"Soulless neutrality"

St Hilda's College, Oxford                                                                                                Source: web

From the Telegraph: St Hilda’s College in Oxford is set to become the first  undergraduate college in the University to cease having a dedicated Anglican chapel, transitioning instead to a multi-faith prayer room described by Elizabeth Oldfield as a victory for 'soulless neutrality'. 

This decision even ruffled the feathers of Giles Fraser who wrote: "St Hilda’s College is the first college of the University of Oxford to have demolished its chapel. First of all they were going to replace it. But having knocked down the old one they have now decided they want a multi-faith space instead. The humanists are crowing that this represents a triumph for the forces of secularism – and they are, of course, perfectly correct."

But Fraser goes further: "This has nothing to do with an Anglican desire to maintain some sort of theological dominance within the University. If St Hilda’s decided it was going to have a mosque or a synagogue instead, I for one could entirely see the point and much prefer it. Such a space would have a particular religious character and be so better for that. Indeed, there are dozens of college chapels. So why not a bit of re-balancing? But of course they won't do that, too afraid of the Daily Mail, too afraid of being labeled as the college with the mosque."

Prior to 2007 St Hilda's was a Hall for Women Students. Women would have been able to worship on equal terms with men in the Anglican chapel unlike Muslim and Orthodox Jewish women who are segregated in worship.

Replacing the dedicated Anglican Chapel with a multi-faith prayer room is a politically correct, retrograde step signalling equal worth of beliefs contrary to the teaching of the Bible.

Ignorance of what Islam teaches is rife and is unlikely to improve without radical changes.

In July 2019 the Government appointed an "Independent expert" to tackle Islamophobia. The appointee, Imam Qari Asim, MBE, said at the time: "To tackle the alarming rise in anti-Muslim sentiment, it is imperative that Islamophobia is defined. I am deeply committed to working across Muslim communities and with relevant stakeholders to formulate a legally robust, comprehensive and workable definition of Islamophobia."

Talking at a workshop organised by The Centre for Muslim-Christian Studies the Imam "argued the case for Muslims to obey the law of the land most of the time. But he also made clear how he would like the law to accommodate Islamic ideas. For example, he would like to see polygamy legalised, and inheritance to favour male heirs in line with sharia principles. He also supports Islamic finance with its radical view that interest should be banned." He would also "support an explicit Islamic blasphemy law."

Qari Asim is facing calls to stand down after he was accused of questioning free speech. Replaced or not, a clear distinction needs to be made between Muslims and Islam. Having an opinion on the teaching of Islam is not anti-Muslim.

The 'soulless neutrality' of political and spiritual leaders also needs to be confronted.

The following is an extract from Christian Concern's Is Islam a religion of peace? :

The teaching of the Qur’an

"Confusingly for the ordinary reader, the Qur’an is not in chronological order. The chapters (Surahs) come in order of length, from the longest to the shortest. According to classical Islamic teaching, however, earlier verses (in chronology of revelation rather than position in the Qur’an) are sometimes cancelled by later instructions in a manner somewhat similar to how Christians view the New Testament as cancelling some of the instructions of the Old Testament. This Islamic doctrine is called abrogation, and it is found in the Qur’an:

"We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent? (Q 2:106)

"Or again:

"And when We substitute a verse in place of a verse – and Allah is most knowing of what He sends down – they say, “You, [O Muhammad], are but an inventor [of lies].” But most of them do not know. (Q 16:101)[10]

"This doctrine of abrogation enables apparent contradictions in the Qur’an to be resolved; later verses abrogate earlier ones. Furthermore, Muhammad did not advocate violence earlier in his career, but waited until he had amassed a following large enough to wage war. Earlier verses are thus more peaceful, while later verses are more violent.

"The most famous example of a peaceful verse is Q 2:256:

"There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.

"However, this verse, and many others, is regarded as having been abrogated by the ‘verse of the sword’:[11]

"But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. (Q 9:5)

"In fact, surah 9 is the last chapter to be revealed in the Qur’an and is seen as abrogating earlier instructions. Surah 9 is also the most violent chapter as the following verses demonstrate:

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Q 9:29)

"Here ‘Jizya’ is the Islamic subjugation tax to be paid by Christians or Jews who have accepted the subjugated status of ‘dhimmi’.

"O Prophet, fight against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be harsh upon them. And their refuge is Hell, and wretched is the destination. (Q 9:73)

"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur’an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? (Q 9:111)

"O ye who believe! Fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him. (Q 9:123)

"Note that these are open-ended commands without qualification. In total, there are well over a hundred verses advocating violence in the Qur’an.[12]"

Postscript

An extract from Christian Concern's How to tackle the Islamisation of prisons:

"The latest prison population statistics show that 16.1% of the prison population is Muslim, up from 12% in 2009. This compares with around 5.6% of the UK population who identify as Muslim. As of 2018 there were 61 full-time equivalent Muslim prison ‘chaplains’ (nearly 40% of all chaplains working in prisons), compared with 157 Christian prison chaplains. This makes the Prison Service one of the largest employers of Muslim religious professionals in the country. Yet former prison governor Ian Acheson, when reviewing Islamist extremism in prisons, found that virtually none of the prison imams he asked even knew about their Prevent duty."

Near neighbours

"A programme crossing religious and cultural boundaries has been awarded a further £3m by the Government in support of its work. The Near Neighbours programme is a partnership between the Church Urban Fund and the Archbishop's Council that provides small grants to grassroots multi-faith projects" (story here). That's £8 million so far for learning to be good neighbours, something that Christians are familiar with even when not reciprocated.

Sadly this story has links with my previous entry despite the apparent good works. The idea of Near Neighbours "in a nutshell" is to bring people together who are near neighbours in communities that are diverse, so they can get to know each other better, build relationships as people and collaborate together on initiatives that improve the local community they live in. In other words, trying to make multiculturalism work. Archbishop Welby had this to say: "In our Christian belief...one of the biggest characteristics of Jesus was not being frightened about who He talked to. He didn't only sit in His own holy little huddle but He reached out telling us to love our neighbour" quoting the story of the Good Samaritan.

Of the 2,000 visitors to this Blog since my previous entry few bothered to watch "What the West Needs to Know" according to the viewing count. Perhaps they have the same view as the Home Secretary, that presenting the facts spreads hate! If so, and an hour and a half is too much time to learn why 90% of conflict around the world involves Islam, perhaps they can be persuaded to spend just eight minutes here. One of the three points covered is the Islamic principle of Taqiyya where Muslims are allowed to deceive non-Muslims if it helps Islam: There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman.  These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause Islam - in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.  

Archbishop Welby was right when he said that Jesus was not frightened about who He talked to but Jesus' message was clear. He said "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me". Yet some Islamists even claim that Jesus was a Muslim (here)! Jesus also said: "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves". Love your neighbour, yes, but also be aware of what your neighbour believes.

Churchill was considered to be “scaremongering” when he spoke in the 1930s of the growing Nazi German threat. This is what he wrote earlier in The River War (1899) about the threat of Islam:

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property‹either as a child, a wife, or a concubine‹must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science‹the science against which it had vainly struggled‹the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome."