HOME-PAGE           SITE-MAP          EMAIL


The pages listed below will be revised to exclude duplicated material and to achieve other benefits.

1a. Alan Billings, South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner: Complaint
1b. Same content as (1) but in single column
1c. Alan Billings: Ichtheology: The Billingsgate Challenge
1d. Police / Ethics Panels
1e. S. Yorks Police: IOPC
1f. Police, PCC, Panels
- with 'Billingsgate  Challenge'
1g. Dr Billings: 'HATE CRIME'
1h. Capability in education and policing


The pages listed above will be revised to exclude duplicated material and to achieve other benefits.


Simon Webb

These are two hideous comments that follow a You Tube video of Simon Webb, 'How two Jewish academics in America created the modern concept of anti-racism.' More comments are quoted later on: in all the comments quoted, spelling, punctuation and grammar as in the original.


'thank you so much for being such a brave fellow this needs to be heard the truth will finally be revealed to the public one of these days the german man [obviously a reference to Hitler] tried to warn us but nobody listened people like you are so brave thank you so much sir for making this video god bless''


They [an obvious reference to Jews] even managed to make a teetotal vegetarian who loved animals and who enjoyed painting as a pastime ... into evil incarnate.' [an obvious reference to Hitler.]


Anti-semitism takes different forms, obnoxious but comparatively mild and forms which are much worse than obnoxious. The antisemitic language of the Nazis was terrifying, the kind that led to the policy and practice of annihilation. The comments of these people on the Simon Webb page aren't in that category but they are surely much worse than obnoxious.

The two academics who according to Simon Webb created 'the modern concept of anti-racism' are Franz Boas and Ruth Benedict. According to the evidence available to me, neither of them were observant Jews. Even if they had been observant Jews, the description Jewish academics would have been completely unnecessary. If Simon Webb thinks that no objection can be taken to the description Jewish academics, a large number of the commenters thought that the mention of 'Jewish' was very, very significant and responded, in some cases like Nazis, in others like easily-led sheep.

It's very, very disturbing that Simon Webb never intervened and responded to the antisemitism of so many of the comments. He did respond to a single comment, which wasn't antisemitic. The comment: 'Did your wife write this one?' Writing as 'History Debunked,' the title of his You Tube channel, Simon Webb responded with 'That is an odd question! No, I wrote it myself.' The question posed in this comment was odd, but he preferred to be silent about the hideous spectacle which was playing out on this You Tube page of his. I find it impossible to believe that the only comment he read was this one about his wife. He must have known that vile claims were being made but chose to do nothing about it.


In a matter as important as this, responsibility doesn't end with posting a video. He should have known the likely response or a possible response from antisemites before posting the video. If his historian's judgment failed him and he had no idea of what could happen, the evidence soon came flooding in - and still he did nothing. He was culpable, he failed. He's welcome to come up with explanations or excuses, if he can think of any.


Simon Webb is a liability to 'the anti-woke cause' - except that there isn't a single, monolithic cause. There are nuances, small differences and, also major differences, with the possibility of the contradictions, unexpected events, grotesque complications which are common in human life.


The comments of what I call 'the rabble,' the rabble enthused or inspired by if not incited by Simon Webb, included these:


'Europe and the US would truly be something magnificent without them.' [i.e., the Jews. And the Nazis believed that Germany would be something magnificent without the Jews.]


'Good work here Simon, finally calling them out.' [Again, 'them' obviously refers to the Jews.] 'Oh yes he's finally addressing the tribe [obviously the reference intended is to Israel] ... Many other things they inflicted on the west.' [No attempt made to give examples. The Nazis did, of course, come up with examples of alleged harm to justify their policy of exclusion and then extermination.]


'I always appreciate your honesty Simon.' [Perhaps someone who is easily pleased - by, for example, an affable manner, by appearances, without delving any deeper.]


'The thanks we get for saving them.' [The commenter would find in Martin Gilbert's book 'The Righteous: The Unsung Heroes of the Holocaust' a great deal of information about 'Yad Vashem,' based in Jerusalem, which amongst other things honours, commemorates and makes completely clear the gratitude of the state of Israel for the many people who risked their lives to save Jews during the Holocaust. There are countless other pieces of evidence which could be cited.]


'Who would have guessed, a concept invented by the 'chosen' people.'


'It's always them. The same group behind everything.' [The Nazis had the same deluded conviction.]


This [the thesis which the writer of the comment finds in the video and found by so many others who added a comment to the video] is explained in 'Culture of Critique' by Macdonald.' [Wikipedia gives this information, 'The Culture of Critique series is a trilogy of books by Kevin B. MacDonald, an antisemitic conspiracy theorist, white supremacist and a retired professor of evolutionary psychology. MacDonald claims that evolutionary psychology provides the motivations behind Jewish group behaviour and culture. Through the series, MacDonald asserts that Jews as a group have biologically evolved to be highly ethnocentric and hostile to the interests of white people. He asserts Jewish behaviour and culture are central causes of antisemitism, and promotes conspiracy theories about alleged Jewish control and influence in government policy and political movements.' ]


'15.2 million Jews in the world. 6.3 million of those are in Israel. Therefore, there are only 8.9 million Jews in the entire world outside of Israel. Smaller than the population of London. They've got a lot to say haven't they? They do seem to be at the root of much of christian society's problems. I've never held antisemitic thoughts. I worked on a kibbutz in Israel when I was a teenager. However, even I am beginning to see a pattern here.'


'Oh yes he's finally addressing the tribe...Many other things they inflicted on the west.'


'Perhaps just perhaps that little fella with the strange moustache knew something all along ?' [Another obvious reference to Hitler.]


'Youll get the clicks. Thanks for sticking for the truth.' [Present statistics: 9,600 likes, no dislikes. It would have been far, far better for the reputation of his followers and admirers if for this video, there had been far less likes.]


'Your channel could be taken down soon if you keep this up. It's not worth the risk. It's sad that merely speaking verifiable information with proof is this risky.'

'But isn't it strange that they never insisted on equality between Jews and Palestinians?' A reply to this comment: 'They don't consider anyone else to be their equals. Their sense of worth is vastly out of proportion to their contributions to humanity.'

Is the penny or should that be shekel starting to drop for Simon after all these years?'

'Universal troublemakers' 'I don't hate them, but they've pulled the wool over our children's eyes, enough is enough.'

'WOAH 6 MILLION JEWS WERE MURDERED BRUTALLY IN YHE HOLOCAUST HOW DARE YOU CRITICIZE GODS CHOSEN PEOPLE.' [I take the view for a variety of reasons, including stylistic reasons, that this wasn't a genuine expression of dismay that Simon Webb had criticized Jews but a facetious comment posing as a genuine expression of dismay. As such, given the use of the shocking statistic that 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust - or rather misuse - this could be called a particularly shocking comment on the part of whoever wrote the comment.]


And with that, I leave Simon Webb and the New Culture Forum to think about the implications of all these comments, if they're so minded, and to consider their responses, if any. Perhaps any people who recorded their appreciations of the wonderful talents, the wonderful gifts, the wonderful personality of Simon Webb in many of the comments on that You Tube page and who find out about this dissenting view may like to think about the issues and consider this possibility: that this is a man less wonderful than they supposed, a man with some very substantial flaws. I think that Peter Whittle would benefit by reconsidering his obviously high opinion of Simon Webb. No professional historian who values his reputation would or should allow what Simon Webb did, complacently allowing so many of his admirers and followers to run riot, in effect.


Simon Webb: Christianity and homogeneity


A Simon Webb video on homogeneity was grossly deficient - as usual. He  left out one one prime example of the effect that non-British people and foreign influences can have on a homogenous society - Christianity! Pagan Britain was a relatively homogeneous society, no more than that, but after the waves of missionaries reached these shores, Britain was exposed to a wide range of foreign influences which made it far less homogeneous. He mentioned 'speaking different languages' as a factor which reduces homogeneity (a bad thing, you think.) He mentioned Jews as one of the groups which reduce the diversity of the country. He thought that that was  regrettable as well (Some of the people who admire him would use a much, much more extreme word than 'regrettable.')


The missionaries claimed that Jesus, an Aramaic-speaking Jew, was the son of god. The 'good news' of the gospel (which turned out to be very bad news for all the victims of Christian persecution) wasn't written in Anglo-Saxon or English, of course, but Greek. The Old Testament, which in some passage supposedly prophesied the coming of the Messiah was written in Hebrew.


The names of the majority of British Churches are named after non-British people, to give just one example, St Augustine, born in North Africa. This is the Augustine who taught that unbaptized babies go to Hell. Another 'saint' called Augustine was born in Italy and came to this country to convert the natives. Later, with the development and intellectualizing of Christianity, there were many more foreign influences.


St Thomas Aquinas, born in Italy, revered the pagan Greek philosopher Aristotle. In his Summa Theologiae, written in Latin, not English, St Thomas Aquinas wrote, 'With regard to heretics two points must be observed: one, on their own side; the other, on the side of the Church. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death. For it is a much graver matter to corrupt the faith which quickens the soul, than to forge money, which supports temporal life. Wherefore if forgers of money and other evil-doers are forthwith condemned to death by the secular authority, much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death.' This saint of the Roman Catholic Church is known as the 'Angelic Doctor.'


The Church of England and the Protestant Churches owe their origins to foreign 'reformers' such as the German Luther (born in the Holy Roman Empire of the time) and Calvin, born in France and active in Geneva. Calvin denounced the 'heretic' Servetus, who was burned alive. I loathe political correctness but in any fair-minded survey of the issues, the cruelties perpetrated by so many Christians have to be taken into account, as well as the Church's interference with free and reasonable expression - well into the 19th Century, the universities of Oxford and Cambridge were only open to people willing to subscribe to the Thirty Nine Articles, the Anglican statement of doctrine. Compare and contrast 'Woke' attempts to suppress free and reasonable expression. I wouldn't say that the Anglican impact was less harmful than the 'woke' impact.


Simon Webb seems actually to believe that Christianity is part of the fabric of this country and is not just a beneficial influence but vital to British identity. Any chance of fuller explanation from him in a future video? But I think he's much too prolific already and instead of offering so many bite-sized You Tube offerings to people hungry to hear his views, he would benefit by doing more thinking, more reflecting. He seems to take the view that again and again, history confirms his views. Perhaps he would benefit by reading much more history, but with a chastened, more critical viewpoint.

 One comment below the page which presented the Simon Webb video on homogeneity - I don't name the commenter but it's easy to find on the page - was obviously addressed to Simon Webb: 'You overlooked two other examples - Germany [Jews] and United Kingdom [Catholics].' This loathsome comment unwittingly draws attention to some of the dangers of the 'Webb Homogeneity Thesis.' The Nazis wanted a homogeneous, Aryan Germany and saw the Jews as an obstacle, so they used extermination to remove the Jews, killing about 6 million before the war ended and the camps were liberated. Protestants who wanted a homogeneous Protestant society without the 'contagion' of the Catholics sometimes executed Catholics or went to war against them. Catholics who wanted a homogeneous Catholic society without the 'contagion' of the Protestants sometimes executed Protestants or went to war against them. In both cases, this led not to thousands of deaths but many millions, in the 17th century alone.

For the record, I don't in the least regard greater diversity as automatically enriching a society, to be advocated in all circumstances. For one thing, I support stringent and effective border controls, for a variety of reasons. One is the extreme importance of doing everything possible to keep out Islamist extremists. I was surprised to find a Simon Webb video which gives a very relaxed view of some aspects of Islamism, called 'Why some people have a bee in their bonnet about Islam,' with this amplification, 'One religion [Islam] seems to be the focus of a good deal of negativity.' I was glad to find that a large number of commenters took issue with his view of the matter.


 The site of Migration Watch UK (an outstanding site, I think) includes a summary page 'What is the problem?' I agree with Migration Watch's approach to the massive problem -of mass immigration into this country. Attempts to increase diversity can have a range of unintended consequences.


Attempts to reduce diversity can have a range of unintended consequences. Simon Webb has been careless - reckless - in presenting his 'Homogeneity Thesis.' He hasn't thought things through. He doesn't seem to understand the difficulties in restoring homogeneity to a society which has become far less homogeneous. His understanding of practical politics, of the realities of political action seems to me grossly deficient. The same criticism can be made of so many ant-anti-woke people and organizations - and, of course, so many 'woke' people and organizations.



Emma Webb and The New Culture Forum


At one point in the discussion, Peter Kiszely said, with reference to the use and misuse of the word 'safe,' 'We all know you can see it in the language.' Whatever good sense and sensitivity the host and guests showed when discussing the mistakes of the woke, their actions as well as the language they use so often, was nowhere to be found when it came to discussing the 'flag and the swastika' episode. On the evidence available, it seems that Hampshire Police blundered - a comical act with serious, even sinister overtones. But when Emma Webb gave her own interpretation, it was very disturbing, conniving in hideous misuse of language, and those highly accomplished bullshit detectors Rafe Heydel-Mankoo and Philip Kiszely seemed to find nothing wrong. Their minds, or their nostrils, perhaps, failed them, it seems.


Has there ever been a time when the word 'love' has been used and misused so often? Connotations of intense emotion seem to have disappeared. I remember seeing an advertising poster put out by the British Conifer association, 'Love me, love my conifer.' Equating a man's love for a woman or a woman's love for a man (or, of course, a man's love for a man or a woman's love for a woman) with loving a fir tree or a yew tree or a juniper bush seems ridiculous to me but the priorities of the people who grow and sell conifers are obviously different.


The word 'love' may be a lost cause, or largely lost cause, but it's essential not to equate the Nazis with people who are obviously not Nazis, to use the word 'Nazi' indiscriminately, negligently, without giving any thought to the barbarities which put the Nazis, probably, in a category apart - their cruelties rivalled by the cruelties which occurred in Stalinist Russia but exceeding them by quite a margin. If people know about Auschwitz and Belsen and Dachau and perhaps a few more concentration and extermination camps, and about some of the horrors which took place in the Nazi domination of Europe, they may not know enough. The mobile killing units, the Einsatzgruppen, which accompanied Nazi forces during the invasion of Russia, are not common knowledge, perhaps, but their contribution to the horrors which took place under Nazi domination was immense. To equate the men who shot babies and their mothers, in some cases, for bravado, with a single bullet, with the actions (and antics) of gay pride is horrible. For Emma Webb to equate Hampshire police with the Gestapo is horrible - a mistake, a bad mistake, a deeply disturbing mistake. Adolf Eichmann was a member of the Gestapo.

Peter Whittle, the founder of the New Culture Forum, declares that he isn't 'a religious man' but adds, 'That doesn't mean I don't appreciate the extraordinary works that churches do.' His comments appear on the Website of 'Premier Christian News,'




His comment is bland, almost formulaic, but is completely understandable, given the circumstances. The issue of the Churches and their contribution, not just their contribution now but in past centuries - the New Culture Forum has quite a developed historical sense - merits a much closer examination.   I can't possibly give an adequate examination here but I think this outline should provide, not unexpected insights but material that contradicts any naive view of the 'wonderful work that churches do.' Peter Whittle may well be unaware that many, many Christians won't have nearly as favourable view of him as he has of the Churches. Here, I discuss not 'churches' in general but particular versions of christian faith. Their differences are often very significant.  


 It would be impossible to do more than touch upon the ridiculousness and harmful effects of Roman Catholicism over the years, over the centuries, which I would claim exceed the ridiculousness and harmful effects of 'woke' views, and not by a small margin. For the record, I've been and still am an opponent of 'woke' views, an energetic opponent, I could claim, but I can't possibly provide much evidence here. This comment is long enough as it is. All I can do is give a few snippets of information but I'll include comments on the ridiculousness and harmful effects of evangelical and other protestant views, a few comments on the Anglican Church's very substantial contribution (as the Established Church for centuries, it has had plenty of practice). I'll begin, though, with the Roman Catholic Church.


 The Roman Catholic Church has few rivals, or no rivals, for ridiculousness but as a source of harm, it's far from being one of the worst perpetrators. Nazism and Stalinism have been vastly worse. I don't in the least claim that individual Roman Catholics and other Christians are always negligible people, quite the opposite. There are many, many Roman Catholics and other Christians known to me with substantial strengths - massive strengths. The teaching of 'Saint' Thomas Aquinas, the 'Doctor Angelicus' ('Angelic Doctor') of the Roman Catholic Church: 'With regard to heretics,' the Angelic Doctor writes, 'two points must be observed: one, on their own side; the other, on the side of the Church. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death. For it is a much graver matter to corrupt the faith which quickens the soul, than to forge money, which supports temporal life. Wherefore if forgers of money and other evil-doers are forthwith condemned to death by the secular authority, much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death.' The burning alive of heretics and execution by other means constitutes a hideous episode of Roman Catholic history.


 A well known example: Giordano Bruno, who denied such Catholic doctrines as eternal damnation, the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, the virginity of Mary and transubstantiation. He was found guilty and burned at the stake in 1600.


 Protestants have also dealt with failures to conform to Protestant orthodoxy by methods far in excess of any used by 'woke' people. To give just one, well-known example, Michael Servetus rejected the doctrine and other Roman Catholic doctrines. He was condemned by the Catholic Church in France and fled to Calvinist Geneva. He was denounced by Calvin and burned at the stake for heresy in 1553, by the order of the governing council of Geneva.


The pretence that British history has been overwhelmingly or almost always a a force for good is is contradicted by many, many events.


I'd include in the ong list of exceptions this, the execution of Thomas Aikenhead for blasphemy, but this execution was as long ago as 1697. So far as I'm aware, the much more recent phenomenon of 'wokeism,' for all its harmful effects, has never executed anyone. Censoring of books has been an established, official practice of the R.C Church. The 'Index Librorum Prohibitorum' ('List of Prohibited Books') contained books which Catholics were forbidden to read. It included books deemed heretical or contrary to morals.


Books placed on the prohibited list included Kant's monumental 'Critique of Pure Reason,' Pascal's ' Penseés' (with notes by Voltaire), Spinoza's 'Tractatus Theologico-Politicus,' Locke's 'An Essay Concerning Human Understanding,' John Stuart Mill's 'Principles of Political Economy,' Edward Gibbon's 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,' Flaubert's 'Madame Bovary' - and all the works of the philosopher David Hume, all the works of Zola and all the works of Sartre.  


Here, in its zealous pursuit of 'error,' wokeism comes close to the hideous record of the Roman Catholic Church or even surpasses it in some ways. The penalties for offending may be severe, if nowhere near as severe as execution. Over the centuries, Roman Catholics have persecuted orthodox protestants and orthodox protestants have persecuted Roman Catholics, often forcing them into hiding and often executing them when discovered.   Well into the 19th century, members of Oxford and Cambridge University were required to subscribe to the Thirty-Nine articles of the Church of England, the statement of faith and practice which amongst much else articulated the doctrine of the Trinity and doctrines of sin and salvation which have hideous implications - I touch upon this briefly below. The universities were far from being havens of sanity and unfettered debate before the advent of 'wokeism.'  


It would take a long time to give a summary of the ridiculous aspects and harmful effects associated with one Roman Catholic doctrine alone, baptism. Here, Protestant views are surely less ridiculous, less harmful (but, as I explain later, Protestant doctrines of salvation and redemption are very often much more ridiculous and harmful than Roman Catholic doctrines: the contrast between salvation by faith and salvation by works.  


As in other parts of this comment, I must be brief, in full awareness that this collection of brief comments is adding up to a very long comment as things usually go in You Tube comment sections.   Roman Catholic doctrines of the sacraments are markedly different from Protestant doctrines. The sacrament of baptism has very often been thought essential for salvation in the Roman Catholic Church.   Augustine (the Augustine of Hippo, North Africa, not the Augustine of Canterbury) seems to have changed his views on baptism. In one sermon of his, he claimed that only people who had received baptism could be saved, a belief shared by many early Christians. A passage in 'City of God' may possibly indicate a belief that children born of Christian parents who died unbaptized were not necessarily doomed to hell. The Roman Catholic Church has in general shown the utmost reluctance to concede that unbaptized children could be admitted to heaven, hence the extension of doctrine to include the state of 'Limbo' for unbaptized babies, neither heaven nor hell. I'd say that 'woke' beliefs in general don't quite reach the ridiculousness of all this.   Modern Catholic discussions of baptism equal or surpass in ridiculousness 'woke' views. A short extract from an article on the site




  with a title which reflects the Website address, 'Emergencies and baptism: will soda water do?'   'A red pickup truck was overturned by the side of the road. The driver lay on the grass, thrown clear of the vehicle, crumpled, bleeding and unresponsive. A young man pulled his car off the road and sprinted to the side of the dying man.  He called 911, then rushed back to his car and grabbed the waxed cup from a fast-food restaurant that was in the cup holder of his car. It held some melting ice and water, left over from a soda he’d drank earlier in the day. He poured the water from the melted ice over the man’s forehead with the words, “I baptize you in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” The man died a few minutes before the ambulance arrived.    'The next day, the young man posted the question on a Catholic Q&A site: “I’m just wondering — was it a valid baptism?”   The helpful advice offered in the article included this, 'For a valid baptism of an adult, the Church requires an unbaptized person and pure water.' It gives this quotation from the 'Catholic Encyclopedia:'   Water derived from melted ice, snow, or hail is ... valid. … As to a mixture of water and some other material, it is held as proper matter, provided the water certainly predominates and the mixture would still be called water. Invalid matter is every liquid that is not usually designated true water. Such are oil, saliva, wine, tears, milk, sweat, beer, soup, the juice of fruits and any mixture containing water which men would no longer call water.'  


As for doctrines of salvation, redemption, orthodox evangelical views are unsurpassed for their hideous implications, but are widely shared by other Christians. 'Saint' Paul taught that the eternal destiny of a person is decided by faith or lack of faith in Jesus Christ as 'personal lord and saviour.' There are countless statements of Christian faith which present this bleak view. This is from a page of the Christian Police Association with the title 'Faith.'   'We Believe ... that 'those who have died having believed and received forgiveness will be raised, and together with those believers who are still alive, will be taken to live with Christ forever. Those who have refused to believe will be condemned from God’s presence forever.'  


The Oakes Holiday Centre in Sheffield, which tries to mix fun with Christianity, can find no fun in this 'Statement of Belief' on their Website: 'The Lord Jesus Christ will return in person, to judge everyone, to execute God's just condemnation on those who have not repented and to receive the redeemed to eternal glory.'  


These are some implications of these statements and similar statements from Christian Churches all over the country, all over the world. The list could be extended indefinitely. According to this doctrine of redemption, commonplace in Christian circles:


 All police officers are doomed to spend eternity in hell, except for the minority of police officers who have accepted Jesus Christ as personal lord and saviour, including police officers killed in action. 


 All the troops who liberated the concentration camps and extermination camps are consigned to hell, except for the minority of Jesus Christ accepters.   All the people executed by the Nazis for saving the lives of Jews are consigned to hell, except for that minority.  


Time to mention the case of one person, Ernst Biberstein, who studied theology and became a pastor. During the Second World War, he was the commanding officer of Einsatktommando 6, which executed thousands of people. The Einsatzkommandos were a sub-group of the Einsatzgruppen, mobile killing squads, who exterminated Jews and others in the territories captured by the German forces as they advanced Eastwards. After the war, he was tried and sentenced to death but the sentence was commuted. He was released in 1958 and returned to the clergy.  


There seems reason to believe that he was a committed Christian and qualified for salvation according to the orthodox Christian view, or one view of the orthodox Christian view. There's every reason to believe that virtually all the people massacred by his execution squads and the other Einsatzgruppen were not qualified for salvation according to the orthodox Christian view, every reason to believe that virtually all the people killed in the Nazi gas chambers were unqualified for salvation, according to this deranged doctrine. There may well have been some Christian converts amongst them, but the victims were overwhelmingly Jews, without a belief in Christ as Lord and Saviour.  


Loving mothers and fathers, loving mothers and fathers who have looked after disabled children, are all consigned to hell, unless they belong to that minority of believers. And what of the fate of the disabled children themselves - are they saved or damned? The Bible gives no information about an age above which young people qualify for damnation. I know of no Christian discussions of the issue, although there must surely be some.  


And this: all supporters of the New Culture Forum are consigned to hell according to these doctrines, unless, again, they belong that minority of believers. Peter Whittle, who says that he isn't a religious man, is certainly destined for hellfire, according to orthodox evangelical belief and not just evangelical belief - unless he changes his mind, perhaps as a result of a miraculous conversion. Many, many Christians pray for that kind of thing.  


The belief that all composers go to hell is yet another consequence. So, to give just one example, Dmitri Shostakovich: hell. Johann Sebastian Bach, heaven.   All the working people who have done backbreaking and dangerous work - or backbreaking and dangerous work - are damned, including ones killed in pit disasters, in industrial accidents, all doomed - apart from the believing minority. The Christian Police Association also has this belief: 'We Believe that the Bible, as originally given, is the inspired Word of God without error and is the only complete authority in all matters of faith and doctrine.'  

On to other matters in this brisk tour of Christian theological artefacts.


A fascinating/ridiculous page   https://anglican.ink/2022/05/21/growth-decline-and-extinction-of-uk-churches/



gives 'Estimated Extinction Dates for UK Churches.'   'The Church of England and Catholics should last until the second half of the century. However, they need to take urgent action now. Stemming losses is not enough. None of us can prevent ageing! Whatever their current denominational emphases, they should put all aside to encourage members to make new disciples who can replicate themselves. Praying for an outpouring of the Holy Spirit would not go amiss either.


'Sadly, the immediate future looks bleak for the Church in Wales, Church of Scotland, Episcopalians, Methodists, and older Welsh nonconformists. They need to seriously ask themselves how they have gotten themselves into a situation where extinction is less than 30 years away.' Extinction is hardly likely to be complete extinction. There will surely be isorated Christian believers and pockets of Christian believers and larger groups, although not numerically very large. The consequence, if orthodox Christians are to be believed (but they shouldn't be believed, not for one moment) is that the percentage of people headed for hell will increase enormously - an enormous contrast with the situation in the ages of faith, when Christians persecuted ferociously Christians with different shades of belief and non-Christians but there were so many people who did accept Christ as their Saviour.



Conservative Woman and Christianity



which now calls itself 'TCW' promotes a form of Conservatism which would be rejected by most supporters of the Conservative Party, although some views promoted by the site would be accepted. I had an article accepted for publication on the site, before I knew nearly enough about 'Conservative Woman.'  It was published on January 7, 2020.




A few short extracts from the article:


The membership list of MPs is strewn with errors ... According to the list, Simon Danczuk is the current MP for Rochdale. Mr Danczuk was suspended by the Labour Party in 2015 after it was claimed that he had sent explicit messages to a 17-year-old girl. He was banned by Labour from standing as a candidate, resigned from the party and was replaced as MP for Rochdale by Anthony Lloyd in 2017 ... Currently, 131 MPs support our work in Parliament.’ The actual number is far fewer at 93. You would have thought that some of them at least would have looked at the list to find out about changes – who had joined, who had left. You would have thought that a good look at the website was an absolute priority for Lisa Nandy when she took over [as Chair of Labour Friends of Palestine and the Middle East.']

The comments on one single page of the site 'Conservative Woman' from one commenter, a Protestant who calls himself 'Reformed Gentleman,' to another commenter, a Roman Catholic:

' ... you're still unhinged. I've no time for RC garbage ...'
'Are you deranged? You want to talk 'biblical' yet you cite your heretical garbage?'
'Yeah, you're still rambling, heretic. Do you ever ask yourself why you cannot derive your weird little beliefs from the Bible?'
'Subjectivist bullpoop, Catholicism personified.'
' ... there's the RC subjectivist bullpoop. Thank you, heretic.'
'You're an utter cretin. Your position is anti-objectivity and therefore champions my own view over yours ... Yikes!'
'You're a joke. Abandon the dramatics.'
'Look to your own anti-Gospel grabage (sic), heretic.'
'Wow, look at the deceitful Romanist. Bless you, heretic.'
'Tell me, Romanist heretic, where in the Bible can you find your latest wokist rant?'
'Utter drivel. What a waste of bandwidth.'
'Yes, heretic, your rambling garbage aside, we reformed know where we got the canon ...'
'Oh my. The emition (sic) is palpable. Where's your Bible, heretic?'
'Pathetic. You cowardly heretic.'



I'll give an assortment of evidence to justify the claim that Christianity is a liability for anti-woke sites, that although  woke views are in general ridiculous and harmful, they are less ridiculous and less harmful than the views of orthodox  Christian doctrine.  It's a long comment  but it could easily be much, much longer. Anti-woke people who find it too much effort to follow discussions which are thorough - nobody is forcing you to read any of this. Post your complaints if you feel inclined - if, that is, you can summon up the energy to post a one-or-two liner, probably not more, but nobody is compelled to read your complaints either ... [The remainder of the comment is provided as the last comment in this section. Not all the comments in this section are about Christianity. The material on Christianity is quite detailed - but may be useful as background information, and it leaves no room for doubt as to my reasons for thinking that orthodox Christian belief is vastly more ridiculous and harmful than the views of 'woke' people. I'm sure I can assume that all the people who signed the Open Letter are 'woke' people. ]



[The 'mocked, reviled and pelted with eggs Pastor here was protesting against a Gay Pride Event.]

From the Pastor's article: 'A video report on Sky News used the term ‘religious bigotry’ to describe our Christian testimony. Whatever happened to impartial reporting? Why did the reporter not come over to us and ask some questions? She would have found out that we are perfectly capable of engaging in civilised debate.

If the Pastor ever made use of the opportunity to have a 'civilized debate' with Sky News about homosexuality, I'd recommend to Sky News asking him for a comment on the material to be found in the Wikipedia 'List of people executed for homosexuality in Europe.'


If homosexuals loathe his orthodox views on homosexuality, it has something to do with awareness of what orthodox Christians have done to homosexuals over the centuries. They would loathe them even more the more they know about the horrific facts. Among the punishments mentioned in the article, including some from this country:

A German cross-dressing lesbian executed for heresy against nature
They were pierced in their tongues, hanged and burned; they were also charged with blasphemy.
German from Augsburg; burned in Rome with 3 heretics
From Augsburg; one burned, other 4 (all ecclesiastics) bound hand and foot in a wooden cage to starve[
both drowned in a barrel
Lesbian, drowned
Burned at Tudela for "heresy with his body"

And from the UK:

His trial was at the Old Bailey in November, where he was convicted of having "a venereal affair" with James Hankinson. He was hanged at Newgate. He was hanged with a forger, Ann Hurle - they were led out of Debtor's Door and rather than the New Drop they were hanged by a cart being driven from under them.
"Spershott's hanging was perhaps the last occasion at which was performed the folk ritual of the hangman passing the dead man's hands over the neck and bosoms of young women as a cure for glandular enlargements."
The last two men to be hanged for homosexuality in England. [1835]

Is Pastor Peter Simpson perfectly capable of engaging in civilized debate or perfectly capable of becoming evasive when confronted by harsh realities?



Sky News Australia

Comment posted in the Comments section of a video of Sky News Australia.

Hampshire Police has blundered, Laurence Fox (who manipulated a gay pride flag to form a swastika) has blundered, the veteran was badly mistaken, so many anti-woke sites are badly mistaken in their interpretation of the events and now you're badly mistaken as well. The anti-woke sites and Sky News Australia are badly mistaken not about every aspect of the case but about a central aspect of the case.


Without thinking, you were quick to see the case with anti-woke vision - but the case raised issues which needed a very different perspective.


A central issue which has been neglected by the anti-woke media: it's essential not to equate the Nazis with people who are obviously not Nazis, such as people involved with gay pride events. To use the word 'Nazi' indiscriminately, negligently, without giving any thought to the barbarities which put the Nazis in a category apart - their cruelties rivalled by the cruelties which occurred in Stalinist Russia but exceeding them - has to be condemned. People generally know about Auschwitz and Belsen and Dachau and perhaps more concentration and extermination camps, and about some of the horrors which took place during the Nazi domination of Europe, but might benefit by enlarging their knowledge. The mobile killing units, the Einsatzgruppen, which accompanied Nazi forces during the invasion of Russia, are not common knowledge, perhaps, but their contribution to the horrors which took place under Nazi domination was immense.


To equate the men of the Einsatzgruppen who shot vast numbers of people, including babies and their mothers, in some cases, for bravado, killing both with a single bullet, with the actions (and antics) of gay pride is very wrong - despicable. It would be like saying of a gay activist, 'he's the worst person whose ever lived.' It would be an abandonment of all balance and fair-mindedness, completely ridiculous but also very disturbing.


I live in a country, England, whose wartime achievements are reason for intense pride, without forgetting that we were aided by people from many other countries. You Australians live in a country whose wartime achievements are reason for intense pride. Your achievements are beyond praise. 'Pride' is a word which tends to be overused and misused, like the word 'celebrate.' Limited achievements, very limited achievements, non-existent achievements are so often treated as 'awesome.' Some people seem to be forever 'celebrating' this and that.


To give just one example of those wartime achievements, the perilous low-level attack by RAF Mosquito planes on the Gestapo headquarters at Aarhus, Denmark which freed members of the Danish resistance in Gestapo captivity, which killed many members of the Gestapo and which destroyed Gestapo files, including ones on the Danish resistance. The attack has been described as the most successful one of its kind during the Second World War. But obviously there are countless more. Pride in the part played by Britain and Australia, and New Zealand and other countries in the Second World War is not just justifiable but to be encouraged.


The arrest of the veteran was obviously not just counter-productive but wrong, but anyone who supposes that being arrested by Hampshire Police can be equated with being arrested by the Gestapo is badly mistaken. The members of the allied armed forces who faced flame-throwers in battle, who risked being torn limb from limb, who faced all kinds of other dangers, dangers, in the Atlantic and Pacific, in all spheres of action, deserve not to have their achievements diminished by comparing the swastika, the symbol of hideous Nazi brutality, with the Gay Pride Flag. Hampshire Police mishandled the matter and made bad mistakes but they are no more Nazis than the Gay Pride people.


The Swastika is an ugly, hideous symbol of fanaticism and cruelty. It's not a symbol which lends itself to a Laurence Fox publicity stunt. There are different ways of regarding his manipulation of the images but I think they must all amount to adverse judgment on him. I get the impression that there's complacency in many parts of the anti-woke camp. Someone who is anti-woke may even believe that the anti-woke cause matters more than any other cause, or most other causes - another bad mistake.


 Democratic, advanced societies face a vast range of problems, call upon a vast range of skills, are intrinsically intricate. Woke mistakes are only part of the whole and anti-woke activity is only part of the whole. Police forces may be sadly deficient in some respects whilst being efficient, good, perhaps outstanding in so many others. To suppose that they should be judged primarily for their action or lack of action in aiding the anti-woke movement is very wide of the mark. To overlook the fact that they face violence often, that they are sometimes injured in the course of duty, that a significant part of their work is unpleasant and intensely difficult is mistaken. It's essential to take into account the fact that their work often calls for great versatility and that inevitably, some or many members of police forces will be found wanting. It's essential to view these issues without smugness, without the delusions and illusions which can easily occur when people are sitting at their computers in a place of safety judging people who often have to work in conditions which aren't safe.


The atrocious misuse by woke people of 'safe,' as in 'safe spaces,' has to be condemned severely, but anti-woke people may lack appreciation of physical dangers, the kind that the police often have to face. The police forces which protect society against all kinds of threats can't, realistically, protect society against all threats.


Anti-woke candidates in elections are never or hardly ever electable, because their speciality, anti-woke studies, doesn't address so many of the problems which societies face. Anti-woke people can't possibly claim immunity from reasonable, fair-minded criticism. There is such a person as the anti-woke 'snowflake,' who can't face criticism. Anti-woke people who can dish out criticism but can't take it should try a different field for their talents, if they have any. I certainly don't claim immunity from criticism myself. I won't give any details here, but over the years, I've worked energetically to oppose 'woke' views (I'm not at all keen on the word 'woke,' but for convenience, I've used it.) If anyone wants to make criticisms of my views, go ahead.




GB News


In the column to the right: Some objections to Christian belief. In this column:

GB News: banning, blocking and censorship

GB News: Christian religion


This section on GB News is a very new section of the page. The material here will be revised and extended. The emphasis will be upon GB News and Christian belief but the first item here is concerned with GB News and the death penalty and what seems to me to have been a clear-cut case of banning / blocking / censorship on the part of GB News. I'll be concentrating my attention on these GB News people: Emma Webb, Calvin Robinson, Patrick Christys, Neil Oliver. There'll also be material on guests appearing in GB News programmes. There's already material  on some of them,


Peter Hitchens (the material on Peter Hitchens is  facetious, in part), Tim Stanley , 'Fr' Daniel French, Michael Phillips of the Christian Legal Centre.  There'll also be material on people linked with GB News in other ways.


There will be supplementary material on people with an indirect connection with GB News or relevant to the issues I discuss, such as orthodox Evangelicals or Anglo-Catholics.   One reason for including such people. Emma Webb and Calvin Robinson sometimes claim, in effect, that the Church of England has been taken over by 'woke' views. The profiles of these people are a reminder that this amounts to falsification. However, I intend to discuss  some non-Christians who have an indirect connection with GB News or are relevant to the issues I discuss.


 I recognize that GB News does have some strengths, just as individuals I criticize may have strengths, and substantial strengths.


GB News has this important difference from secular news outlets. Secular news outlets never remind their readers or viewers of the dread importance of their 'eternal destiny.' Calvin Robinson has done just that. GB News regularly includes prayers in its programmes.


The majority of GB News employees will be non-Christians, the majority of GB News viewers will be non-Christians, despite what some of them may think - the people who might describe themselves as 'C of E' but who have never committed themselves to 'The Lord Jesus,' who 'died on the cross for our sins.' Their eternal destiny, according to orthodox Christian theories of redemption, will be with the devoted parents who cared for disabled children, the Jews who died in the extermination camps, the troops who liberated concentration camps or risked their lives on the Atlantic convoys or the Arctic convoys or in North Africa, in all the theatres of war, in all the villages, towns and cities of this country and any other country - everyone sharing the same hideous fate, apart from the minority of true believers, Emma Webb, Calvin Robinson and Father Daniel French, to name just a few.


These are considerations which never arise in the case of secular or semi-secular news organizations but which do arise in the case of GB News, 'God Squad News.' Its activities are wide-ranging and very varied, to name a few,  whipping up hysteria, reinforcing prejudices, using falsification by generalization - but its activities are often informed by common sense and vigorous pursuit of fraudulent thinking, most of the time oblivious to its own shortage of common sense and its own fraudulent thinking.


I oppose their illusions and delusions as well as  illusions and delusions they oppose.


GBNews: banning, blocking and censorship


Copy of an email sent to GB News, 22/08/2023


I posted a comment on your Youtube page 'Death Penalty. Should the UK bring back capital punishment?'


It wasn't accepted. The comment is courteous and it contains relevant information, surely. GB News should avoid banning, blocking and censorship for no good reason. The fact that a comment is regarded as 'inconvenient' isn't a good reason in the least. I tried again and it was rejected again. It seems that I'll have to use the opportunities available to me to publicize this issue, the issue of banning and blocking.

The rejected comment:  

From the Website of the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) in the United States: 'Many people assume that the state saves money by employing the death penalty since an executed person no longer requires confinement, health care, and related expenses. But in the modern application of capital punishment, that assumption has been proved wrong. The death penalty is far more expensive than a system utilizing life-without-parole-sentences as an alternative punishment.'  

The DPIC page https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/costs   gives detailed reasons why it's more expensive to execute than to imprison for a whole life term.  A summary of a recent cost study in the United States: Death penalty case costs were counted through to execution. Median cost: $1.26 million. Non-death penalty case costs were counted through to the end of incarceration. Median cost: $740,000.


A very large amount of information from individual states is available, to give just one example, a wide-ranging study from Oklahoma, which found that 'seeking the death penalty in Oklahoma capital cases cost 3.2 times more than non-capital cases on average.' The researchers concluded: 'It is a simple fact that seeking the death penalty is more expensive. There is not one credible study, to our knowledge, that presents evidence to the contrary.'

The arguments against the death penalty go far beyond the economic arguments. I attended an event where there were three men who had been sentenced to death in California. They had been released from death row after it was found that they were innocent. In the last 50 years, more than 190 people who had been sentenced to death in the United States have been found to be innocent and released from death row.

The notion that the death penalty is 'a vital weapon in the hands of the justice system ... ' is very wide of the mark. In the United States, the fact that there are executing states and non-executing states makes available a very large amount of comparative evidence. Just one aspect of a very big issue: A survey by the New York Times found that states without the death penalty have lower homicide rates than states with the death penalty. ' ... During the last 20 years, the homicide rate in states with the death penalty has been 48% - 101% higher than in states with the death penalty.' From the page

The death penalty won't be restored in this country. GB News is wasting its time and encouraging hysterical reactions by treating restoration of the death penalty as a realistic possibility. Any of your pro-death-penalty followers who don't know about the case of Timothy Evans, hanged on 9 March 1950 after being wrongfully convicted, would benefit by finding out more. This was one of the cases which played a major part in the abolition of capital punishment for murder in this country 1965. Capital punishment was later abolished for all crimes. This country won't be joining the diminishing list of executing countries.


GBNews and Christian religion


Here, I intend to give argument and evidence to substantiate my view that GBNews is very misguided in its general support for Christian belief. I intend to criticize in particular Emma Webb and Calvin Robinson and, also, another presenter who so far as I know is not a Christian believer but someone whose views and approach have, I think, unexpected linkages with Christianity or relevance to the general GB approach to Christianity: Neil Oliver.  I also intend to comment  briefly  on some Christians  who have appeared in GB News programmes, such as Fr Daniel French of Holy Trinity Church, Salcombe. Like Calvin Robinson, he would describe himself as an 'evangelical (Anglo) Catholic.'


There's already some critical comment on Emma Webb in the section in the column to the left  The New Culture Forum and Emma Webb).


I've generally added comments to You Tube videos and other sites every few months and every few years, although recently, I've posted comments more often - I intend to revert to commenting much less often. I'm not in the least a prolific commenter on any sites, apart from this site, of course. I don't add comments to You Tube video pages or other sites with the objective of including the comments on a page of this site. Most of the comments I've added haven't been included on this site, but from time to time,  I do include some, as now.


Another comment I added to a GB News You Tube video,  originally posted on the page




I'll quote the comment now, in full. It will introduce a few of the issues I intend to discuss later. It's followed by 'Matters arising' (which will be revised and extended.) To skip the Comment and go to the Matters arising, please click on a link:


Matters Arising 1
Matters Arising 2
Matters Arising 3
Matters Arising 4
Matters Arising 5
Matters Arising 6
Matters Arising 7


GB News is  a liability, an embarrassment, even. I take the view that the good work of GB News people is undermined and damaged by the work of the orthodox Christian believers amongst your staff. I recognize, of course, that orthodox Christian believers can talk and write good sense on matters unrelated to their faith. 'The Church of England can either push woke agendas or defend the faith ...' Can Calvin Robinson and Emma Webb defend their faith? No, not at all, I think. It's certainly not at all likely. Here's a selection of questions. I don't expect answers to these questions in a future GB News production, that would be asking too much - it would obviously be asking the impossible - but perhaps some of the secularist staff of GB News could do a little probing and elicit some information from the orthodox Christians, informally.


On the evidence available to me, Calvin Robinson combines evangelical beliefs with Anglo-Catholic beliefs. Presumably, then, he believes in justification by faith: he believes that acceptance of Christ as personal Lord and Saviour is essential for salvation. Does he believe that 'good works' are not enough for salvation? Does he believe that sin doesn't preclude salvation, provided that the person has accepted Christ as saviour? Does he believe in the reality of hell? Does he believe that orthodox Christians who have been guilty of gross sexual abuse - John Smyth is one of many examples - spend eternity in union with Christ? Does he believe that the destiny of non-believers amongst GB News staff, and supporters of GB News, is very different - eternal separation? Does he believe that loving parents of disabled children - and the disabled children themselves - go to hell if they never accept Christ as Lord and Saviour? I asked an evangelical Christian if he could cite any 'age limit' for salvation - below that age, there would be no condemnation to eternal separation, or, in the colourful language of orthodox Christianity, to hellfire. I asked this evangelical, do you have a view of this? Do you believe that a ten year old or a five year old can go to hell? He said that he knew of no such exemption. Can Calvin Robinson or Emma Webb outline the orthodox view and their own view? They may not be the same in this case.Can they offer any 'Biblical evidence' or 'Biblical proofs' or quotations from the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas or the early Church fathers, anything at all which they think may be helpful?


Calvin Robinson has an orthodox view of the sacraments, I presume. Would he share my view that 'Saint' Augustine's view of the 'sacrament' of infant baptism is hideous and barbaric? Augustine believed that babies and infants who died unbaptized spend eternity in hell. Do Calvin Robinson and Emma Webb take a 'common sense' view of the issues? Is a common sense view possible? What view do they take? Can Calvin Robinson explain his view of the 'real presence'? Does he believe in transubstantiation, the view that the bread and wine of Holy Communion / Mass become the actual body and blood of Christ, that this is not just a matter of symbolism? My view is that his Catholic beliefs, like his evangelical beliefs, far surpass Woke views in their stupidity.


I think that Calvin Robinson and Emma Webb should do some explaining, although, as I've mentioned, I don't think they would be willing to do it in a GB News video. There are a very large number of other objections I could make but this will have to do. Already, you've received comments from a large number of orthodox Christians. Any chance of a comment on objections to orthodox Christianity, or would that be too much trouble? Are your orthodox Christian commenters ready and willing to 'defend the faith?' I have to say that, based on long experience of orthodox Christians, I have very low expectations of such people. I don't think there will be many, if any, who will be willing to defend Christian orthodoxy. Too much like hard work.


Matters arising:


Matters Arising 1.


Emma Webb used 'Biblical Proof' or 'God's Word' in the form of quotations from the Gospels to corroborate her claim that Jesus had predicted the kind of problems faced by Christians today. She quoted the texts out of context. She ignored the ignorance and dark implications of the context. She showed not the least understanding of a very different kind of problem faced by Christians now - making sense of the chaotic, contradictory Biblical 'evidence,' its remoteness from humane values.

Amongst the texts she quoted is this, from Matthew 10:22. She used the English Standard Version. Below, I quote this extract and some other extracts from Matthew 10, using the 'Good News Translation.'

1. Jesus called his twelve disciples together and gave them authority to drive out evil spirits and to heal every disease and every sickness. 

14. And if some home or town will not welcome you or listen to you, then leave that place and shake the dust off your feet. 15 I assure you that on the Judgment Day God will show more mercy to the people of Sodom and Gomorrah than to the people of that town!

22.    Everyone will hate you because of me....

28. Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather be afraid of God, who can destroy both body and soul in hell. 


1. She may believe that the disciples could 'heal every disease and every sickness.' For many, many centuries, Christians believed that curing disease was a theological matter, not a matter to do with patient research, the development of techniques, all the complex knowledge which makes up the astonishing achievement of modern medicine. As a result, Christian communities were devastated periodically by plague and other diseases.

The New Testament has many references to driving out demons. Present day Christians often believe in demons and some of them try to drive out demons. In a Church not far from here, there was an attempt to drive out 'demons' from a person in an attempt to 'cure' this man's homosexuality. The case is being investigated by Barnardo's.

A concise summary of some events in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah were supposedly 'wicked.' Traditionally, the wickedness involved homoexual acts. In modern times, the wickedness has been claimed to be of a different kind, simple lack of hospitality. God rains down fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, yet another instance of mass murder on the part of God, the killing of men and women, children and babies.  Angels make a crowd blind. Lot's wife looks back, despite being warned by angels, and is turned into a pillar of salt.

Is Emma Webb convinced that God and his helpers, the angels, actually carried out these acts?

28. Hellfire - but New Testament references to hell are full of difficulties. In the Bible, 'Hell' is translated by different words. Christian believers again and again overlook the fact that when they quote Biblical verses in the King James version or others, they are using translations. They overlook the pitfalls of translation. This is the New Testament original of 'rather be afraid of God, who can destroy both body and soul in hell.'

μᾶλλον τὸν δυνάμενον καὶ ἀπολέσαι ἐν γεέννῃ

The last word here 'γεέννῃ' is 'Gehenna,' a valley in Jerusalem, very different in its associations from 'hell' but an analogue of the Lake of Fire in Jewish and Christian tradition. Some scholars have suggested that Gehenna many not be synonymous with the lake of fire but a prophetic metaphor for the fate that awaited the civilians killed in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. The word is used 13 times in 11 different verses of the King James Bible.

Whatever her view of Sodom and Gomorrah, demons and evil spirits, cures by faith healing rather than modern medicine, heaven and hellfire, what is GB News playing at by giving her the opportunity to preach to its viewers and by giving Calvin Robinson the opportunity to preach online?

Matters Arising 2.


Emma Webb and Calvin Robinson, GB News as a whole, concentrate their attention on 'Woke' views in the Church of England and claim that this is evidence that the Church of England is finished, that it has been overrun by Woke propagandists. This is to ignore completely the fact that orthodox Christian faith is represented in the majority of dioceses and parishes. Conservative evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics have far more power within the Church of England than the Wokeists.


 Matters Arising 3.


Emma Webb and Calvin Robinson, GB News as a whole ignore almost completely one massive problem, the very large number of cases of sexual and other abuse in the Church of England, as well as the Roman Catholic Church. My page Abuse, safeguarding, faith: The Churches and their failures  can only touch upon some of the grim cases. Whenever I read about cases of abuse in the Churches and can obtain information about the beliefs of the abusers, I find that the abusers seem to have orthodox Christian beliefs. Abuse in the churches is a failure of orthodoxy, not of liberal or woke forms of Christianity, which have their own defects, but very different ones.


Again and again, Emma Webb and Calvin Robinson, attempt to reinforce the view that abuse in the Churches is not an important issue, or not an issue which they need to publicize. GB News as a whole is reinforcing the same view. They are making the same mistakes - very bad mistakes - outlined in reports of  the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse. An extract:


The Inquiry identified a number of concerns regarding the culture of the Church.

4.1. Clericalism: Power was vested chiefly in the clergy, without accountability to external or independent agencies or individuals. A culture of clericalism existed in which the moral authority of clergy was widely perceived as beyond reproach. They benefited from deferential treatment so that their conduct was not questioned, enabling some to abuse children and vulnerable adults. In the third public hearing Bishop Hancock (then Lead Bishop on Safeguarding) agreed that “issues of clericalism and deference have allowed abuse to be covered up and the voices of the vulnerable to be silenced”. In his view, “the abuse of power has been perhaps the most significant reason why abuse has been allowed to foster” in the Church of England.

4.2. Tribalism: Within the Church, there was disproportionate loyalty to members of one’s own ‘tribe’ (a group within an institution, based upon close personal ties and shared beliefs). This extended inappropriately to safeguarding practice, with the protection of some accused of child sexual abuse. Perpetrators were defended by their peers, who also sought to reintegrate them into Church life without consideration of the welfare or protection of children and vulnerable adults. Contributors to the Inquiry’s Truth Project, who described their abuse in religious contexts, said that they were “disbelieved, discredited and not supported after disclosing their experiences of sexual abuse”.

4.3. Naivety: There was and is a view amongst some parishioners and clergy that their religious practices and adherence to a moral code made sexual abuse of children very unlikely or indeed impossible. Reports of abuse were on occasions dismissed without investigation. There are some within the Church exploring how to respond to these attitudes through academic research.

4.4. Reputation: The primary concern of many senior clergy was to uphold the Church’s reputation, which was prioritised over victims and survivors. Senior clergy often declined to report allegations to statutory agencies, preferring to manage those accused internally for as long as possible. This hindered criminal investigations and enabled some abusers to escape justice. In her review of the Peter Ball case, Dame Moira Gibb concluded that senior clergy placed more emphasis on the Church’s high standing than on the welfare of victims and survivors.Church leaders sought to keep allegations out of the public domain and the resulting lack of engagement with external agencies helped to create a culture of “almost unchallengeable authority” in the Church.

4.5. Sexuality: There was a culture of fear and secrecy within the Church about sexuality. Some members of the Church also wrongly conflated homosexuality with the sexual abuse of children and vulnerable adults. There was a lack of transparency, open dialogue and candour about sexual matters, together with an awkwardness about investigating such matters. This made it difficult to challenge sexual behaviour. Mr Colin Perkins, diocesan safeguarding adviser (DSA) for the Diocese of Chichester, told us that homosexual clergy may have found themselves inadvertently “under the same cloak” as child sexual abusers, who sought to mask their behaviour “in the same cultural hiding place”.

5. In May 2019, the Inquiry published its thematic report Child Sexual Abuse in the Context of Religious Institutions, which included accounts from those abused by individuals within the Church of England. Many contributors saw their perpetrators as prominent members of society, with “privilege, respect and reverence” by virtue of their influential positions; their actions were “never questioned” and their ability to abuse was “never contemplated”.The report stated that the “particularly high regard and trust placed in religious institutions” amongst other factors facilitated abuse and discouraged appropriate responses to allegations in the Church.

Matters Arising 4.

The policies and practice of Emma Webb, Calvin Robinson and others at GB News are actively harmful. GB News is a distorting, self-censoring news organization in these aspects of its work. Neil Oliver is a gloomy presence whose (relative) popularity depends upon his telling a section of the GB News public just what they want to hear. His sober demeanour, gross generalizations, simplifications  and exaggerations are successful in whipping up a degree of frenzy and hysteria. Some others at GB News do the same or try to do the same, but the long-term reputation of GB News won't survive these trashy efforts. GB News has to do far more than this if it wants to become far more than a  footnote in the history of media.

Matters Arising 5.

Emma Webb and Calvin Robinson have agendas - not hidden agendas, of course, but public agendas - which include evangelism, conversion. People with religious or ideological agendas who work in supposedly general media organizations have to be very careful. The media organizations which employ them have to be very careful. GB News hasn't been at all careful. GB News has been negligent and reckless but throughout, it has at least supported the principle of freedom of expression,  in the comments sections of its  You Tube videos and is many of its programmes.

Matters Arising 6.

Calvin Robinson underestimates the difficulties and complications of the Anglo-Catholic and Roman Catholic sacraments.


Understanding the invalid baptism controversy: a guide for catholics




In  February, the Diocese of Phoenix announced that thousands of infant baptisms that had been performed by a local pastor were in fact invalid as a result of one incorrect word. In the official rite of baptism, the baptizing priest is required to say, “I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.” But in Phoenix, the priest had instead been using the first person plural pronoun, “we,” seemingly to indicate that the priest was baptizing the child on behalf of the entire Catholic community.


The announcement, along with the pastor’s resignation, devastated many in his parish and clearly confused Catholics everywhere else, as they wondered what exactly this meant for them and the church. Could their own baptisms or weddings suddenly someday be declared invalid in this way?




In 2020, the Rev. Matthew Hood, a priest in Michigan, discovered while watching a home video that his own baptism had been done using an invalid formula, which meant not only that his own baptism and ordination were invalid but also that all of the baptisms, weddings and other sacraments that he had ever performed as a priest were invalid.


If Calvin Robinson is ordained, according to the Roman Catholic Church, his ordination will be invalid. It would be invalid if the ordination were performed by the Church of England, not the much, much smaller Free Church of England which made him a Deacon.


The Church of England recognizes the orders of the Free Church of England. Not so the Roman Catholic Church. It recognizes the orders of neither church. All the people ordained by these churches are invalidly ordained, according to the Roman Catholic Church.


Pope Leo XIII issued an apostolic letter in 1896 called Apostolicae curae which declared that all Anglican ordinations are 'absolutely null and utterly void.' This applies to the consecration of Anglican priests and bishops: invalid since the 16th century. Anglo-Catholic priests and bishops who imagine that during Communion they are converting the bread and wine into the actual body and blood of Christ are mistaken, according to this pronouncement of the Pope (who was speaking ex cathedra, a guarantee of infallibility according to Roman Catholic doctrine.) Ex cathedra pronouncements are supposedly infallible when the subject is a matter of 'morals' as well as 'faith.'


Glimpses into the madhouse of Roman Catholicism. Non-Roman Catholics have their own versions.


Matters Arising 7


A claim made in the text which accompanies the video: 'The Church of England can either push woke political agendas or defend the faith. It can't do both.'


Alan Billings, the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner, has been doing both.


Police and Crime Commissioners are supposed to be impartial. Since he was appointed Police and Crime Commissioner, Alan Billings has been promoting Christian belief whenever he can. He included a text from the Old Testament, Jeremiah 29:7, or an extract from the text which distorted its meaning, in his 'Keeping Safe,' 'The Police and Crime Plan for South Yorkshire 2017 - 2021.


At the same time, he has promoted vigorous action against 'Hate Crime' on the part of South Yorkshire Police.'


From various pieces of evidence, it's obvious to me that his faith is orthodox Christian faith, but he combines it with woke views. An extract from an astonishing article he wrote which was published in 'The Yorkshire Post.' (16 December, 2022.)





'Police forces should be 'woke' as it helps them understand the communities they serve - Alan Billings.'


'Watch, therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour (Matt 25.13). That verse sums up the Church’s pre-Christmas season of Advent: it is all about being alert and awake. We could say being ‘woke’.'


His use of Matthew 25:13 is grotesque. He seems unaware of the fact that this isn't in the least a general recommendation to be vigilant but a specific order which concerns the so-called 'Second Coming' of Jesus, which was to be expected  by his listeners but which never took place - a doctrinal minefield.



Two comments of mine accepted by GB News and published on the page 'Calvin's Common Sense Campaign. Saturday 19 August, 2023.





More on Calvin Robinson's 'Common Sense Crusade.' In a religious context, 'crusade' could be considered a tainted word. It seems that Calvin Robinson - and GB News - are ignorant of the horrific persecutions associated with the word. From the vast mass of historical evidence, just a few facts concerning one of the many crusades, the 'German Crusade' of 1096. During this crusade, mobs of French and German Christians massacred Jews. These massacres have often been seen as the first in a series of large-scale anti-semitic events in Europe which eventually culminated in the Holocaust. Just one episode in this crusade: at least 800 Jews were massacred in the German city of Worms when they refused Catholic baptism.


Below, statue of Godfrey of Bouillon (who took part in the German Crusade) in the Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria. According to the Jewish historian Solomon bar Simson, he swore 'to go on this journey only after avenging the blood of the crucified one by shedding Jewish blood and completely eradicating any trace of those bearing the name 'Jew ...'





I support the view of the non-believer who wrote in the comments section, 'How can a religious person go on a common sense crusade?' Full title: 'Calvin's Common Sense Crusade.' I know that Calvin Robinson has an Anglo-Catholic view of the sacraments, including baptism. He believes that baptism is a very important step in the life of a Christian. It turns out that doctrines of baptism have unexpected difficulties, to do with validity. Theologians have got to work to address the difficulties and have come up with contradictory, mutually exclusive solutions, as so often in theology. I wonder if Calvin Robinson, as a person with common sense - to his own satisfaction, at least - has a view on one aspect of baptism, to do with valid and invalid liquids. This is an extract from the site http://www.archbishoplefebvre.com/ which, according to the site, 'is devoted to the Truth which is the Catholic Faith ... '


'The code of canon law explains that "true, clean, and natural water" is necessary for baptism (canon 849). Liquids can be assessed in three categories: Those that are certainly valid, those that are doubtfully valid, and those that are certainly invalid. Certainly valid liquids include water as found in rivers, oceans, lakes, hot springs, melted ice or snow, mineral water, dew, slightly muddy water (as long as the water predominates), and slightly brackish water. 'Doubtfully valid liquids are those that are a mixture of water and some other substance, such as beer, soda, light tea, thin soup or broth, and artificially scented water such as rose water.The last category is of liquids which are certainly invalid. It includes oil, urine, grease, phlegm, shoe polish, and milk. 'The rule of thumb is that, in emergency situations, you should always try to baptize with certainly valid liquids, beginning with plain, clean water. If plain water isn't available, baptize with a doubtfully valid liquid using the formula, "If this water is valid, I baptize you in the name of the Father . . ." ... Never attempt to baptize anyone with a certainly invalid liquid.'   So, in an emergency, baptizing a baby with beer or thin soup (but not thick soup) will be adequate or more than adequate, providing the priest says 'I baptize you in the name of the Father ... ' But attempts to baptize a baby with shoe polish won't work, even if the priest says 'I baptize you in the name of the Father ... ' Canon law makes this absolutely clear.

i wonder if Calvin Robinson, using his common sense perspective, would agree with this statement of doctrine or not. Perhaps the Free Church of England, the branch of the Church he belongs to, would take a different view: that baptizing a baby with shoe polish would be effectual after all, even if the Church would prefer to use other liquids, such as slightly muddy water (provided that it contains not very much mud.)


'Fr' Daniel French




Title: 'The End of Evangelicalism? Fr Daniel French warns of division in the Church of England.'


The 'warning' is hardly that. In the GB News video, Daniel French comes across, to me at least, as not a very strenuous person at all, an impression reinorced by the Website of his Church, Holy Trinity Salcombe in Devon.




The stress is upon the seaside, the surroundings, not in the least on orthodox faith. This is a missed opportunity, surely - but of course, I would view an attempt at explaining the faith and attempting to convert people to the faith as a waste of time.


In the GB News video, he concentrates so much attention on statistical evidence - again, of a non-rigorous kind, evidence which is misused rather than used, demonstrating and proving nothing or next to nothing. He plays the percentages game but fails to notice that the steadily increase, the dramatic increase in the percentage of secular people, people  who have no interest in Christian faith or next to no interest, is far more significant than marginal increases in one form of Christian belief rather than another.


Calvin Robinson and Daniel French are impressed by bigness, the churches which make a big contribution to the figures for Church attendance, the churches which seem to be making a big impression. With a different perspective, the bigness shrinks alarmingly - the activities of these churches aren't significant in the larger scheme of things at all - but this would be to see it from a secular perspective.


The two of them overlook one very important and significant fact (they overlook far more than one fact, but I concentrate on the one.) The Churches which they regard as so important for restoring the power of Christian faith in society have again and again failed abysmally. The number of churches which have transgressed in particularly serious ways is a minority, but a very significant minority. Here, I add to the material in other pages of the site and use some of the material to be found there. The mass of critical material - the 'critical mass' - is very striking. All I can do here is provide a very small sample. Most of it is information, disturbing information, about a group of Churches not far from where I live, although I begin with a different group of Churches and the starting point is Lucy Letby.


The Church which has been in existence for the longest time is successful. It has planted other Churches, successful too - successful in the very restricted sense used by Daniel French and Calvin Robinson. If the criteria used are ones other than large or very large congregations and the accumulation of money and other resources, the record of the parent church and its offshoots is a story of abysmal failure. There are large numbers of churches throughout the country which show the same combination of 'success' and failure. I think that anyone who commits time and money to such churches would be making a bad mistake - but I don't confine my criticisms to Churches in this class.


Scandal in the second biggest Pentecostal Church in Britain




With her former bus driver husband, she set up a church with a congregation of 50 that grew into a charity with an annual income of £3.5 million.

As the charismatic leaders of the Victory Christian Centre, Erica Goodman and self-styled pastor Douglas Goodman were respected by thousands of worshippers.

But away from the pulpit Douglas Goodman was grooming vulnerable young women in his congregation for sex. And he and his wife were enjoying a lavish lifestyle, with a five-bedroom house and a fleet of expensive cars.

Today a two-year investigation by the Charities Commission into the second biggest Pentecostal church in Britain reveals how it registered debts of £200,000 despite having an income of £3.5 million at its peak.

The probe found evidence of " misconduct and mismanagement," including "significant unauthorised salary payments and other benefits provided to the pastor and his wife as well as a number of trustees."

The church, based in an old cinema in Kilburn, was shut down in December 2002 after a receiver and manager appointed by the Charities Commission uncovered a long list of creditors.

There is little chance of recovering cash and benefits taken out of church funds, and it has emerged that Erica Goodman is back in business as senior pastor of the slightly rebranded Victory To Victory Christian Church (V2V). Her sleek image adorns its website, under the slogan: "The family church with you in mind." It promises happiness, healing and prosperity.

The church meets three days a week at a school hall near Wembley - and is accepting online donations from supporters, suggesting they pay their "biblical tithe" by credit card.

Douglas Goodman is serving three and a half years for indecent assault, attempted indecent assault and perverting the course of justice.

Goodman's victims were a teenage student and a 26-year-old. The jury was told he would shower them with gifts, urging them to call him Daddy or Papa D. A detective said: "The victims are really messed up. Some of those who made allegations against him have made half-hearted attempts to commit suicide."

But while Goodman serves his sentence his church has been reborn as a non-profit organisation, this time without charitable status.

Today's Charities Commission report sets down new rules to close a loophole that allowed Goodman to extort money from his congregation by claiming a salary.

Meanwhile, Mrs Goodman, who continues to live in the couple's ?1.5 million house in Northampton, claims the new church is like one large family. She states on the website: "God has blessed V2V abundantly. He has helped us grow into a thriving church."

She has also set up the Victory Bible Institute, linked to V2V, which holds conferences and offers a two-year diploma in biblical studies for a fee of ?950. The website states VBI exists to make sure that lives fully given to Jesus reap the richest harvest.

The Evening Standard attempted to contact Erica Goodman but a spokeswoman for the church refused to make contact. The spokeswoman refused to comment on the Charities Commission report and refused to state what revenues are used for.

She said: "There is no comment. We do not do interviews for newspapers."

From the Website of Network Church, Sheffield: St Thomas Philadelphia.


'Our church was planted out of St Thomas Crookes (an Anglican / Baptist church in Crookes) beginning in 1998, under the leadership of Mike Breen.


The planting out was in response to significant growth and also to a sense of call to the whole city.


Extract from a  report by the BBC of an event at St Thomas Philadelphia




Children's charity Barnado's is to conduct a review into claims conversion therapy was performed at a church.


Matthew Drapper said he suffered long-term trauma after undergoing a form of "exorcism" at Sheffield's St Thomas Philadelphia church eight years ago.


St Thomas church has denied it engaged in any conversion therapy.


Mr Drapper, 33, previously told the BBC he was made to repeatedly shout a prayer during a 20-minute session, which left him "cramping up and struggling to breathe".


"They told me to speak to the gay part of myself as if speaking to a wild dog coming up to me - and for me to say to 'leave my body'," he said.

"The people I was with told me they could see demons leave me and go out of the window."


Barnard's has still not published a report on the incident.


Most Churches now have safeguarding officers, a response to the fact that Bishops and other senior clergy have so often done nothing or next to nothing about allegations of abuse, sexual abuse and other forms of abuse.  The cases still surface, with claims that the action of the Churches has been insufficient or non-existent.


Daniel French has illusions about the kind of faith or the kinds of faith to be found in 'The Global South.' This is a big topic. I allude to some issues in connection with the farcical map below, included with brief comments in the section Africa and Jesus in my page Home Page Images. Of course, the approach of Daniel French to this continent of 'The Global South' is very different, to some extent its diametrical opposite, approving rather than condemning. However, there are intersections between these two approaches and they are unified by one obvious factor, an orthodox Christian view. I don't claim in the least that the multiple misrepresentations of the map follow from orthodox Christian belief, only that orthodox Christian belief underlies many of them.



Supplementary: Anglo-Catholicism


Calvin Robinson and Daniel French are Anglo-Catholics. Below I include some images of the people they'd find congenial company, fellow Anglo-Catholics attending The Walsingham Miracle - more images and further information on my page Home Page Images.  Or would they find them congenial? Not necessarily. It's necessary to take into account the petty or poisonous jealousies, rivalries, ambitions, animosities which can be found in groups like this, and, of course, far more widely. These people will, though, have this in common -   the assurance that their eternal destiny has been taken care of, is in safe hands. It's possible that Calvin Robinson may  feel aggrieved that this is an Anglican (and Roman Catholic) event. In these august circles, the Free Church of England, the outfit he belongs to, occupies a lowly position. Roman Catholics will claim pre-eminence. If they follow Roman Catholic teaching, they will believe that the ordinations of all the others are 'null and void.'  Doctrinal 'errors' won't be overlooked.




Peter Hitchens


For the time being, this is very short. I include an extract from my page Billingsgate, which includes material on 'Ichtheology.'




Above, representation of Peter Hitchens, contributor to GB News, in the form of a hammerhead shark, with use of artistic licence.


Hammerhead sharks aren't deadly fish. The teeth on this specimen are nothing to be afraid of. There are no recorded human fatalities. Most hammerhead shark species are too small to inflict serious damage. Peter Hitchens isn't big but bloated. The mouths of hammerhead sharks are small. Peter Hitchens talks big but what comes out is far from impressive, more often than not. His reputation as a fearless, deadly polemicist is unearned, but when he makes the effort, he can be quite good, although the opinion that his writing is 'as firm, polished and potentially lethal as a Guardsman's boot' is surely exaggerated, as well as peculiar. So many of his opinions are standard stuff. His opinions aren't the opinions of an endangered species. Some specimens:


Oppose Covid public health measures
Support the Church of England
Bring back hanging


His opinion that the 'Conservatives are now the main Left-wing party in the country' is becoming more and more common but amounts to flagrant exaggeration, surely.


His book 'The Phoney Victory: The World War II Illusion,'  published in 2018 presents his views on what he would regard as 'the national myth' of the Second World War.   It was reviewed by Richard Evans,  who described the book as 'riddled with errors.' An extract:

 He '
relies on a handful of off-beam, eccentric studies of prewar diplomacy, like the work of the Europhobe and climate change denier Richard North, instead of using standard modern works such as Zara Steiner’s two magisterial volumes on interwar diplomacy in the Oxford History of Modern Europe.


'This leads him into one error after an-other. He suggests, for example, that Chamberlain had decided to bring about a world war in 1939. There is no evidence whatsoever to support this contention, and abundant evidence to the contrary; even at the beginning of the war the British prime minister was trying to arrange for the Italian dictator Mussolini to intervene to stop the fighting, and had to be overruled by his cabinet. The problem with arguing, as Hitchens does, that Britain should have waited to declare war until rearmament had created a military that was effective enough to defeat Nazi Germany is that Nazi Germany was rearming even faster than Britain was.



'Similarly, he is flying in the face of many years of research by German historians when he claims that the German armed forces in the war were fighting for military objectives that would have been regarded as legitimate by the democratic governments of the Weimar Republic that pre-ceded Hitler’s rise to power: it is very doubtful indeed whether Weimar’s foreign minister, Gustav Stresemann, would have approved the invasion of France, Denmark, Norway or even Czechoslovakia, let alone the Soviet Union.'


In some ways, the review is  poor. Richard J Evans writes,


The word “we” occurs innumerable times in this book, denoting the inhabitants of the United Kingdom, who apparently hold firm to the false memory of Britain standing alone, fighting a “good war” against Nazi Germany from 1939 to 1945 ... Hitchens’s “we” in truth, I suspect, means mainly elderly readers of the newspaper he writes for, the Mail on Sunday, and this book is really only for them.'


This caricature is ridiculous. Peter Hitchens may write for the Mail on Sunday but his views on the Second World War won't be to the liking of the vast majority of the readership at all.


Richard J Evans would seem to share Peter Hitchens' view of strategic bombing. Frederick Taylor's book 'Dresden' is one of the many re-examinations of strategic bombing which have presented the moral dilemmas but also examined in detail the practcal dilemmas, shockingly hard realities. Richard J Evans, like Peter Hitchens, seems to be unaware of the mass of argument and evidence which presents a very different case.


My loathing for Patrick Christys and Peter Hitchens is increased by the fact that both of them support restoration of the death penalty. I've already given some arguments against the death penalty in the section on Patrick Christys. See also my page on the death penalty.


I'll give extracts from two sources on a case which has relevance to the Lucy Letby case. I don't regard the material as having relevance to the conviction of Lucy Letby. I include it only because it has relevance to the case for restoring the death penalty. It would be disastrously misguided to restore the death penalty and it would be impossible or virtually impossible to restore it. The stupidity of Patrick Christys and Peter Hitchens may prevent them from realizing this but people with more sense should have no difficulty.


Note: Above, I refer to 'The stupidity of Patrick Christys and Peter Hitchens ... '  I'd prefer to use a different form, the more specific 'The *stupidity of Patrick Christys and Peter Hitchens ... '


I take the view that natural language, in this case obviously English, is often a very imperfect instrument. It's all we have for uses like this, but it needs modifying or supplementing, in this case, for the reason that calling these two people 'stupid' is an unfair generalization. Similarly for the variant, 'Patrick Christys and Peter Hitchens are exceptional people ... exceptionally stupid.' I prefer to make it clear that they are stupid in this context. I wouldn't claim that they are stupid in every way. To make it clear in this way requires explanation, not very much perhaps, but enough to lead to a loss of directness, a decrease in force.  . Using the asterisk before the word would be a way of showing that they're stupid, but in a restricted sense: a sense subject to {restriction}.


The people at GB News generalize again and again - but that is a generalization in itself, of course. It refers to all of them, when what I mean is that some of them (or perhaps most of them) do that. The misuse of generalization is so frequent that it would be justifiable to introduce a new category of generalization, the 'GB News generalization.' They are reckless and ridiculous and the claims can't be corroborated.


The use of the asterisk here can only be used in writing. A spoken form might be useful - but it doesn't seem likely in the least that this idea will be adopted, so I simply repeat the point that Patrick Christys and Peter Hitchens aren't stupid in every way but that their obsession with reintroducing the death penalty is stupid but amounts to more than mere stupidity - much more. I hope this clarifies the matter.


The discussion here has philosophical implications. Very little on this site amounts to philosophical discussion, but academic philosophy is a frequent background. In this case, there's a linkage with 'Ordinary Language Philosophy,' which I find inadequate. J L Austin, an ordinary language philosopher, wrote in 'A plea for excuses,' 


'...our common stock of words embodies all the distinctions men have found worth drawing, and the connections they have found worth marking, in the lifetime of many generations: these surely are likely to be more numerous, more sound, since they have stood up to the long test of survival of the fittest, and more subtle, at least in all ordinary and reasonable practical matters, than any that you or I are likely to think up in our armchair of an afternoon—the most favourite alternative method.'


Tim Stanley


Tim Stanley was a guest on the GB News show, 'Calvin's Common Sense Crusade' on 12 August, 2023.

The address of the GB News video:


He appears at 19:36 into the video. He disappears from view at 26:15. During his talk, he refers to the New Atheist Movement. According to Tim Stanley, The New Atheist Movement claimed that 'There was nothing sane about religion.' Tim Stanley claims that 'They never bothered to understand religion.' I think I can claim that I've made the effort to understand Christian religion, including the Roman Catholic variant.


The claims he makes can't be allowed to go unchallenged. I've given answers, I've provided a very great deal of counter-argument and counter-evidence on this site, on this page and on other pages. The material is dispersed and it wouldn't be a good use of my time to collect all the dispersed material and to present it here. He makes a set of claims which aren't in the least reasonable presented in a reasonable tone of voice. His apparent plausibility hasn't been earned in the least.

This is what he has to say: '[Christianity] offers you a map for life. It says, here's what you are created for, here's the purpose, here's the relationship you're trying to build with God and other people and here's a whole ethical code that goes with it, here's 2,000 years of magnificent culture ... '

The '2,000 years of magnificent culture' amount to gross a gross generalization and the generalization amounts to gross falsification. Even a broad survey uncovers massacres, persecutions, executions inflicted by Christians upon non-Christians or inflicted by Christians of one Church upon Christians of another Church.

A much more detailed set of investigations uncovers horrific evidence. To give just one example - in his grotesque generalization, Tim Stanley has failed to take into account this evidence: between about 1450 to 1750, which included the period of the Reformation and Counter Reformation and the Thirty Years' War, there were an estimated 35,000 to 50,000 executions for witchcraft, carried out by both Protestant and Catholic jurisdictions.


Below, three witches being burned alive in Baden-Baden, Germany. The Baden-Baden witch trials (in which torture was used to secure 'evidence') took place between 1627 and 1631 and resulted in the executions of about 200 people.



There are 'floating voters,' people who go from one political party to another, and 'floating believers.' Tim Stanley was a floating believer. He seems to have been faithful to one particular Christian sect, the Roman Catholic branch, for a long time. Can he defend his decision? I'm sure that he can't, but if he wants to defend his views in detail, he should go ahead.

This is from the Wikipedia entry for this floating believer:

In October 2012, Stanley stated he was "raised a good Baptist  boy".Later, he considered himself to be an Anglican,   beginning around "one glorious summer" in 2002, and was baptised as an Anglican in Little St Mary's, Cambridge,  in New Year 2003. He subsequently aligned himself with the Church of England's Anglo-Catholic wing, before converting to the Catholic Church when he was 23.'


'There was nothing sane about religion.' He converted to a Church which venerates Saint Augustine, who taught that unbaptized babies go to hell for eternity. This is just one deranged view that I attack on this site. Tim Stanley lives in a dream world - not all the time, not in every way, obviously, but with some deeply confused part of his personality. I should phrase this differently, though - 'with some shallowly confused part of his personality.'


Michael Phillips, Christian Legal Centre


Michael Phillips, of the Christian Legal Centre, appeared on the GB News programme, 'Calvin's Common Sense Crusade' of Saturday 9 September, 2023.




I posted a long comment on the same page, not directed at Michael Phillips. Calvin Robinson sees the need for every disused Church to be recognized as a 'sacred space.' He recited a list of new uses to  which former churches have been put and said, 'I think it's disrespectful, I think that a sacred space should always be respected and used for worship.'


Before a church closed for good, the congregation may well have dwindled to vanishing point. If he has a miraculous answer to the issue of how a church can be kept in a state of repair when things have reached this state then he didn't mention it on the programme.


But thriving churches, churches which are packed out, aren't 'sacred spaces' so much as places where cruel, backward doctrines are taught - I include some of them in the column to the right. But Michael Phillips has no idea. He persists in the belief that 'the church is in decline because it is moving in a certain direction' (away from orthodox faith.' I give profiles of a conservative evangelical churches which still attracts large congregations on my page Church donations.  The Church is STC (formerly St Thomas Church) Sheffield.


The Christian Legal Centre appeals for donations - no surprise. The page




gives information about how to donate. My advice is: don't bother. According to the Wikipedia entry




the Christian Legal Centre 'has lost most of its legal cases.' Some examples:


Graham Cogman, a Norfolk police constable lost his job for sending emails to colleagues in which he quoted Bible passages condemning homosexuality and gave information about  

a group offering to 'cure' homosexuals. He complained to an employment tribunal, supported by the Christian Legal Centre, claiming harassment on the grounds of his religious beliefs. He lost his case and his dismissal was not rescinded.


Duke Amachree, a homelessness officer, was fired by Wandsworth Council  for subjecting a client to a "30-minute barrage" of evangelism  when he was supposed to be offering her housing advice. The client complained to the council, leading to an investigation. The council complained that Amachree revealed "sensitive personal information" about the client to the media, namely in an interview with the Daily Mail after the Christian Legal Centre  had become involved The CLC supported Amachree in an unsuccessful legal claim for unfair dismissal, religious discrimination, and breach of contract.


In 2018, a High Court judge expressed serious concerns over the conduct of Christian Legal Centre consultant Pavel Stroilov during the Alfie Evans case. [Clicking on the link will give information about the case.] Mr. Justice Hayden described Stroilov as a "fanatical and deluded young man" whose "malign hand" was "inconsistent with the real interests of the parents' case." The judge also accused CLC activists of doing the parents "far more harm than it does them good" and said submissions were "littered with vituperation and bile" ...  Mary Holmes, former solicitor for the parents of Alfie Evans, accused the CLC of exploiting the case for their own benefit.

Three court of appeal judges said a letter from Stroilov to the parents of Alfie Evans was "misleading to the extent of giving the father false advice". The letter in question advised Evans' father that it would be lawful to remove Alfie from Alder Hey Hospital. The court heard that this led to a confrontation at the hospital, in which Alfie was involved, and police were called. A court of appeal judge said that the letter was "disseminated on social media (presumably with the knowledge of Mr Stroilov".






















Some objections to Christianity


The section summarizes some of  the harmful effects of Christian religion, as I see it. My page Christian Donations (which is the 'Hub' page for my pages on Christianity) also contains this section.

Exodus 11 [4] So Moses said, "This is what the Lord says: 'About midnight I will go throughout Egypt. [5] Every firstborn son in Egypt will die, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the firstborn son of the slave girl, who is at her hand mill, and all the firstborn of the cattle as well.'


Exodus 12:29 records that 'the Lord' did exactly what he had promised - committed mass murder, including the killing of male babies and male children, the killing of babies and children who were the sons of women slaves, the killing of husbands. They could already face separation from husband or children if the 'owner' decided to sell family members to different owners - these killings were a new horror in the horrific lives of these women.


Psalm 137:9
'Bible Truth?'
'God's Word?'

'Babylon, you will be destroyed.
Happy are those who pay you back
for what you have done to us-

who take your babies
and smash them against a rock.


Peter Hitchens: 'I believe in the absolute goodness of God.'
(Interview with 'Risen Magazine.')


Christian believers ... do you believe that God carried out the mass killing of babies, children and men, the first born of Egypt? Do you believe that God advocated the violent killing of babies, as recorded in Psalm 137? Do you believe that God ordered or carried out the mass killing of men, women and children, as recorded in other passages of the Bible?


Do you believe in the eternal damnation of everyone who fails to accept Jesus as risen redeemer? 


 Can you excuse the cruelties carried out in so many of the centuries when the churches were dominant - the many, many executions for heresy, blasphemy and witchcraft, burning alive - and boiling alive, a punishment sometimes used in Christian England - the use of torture, the massacres of Jews, Protestant-Catholic wars and atrocities?


Boiling alive was a punishment ordered in some cases by King Henry VIII. Supplementary information about him:


Henry VIII was responsible for as many as 57,000 executions during his reign. 'Defender of the faith' (Fidei Defensor) is a title of English and later British monarchs since 1521, when it was bestowed on Henry VIII.  It was revoked when Henry VIII decided to break with Rome and to make himself head of the Church of England.The King was excommunicated by Pope Paul III. But the Parliament of England conferred on the sadist King as well as his successors (which include King Charles III) the title 'Defender of the Faith and of the Church of England and also of Ireland in Earth the Supreme Head.'


In the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and John), Jesus is recorded as performing many alleged miracles involving exorcisms of people supposedly possessed by demons. In the 'Miracle of the Gadarene Swine,' the expelling of demons by Jesus is achieved by sending the 'demons' into pigs, who rush down a hill into the sea and are drowned. (A long line of theological commentators, including 'Saint' Augustine of Hippo and 'Saint' Thomas Aquinas, argued that the fate of the pigs showed that Christians have no duties to animals. Throughout most of the history of Christianity, indifference to cruelty to animals has been a constant.)


In Matthew 10:7, 8 Jesus is recorded as sending out twelve apostles, with these instructions:


'As you go, announce that the Kingdom of Heaven will soon be here. Heal the sick, raise the dead, heal people who have leprosy and force out demons ... '


(The New Testament Greek for the last clause, 'force out demons,' is


The translation of the King James Bible is 'cast out devils.' It consistently uses 'devils' instead of 'demons.')


 Later Christians have taken texts like this as encouragement to drive out demons too, to think of psychiatric conditions and many illnesses as caused by demonic possession, curable by casting out demons. If the report is substantiated, attempts were made at a Sheffield Church, Network Church - Philadelphia St Thomas, to drive out demons in an attempt to cure a young man of homosexuality. Attempts made by the Sheffield Diocese to disassociate itself from exorcisms of demons have the difficulty that Jesus himself resorted to exorcism of 'demons' repeatedly.


Sheffield Diocese is a member of 'Arise!' a large group of Churches in Sheffield and North Derbyshire. Another member of 'Arise' is the Rock Christian Centre. The people there really do believe in demons, like the people at countless churches.


From the Rock Christian Centre Website.



They believe in

'The divine inspiration and supreme authority of the Old and New Testament Scriptures, which are the written Word of God - fully trustworthy for faith and conduct.

The personal and visible return of Jesus Christ to fulfil the purposes of God, who will raise all people to judgement, bring eternal life to the redeemed and eternal condemnation to the lost, and establish a new heaven and new earth.' ['The lost,' who are eternally condemned, include children and their parents if they have never accepted Christ as their 'personal Lord and Saviour,' and, of course, all people who have failed to commit themselves to Christ. They include all the allied soldiers, sailors and airmen who fought to defeat the Nazis, including those who liberated the concentration camps and the Jews who died in the concentration and extermination camps - except for the small minority of believers in the Risen Redeemer.]


Very large numbers of  children have been abused by Roman Catholic priests and others in the Church, in many, many countries  - allegations, investigations, trials, convictions, admissions of guilt, apologies by the Church, attempts by Church authorities to do nothing and to cover up the cases of abuse. The abused include mostly boys but also girls, some as young as three years old, with the majority between the ages of 11 and 14. Clergy and others in the Church of England have been responsible for horrific abuse too and all too often, the abuse has been ignored by senior clergy. Despite changes in the church's approach, new cases emerge.


There have been many, many cases of sexual and other abuse in the  Church of England and other Churches of the Anglican Communion. The churches placed reliance upon the supposed benefits when a non-believer became a Christian believer, they believed their own 'teaching,' that the Christian believer was a new person, transformed, now guided by the Holy Spirit, now with all the benefits of God's Word, the Bible, now part of the historic Church, a community of believers, extending deep into the past. The massive, ever increasing evidence to the contrary could not be ignored. Orthodox Christians were committing vile acts and the historic teaching of the Church had failed to control these abuses. What the Church did was to turn to secular methods instead of relying upon distinctively Christian methods. It has appointed 'safeguarding officers' in the dioceses and parishes. Cathedral and church and church school websites now give prominence to safeguarding policies which include safeguarding information. A significant number of these safeguarding officers will have what amounts to 'modified' Christian belief, Christian belief which takes into account modern and enlightened views of the issues, and Christian belief accompanied by some common sense. A significant number of these safeguarding officers will be completely unsuitable for their roles.


The responses of Churches to the findings of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse are astonishing - and very, very revealing. They show that  claims so often made in the glossy pages of Church and Cathedral and Christian organization Websites are hollow, to be more exact, completely false.


This is an extract from a representative example, from the response of the Methodist Church (1 March 2022) changes and additions to its policy after a policy review:


1. The policy statement now includes a definition of “safeguarding” and why it is integral to the mission of the Methodist Church. It includes a definition of the term “abuse”, information about contextual safeguarding and examples of the various forms which abuse can take, including peer-on-peer abuse;


2. The policy includes a "Code of safer working practice with children and young people”, which sets standards for appropriate conduct and provides a template for local churches to produce their own version of the document;


3. It includes a section entitled “Procedures for responding well to safeguarding incidents” which gives guidance on how to respond to allegations and when to make referrals to statutory agencies;


 4. Safer recruitment procedures have been reviewed and amended;


5. The role and purpose of District Safeguarding Groups have been made clearer and core standards and criteria have been introduced;


6. A new comprehensive training programme for all those involved in monitoring and supporting those subject to safeguarding contracts is being piloted.


This is a secular way of attempting to make improvements. This is a long, long way from 'The Way, the Truth and the Life,' the way promoted by those Christian Websites, the way which attracts funds and which sometimes attracts converts, with its staggeringly naive claims - that followers of Jesus become more like Jesus, guided by the Holy Spirit, and the staggeringly naive claim that prayer works.


The Christian way failed, and failed abysmally, to protect the vulnerable from harm. The 'imitation of Christ,' 'sanctification,' becoming more and more like Christ as the believer matures in faith - all these have failed. The churches encourage Christians to pray about the most diverse topics, big and small, not noticing the lack of evidence that prayer works.


Faced with the cumulative evidence of deeply disturbing abuse in the Churches, the Churches didn't set out to solve the problem by organized prayer. In the case of this issue, they were not allowed to get away with it. Attempts to 'solve' the problem by means of prayer would not have been accepted. They have had to use other methods, the methods of secular society, including 'referrals to statutory agencies.'


A contemporary version of the Book of Common Prayer includes these futile requests (V, spoken by the celebrant at the service) and responses (R, from the congregation)

V. Endue thy ministers with righteousness;
R. And make thy chosen people joyful.
V. Give peace, O Lord, in all the world;
R. For only in thee can we live in safety.

The expectation that God will hear the prayer and make a minister who happens to be a child abuser or someone who does nothing about cases of child abuse brought to the minister's attention is a pious, futile wish asking for wish fulfilment.

The expectation that God will hear the prayer and actually grant peace in any area ravaged by war, let alone grant peace 'in all the world' is grossly deluded.

Wars of any size are won only by the massive expenditure of time and effort, attention to detail, the proper exercise of economic power - and often by a measure of good fortune, never by lazy-minded prayer. The scale of the Allied War effort needed to defeat Nazi Germany and the other axis powers is staggering. I'd  recommend a long, remedial course in military history to theologians who have spent most of their study time on other theologians and the source materials, the Old Testament in Biblical Hebrew and the New Testament in New Testament Greek, with the realization that this is impractical.

I wouldn't, though, regard all these people as beyond redemption - using the phrase in a strictly secular sense, of course. It may well be perfectly possible to show some of them, and, I'd hope, in ever increasing numbers, to shake their faith, to deprive them of the certainty or near certainty that the Christian world is a world of illusion.

Even those people whose experience of Christianity owes so much to the soothing language of the Book of Common Prayer and hymns sing in English country Churches, I'd claim, are sometimes able to think new thoughts, to have new emotiotns, to contemplate the possibility that their beliefs are based upon inner laziness, a refusal to think, and feel in ways which aren't predetermined by Christian dogmas.

One experience of the horrific imperfections of the world - a very different matter from the claimed 'sins' of the world - may well be decisive, an event which can't easily, if at all, be reconciled with the Christian view of things - or a longer process, a transition which leads the believer to become more and more aware of the smugness of the Christian community, the far greater variety and interest of the non-Christian world, an increasing reluctance to take seriously the Christian claims.


What evidence would count as evidence that prayer is effective? Coincidences or fortunate outcomes are not acceptable as evidence. A Christian who prays for success in getting a job in the church and who does get the job isn't in the least entitled to believe that the prayer was answered and that God ensured success in the job application.


Christians have not been able to use Bible texts to guide them in their attempts to escape from the legacy of gross abuse. St Paul and the other New Testament writers are silent about abuse. They have no reported 'teaching' of Jesus to guide them. Yet abuse at the time of the early Church and for so many centuries afterwards was on a scale which dwarfs present-day abuse and took forms that were very often exceptionally barbaric.


An extreme example:


A case discussed in the column to the left, The case of Julie Morris.  Julie Morris was a primary school deputy head teacher and the safeguarding lead at a school in Wigan.


Julie Morris and her partner were imprisoned for dozens of  child sexual abuse offences, including nine counts of rape. They had filmed themselves abusing and raping a girl under the age of 13.


One example of a safeguarding document, the information concerning safeguarding on the Website of the Oxford Diocese




An example of failures of safeguarding, multiple failures rather than a single failure, also from the Oxford Diocese, the information I provide in the second column of this page, Action and inaction in the Diocese of Oxford.


This claim appears on every page of the Oxford Diocese Website:



The practice of the Oxford Diocese has been very different in many different ways. To confine attention to the claim that the Diocese is 'courageous' and one important aspect of courage, moral courage, it isn't self evident that the practice has been inspiring or just about adequate on many, many occasions. The Diocese engages in mission, like all other dioceses, like all parishes. But in my experience, none of them make an effort in one aspect of mission which should be vital: apologetics, that is, defending Christian belief against objections. The non-Christians, the lost, the 'unsaved,' are taken to be a homogeneous mass of people, in effect, wandering in darkness, desperately in need of Christian belief, the belief in the 'Risen Redeemer.' Next to no attempt has been made to address the very substantial objections to Christian belief.


In many, many of the 'Christian centuries,' it was easy - unbelievers could be tortured to convince them of 'the error of their ways' and executed. When countries began to secularize, when these expedients became unavailable, there was no significant increase in attempts to defend Christianity against objections by means of the spoken or written word, in print and later by means of the internet.


No doubt, in private prayer, Christians have continued to send prayers thick and fast to |God for the conversion of X, Y or Z or the conversion of a whole country, including communities in distant countries - prayers from England for the success of missionary work in a country in Sub-Saharan Africa, perhaps. And, also prayers for the ending of conflicts in sub-Saharan Africa and terrorism in sub-Saharan Africa.


Rational, empirical attempts to confirm the effects of prayer have been lacking. The claim that prayer is beneficial, that prayers are often answered, has never been subjected to honest, extensive appraisal by believers. So believers go on praying and praying - after all, it costs them nothing but the time taken and it enhances the believer's self-esteem. Concrete measures to address suffering, to address wrongs in the real world are very different - generally arduous, requiring enormous effort and in many or most cases twith no guarantee of success - but the successes can be overwhelmingly important and can genuinely transform lives, or aspects of lives.


Prayer is facile, like the claim on the Oxford Diocese Website that the diocese is 'contemplative, compassionate, courageous.'


Do the Christian Churches deserve to be supported?
Should money be given to them?
No, for many different reasons.

Give money to good causes,
not to the Churches.

Jesus' teaching according to Matthew 5:17 in the New Living Translation:


'Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose.'


The translation of the King James Bible


'Think not that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets ...' 


This is the King James who had women tortured and executed for 'witchcraft' and who was complicit in the burning to death of the last person to be executed for heresy in this country. This command is yet another part of the Law, yet another command which Jesus never opposed: Exodus 22:18. 'Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.' In a modern translation, 'Put to death any woman who practises witchcraft.'


Advice on parenting from 'God's Word,' Deuteronomy, 21: 18-21, in the English Standard Version. It too forms part of 'The Law,' and Jesus saw no objection to it.


A Rebellious Son


18 “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, 19 then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, 20 and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ 21 Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst ... '

More from Jesus on God's Law:


'I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God's law will disappear until its purpose is achieved.' (Matthew 5:18, New Living Translation.)


Material on this site tends to be highly dispersed - a comment I make in various pages of the site.  Below, some material extracted from the very varied page Home Page Images. It illustrates one aspect of the callousness and heartlessness of orthodox Christianity.


33. The Huskar Monument and a  Monument outside a Parish Church



A memorial to the 26 children who lost their lives in the Huskar Mine Disaster of 1838 when the Huskar Pit (Silkstone Common, South Yorkshire) was flooded during an intense rain storm. The monument features two children, a boy and a girl, in representations of the coal seams where they were working, deep underground. The disaster led to the 1842 Mines Act which prohibited the employment underground of boys and girls under the age of 10. A book by Alan Gallop about the event's history, "Children of the Dark: Life and Death Underground in Victorian England" was published in 2003 


The boys who died were

George Burkinshaw aged 10 years.

James Burkinshaw aged 7 years, brothers

Isaac Wright aged 12 years.

Amos Wright aged 8 years, brothers.

James Clarkson aged 16 years.

Francis Hoyland aged 13 years,.

William Allick aged 12 years.

Samuel Horne aged 10 years.

Eli Hutchinson aged 9 years.

John Simpson aged 9 years.

George Barnett aged 9 years.

George Lamb aged 8 years.

William Walmseley aged 8 years.

John Gothard aged 8 years.

James Turton aged 10 years.


The girls who died were

 Catherine Garnett aged 8 years.

Hannah Webster aged 13 years.

Elizabeth Carr aged 13 years.

Anne Moss aged 9 years.

Elizabeth Hollin aged 15 years.

Hannah Taylor aged 17 years.

Ellen Parker aged 15 years.

Mary Sellars aged 10 years.

Sarah Jukes aged 8 years.

Sarah Newton aged 8 years

and Elizabeth Clarkson aged 11 years


A monument was erected outside the Parish Church with this hideous inscription: no mention of the human cost of the disaster, instead the claim that this was an instance of divine judgment:

Take ye heed watch and pray for ye know not when the time is. Mark X111 Chap 33 Verse.


Was erected to perpetuate the remembrance of an awful visitation of the Almighty which took place in this Parish on the 4th day of July 1838.

On that eventful day the Lord sent forth His Thunder, Lightning, Hail and Rain, carrying devastation before them, and by a sudden irruption of Water into the Coalpits of R.C.Clarke Esqr. Twenty six human beings whose names are recorded here were suddenly summon’d to appear before their Maker.


Every neglected call of God will appear against Thee at the Day of Judgment. Let this solemn Warning then sink deep into thy heart and so prepare thee that the Lord when he cometh may find thee WATCHING.


Oaks Colliery, not very far away, was the site of two separate explosions on 13 December,1866 which caused the deaths of 361 men and boys, including a boy only ten years old. This loss of life was the highest in the history of coal mining in England.


Is there an age limit which applies to damnation? (None is mentioned in the Bible.) Can ten year olds be damned for eternity? Can five year olds?


There are many, many Christians who may differ in their dogmatic beliefs, with beliefs which contradict the beliefs of other Christians - they can't possibly all be true - but in agreement about this: orthodoxy is the way forward, conservative evangelical and Anglo-Catholic faith. This faith is based upon a literal interpretation of the Bible, a belief that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. Don't they see the difficulties here? it seems that they don't. The way forward they endorse seems to be based on complacency and worse, far worse.

Christians, not all, obviously, but a significant proportion,  have believed in every century of Christian belief that God has killed people in natural disasters, such as earthquakes, storms at sea and on land, sending plagues and other diseases as a punishment for 'sin' or as a warning to 'sinners.' There are still many, many Christians who prefer to believe in God as mass killer rather than  accept scientific explanations.


Jesus ('God the Son') did nothing to discourage warped views on killing. He warned of the destruction of towns, the punishment of towns with the punishment inflicted on Sodom and Gomorrah - more mass killing, more killing of innocent men, women, children and babies. More on this in the Gospel according to Matthew 10. In this Trinitarian religion the blame is equal and shared. There's no possibility of 'God the Father' being guilty of mass killing but the other two members of the Trinity completely innocent.


But these considerations  only arise in a religion which involves the willingness to ignore realities. Elaborate theoretical and theological explanations intended to  excuse God, to absolve him from all blame, to put the entire blame on human agency, have failed to find excuses for the Christian God,  although the excuses generally convince the simple faithful, including the simple faithful at GB News.

The first item on the list of images and comments on the page Home Page Images is about slavery - the treatment of slaves on the tiny South Atlantic island of St Helena. A copy of the material which appears on the page:

1. Slaves


The poster relates to slaves on the island of St Helena, colonized in 1659. Extract from the  St Helena 'Laws and Orders, constituted for the Negro Slaves, by the inhabitants of the island, with the approbation of the Governor and Council,' 1670: 

That no Black or Blacks, upon any pretence whatsoever, shall wander from his master’s plantation upon Sundays, without a lawful occasion granted by their said masters or mistresses, either by writing, or some other token that shall be known by the neighbourhood, upon the penalty of ten lashes on his naked body for the first offence, fifteen for the second, twenty for the third, and so for every offence thereafter committed ...

Those that shall absent their masters’ service three days, and three nights, shall be punished according to the last foregoing article, and the master make satisfaction for what they have stolen as aforesaid. For the first offence of this kind, the master or masters shall make satisfaction for what is stolen, and repair all damages done by the slave or slaves ; so soon as taken, shall be brought to the fort, and immediately receive, on his naked body, one hundred lashes, then secured ; four days after that, thirty; six days after that, twenty more, and branded in the forehead with the letter R : for the second offence in this kind, he shall be punished as above said, and wear, for one year, a chain and clogs of thirty pounds weight ; and for the third offence, satisfaction shall be made as above said to the loser or losers, and the slave or slaves shall suffer death, at the discretion of the Governor and Council.

In case any, slave, from the age of sixteen years and upwards, shall presume and attempt to strike or assault any white person whatsoever, correcting him or otherwise, for any cause whatsoever, shall, for the said offence or offences (though without weapon or dangerous instrument) undergo and suffer the punishment of castration, that is to say, shall have his, testicles cut out ...

In 1693, a slave called Jamy was sentenced to be burned alive for 'sorcery' in St Helena.


The Apostle Paul includes sorcery in the list of 'works of the flesh:' “Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife . . . and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God” (Galatians 5:19-21).

St Helena takes its name from Saint Helena, born about 250 and the mother of the emperor Constantine. It is claimed that on a pilgrimage, she discovered the actual cross on which Jesus was crucified. As a result of this discovery, she is revered as a saint by the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Church and the Lutheran Church.


According to the grim theology of another Saint, 'St' Paul, the pious St Helena has inherited the kingdom of God but the slave Jamie has not.


'St' Helena actually found three crosses, according to legend. A woman who was very ill touched all three crosses. After touching the first and second, nothing happened but when she touched the third cross, she suddenly recovered, so Helena declared that this MUST be the True Cross of Jesus.

It was also claimed that Helena found the nails used in the crucifixion of Jesus.


From the Wikipedia entry on 'Relics associated with Jesus,'


At various points in history, a number of churches in Europe have claimed to possess the Holy Prepuce,   Jesus' foreskin from his Circumcision; tears shed by Christ when mourning Lazarus; the blood of Christ shed during the crucifixion; a milk tooth that fell out of the mouth of Jesus at the age of 9; beard hair, head hair, Christ's nails. [Presumably, finger nails and toe nails.] A section of the Holy Umbilical Cord believed to remain from the birth of Christ is currently in the Archbasilica of St John Lateran.  


Throughout its history as a slave-owning, slave flogging, slave castrating and slave executing jurisdiction - and afterwards - St Helena was Christian, with active churches, where the gospel was preached, prayers offered and Holy Communion was taken. Abuses which took place in the Roman empire were ignored by Jesus, St Paul and others in the  Christian Churches - just about all of them, not just some of them. These abuses were ignored in St Helena and carried out in St Helena, although it's likely that the abuses in the Roman empire were worse.


The Roman doctor and writer on medicine Galen observed slaves being kicked, beaten with fists, and having their teeth knocked out or their eyes gouged out, witnessing the i blinding of one slave by means of a pen.


The Apostolic Fathers were Christian theologians who lived in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD. Galen's lifetime was in the same broad period.  Their writings were popular in the early Christian Church but not included in the canon of the New Testament   once it reached its final form. Many of the writings derive from the same time period and geographical location as other works of early Christian literature that did come to be part of the New Testament, and some of the writings found among the Apostolic Fathers' seem to have been just as highly regarded as some of the writings that became the New Testament.


The Apostolic Fathers never mention  barbaric treatment of slaves. Their minds were on other things, such as Ecclesiology.


In 56 AD, the Roman senator Lucius Pedanius Secundus was murdered by one of his slaves. The senate approved the execution of all of his slaves, about 400 in number - men, women, children and, it may be, babies - in accordance with Roman law. Christians, following the example of the founder of the religion, would not have been outraged. Their minds were on other things, such as converting 'heathens' to belief in Jesus as Lord and Saviour. It' likely that there will have been very few Christian converts amongst the executed slaves, probably none, and so the destiny of all of them, with perhaps a few exceptions, will have been eternal separation from God, according to this deranged theology.



The institution of slavery freely permitted the separation of baby from mother and the selling of baby and mother to different 'owners.' For most of its recorded history, Christianity has opposed heresy, blasphemy, 'witchcraft,' drunkenness, but not the slave market or harsh treatment of slaves, such as flogging.


The Church of England has apologised for its historical links to the slave trade.


Commissioners of the church, including the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, looked into their history and involvement in the slave trade and said its connection to it caused 'great dismay' and was a 'shameful and horrific sin.'


Slavery was never regarded by Jesus and St Paul as a 'shameful and horrific sin.' For most of the recorded history of the Christian churches, slavery has never been regarded as a sin at all.


The Archbishop of Canterbury will never issue an apology along these lines: 'Our founder, Jesus Christ, God the Son never regarded slavery as a sin. He allowed slavery to go unopposed. We apologize unreservedly for his failure to condemn she shameful and horrific evil of slavery.



Above, after a flogging: a slave in Louisiana in the mid nineteenth century.


Flogging of slaves in the Roman Empire would have been a public event very often, impossible not to notice but not impossible to ignore - Jesus, St Paul and vast numbers of members of the Christian Church in Roman times did ignore it.




Hunger and industry


Material on this section takes the form of extracts from my page Ireland and Northern Ireland.


On the back cover of Peter Mathias's 'The First Industrial Nation:' 'The fate of the overwhelming mass of the population in any pre-industrial society is to pass their lives on the margins of subsistence. It was only in the eighteenth century that society in north-west Europe, particularly in England, began the break with all former traditions of economic life.'


'In the 'Prologue,' this is elaborated: 'The elemental truth must be stressed that the characteristic of any country before its industrial revolution and modernization is poverty. Life on the margin of subsistence is an inevitable condition for the masses of any nation. Doubtless there will be a ruling class, based on the economic surplus produced from the land or trade and office, often living in extreme luxury. There may well be magnificent cultural monuments and very wealthy religious institutions. But with low productivity, low output per head, in traditional agriculture, any economy which has agriculture as the main constituent of its national income and its working force does not produce much of a surplus above the immediate requirements of consumption from its economic system as a whole ... The population as a whole, whether of medieval or seventeenth-century England, or nineteenth-century India, lives close to the tyranny of nature under the threat of harvest failure or disease ... The graphs which show high real wages and good purchasing power of wages in some periods tend to reflect conditions in the aftermath of plague and endemic disease.'


'Larry Zuckerman, 'The Potato:' 'Famine struck France thirteen times in the sixteenth century, eleven in the seventeenth, and sixteen in the eighteenth. And this tally is an estimate, perhaps incomplete, and includes general outbreaks only. It doesn't count local famines that ravaged one area or another almost yearly.'


Christian Wolmar's 'Blood, Iron and Gold: how the railways transformed the world' includes this, after pointing out one way in which diet was improved by the coming of the railways: 'There were countless other examples of the railways improving not only people's diets but their very ability to obtain food. France, for example, had periodically suffered famines as a result of adverse weather conditions right up to the 1840s, but once the railways began reaching the most rural parts of the country food could easily be sent to districts suffering shortages. Moreover, it would be at a price people could afford ... The consumption of fruit and vegetables by the French urban masses doubled in the second half of the nineteenth century almost solely as a result of the railways.'


No transformation in history is as important as the British industrial revolution, which quickly transformed more receptive nations, such as Belgium, but not others, such as Ireland. Why do far fewer women die in childbirth, why do few people in industrialised nations live amidst vermin, unable to feed themselves adequately or to keep warm, why do people in industrialised nations not live in insanitary cabins?


Britain's response to The Great Famine in the mid-nineteenth century was worse than inadequate, but Britain had this to its credit. It was the place where The Industrial Revolution began, where so many of the inventions and innovations which transformed life were devised, the place where for a long period of time The Industrial Revolution was most vigorous by far. There wasn't one famine in history, of course, which dwarfed all other famines, this period of famine in Ireland. By then, there had been famines in every country in the world, very often less severe, sometimes more severe. It was The Industrial Revolution which ended the threat of famine in industrialised countries. When Ireland eventually became an industrialised country itself, it was with British help.


E A Wrigley gives this useful summary of the impact and benefits of the Industrial Revolution  in 'Energy and the English Industrial Revolution:'

'One of the best ways of defining the essence of the industrial revolution is to describe it as the escape from the constraints of an organic economy. Civilisations of high sophistication developed at times in many places in the wake of the neolithic food revolution: in China, India, Egypt, the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates, Greece, and Rome, among others. Their achievements in many spheres of human endeavour match or surpass those of modern societies: in literature, painting, sculpture, and philosophy, for example, their best work will always command attention. Some built vast empires and maintained them for centuries, even millennia. They traded over great distances and had access to a very wide range of products. Their elites commanded notable wealth and could live in luxury. Yet invariably the bulk of the population was poor once the land was fully settled; and it seemed beyond human endeavour to alter this state of affairs.

'The 'laborious poverty', in the words of Jevons, to which most men and women were condemned did not arise from lack of personal freedom, from discrimination, or from the nature of the political or legal system, although it might be aggravated by such factors. It sprang from the nature of all organic economies. [In organic economies] .. plant growth ... represented the bulk of the sum total of energy which could be made available for any human purpose. The other energy sources which were accessible, chiefly wind and water, were, comparatively speaking, of minor importance. The ceiling set in this fashion to the quantity of energy which could be secured for human use was a relatively low limit because only a tiny fraction of the energy reaching the surface of the earth from the sun was captured by plant photosynthesis. Since all productive processes involved the consumption of energy, and plant growth was the dominant energy source, the productivity of the land conditioned everything else.


'The process of escape was slow but progressive ... from being a minor contributor to energy supply in Tudor times, coal increased steadily in importance, reaching a position of almost total dominance by the mid-nineteenth century.'


The Gospel of Jesus and Public Health


Prominent in the Gospel of Jesus and the teaching and practice of Jesus' followers: reliance upon miracles (such as the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000) and prayer (such as praying for an end to the plague). Christians have sometimes used other measures, such as killing Jews. During the period of the Black Death, false accusations were often made against Jews - that they had poisoned wells. Jews were sometimes tortured to make them confess to poisoning the sources of drinking water. As I point out in various places on the site, there's no record of Jesus, or St Paul, or other Christians in the early Church-  or most Christians in the centuries when Christianity was dominant - opposing the use of torture.


The Black Death was the deadly plague pandemic, at its peak between 1347 and 1351. Estimates of the number of deaths caused by the plague vary - from around 75 million to around 200 million.


The scientific perspective: Bubonic plague is caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis,  spread by fleas, but during the Black Death it probably also took a secondary form, pneumonic plague, spread by person-to-person contact.


Of all the causes of disease, diseases caused by lack of safe drinking water are the most prominent. Cholera is one example, but there are so many others. Again, the measures which have been effective are very different from the Christian 'solutions,' which are no solutions at all.


Provision of safe drinking water and treatment of sewage have been achieved by vastly different means, scientific advances, such as chlorination of drinking water, and vast construction projects, the building of reservoirs, water treatment plants, sewage plants, the construction of massive pipelines to convey drinking water (and the water needed for industry, again, on a vast scale) and separate pipelines to take away sewage.


A little information about the construction of just one civil engineering project, the construction of Derwent Dam in Derbyshire. The dam is important for many reasons, among them this: it was used for practice by the Dam Busters during the Second World War.


From the Severn Trent water publication, 'Dam builders to Dambusters:'


'Derwent Dam took over ten years to build and six months to fill!



'Imagine over a million tonnes of stone blasted out of the earth at Grindleford's Bole Hill quarry, travelling to Bamford by rail, then on to the valley over 7 miles of specially built railway ...



'Different trades worked on the dams. Skilled masons from as far away as Cornwall dressed the stone to the precisely proportioned blocks you see. Strong navvy labourers, many from Wales, worked in teams digging out foundations, shifting earth and stone.'


The industrial revolution was harsh, as harsh as the pre-industrial age, but a necessary prelude to this age of comfort and comfortable assumptions and illusions.

 The harshness of the industrial age, like the comfort of this age, wasn't, of course, shared by everyone. The harshness was experienced by people who really are all but invisible today, all but forgotten, such as the navvies.


 'Men of Iron,' the superb book by Sally Dugan, is mainly concerned with the audacious work of the engineers Isambard Kingdom Brunel and Robert Stephenson (she also does justice to the genius of their fathers, Marc Brunel and George Stephenson).

 She writes of the navvies' work, 'Maiming or mutilation came with the job, and navvies were lucky if they escaped with nothing more than the loss of a limb. They worked using picks and shovels, crowbars and wheelbarrows, and their bare hands; the only other aid they had was the occasional blast of gunpowder. Some were blinded by explosions; others were buried in rock falls. All led a life of hard, grinding physical toil, tramping from one construction site to another in search of work.'



 'Men of Iron' includess this quotation, from Elizabeth Garnett: 'Certainly no men in all the world so improve their country as Navvies do England. Their work will last for ages, and if the world remains so long, people will come hundreds of years hence to look at it and wonder at what they have done.'


The view that all navvies were sentenced to eternity in hell, except for the tiny minority who had accepted Jesus as 'personal Lord and Saviour' is contemptible.




  Inanity: 'Lack of intelligence or imagination; senselessness' (Collins Dictionary)

Christian-inanity: GB News, other anti-woke sites and other issues