Exclusive: Christian New Media Awards - the finalists

Mouse can exclusively announce the finalists for the Christian New Media Awards, with many thanks to Maria Toth from Premier.  First up, here are the finalists for the categories of Best Christian Blog, Most Inspiring Leadership Blog, Best Christian Organisation and Best Christian Music Site.

From Mouse's perspective it is a rather strong field for his category, so he's delighted to be a finalist.  Interesting that the other contenders are either Bakers (the Sophia Network blog is run by Jenny Baker, wife of Jonny) or cartoonists.  Its great to see that they're all 'independent' bloggers too.

We won't know the winners until the night of the awards on 15 October, so all the best to everyone on the shortlists.

It would also be remiss of Mouse not to mention the conference associated with this event.  If you are a church leader or are involved in 'new media' do check it out.  There are lots of great speakers, and it will no doubt be a very worthwhile chance to share ideas and network.

Best Christian Blog:

The Church Mouse
Sophia Network
Jonny Baker
Jason Ramasami
Dave Walker

Most Inspiring Leadership Blog:

Dave Gilpin
Mark Stibbe
Adrian Warnock
Richard Littledale
President and Vice President of the Methodist Church

Best Christian Organisation:

24-7 Prayer
Father's House Trust
Urban Saints
Church Army
Christian Medical Fellowship

Best Christian Music Site:

Matt Redman
London Community Gospel Choir
Worship Central - Al Gordon & Tim Hughes
Musicademy

Please consider donating

Ed Miliband and religion

It has been much commented that new Labour leader Ed Miliband is an atheist.  Some humanist sites have rejoiced that two of the three party leaders now describe themselves as non-believers.  Both Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband have spoken of their respect for people who do have a religious faith, and Nick Clegg even implied that he wished he had a faith.

The truth about Ed Miliband's beliefs, however, seem more nuanced than that.

Mouse was rather struck by last night's Newsnight interview with Jeremy Paxman.  Paxman asked Miliband about his upbringing and faith.  In response Miliband said a number of really interesting things.  "Yes I'm a Jew" was his first response.  He then explains that he is not "practicing" (a phrase that Mouse hates and is only ever used by atheists) because it was not the tradition in which he was brought up.  

However the point which really made Mouse sit up was when he explained that he does not believe in God, but has "great respect" for those who do, adding "I think, in a way, it might make life on earth easier if you do".  It was hard to read the body language at this point.  Both he and Paxman had broad smiles on their faces at this time, with Miliband looking slightly embarassed by the whole thing. 

This does, of course, ask big questions about the role of faith in our lives.  Some would argue that it does make life easier, and others would say that life is just as hard with a faith as without - its just that some of the difficulties are different.  Mouse would be in the latter camp.

It struck Mouse that Miliband was probably attempting to follow Clegg's line that in some ways he wished he did have a faith, but unfortunately doesn't.  This is designed to make believers feel that they are resepcted and valued, whilst making non-believers feel that he's also on the side of reason and rationality, no matter how nice it might be to believe in these fairy stories.  

Patronising all round really.  If the truth is that he looked at it and decided it was not true, Mouse would rather he just said that.

You can see that part of the interview at about 0.53 into this video.

Please consider donating

On-line hustings for General Synod elections

General Synod elections are underway, and Mouse has been struck by the rather archaic methods involved.  Not just in the strange form of democracy applied, whereby only members of Deanery Synods  get to vote for General Synod members, but also by the election process itself.

Mouse was rather surprised to hear that the standard approach is for candidates to write an election address on two pages of A4, which are distributed to those elligible to vote, who reply through a postal vote system.  Of course, that means any new members who are not known to the electorate may get little more than two sides of A4 to introduce themselves and their stance of the key issues.  However, Dioceses are at liberty to organise further opportunities for candidates views to be heard.

So Mouse says well done to Bristol Diocese (and any others who have done this without Mouse's knowledge) for acting like we really are living in the 21st century when it comes to General Synod elections.

Bristol Diocese have taken a bold step forward and asked each candidate to record a short video and put their election addresses online.  They have recorded a virtual hustings debate and made that available online too, so those who do have a vote have a much better chance of getting to know the candidates.

Now that sounds like something which should be standard practice to Mouse.

Please consider donating

Top ten unanswerable questions

A fun little piece from the search engine Ask Jeeves.  To celebrate their anniversary they have put together the top ten list of unanswerable questions which have been most commonly posted on their search engine.  They are:

1. What is the meaning of life?
2. Is there a God?
3. Do blondes have more fun?
4. What is the best diet?
5. Is there anybody out there?
6. Who is the most famous person in the world?
7. What is love?
8. What is the secret to happiness?
9. Did Tony Soprano die?
10. How long will I live?

In itself this is rather interesting, showing how the big questions really are on people's minds.  However, the good people at Ask Jeeves have a little more imagination than just to post a list of questions.  They have set up a website to debate these questions to see if answers can be found.  In addition, they've asked people to engage in on-line debates.

Please consider donating

Ordinariate developments - full steam ahead for who knows what

For those following the snail like progress of the Ordinariate since the Pope announced it nearly a year ago, you may be slightly baffled by the latest developments.

A group of Anglo-Catholics, largely from Forward in Faith, have established a 'society' within the Church of England.  For what purpose?  We don't really know.  What will this society do?  We don't really know.  Who will run the society?  We don't really know.

The first action of the Society will be to immediately set about theological investigations of what it is for.  Brilliant stuff.

Neverthelss, you can sign-up online and join the Society of St Wilfred and St Hilda, so long as you have any idea whatsoever of what you're joining.

It has been widely reported that this society will be the pre-cursor to the Ordinariate, but the statement seems to say that this is "in addition to the Ordinariate" and that it will operate within the Church of England.

Mouse copies the statement announcing the society in full below.  If someone can explain, please do so in the comments.

Meanwhile, the Catholic Herald has picked up on comments made by some of the Flying Bishops which imply that the Ordinariate might be up and running by the end of the year.  We'll see.

-------------------
A Statement issued yesterday on behalf of the Bishop of Chichester, the Bishop of Gibraltar in Europe, the Bishop of Beverley, the Bishop of Burnley, the Bishop of Edmonton, the Bishop of Horsham, the Bishop of Plymouth, the Bishop of Pontefract, Bishop Lindsay Urwin OGS and others.

Anglican Catholic bishops have announced that in addition to the provision of an Ordinariate offered recently by Pope Benedict there is to be a new Society [of St Wilfrid and St Hilda] for bishops, clergy, religious and laity in order to provide a place within the Church of England where catholics can worship and minister with integrity without accepting innovations that further distance the Church of England from the greater churches of the East and West.

At two upbeat gatherings this week of over 600 clergy and religious from the northern and southern provinces of the Church of England, there was unanimous condemnation of proposed legislation to allow the ordination of women as bishops that will soon go to the dioceses for discussion, debate and approval.

The unveiling of The Missionary Society of St Wilfrid and St Hilda reflects a determination not to accept a Code of Practice as currently suggested by the General Synod but to work for and create a more realistic approach which allows the integrity of those who cannot accept this innovation to be preserved, to flourish and grow within the Church of England. This development represents a constructive initiative on the part of those who cannot accept the innovations proposed in legislation and who are hurt and frustrated by the General Synod’s inability to provide for their theological position.

The Society has been named after two English saints with a passion for the unity of the church and is expected to attract thousands of members. It was quite clear during the gatherings that many wish to remain loyal to the comprehensive nature (within the confines) of the Church of England despite the legislation and are unlikely to join the Ordinariate at least in the foreseeable future.

As with the Ordinariate further details about the Society and its life will emerge in the comings months. In the meantime a group has been asked to do some theological reflection about the identity of the Society, its common life and the way it might have the potential for ecumenical dialogue directed towards the goal of full visible communion with the rest of the Church catholic, both Eastern and Western.

The meetings were called by catholic bishops to allow those with concerns about the future to consult together. The gatherings were united in their concern about the disastrous implications the proposals will have for the cause of Christian unity with the Church both East and West and for the genuine comprehensiveness of the Church of England should the legislation pass. However it was clear that participants at the conferences are likely to take divergent paths in the future. But all are committed to a “parting of friends” and the maintaining of the closest possible relationship.

The Bishop of Plymouth, John Ford, on behalf of the Catholic bishops, said today: “It was greeted with utter incredulity that this debate should be allowed without any clarity concerning the promised provision for those unable to accept this innovation.

In the meantime a group has been asked to do some theological reflection about the identity of the Society, its common life and the way it might have the potential for ecumenical dialogue directed towards the goal of full visible communion with the rest of the Church catholic, both Eastern and Western.

This development represents a constructive initiative on the part of those who cannot accept the innovations proposed in legislation and who are hurt and frustrated by the General Synod’s inability to provide for their theological position.

The Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus, published on 4th November 2009, was positively commended to the Sacred Synod of Anglican priests from the Southern Province, meeting at Westminster on 24th September, 2010. The Apostolic Constitution offers Anglo Catholics the way to full communion with the Catholic Church for which they have worked and prayed for at least a century and it is a way in which they will be ‘united and not absorbed’. Pope Benedict spoke warmly about the Apostolic Constitution when he addressed a meeting of Catholic bishops at Oscott College, on 19th September 2010, during his recent State Visit to the United Kingdom. He set the offer firmly within the developing ecumenical dialogue when he described it as ‘a prophetic gesture that can contribute positively to developing relations between Anglicans and Catholics’. This, then, is an exciting initiative for those for whom the vision of ARCIC of corporate union has shaped their thinking over recent years.

The crucial issue is the ministry of the Pope himself, as the successor of St Peter. Anglicans who accept that ministry as it is presently exercised will want to respond warmly to the Apostolic Constitution. Those who do not accept the ministry of the Pope or would want to see that ministry in different ways will not feel able to accept Anglicanorum Coetibus. The decision to respond to the provisions of the Apostolic Constitution is not dependent on the decisions of the General Synod or on any particular issue of church order. The initiative should be judged on its own merit. It will require courage, and vision on the part of those who accept the invitation, particularly amongst the first to respond. Although there are few practical details at present in the public forum, discussions have already been taking place as to how the vision of the Apostolic Constitution can be implemented. It is expected that the first groups will be small congregations, energetically committed to mission and evangelism and serving the neighbourhood in which they are set.

Please consider donating

ONS Integrated Household Survey - 70% identify as Christian

Mouse has said on a number of occasions that the number of people in Britain who claim to be Christian varies dramatically based on the wording of the question you ask.  In this instance, the question was, "What is your religion, even if you are not currently practising?"  This allows for a rather broader interpretation, and no doubt many would have answered Christian for cultural reasons, rather than because they would claim to recognise the Lord Jesus as their personal saviour.

Nevertheless it is an impressive statistic, showing that even though many people may not go to church, they still in some sense consider themselves Christian.  There was an option for 'No Religion' which 20.5% went for.

The actual number who stated their religion was Christian was 71.4%, interestingly this is slightly up from the 2001 census figure of 70.6%, however, BRIN's commentary points to some differences in calculation (one excluded people who didn't answer the question, whilst the other didn't), and it is likely that these are both within a reasonable margin for error in survey based stats.

Mouse would have expected the number to have fallen, as we are constantly being told that religion is on the decline in Britain, but this doesn't seem to be the case.

Please consider donating

Rowan's little communication problem

Rowan Williams has managed something quite remarkable with his now widely reported interview with the Times (paywalled so link is to BBC).  He has managed to offend many within the Church and make the Church look rather foolish (or worse) simply by attempting to explain the official line on gay clergy which has been in place since 1991.

Not bad eh.

Rowan made a school boy interview error, in failing to understand the reason why he was being asked a question and failing to realise what would happen if he answered it.

The interview was actually rather long and wide ranging, but Rowan must be aware that if anything passes his lips on the subject of homosexuality, particularly homosexuality amongst clergy, then everything else he says will become irrelevant.  It was naive of him to think that the interviewer actually wanted to understand the church's line on gay clergy, as this is widely known and easily accessed.  Actually, they just wanted Williams to say something on the topic, anything on the topic, which can then be used to generate a headline.

And so we have "Williams backs gay clergy as long as they're celibate".

Mouse's view is that Rowan has two possible reactions to this kind of question.  The first is simply to stonewall.  That would be Mouse's advice.  Simply respond, "the Church's approach to this is well known and widely documented" then refuse to go further.  This is rather boring for interviewers but doesn't give them room to make up juicy headlines.

The other option is rather more high risk.  That would be to say, "the Church's line on this is well known and widely documented, but we all know that it is a dreadful fudge concocted to try to avoid total civil war in the Church.  I hope to be able to move forward on that in due course."

The benefit of this is that it avoids you sounding like you're defending a pretty indefensible position, as the Church's current line really is.  It is inconsistent and illogical, but its what we've got.  The second is that it puts Rowan on the front foot leading the debate.  Of course, it is more high risk, as many within the Church would respond with their usual venom.  However, the ultimate virtue of this position for Rowan Williams is that it is actually what he believes.

Still, at least the selection of a new leader of the Labour party is keeping it lower in the news bulletins that might otherwise be the case.  There is something to be said for timing, if not content.

Please consider donating

Interview with a Mouse

Mouse has given a short interview for The Big Bible project.  This is an initiative which sits under the Bible Fresh programme.  The overall aims seems to be to get people reading the Bible and engaging with it and each other through social media.

The Big Bible project is being run by Dr Bex Lewis, who has her own blog with similar themes.

Please consider donating

How General Synod elections work: guest post from Justin Brett

General Synod elections are underway.  But Mouse suspects most people don't know how the people who make important decisions at Synod are chosen.  So he asked Justin Brett to provide an outline of the process.  Justin was a member of the last Synod, and is standing for election to the House of Laity for the next Synod.  It's certainly not a straight forward process, and Mouse will be returning to the question of whether it is fit for purpose at a later date.

You can find more posts by Justin on the General Synod Blog and also on his own blog The Dodgy Liberal. The title of the latter might tell you something about his church-related views.

---------------------------------

Mouse has very kindly allowed me to don my electoral anorak by asking me to write a short post about how General Synod elections work. The fact that it might not be short at all will probably be the subject of a following post by the man (mouse) himself...

General Synod has three Houses - Bishops, Clergy and Laity - and unsurprisingly the elections work differently for each, although they all vote using the Single Transferable Vote system. First of all, diocesan bishops are automatically members of the House of Bishops, as is the Bishop of Dover. He is technically a suffragan in Canterbury diocese, but functions as its diocesan. There are also a few suffragan bishops who are elected by their peers. Four suffragans from the province of Canterbury are elected by all the suffragans in the province, and likewise two (I think, but it might be three) are elected by the province of York. So far so slightly labyrinthine.

The House of Clergy is somewhat simpler. All the licensed clergy in a diocese vote for the clergy representatives of that diocese - called Proctors in Convocation, which is rather splendid. The number of proctors is determined by the number of licensed clergy in each diocese. Oxford has nine, for example, while Durham has three.

The House of Laity is where it gets a bit odd. Each diocese has a number of lay representatives determined by the total number of people on electoral rolls within the diocese, but House of Laity members are elected by the members of Deanery Synods, who together form a sort of electoral college. So in my case, despite the fact that I hope to represent all the lay people in the diocese of Chichester, the only people who will actually get to vote for me (or not, as the case may be) will be the 500 or so lay members of Chichester's 21 Deanery Synods. In fact, this time round I can't even vote for myself - you have to be on an electoral roll in the diocese to be able to stand as a lay candidate, but because I was representing Oxford until July I couldn't be a member of my Deanery Synod in Brighton. (My church elected me anyway, but that's a different story...)

And how, you may ask, do people find out about the candidates anyway? In the case of suffragan bishops and clergy, they generally know each other reasonably well. Laity, however, generally don't - and that's where the Election Address comes in. Every candidate is allowed to fill two sides of A4 with a statement that is then sent to all electors. You can find the text of several of them on the General Synod Blog. People ususally include biographical details, as well as a rough idea of where they fit in to the C. of E.'s broad spectrum of beliefs - some people are very up front about this, but there is a fair amount of code there too. People also usually name their proposer and seconder. Although you don't have to put your age on your election address, your year of birth appears on the ballot paper, which is in itself interesting. Actually, in Chichester's case it is quite shocking. At 39 I am the youngest candidate on the ballot...

Just as a final point, if you would like a slightly sharper take on the whole synod election thing, then I would recomment Bishop Alan's Blog along with the comments attached to his post. It is, I am certain, all too complicated and not democratic enough. Nevertheless, if you happen to be a member of a Deanery Synod in the diocese of Chichester I would be very grateful for your first preference vote...

Please consider donating

Friday round up

Here's my round up from the blogosphere.  Ten of the best from the blogs this week:

1. The Big Bible project have an audio interview with The Church Mouse

2. The Church Sofa on the benefits of pews and chairs

3. Phil Ritchie on how helpful it is to call each other Nazis

4. Tall Skinny Kiwi with some random thoughts on living with Muslims

5. FaithWorld on the strange (and pointless) report on how the Red Sea could have been parted

6. Bishop Alan on Synod election addresses & Lesley Fellows with some top tips on the same subject

7. Dave Bish has the top 10 unanswerable questions

8. Significant Truths asks whether secularism is a friend or a foe

9. BRIN on how many Catholics there are and how many Muslims

10. SuperBadger on the Millennium Development Goals summit

Please consider donating

Open letter to Michael Gove - no flying spaghetti monster theories in science lessons

Dear Mr Gove

I note with interest that you have given assurances to the British Humanist Association that creationism and intelligent design should not be taught in school science lessons on the basis that they are not on the national curriculum.  However, I support the BHA's call for stronger measures to ensure these non-scientific theories are not taught.  A legally binding curriculum backed up by a national schools inspection regime are simply not adequate.

More importantly, however, I note that there is no statutory provision to prevent a whole range of other unproven theories in science lessons.  Take the issue of flying spaghetti monsters, for example.  Professor Richard Dawkins alerted me to these "creatures" some time ago, and I understand that the entire scientific community is of one mind on the issue, and agree that they do not exist.  And yet there is no specific statutory measure which prevents science teachers from indoctrinating the young children of Britain with this theory, other than the fact that it is not on the curriculum and their compliance with the curriculum is monitored by OFSTED inspectors on a regular basis.

I would also like you to implement statutory measures to prevent the teaching of the following non-facts:

• ducks quacks don't echo - they do, of course, like all sounds
• a tooth left in a glass of coke overnight will dissolve - no it won't, and can be easily proven by scientific experimentation
• Elvis is working in a chip shop in Grantham - I went to every chip shop in Grantham and can attest to the falsity of this rumour

To properly safeguard against these things, we must go much further than simply regulating the curriculum and monitoring against it.  I recommend training members of the British Humanist Association to sit in on all school lessons and making notes of anything taught which deviates from the approved curriculum.  We simply cannot leave it to teachers to teach facts, or to the school regulators to monitor their performance at this.

Your indignantly

The Church Mouse

Please consider donating

BBC receives hundreds of complaints about coverage of the Papal visit - some say too favourable, some say too critical

Mouse commented earlier in the week about how both opponents and supporters of the Pope both seem to have detected bias against their cause in the media coverage of the Papal visit.  The BBC confirm this view by announcing the complaints they have received about their coverage of the visit.

The BBC mainly covered the visit on their news channel, but with the official welcome in Edinburgh and the outdoor services in London and Birmingham also shown on BBC2 and Radio 4.

In response to this the following comments were received:

384 complained that there was too much coverage of the visit
197 complained that the coverage too critical in nature
169 complained that the coverage was too favourable in nature
122 wrote to commend the coverage

The BBC responded with a pretty big stone wall, and rightly so in Mouse's view.  They said:

In its News and Current Affairs coverage of any subject the BBC is always committed to impartiality and accuracy, seeking also to reflect the different sides of any debate. The coverage of the current Papal visit was no different, and careful planning went into making sure that we provided the most comprehensive and authoritative coverage for our audiences.

Mouse reckons the split in opinion pretty well demonstrates that the coverage probably pretty was fair.

Please consider donating

A Benedict bounce for the Catholic church?

Cardinal Keith O'Brien announced on the last day of the Papal visit that the church was enjoying a "Benedict Bounce", referring to a jump in popularity caused by the attention given to the Pope.  I'm sure Pope Benedict was amused by the idea, although he may have been slightly baffled by the term, unless he is familiar with British political jargon.  O'Brien said,

The St Ninian scarf, which you so graciously wore, showed you were proud to be an honorary Scotsman just for a day.

Already in Scotland we are talking about the ‘Benedict bounce’. Be assured, Holy Father, that we are bouncing back. You are reassuring us that Christianity is alive and well in our countries.

Now there seems to be some early polling evidence that there has been a small bounce for the Church, in the form of a YouGov poll.  The survey shows that 19% of people felt their perception of the Pope has become more positive as a result of the visit, compared with 9% who felt their perception of the Pope had become more negative.  So that's a net 10% feeling more positive about the Pope.

This strikes Mouse as a rather small bounce, but significant nonetheless.  However, we don't have much of a breakdown on the data and it was quite a small sample (772), so its pretty hard to interpret.  It may be the case that these movements are simply reinforcing existing views (i.e. those who feel more positive already felt pretty positive, and those who felt more negative were already pretty negative).  In this case, the movement wouldn't mean much.  If the trend is more general, then it could be indicative of a more broad improvement in perceptions of the Pope.  The survey did give options for "No difference - I had a positive opinion of the Pope anyway" and the opposite, so Mouse tends to read this as a more general improvement.  However, it should be noted that the most popular answer to the question at 49% was "No difference - I had a negative opinion of the Pope anyway".

Mouse's other observation is that the question asked is quite specifically about perceptions of the Pope.  Not the church.  So this doesn't necessarily mean that we will be seeing more people lining up outside Catholic churches for mass this coming Sunday.  But then again, we might.

Please consider donating

Don't forget the Anglican Communion

Whilst all eyes in Britain have been on the Catholic Church, we might have forgotten that there are grave fears about the state of the Anglican Communion.  

On the other side of the pond, the tittle-tattle has continued over the events at the African Primate's meeting in Entebbe.  David Virtue, who styles himself as the "Voice of Global Orthodox Anglicanism" has published a rather comprehensive view of why he believes a "paperless divorce" now exists in the Anglican Communion.

Essentially he claims that at Entebbe, the African Bishops secretly decided that the game is up for the Anglican Communion as we know it.  He wrote:

African bishops and archbishops who spoke privately to VOL [Virtue OnLine - David Virtue's blog] in Entebbe, Uganda, believe that the communiqué issued by orthodox Anglican African bishops expressing concern over "progressive developments" in the West was a surface response to the deep fissures and unbridgeable divide that now exists between the Global South and the Global North and there is "absolutely" no way the two can ever come together again. Ever.

His conclusion is that whilst the Communion may never formally split, there will in effect be two communions with the global south doing their own thing and everyone else doing their own thing.

Mouse reckons that might just be a good thing, and a jolly good way of settling the whole argument.

Please consider donating

When school awards turn nasty

The Church of England have announced the introduction of awards for church schools.

Church schools across the country are being invited to showcase examples of how they help foster strong community relations with the launch of the Church School Awards for inspiring citizens and transforming communities.

Sounds great, doesn't it.  But not everyone was happy about this.  It rather rained on the parade of the Accord Coalition's Inclusive School Awards.

You see the Accord Coalition campaigns for Church schools to lose their right to have religious criteria in their selection and employment policies.  Mouse has no truck with this, as OFSTED have said that Church Schools are better at promoting community cohesion than other schools.  The argument that they create religious ghettos is not borne out by the evidence.  However, Accord have not reacted well to the new awards.  Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain, Chair of the Accord Coalition said:

We welcome attempts to improve community cohesion, but the commitment of the Church Schools Award towards inclusivity and advancing community cohesion seems at best insincere, and at worst a distraction from the negative effects that religious discrimination of many faith schools has on wider society. It is very troubling therefore that the Church of England and Methodist Church have chosen to support the Church Schools Award on this basis.

You see, the new Church School Awards are basically the same as Accord's award, which was set up the year before, but does not look at the employment or selection policies of the school.

It is rather interesting that these awards were set up in consecutive years.  It almost leaves Mouse with the view that the Church of England has sharpened up on its PR.

Please consider donating

Why has no-one mentioned the Ordinariate during the Papal visit?

Perhaps Mouse just missed it, but he has not heard a squeek about the Ordinariate throughout the entire Papal visit.  It is possible that the Vatican decided with would be considered a slap in the face for Rowan by the watching media if the Pope was to mention it.  However, he did mention it.  During his speech to the English Bishops at Oscott College he said:

The other matter I touched upon in February with the Bishops of England and Wales, when I asked you to be generous in implementing the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus. This should be seen as a prophetic gesture that can contribute postitively to the developing relations between Anglicans and Catholics. It helps us to set our sights on the ultimate goal of all ecumenical activity: the restoration of full ecclesial communion in the context of which the mutual exchange of gifts from our respective spiritual patrimonies serves as an enrichment to us all. Let us continue to pray and work unceasingly in order to hasten the joyful day when the goal can be accomplished.

In itself this is a fascinating passage.  Of course, many will see the reference to "full ecclesial communion" as meaning the absorption of all churches into the Roman Catholic fold, whilst others will see this as tacit acceptance of the legitimacy of apostolic succession in the Anglican church.  Mouse doesn't quite go along with either of these, and feels that it should be taken at face value.

Of course, others will note that it is a strange plea for the Pope to have to make at all.  It has been widely reported that the Catholic Bishops aren't too pleased with the whole idea, so it is possible that this is simply a plea from the Pope not to scupper the entire enterprise.

Please consider donating

Media coverage of the Papal visit

Mouse was struck once again by difference perceptions of how the media covered the Papal visit.  On a similar note to Mouse's observation prior to the visit, he has noted that those who wished to protest about the visit have largely claimed that the media has been uncritical of its coverage of the event.

During the visit, the National Secular Society stated that, "As expected, the fawning British media is giving the Pope a very easy ride", and yet Christians continue to believe that the NSS (membership c4,000) punch way above their weight in terms of media presence, and it is only fair that the spiritual leader of around 1.2bn people makes a few headlines when he is in town.

The secularist argument is that in order for coverage of the Pope's visit to be 'balanced' it should include both sides of their argument.  However, Catholics believe that the criticisms of a small minority should not carry equal weight with a much larger majority.

Mouse's view (subjective though it may be) is that the NSS do get far more media attention than their numbers merit.  They claim to be speaking on behalf of a silent majority, but this argument is specious when espoused by anyone with a small following, and their case should be no exception, particularly so on this occasion when a number of opinion polls showed that very few actively opposed the Papal visit.

In the case of the Papal visit, the protestors had a number of high profile cases where their argument was aired.  A series of prime-time documentaries came from a critical perspective, including Peter Tatchell's own documentary and all the newspapers covered the critical angles, particularly the Guardian.

Mouse reckons the basic fact is that everyone thinks they are not being listened to enough by the media, but there are few instances where this really is the case.

Please consider donating

Guest Post: Reflections on the Papal visit by Dominic Burbidge of Catholic Voices

Mouse will be reflecting on the impact of the Papal visit on the Church of England, but also wanted to post a perspective from the Catholic Church.  Dominic Burbidge is a postgraduate student of Oriel College, Oxford, and a member of Catholic Voices, a media team set up to explain Catholic teaching during the Pope’s visit.  Here Dominic reflects on the visit.

Views expressed below are Dominic's and may not reflect Mouse's views.

Dominic writes:

---------------------------------------------------------

Rome hits home 

Sitting in the chapel of Oriel College last Wednesday, Blessed John Henry Newman’s spot, I prayed hard that Pope Benedict’s visit would be a success. I must have been praying very hard indeed because it wasn’t long before the alarm went off and the porter ran in, asking if I had stepped past the boundary into the altar.

The tension I felt for the Pope’s visit was a tension shared by many British Catholics. The UK is the last place I want to show my Catholic faith in. It is not a place of discrimination or intolerance but there is a certain anxiety when feeling everyone else’s unspoken judgment: he is Catholic because he was brought up that way. That’s why he doesn’t do what he wants to; the Church guilt-tripped him into following a moral code.

During these days in which Pope Benedict has been in the country, he echoed the words of Blessed Newman, challenging us to be bold in our faith. Whether we are school children, teachers, professionals or elderly, Newman and Benedict are crying out to us: “Religion ... is not a problem for legislators to solve, but a vital contributor to the national conversation.”

Amidst the dizzying tumult of people and whirling show of flags, the Pope struck home with three points. First, faith and reason depend on each other like brothers. Throw away one and you lose the other; no one can be a brother on their own. In this country we are used to defining faith as blind acceptance. But this is an understanding lodged in a stereotype of the enlightenment somehow challenging the fundamentals of religion. The Pope sees faith in terms of the bringing together of different disciplines of reason into a unified whole—scientific certainty is not the only type of certainty. Faith follows the reasoned findings of the pure sciences, philosophy, history, sociology and theology and finds their points of unity. This is the faith that is inspiring, not just for religious but for the public at large.

Secondly, the Pope has joined forces with Newman on the fundamental importance of the respect for conscience. In Westminster Hall, where St Thomas More was sentenced for treason, Pope Benedict affirmed how “the great English scholar and statesman ... is admired by believers and non-believers alike for the integrity with which he followed his conscience, even at the cost of displeasing the sovereign whose ‘good servant’ he was, because he chose to serve God first.”

This was not the Pope highlighting grievance with Henry VIII but a rallying call to Brits throughout the country. Conscience in public life is being shut out. From issues of embryonic stem cell research to euthanasia to homosexual adoption, legislators are convinced: there is no right to stand up against the license of individuals to do as they see fit. Pope Benedict joins voices with Newman and complains: “there are those who argue—paradoxically with the intention of eliminating discrimination—that Christians in public roles should be required at times to act against their conscience. These are worrying signs of a failure to appreciate not only the rights of believers to freedom of conscience and freedom of religion, but also the legitimate role of religion in the public square.” The ability to act in conscience is essential for democracy, essential for the tolerance to other views of which our country is rightly proud.

And this deeper understanding of respect culminates in a third point Benedict and Newman have stressed: friendship. The theme of the papal visit: “heart speaks to heart” calls on Brits to value their personal relationship with each other and their personal relationship with God. In the bedroom chapel of Newman in Birmingham, pictures of his friends lined the wall so that he could turn and pray for them during Mass—his very own facebook. And so amidst the urban jungle of modern life, these two quiet gentlemen, Benedict and Newman, ask this third thing of us: that we may open our hearts to friends and God.

Please consider donating

New blogging bishop

Mouse would like to congratulate Bishop Paul Butler on starting a blog, and would like to direct your RSS readers in that general direction.

Paul is the new Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham, having previously been Bishop of Southampton.  He is also Children's advocate for the good old CofE.

As well as blogging Bishop Paul has been a member of the Twurch of England for a while.

Now, could someone over at the good old CofE update their website?

Please consider donating

Offensive ice cream? Mouse doesn't think so

The Advertising Standards Authority has upheld 10 complaints it has received about an advert for ice cream on the basis that it is likely to offend Christians, particularly Catholics.  Mouse thinks this is utter madness.

So lets start from the point that Mouse cannot see anything offensive in this advert.  Mouse can't really see anyone other than the seriously closed minded finding it offensive.  So why would the ASA think it would be highly likely to cause "serious or widespread" offense?

Perhaps it reflects a lack of understanding of Christians in general and Catholics in particular.  However, there is definitely a danger in public institutions trying too hard to avoid offending religious groups.  That is one of the reasons we end up with organisations which ban the word Christmas, in case non-believers or people of non-Christian faiths become offended - which of course they never are.

Please consider donating

Quote of the day

Ian Paisley, after flying to Edinburgh and setting up a protest within sight of the Pope:

"I shall be keeping as far away as possible."

Strangest comment on the Papal visit?

Mouse was really confused yesterday on more than one occasion as he attempted to follow the massive media coverage of the Papal visit, as the show hit London.

One particular cause of confusion came when the British Humanist Association put out a press release at 10.26am denouncing the Pope's outspoken attack on Britain's equality laws.  Except if you read it carefully, the speech was due to be given later in the day, and it was actually denouncing something that they were expecting the Pope to say in the future.  Why they couldn't wait for him to actually say it before they put the press release out utterly baffled Mouse.

As it turned out, they were close, but not quite right with their prediction.  Pope Benedict XVI did speak about the place of religion in public life, but he didn't mention our equality laws.  Unfortunately that rather gave the impression that they had formed their opinions before listening to the Pope's point of view.  As a result, when they responded to what the Pope actually did say later on in the day, it felt a little like they had shoe-horned their criticism to fit with the Pope's comments, rather than actually responding to them.

Very odd indeed.

The other contender for strangest comment of the day yesterday came from religious think tank Ekklesia.  They carried a news story headlined "Pope needs to listen, not lecture, says think-tank".  Read on and you will find that the think-tank in question was ... Ekklesia!

Please consider donating

Mobile site - apologies for incompetence

Apologies to anyone who has tried unsuccesfully to access the mobile version of this blog earlier today.  Through Mouse's own stupidity this site is now down, so Mouse has switched it off until he has the time required to fix it.

Please consider donating

Quote of the day

Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, on meeting the Pope.

"He seemed smaller and thinner than I expected"

Let's hope he doesn't meet President Sarkozy without a briefing.

Please consider donating

Friday round up

Here's my round up from the blogosphere.  Ten of the best from the blogs this wee.

1. Cranmer is back, and writes on the place of faith in public life

2. Guardian live-blog the papal visit so following it couldn't be easier

3. Gavin Drake has an urgent press release from the Liberal Elite

4. BRIN follow up on Christian Research's announcement on church attendance by mapping church attendance

5. Twurch of England blog looks at the tech side of the Papal visit

6. Clayboy wonders how child-friendly the Bible really is

7. Thinking Anglicans point out the spat over funding of the African bishops conference

8. Bishop Nick Baines does not like Polly Toynbee's latest article

9. Andrew M Brown on the Pope and Blue Peter

10. New Humanist looks at the pregnant nuns ice cream advert

Please consider donating

+++ Breaking 5 men arrested by counter terrorism police for Pope plot +++

It is being reported that five men have been arrested by counter terrorism police on suspicion of plotting to harm the Pope.  The arrests were made early this morning based on intelligence reports.

Some have questioned the cost of the Papal visit, and described policing as 'over the top', however, it was clear that there was always a threat to the Pope, which this seems to confirm.

Please consider donating

David Cameron quotes The Church Mouse

Well sort of.  Actually its stretching the facts beyond breaking point, but bear with Mouse here for a little bit.

Mouse was delighted to give Benita Hewitt from Christian Research the opportunity to talk about the findings of her latest research into Church attendance.  It was a major story to hear that Church attendance had levelled off after a decade of serious decline.  It is important because it fundamentally changes the perception of the Church in Britain from an aged institution in terminal decline to an organisation which can hold its own in the modern world.  Perhaps one day soon we may even believe that it is the hope for the future.

So after Mouse had put the word out, he was delighted to see it in the Telegraph and then the Guardian gave Benita a Cif slot.  The Church Times have followed today.  And then things got interesting.

Mouse started to hear that the research was being mentioned in some rather interesting places.  Mouse was told that the research was mentioned on Newsnight, although Mouse hasn't found this yet on iPlayer.  Baroness Warsi's address to the Church of England's House of Bishops seemed to draw on this research, amongst other research which supports the same view.  But then Mouse heard that David Cameron had said the following:

There has been a lot of exaggerated comment that Pope Benedict will this week be visiting a largely secular country. I do not agree with this and there is much evidence in polls and the attendance at religious services to contradict it. [Emphasis added by Mouse]

Mouse can only assume that the reference to "attendance at religious services" refers to the Christian Research data featured on this blog.  


Now Mouse is not foolish enough to suggest that any of these people have read the Church Mouse blog, but since the news of this research first appeared here is rather significant.  What it says to Mouse is that blogs can make a difference to the way the Church is perceived.

Please consider donating

Where's Benny? A Mouse eye view of the Papal visit Day 1

Things got off to a pretty shaky start with comments from Cardinal Walter Kasper which didn't sound too complimentary about Britain.  However, the 77 year-old Cardinal developed gout, so won't be here to explain himself.  From Mouse's perspective he is very surprised by the level of comment generated by an interview which seems to only be available in hard copy in Germany in German.  Mouse wonders how many of those criticising the Cardinal were able to read the comments in context.

So after this hiccup, Mouse was looking forward to the Pope being greeted at Edinburgh airport by Prince Philip.  Even the most optimistic Catholic must have considered this a PR risk.

Nevertheless, the greeting passed off without incident, which led to the exchange of gifts between the Pope and the Queen.  The Pope will have to find room in his suitcase for an rather large edition of 85 sketches from the 16th Century German artist Hans Holbein the Younger - all tastefully encased in a white papal binding. In return, the Pope handed over to the Queen a copy of the Lorsch Gospels dating from 778 to 820.  Isn't she a lucky thing.

The Pope gave a speech at Holyrood House thanking the Queen for her welcome and since it mentioned atheism, that sentence got all the headlines for a few minutes.  The BHA fired out a press release accusing him of libel with such speed that some suspected it had been pre-written.  Considering some of the things the BHA and their 'distinguished supporters' have been saying about the Pope Mouse reckons they've got some chutzpah at taking offence at this one.

Next the Pope went for a drive rather cleverly wearing tartan to endear himself to the locals.  He was taken for a lunch of haggis the home of Cardinal Keith O'Brien, Scotland´s most senior Catholic. Lets just hope he didn't ask what was in it.

It looked to Mouse like the crowd lining the route was a little disappointing.  Police estimated it at 125,000, which is reasonably decent, but it looked rather thin in parts to Mouse.  On the other hand, the protest was put at 150, which must be considered rather disappointing.

The Papal Mass came next, and the vibe on Twitter seemed to indicate that this was the highlight of the day by a long shot.  The crowd cheered and waved banners and generally enjoyed themselves.  The Pope must have particularly enjoyed the occasion, leaving the venue just as Susan Boyle took to the stage.  Sometimes timing is everything.

As Mouse writes this the Pontiff is on his way down to Heathrow.  So Mouse offers a few words of advice for day two.  In the words of the great Catholic philosopher, Ronan Keating, you say it best when you say nothing at all.  Your best bits today were not the speeches which get picked over in minute detail, but the kissing of children and babies and waving at locals.  If you do more of this and less of the lecturing, you'll win a few friends.

Overall, the Catholic Church will be pretty pleased with day one.  The crowds were large enough and cheered enough to make it a success.

Finally, Mouse leaves you with some guidance from the Catholic Church for those who are not so familiar with all this Catholic stuff.  Just to give you the level seems to be primarily aimed at morons.

Please consider donating

50 "celebrities" who wrote their anti-Papal letter to the Guardian failed to declare an interest

In case you haven't seen it, a letter was signed by 50 people to the Guardian saying that the Pope's visit should not be a state visit.  This was widely reported as 50 well known people.  First up, Mouse challenges anyone to recognise more than about half a dozen of the names.  However, if you want to know more about the, the best source would be the websites of the British Humanist Association and National Secular Society.  Almost all of them have significant connections with the British Humanist Association or National Secular Society, although they didn't point that out in the letter.

Of course, that doesn't invalidate the point, but Mouse finds it hard to believe that a group of 50 Catholic bishops welcoming the Pope would have been news, so why would 50 prominent members of humanist / secularist groups?  These round robin letters are a clever campaign tactic, as they imply broad support for a position.  It was effectively used, for example, during the last election campaign when a group of scientists wrote a letter arguing that the Labour policies best supported science.  Only later did it emerge that they were all members of Scientists for Labour.

It looks an awful lot like the BHA and the NSS sent a note round asking if people would sign up to this letter. However, they must be disappointed by the take-up as their list of prominent supporters on their website is much longer than this.  In particular, they must be gutted that the biggest name of all, NSS honorary associate Ricky Gervais, failed to sign the letter.

Stephen Fry - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Professor Richard Dawkins - do I really need to ....
Professor Susan Blackmore - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Terry Pratchett - NSS Honorary Associate, BHA Distinguished Supporter
Philip Pullman - NSS Honorary Associate, BHA Distinguished Supporter
Ed Byrne - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Baroness Blackstone - VP British Humanist Association
Ken Follett - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Professor AC Grayling - Vice President British Humanist Association, NSS Honorary Associate
Stewart Lee - BHA Distinguished Supporter, NSS Honorary Associate
Baroness Massey - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Claire Rayner - Vice President British Humanist Association, NSS Honorary Associate
Adele Anderson - BHA Distinguished Supporter
John Austin MP - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Lord Avebury - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Sian Berry - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Professor Simon Blackburn - Vice President British Humanist Association
Sir David Blatherwick - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Sir Tom Blundell - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Dr Helena Cronin - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Dylan Evans - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Hermione Eyre - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Lord Foulkes- Unknown
Professor Chris French - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Natalie Haynes -BHA Distinguished Supporter
Johann Hari - Board of National Secular Society
Jon Holmes - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Lord Hughes - Vice President British Humanist Association
Robin Ince - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Dr Michael Irwin - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Professor Steve Jones - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Sir Harold Kroto - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Professor John Lee - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Zoe Margolis - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Jonathan Meades - BHA Distinguished Supporter, NSS Honorary Associate
Sir Jonathan Miller - BHA Distinguished Supporter, NSS Honorary Associate
Diane Munday - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Maryam Namazie - BHA Distinguished Supporter, NSS Honorary Associate
David Nobbs - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Professor Richard Norman - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Lord O'Neill - BHA Distinguished Supporter, NSS Honorary Associate
Simon Price - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Paul Rose - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Martin Rowson - BHA Distinguished Supporter, NSS Honorary Associate
Michael Rubenstein - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Joan Smith - NSS Honorary Associate
Dr Harry Stopes-Roe - Vice President British Humanist Association
Professor Raymond Tallis - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Lord Taverne - NSS Honorary Associate
Peter Tatchell - Protest the Pope founder
Baroness Turner - NSS Honorary Associate
Professor Lord Wedderburn of Charlton QC FBA - NSS Honorary Associate
Ann Marie Waters - unknown
Professor Wolpert - BHA Distinguished Supporter
Jane Wynne Willson - Vice President British Humanist Association

Please consider donating

France Burka ban completes passage through parliament

Yesterday, whilst the religious news output was focused on the Papal visit, France passed possibly the most illiberal piece of legislation in Europe.  Our European brother in (secular) France's Senate passed the legislation required to ban the wearing of the burka in public, with only one Senator voting against the legislation.  Interestingly it also makes it an offence for someone to coerce someone else into wearing such clothing.  For daring to cover your face in public you can be fined up to £125 or be forced to attend a brainwashing session course in citizenship.  For forcing someone else to wear the burka, you can be fined up to £25,000 or face a prison sentence.

Mouse finds it quite astonishing that the name of secular liberalism can be used to justify the targeting of a religious group with legislation to govern their choice of wardrobe.  Mouse is also rather surprised that it is legal under European law, as it is self evidently targeted at a religious group.  In fact the legislation is still subject to a legal challenge before it becomes law.

We have also hearing more about France's policy of deporting large numbers of Roma people from the country as part of a crack down on crime.  Previously the crackdown on illegal 'settlements' was claimed not to be targeting Roma people.  However, a leaked memo from the French government has made the European Union rather livid, as it appears to show that France has been wholly honest with the Commission when it denied that it has a policy of targeting Roma people.  The memo states that the crackdown should make Roma people a 'priority'.  European Commissioner Viviane Reding described the policy as 'disgraceful' and said the EU would initiate sanctions for breach of European law.

Now Mouse would not seek to portray this model of secularism as the only form.  Indeed the US is an example of how religious can sit very comfortably alongside a formally secular state.  However, the French model is rather different, and Mouse doesn't like it.

Please consider donating

Mr CatOLick's new home (and new look)

Mouse is a fan of Mr CatOLick, so thought it worth directing you to his new website.  Mouse is looking forward to a rather more interesting narrative on the Papal visit than he gets from the mainstream media.

Please consider donating

Promoting myth in the name of truth part I: the great Darwin Vs Religion debate is perpetuating a myth

A plinth is to be erected on the site of the famous debate between "Soapy" Sam Wilberforce and Thomas Huxley on the subject of Charles Darwin's newly published theory of evolution by natural selection.  The story is known by pretty much every scientists and is the epitome of conflict between science and religion, up there with the persecution of Galileo.

For those now in the know, the story goes that a debate was held between these two with Wilberforce, the Bishop of Oxford, railing against Darwin's theory.  Legend has it that Wilberforce asked Huxley whether he traced his roots to an ape through his grandmother or grandfather.  Huxley cut back with the killer line that he would rather be descended from an ape than be someone who denies the truth, and went on to win the debate in a symbolic win for rational science against reactionary religion.

The story has been told and retold, and is now one of the foundational stories for the new atheists, who see it as a great example of how religion seeks to defend its own interests before it seeks to defend the truth, and how scientific advancement can overcome religion.

The problem with the story is that it is not true.

John Hedley Brook, Professor of Science and Religion in the University of Oxford, observed that, "It is the kind of story that would have to be invented were it not true. Actually, it probably was invented –at least in part. One answer to the question why this celebrated exchange occurred at all is that it didn't – or at least that the legend is deeply misleading."

Whilst there is no verbatim account of the debate, there are a number of contemporary accounts, many of which are contradictory.  However it is clear that there are a number of central elements of the story which do not fit the facts.

The most important of these, according to Brook, is the fact that Wilberforce did not attack the argument on religious grounds.  Wilberforce based his attack during this debate on his review of Darwin's new book, The origin of species, which was published just a few days after the debate.  This commentary is available today, and offers invaluable insight into Wilberforce's views on the subject.  Here we find that Wilberforce's argument was based on the scientific substance of Darwin's new theory, and not religious prejudice.  Whilst Wilberforce allows himself some polemics at the end of the review, the substance of the argument is scientific, and calls on some of the most emminent scientists of the day who back him up.  Wilberforce summarised his arguments saying:

Our readers will not have failed to notice that we have objected to the views with which we are dealing solely on scientific grounds. We have done so from our fixed conviction that it is thus that the truth or falsehood of such arguments should be tried. We have no sympathy with those who object to any facts or alleged facts in nature, or to any inference logically deduced from them, because they believe them to contradict what it appears to them is taught by Revelation. We think that all such objections savour of a timidity which is really inconsistent with a firm and well-intrusted faith.

It is also interesting to note Darwin's own reaction to Wilberforce's critique: "it is uncommonly clever; it picks out with skill all the most conjectural parts, and brings forward well all the difficulties. It quizzes me quite splendidly.

There are many other problems with the famous debate where the evidence of what really happened do not support the myth which has built up.  For example, one account suggests that Huxley struggled to make himself heard over the noise of the crowd during the debate, and another states that Wilberforce's memorable line about Huxley's ancestory was intended as a joke, but one which ultimately backfired.

Nick Spencer, Director of Studies at think tank Theos and author of Darwin and God, commented to Mouse:

The Wilberforce-Huxley debate has been blown up to iconic proportions - although for the wrong reasons. Both of the main participants were intelligent, erudite men and in spite of the caricature, Wilberforce's criticisms of evolution and The Origin of Species, which he reviewed in Athenaeum, were thoughful and based on scientific, rather than simply religious grounds. It is not even clear that Huxley won the debate as clearly as is sometimes thought. The conflict was as much about the changing nature of British science - the old order vs. new.

What is most disappointing in all this is the fact that this debate is held up as the epitome of reactionary science working against the cool rationalism of science.  Richard Dawkins invoked the story recently, whilst making a perfectly sensible argument that because something is improbably does not mean it is false, but concluded:

If ever you find yourself arguing with a creationist and he tries to hit you with the astronomical improbability of living organization, don't deny the improbability and don't apologise for it. Rejoice in it and go one better, while echoing the sotto voce response of Thomas Huxley to Bishop Wilberforce: "The Lord hath delivered him into mine hand."

The reality is that this myth is being promoted in the name of truth.

Please consider donating