Church of England guilt-trips Christians about holohoax

[yankeedoodle]

The Church Of England Officially Blames Christians In General For Contributing To The 'Holocaust'
https://christiansfortruth.com/the-church-of-england-officially-blames-christians-in-general-for-contributing-to-the-holocaust/

The Church of England, headed by Justin Welby, the jewish Archbishop of Canterbury, admitted Thursday that centuries of Christian anti-Semitism helped lead to the Holocaust:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/church-of-england-report-admits-christian-anti-semitism-led-to-holocaust/
In a major report that was three years in the making, England's established church cited "the attribution of collective guilt to the Jewish people for the death of Christ and the consequent interpretation of their suffering as collective punishment sent by God" as being among the ideas that "contributed to fostering the passive acquiescence if not positive support of many Christians in actions that led to the Holocaust."

The report, "God's Unfailing Word: Theological and Practical Perspectives on Christian–Jewish Relations," also urged Christians to accept the importance of Zionism for most Jews....

The Church of England stands at the center of the Anglican Communion, a worldwide network of churches. In England, it is the state church and headed by Queen Elizabeth II.

In an afterword to "God's Unfailing Word," the UK's chief rabbi takes the church to task for failing to reject outright the work of evangelical Christians who attempt to convert Jews.

Ephraim Mirvis praises the 105-page report for being "sensitive and unequivocal in owning the legacy of Christianity's role in the bitter saga of Jewish persecution."

Mirvis goes on, though, to express his "substantial misgiving" at its unwillingness to condemn the "efforts of those Christians, however many they may number, who, as part of their faithful mission, dedicate themselves to the purposeful and specific targeting of Jews for conversion to Christianity."

...The document is unflinching in its acceptance of the historic role of Christianity in perpetuating anti-Semitism. "Recognition on the part of the Church that it bears a considerable measure of responsibility for the spread of antisemitism demands a response from the Church," it argues.

The report goes on to call for "attention to the persecution and prejudice experienced by Jewish people through history" and "the responsibility held by Christians for that and its persistence in the contemporary context." Christian teaching, it admits, has provided a "fertile seed-bed for murderous antisemitism in the modern era."

Quoting [Archbishop] Welby's words in 2016 that the theological teachings of the Church have "compounded the spread of the virus" of anti-Semitism," the report says "the attribution of collective guilt to the Jewish people for the death of Christ and the consequent interpretation of their suffering as collective punishment sent by God is one very clear example of that."

"Within living memory, such ideas contributed to fostering the passive acquiescence if not positive support of many Christians in actions that led to the Holocaust," it adds.

..."England had its own role in this history, with a claim to being the birthplace of what became known as the 'blood libel,' whereby Jews were falsely accused of murdering Christian children to make Passover matzot with their blood," it says.

Two English cathedrals, Norwich and Lincoln, were associated with the development and spread of the blood libel in the Middle Ages.

Its first recorded instance was when a 12-year-old boy was found murdered outside of the East Anglian city of Norwich in 1144. Members of his family accused the Jews of Norwich of killing him.

The report notes that "this allegation, originating in England, became the catalyst for the murder of many Jews in this country and across Europe, especially in pogroms at Eastertide."

In 1290, it also goes on to acknowledge, England "became the first country to order the entire Jewish community to leave, thereby seeking to be a Christian territory with no Jewish presence."

The very nature of real Christianity is anti-jewish, and no amount of hand ringing, apologies, or changing of doctrine is going to change that.  Christ rejected the Jews and everything they stood for, and by demanding that today's Christians embrace the Jews is tantamount to demanding that Christians reject Christ, which is exactly what the Jews want.

And Justin Welby was indeed appointed as the Archbishop of Canterbury because he is racially jewish and therefore would be far more sympathetic to throwing Christianity under the bus to placate the Jews, who will never forgive the English people for kicking them out of the country in 1290 for ritually sacrificing Christian children, a practice they continued to indulge in long after their expulsion.

Allowing the Jews back into England after 300 years in exile was the beginning of the end of Christian England.

But this announcement is part of a larger jewish game that's afoot, which is to hold not just the Germans responsible for the so-called Holocaust, but the entire Christian European people, or Christendom.

The plan is to replace the suffering of Christ with the alleged suffering of the Jews during World War II.  Holocaustianity has replaced Christianity in the hearts of atheistic western Europeans, and their new overlords are ruthless jewish bankers.

Those who refuse to be ruled by Christ are destined to be ruled by the Jews.  Just ask the 60 million dead Russians what that will be like.

[yankeedoodle]

UK Church "chills" free expression – and is (apparently) oblivious to the fate of Christianity in the Holy Land
https://www.redressonline.com/2019/11/uk-church-chills-free-expression-and-is-apparently-oblivious-to-the-fate-of-christianity-in-the-holy-land/

By Stuart Littlewood

I'd seen confusing reports about Zionist interference forcing a two-day interfaith conference at Chester to hurriedly relocate to nearby Hoole and causing key speakers to drop out.

A Catholic church had been booked for the event, and the Jewish Chronicle reported that church authorities cancelled the booking after being contacted by the North West Friends of Israel. These complainers maintained that Gilad Atzmon's past statements include "Jewish ideology is driving our planet into a catastrophe" and "I'm not going to say whether it is right or not to burn down a synagogue, I can see that it is a rational act"; and Revered Stephen Sizer had been reprimanded for sharing material suggesting Israel carried out the 9/11 attacks.

Atzmon was scheduled to talk about "Palestine under the Jewish state" and Stephen was to discuss 'Christian Zionism: Roadmap to Armageddon?'. How utterly shocking!

The Jewish Chronicle quoted the Diocese of Shrewsbury as saying that it "condemns and opposes anti-Semitism in all its forms and will not allow such activities on its premises.

"When serious concerns about the nature of this event were brought to our attention appropriate steps were immediately taken," it added.

So just how appropriate was caving in to such extremism?

It leaves the unfortunate impression that the Shrewsbury Diocese too easily surrenders to pressure.

A leading light in Friends of Israel then launched an attack on Rod Heather, Chairman of Hoole Community Trust, which allowed the conference to go ahead on their premises: 

As a charity you facilitated an event organised by a person who claims there is a "Jewish lobby" (an anti-Semitic claim), which had a session on Israeli genocide (also anti-Semitic), hosted by a conspiracy theorist in Steven Sizer who claims that Jews planned and carried out 9/11 and has Gilad Atzmon, a known holocaust denier... and you think there is nothing wrong!

You, Mr Heather, are part of the problem and clearly have no issue with Jew hatred.

North West Friends of Israel quickly contacted the Diocese of Shrewsbury and we are grateful for the archbishop who cancelled the event immediately. Thank you!

When the pro Palestinian organiser was told of the cancellation his response was that the Church succumbed to "the Jewish lobby"! This says it all!

Thank you again to the Diocese of Shrewsbury for not tolerating anti-Semitism.

But Roderick Heather was more than equal to the challenge. He said he would never allow anyone a platform to express such ridiculous and extreme views as holocaust denial. But having attended much of the conference himself he said there had been no such talk and "nothing occurred that could be viewed as anti-Semitic".

In a robust response he said:

Your intervention, and the various other coordinated extreme ones we received today, did nothing to help foster good community relations here in Chester or to improve the understanding of and sympathy for the Jewish cause nationally in the UK. The ill-informed and bigoted telephone and social media campaign that we have witnessed is a disgrace. It was unfounded and unnecessary and has done your cause much harm. Be aware that I am ensuring that as many people as possible (locally and nationally) are made aware of the vitriolic, verbal bullying we have been subjected to today.

So I emailed the Diocese asking:

Would the Diocese – and Bishop Mark [Davies – pictured above], please – care to comment on what happened and perhaps explain why Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 10 of our own Human Rights Act were not, apparently, at the forefront of their actions.

It would also be helpful to know the Church's stance on the situation in the Holy Land where Christian communities are shrinking fast and there may soon be none left in the place where Christianity was born.

This was met by stony silence. After several days I wrote again asking if Bishop Mark Davies had anything to say. The question was totally ignored. It's no surprise when one considers the weak-kneed performance of some senior churchmen in the West. But you don't expect the Catholics to be quite so gormless when their brethren in Palestine are in the front line fighting the good fight in truly difficult circumstance and suffering all kinds of abuse.

Let's remind ourselves what Article 19 says:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Of course, you mustn't push it to the point where you risk stirring up hatred.

And Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 says much the same thing:

Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.

Of course, it warns that exercising these freedoms carries duties and responsibilities such as respect for the reputation or rights of others.

And as Liberty explains:

... the right to free expression would be meaningless if it only protected certain types of expression. So Article 10 protects both popular and unpopular expression – including speech that might shock others – subject to certain limitations.

And when considering whether free expression should be limited, "courts will question whether doing so could have a 'chilling effect' on free speech..."

So thanks for the chill, Bishop.