News Item: : Singing from the Same Hymn Sheet (as the Globalists)
(Category: Torch of The Faith News)
Posted by admin
Wednesday 08 February 2017 - 23:37:41

It's that man again! Not Tommy Handley, but that other radio-friendly former ''Scouser'' Cardinal Vincent Nichols.

Speaking in Unison

From Brexit to sex-ed on all the way to Islamic immigration, it is often intriguing to witness the extent to which some episcopal leaders march in lock-step with official government policies. This is certainly noticeable in relation to those powerbrokers furthering the globalist agenda.

It can be especially revealing to observe the times when church leaders closely parrot whatever narrative is currently dominant in the mainstream media.

Take, for example, the recent joint-appearance on Leading Britain's Conversation Radio (LBC), of Westminster's Cardinal Vincent Nichols and the present Anglican claimant to the ancient Catholic See of Canterbury, Mr. Justin Welby.

The pair were on-air together to present a shared front in the popular narrative which has formed up against the immigration controls sought by US President Donald Trump.

Their shared radio appearance had its sequel when Cardinal Nichols also appeared in a related interview on BBC Radio 4's Westminster Hour.

These media communications took place during a week in which the mainstream media also: presented a narrative depicting Queen Elizabeth II as having being ''put in a very difficult position'' by the planned State Visit of President Trump; reported on a 1.3-million petition demanding a halt to the planned visit; gave coverage to various anti-Trump marches in British cities; and gave space for the House of Commons Speaker, Mr. John Bercow, to voice his opposition to President Trump being permitted to address Parliament, by accusing Trump of ''racism'' and ''sexism''.

During the LBC interview, Cardinal Nichols built on the rhetoric he uttered last November; when he had argued that some politicians were ''trading in fear'' and suggested that the British people could ''learn much'' from the ''vibrancy of the Muslim faith'' of new immigrants, including refugees.

Now joining Mr. Welby's on-air critique of ''policies that are based in fear rather than confidence and courage and Christian hospitality'', Cardinal Nichols opined: ''To identify a whole people, a nation or a whole religion as the enemy is a desperate road to go down.''

He suggested that such a policy would put Christians in greater jeopardy, whilst ''doing nothing to help the Muslim community deal with the tensions within it.''

It must be said that such talk of ''tensions'' sounds awfully prissy when one recalls the genocidal mass-slaughter of Christians and various minority groups by Islamists in the Middle-East and parts of Nigeria.

Iraq's Archbishop Warda adds Some Depth

Given the Cardinal's talk of putting Christians in jeopardy, it is well worth reflecting on something we first said last Monday. That is when we noted that Mr. Trump's intended immigration control was not a ''Muslim ban'' in any case.

The importance of restating this point hits home when reflecting on an interview given by the good Archbishop Bashar Warda of Iraq to Crux. It will become clear that His Grace was speaking primarily in relation to the anti-Trump rallies in the US, but his words can be given similar application to the British situation.

Having expressed his wonder that those protesting Trump's refugee order were nowhere to be seen when ISIS came to kill Christians, Yazidis and other minority groups, nor when Syrian Christians were only being allowed into the US at a rate that was 20 times less than the percentage of their population in Syria, His Grace reflected: ''I would also say this, all those who cry out that this is a ''Muslim ban'' - especially now that it has been clarified that it is not - should understand clearly that when they do this, they are hurting we Christians specifically and putting us at greater risk. The executive order has clearly affected Christians and Yazidis and others as well as Muslims... Here in Iraq, we Christians cannot afford to throw out words carelessly as the media in the West can do. I would ask those in the media who use every issue to stir up division to think about this. For the media, these things become an issue of ratings, but for us the danger is real... Most Americans have no concept of what it was like to live as a Yazidi or Christian or other minority as ISIS invaded. Our people had the option to flee, to convert, or to be killed, and many were killed in the most brutal ways imaginable. But there were none of the protests then of ISIS' religious test.''

Irrational Fear or Reasonable Concern?

This brings us to an important aspect in critiquing the Welby-Nichols rhetoric. It seems to me that their depiction of President Trump's refugee policy is at best a caricature. For example, they consistently suggest that Trump's policy is based on ''fear'' and the ''trading in fear''.

But, surely, it is necessary to distinguish between fear that is irrational, such as that based in xenophobic bigotry, and the rational concern that is rooted in experience, observation and reason?

After all, we would all do well to remember that Ahmad al-Mohammad and another of the jihadis who callously slaughtered 130 people in Paris in November 2015 had only recently entered mainland Europe as supposed refugees.

Then again, the Daily Mail reported, on 18th February, 2015, that ISIS had threatened to send 500,000 migrants to Europe as a ''psychological weapon''. Even allowing for hyperbole, it is necessary to know that the Daily Mail also described letters from jihadis which spoke of plans to hide terrorists among the incoming refugees.

As the events of Paris and elsewhere have demonstrated, even a very small number of determined terrorists pose a significant threat. This is why it is only reasonable to ensure exactly who is coming into Europe, from where they are coming, and what their key intention is by coming.   

This opens up another critique of the Nichols-Welby narrative. For example, when one looks at the scale of the issues, their talk of ''Christian hospitality'' begins to sound more like an ecumenical tea-party, than a developed approach to the complexities of cultural cohesion, national sovereignty and civic security.

If one looks a little deeper into the historical development of the traditions of ''Christian hospitality'' which they highlight, then one finds a Christendom that was prepared to welcome newcomers on condition that they posed no threat and that they could demonstrate a willing ability to integrate into the Christian civilization, with all of its core values.

In this context, it is important not to overlook the contribution made by St. Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologiae. For instance, he addressed the issue of immigration in article 3 of Q.105, on the question of Whether the judicial precepts regarding foreigners were framed in a suitable manner?  

St. Thomas wrote: ''With regard to these a certain order was observed. For they were not at once admitted to citizenship; just as it was law in some nations that no-one was deemed a citizen except after two generations, as the Philosopher says (Politics 111.1). The reason for this was that if foreigners were allowed to meddle with the affairs of a nation as soon as they settled down in its midst, many dangers might occur, since the foreigners not yet having the common good firmly at heart might attempt something hurtful to the people.''

That this kind of danger is as relevant as ever in terms of genuine existential threats - and not just as the Nichols-Welby discussion has it as a mere ''trading in fear'' - is evidenced by the fact that the precincts of the medieval Canterbury Cathedral, that important site of European Christendom, now have to be patrolled by police, bristling with Glock 17 semi-automatic 9mm pistols and Tasers, to deter potential Islamist attacks. 

Indeed, only last week it was officially announced that the weekend Changing of the Guard ceremony at Windsor Castle would be permanently stopped to avoid the crowds of tourists in the summer months becoming potential targets of terror.

This is Windsor Castle in 2017 mind you; not some isolated 19th-Century fort on the North-West Frontier of Imperial British India!

And yet, even though he is based right there at Canterbury, sitting on the borrowed throne of St. Augustine nonetheless, Mr. Welby does not seem to make these connections in his thinking when he so strongly denounces Trump's developing foreign policy.

Before we conclude today, there are just two final points that trouble me deeply.

Singing, but to whose tune?

It seems remarkable to me as a Catholic layman that Cardinal Nichols can devote so much time and energy to using the media to criticize President Trump, in a manner which so echoes the ideology of those stirring up opinion and marches against Trump, when he could be using the opportunity to further Our Lord's Great Commission to the Apostles and their successors of bringing all peoples into the unity of Christ's Church. Surely this, and not international politics is his remit?

Then, again, if Cardinal Nichols is going to focus on President Trump's political affairs, why does he only zero-in on those matters that he personally deems to be negative?  

Would it not be appropriate for a Catholic prelate to also speak positively of those good things that President Trump has already achieved in the areas of the family and pro-life; such as sending his deputy to the March for Life, or managing to save lives by defunding IPPF and Marie Stopes International through the reinstatement of the Mexico City Policy?

But then again, perhaps those things do not fit with the present narrative being pedalled by the powers that be in government and media...

Talk about singing from the same hymn sheet!

---

This news item is from Torch of The Faith
( http://www.torchofthefaith.com/news.php?extend.1549 )