion and freedom of expression are blasphemous and “false ideals.” The Grand Mufti of Syria was wrong to oppose violence against Jewish settlers in the Palestinian terrorities.

    “....these wrong and false ideals like ‘freedom of religion’ or ‘freedom of expression’. In Islam I do not allow under the banner of ‘freedom of expression’ someone to come and curse or insult a Prophet of Allah... it is blasphemy, it is not freedom of speech at all.”


    Sheikh Shady Al-Suleiman

    The Sheikh says adulterers should be stoned to death:

    “Remember that if there is an Islamic state the punishment of zina, the punishment of those who commit zina, if they have never been married before, they will be lashed 100 lashes. If they are married while they committed zina, or previously been married and divorced, and they committed zina, then their punishment is stoning to death.”



    Iman Abdul Wahid Pedersen

    He admits that the stoning of adulterers is cruel, but he has defended the cruel punishment:

    “I agree that stoning is a cruel punishment, but it doesn’t change the fact that according to Islam the practise has been ordained by our Creator. We are not in a position to change this. Things that are stated unambigiously in the Koran or by the Prophet Mohammed are not open to debate among Muslims.”


    Sheikh Said Rageah

    He says Muslims should disassociate themselves from non-Muslims. Blasphemers who don’t repent should be killed. Women should stay at home and never leave the house without necessity:

    “You will see a lot of them going to the kuffar (non-Muslims) , taking them as supporters and helpers and friends and allies…(Arabic) If they were true believers in Allah and the messenger (Arabic) they would never take them as allies.”

    “…it could also, y’know, be to the point as far as killing that person (who commits blasphemy) if he doesn’t repent what he’s saying…Muslims do not tolerate anyone to insult Muhammad, Isa or Jesus, Moses, any of the prophets of God. If you’re in a Muslim country and you insult Muhammad or Jesus, you will receive the same punishment because both of them are the messengers of God.”

    “Islam and Allah (Subhanahu Wa Ta’ala) is telling us in the Quran: stay home because otherwise you’re gonna cause fitnah to a lot of people…Allah created women for beauty…so women are like this they must understand. They should stay at home and not come out of the house unless it’s a necessity, otherwise Shaytan will take advantage of that and leave the people being tested and tried.”


    Sheikh Muhammad Al Shareef

    The Sheikh believes the social integration of Muslims is wrong. Muslims should not associate with non-Muslims, and Muslims should not send their children to non-Islamic schools:

    “The horror story begins when the child is entrusted to a non-Muslim…”

    ”If a parent has chosen public school for his son, in the final year when he looks over the school yearbook and sees a picture of his son standing hand in hand dancing with a kafir woman, at that time it will be too late to question his upbringing. Now is the time to question it, now, before it’s too late.“


    He also states that Jews control the media and Muslims should not ally with them, imitate them or marry them:

    “Who owns the press? Well, you can believe me when I say that it is not the god fearing beloved of Allâh.
    “It would be profitable for us to reflect on the implementation of our Wala’ and Bara’ in regards to the Jews:
    “Firstly: We should not take them as our close allies. Secondly: We should not imitate them. Thirdly: A Muslimah may never marry a Jewish or Christian man that remains in his beliefs.”


    Sheikh Al Shareef says homophobia is praiseworthy:

    “Alhamdulillah [praise to God] that you’re homophobic. Alhamdulillah we have a fear of homosexuality. And then they will say it as if it is a derogatory term, but in fact it is a praiseworthy term.”


    He argues sex outside of marriage deserves 80 lashes:

    “One of them is a married person committing zina and the other is an unmarried person committing zina. So a married person committing zina is actually much, much more serious in Islam. They’re both serious and they’re both major sins but it is much more serious…if somebody’s married the punishment for that would be eighty lashes.”



    Sheikh Yasir Qadhi

    The Sheikh claims the toleration of homosexuality is a sign of social regression:

    “For those who have been around for a little bit longer than those who are eighteen or nineteen, look at how this own society and culture has evolved in the way it looks at homosexuals. In our own time, I remember as a kid in the eighties, which gives you an idea how old I was, growing up in the eighties I grew up, OK? I remember how homosexuals were looked down upon and the names that were given to these people, and how disgusted the average masses were with that segment of society. Now look, now look at how we have regressed, not progressed.”


    He says Jews control Islamic studies and want to destroy Muslims:

    “You go to America, you find that 95% of the Islamic Studies professors are Jews, you know that? 95% of Islamic Studies [sic] are Jews. And 0% of Judaic Studies [sic] are Muslims. I am not advising any Muslim to waste his time studying Judaism but I’m saying, why are Jews studying Islam? There is a reason, not that they want to help us, they want to destroy us [...] they want to bring about doubts, look at the doubts that exist, look at the divisions, the discord, look at the disunity, look at all these ideologies that are being spread (4). Know that the Yahood [Jews] and the Kuffar [Infidels] like this type of thing.”


  • From Antelias to Bzoummar

    Sur la communauté libanaise d’origine arménienne. Via @bintbattuta

    Yet, despite the evident decline in numbers, the Armenians of Lebanon are by no means a dying community. Archbishop Nareg shared his impression with me that emigration of Armenians has slowed since 2008, for the simple reason that previously attractive destinations such as the United States or France are no longer seen as attractive alternatives to escaping Lebanon’s economic malaise. Both the archbishop and Reverend Haidostian pointed out to me that there has actually been a fairly significant influx of Armenians into Lebanon from neighboring Syria since the start of that country’s brutal civil war.

    The assimilation process may also not be as inevitable as it seems. After all, the political security the Armenians enjoy in Lebanon is predicated precisely on their identification as Armenian—being a member of the community means having guaranteed representation in Parliament, as well as a quota of government jobs, among other privileges. The continued existence of Armenian schools and especially of Haigazian University still partially counteracts the trend.

    Finally, the fact that Lebanon is the site of spiritual centers of great importance for all three Armenian denominations scattered through the Diaspora suggests that the Armenian Christians here will survive in one form or another for a long time to come. As long as Apostolic, Catholic and Evangelical Armenians view the country as a hub of pilgrimage and theological education that benefits the Diaspora as a whole the community, even if reduced in size from its glory days, will remain vital.

  • Uefa accused of ignoring anti-Palestinian bias | Football | The Guardian

    European football’s governing body, Uefa, has been accused of showing “total insensitivity” to the “blatant and entrenched discrimination” of Israel against Palestinian sportspeople.

    A group led by Nobel peace prize laureate, former archbishop Desmond Tutu, and footballer Frédéric Kanouté have accused the body of “rewarding Israel’s cruel and lawless behaviour” against Palestinians by allowing Israel to host the European Under-21 Championship next month.

    In a letter in today’s Guardian, they call on Uefa “to reverse the choice of Israel as a venue”.

    Signatories of the letter include the actor Roger Lloyd Pack, film-maker Ken Loach, comic Alexei Sayle, Michael Mansfield QC and the Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn.

  • Nobel Laureates Salute Bradley Manning – Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Mairead Maguire, Adolfo Pérez Esquivel

    We Nobel Peace Prize laureates condemn the persecution Bradley Manning has suffered, including imprisonment in conditions declared “cruel, inhuman and degrading” by the United Nations, and call upon Americans to stand up in support of this whistleblower who defended their democratic rights. In the conflict in Iraq alone, more than 110,000 people have died since 2003, millions have been displaced and nearly 4,500 American soldiers have been killed. If someone needs to be held accountable for endangering Americans and civilians, let’s first take the time to examine the evidence regarding high-level crimes already committed, and what lessons can be learned. If Bradley Manning released the documents, as the prosecution contends, we should express to him our gratitude for his efforts toward accountability in government, informed democracy and peace.

  • Head of Catholic Church in San Francisco decries gay marriage victories | Gay Star News

    Head of Catholic Church in San Francisco decries gay marriage victories
    Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone: Marriage is between man and woman ’or it is nothing at all’
    09 November 2012 | By Greg Hernandez

    It’s already known that Salvatore Cordileone, archbishop of the Catholic Church in San Francisco, is a fervent supporter of Proposition 8 which banned same-sex marriage in California.

    So it’s no surprise that following voters approving gay marriage in Maine, Maryland and Washington this week, Cordileone would not be happy.

    ’No matter what policy, law or judicial decision is put into place, marriage is the only institution that unites a man and a woman to each other and to any children born of their union. It is either this, or it is nothing at all,’ he wrote in a letter posted on the Archdiocese website.

    In addition, voters in Minnesota rejected a ballot measure that would have banned gay marriage.

    ’November 6, was a disappointing day for marriage, as the effort to preserve the unique meaning of marriage in the law lost by only a narrow margin in four states, even though vastly outspent by those who promote the redefinition of marriage,’ Cordileone also wrote.

    His appointment to be head of a church in a city with such a large gay population and history of LGBT activism drew protests earlier this year.

    Cordileone was officially installed just last month and was recently arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence.

    In 2008, he helped raise funds to get Prop 8 on the ballot box and donated approximately $6,000 of his own funds in support of the referendum.

    • It would be very interesting how this Archbishop would define the marriages between the priests and jesus, or the marriages between the priests and the holy virgin mary, not to speak of all the nuns........

      As far as I know it is not allowed within the RCC to marry a man (as the Archbishop so bigottedly tells us), and msot certainly the RCC does not promotes polygamy.....

      And then... what about the lesbian marriages between the nuns within the RCC and the Virgin Mary?

      |Does the Archbishopp has any definition for those lesbians and the obviously straight mary, mother of jesus, who was pregnant prior to marriage.........

      Seems to me that the RCC has a problem there, and there... and everywhere...

  • UK: New Archbishop signals openness on LGBT issues
    By Scott Robertsfor PinkNews.co.UK
    9 November 2012, 3:02pm

    Dr Welby is replacing Dr Rowan Williams (KJB Photography)

    Dr Welby is replacing Dr Rowan Williams (KJB Photography)

    The Bishop of Durham Justin Welby, who has been appointed as the new Archbishop of Canterbury, says the Church of England must have “no truck with any form of homophobia”.

    Although Dr Welby has previously stated his opposition to equal marriage and the ordination of gay bishops, in a speech made on Friday at Lambeth Palace, Dr Welby signalled that he was willing to engage on LGBT issues by saying:

    “It is absolutely right for the state to define the rights and status of people cohabiting in different forms of relationships, including civil partnerships.

    “We must have no truck with any form of homophobia in any part of the church”.

    He said that he supported the House of Bishops’ statement in the summer in response to the government’s consultation on same-sex marriage – which opposed the measure.

    “But I also know I need to listen very attentively to the LGBT communities and examine my own thinking carefully and prayerfully,” he added.

    Dr Welby was named on Thursday as the replacement for Dr Rowan Williams, who steps down in December after ten years in the post as Archbishop of Canterbury.

  • NFL’s Kluwe Slams Archbishop’s Anti-Gay Views - masteradrian’s posterous

    NFL’s Kluwe Slams Archbishop’s Anti-Gay Views
    By Jason St. Amand
    Web Producer / Staff Writer
    Thursday Oct 11, 2012Chris Kluwe
    Chris Kluwe

    Minnesota Vikings punter Chris Kluwe has been making headlines recently for his strong support for marriage equality and gay rights. The football player has called out athletes and politicians and has now criticized the archbishop of St. Paul and Minneapolis for a letter he wrote to a woman pleading for acceptance for her gay child.

    Truth Wins Out and Think Progress have circulated a 2010 letter written by Twin Cities Catholic Archbishop John Nienstedt on social networking websites. The two-year-old letter is a response to a woman’s letter where she asks for acceptance for her gay child. But the bishop says that she might go to Hell if she comes to terms with her child’s sexual orientation.

    “I write to inform you that the teaching of the Catholic Church on homosexuality, as described in paragraphs 2357 and 2358 and 2359 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church is rooted in Scripture and based on the Natural Moral Law,” Nienstedt wrote. "It, therefore, shares in God’s revelation to us. Catholics are bound in conscience to believe this teaching. Those who do not cannot consider themselves to be Catholic and ought not to participate in the sacramental life of the Church.

    “Indeed, some might find this is a hard saying but many of Jesus’ teachings were likewise received as such,” he continued. “I urge you to reconsider the position that you expressed in your letter. Your eternal salvation may well depend upon a conversation of heart on this topic.”

    Nienstedt’s letter sparked Kluew to respond in an op-Ed piece in the Minneapolis-St.Paul Pioneer Press.

    “It fills me with great sadness and regret that a steward of the Catholic Church on this Earth feels the need to take a stance of oppression, intolerance, and fear,” Kluwe wrote.

    “Millions of children grow up raised in the Catholic faith. Some of these children will be gay, through no choice of their own, but because of how God created them,” he continued. "What does it say to those children when the head of their religion in this state, a man who claims to ’explain and defend the teaching of the Church because I have been ordained to do so and I believe those teachings with all my heart,’ a man acting under the direct auspices of the Pope himself, tells them that they can’t be as worthy as everyone else, even though they believe in the teachings of Jesus?

    “What will these children think, as they suffer the barbed insults of their classmates and teachers; I ask you, sir, what will these children think as they are belittled and tormented due to teachings you espouse? What judgment will be passed on your soul when yet another poor child reaches for the knife or the noose to end his or her earthly torment due to your example?”

    Kluwe, who also calls out Pope Benedict XVI, asks why the Catholic leaders don’t practice empathy and uses the Bible’s teachings to make his point for equality.

    “If you strike me, I shall turn the other cheek. If you ask me to walk with you for a mile, I will do so,” the athlete writes. “If you ask me to respect your faith, your beliefs, then all I ask is that you do the same for everyone else. For is that not the most pertinent of Jesus’ teachings, and one that everyone, no matter their religion, can strive to achieve?”

    Nienstedt’s letter may have been from two years ago, but it seems as though the bishop still hasn’t changed his anti-gay marriage views. Last week EDGE reported that Nienstedt sent a letter asking Roman Catholic followers to support a legislation that would ban same-sex marriage in Minnesota.

    When the letter was read, many parishioners were so upset that they walked out during church services.

  • Former archbishop of Canterbury attacks gay marriage at Tory conference | Society | The Guardian

    Former archbishop of Canterbury attacks gay marriage at Tory conference

    Lord Carey says plans would cause deep divisions and likens opponents of gay marriage to Jews in Nazi Germany

    Share 323

    Michael White
    The Guardian, Monday 8 October 2012 17.32 BST
    Jump to comments (382)

    As Ann Widdecombe and Lord Carey address a conference fringe rally against same-sex marriage, Michael White hears the views of Tory delegates Link to this video

    The former archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, has accused David Cameron of “plundering” the institution of heterosexual marriage to promote same-sex marriage rights. Allowing gay marriage would cause deep divisions in society “without giving gays a single right they do not have in civil partnership”, he said.

    At a Coalition for Marriage rally on the fringe of the Conservative conference in Birmingham on Monday, Carey joined David Burrowes, the backbench MP for Enfield Southgate, and former MP Ann Widdecombe in protesting that neither the Lib Dem nor Tory 2010 manifesto included a pledge to legalise gay marriage.

    Carey claimed that in some countries where same-sex marriage had been made legal – including Mexico, Brazil and the Netherlands – it had led to unforeseen consequences such as three-person marriages.

    Asked about opponents of gay marriage being described as “bigots” – on one occasion by Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister – Carey said: "Let us remember the Jews in Nazi Germany. What started against them was when they started to be called names.

    “And that was the first stage towards that totalitarian state. We have to resist them. We treasure democracy. We treasure our Christian inheritance and we want to debate this in a fair way.”

    Widdecombe said: “This is not an anti-gay rally. It is defending marriage.”

    Outside the town hall rally, attended by about 400 people, gay rights protesters accused the platform of promoting “marriage apartheid” by denying the right to marry on equal terms.

    Cameron has joined the US president, Barack Obama, in endorsing same-sex marriage and is poised to report on the results of a 12-week consultation before proceeding to legislate. All main parties, including the SNP government in Edinburgh, now endorse the change.

    Burrowes urged ministers to stage a referendum on the issue, as has been done in 32 US states with mixed results. He said there had been no pressure for a change to civil partnership before the election – “no letters, emails or tweets” from voters – but MPs’ postbags were now full of the controversy. “If the government can think again about pasties and caravans it can certainly do so about the important issue of marriage,” he said.

    Widdecombe, a former Home Office minister, said such consequences would include the replacement of cherished liturgy and names such as “mother” and “father” with “progenitor A and progenitor B” or “partners to the marriage”. François Hollande, the French president, was proposing to use the word “carers”, she said.

    Carey argued that teachers, doctors and other professionals might be forced out of their jobs if they refused to embrace the proposed change to the law, an intolerant restriction on free speech that Widdecombe said could make the Church of England force disestablishment.

    “I know, David Cameron, that is not the sort of Britain you want,” she said.Carey hinted that the prime minister might have conceded the policy on “pragmatic” grounds to sustain his coalition with the Lib Dems – “the very worst of reasons”.

    Ben Summerskill, the chief executive of gay rights group Stonewall, said: "We’re deeply saddened that Lord Carey seems to be resorting to student union abuse. The reality is that gay people are very well aware of the consequences of the Holocaust, for obvious reasons, and when someone descends to this level of rhetoric it suggests they don’t think they have very powerful arguments to rely on.

    "Lord Carey is perfectly entitled to his view and we respect that. It’s the view of many people of his generation and we accept that, but to compare Cameron to Hitler is just sad as well as being entirely inappropriate.

    "It’s extraordinary that he should resort to this sort of invective and profoundly unchristian. There will be gay people of faith who are very disturbed by what he has said.

    “The argument is lost already but that doesn’t mean the battle won’t be a rough one when the time comes. But it is surprising they couldn’t come up with a more persuasive argument for this, the apex of their campaign for which they have had had plenty of time to marshall their arguments.”

  • Archbishop says ‘support marriage equality? Don’t take Communion’ | Gay Star News

    Archbishop says ‘support marriage equality? Don’t take Communion’
    The Archbishop of Newark has called on Catholic supporters of marriage equality to refrain from taking Communion until they recant their views on the issue
    05 October 2012 | By Andrew Potts
    Archbishop John Myers

    The Archbishop of Newark, New Jersey has told Catholic supporters of marriage equality that they are not welcome to take Communion on Sundays.

    Archbishop John Myers wrote a pastoral letter in which he warned that Catholic supporters of same sex marriage were ‘seriously harm[ing] their communion with Christ and His Church,’

    ‘I urge those not in communion with the Church regarding her teachings on marriage and family ... sincerely to re-examine their consciences,’ wrote the Archbishop.

    ‘If they continue to be unable to assent to or live Christ’s teachings in these matters, that they must and in all humility refrain from receiving Holy Communion until they can do so with integrity.’

    Myers wrote that gays and lesbians could marry people of the opposite sex and lead ‘faithful and even joyous married lives.’

    Myers was criticized by Cornell University Law Professor Steve Shiffrin on Catholic law blog Mirror of Justice, who wrote that Myers would be more likely to succeed in marginalizing himself rather than Catholic dissenters who disagreed with the church’s teaching on this and other issues.

    ‘If Myers is right about this, it seems to me that the overwhelming majority of American Catholics should not be receiving communion,’ Shiffrin wrote.

    ‘To reject the Church’s teaching on contraception is to reject the teaching authority of the Church, and the overwhelming majority of American Catholics do exactly that.

    ‘There is already a crisis in the teaching authority of the bishops. If they follow the lead of Archbishop Myers in being specific about which moral teaching cannot be rejected while continuing to receive communion, Catholics will either leave the Church or contumaciously receive communion anyway.

  • The #Pope's unholy alliance with the dictator | Nick Cohen | Comment is free | The Observer

    So it was with a little hope that opposition leaders asked to meet Archbishop Martin Vidovic, the papal nuncio in #Belarus. They carried a letter to the Pope, which said: “Today Belarus is enshrouded in darkness. Arrests of activists, raids and pogroms at independent websites and newspaper offices, searches of apartments continue. The authorities are blackmailing the political prisoners using their little children. We are seeking your help.” The nuncio refused to meet them. Later he relented, but Ratzinger has not protested against the oppression or promised to break diplomatic relations with the outlaw state.