Is the Archbish right?

Is Rowan Williams right to say that “no one voted” for the Coalition Government’s policies?

He was talking about its “radical long-term policies” on health and education, but the charge would be more accurate if made of the Government’s deficit-reduction plan. Labour and the Lib Dems agreed on two-thirds of the Conservative spending cuts and tax rises.

And he has a point about the NHS, although Lansley’s reforms could have been presented as an intensification of Labour policy. The weakest link, curiously, is tuition fees, because Labour and the Conservatives both supported the Browne review of university finance and, had Labour been re-elected, it would probably have brought in something similar – if perhaps not going as high as a £9,000 maximum.

Has the Archbishop been reported as criticising Nick Clegg for having changed the Liberal Democrats’ position on the deficit? No, he seems to have been criticised for saying the Tories are heartless.

But then, reading his last paragraph, it is a genuine non-papist miracle that anyone can work out what he is saying at all:

A democracy going beyond populism or majoritarianism but also beyond a Balkanised focus on the local that fixed in stone a variety of postcode lotteries; a democracy capable of real argument about shared needs and hopes and real generosity: any takers?

Recent Posts on Eagle Eye

• What to do about Syria?
• "It’s almost as if New Labour didn’t happen"
• Top 10 Useful Words For Which English Has No Equivalent
• Blair on Syria, tax and immigration
• Is Cameron an asset to his party?

• discustarded

  Yes and No

  YES on this 
  But..  NO on the whole talking animals, virgins getting pregnant and dead people coming back to life

• plutotune

  Well, in the sense that all teleology is subjective (intrinsically), so all entities are agents of their very constitution and processes and being, then the reality of objective teleology is clearly non existent.
  But conceptualising humanity (and all else) inevitably ‘orders’ teleology, and therefore does exist objectively. 
  Conceptualising the ’animal other’ is what humans have done for 10,000 years or so. Nonhuman animals have no agency, unless they are coopted into human reality. Forget the universal principle of human rights, neo-classical economics has reduced all agents to mathematical equations.
  Anthropomorphic twaddle? Maybe.

• mentalfight

  Three unholy bishops in unity (united, to degrade Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God)

  I am reading the book “Arius, Heresy and Tradition” written by Bishop Rowan Williams. Rowan Williams is the Archbishop of  Canterbury.

  Subject-specifically seen, the book of Williams is excellent. You can get a lot of information about Arius, his heresy and the struggle between bishop Athanasius, the Christian Church and Arius.

  It is common knowledge that Arius wanted to degrade Jesus Christ to a creature. Even if he was so clever to tell the Christians, they could consider Jesus Christ as a kind of God. Yet alone this heresy, to designate Jesus as a pure creature, is enough, to be condemned as a heretic.

  Assumed, Jesus had merely been a creature, he would have been never able to bear our sins at the cross. Only the eternal Son of God could bear the punishment for our sins. At the cross all our sinfulness has perished together with Jesus and we have resurrected with him to a new life. At the sacramental baptism the power of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is dedicated to us (the wrong rebaptism of some Free Churches is to reject). Near-terms to baptism we receive the Holy Spirit.

  By reading Williams’ book, I realized that Arius’ heresy goes even deeper than to degrade Jesus to a creature. Arius even tries to establish a Father-God, whose character is different or independent from the Son’s character. Strictly speaking, Arius’ tries to establish a second God beside the Christian God. Arius second God is totally inaccessible, impalpable and invisible. According to Arius, the second God can behave totally different from the Son.
  Arius’ heresy can have incalculable consequences. According to Arius it is possible that the Father-God has changed his mind and thus accepts other religions beside Christianity, for example the Islam. According to Arius someone can claim to be a Christian and to be a Moslem at the same time (by the way in the USA there is a big confusion about the faith of president Obama. Sometimes he says, he is a Christians, sometimes he claims to be a Moslem. Maybe he is a Neoarian.)

  When someone has a look at the religious landscape, it seems to be a matter of fact that a number of our religious leaders have accepted the heresy of Arius. There is a general consensus that all religions have to be acknowledged. Finally nobody knows the real opinion of the Father-God. The opinion of the Father-God can be totally different to Christianity. Maybe Christianity is solely the opinion of the Son?

  To bring to the boil, Arius even claims, the Father-God could create a second Son. That’s outrageous. This heresy can lead people to claim: “I am the Messiah!”.

  The MCA: Williams tries to rehabilitate Arius as a gifted theologian, who was just a little misunderstood by the established Church of his time. That is worse than 9/11 and Fukushima together. That is a spiritual Mega-MCA. If Arius’ heresy will spread, the Western World will perish. Bishop Williams must leave the Church. No sympathy for the devil!

  By the way the leader of the German Evangelical Church (EKD) has got a similar heresy like Arius, called doctrine of adoption. According to Schneider Jesus was just produced by sexual intercourse of Joseph and Mary. First at his baptism by John the Baptist he was raised (adopted) to God’s Son. Schneider even rejects the Virgin Birth. Mr. Schneider is a heretic, who should leave the Church.

  Assumed, the pope rejects the heresy of Arius and the doctrine of adoption, nevertheless he belongs to the Unholy Trinity. Why? Answer: The pope has stolen Christ’s office, to be the head of the Church. He says: “Who wants to get saved, must come under his (the pope’s) rule.”

  Rowan Williams, Präses Schneider and the pope have something in common: They undermine the divine sonship of Jesus Christ. They are soulkillers. They keep away people from the rule of the true Jesus Christ and by this deny the people the Salvation in Christ.

  The true Jesus:

  Let Jesus speak himself (John 14: 7-11):

  7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
  8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
  9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou [then], Shew us the Father?
  10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
  11 Believe me that I [am] in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.

  One of the most important sentences of history:

   Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou [then], Shew us the Father?

  Today let us remember Athanasius. Athanasius fighted against the heresy of Arius. Athanasius was a spiritual knight, he was a faithful spiritual fighter.

• mentalfight

  Three unholy bishops in unity (united, to degrade Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God)

  I am reading the book “Arius, Heresy and Tradition” written by Bishop Rowan Williams. Rowan Williams is the Archbishop of  Canterbury.

  Subject-specifically seen, the book of Williams is excellent. You can get a lot of information about Arius, his heresy and the struggle between bishop Athanasius, the Christian Church and Arius.

  It is common knowledge that Arius wanted to degrade Jesus Christ to a creature. Even if he was so clever to tell the Christians, they could consider Jesus Christ as a kind of God. Yet alone this heresy, to designate Jesus as a pure creature, is enough, to be condemned as a heretic.

  Assumed, Jesus had merely been a creature, he would have been never able to bear our sins at the cross. Only the eternal Son of God could bear the punishment for our sins. At the cross all our sinfulness has perished together with Jesus and we have resurrected with him to a new life. At the sacramental baptism the power of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is dedicated to us (the wrong rebaptism of some Free Churches is to reject). Near-terms to baptism we receive the Holy Spirit.

  By reading Williams’ book, I realized that Arius’ heresy goes even deeper than to degrade Jesus to a creature. Arius even tries to establish a Father-God, whose character is different or independent from the Son’s character. Strictly speaking, Arius’ tries to establish a second God beside the Christian God. Arius second God is totally inaccessible, impalpable and invisible. According to Arius, the second God can behave totally different from the Son.
  Arius’ heresy can have incalculable consequences. According to Arius it is possible that the Father-God has changed his mind and thus accepts other religions beside Christianity, for example the Islam. According to Arius someone can claim to be a Christian and to be a Moslem at the same time (by the way in the USA there is a big confusion about the faith of president Obama. Sometimes he says, he is a Christians, sometimes he claims to be a Moslem. Maybe he is a Neoarian.)

  When someone has a look at the religious landscape, it seems to be a matter of fact that a number of our religious leaders have accepted the heresy of Arius. There is a general consensus that all religions have to be acknowledged. Finally nobody knows the real opinion of the Father-God. The opinion of the Father-God can be totally different to Christianity. Maybe Christianity is solely the opinion of the Son?

  To bring to the boil, Arius even claims, the Father-God could create a second Son. That’s outrageous. This heresy can lead people to claim: “I am the Messiah!”.

  The MCA: Williams tries to rehabilitate Arius as a gifted theologian, who was just a little misunderstood by the established Church of his time. That is worse than 9/11 and Fukushima together. That is a spiritual Mega-MCA. If Arius’ heresy will spread, the Western World will perish. Bishop Williams must leave the Church. No sympathy for the devil!

  By the way the leader of the German Evangelical Church (EKD) Nikolaus Schneider has got a similar heresy like Arius, called doctrine of adoption. According to Schneider Jesus was just produced by sexual intercourse of Joseph and Mary. First at his baptism by John the Baptist he was raised (adopted) to God’s Son. Schneider also rejects the Virgin Birth. Mr. Schneider is a heretic, who should leave the Church.

  Assumed, the pope rejects the heresy of Arius and the doctrine of adoption, nevertheless he belongs to the Unholy Trinity. Why? Answer: The pope has stolen Christ’s office, to be the head of the Church. He says: “Who wants to get saved, must come under his (the pope’s) rule.”

  Rowan Williams, Präses Schneider and the pope have something in common: They undermine the divine sonship of Jesus Christ. They are soulkillers. They keep away people from the rule of the true Jesus Christ and by this deny the people the Salvation in Christ.

  The true Jesus:

  Let Jesus speak himself (John 14: 7-11):

  7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
  8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
  9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou [then], Shew us the Father?
  10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
  11 Believe me that I [am] in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.

  One of the most important sentences of history:

   Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou [then], Shew us the Father?

  Today let us remember Athanasius. Athanasius fighted against the heresy of Arius. Athanasius was a spiritual knight, he was a faithful spiritual fighter.