Paranoia about the role of religion in the Big Society

One of the peculiar reactions to the Big Society initiatives from the government has been the reaction from the secularist lobby.  Their main concern seems to be that religious groups be tied down even further to ensure that they do not evangelise or discriminate when they are dealing with Joe Public.

The latest such warning shot has come from the ever present Lib Dem ex-MP Evan Harris.  Dr Harris is carving out a new political career since losing his seat in the last general election, so is ready to pop up with an interview or a quote at the drop of a hat, and is a big supporter of the National Secular Society and their brand of secularism.

This weekend, Harris has issued a warning to the government, seemingly in the name of all Liberal Democrats, saying "The party has made clear that it does not want the government to sanction 'proselytising on the public purse".  He continued:

Any increased use of faith-based organisations delivering essential public services will need stricter safeguards to prevent discrimination against vulnerable and captive populations on the basis of religion or sexuality, as well as to prevent employees needing to pass 'faith tests'.

The Lib Dems have made clear that religious organisations have as much right as anyone else to provide services, but until legal loop-holes are closed we expect the Government to ensure that contracts contain non-discrimination clauses.

This follows in a long line of articles from the NSS and British Humanist Association arguing that religious groups should not get government money to support the services they deliver.

Mouse dislikes this form of paranoia.  The Guardian report this with reference to a particular faith based charity which has received government funding in the area of sex and pregnancy counselling.  Judging from the article there is absolutely no suggestion that any for of discrimation or evangelism are taking place at all with this project.

There seems to be more than ample legislation already in place to prevent discrimination.  Almost every week we hear of a new case of someone in the public sector who is being sanctioned for either discussing their faith at work or attempting to act in accordance with it.  The case of Catholic adoption agencies provides another example of how the law is absolutely clear on how public services must be delivered, whether by faith based organisations or anyone else.

The reality is not that there are 'legal loopholes', but that Dr Harris is adopting the classic political tactic of putting up a straw man so that it can then be smashed down.

Faith based organisations should simply ignore Dr Harris, as should the government.  And they should make a positive case for why they are well placed to play their part in society.

Gay Bishops, angry Archbishops and Deans speaking from beyond the grave

It has not been a good week for the Church of England.  This week, Andrew Brown revealed in the Guardian details of a memo written by Colin Slee in which he detailed some pretty unpleasant goings on at the highest levels in the Church.  Colin died last year, soon after being diagnosed with pancreatic cancer.  Before he died he was Dean of Southwark Cathedral and had been part of the Crown Nominations Commission which selected the successor to Bishop Tom Butler as Bishop of Southwark.

This selection process hit the headlines when a leak from the CNC revealed that Jeffrey John, the gay Dean of St Albans Cathedral, was in the running for the job.  At the time, it was reported that Rowan Williams was furious with the leak and blocked Jeffrey John's appointment.

The latest revelation was a memo written by Colin Slee as part of an internal Church of England enquiry into the first leak.

So we have the rather embarrassing situation of a leak enquiry producing a far more damaging leak than the one it was set up to investigate.

Good work.

As for what Colin Slee claimed and alleged, Mouse will allow you to read it for yourself.  The bottom line is that he felt he was blamed for the original leak, which was wrong.  The journalist involved, Jonathan Wynne-Jones from the Telegraph, has stated for the record that it wasn't Colin who leaked the details.

Following that Colin Slee claims that there were two horrible days of the CNC meeting during which the Archbishops were angry, bullied the other members and blocked Jeffrey John and Nick Holtam, Vicar of St Martin in the Fields, who is married to a divorcee.

There has been ample coverage of this already, noting some important points.  Firstly, the double standards to which gay candidates seem to be treated during this selection process, asking a lot of detailed questions about their sexual past that would never be considered for a straight candidate.  They also point out that a celibate gay man fully meets the criteria set out in "Issues in Human Sexuality", the CofE's "policy" on homosexuality in the clergy.  Anything beyond that is outside the Church's formal policies.

Some have reacted angrily and accused Rowan Williams of betrayal and hypocrisy.  Mouse hasn't heard anyone defend him yet, or the selection process under which this all took place.

Mouse has a few of things to add.

1. The process for selecting bishops is clearly broken.  Mouse has pointed this out before, and is backed up by Colin Slee in his memo.  At the end of the selection process, each member of the CNC is asked whether the process is fair.  Colin says that this time he said "Well it was done according to the rules, but the whole system stinks".  One of the reasons why this sort of thing is allowed to fester on is that it is going on in secret under a system designed for another age.  Not many people argue for a democratic electoral system for selecting bishops, and Mouse has reservations about it, but the system must be reformed to give more transparency and accountability to those making the selections.

2. The current "rules" surrounding issues of sexuality are a total fudge and must be sorted out.  Rowan Williams stated recently that there were absolutely no issues with gay people becoming bishops, as long as they complied with the celibacy rule.  Indeed, we already have several.  They just don't talk about it.  However, if the candidate is open about his sexuality, then the "rules" which in themselves simply ask that they confirm they are celibate, seem to fly out of the window.  The absurd list of reasons why you can block the selection of a gay person to bishop should be thrown out completely - it really is outrageous that someone could seriously suggest asking a candidate for the office of bishop whether they had repented of their past sexual sins.  If this question were asked in virtually any other context, Mouse can't imagine what kind of answer would be given.

3. Someone should come to the defense of Rowan Williams, who has taken the brunt of many attacks this week.  Colin Slee's memo doesn't make pretty reading, but there is quite a lot of context missing and we don't have accounts from anyone else there.  His claims that the Archbishops were set on blocking both Jeffrey John and Nick Holtam are a little odd, particularly since Nick Holtam has subsequently become Bishop of Salisbury.  Mouse's reaction when he heard that Jeffrey John was in the running for Southwark was that it would be a big step for someone who hadn't been a suffragan bishop to become diocesan bishop of one of the largest dioceses in the country.  Perhaps Rowan had other reasons for taking the position he did than basing his decision purely on Jeffrey John's sexuality or Nick Holtam's wife's divorce.

Rowan's anger, even in Colin Slee's account, is not due to Jeffrey John or Nick Holtam being considered, but from the leak.  It must be a very difficult position if you think someone in the room you are discussing these issues with is then briefing the press.  Colin Slee seems to think that the leak most likely actually came from lawyers who Rowan Williams had consulted on the issue.  However, that is pure guesswork, and wouldn't account for how subsequent leaks discussed issues "in the room", not just vague legal advice.  Jonathan Wynne-Jones was able to report, accurately as we now know, that Rowan was angry and blocked the candidates.  This couldn't have come from lawyers.  Mouse reckons Colin Slee got that one wrong, and that Rowan's anger is understandable, even if is bad behaviour is not what we would expect.

4. There is a lot of talk at the moment of outing gay bishops.  This is foolish.  If you aren't aware, some bishops are gay.  But we don't talk about it.  Colin Coward from Changing Attitude has written about how he feels let down by these people, and is tempted to name some names.  However, he shouldn't, and Mouse doesn't think he will.  It would certainly bring the issue to a head if one or some of these people were to come out themselves, but it would also put them under a huge amount of personal pressure and would totally divert them from doing the job that they are actually there to do.  Mouse does not condemn them for trying to get on with doing what God called them to do without seeking out the anger of a vocal wing of the Church.

These leaks are very damaging, and Mouse can only imagine how hard it is for Jeffrey John in particular to read about himself in this way.

But it is more damaging that the Church operates under these farcical and outdated rules and procedures.

Some have drawn the comparison with the way the Church of Scotland is taking this issue forward.  After a pretty dignified debate, they are planning a report on the way forward.  Whether that approach would work in the Church of England is anyone's guess.  But what won't work for the good of the gospel is to go on fudging our way through these issues, and allowing this kind of secret war to go on under the surface.

Friday round up

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

1. Peter Ould and Jonathan Wynne-Jones both reflect intelligently on the gay bishops saga

2. Carnmer on Bible burning

3. Jubilee Centre blog looks at belief in doctors (and doctors' beliefs)

4. FaithWorld on the complex relationship between Coptic Christians and Muslims in Egypt

5. Catherine Beyer on fast food religion

6. Lesley Fellows (at her new blog home) on who the 'focus for unity' in the Church should be

7. Will and Testament on 'spiritual intelligence'

8. The Staggers on Harold Camping

9. The Church Sofa on how to get the Church leader to love you

10. Bishop Nick Baines shares his sermon from his enthronement as Bishop of Bradford

Catholic Church withdraws permission for Cathedral to hold Methodist ordinations

The Metropolitan Cathedral of Christ the King was scheduled to host an ordination service for the Methodist Church in July, but has withdrawn permission to host the event after "advice" from the Vatican.

Mouse is not impressed.

Archbishop Patrick Kelly of Liverpool had given permission for the annual service of ordination for the Methodist Church to be held in the Cathedral after a request from Rev James Booth, chairman of the Liverpool Methodist District.  Since they don't have a building suitable for hosting this national event, an ecumenical venue was sought and the arrangement was agreed.

But then Archbishop Patrick Kelly sought permission from the Vatican and was told that it was not acceptable.  In a completely incomprehensible statement, the Archbishop said, "the occasion would be a symbol and given the iconic reality of the Metropolitan Cathedral far beyond Merseyside it would be watched, interpreted, scrutinised quite properly by many. And symbols are dangerous things; they can explode".

Mouse has never seen or heard of a symbol exploding.

It seems that the service had been controversial amongst Catholics.

He added that after he had time to reflect (read the condemnatory blogs?) Kelly added that he was “not entirely surprised” that “this was the judgment of the Holy Father’s Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity in their interpretation of the principles set out in the ecumenical directory of that same Pontifical Council."

Mouse wonders how the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity came to the decision that slapping another denomination in the face is a way forward for Christian unity.

It also seems pretty odd that an Archbishop doesn't have the authority to say what can and cannot go on in his own Cathedral.  Mouse is often surprised by the level of central control that goes on in the Catholic Church, which couldn't be in greater contrast to the Church of England.

It must have been rather awkward for the Methodist Church to find that they had no venue for the ordination service just two months before the event, so Mouse is glad that the Anglican Chester Cathedral was able to host the event.

Mouse has been hopeful for some time that things would move quicker on the implementation of the Anglican Methodist covenant.  Since both Methodists and Anglicans agree that there are no substantive theological differences between them, there is no real excuse why the churches are not united in a full and visible way.

Mark Rowland is being ordained in this service and has blogged on his views of this affair, which is well worth a read.

Statements from Archbishop Patrick Kelly and Rev Jim Booth are copied below:


Statement from Archbishop Patrick Kelly

Some time ago I was approached by the Rev James Booth, Chair of the Liverpool Methodist District with this request: when, following their usual pattern, the annual Conference of the Methodist Church celebrates the ordination of its ministers, could one of the three places they need because this is a national event, involving several hundreds of people, be the Metropolitan Cathedral of Christ the King. But it was not just a question of a large enough venue. It could also be a word about the ecumenical journey to which we have been long committed, which was re-affirmed when Cardinal Kasper visited Liverpool at Pentecost in 2010 and yet more powerfully by Pope Benedict during his visit to this island last September. In response, therefore, to this request I did last Autumn, give my permission for the use of the Cathedral for this purpose.

However it was always clear to me that the occasion would be a symbol and given the iconic reality of the Metropolitan Cathedral far beyond Merseyside it would be watched, interpreted, scrutinised quite properly by many. And symbols are dangerous things; they can explode. Every pattern of ordination known to me is at the service of communion and an occasion for profound renewal of the most personal, hidden demands of discipleship. Spotlights, controversy, fear of misinterpretation undermine the prayer and discipleship into which the Spirit would lead us.

During my recent prolonged time to reflect because of convalescence, I found myself often wondering if what I had encouraged was inappropriate at this time and a possible scandal in the original meaning of that word, a stumbling block for an ordination and for the ecumenical journey. I was not entirely surprised when I was informed that this was the judgment of the Holy Father’s Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity in their interpretation of the principles set out in the Ecumenical Directory of that same Pontifical Council. Sadly, therefore, I have to conclude that the invitation for some Methodist ordinations to be celebrated in the Metropolitan Cathedral should be withdrawn.

I recognise that this decision will be bring pain to some, relief to others, and confusion to many. I am very aware that it gives rise to very practical problems for the Methodists only two months before their ordinations. I can only apologise for any drift for which I am responsible and pledge that I will continue to be as faithful as I have for all the nearly 50 years of my life as a priest to the ecumenical journey to which the Second Vatican Council committed every Roman Catholic. 

I invite everyone who reads this to make their own these words of Saint Paul, which always break open for me the prayer of ordination spoken over me by Cardinal Godfrey on 18 February 1962:

“For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth takes its name, that according to the riches of his glory he may grant that you may be strengthened in your inner being with power through his Spirit, and that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith, as you are being rooted and grounded in love. I pray that you may have the power to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth, and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, so that you may be filled with all the fullness of God. Now to him who by the power at work within us is able to accomplish far more abundantly than all that we can ask or imagine, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations, for ever and ever. Amen. Ephesians 3.14-20


Statement from Jim Booth

I, along with many others – both those to be ordained and those supporting them – have, for many months now, been joyfully anticipating the Ordination Service that was to have been held in the Metropolitan Cathedral of Christ the King here in Liverpool on 3rd July. I had been delighted when, in the Autumn of last year, Archbishop Patrick Kelly confirmed his permission for the Methodist Church to celebrate this most special act of worship in the glorious building that is the Metropolitan Cathedral. There had been careful conversation about how the Methodist Ordination Service could appropriately and properly be held in the Cathedral, honouring and respecting both Roman Catholic and Methodist tradition and understanding, whilst at the same time affirming the ecumenical journey that we share and the fact that the destination of that journey is not yet reached.

The statement of Archbishop Patrick, to which I add these words, explains why he has now had to withdraw his permission for our use of the Cathedral. To say that I am disappointed that this decision has had to taken would be an understatement, but it is a decision that I, and the Methodist Church, must respect and understand. I also want to say that, working with Patrick as a colleague and friend, I know that it is a decision he has not taken lightly, but under that discipline of belonging that, as Methodists, I hope we understand.

Of course, with the decision coming as it does so close to Conference, there are many immediate practical issues to resolve, not least that of finding an appropriate alternative venue. These matters will be resolved, I am sure. The Ordination Services will take place and will, once more, be great occasions of commitment to ongoing discipleship for all involved.

Finally, I with Patrick, commit myself to our ongoing ecumenical journey, to our continued working together as disciples of Christ here in Liverpool and pray that, by the grace of God and the power of His Spirit, we will be strengthened, not weakened, by the events of these past days for that ongoing task.

New detailed analysis of US Catholic child abuse

Mouse has been following the latest developments in the ongoing Catholic child abuse scandal with interest.

It has been obvious to Mouse that there has been a huge lack of objective commentary on this issue from the outset.  And it is quite understandable why.  It is pretty hard to look objectively on child abuse.  Yet it does a disservice to victims as well as everyone else if commentary plays fast and loose with the facts, and so Mouse is glad to see that the independent John Jay Institute has done a detailed analysis of the facts in an attempt to get to the causes of abuse by Catholic priests in the US.

The report is comprehensive in nature and detailed in its assessment, although the fact that it was presented to the Catholic Bishops will no doubt have some arguing that it must be a whitewash.

But it is nothing of the sort.

Andrew Brown summarises well in the Guardian, and concludes that none of the prevailing explanations for the abuse scandal seem to fit with the facts.

The pattern of abuse detailed is not what would be expected by any of the proposed explanations.  The levels of abuse reached a peak in the 1970s then fell dramatically in the 1980s, yet there is no obvious reason for this.  Abuse is not strongly correlated with instances of gay sexual behaviour before abusers entered the ministry or homosexual orientation, and nor is it correlated with celibate or non-celibate behaviour before abusers entered the ministry and after their ordination.

The main personal factors which did indicate an increased likelihood that a priest would become an abuser were, not surprisingly that they were abused themselves or that they lacked friendships and social networks.

The bishops were let off the hook to some extent, as the study found that by the mid 1980s 80% of the abuse that we now know about had already taken place, yet only 6% of these cases had been reported to the Church authorities.  Whilst they new of some instances, they were not aware of the scale of the problem.

However, the report is damning in looking at how the Church authorities responded when abuse was reported.  It is clear that where cases were identified, the Church authorities generally responded poorly with internal attempts to 'rehabilitate' the abusers.  They generally did not involve the civil criminal authorities, and there was little focus on the victims.

The report does add that the response from Church authorities became more 'appropriate' since the mid-1990s, as the scale of the abuse scandal became clearer.

What the John Jay Institute seemed to be concluding is that in the 1960s and 1970s 'deviant' behaviour, which they define as including crime and drug use, was on the rise in society at large, and the sexual abuse of minors seems to have been part of this.  The rather unsatisfactory conclusion is:

no single “cause” of sexual abuse in society can be found; similarly, no single “cause” of sexual abuse by priests is evident. Rather, sexual abuse is a complex phenomenon, and the pattern of change in incidence that is analyzed in this study has social, psychological, developmental, and situational explanations.

The levels of abuse are not really the focus of the report.  It is aimed at the causes and the preventative measures which can be taken in the future.  However, the report points out that abuse by priests was a small proportion of incidents of sexual abuse in society at large, in which sexual abuse is a pervasive problem.

That won't be much comfort to the victims and their families who put their trust in the Church and its priests and have been terribly let down in the worst possible way.  But it does mean that those who wish to use this dreadful scandal as evidence of a uniquely evil institution should stop and look at the problem in its wider context.

The result of all this is to kill off a few of the theories about why this abuse took place.

It is not connected with homosexuality, despite most of the victims being boys.  Nor is it the result of celibacy.  It is not the result of the Catholic Church being an evil institution and despite dealing with abuse reports poorly in the 1980s and 1990s, by the time the Church authorities knew about the vast majority of cases it was decades after they had happened and there is little they could have done to prevent them.

Those who wish to excuse this episode in the Church's history, and those who wish to use it to beat the Church with will both have to work harder now that this report is out.

Congratulations to Rev on winning a BAFTA

Just a quick note to say congratulations to everyone involved in the hit sitcom Rev for winning the BAFTA award over the weekend.

Mouse is looking forward to the second series to air later this year (which is code for Mouse has no idea when the second series is due to air).

A few didn't like Rev, accusing the series of making the Church of England look like a bunch of ineffectual wet liberals, but Mouse thought it was great.  It was touching, funny and showed that whether you liked the characters or not, they clearly fitted into the modern world.

The sitcom was a sensitive and sympathetic portrayal of the Church and Mouse reckons it has already done the Church of England a great deal of good.  Lets hope the next series picks up where the last one left off and really gets into its stride.

On the red carpet at the BAFTAs, Tom Hollander, who plays the title character on the show, gave some clues as to what we can expect in the coming series.

Just ups and downs.  But also all the other characters you get to know much better. [There are] marvellous things for the archdeacon and for Nigel. You get to know Nigel much better. You get to know Alex better. And Colin, of course. You just go further into the world.

Can't wait.

Christian GPs evangelism

Dr Richard Scott has been made an offer he cannot accept.  He must either accept a formal reprimand on his employment record for discussing his Christian faith with a patient, or face a disciplinary hearing at which the punishment could be worse.

Dr Scott has decided that he will fight.

The case has made quite a few headlines, as the latest in a very long line of so called 'Christian discrimination' cases.  The ever present Paul Diamond QC from the Christian Legal Centre has been appointed to represent Dr Scott.

The basics of the case, as they are being reported, are that a 24 year-old man went to see Dr Scott for a routine appointment.  After the medical consultation, Dr Scott asked if he minded talking about faith as well, as he had personally 'found it useful'.  A complaint was later made by the patient's mother, saying that the doctor had attempted to push his faith on a vulnerable patient.

The first observation that Mouse makes is that the only version of events we have is from the Doctor and the Christian Legal Centre, and there is definitely more to this than is in the public domain.

What makes the case particularly interesting, however, is the fact that the Bethesda Medical Centre, at which Dr Scott practices, describes itself as a Christian practice at which doctors discuss faith issues with their patients.  The NHS website suggests that patients who don't want to do this should let the practice know.  Their entry on the NHS Choices website says:

The 6 Partners are all practising Christians from a variety of Churches and their faith guides the way in which they view their work and responsibilities to the patients and employees. The Partners feel that the offer of talking to you on spiritual matters is of great benefit. If you do not wish this, that is your right and will not affect your medical care. Please tell the doctor (or drop a note to the Practice Manager) if you do not wish to speak on matters of faith

Richard Scott himself has said that he has had similar discussions to the one which is now subject of a complaint "literally thousands" of times.  He has said that he invites patients to his Church, which runs courses, including the Alpha Course, and claims that for every 10 patients he invites, eight will attend and two will have their lives changed as a result.

As far as the story has been told at the moment, it seems that Dr Scott has done nothing wrong.  He has had a discussion with a grown man.  He has not 'forced' anything on anyone.

However, he must have known that he was treading a pretty fine line.  Dr Scott is right to point out that he is acting within GMC guidelines, which state:

33. You must not express to your patients your personal beliefs, including political, religious or moral beliefs, in ways that exploit their vulnerability or that are likely to cause them distress.

However, the guidance also states:

19. You should not normally discuss your personal beliefs with patients unless those beliefs are directly relevant to the patient's care. You must not impose your beliefs on patients, or cause distress by the inappropriate or insensitive expression of religious, political or other beliefs or views. Equally, you must not put pressure on patients to discuss or justify their beliefs (or the absence of them).

Mouse would hope Dr Scott spotted the note of caution in that guidance, and Mouse cannot see why religious matters would be 'directly relevant' to the thousands of patients that Dr Scott has had these discussions with.  

It is just odd, to say the least, that a standard addendum to a medical consultation should be an invitation to join the Alpha Course.  If Dr Scott's conversion rate is what he claims, then his Church must be one of the largest and fastest growing in the country.  Mouse suspects that his sample is rather skewed, however.

The conclusion to all this is pretty clear.  We don't really know what happened or whether Dr Scott broke GMC guidelines or not.  Mouse would suggest, however, that his brand of evangelism is not a particularly good idea, but that doesn't mean he should be reprimanded for his actions.

However, just to be helpful, and in recognition of Paul Diamond's recent track record on these cases, Mouse offers up some free legal advice for Dr Richard Scott.

Your case is based solely on whether you have broken the rules or not.  Ignore any reference to how sincerely you believe what you believe and disregard any broad brush arguments about Christians being persecuted or freedom of expression.  You simply need to explain how your actions were in line with the GMC's rules.  If you have a good reason why your discussion of religion was relevant to your patient's medical care, then you are sure to win your case.  If you cannot, then you are set to lose it.

Millions of Twitter users drove rapture hype

Many have claimed "the rapture" is coming.  But Camping's claims that it would take place on the 21st of May can be considered the first Twitter rapture.

Right now, 89 year-old American paster Harold Camping is racking his brains trying to work out why his prediction that the rapture would take place on Saturday 21st May was wrong.

Camping had calculated, using numbers in the Bible and some pretty liberal guesswork, that the 21st May was a very significant date.  He also interpreted some Bible passages to indicate that the process for the end of the world is for the faithful to be taken up to Heaven in advance of the end of the world.  This is known as the rapture, and Camping estimated that around 200m people would qualify.

The calculations Camping came up with told him that 21st May was rapture day, and the end of the world would follow around five months later.

This is not the first time that Harold Camping has claimed he knew the date for this event.  The last time was in 1994, when he predicted they would ascend to heaven, although that time he acknowledged that he "could be wrong".  Following that, he simply claimed a mathematical error had led to him picking the wrong date.

What he will say this time remains to be seen.

Mouse's attention, however, was drawn to the way this loonie American paster, one amongst many unfortunately, with a tiny handful of followers managed to make headline news across the world with claims that have been made before and will be made by others again.

The world is full of people who claim that the end of the world will take place at a particular point in time.  So why so much attention on Harold Camping.

One reason is Twitter.

Fads gain ground very quickly on Twitter.  At the click of a button messages can be sent to thousands, and a few clicks later they can be repeated to millions.  Certain footballers are finding out just how quick and far news can spread.  The use of hashtags also encourages group networks to coalesce around themes.

And the rapture became one of those themes.  At it's peak the tweets with the hashtag #rapture accounted for 2.5% of all tweets - probably around 3m on a single day.  It is impossible to know how many more were discussing the event but without the hashtag, but Mouse would estimate it is a multiple of that number.

Over the days leading up to the 21st, Mouse estimates that the hashtag was used around 4m times.  Multiply that by something to guess how many tweets talked about the event without the hashtag and then consider how many users see each tweet, then you get a sense of the extent to which Twitter drove the hype around this story.

The Today Program on Saturday discussed the rapture claim.  What Mouse found fascinating was that they didn't really focus on Camping and his claims at all.  They discussed why people in general make apocalyptic claims.  But most interestingly Evan Davis's introduction to the story explicitly stated that it is news because it was buzzing round Twitter.

It is being claimed in some of the media that Camping's organisation, California Family Radio, has spent £100m on advertising the rapture, through the donations of followers and the "sale of assets", although this can't be verified (so Mouse is instinctively sceptical).

It is also claimed that all this money was spent on billboard advertising, which sounds like an awful lot of billboards.

Which virtually no-one in this country have seen.  However, millions in this country probably saw tweets about the event.

The power of Twitter is very much in the news at the moment, with its power to break super injunctions,   but the lesson of the Harold Camping rapture phenomena is that it can also drive hype and ultimately mainstream media attention.

Friday round up

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

1. Phil Ritchie on Hawking on heaven

2. Eddie Arthur on religion and social standing

3. BRIN on the influence of the Bible

4. Charlie Peer on Lords reform

5. Dave Walker on the dangers of data projectors (hadn't he heard that the CofE is phasing out OHPs?)

6. Clayboy on the gay underpants ex-vicar politician publicity seeker

7. Bishop Alan Wilson on airbrushing out women

8. The Dodgy Liberal comes out (as a Freemason)

9. Jonathan Evens on whether the art world is anti-Christian

10. Dean Roberts on whether half the Bible is forged (Mouse reckons it isn't)

The future of bishops in the Lords

Earlier this week the government finally published its proposals for reform of the House of Lords.  In some respects it is a little hard to digest, as there are options and transitional periods which make the changes rather hard to follow.

However, in respect of the potential fate of the Lords Spiritual the reforms are perfectly simple.  There are none.

The only change being proposed is to reduce the number in line with the overall reduction in the number if peers in the upper chamber.  Don't let the NSS and the BHA tell you the ratio of bishops to other members has increased - well actually it has, but only by 0.62% which is hardly worth a serious debate.

For Mouse the announcement is a bit of a disappointment, as it deals with only one aspect of the House of Lords - how peers find themselves in the Upper House.  Why they are put there and what they do when they arrive is left up to us to imagine, and remains unchanged.  So it is rather like changing the way you pick players for a team without being told what sport they are playing.

Still, when it comes to the 26 Church of England bishops who have a reserved place in the House of Lords, there are some legitimate questions to be asked about why they are there and why they should be entitled to automatic entry when no-one else is.

Mouse finds it impossible to justify.  It is also pretty pointless.  They hardly ever turn up, speak or vote and when they do it very rarely makes any difference.  Mouse would rather they spent their time being bishops than being politicians.

Mouse struggles to understand why the Church of England is so keen on being in the House of Lords.  There seems to be no benefit to the Church, and it doesn't advance the mission or ministry of the Church.

To their credit, the Church of England put out a pretty sensible statement on the proposals.  They point to the dangers of an increasingly politicised House of Lords and the independence of the bishops.

However, Mouse still feels that the Church of England made the argument that their bishops have other responsibilities, and that they will leave lawmaking to others.

Is the Bible the best way to promote Christianity in Britain?

A ComRes survey, commissioned by the Bible Society, has shown that the the great British public are rather fond of the Bible, but they are not particularly familiar with it.

The most interesting question for Mouse was one which asked people how important they feel the Bible was for them personally.  8% considered it very important and read the Bible regularly, 46% considered it important but don't read it regularly, 42% considered it unimportant and 4% considered it dangerous.

What this says to Mouse is that 46% of the population see value in engaging with the Bible more than they currently do.

Most evangelistic strategies don't kick off with the Bible.  It is often seen as a bit difficult, and something you get to later when you've got some way down the road.

Perhaps this is wrong.

There are certainly some compelling reasons why the Bible is a great way to start conversations.  Many people have baggage from earlier experiences of Church, yet few have the same issues with the Bible.

The anniversary of the King James Bible has not only generated some interest in the Bible, but has also inspired many to find creative ways to engage with the Bible.

Mouse suggests this is more important than simply a way of commemorating the King James Bible.

Church misery guts over royal wedding spoof video

This video was widely shared, both by members of the Church and by many outside the Church.  It was an advert for T-Mobile, set in St Bartholomew the Great Church in the City of London.  The video has been shared on YouTube over 21 million times.  It was a bit of a sensation, and shows royal look-a-likes (in the loosest sense of the word) dancing their way down the aisle to the sound of the 1990s hit record "House of Love" by East 17.

It is funny.

The vicar of St Bartholomew the Great, Rev Martin Dudley, allowed the mobile phone operator to film in his church for a fee of £3,500, so Mouse reckoned that some good would come of it through the work the Church could do with this cash.

However, it seems that the local Archdeacon is not so amused.  The Archdeacon of London, David Meara, has described the film as 'embarrassing' and has berated Rev Martin for allowing it to be shot in his church, suggesting that Rev Martin give the money raised to one of Prince William's charities to "sweeten the taste in the mouth".

Rev Martin has rightly responded that he will do no such thing.

In an interesting aside, however, it seems that the Church of England is not quite so stuffy on this sort of thing.

Mouse spotted straight away that the spoof video was based on a real wedding video which was a YouTube sensation.  Jill and Kevin's Big Day has been viewed over 66m times, and is clearly the inspiration for the T-Mobile film.

And guess who uses the JK wedding video to inspire clergy to re-think weddings ...

That's right.  The Church of England Wedding Project is currently touring the country, running events for clergy in dioceses, showing this video, and challenging clergy to imrpove how they deliver weddings.

Mouse reckons David Meara should get with the programme.

The Church should update its policy on Freemasonry

The news that the Bishop of Ebbsfleet designate was appointed despite his high level involvement in the Freemasons has caused quite a stir.

The initial report from the Telegraph focused on the Archbishop of Canterbury's historic opposition to Church members being Freemasons.  He had previously said that he had blocked senior appoints within the Church of Freemasons and that Freemasonry was 'incompatible' with Christianity.

And he is certainly not alone in that view.  Many last week were expressing surprise that Freemasons could still be Bishops.

According to a statement from Rev Jonathan Baker, the Bishop designate concerned, Rowan 'invited him to reconsider' his membership of the Freemasons, but went ahead with the appointment without insisting on it.

There are a few interesting aspects to this story, not least the fact that the Catholic Church's position on Freemasonry is absolutely clear - it is prohibited, and defined by Papal Bull as a 'grave sin'.  A relevant piece of information for a role where the previous incumbent left the Church of England for the Catholic Church and who's primary role is to oversee a largely Anglo-Catholic wing of the Church.

So what is the Church of England's official position on Freemasonry?

Well, there isn't really one.

Some have a hazy memory of a report and a debate at General Synod in 1987 which said that Freemasonry is incompatible with Christianity, but that wasn't actually the conclusion.  That was certainly the view of many who wrote the report, but the group who authored the report also included Freemasons who opposed that view.

The actual conclusion of the report was:

This Report has identified a number of important issues on which, in the view of the Working Group, the General Synod will have to reflect as it considers 'the compatibility or otherwise of Freemasonry with Christianity'.  The reflections of the Working Group itself reveal understandable differences of opinion between those who are Freemasons and those who are not.  Whilst the former fully agree that the Report shows that there are clear difficulties to be faced by Christians who are Freemasons, the latter are of the mind that the Report points to a number of very fundamental reasons to question the compatibility of Freemasonry and Christianity.

So that's clear as mud.  Whilst the report said that there were serious issues over whether Freemasonry is compatible with Christianity, it fell short of a clear and definitive conclusion.  The resolution that followed at Synod merely commended the report to the Church and endorsed the concerns.  No follow up ever happened, and no final conclusion was ever drawn which adopted a clear policy for the Church in senior appointments.

The House of Bishops reconsidered the position in 2007, after a request from Truro Diocese, and concluded that "the position adopted by General Synod in its motion of 1987 did not need to be revisited".

Mouse begs to differ.

We currently have a position where some, including the Archbishop of Canterbury in the past, are blocking senior appointments as a result of membership of the Freemasons, whilst others, including the Archbishop of Canterbury today, are not.  We also have some within the Church arguing that Freemasons are heretics and pseudo satanists, whilst bishops argue there is nothing wrong with it.

Mouse asked Lambeth Palace how many other bishops are Freemasons, and they didn't know.

Mouse's has two issues with Freemasonry.  Firstly, he doesn't like the idea of Bishops being members of a secret society which requires pledges of primary loyalty.  That doesn't sound like the kind of thing bishops should be doing.  He is also nervous about the pseudo-spiritual nature of some of the rituals he hears about.

However, the problem with Freemasonry is that the secret nature of it makes it pretty easy for members to claim that reports of their activities are not accurate, and it is hard to look at it from a position of certain knowledge.

So Mouse suggests that the dust should be blown off the 1987 report, and the Church of England should revisit this position, if only to ensure consistency of approach across the country.

Christian Aid Week - the biggest secret in Britain?

Mouse has been most reticent in not 'biggin up' Christian Aid Week until this late stage.

So here is a short post to correct that, and to raise some awareness of one of the biggest secrets in Britain - just how big Christian Aid week is.

Most people who read this blog will be well aware of the incredible work Christian Aid do, supporting life changing work in developing countries.  And huge numbers will no doubt have rattled a tin or distributed red envelopes to raise some money.

But are you aware of just how many of you do that?

According to Christian Aid's annual report, the 2009 Christian Aid week was hit by the recession, yet still managed to rival BBC's Children in Need for fundraising.  The annual event typically includes over 20,000 churches and 350,000 individuals hitting the streets, going door-to-door and digging deep to make a difference.

Last year Christian Aid Week raised around £15m.  By way of context, BBC Children in Need, with it's massive BBC profile, evening long telethon and celebrity endorsements raised £18m in 2010.

It is amazing that grass roots Christians can rival such a high profile event, but what is truly incredible is that they do so in just one week, and almost completely under the radar of the mainstream media.

So Mouse encourages all his readers to do something for Christian Aid Week this week - it is not too late.

If you still need convincing, then watch this.

Sunday round up

Due to a reasonably catastrophic blogger failure, Mouse's Friday round up was postponed.  Here's my round up from the blogosphere.  Ten of the best from the blogs this week:

1. Phil Ritchie on Havier Hernandez (he's a footballer)

2. Krish Kandiah on Osama, Twitter and the battle for the Bible

3. Jonathan Evens on Christianity and Consumerism

4. Christian Research blog on the National Churches Trust survey

5. Lesley Fellows on learning from art

6. Clayboy on the politicians who had a pop at the Church over weddings

7. Vic the Vicar on dinner graces

8. Evangelist Changing keeps the Rob Bell promotion going with some thoughts on his interview with Adrian Warnock

9. FaithWorld on the new push from the Catholic Church to abstain from meet on a Friday

10. Bishop Nick Baines on hand-wringing

The hysterical reaction to creationism in schools

A new 'coalition' has been formed called CrISIS - Creationism In Schools Isn't Science.

This has come in response to the threat caused by creationists working their way into schools, and in particular in response to the case of St Peter's Church of England School in Exeter.  A mother withdrew her child from school worship when she heard that a creationist speaker had been invited.

What followed can only be described as irrational hysteria.

Before we get too far into this issue, Mouse will point out that he holds no truck with creationism.  It is a strange new idea, which is not supported by the overwhelming evidence available to us, and has not been held by the vast majority of Christians ever since Mr Darwin had his clever idea.  Evolution is no threat to Christianity, but Christians denying evidence and facts is.

So, first up let's consider the context of the incident at St Peter's Church of England School in Exeter which has sparked this whole thing off.

Philip Bell from Creation Ministries International was invited to take part in a GCSE RE revision day for 16 year olds, in which he would debate the subject of evolution with a scientist.  The context was clearly RE, and not a science lesson.  The young people who watched this debate were 16.  The objective was to learn about people's religious beliefs, and to develop a critical analysis to beliefs.

So just what your average secular atheist would expect to happen in a high quality RE lesson?

Clearly not.

Speaking about the launch of CrISIS, Horner said:

"I was appalled to find out that my children had been exposed to this dangerous nonsense and I am determined that the Secretary of State for Education should urgently plug the loophole that allows creationists to do this.

What has happened in Exeter has serious implications for all existing state schools, but also because groups of creationists are known to be drawing up applications to run Free Schools, which would remove many checks and balances."

Perhaps she is unaware that creationism is on the RE syllabus in that area.  How better to learn what creationists believe than to hear it explained by a creationist.  How better to challenge those beliefs that to hear him debate those beliefs with a scientist who can explain the evidence for evolution.

What on earth is dangerous here?

It sounds to Mouse like St Peter's Church of England School has done a bang up job of making RE lessons interesting and engaging, and allowing young people to hear views and challenge them.

So in response to this benign circumstance, where young people of 16 are exposed to a debate on creationism, we find the establishment of CrISIS, followed up with a letter to Michael Gove, the Education Secretary and winner of the 'recipient of most open letters on the subject of creationism award', and a petition. In writing to Michael Gove, CrISIS "demand" further safeguards against creationism being taught as scientific fact in state schools.

Now Mouse is sure they are aware that in the only instance they are able to cite, this is not what happened.  The lesson was RE, and the views were challenged.  If the argument is that false claims should not be allowed to be heard, then we are in a very dangerous place.

Mouse has previously asked what other opinions and beliefs we should regulate in schools.  Perhaps we should pass laws which ensure that the existence of flying spaghetti monsters is not taught as scientific fact - I hear some atheists are particularly concerned with these mythical creatures.

Or perhaps we should simply rely on the current regime - an already too prescriptive curriculum, backed up by an independent schools inspection process.  If a school is teaching creationism as science, then it is clearly failing to teach the science curriculum and failing to apply decent standards of education.

Campaigners say that there is a 'loophole' which allows creationists to avoid the 'ban' on creationism being taught in science by teaching it in RE.  But it seems pretty reasonable to Mouse for a religious belief to be covered in Religious Education lessons.

They also claim that it is not an issue of atheists versus religious, as the campaign has attracted 'key figures from science, education and religion', some Christians have signed up as supporters.

Mouse can understand why some Christians would want to support this campaign.  After all, creationists tend to be rather embarrassing. If we are to make any claims to truth in Christianity, then becoming science denyers does not help.

However, the massive over-reaction and the championing of this issue amongst atheist and secularist groups is revealing.  RE lessons may include teaching children that some people believe that the planet was populated by an alien special called Elohim.  These people are called Raelians.  Children may be taught that some people believe that human beings were brought to earth by Xenu, the tyrant ruler of the "Galactic Confederacy" 7.5 million years ago in spacecraft resembling Douglas DC-8 airliners.  These people are called Scientologists.

Mouse hopes his children are exposed to these ideas in an environment in which they can be explained and clearly challenged.  These ideas are clearly nonsense, and we don't need specific laws banning these ideas from being mentioned in schools.

The other particularly odd thing about this campaign is that it is targeted specifically at state funded schools.  Mouse doesn't quite see the line of argument that says that exposing children to creationism is dangerous and should be banned from schools, but only where one type of school funding arrangement is in place.

If it is dangerous then why wouldn't you want it banned from all schools?

The campaigners are all too aware of the government's "free schools" program, which gives the school full freedom over the curriculum.  And they don't like it.  Their main concern seems to be that it would allow creationism to be taught.

Mouse's take on all this is that creationism is something which shouldn't be taught as fact, along with an endless list of other untruths.  But the current hysteria which is being generated around the issue will do nothing to put this strange idea back into its box.

For another complementary view, see Mark Vernon's piece in the Guardian which argues a similar point but from a slightly different angle

Wikio Religion & Belief blog rankings - May full update

Here's the full update on the May Wikio blog rankings.  There are quite a few ups and downs this month, with no overall general direction for the category.

It is interesting that there is quite a bunch pushing into the top 200, with the top six all having risen significantly over the past few months, so Mouse hopes they will continue to rise into the top 100.


1 The Church Mouse Blog (91)
2 The hermeneutic of continuity (127)
3 eChurch Blog (136)
4 Islam in Europe (164)
5 Lesley's Blog (166)
6 The Freethinker (170)
7 Bartholomew's Notes on Religion (172)
8 Clayboy (204)
9 Epiphenom (213)
10 Phil's Treehouse (229)
11 Anglican Mainstream (232 - BUT IT'S NOT A BLOG)
12 Thinking Anglicans (234)
13 Adrian's Blog (244)
14 Maggi Dawn (269)
15 The Beaker Folk of Husborne Crawley (361)
16 Bishop Alan’s Blog (430)
17 Of course, I could be wrong... (462)
18 Apologetics 315 (464)
19 Nick Baines's Blog (468)
20 The Ugley Vicar (470)

Back to Church Sunday is coming back

Last year Mouse commented that Back to Church Sunday barely got a mention until about three weeks before the event.  Mouse doesn't know why it was so low profile, given the success of the initiative the year before.  But whatever the reason, the result was that lots of churches didn't get involved or prepare for it properly.

So Mouse thought he'd be more helpful this year, and remind everyone that it is time to register.

In fact, the good people at Back to Church Sunday HQ want you to register by 30 June, which isn't actually very far off.

There is plenty of time to plan if you start now, as the actual day is not until 25 September.

If you are planning on taking part, Mouse will reiterate the points he makes every year on this topic:

1. work out why people may have left your church in the past, and avoid a 'Come back to Church and remember why you definitely don't like it' Sunday

2. lay on something special enough that it feels like an effort is being made, without it feeling like it is so different from normal Church that it is artificial

3. get the whole congregation genuinely involved, and make sure people really are invited back - there is nothing worse that visitors turning up for the visitor service and finding they are the only visitor there

All the best, and let Mouse know how you get on.

RE:ACT petition hits 100,000 - will there be a debate in the House of Commons?

Interesting press release from the RE:ACT campaign yesterday.  Mouse highlighted this campaign a little while ago, which is aimed at pushing the government to include Religious Education on the new English Baccalaureate.

The interesting this is that David Cameron said that he would like to introduce a scheme whereby petitions which raise 100,000 signatures could trigger debates in the House of Commons. 

Well RE:ACT have hit 110,000 signatures.

Mouse would point out that whilst David Cameron said he would like to introduce this, he hasn't actually done so yet, so he is certainly not under any obligation to do this, other than some sense that it might be the right thing to do, given his earlier statements.

The full press release is copied below, as it is all worth reading, as Mouse is not in the habit of blogging by copying things from press releases.

This does seem to be a campaign which is gaining support from all quarters, and it is interesting that 100 MPs have also signed an Early Day Motion in support of the idea.

This might just have a chance.




REACT Campaign PETITION achieves the magic number to spark House of Commons debate
Will David Cameron honour his 100,000-signature promise?

The RE.ACT Campaign, which aims to put religious education at the heart of humanities in the English Baccalaureate, has achieved well over 110,000 signatures, thus qualifying under David Cameron's promise, '...where any petition that collects 100,000 signatures will be eligible to be formally debated in the House of Commons.'  If the Prime Minister, David Cameron honours his promise, the RE.ACT Campaign could be the first to have a formal debate in the House of Commons.

Since the campaign's launch on Feb 20th, over 110,000 people have signed the petition calling on the Secretary of State for Education, Rt. Hon Michael Gove MP to include GCSE RE in the English Baccalaureate.

The controversy surrounding the exclusion of GCSE RE from the Baccalaureate has received much criticism from leading religious leaders, academics and MPs including the Bishop of Oxford and Former MP Ann Widdecombe. At parliamentary level, 98 MPs have already signed the Early Day Motion 1375- Religious Education and the English Baccalaureate, including some very senior and experienced MPs.

The campaign has also united representatives from a range of faith communities including; Dr Indarjit Singh, Director Network of Sikh Organisations UK, The Network of Buddhist Organisation UK's Education Advisory Group, CARE (Christian Action Research and Education), the Muslim Council of Britain and the Hindu Forum of Britain to name a few.

Bishop of Oxford the Rt Revd John Pritchard calls for a debate in the Commons, "We have serious concerns that the English Baccalaureate does not include RE in the core of selected academic subjects. Many testify to RE being the only space on the curriculum where they can explore their own beliefs and values and engage with people of faith in that exploration.  There is a real problem with religious literacy in society and RE is a crucial gift to us. We commend that it should be debated in the Commons."

In support of the campaign, the Network of Buddhist Organisation UK's Education Advisory Group, said: "We are extremely concerned at the omission of Religious Education from the English Baccalaureate. English RE is highly distinctive and stimulates consideration of the meaning and purpose of life. Broadening young people's minds to other worldviews, RE can promote greater understanding and social cohesion and should remain an examined subject at the heart of the Humanities curriculum."

Similarly, Bharti Tailor Secretary General of the Hindu Forum of Britain's, Education Group, said "We strongly urge the government to review its decision to exclude GCSE RE from the English Baccalaureate as it goes against the Government's vision of the creation of a Big Society. We believe that retaining this key subject area within the new curriculum and encouraging the routine teaching of Hinduism alongside other Religious Traditions, will lead to greater understanding, empathy and help to develop greater cohesion in Society."

The RE.ACT campaign was organised by the UK's largest Christian Media organisation, Premier Christian Media. Peter Kerridge, it's CEO, said:  " We are amazed at how quickly the campaign has gained the support of over 110,000 people and this number increases daily. And now that we have reached the 100,000 number of signatories, we are in the process of putting forward our request for a House of Commons debate on this issue. The public has clearly spoken out in support of this issue and it is our hope that a government elected by the people, should listen to the people and reconsider its decision and include GCSE RE in the English Baccalaureate."

What's the Church got to do with education? Facts help understand

Church schools are back in the news, and the words of the Bishop of Oxford, John Pritchard, are once again the reason.

This time, Bishop John, the Chairman of the Church of England Board of Education, is being credited for steering a new strategy for Church Schools in leading a drive to convert 70% of church schools to academies, based on comments in the Times Educational Supplement.

The Independent carried a report which was typical of the media coverage:

The academies programme receives its biggest boost today with the news that thousands of faith schools are about to convert to the status.

The Church of England estimates that 70 per cent (3,360) of its 4,800 state schools will become academies within the next five years. That would bring the total number of academies in England to more than 4,300 – around one in five of all state primary, special and secondary schools. At present there are 629 with a further 473 in the pipeline.

The move towards academy status could have a "domino effect" – with other schools quitting local authority control as they realise their councils no longer have the cash to fund vital services such as help for special needs and school improvements.
The exodus of Church of England schools from local authority control comes in the wake of a deal between church leaders and the Government that removed obstacles to their schools becoming academies.

Previously, they had been worried that valuable land would revert from the diocese to individual governing bodies if they opted for a change in status.

Regular readers of this blog will not be surprised to learn that Bishop John Pritchard said nothing of the kind.  In fact, he was reflecting on the current direction of government policy.

The line which sparked these reports was Bishop John's comment that "In the long run there will be a major shift to academies because it is what the Government is determined shall be" (my emphasis).

He went on to predict that the departure of a large proportion of schools from LEA control would create a domino effect, as LEAs would lose their critical mass.  He even questioned whether some non-Church schools would look to Church schools for some kind of support, if LEAs couldn't provide it.

Interesting stuff, but a long way from an announcement of a change in Church schools policy.  No doubt some will ask whether Bishop John could have been a bit more careful with his words, but Mouse thinks he is raising some interesting issues here.

Not to mention the minor fact that Bishop John doesn't actually control Church schools and would have no authority to push through this sort of policy.  The decision to become an academy is one for the school's governors.

Mouse has been frustrated in recent weeks that the Church doesn't seem to have been getting its message across on its involvement in education.

It is a clear line of attack from secularists to claim that Church schools are divisive in communities, discriminatory in their policies and allow religious zealots to proselytise to the young and vulnerable.

In the midst of these accusations and insinuations, Mouse is at pains to emphasise a few facts:

1. most Church of England schools (53%) are Voluntary Controlled, which means they do not control their admissions or employment policies, but are subject to the policies of the Local Education Authority, in the same way as all other maintained state schools

2. the minority of Church of England schools which are Voluntary Aided do have control over their admissions when the school is oversubscribed, within the limits set out by government.  These prohibit any form of overt or covert selection by ability.

3. These local school admission policies are defined by the School Governors, not by the Church of England, although in VA schools the local churches can appoint a majority of governors.

4. Mouse has never seen any statistics on how many schools use church attendance in admissions, so unless he has missed something, most people are using anecdotal evidence rather than hard facts when they talk about the extent of these issues.

5. The Church overall has the same proportion of its schools defined as having 'severe' disadvantage (>30% of pupils eligible for free school meals) as the national average.

6. Many VA schools have no reserved places based on church attendance, and others use 'fair banding' to ensure that where they do reserve places to preserve the Christian ethos of the school, this is not a bias towards the middle class or to 'smart kids'.

7. OFSTED have reported that Church schools are better at promoting community cohesion that other schools.

Mouse puts a high priority on the Church's involvement in education.  From all the available evidence, the dedication and service put into Church schools has benefited and improved the life chances of millions.  That is exactly what the Church is there for.

Mouse doesn't quite buy Bishop John's line that Church schools were originally set up to educate the poor.  Whilst that is true to an extent, it was done in a typically 19th century philanthropic way, with the purpose of teaching the poor about the established religion of the day.  The intention was not to emancipate them.

Nevertheless, education remains one of the biggest issues of the day.  With around half of all young people leaving school without a basic qualification in English and Maths.

The issue for Church schools in admissions is about how to deal with huge oversubscription.  Working out the best way to apply quotas into this situation is always going to be painful.  Mouse will continue to argue that a better solution would be to allow school provision to expand in response to demand, rather than forcing parents to accept second, third or fourth choices of schools.

More flying bishops

It was announced yesterday that the Archbishop of Canterbury (well, actually the Queen) has appointed two new Provincial Episcopal Visitors - flying bishops.

Rev'd Jonathan Baker and Rev'd Norman Banks will take over the sees of Ebbsfleet and Richborough respectively.

Mouse spotted that Rev'd Jonathan Baker, Secretary to Forward in Faith, was also a member of the drafting group for the legislation on women bishops.  Rev'd Norman Banks is a vicar in Walsingham.  For those who don't know the full name of the Ordinariate, to which the two previous flying bishops have flown off to, is the Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham.

Mouse wonders whether these things are significant.

FiF have welcomed the appointments, importantly saying that they hoped this would lay the foundations for a 'permanent' provision for those opposed to women's ordination.  This is not what is proposed in the current legislation on women bishops, however.  Under the legislation, currently making its way through Diocesan Synods, the flying bishops will be abolished, as will the current means by which parishes opt out of their supervision.

Friday round up

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

1. Clayboy celebrates church with the geeks on Star Wars day (May the fourth ...)

2. Cranmer organises some support for the Cartwheeling Verger, just in case the Abbey are giving him a hard time

3. Dave Walker's Cartoon Church blog splutters back to life

4. Bishop Nick Baines and Krish Kandiah both reflect intelligently on Bin Laden's death

5. Anna Arco reports on Pope John Paul II's beatification and the Vatican bloggers conference

6. Heresy Corner has an excellent report on Nadine Dorries' sex education bill

7. eChurch Christian Blog has the most quoted Bible verses on social media following Bin Laden's death

8. The Church Sofa (or is it a chaise lounge) on Christian only social media sites

9. Science and Belief on Islam and science

10. Quarentia on how to cut out sinning from your church

The Ninja Nuns

Continuing Mouse's high brow Royal Wedding theme, today we turn our attention to the Ninja Nuns.

This refers, of course, to the unexpected appearance of two nuns during the wedding ceremony seated next to the royal couple in Westminster Abbey.

These two nuns managed to get better seats than Rowan Williams, than Richard Chartres, the Bishop of London, and better even than the Queen.

Twitter was buzzing with people wondering who they were.

Then someone spotted something unexpected.  One of the nuns was wearing a pair of black Reebok Classic trainers.  As quips started to spread that the taller of the two nuns was an undercover MI5 officer, the ladies became known as the Ninja Nuns.

And so Mouse is grateful to the Daily Mail for tracking down Sister Annaliese Brogden, a 52-year-old nun from the Community of the Sisters of the Church, and telling us a bit more about her.  The nuns live at St Michael's convent in Ham Common near Richmond, Surrey.

The two nuns are part time chaplains at the Abbey, and so they had the chance to sit in their usual seats.

It seems that Sister Annaliese always wears trainers for comfort, although her father told the Mail that she 'probably' had some more dressy shoes at the convent, but didn't wear them for the wedding.

Her father also reported that she feels a bit embarrassed by the attention, but did have a giggle when she heard she had been called the Ninja Nun.

Mouse is dead chuffed.

The Cartwheeling Verger - how to look a PR gift horse in the mouth

Welcome to the wacky world of the Church of England.

One of the high points of the Royal Wedding for Mouse was the Cartwheeling Verger.  This is the now legendary incident in which Verger Ben Sheward, trotted back down the aisle of Westminster Abbey full of jubilation and joy after the wedding party had left the building.  He was so overcome by the occasion that he did two cartwheels.

What followed was a sensation.

His cartwheels were picked up by ITV cameras and Ben Sheward became a global superstar.  The clip has been added to YouTube more than a dozen times, racking up close to 1m views across them.  The story was picked up by all the major print and broadcast media in the UK as well as the major US broadcasters and other global media.

Bishop Alan Wilson, the Bishop of Buckingham, shared the clip on his Facebook page, and described it as a "Lovely joyful end to the day".  The sentiment was universally shared.

Westminster Abbey and the Church of England had been gifted a PR triumph.

Then things started to go wrong.

Westminster Abbey immediately refused to allow Ben to speak to the media, or to answer press queries about him.  They said that they wanted to protect him from the media.

Then the Daily Mail published a story in which they claimed that the Abbey was ungry with ITV for releasing the pictures, as they had agreed to switch off the cameras after the wedding party had left, and had rebuked Sheward for acting in the way he had.

Cranmer has started a petition in support of Ben, and a dedicated Facebook page has appeared with over 1,200 fans.  Mouse endorses them both.

The only response from the Abbey came in a single line from their anonymous twitter account, which denied any 'disciplinary', then ignored repeated queries as to whether that was a cleverly worded way of avoiding the issue - a telling off is not necessarily the same as a disciplinary procedure.

Mouse is utterly baffled.

A little bit of controlled access to the media would have done the world of good.  The incident showed a side to the Church that many do not normally see.  Mouse won't go into his view of the stereotypes which the Church is so often subject, but this incident broke them all and captured the mood of the nation.

As for Mouse, the Abbey are now ignoring his emails and tweets.  He can only now offer up publicly what has been refused privately - a helping hand from a friend to show the great British public why Ben was so joyful that he did cartwheels, and to put straight the stories which are making the Abbey, and the Church, look like a bunch of po-faced killjoys.

Celebrating death

Awaking yesterday to images of crowds chanting "U.S.A", jubilant at the news that Osama Bin Laden had been killed, made Mouse feel rather sick.

Mouse was pleased to have read plenty of sensible commentary from Christian blogs about the feelings that various people experienced on hearing the news.

The bottom line for most of us is that no matter how odious a man is, their death is not something to be celebrated.

Whilst few would argue with the idea that the world is a better place without Bin Laden in it, the celebratory mood amongst some strikes the wrong note.  Mouse is rather more sombre.  Too many people have died in this 'war' to feel anything joyful right now.

There are a number of issues involved in the death of Bin Laden.  Heresy Corner and David Allen Green ask some sensible questions about the legality of the action, although it seems to now have the backing of the UN amongst others, so that may be a red herring.

We can ask whether he should have been taken alive and put to trial, but this is utterly academic.  There is no chance that Bin Laden would have given himself up.

Others will be better placed than the Mouse to assess the geopolitical significance, and Mouse hopes this contributes somehow to the mood of change which is sweeping across the Middle East.

All Mouse can really do in this situation is pray for a better future, and for all those who have been affected by terrorism.

Wikio Religion & Belief blog rankings - May sneak preview

Mouse's final offering of this glorious bank holiday weekend is the sneak preview of the Wikio Religion & Belief blog rankings.

As usual, His Grace Archbishop Cranmer doesn't feature, but his meteoric rise up the political rankings (up to 11th this month) means he would surely claim top spot if he did.

Something is obviously going on over at The hermeneutic of continuity blog, as that has risen from 5th spot last month to second this month.  The Freethinker is up from 13 to 6 and Clayboy is up from 12 to 8.

Mouse should also give a big congratulations to Heresy Corner, which Mouse used to include in his list of Religion & Belief blogs.  The Heresiarch doesn't do much in that space any more, but has just been shortlisted for the Orwell Prize for Blogging, which is a huge achievement and very well deserved.

As usual, Mouse will provide the full ranking update when it is available.

1	The Church Mouse Blog
2	The hermeneutic of continuity
3	eChurch Blog
4	Islam in Europe
5	Lesley's Blog
6	The Freethinker
7	Bartholomew's Notes on Religion
8	Clayboy
9	Epiphenom
10	Phil's Treehouse
11	Anglican Mainstream
12	Thinking Anglicans
13	Adrian's Blog
14	Maggi Dawn
15	The Beaker Folk of Husborne Crawley
16	Bishop Alan’s Blog
17	Of course, I could be wrong...
18	Apologetics 315
19	Nick Baines's Blog
20	The Ugley Vicar

Ranking made by Wikio