eChurch Blog

Email alert from Christian Concern for our Nation

At the end of July, the House of Lords ruled that the Director of Public Prosecutions should publish his policy on prosecuting those who assist others to commit suicide.  The case of Debbie Purdy concerned her desire to have her husband assist her death in Zurich, where the practice is allowed.  However, the DPP’s comments in a national newspaper that his guidelines would apply equally to those who assist suicides in the UK, have put pressure on Parliament to legalise assisted suicide.

Again we find ourselves faced with an amendment to the Coroners and Justice Bill that seeks to legalise assistance with the suicide of those who are suffering from an “incurable and disabling illness”.  The vulnerable person does not even need to be terminally ill for the amendment to apply—they merely need to be disabled by their illness.

Lord Alderdice’s amendment is number 66 and is likely to be voted on next Monday (26th October) or Wednesday (28th October).  Please send one or more Peers an e-mail as soon as you can and urge them to attend the House of Lords to vote against Lord Alderdice’s amendment (and any further amendments that seek to legalise assistance with suicide).  You might like to mention the fact that the House of Lords has already rejected assisted suicide as recently as July, by 53 votes and after lengthy consideration.

Care Not Killing, which promotes more and better palliative care whilst seeking to ensure that existing laws against euthanasia and assisted suicide are not weakened, has issued an e-mail action alert.  Please use their e-mail, below, to help you write to Peers.

Dear Supporter,

Lord Alderdice has just tabled an amendment to the Coroners and Justice Bill allowing exceptions to the offence of assisting suicide, which reads as follows:

Exceptions to offence of assisting suicide

Notwithstanding sections 53, 54 and 55, no offence shall have been committed if assistance, is given to a person to commit suicide who is suffering from a confirmed, incurable and disabling illness which prevents them from carrying through their own wish to bring their life to a close, if the person has received certification from a coroner who has investigated the circumstances, and satisfied himself that it is indeed the free and settled wish of the person that they bring their life to a close.’

On the CNK website you will find a list of Peers who are known to oppose the legalisation of assisted suicide.  Please write to them urging them to be present to vote against the Alderdice amendment (66), should it come to the vote on 26th or 28th October.  We suggest you write to the two or three Peers with surnames closest to your own.

You can either e-mail them by clicking on their names on the website (for those whose e-mail addresses we have), or send a letter to them at The House of Lords, London, SW1A 0PW.  Given the uncertainties of the postal strike it is currently far better to use e-mail.

We suggest you write as follows:

Thank them for opposing Lord Falconer’s assisted suicide amendment on 7th July

Urge them to vote against Lord Alderdice’s assisted suicide amendment to the Coroners and Justice Bill if it comes to the vote at Report Stage on 26th or 28th October

Say briefly why you oppose to the amendment (use two to three of the bullet points below)

The amendment would remove legal protection from vulnerable sick and disabled people who could be brought under pressure to end their lives so as not to be a burden on relatives, carers or the state

The Coroners and Justice Bill is attempting to tighten up the law to prevent internet promotion of suicide and this amendment attempts to hijack it for another purpose altogether creating legal confusion

There are no safeguards in the amendment to prevent abuse e.g. there would be nothing to stop a person ‘assisting’ a sick person’s suicide even if it was not requested, once the Coroner had given permission, and there is no provision for ensuring mental capacity

The job of the coroner is to investigate and record the cause of death rather than to give licence to others to help bring it about

The House of Lords has already this year considered and rejected an attempt to legalise suicide in some circumstances

The current blanket prohibition on assistance with suicide both deters abuse and allows mercy in hard cases—it does not need changing

Many thanks for your support

Care Not Killing

“There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.” Hebrews 4:9

THE Apostle proved, in the former part of this and the latter part of the
preceding chapter, that there was a rest promised in Scripture called the
rest of God. He proved that Israel did not attain that rest for God sware in
his wrath, saying, “They shall not enter into my rest.” He proved that this
did not merely refer to the rest of the land of Canaan; for he says that after
they were in Canaan, David himself speaks again in after ages concerning
the rest of God, as a thing which was yet to come. Again he proves, that
“seeing those to whom it was promised did not enter in, because of
unbelief, and it remaineth that some must enter in, therefore,” saith he,
“there remaineth a rest to the people of God.”

“My rest,” says God: the rest of God! Something more wonderful than any
other kind of rest. In my text it is (in the original) called the Sabbatism —
not the Sabbath, but the rest of the Sabbath — not the outward ritual of
the Sabbath, which was binding upon the Jew, but the inward spirit of the
sabbath, which is the joy and delight of the Christian. “There remaineth
therefore” — because others have not had it, because some are to have it
— ”There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.”

Now, this rest, I believe, is partly enjoyed on earth. “We that have believed
do enter into rest,” for we have ceased from our own works, as God did
from his. But the full fruition and rich enjoyment of it remains in the future
and eternal state of the beatified on the other side the stream of death. Of
that it shall be our delightful work to talk a little this morning. And oh! if
God should help me to raise but one of his feeble saints on the wings of
love to look within the veil, and see the joys of the future, I shall be well
contented to have made the joy-bells ring in one heart at least, to have set
one eye flashing with joy, and to have made one spirit light with gladness.
The rest of heaven! I shall try first to exhibit it and then to extol it.
I. First, I shall try to EXHIBIT the rest of heaven; and in doing so I shall
exhibit it, first by way of contrast, and then by way of comparison.

1. To begin then, I shall try to exhibit heaven by way of contrast. The rest
of the righteous in glory is now to be contrasted with certain other things.
We will contrast it, first, with the best estate of the worldling and the
sinner. The worldling has frequently a good estate. Sometimes his vats
overflow, his barns are crammed, his heart is full of joy and gladness, there
are periods with him when he flourishes like a green bay tree, when field is
added to field, and house to house, when he pulls down his barns and
builds greater, when the river of his joy is full, and the ocean of his life is at
its flood with joy and blessedness.

But sh! beloved the state of the righteous up there is not for a moment to
be compared with the joy of the sinner; — it is so infinitely superior, so far
surpassing it, that it seems impossible that I should even try to set it in
contrast. The worldling, when his corn and his wine are increased, has a
glad eye and A joyous heart; but even then he has the direful thought that
he may soon leave his wealth. He remembers that death may cut him
down, that he must then leave all his fair riches behind him, and sleep like
the meanest of the land in a narrow coffin, six feet of earth his only
heritage. Not so the righteous man: he has obtained an inheritance which is
“undefiled, and that fadeth not away.” He knows that there is no possibility
of his losing his joys;

“He is securely blessed,
Has done with sin, and care, and woe,
And doth with Jesus rest.”

He has no dread of dissolution, no fear of the coffin or the shroud, and so
far the life of heaven is not worthy to be put in comparison with the life of
the sinner. But the worldling, with all his joys, always has a worm at the
root of them. Ye votaries of pleasure! the blush upon your cheek is
frequently but a painted deception. Ah! ye sons and daughters of gaiety!
the light foot of your dance is not in keeping with the heavy woe of your
miserable spirits. Do you not confess that if by the excitement of company
you for awhile forget the emptiness of your heart, yet silence, and the hour
of midnight, and the waking watches of your bed, bid you sometimes think
that there must be something more blessed than the mere wanderings of
gaiety in which you now are found? You are trying the world some of you;
speak then! Do you not find it empty? Might it not be said of the world, as
an old philosopher said of it when he represented a man with it in his hands
smiting it and listening to its ringing? Touch it, touch it I make it ring
again; it is empty. So it is with the world. You know it is so; and if you
know it not as yet, the day is coming when after you have plucked the
sweets you shall be pricked with the thorn, and when you shall find that all
is unsatisfactory that does not begin and end with God. Not so the
Christian in heaven. For him there are no nights; and if there be times of
solitude and rest, he is ever filled with ecstatic joy. His river floweth ever
full of bliss, without one pebble of sorrow over which it ripples, he has no
aching conscience, no “aching void the world can never fill.” He is
supremely blessed, satisfied with favor, and full with the goodness of the
Lord. And ye know, ye worldlings, that your best estates often bring you
great anxiety, lest they should depart from you. You are not so foolish yet
as to conceive that riches endure for ever. You men of business are
frequently led to see that riches take to themselves wings and fly away.
You have accumulated a fortune; but you find it is harder to retain than it is
to get. You are seeking after a competence; but you find that you grasp at
shadows that flit away — that the everlasting vicissitudes of business and
the constant changes of mankind are causes of prudent alarm to you, for
you fear that you shall lose your gods, and that your gourd shall be eaten
by the worm, and fall down, and your shadow shall be taken away. Not so
the Christian. He lives in a house that can never hasten to decay; he wears
a crown, the glister of which shall never be dim; he has a garment which
shall never wax old; he has bliss that never can depart from him, nor he
from it. He is now firmly set, like a pillar of marble in the temple of God.
The world may rock, the tempest may sway it like the cradle of a child; but
there, above the world, above the perpetual revolution of the stars, the
Christian stands secure and immovable; trio rest infinitely surpasseth yours.
Ah I ye shall go to all the fabled luxuries of eastern monarchs, and see their
dainty couches and their luscious wines. Behold the riches of their
pleasantry! How charming is the music that lulls them to their sleep! How
gently moves the fan that wafts them to their slumber! But ah!

I would not change my blest estate
For all the world calls good or great;
And whilst my faith can keep her hold
I envy not the sinner’s gold” —

I reckon that the richest, highest, noblest condition of a worldly man is not
worthy to be compared with the joy-that is to be revealed hereafter in the
breasts of those who are sanctified. O ye spendthrift mortals, that for one
merry dance and a giddy life will lose a world of joys! O fools that catch at
bubbles and lose realities! O ten thousand times mad men, that grasp at
shadows and lose the substance! What! sirs do you think a little round of
pleasure, a few years of gaiety and merriment, just a little time of the
tossing about, to and fro, of worldly business, is a compensation for eternal
ages of unfading bliss! Oh! how foolish will you conceive yourselves to be,
when you are in the next state, when cast away from heaven you will see
the saints blessed! I think I hear your mournful soliloquy, “Oh! how
cheaply did I sell my soul! What a poor price did I get for all I have now
lost! I have lost the palace and the crown, and the joy and bliss for ever,
and am shut up in hell! And for what did I lose it? I lost it for the lascivious
wanton kiss. I lost it for the merry drunken song; I lost it for just a few
short years of pleasures, which, after all, were only painted pleasures!” Oh!
I think I see you in your lost estates, cursing yourselves, rending your hair,
that you should have sold heaven for counters and have changed away
eternal life for pitiful farthings, which were spent quickly and which burned
your hand in the spending of them! Oh! that ye were wise, that ye would
weigh those things, and reckon that a life of the greatest happiness here is
nothing compared with the glorious hereafter: “There remaineth a rest to
the people of God.”

Now let me put it in more pleasing contrast. I shall contrast the rest of the
believer above with the miserable estate of the believer sometimes here
below. Christians have their sorrows. Suns have their spots skies have their
clouds, and Christians have their sorrows too. But oh! how different will
the state of the righteous be up there, from the state of the believer here!
Here the Christian has to suffer anxiety. He is anxious to serve his Master,
to do his best in his day and generation His constant cry is — “Help me to
serve thee, O my God,” and he looks out, day after day, with a strong
desire for opportunities of doing good. Ah! if he be an active Christian, he
will have much labor, much toil, in endeavoring to serve his Master; and
there will be times when he will say, “My soul is in haste to be gone; I am
not wearied of the labor, I am wearied in it. To toil thus in the sun, though
for a good Master, is not the thing that just now I desire.” Ah! Christian,
the day shall soon be over, and thou shalt no longer have to toil; the sun is
nearing the horizon; it shall rise again with a brighter day than thou hast
ever seen before. There, up in heaven, Luther has no more to face a
thundering Vatican; Paul has no more to run from city to city, and
continent to continent, there Baxter has no more to toil in his pulpit, to
preach with a broken heart to hard hearted sinners, there no longer has
Knox to “cry aloud and spare not” against the immoralities of the false
church; there no more shall be the strained lung, and the tired throat, and
the aching eye; no more shall the sunday school teacher feel that his
sabbath is a day of joyful weariness; no more shall the tract distributor
meet with rebuffs. No, there, those who have served their country and their
God, those who have toiled for man’s welfare, with all their might, shall
enter into everlasting rest. Sheathed is the sword, the banner is furled, the
fight is over, the victory won; and they rest from their labors.

Here, too, the Christian is always sailing onward, he is always in motion he
feels that he has not yet attained. Like Paul he can say “Forgetting the
things that are behind, I press forward to that which is before.” But there
his weary head shall be crowned with unfading light. There the ship that
has been speeding onward shall furl its sails in the port of eternal bliss.
There he who, like an arrow, has sped his way shall be fixed for ever in the
target. There we who like fleeting clouds were driven by every wind, shall
gently distil in one perennial shower of everlasting joy. There is no
progress, no motion there; they are at rest, they have attained the summit
of the mountain, they have ascended to their God and our God. Higher
they cannot go; they have reached the Ultima Thule, there are no fortunate
islands beyond; this is life’s utmost end of happiness; and they furl their
sails, rest from their labors, and enjoy themselves for aye. There is a
difference between the progress of earth and the perfect fixity of the rest of
hearer.

Here, too, the believer is often the subject of doubt and fear. “Am I his or
am I not?” is often the cry. He trembleth lest he should be deceived, at
times he almost despairs, and is inclined not to put his name down as one
of the children of God. Dark insinuations are whispered into his ears, he
thinks that God’s mercy is clean gone for ever, and that he will not be
mindful of him any more. Again, his sins some times upbraid him, and he
thinks God will not have mercy on him. He has a poor fainting heart; he is
like Ready-to-halt, he has to go all his way on crutches; he has a poor
feeble mind, always tumbling down over a straw, and fearing one day he
shall be drowned in a cart-rut. Though the lions are chained he is as much
afraid of them as if they were loose. Hill Difficulty often afrights him; going
down into the valley of humiliation is often troublesome work to him; but
there, there are no hills to climb, no dragons to fight, no foes to conquer,
no dangers to dread. Ready-to-halt, when he dies, will bury his crutches,
and Feeblemind will leave his feebleness behind him; Fearing will never fear
again; poor Doubting-heart will learn confidently to believe. Oh, joy above
all joys! The day is coming when I shall “know as I am known,” when I
shall not want to ask whether I am his or not, for in his arms encircled,
there shall be no room for doubt. Oh! Christian, you think there are slips
between your lips and that cup of joy, but when you grasp the handle of
that cup with your hand, and are drinking draughts of ineffable delight,
then you will have no doubt or fear.

“There you shall see his face,
And never, never sin
There from the rivers of his grace,
Drink endless pleasures in.”

Here, too, on earth, the Christian has to suffer; here he has the aching head
and the pained body; his limbs may be bruised or broken, disease may rack
him with torture; he may be an afflicted one from his birth, he may have
lost an eye or an ear or he may have lost many of his powers; or if not,
being of a weakly constitution he may have to spend the most of his days
and nights upon the bed of weariness. Or if his body be sound, yet what
suffering he has in his mind! Conflicts between depravity and gross
temptations from the evil one, assaults of hell, perpetual attacks of divers
kinds, from the world, the flesh, and the devil. But there, no aching head
no weary heart; there no palsied arm, no brow ploughed with the furrows
of old age; there the lost limb shall be recovered, and old age shall find
itself endowed with perpetual youth, there the infirmities of the flesh shall
be left behind, given to the worm and devoured by corruption. There they
shall flit, as on the wings of angels, from pole to pole, and from place to
place, without weariness or anguish; there they shall never need to lie upon
the bed of rest, or the bed of suffering, for day without night, with joy
unflagging, they shall circle God’s throne rejoicing, and ever praise him
who hath said, “The inhabitants there shall never be sick.”

There, too, they shall be free from persecution. Here Sicilian Vespers, and
St. Bartholomew, and Smithfield, are well-known words; but there shall be
none to taunt them with a cruel word, or touch them with a cruel hand.
There emperors and kings are not known, and those who had power to
torture them cease to be. They are in the society of saints; they shall be free
from all the idle converse of the wicked, and from their cruel jeers set free
for ever. Set free from persecution! Ye army of martyrs, ye were slain, ye
were torn asunder, ye were cast to wild beasts, ye wandered about in sheep
skins and goats’ skins, destitute, afflicted, and tormented. I see you now, a
mighty host. The habiliments you wear are torn with thorns; your faces are
scarred with sufferings; I see you at your stakes, and on your crosses; I
hear your words of submission on your racks, I see you in your prisons, I
behold you in your pillories — but

“Now ye are arrayed in white,
Brighter than the noonday-sun
Fairest of the sons of light,
Nearest the eternal throne.”

These are they, who “for their Master died, who love the cross and
crown;” they waded through seas of blood, in order to obtain the
inheritance; and there they are, with the blood-red crown of martyrdom
about their heads, that ruby brightness, far excelling every other. Yes, there
is no persecution there. “There remaineth a rest for the people of God.”
Alas! in this mortal state the child of God is also subject to sin; even he
faileth in his duty, and wandereth from his God; even he doth not walk in
all the law of his God blameless, though he desireth to do it. Sin now
troubleth him constantly; but there sin is dead, there they have no
temptation to sin, from without or from within, but they are perfectly free
to serve their Master. Here the child of God has sometimes to weep
repentingly of his backslidings; but there they never shed tears of
penitence, for they have never cause to do so.

And last of all, here, the child of God has to wet the cold ashes of his
relatives with tears; here he has to bid adieu to all that is lovely and fair of
mortal race; here it is he hears, “earth to earth, and dust to dust, and ashes
to ashes,” while the solemn music of the dust upon the coffin lid beats
doleful time to those words. Here is the mother buried, the child snatched
away, the husband rent from the bosom of a loving wife, the brother parted
from the sister. The plate upon the coffin, the last coat of arms of earth,
earth’s last emblems are here ever before our eyes. But there never once
shall be heard the toll of the funeral bell, no hearse with plumes has ever
darkened the streets of gold, no emblems of sorrow have ever intruded into
the homes of the immortal, they are strangers to the meaning of death; they
cannot die — they live for ever, having no power to decay, and no
possibility of corruption. Oh! rest of the righteous, how blest art thou,
where families shall again be bound up in one bundle, where parted friends
shall again meet to part no more, and where the whole church of Christ
united in one mighty circle, shall together praise God and the Lamb
throughout eternal ages.

Brethren, I have tried thus to set the rest of the righteous in the way of
contrast; I feel I have failed. Poor are the words I can utter to tell you of
immortal things Even holy Baxter himself, when he wrote of the “Saints’
Rest,” paused and said; “But these are only tinklings compared with the
full thunders of heaven.” I cannot tell you, dear friends, nor can mortal tell,
what God hath prepared for them that love him.

2. And now I shall try very briefly to exhibit this contrast in the way of
comparison. The Christian hath some rest here, but nothing compared with
the rest which is to come.

There is the rest of the church. When the believer joins the church of God,
and becomes united with them, he may expect to rest. The good old writer
of the “Pilgrim’s Progress,” says, that when the weary pilgrims were once
admitted to the house Beautiful, they were shown to sleep in a chamber
called peace,” or “rest.” The church-member at the Lord’s table has a
sweet enjoyment of rest in fellowship with the saints; but ah! up there the
rest of church fellowship far surpasses anything that is known here; for
there are no divisions there, no angry words at the church meetings, no
harsh thoughts of one another, no bickerings about doctrine, no fightings
about practice. There Baptist, and Presbyterian, and Independent, and
Wesleyan, and Episcopalian, serving the same Lord, and having been
washed in the same blood, sing the same song, and are all joined in one.
There pastors and deacons never look coolly on each other; no haughty
prelates here, no lofty-minded ministers there, but all meek and lowly, all
knit together in brotherhood; they have a rest which surpasseth all the rest
of the church on earth.

There is, again, a rest of faith which a Christian enjoys; a sweet rest. Many
of us have known it. We have known what it is, when the billows of
trouble have run high, to hide ourselves in the breast of Christ, and feel
secure. We have cast our anchor deep into the rocks of God’s promise, we
have gone to sleep in our chamber and have not feared the tempest, we
have looked at tribulation, and have smiled at, we have looked at death
himself, and have laughed him to scorn, we have had much trust by
Christian faith that, dauntless and fearless, nothing could move us. Yes, in
the midst of calumny, reproach, slander and contempt, we have said, “I
shall not be moved, for God is on my side.” But the rest up there is better
still more unruffled, more sweet, more perfectly calm, more enduring, and
more lasting than even the rest of faith.

And, again, the Christian sometimes has the blessed rest of communion.
There are happy moments when he puts his head on the Saviour’s breast
— when, like John, he feels that he is close to the Saviour’s heart, and
there he sleeps. “God giveth his beloved sleep;” not the sleep of
unconsciousness, but the sleep of joy. Happy, happy, happy are the dreams
we have had on the couch of communion; blessed have been the times,
when, like the spouse in Solomon’s song, we could say of Christ, “His left
hand was under my head, and with his right hand did he embrace me.”

“But sweeter still the fountain head,
Though sweet may be the stream;”

When we shall have plunged into a very bath of joy, we shall have found
the delights even of communion on earth to have been but the dipping of
the finger in the cup, but the dipping of the bread in the dish, whereas
heaven itself shall be the participation of the whole of the joy, and not the
mere antepast of it. Here we sometimes enter into the portico of happiness,
there we shall go into the presence chamber of the King, here we look over
the hedge and see the flowers in heaven’s garden, there we shall walk
between the beds of bliss, and pluck fresh flowers at each step; here we just
look and see the sunlight of heaven in the distance, like the lamps of the
thousand-gated cities shining afar off, but there we shall see them in all
their blaze of splendor, here we listen to the whisperings of heaven’s
melody, borne by winds from afar; but there, entranced, amidst the grand
oratorio of the blessed, we shall join in the everlasting hallelujah to the
great Messiah, the God, the I AM. Oh! again I say, do we not wish to
mount aloft, and fly away, to enter into the rest which remaineth to the
people of God?

II. And now, yet more briefly, and then we shall have done. I am to
endeavor to EXTOL this rest, as I have tried to EXHIBIT it. I would extol
this rest for many reasons; and oh! that I were eloquent, that I might extol
it as it deserves! Oh! for the lip of angel, and the burning tongue of cherub,
to talk now of the bliss of the sanctified and of the rest of God’s people!
It is, first, a perfect rest. They are wholly at rest in heaven. Here rest is but
partial. I hope in a little time to cease from every-day labors for a season,
but then the head will think, and the mind may be looking forward to
prospective labor, and whilst the body is still, the brain will yet be in
motion. Here, on Sabbath days a vast multitude of you sit in God’s house,
but many of you are obliged to stand, and rest but little except in your
mind, and even when the mind is at rest the body is wearied with the toil of
standing. You have a weary mile perhaps, many miles, to go to your homes
on the Sabbath day. And let the Sabbatarian say what he will, you may
work on the Sabbath day, if you work for God; and this Sabbath day’s
work of going to the house of God is work for God, and God accepts it.
For yourselves you may not labor, God commands you to rest, but if you
have to toil these three, these four, these five, these six miles, as many of
you have done, I will not and I must not blame you. “The priests in the
sanctuary profane the Sabbath, and are blameless.” It is toil and labor, it is
true but it is for a good cause — for your Master. But there, my friends,
the rest is perfect; the body there rests perpetually, the mind too always
rests; though the inhabitants are always busy, always serving God, yet they
are never weary, never toil-worn, never fagged; they never fling themselves
upon their couches at the end of the day, and cry, “Oh! when shall I be
away from this land of oil?” They I never stand up in the burning sunlight,
and wipe the hot sweat from their brow; they never rise from their bed in
the morning, half refreshed, to go to laborious study. No, they are perfectly
at rest, stretched on the couch of eternal joy. They know not the semblance
of a tear; they have done with sin, and care, and woe, and, with their
Savior rest.

Again, it is a seasonable rest. How seasonable it will be for some of you!
Ye sons of wealth, ye know not the toils of the poor; the horny-handed
laborer, perhaps, you have not seen, and you not how he has to tug and to
toil. Among my congregation I have many of a class, upon whom I have
always looked with pity, poor women who must rise to-morrow morning
with the sun, and begin that everlasting “stitch, stitch,” that works their
finger to the bone. And from Monday morning till Saturday night, many of
you, my members, and multitudes of you, my hearers, will not be able to
lay aside your needle and your thread, except when, tired and weary, you
fall back on your chair, and are lulled to sleep by your thoughts of labor!
Oh! how seasonable will heaven’s rest be to you! Oh! how glad will you
be, when you get there, to find that there are no Monday mornings, no
more toil for you, but rest, eternal rest! Others of you have hard manual
labor to perform; you have reason to thank God that you are strong
enough to do it and you are not ashamed of your work; for labor is an
honor to a man. But still there are times when you say, “I wish I were not
so dragged to death by the business of London life.” We have but little rest
in this huge city, our day is longer, and our work is harder than our friends
in the country. You have sometimes sighed to go into the green fields for a
breath of fresh air, you have longed to hear the song of the sweet birds that
used to wake you when you were lads; you have regretted the bright blue
sky, the beauteous flowers, and the thousand charms of a country life. And
perhaps, you will never get beyond this smoky city, but remember, when
you get up there, “sweet fields arrayed in living green” and “rivers of
delight” shall be the place where you shall rest, you shall have all the joys
you can conceive of in that home of happiness; and though worn and
weary, you come to your grave, tottering on your staff; having journeyed
through the wilderness of life, like a weary camel, which has only stopped
on the Sabbath to sip its little water at the well, or to be baited at the oasis,
there you will arrive at your journey’s end, laden with gold and spices, and
enter into the grand caravanserai of heaven, and enjoy for ever the things
you have wearily carried with you here.

And I must say, that to others of us who have not to toil with our hands,
heaven will be a seasonable rest. Those of us who have to tire our brain
day after day will find it no slight boon to have an everlasting rest above. I
will not boast of what I may do, there may be many who do more, there
may be many who are perpetually and daily striving to serve God, and are
using their mind’s best energies in so doing. But this much I may say, that
almost every week I have the pleasure of preaching twelve times, and often
in my sleep do I think of what I shall say next time. Not having the
advantage of laying out my seven shillings and sixpence in buying
manuscripts, it costs me hard diligent labor to find even something to say.
And I sometimes have a difficulty to keep the hopper full in the mill, I feel
that if I had not now and then a rest I should have no wheat for God’s
children. Still it is on, on, on, and on we must go, we hear the chariot
wheels of God behind us, and we dare not stop, we think that eternity is
drawing nigh, and we must go on. Rest to us now is more than labor, we
want to be at work; but oh! how seasonable it shall be, when to the
minister it shall be said —

“Servant of God, well done!
Rest from thy loved employ;
The battle fought, the victory won,
Enter thy Master’s joy.”

It will be seasonable rest. You that are weary with state cares, and have to
learn the ingratitude of men; you that have sought honors, and have got
them to your cost, you seek to do your best, but your very independence of
spirit is called servility, whilst your servility would have been praised! You
who seek to honor God, and not to honor men, who will not bind
yourselves to parties, but seek in your own independent and honest
judgment to serve your country and your God you, I say, when God shall
see fit to call you to himself, will find it no small joy to have done with
parliaments, to have done with states and kingdoms, and to have laid aside
your honors, to receive honors more lasting amongst those who dwell for
ever before the throne of the Most High.

One thing, and then once more, and then farewell. This rest, my brethren,
ought to be extolled, because it is eternal. Here my best joys bear “mortar”
on their brow; here my fair flowers fade; here my sweet cups have dregs
and are soon empty; here my sweetest birds must die, and their melody
must soon be hushed; here my most pleasant days must have their nights;
here the flowings of my bliss must have their ebbs, everything doth pass
away, but there everything shall be immortal; the harp shall be unrusted,
the crown unwithered, the eye undimmed the voice unfaltering, the heart
unwavering, and the being wholly consolidated unto eternity. Happy day,
happy day, when mortality shall be swallowed up of life, and the mortal
shall have put on immortality!

And then, lastly, this glorious rest is to be best of all commended for its
certainty. “There remaineth a rest to the people of God.” Doubting one,
thou hast often said, “I fear I shall never enter heaven.” Fear not, all the
people of God shall enter there; there is no fear about it. I love the quaint
saying of a dying man, who, in his country brogue, exclaimed, “I have no
fear of going home; I have sent all before me. God’s finger is on the latch
of my door and I am ready for him to enter.” “But,” said one “are you not
afraid least you should miss your inheritance?” “Nay,” said he “nay, there is
one crown in heaven that the angel Gabriel could not wear; it will fit no
head but mine. There is one throne in heaven that Paul the apostle could
not fill; it was made for me, and I shall have it. There is one dish at the
banquet that I must eat, or else it will be untasted, for God has set it apart
for me.” O Christian, what a joyous thought! thy portion is secure! “there
remaineth a rest.” “But cannot I forfeit it?” No, it is entailed. If I be a child
of God I shall not lose it. It is mine as securely as if I were there.

“Come, Christian, mount to Pisgah’s top,
And view the landscape o’er.”

Seest thou that little river of death, glistening in the sunlight, and across it
dost thou see the pinnacles of the eternal city? Dost thou mark the pleasant
suburbs and all the joyous inhabitants? Turn thine eye to that spot. Dost
thou see where that ray of light is glancing now? There is a little spot there;
dost thou see it? That is thy patrimony; that is thine. Oh, if thou couldst fly
across thou wouldst see written upon it, “this remaineth for such an one,
preserved for him only. He shall be caught up and dwell for ever with
God.” Poor doubting one; see thine inheritance; it is thine. If thou believest
in the Lord Jesus thou art one of the Lord’s people; if thou hast repented
of sin thou art one of the Lord’s people; if thou hast been renewed in heart
thou art one of the Lord’s people, and there is a place for thee, a crown for
thee, a harp for thee. No one else shall have it but thyself, and thou shalt
have it ere long. Just pardon me one moment if I beg of you to conceive of
yourselves as being in heaven. Is it not a strange thing to think of — a poor
clown in heaven? Think, how will you feel with your crown on your head?
Weary matron, many years have rolled over you. How changed will be the
scene when you are young again. Ah, toil-worn laborer, only think when
thou shalt rest for aye. Canst thou conceive it? couldst thou but think for a
moment, of thyself as being in heaven now, what a strange surprise would
seize thee. Thou wouldst not so as much say, “What! are these streets of
gold? What! are these walls of jasper?” “What, am I here? in white? Am I
here, with a crown on my brow? Am I here singing, that was always
groaning? What! I praise God that once cursed him? What! I lifting up my
voice in his honor? Oh, precious blood that washed me clean! Oh, precious
faith that set me free! Oh, precious Spirit that made me repent, else I had
been cast away and been in hell! But oh! what wonders! Angels! I am
surprised. I am enraptured! Wonder of wonders! Oh! gates of pearls, I long
since heard of you! Oh! joys that never fade, I long since heard tell of you!
But I am like the Queen of Sheba, the half has not yet been told me.
Profusion, oh profusion of bliss! — wonder of wonders! — miracle of
miracles! What a world I am in! And oh! that I am here, this is the topmost
miracle of all!” And yet ‘tis true, ‘tis true; and that is the glory of it. It is
true. Come, worm, and prove it, come, pall; come shroud; come, and
prove it. Then come wings of faith, come, leap like a seraph; come, eternal
ages, come, and ye shall prove that there are joys that the eye hath not
seen, which the ear hath not heard, and which only God can reveal to us by
his spirit. Oh! my earnest prayer is, that none of you may come short of
this rest, but that ye may enter into it, and enjoy it for ever and ever. God
give you his great blessing, for Jesus sake! Amen.

Zenit News Agency (www.zenit.org)

He affirmed that he will ‘not spare any efforts’ to work for the quick restoration of ‘communion between Catholics and Orthodox’.

A Bulgarian Orthodox prelate told Benedict XVI of his desire for unity, and his commitment to accelerate communion with the Catholic Church.

At the end of Wednesday’s general audience, Bishop Tichon, head of the diocese for Central and Western Europe of the Patriarchate of Bulgaria, stated to the Pope, “We must find unity as soon as possible and finally celebrate together,” L’Osservatore Romano reported.

“People don’t understand our divisions and our discussions,” the bishop stated. He affirmed that he will “not spare any efforts” to work for the quick restoration of “communion between Catholics and Orthodox.”

Bishop Tichon said that “the theological dialogue that is going forward in these days in Cyprus is certainly important, but we should not be afraid to say that we must find as soon as possible the way to celebrate together.”

“A Catholic will not become an Orthodox and vice versa, but we must approach the altar together,” he added.

The prelate told the Pontiff that “this aspiration is a feeling that arose from the works of the assembly” of his diocese, held in Rome, in which all the priests and two delegates from every Bulgarian Orthodox parish took part.

“We have come to the Pope to express our desire for unity and also because he is the Bishop of Rome, the city that hosted our assembly,” he stated.

Initiatives

After the bishop, Luka Bebic, speaker of the Croatian Parliament, addressed the Holy Father, inviting the Pontiff to visit his homeland and thanking him “for the support the Holy See has given our people since independence, during the war back then and now in the process that will lead Croatia to enter the European Union.”

Benedict XVI next greeted members of the Association Rondine Cittadella della Pace [Citadel of Peace], which promotes dialogue and peace by bringing together students from conflict areas to live and study in community.

They shared with the Pope a concrete proposal titled “14 Points for Peace in the Caucasus” that was developed at an international congress the association organized in May.

The proposal was also distributed to the ambassadors of the Caucasus countries and to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. Young people of all the ethnic and religious groups of the Caucasus were also present at the audience.

Members of the Congregation of the Sisters of Charity of Cardinal Sancha, whose founder, Cardinal Ciriaco María Sancha y Hervas, was beatified Sunday in Toledo, Spain, also greeted the Pontiff. Headed by their superior, Sister Maria del Carmen Dominguez, the religious expressed to the Holy Father their commitment to be faithful to their original charism “of service to the poor, orphans and the elderly.”

Posted by Tim Drake

Well, the media mantra about the Vatican’s welcome to Anglicans has begun, and the anti-Catholicism is about as ugly as it gets.

Venues such as National Public Radio, the London Times, and the Kansas City Star describe the Church as “poaching.” USA Today says the Church is “rustling.” Other media outlets used the term “luring.” Some question whether the move was a “hostile takeover.” And London Times’ Columnist Libby Purves says that “converts may choke on the raw meat of Catholicism.”

Mainstream newspapers such as the New York Times and Washington Post have used the word “bid.” The Boston Globe uses both the words “lure” and “bid.”

No matter how you look at it, they’re all unsavory terms used by the secular media to describe the Church’s actions.

Even some Catholic commentators have taken to calling the move “sheep-stealing,” saying that there’s an unwritten rule that the Church doesn’t proselytize other Christians.

Since when did the Catholic Church cease to be an evangelizing Church, bringing the Gospel to all peoples?

At first, we might be puzzled by such reactions. Yet, it’s not so surprising when you think of the repercussions of the Church’s actions – potentially hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Anglicans pouring into the Church from the U.S., Africa, and elsewhere. In the eyes of many, the Catholic Church is seen as the “enemy,” – the great authoritarian, patriarchal, fraternal “beast.”

While the media would like to see the Church as predator and the Anglicans as prey, there’s nothing of the sort here. In fact, the move, which has taken years to happen, occurred only because such a large number of Anglicans petitioned the Vatican to find a way to make it happen.

“This is a response to overtures that had already been made – it’s not as if the Catholic Church had gone ‘poaching’ or ‘fishing’ as some media may have claimed,” said Father Robert Imbelli, associate professor of theology at Boston College. “The Apostolic Constitution has not yet been issued and that will be the key document. It will set the parameters for the reception. It sounds as if it represents an accommodation to the Anglican tradition, which reflects the appreciation of the richness of that tradition. It has been the ecumenical discussions that have led to this new appreciation.”

The Anglican Church, by comparison, has gone the way of the world. In many ways, they’ve ceased to be counter-cultural or a “sign of contradiction.” In that sense, they have a good friend in the media. They’ve jumped into the same water and are floating downstream together.

One of the few things standing against that cultural current is the Catholic Church.

“A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it,” the great British journalist and convert G.K. Chesterton used to say.

Contrary to the media reports, the Catholic Church isn’t poaching, luring, bidding, stealing, or rustling. The Catholic Church is preaching the Gospel Truth, much as it has done for the past 2,000 years.

The Truth, you see, isn’t a steel trap, with unrelenting teeth. No, the Truth is a freedom the likes of which the world has never known. And the Truth always attracts.

Christ didn’t poach or lure his followers. He didn’t force them to follow. He respected their freedom. Jesus Christ spoke the Truth clearly and without apology, and his disciples were attracted by that. That’s a Truth that many Anglicans have found attractive as well.

By Barry Rubin

There are widespread reports about an imminent deal with Iran regarding its nuclear program. Here’s how the New York Times optimistically presents the proposal:

“Iranian negotiators have agreed to a draft deal that would delay the country’s ability to build a nuclear weapon for about a year, buying more time for President Obama to search for a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear standoff.”

(To be fair, even this somewhat cautious note may be much less ecstatic than what we’ll be hearing if the deal goes through.)

What is the proposed bargain? It is based on an offer the Iranian government made in 2007 and reintroduced last June. In practice, the result would be  that Iran enriches unlimited amounts of uranium to a level near that needed for weapons, a large amount of this would be shipped off to France and/or Russia where it would be converted into something useful for medical purposes alone. Thus, it could be said that Iran having nuclear weapons has been either stopped or delayed considerably, though in fact it would only be delayed (if at all) not very long.

If the deal is made—and don’t take for granted it will be as the Iranian regime can think of plenty of delaying tactics, demands for modifications, real or imaginary internal conflicts blocking acceptance, etc.—there will be general rejoicing and the idea of further sanctions will be put on a back shelf to gather dust.

Indeed, it could effectively be argued, that existing sanctions could be removed. This does not seem likely at present–it would require a UN resolution undoing existing sanctions–but such a thing could arise in the future. And of course various countries in Europe could interpret the restrictions more loosely to allow deals that would not have gone through otherwise.

In other words, Iran could go on sponsoring terrorism (in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, against Israel, and in other places) and calling for Israel’s destruction while being treated as a regular member of the international community. It would only be a matter of a week or two before media outlets start writing that this proves President Barack Obama did deserve the Nobel Peace Prize.

Iran is trumpeting the proposed deal as a victory. But that seems rather strange doesn’t it? If this deal is as it appears (and again assuming it happens), then Iran won’t get nuclear weapons, has wasted billions of dollars and years of effort for nothing. In fact, it will be running a huge nuclear program to produce a product which in strategic terms is totally useless.

Or to put it another way, it’s like setting up a massive and expensive sword-making industry, then shipping off the completed swords to be turned into ploughshares and pruning hooks when you didn’t have any agriculture.

And by the way, since Iran–and its apologists–have been insisting that its real goal was nuclear power plants (as if one of the world’s largest oil producers which exports almost all of its production needs that) then why doesn’t Iran just agree to some deal in which all the uranium went to fuel such reactors with foreign-enriched fuel and close supervision? Even that would make more sense than this deal.

Does this make sense? There will be many silly reasons for this put forward: Iran was scared by sanctions and a united front against it, or Obama is so popular that they like him or trust him and it proves his strategy works. These ideas are nonsense but one a lot of average people in the West will believe them).

One logical argument that will be advanced is that internal disorder is forcing the regime to take a step back and be more cautious. This is a partial argument but, again, doesn’t explain why there would be such a huge apparent concession from a regime unaccustomed to making them.

So what’s really going on?

First, the whole thing may turn out to be a maneuver for buying time and no agreement is actually made.

Second, the Franco-Russian reworked uranium could be turned back into something suitable for further enrichment into weapons’-grade material in several months.

Third, Iran may well have other secret facilities which are going to be pumping out military useful enriched uranium. We have just seen how well they can conceal these things by the public exposure of such a secret facility. These could easily replace the uranium shipped abroad in a brief period of time.

Fourth, Iranian leaders, knowing that they have some way to go before being technologically ready to build weapons, are happy to accept a seeming delay in providing the uranium which will allow them to catch up with the technological and engineering requirements of making a bomb that works and missiles that will carry it to the target. Indeed, with sanctions loosened, it might get the very techniques and tools it needs to complete this process under the guise of other uses.

Note that the Bushehr nuclear reactor, which was supposed to have begun operation some months ago, has not been started up yet. Is this due to some technical difficulties? The reason certainly doesn’t seem to be Iran sending a signal of willngness to compromise since the regime has not used this factor as proof of its flexibility.

If this last argument is true–and it seems to be a reasonable one–then the idea that such a deal would even “slow” Iran’s obtaining nuclear weapons wouldn’t necessarily be true.

There could also be Iranian deals with other countries—perhaps North Korea or Venezuela, for example—to cooperate in supplying what’s needed. Such a possible arrangement with Syria was destroyed by an Israeli attack on a facility in that country last year.

And speaking of an Israeli attack, this agreement would buy Iran assurance that this couldn’t happen no matter what Tehran did since the regime’s program would be now under Western protection.

As an Arabic-language expression has it: How do you know it was a lie? Because it was so big.
For example, if Iran was truly going to change course in any real way, there would have been a heated debate within the government of which we would have heard something about.

Or there would have to be a factional dispute or domination by a less extremist group in the ruling circle that argued President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s adventurism was too dangerous to pursue. But all these people have been expelled.

Or it would seem apparent that Iran really was afraid of Western military action or tremendous pressure that would be so great as to force it into a big defeat.

Such cautions seem quite logical. Yet no matter how ridiculous the situation seems if Iran pulls off this ploy it could be a devastatingly successful one.

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). To read and subscribe to MERIA, GLORIA articles, or to order books. To see or subscribe to his blog, Rubin Reports.

Ruth Gledhill, Sophie Tedmanson, Giles Whittell and Richard Owen- Times

Leaders of more than 400,000 Anglicans who quit over women priests are to seek immediate unity with Rome under the apostolic constitution announced by Pope Benedict XVI. They will be among the first to take up an option allowing Anglicans to join an “ordinariate” that brings them into full communion with Roman Catholics while retaining elements of their Anglican identity.

The Pope’s move is regarded by some Anglicans as one of the most dramatic developments in Protestant christendom since the Reformation gave birth to the Church of England 400 years ago.

Archbishop John Hepworth, the twice-married Primate of the Traditional Anglican Communion, who led negotiations with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome, said he was “profoundly moved” by the Pope’s decision and would immediately seek the approval of the group’s 400,000 members worldwide to join.

He described the development as “a moment of grace, perhaps even a moment of history”.

As fully-fledged Anglicans also seek refuge from liberalism in the shelter of Rome, it is feared that the proposal could deal a deadly blow to the 77 million-strong Anglican Communion, which already faces schism over homosexual ordination.

Up to 500 members of Forward in Faith, the traditionalist grouping that opposes women bishops, are meeting this weekend to debate the Pope’s offer of a home for former Anglican laity and married priests.

Many are waiting for the publication of a code of practice by Rome to flesh out what is on offer before deciding whether to go.

Insiders believe that Rome’s new canonical solution to the Anglican crisis could tempt entire dioceses and possibly even a province.

More than 440 clergy took compensation and left the Church of England, most for Rome, after the General Synod voted to ordain women priests in 1992. More than 30 returned.

The Pope has made it significantly more attractive for Anglicans to move over this time by offering a universal solution that allows them to retain crucial aspects of their identity and to set up seminaries that will, presumably, train married men for the Catholic priesthood. But any serving clergyman would face a marked loss of income. A job as a clergyman in the Church of England comes with a stipend of £22,250 and free accommodation. Catholic priests earn about £8,000, paid by their parish and topped up by a diocese where the parish cannot afford even that.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, indicated that there would be no compensation this time. It was only introduced at the last minute previously as a way of getting the whole women’s ordination package through the General Synod with the necessary two-thirds majorities.

Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, the former Catholic who retired this year as the Anglican Bishop of Rochester, welcomed Rome’s “generosity of spirit” in its recognition of Anglican patrimony. But he made clear that many issues needed to be resolved before decisions could be made. The two “flying bishops” appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury to care for opponents of women priests also said that this was not a time for “sudden decisions”.

Andrew Burnham, the Bishop of Ebbsfleet, and Keith Newton, the Bishop of Richborough, who went last year to Rome to begin talks with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said: “Anglicans in the Catholic tradition understandably will want to stay within the Anglican Communion. Others will wish to make individual arrangements as their conscience directs. A further group will begin to form a caravan, rather like the People of Israel crossing the desert in search of the Promised Land.” In the US a writer for the Jesuit magazine America expressed fears that some newcomers would be “nostalgists, anti-feminists and anti-gay bigots”.

At Notre Dame University in Indiana, scholars forecast a migration of Catholics into the new Anglican Catholic rite because of the sudden freedom to marry that it would grant. Professor Lawrence Cunningham called the Vatican’s move a “stunning” endorsement of the married priesthood, adding that it would have immediate repercussions for Catholics. It would “raise anew the question, ‘If they can do it, why can’t the priests of Rome?’ ”

Archbishop Robert Duncan, of the Anglican Church of North America, which broke away from the Episcopal Church over the ordination of the gay Gene Robinson as the Bishop of New Hampshire, said: “We rejoice that the Holy See has opened this doorway, which represents another step in the co-operation and relationship between our Churches.”

In Rome, Vittorio Messori, who has co-written books with the Pope, said that the Anglican Communion was already losing followers because of female and gay priests. “More Muslims go to the mosques in London than Anglicans go to church” he said. “The exit of half a million Anglicans to Rome will only confirm a trend.”

By Jennifer Riley – Christian Post Reporter

The Internet is not only useful for churches in communicating with seekers, but it can also be harnessed to reach people not actively looking for answers, says a Danish scholar.

Peter Fischer-Nielsen, a Ph.D Fellow at the Faculty of Theology at Aarhus University in Denmark, recognizes the difficulty churches have in reaching non-seekers in real life and on the World Wide Web. Non-seekers are often not interested in visiting Christian Web sites, but churches can still meet them by going to their Web turf.

“[T]he church must not isolate itself on its own Web sites; instead, it must take part in the fluent online traffic and develop initiatives on various platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, and Wikipedia,” says Fischer-Nielsen in an article entitled, “Online Mission,” in the latest issue of Lausanne World Pulse.

Fischer-Nielsen, who is researching church communication on the Internet, wrote that the mission of the Church is to reach the world with the Gospel message. The Internet allows the Church to enlarge its reach to anywhere in the world where there is Internet, including in countries hostile to Christianity, he said.

So churches need to be technologically savvy and create Web sites that can be found through popular search engines such as Google, as well as create an online presence on growingly popular social networking sites.

Some Christian ministries have reported much evangelism success after using the Internet to find seekers. Campus Crusade for Christ’s Global Media Outreach is among the success stories, having harnessed the Internet to create a volunteer force of thousands of online missionaries.

In July, GMO announced that over 1 million people indicated a first-time decision to follow Jesus or a decision to recommit their life to Christ through one of more than 90 GMO-hosted Gospel Web sites since its inception in 2004.

The media ministry estimates that 1 in 1,000 Internet searchers is looking for information about God. On a daily basis, around two million people look for God.

“This is an historic event only possible by God’s power,” said GMO founder and chair Walt Wilson.

But both Fischer-Nielsen and GMO agree that the Internet does not take the place of church communities. The scholar and ministry support connecting people who make the decision for Christ to discipleship programs or to local churches.

“These online communities are not a replacement to traditional physical congregations, but a supplement,” says Fischer-Nielsen, who also acknowledges that in some cases they are the only Christian communities for people who would be in danger if others knew of their faith commitment.

The Danish scholar concluded, “The Internet has come to stay and the Church must continually be in dialogue concerning how the Internet can be used to serve its mission.”

Catholic Herald

Exiting St Patrick’s Cathedral into the damp heat of New York in September, I try to see if I can single out Rocco Palmo from among the tourists lounging under the scaffolding, grateful for a shady seat on the cathedral steps. Then I find him, shoulder bag slung to one side looking a bit scruffy (in a good way) and intent on his iPhone, looking for all the world like one of the boy-men of the internet age. He is in his mid-twenties, wearing flip-flops and baggy trousers, a T-shirt and sporting what looks like a three-day beard. He is a bit shorter than I expected, and slight, but his smile is enormous. Palmo is an unlikely grandfather of the Catholic blogosphere.

When the newly minted President Barack Obama took the second question in the first press conference of his term from a blogger, not a member of the media establishment, it became clear that blogs had become mainstream, if not quite respectable. The blog is as old as the internet itself, though it has evolved a great deal from the basic page where the blogger could dump content which was usually of a highly personal nature.

Blogging software was easier to handle than clunky web pages, as Chris Taylor, a journalist at Time magazine gushed in 2002: “Making journal entries is simplicity itself. Type your blindingly brilliant insight or cool link in a white box on the Blogger website, run it through the optional spellcheck, and hit the button marked PUBLISH. Blogger provides the date, the time and the layout.”

Anyone could run a blog. And it seemed that everyone did. For a while it was just college guys in pyjamas doing it, then soccer moms from Middle America began to take it up and enclosed religious orders discovered that they could show the world the way they lived. Even Bishop Richard Williamson has a blog.

Once the domain of amateurs, blogs today are even hosted on the websites of serious national newspapers, which allow for “user-generated content” and use social networking sites like MySpace, Twitter and Facebook in order to promote their products.

Earlier this month one of the oldest of blog hosting programmes, Blogger, celebrated its 10th anniversary. According to the BBC, Blogger claims to have more than 300 million active readers and “enough words to fill about 3.2 million novels”. Let’s see a newspaper match those figures.

Rick Klau, a product manager at Blogger, told the Beeb: “Blogging has become part of the air on the internet. And I believe we will see a bit of a renaissance in blogging where whole new groups of people will understand this gives them a lot more control and flexibility in what they share and how they share it.”

Despite the growing reality that blogs are just as much part of our media landscape as newspapers, radio and television – so much so that Westminster auxiliary Bishop John Arnold mentioned the outpouring of emotion and joy in the blogosphere about the visit of the relics of St Thérèse of Lisieux from the pulpit at Westminster Cathedral last week – they are still viewed with a great deal of suspicion, especially in the Church. Yet Pope Benedict XVI mentioned the new media positively in this year’s World Communication Day address.

He said: “The new digital technologies are, indeed, bringing about fundamental shifts in patterns of communication and human relationships.

“These changes are particularly evident among those young people … In this year’s message, I am conscious of those who constitute the so-called digital generation and I would like to share with them, in particular, some ideas concerning the extraordinary potential of the new technologies, if they are used to promote human understanding and solidarity. These technologies are truly a gift to humanity and we must endeavour to ensure that the benefits they offer are put at the service of all human individuals and communities, especially those who are most disadvantaged and vulnerable.”

But the common perception is that bloggers are polemicists who specialise in half-truths, rhetorical flourishes and rumours. They are seen to further the rule of the mob, in the form of comment boxes or on social networking sites. And it is common knowledge that in order to succeed as a blogger you have to be angry, you have to have a Twitter account, you need to be controversial, you need to have an opinion and you almost certainly need to have comment boxes.

One of the chief criticisms thrown at the blogosphere, especially the Catholic blogosphere, is that it unleashes a wave of anger and fury and that many commentators show a lack of Christian charity that they would never show in real life.

Another truism of the blogging age is that the dead-tree press is hitting the recycling pile and throwing the long-standing tradition of quality “objective” journalism out with it, because there simply isn’t a demand for it.

***

And yet in the Catholic corner of the blogosphere there is one extremely successful blogger, both by the narrow standards of its community and by those of the wider internet, who keeps old media precepts but applied to the new media form.

Palmo runs the highly popular Whispers in the Loggia blog, which has almost 11.5 million hits in five years. He does not allow comments on his stories. They are crafted in the best tradition of American journalism: earnest, informative and so balanced it is difficult to tell where he stands on a subject personally.

He is the kid in the pyjamas of the blogging archetype, but with the sort of journalistic standards that would put many a student even of the mega-earnest and prestigious graduate school of journalism at Columbia to shame.

Whispers in the Loggia carries news of appointments, passes on clerical gossip, explains the news, and sifts through arcane ecclesiastical processes. This year, the wiry Philadelphians broke the news of Archbishop Timothy Dolan’s appointment to the Archdiocese of New York, long before the mainstream press or even the nations’ Catholic press had a chance to write about the news.

For many religion journalists working for nationals newspapers, Whispers in the Loggia is the place to come for Catholic news.

In a medium that lends itself to fostering division Palmo sets out to straddle the gap between secular coverage of Catholicism and the religious press. He also attempts find ways of bridging a growing chasm between liberal and conservative Catholics who are increasingly polarised in President Obama’s America.

He says: “I have friends on both sides of the aisle and sometimes I lean to one side or another. wherever we are in the Church, we are always missing another half. It’s the only way we can be the best Church we can be is if we can be the fullest Church we can be.

“If you look at this country we have a 25 per cent Mass attendance, which means 75 per cent of the Church isn’t with us. What are we doing about that? A lot of these other controversies get us away from the big questions. We have a hurting world. We have challenges to human life and dignity every day. So what is all this doing? Are we just expressing our opinions or are we trying to build something?”

Born in Philly in 1983, Palmo really does come across in person as the new media whizz kid that he is. There is a touch of the geek about him, but these days geeks are the coolest people around. George Weigel wrote recently that Pope John Paul II ran the Church from his rooms in the Vatican, by-passing the Curia entirely. Perhaps it is fitting that Palmo, a true member of the JPII generation, writes Whispers from his parents’ house, bypassing the mainstream media and the Catholic press entirely.

Although he grew up in very Catholic Italian American family, Palmo really came to his faith through newspapers. His father worked on the circulation side of the Philadelphia Inquirer and Palmo often accompanied him to the office. He learned the ropes in the newsroom there, with a number of internships.

When the Philadelphia Archbishop Anthony Bevilacqua was made cardinal in 1991, Palmo was entranced by the ceremony and wanted to learn more. He met Cardinal Bevilacqua and soon got to know some of America’s foremost churchmen because he was a curious and precocious teenager.

He says: “I came out of it with all these questions, I’d never been interested in it before so then I got to meet him and he became – in the Church – my father figure. He answered all my questions and always showed me the ropes of the Church while I had the news people showing me the ropes of journalism.”

Everyone expected Palmo would go on to be a priest, but instead he went to the University of Pennsylvania, studied politics and the Holy See and turned his passion for the Church and for journalism into a blog.

When he started, he says that people “wrote to me saying: ‘You really must be a cardinal writing under a pen name’ or ‘you applied to the seminary and you’re bitter that you got kicked out’.”

“I never applied. If anything I hope I wouldn’t have got kicked out or rejected or whatever, but really the blog just comes from loving the Church and wanting to just examine it. Not as in putting it on trial, but in order to show that there’s always more to the story. Because obviously, in the secular press you can only fit in a certain number of inches and there’s only a certain amount of interest.”

Palmo was surprised and a bit frightened by the success of his blog. “I started the page as a sort of catharsis with three people and never gave the address to anyone else and then five months later discovered it was written on napkins during the [2005 papal] conclave and passed around,” he recalls. “My first thought was, I need to kill this thing.”

The blog shows his development as a journalist: from the first days in 2004 where he promises an ambitious agenda (“short of seeking and highlighting truth, justice and fruitful discourse (or the lack thereof), I come (with no biases)” to today’s more polished writing. He retains the ease and folksy tone but it is clear that he is more careful about actually putting himself into the blog posts than he was when he started.

There are stories he would rather not publish. But that he feels he has a responsibility to as a journalist and as a committed Catholic. He says the watershed moment came when he was given a letter that was being anonymously circulated in the Archdiocese of New York, calling for a vote of no confidence on Cardinal Edward Egan. He says that he received a lot of flak for publishing it.

“This also came as a wake-up call for me and I thought: ‘God, I have to try to be even more responsible and take more of myself out of it.’ I found myself saying to myself: ‘If this is what new media can do in terms of policy and spread, in terms of how decisions are made and what decisions are made, then I need to be more careful.’”

He continues: “I always knew I felt I had an obligation to journalism and to the Church but that really made me a lot more cautious. That said, if I had to, I would do it again.”

In a way, Palmo sets out to do exactly what the Church sets out to do every day, which is to present an old message without changing it, using whatever new media are out there to do it. His faith informs his journalism and vice versa.

When he talks about difficult situations, he says: “The best thing for the Church sometimes means writing about difficult truths. Nobody likes them less than me, but at the same time there are always going to repercussions if people find out that we haven’t been honest, that we haven’t been as transparent as we should have, especially in these days. If we claim to have the capital ‘T’ Truth then we have to be realistic about the small ‘t’ truth, because if you ignore the second for the sake of the first you’re going lose both.”

He says that the Church is a great teacher of journalism. “I have the story, I have to present it, I can’t change it,” he explains. “And that’s what we have to do with the teaching of the Church. We have to present it. We can’t change it. We can’t make into what we want it to be. And if we do we’re being irresponsible.”

PETITION

By Austin Ruse

(WASHINGTON, DC – C-FAM)  An international coalition of pro-life and pro-family groups has re-launched a petition that is expected to gather one million signatures in support of the unborn child and the traditional family.

Groups from the United States, Poland, Spain and other European counties launched the petition last fall and at that time gathered nearly 500,000 signatures, which were presented to selected Ambassadors at the United Nations (UN) and at a UN press conference that was broadcast throughout UN headquarters. The groups included C-FAM [publisher of the Friday Fax], Concerned Women for America, United Families International, all from  the United States, along with the Polish Federation of Pro-life Groups and the Spanish Institute for Family Policy. A prominent parliamentarian from Honduras also participated in the press conference.

The purpose of the petition is to persuade UN Member States to begin interpreting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as protecting the unborn child from abortion and also to recognize traditional marriage and the right of parents to educate their children.

Organizers launched the petition partially in reaction to efforts by pro-abortion groups last year to use the occasion of the 60th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration to promote a right to abortion.

The pro-life petition, which can be signed at http://www.c-fam.org/campaigns/lid.2/default.asp in one of 19 languages, specifically references portions of the Universal Declaration that can be interpreted by States in pro-life and pro-family ways.  For instance, the Universal Declaration says, “Everyone has the right to life.” Though it is not clear that the drafters meant to include the unborn child in this formulation, States may interpret the document this way.

The Universal Declaration also says, “Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family.”  In recent years social radicals have pushed the UN to call for an international right for homosexuals to marry. Social conservatives point out this is in direct opposition to the intention of the drafters of the aspirational Universal Declaration and its binding implementing covenants promulgated in 1966.

Family-rights proponents also highlight the Universal Declaration’s recognition that “Parents have the prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.” There is a push in the West to allow homosexual propaganda in schools even against the wishes of parents. This would be in violation of the Universal Declaration.

Additionally, the petition cites the Universal Declaration where it says “The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection from society and the State.” In recent years efforts have been made to undermine the natural family by redefining it to include homosexual couples, efforts that have been repeatedly defeated in the UN General Assembly.

Organizers were also inspired by efforts of the Catholic St. Egidio Community of Rome who gathered one million signatures calling for a moratorium on the death penalty that resulted in a successful UN resolution calling for a ban on executions.

European Union Parliamentarians Anna Zaborska of Slovakia and Carlo Casini of Italy led similar efforts to the UN pro-life petition in Europe. Their petitions were presented to the European Parliament last year.

PETITION

Previous Related Posts

The Department for Children, Schools and Families published a consultation on home schooling. Please respond in order to preserve the freedoms of those parents who wish to educate their children at home. The closing date is Monday, 19th October 2009.

Keep families free – The Christian Institute

Parents protest at Ofsted inspections for children taught at home

An independent report, commissioned by the Government and published this year, recommends that home-schooling must come closer to the Government control.

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Reject the Report to the Secretary of State on the Review of Elective Home Education in England by Graham Badman.

Socialist Sweden Moves to Ban Homeschooling for Religious or Philosophical Reasons Government accused of “showing off its worst totalitarian socialist roots”.

BBC slurs evangelicals in home school debate – Some evangelical parents need monitoring by the state because they may ‘intimidate’ their children with ideas about God, sin and hell, a BBC radio host Roger Bolton said.

The Christian Institute