Canons of St Paul's

[Chris Newman]

I am pleased to see that Canon Giles Fraser continues the time honoured tradition of St Paul's canons of being controversially Christian. John Donne began it, followed by Jonathan Swift (who really laid into hypocrisy). In more recent times Canons Stanley Evans and John Collins were thorns in the sides of the CofE when they opposed nuclear weapons.

[Simon]

Canons of St Paul's

In more recent times Canons Stanley Evans and John Collins were thorns in the sides of the CofE when they opposed nuclear weapons.

Naive fools at the time, though of course well-meaning.

[MrGongGong]

Naive fools at the time, though of course well-meaning.

so tell me which part of Christianity advocates the use of offensive weapons ?
Its impossible to be a Christian and be in favour of nuclear weapons in the same way that its impossible to be an Islamic Pork butcher !

but he isn't listening anyway

[amateur51]

Naive fools at the time, though of course well-meaning.

Let's just get Simon's pompous statement into context.

Simon has told us previously that he is currently about 40. Thus when Canon Collins helped to found the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament in 1957, Simon would have to wait about a further 14 years to be born.

Canon Collins also founded War On Want in 1951. He later became distressed and alarmed by the apartheid regime in South Africa and in 1981 set up The Canon Collins Educational Trust for Southern Africa, when Simon would have been about 10 and enjoying the fruits, literally, of the Cape I'm sure (what English child of yeoman stock in rural Derbyshire wouldn't?)

So where does Simon get the notion that Canon Collins was a naive fool? Did his oft-mentioned Grannie tell him or perhaps The Duke of Devonshire?

I think we should be told!!

[BBMmk2]

If I am not mistaken, all religions advocate peace?

[MrGongGong]

If I am not mistaken, all religions advocate peace?

Indeed that was my impression
but some seem to think that its naive to actually do something about it

[Simon]

If I am not mistaken, all religions advocate peace?

Well, perhaps not quite all, BBM - there are some pretty weird cults about! But I take your point. Though even in some mainstream religions there may be those that advocate peace overtly whilst secretly supporting violence to gain more domination themselves...

But the nuclear weapons debate, at the time when the USSR was a threat, was not a simplistic one about peace. It was a practical one about survival and the balance of power. As it turned out, the weapons were not used by either side: fear of reprisals saw to that, coupled with the fact that after Stalin there was nobody in Russia at the top who was actually prepared to push it beyond breaking point. But at times it was a difficult balancing act, and the gullible and/or naive in the West who couldn't grasp the point were unhelpful at best.

[Chris Newman]

If I am not mistaken, all religions advocate peace?

Not according to some replies to my original message.

[Lilliput]

I am pleased to see that Canon Giles Fraser continues the time honoured tradition of St Paul's canons of being controversially Christian. John Donne began it, followed by Jonathan Swift (who really laid into hypocrisy). In more recent times Canons Stanley Evans and John Collins were thorns in the sides of the CofE when they opposed nuclear weapons.

Jonathan Swift was Dean of St Patrick’s [Dublin] 1713–45, and had no connection with St Paul’s as far as I know

[Chris Newman]

Well, perhaps not quite all, BBM - there are some pretty weird cults about! But I take your point. Though even in some mainstream religions there may be those that advocate peace overtly whilst secretly supporting violence to gain more domination themselves...

But the nuclear weapons debate, at the time when the USSR was a threat, was not a simplistic one about peace. It was a practical one about survival and the balance of power. As it turned out, the weapons were not used by either side: fear of reprisals saw to that, coupled with the fact that after Stalin there was nobody in Russia at the top who was actually prepared to push it beyond breaking point. But at times it was a difficult balancing act, and the gullible and/or naive in the West who couldn't grasp the point were unhelpful at best.

About survival? We can move the goal posts. In my teens there were idiots like Nikita Khrushchev and John F. Kennedy. The fact that they were prepared to push the world's survival so closely to annihalation proves how stupid and childish international politics was in those days. I do not think of JFK or NK as heroes. Many regard JFK as such. I think of both of them as arrogant idiots. Anyone who pushes the world to that sort of precipice is no better that Hitler or Stalin.

[Chris Newman]

Jonathan Swift was Dean of St Patrick’s [Dublin] 1713–45, and had no connection with St Paul’s as far as I know

I stand corrected, Lilliput (dare I say a small point? ). What I meant, of course, was that Swift would be there, I am pretty sure, with Giles Fraser today.

[DracoM]

IIRC John Donne was Dean of St Paul's?

[Chris Newman]

IIRC John Donne was Dean of St Paul's?

I think I hinted at that in Message 10, but, methinks that today he would be with the protesters.

[Simon]

In my teens there were idiots like Nikita Khrushchev and John F. Kennedy. The fact that they were prepared to push the world's survival so closely to annihalation proves how stupid and childish international politics was in those days. I do not think of JFK or NK as heroes. Many regard JFK as such. I think of both of them as arrogant idiots.

Forgive me Chris, but did you actually study any factual history of that period? Do you know anything demonstrably true about the sequence of events? Do you know anything about the situation in the USSR and the prerssures on the leadership there? Do you know what options Kennedy had?

[MrGongGong]

But the nuclear weapons debate, at the time when the USSR was a threat, was not a simplistic one about peace. It was a practical one about survival and the balance of power..

This sums up quite neatly one of the main reasons that I stopped having anything to do with the church when I was a teenager in the 1970's even though the music was/is wonderful !
I have massive respect for those in the Christian churches who are prepared to actually make their faith have some effect in the world, and none whatsoever who hedge around issues of morality in this way.
There is always a (real or imaginary or red herring ) issue of "survival" against the baddies , its extremely naive to be taken in by this time and time again. The really dangerous bit is maybe when the threats that cause otherwise sensible people to suspend their moral compass turn out to be real , given that our politicians seem to be unable to act in a truthful way about anything.
I'm always heartened by those in the Church prepared to stand up for what they profess to believe (even though it is no longer what I believe myself )