"Can't see the problem"!

Former Second Church Estates Commissioner addressing the Commons
Original source: Mirror

Former Second Church Estates Commissioner, Sir Tony Baldry, attended the recent drag-queen gala at St James’s church, Piccadilly.

The Church Times reports that Sir Tony was one of the 300-strong audience who attended the event. 

Interviewed during the interval, he contrasted the event with the last time he had been in St James’s, for a debate between Theresa May and the Archbishop of York. He defended the drag evening: “It’s not hurting anyone, and making tons of money for the church. I just can’t see the problem.”

Sir Tony couldn't see the problem when he addressed the House of Commons back in 2012. Much was made of the Commissioner's buffoonery in sporting a male-only club tie while he was berating orthodox Christians for being sexist. He claimed that the Church of England's decision to reject the introduction of women bishops "makes it look like a sect".

It didn't then but is going that way. I wrote at the time "Sir Tony Baldry displays an unusual understanding of the word sect which in Christian terms means a group of people with somewhat different religious beliefs (typically regarded as heretical) from those of a larger group to which they belong.

The Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches (GSFA) points out that having recently legitimised and incorporated into the Church’s liturgy the blessing of same sex unions, the Church of England has "departed from the historic faith passed down from the Apostles in the liturgies of the Church and her pastoral practice and disqualified herself from leading the Communion as the historic 'Mother' Church."

Sadly most of the Anglican bishops in Great Britain can't see the problem.

The Rector of St James's Church, Piccadilly, is the Revd Lucy Winkett, staunch promoter of the F word which is where the problem started.

Riots in England: the Prime Minister's response

In his statement to the Commons this morning the Prime Minister admitted what was obvious to anyone watching recent events unfold, that is, 'the police got it wrong'. MPs representing areas worst affected said that their constituents looked on in disbelief as the police simply 'observed' looters entering vandalised shops and walking off with stolen goods. This was the view witnessed by television viewers around the world.


Apparently the police viewed the situation as a "public order" issue rather than criminal activity!  The irony is that, as illustrated here, the police are much swifter in dealing with 'public order' protesters than with criminals, often employing controversial 'kettling' procedures to restrict movement. Watch the BBC clip here and listen to what the then Metropolitan Police Commissioner had to say about containment to avoid trouble spreading. 

Force needs to be met with force employing any lawful means to take control of a situation but in this instance the riotous looting was allowed to get so out of control  that the Prime Minister has since had to speak of 'fighting back'. Rubber bullets have been used elsewhere in the United Kingdom so why not in England? If the police fail to protect citizens it is inevitable that they will seek to protect themselves with all that implies.


The only good thing to come out of this shameful episode is the Prime Minister's stated determination to get to grips with the gang culture and other elements that have blighted our society for too long. It's a pity it comes at such a price.


Update
In the row that has blown up about whether the Government or the Metropolitan Police should take credit for bringing the London riots to a halt we have been treated to this statement by the Acting Commissioner Tim Godwin "As a result of that we were able to nip this in the bud after a few days." 

The problem wasn't 'nipped in the bud', it was allowed to flower grotesquely for 'a few days' resulting in loss of life, homes and jobs with millions of pounds worth of damage. There was much talk on Question Time last night of the difficulties 'officers' face because of fear of further criticism for rough handling but the cases referred to arose as a result of lawful protest, not criminal behaviour involving riots and looting.

Neither the Government nor the Metropolitan Police should be looking to take credit for damping down the public disorder. The complacency in the interview is mind blowing - self praise is no recommendation! 


If more trouble flares up 'nipping it in the bud after a few days' is entirely unacceptable. No wonder we are in such a mess. 


Postscript
An American view here.