The Shadow War Against Syria’s Christians

On June 23, Catholic Syrian priest Fr. François Murad was murdered in Idlib by rebel militias.

You can read the story here. 

67 Christians killed by a radical Muslim group in NIGERIA

LAGOS, - At least 67 people died in a wave of bombings and shootings carried out in northeast Nigeria overnight, officials said Saturday, as frightened mourners left their homes to begin burying their dead.

A radical Muslim sect known locally as Boko Haram claimed responsibility Saturday for the attacks, which represent the most coordinated and wide-ranging assault yet in their increasingly bloody sectarian fight with Nigeria's weak central government. The sect, which wants the strict implementation of Shariah law across the nation of more than 160 million people, promised to carry out more attacks.

Read the rest here.

Two New Martyrs in Pakistan

This in from Rev. Canon John Hollister:

The following message has been received from the Church of India, Pakistan, Burma, and Ceylon's Diocese of Lahore, Pakistan:

"Two Christians accused of blasphemy in Pakistan were killed as they left a courthouse Monday afternoon, Pastor Rashid Emmanuel and His brother Sajid Emmaniel.

"All Anglicans are requested to pray for their souls and express feelings of condolence for the parents and relatives by praying for them.

"The Archdeacon Fr. Mushtaq Andrew

Diocese of Lahore

Church of Pakistan CIPBC

2nd Province of Anglican Catholic Church

www.wix.com/archdeacon/ad"

-----------------------------------------

For One Departed.

ALMIGHTY God, we remember this day before thee thy servants Rashid Emmanuel and Sajid Emmanuel, and we pray thee that, having opened to them the gates of larger life, thou wilt receive them more and more into thy joyful service; that they may win, with thee and thy servants everywhere, the eternal victory; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

REST X eternal grant unto them, and let light perpetual shine upon them. May their souls, X and the souls of all the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace. Amen.

The Collect for a Martyr

(A Book of Common Prayer 361 [South Africa 1954])

O ALMIGHTY and eternal God, who didst kindle the fire of thy love in the hearts of thy holy martyrs Rashid Emmanuel and Sajid Emmanuel: Pour into our minds such power of faith and love, that as we rejoice in their triumph, we may profit by their example; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

For Those Who Mourn.

ALMIGHTY God, Father of mercies and giver of all comfort; Deal graciously, we pray thee, with all those who mourn, especially thy servants the families, friends, and flock of Rashid and Sajid Emmanuel, that, casting every care on thee, they may know the consolation of thy love; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Potential "Honor" Killing in Ohio?

Writing for the Washington Times, Frank J. Gaffney Jr. had this to say in his column today:

Rifqa's father erupted: "If you have this Jesus in your heart, you're dead to me. You're not my daughter. I will kill you."...When Rifqa's family discovered her whereabouts, they began proceedings in juvenile court in Orlando, Fla., to compel her to go back to Ohio. ...All other things being equal, under Florida law, such a minor would be surrendered to her home state unless...

Let us be clear: Rifqa Bary is a proverbial "canary in the mine shaft," a warning to all of us that toxic Shariah is leeching into America. Every effort must be made to ensure that her freedoms -- and, inevitably, ours -- are permanently protected against this deadly assault.

Read the whole story here.

St. John and Antichrist (take two)

(I was asked to revise the former version in light of possible dangers that could be faced by others. I should have thought of that myself.)

A couple of weeks ago I came across a comment addressed to me from a Muslim, in which he declared simply and in summation that religion's view about Jesus and the Bible we read. This blog does not exist for the purpose of spreading Islam's doctrines, so I rejected the comment (and prayed for the man who wrote it). It dawned on me later that his comment was in response to a place in my sermon for Trinity Sunday where I quoted from chapter VIII of the book Orthodoxy, by G.K. Chesterton:

"To us Trinitarians (if I may say it with reverence) -- to us God Himself is a society. It is indeed a fathomless mystery of theology, and even if I were theologian enough to deal with it directly, it would not be relevant to do so here. Suffice it to say here that this triple enigma is as comforting as wine and open as an English fireside; that this thing that bewilders the intellect utterly quiets the heart: but out of the desert, from the dry places and, the dreadful suns, come the cruel children of the lonely God; the real Unitarians who with scimitar in hand have laid waste the world. For it is not well for God to be alone."

Anyone who pays attention to the news about Jihad and who knows the history of Islam, going back even to the raids led by Mohamed himself, cannot escape the fact that this religion has been violent since its inception, and that Chesterton's description is entirely justified. It has been the religion of scimitar, and wherever it has gone it has spread the desert. Not the beauty of the lush green desert, such as I lived in during my time in the Phoenix valley. But, the desert of emptiness and waste where no life grows, the spiritual barrenness of scorching heat and the dust of sand. So it is, I had also written in that sermon: "But, about a god who is one and only one, through and through, with no plurality of Persons in him, we cannot speak of love; rather of an emptiness, a void in which eternity knows no compassion." Indeed, Kismet is antithetical to compassion. (The website Jihad Watch carries news that is updated daily.)

It is time for me to set forth a reasonable theory of Biblical interpretation, drawn from the First Epistle of St. John with the aid of history. This flies in the face, I know, of popular eschatology such as we find in the Left Behind series of books, but which had existed for decades prior to their conception. For, to begin with, it requires an accurate definition of the word "antichrist." In fact, the word "antichrist" does not appear anywhere in the Book of Revelation, but only in the Johanine Epistles. The word is never used in connection with a political leader, but rather is used to speak about false teachers who spread heresy.

"Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth. Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also." ---I John 2:18-23

The word "Christ" comes from the Greek word that means the same as "Messiah," or the "Anointed." For us it has a specific definition when applied to Jesus Christ, that it does not have when applied to anyone else (since the priests, and then later the kings, of Israel were all called "messiahs" throughout the Old Testament). When we use "Messiah" or "Christ" to speak of the Lord, it is always connected to the fact that he alone is the Son of God.

"When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." ---Matt.16:13-17

Muslims are taught that Jesus is simply a prophet. The revelation given to the Church by the Holy Spirit is that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God. In his First Epistle St. John, as we have seen, describes antichrist as any teacher who denies this revelation. We know that one of Islam's declarations, made every day, is "God has no son." This is the teaching that St. John attributed to the evil one, the spirit of antichrist.

And, as we look carefully at the words from his epistle, quoted above, we must see that John makes a distinction between the many antichrists who were teaching their strange doctrines in his day, and a single individual for whom each of the antichrists were forerunners. He is called Antichrist in a singular way. The prediction of the Beloved Disciple is clear. The little anitchrists were, in their way contrary to Christ, preparing the way for the one major Antichrist who was yet to arrive.

A convert from Islam, who is now a priest, once explained that his conversion began as he read the works of ancient gnostic heretics, and saw that the Koran had lifted many of the same passages, word for word, claiming that God revealed these things directly to Mohamed. It was obvious to him that this was akin to plagiarism, a recitation of memorized passages by heretics from various Gnostic sects who had taught in ancient times. He came to the conclusion that the claim to have heard from heaven was false. Eventually, he concluded that when Mohamed came on the scene in the 7th century AD, he combined many of the Gnostic heresies with Arianism, and with Arab folklore.

Could this be what the holy apostle foresaw? "Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time." Instead of looking ahead to a world ruler (known by other names, such as the "son of perdition") might we instead look backward in history and redefine the word "Antichrist," taking it away from its popular but misplaced position in eschatology? Has there been any figure in history more Antichrist than Mohamed, whose most fanatical followers threaten the peace and safety of the whole world? Has any individual other than Christ himself created a following that encompasses whole countries? Islam, has a little more than a billion adherents, the most zealous and fanatical of which have the goal of making their highly oppressive S'haria law, by force, the law of every land and people.

I think that St. John foresaw Mohamed when he wrote those words.

Whereas the persecution of ancient Rome, and the persecution of modern Communism was never able to "wear out the saints of the Most High," the persecution that exists in Muslim countries has always sought to reduce our brethren to dhimmitude. For any Muslim to convert to Christianity (or any religion) is punishable by death, and in some countries this religious law is the law of the land. Readers of Touchstone can find accounts about these things in each issue by reading the "Suffering Church" section. Fanatical Islam also promotes hatred for and murder of Christ's own relatives "after the flesh," namely the Jewish people.

Even if my theory is not fully accepted, the nature of this spiritual warfare is indisputable, and our chief weapon is prayer.

Rowan Williams and Sharia

A lecture on Thursday by the Archbishop of Canterbury, suggesting that Islamic law, or sharia, might need to be introduced in England in some degree, has sparked outrage, and calls for his resignation.

I heard snippets of the lecture on television the other night, and it did not initially strike me as that remarkable. He seemed to be saying that, in cases where issues unique to Muslim faith arise, where both parties are in agreement, and where there is no violation of fundamental human rights, then it might be worthwhile, even desirable, to allow sharia to be applied.

In light of the scandal, I have resolved to sit down today and read the transcript of the lecture, and I invite you to do so as well. For some reason, the hyperlink is not working, so you will need to cut and paste: http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/1575.

You might also be interested in reading some of the commentary that has ensued, which you will find here.

Once we have read the lecture, and only then, I would welcome discussion.

Toward the beginning of his lecture, the archbishop raises the issue:

"(T)here remains a great deal of uncertainty about what degree of accommodation the law of the land can and should give to minority communities with their own strongly entrenched legal and moral codes. As such, this is not only an issue about Islam but about other faith groups, including Orthodox Judaism; and indeed it spills over into some of the questions which have surfaced sharply in the last twelve months about the right of religious believers in general to opt out of certain legal provisions -–as in the problems around Roman Catholic adoption agencies which emerged in relation to the Sexual Orientation Regulations last spring."

Further on, he lays out a precondition for such accomodation taking place, a precondition that it would seem his detractors have overlooked:

"If any kind of plural jurisdiction is recognised, it would presumably have to be under the rubric that no 'supplementary' jurisdiction could have the power to deny access to the rights granted to other citizens or to punish its members for claiming those rights."

Update on TEC's Muslim Priestess

The following was posted on Stand Firm in Faith:

To: Clergy, Members of Diocesan Council and Standing Committee
From: The Rt. Rev. Geralyn Wolf
Re: The Rev. Dr. Ann Holmes Redding

As many of you know, The Rev. Dr. Ann Holmes Redding is an Episcopal priest who has recently professed her faith in Islam. Dr. Redding is canonically resident in the Diocese of Rhode Island, though she has not served here for over twenty years.

After meeting with her I issued a Pastoral Direction giving her the opportunity to reflect on the doctrines of the Christian faith, her vocation as a priest, and what I see as the conflicts inherent in professing both Christianity and Islam. During the next year she is not to exercise any of the responsibilities and privileges of an Episcopal priest or deacon. Other aspects of the Pastoral Direction will remain private.

I am sending this e-mail to you because the continued web-site coverage suggests that I be as clear as possible with those exercising leadership in our diocese.

Just When You Thought it Couldn't Get Any Worse

Assuming that the following article presents a fair assessment of this woman's beliefs, she is a heretic, an Arian at the very least. What, I wonder, are the chances that she will be brought up on presentment. Nil, probably.

A little more than a year ago, the Rev. Dr. Ann Holmes Redding found herself at the doorway of a new world, Islam, and wasn’t quite sure how she got there. As she reflected on her journey, she realized Jesus was her guide. Now both a practicing Muslim and an Episcopal priest, Redding shares her thoughts on how the two faiths inform each other.

"The way I understand Jesus is compatible with Islam,” Redding explains, "and although there are Christians and Muslims who think I must convert from one to the other, the more I go down this path the more excited I am about both Christianity And Islam."

Redding credits her upbringing for early exposure to interfaith relationships. She was baptized by an African Methodist Episcopal minister but the only Sunday school she attended was Episcopal. She attended a Unitarian youth group in high school when the Episcopal group disbanded. She was influenced by a cooperative community near where she grew up that was comprised of mostly Quakers, Unitarians and Jews. Her father was a prominent civil rights lawyer whose work brought him and the family into contact with people of many faith backgrounds.

After an introduction to a Muslim prayer practice in early 2006, Redding knew she had been wrestling with a call to Islam. She approached a Muslim woman and told her so, and the woman replied, "Christianity has been good to you and you to it, and you don’t have to choose." That made all the difference in Redding’s choice to practice Islam.

"What Islam has done for me is shed this light on Christianity and shown for me anew what a glorious way Christianity is," she explains.

"We Christians, in struggling to express the beauty and dignity of Jesus and the pattern of life he offers, describe him as the ‘only begotten son of God.’ That’s how wonderful he is to us. But that is not literal," she continues. "When we say Jesus is the only begotten one, we are saying he’s unique in some way. Islam says the same thing. He’s the only human aside from Adam who is directly created by God, and he’s different from Adam because he has a human mother. So there’s agreement -- this Person is unique in his relationship to God."

If you have the stomach to read on, you can find it all on Page 9 here.

Why Are Muslims Attracted to Christianity?

Some thoughts from my friend and regular reader, Abu Daoud. You can find more of his writing on his blog.

I don't know if this can be verified, but I heard that more Muslims have converted to way of Jesus Christ in the past ten years than in all the other years since the advent of Islam in the 7th Century. I'm not sure it's an accurate figure, but I will say that something is certainly happening among Muslims and that there is an openness in their society that was not there before. I also want to point out that large numbers of nominal Christians, especially in Europe, are converting to Islam -- a main reason being so they can marry Muslim women. Who has more converts? I have no idea. I will say that Muslims converting to Christianity often pay a heavy price in terms of persecution, and that Westerners converting to Islam are afforded generous protection by their governments.

But here is the question: why are Muslims attracted to the way of Jesus Christ? Here are some of the main reasons:

1) The Bible: We forget how compelling and convincing Jesus' teachings and parables are. He was certainly, among other things, a highly talented teacher, and his parables and sayings have the ability to lodge themselves into a person's mind, even after only one hearing. His insights into human nature, society, kindness, forgiveness, and God's power -- not too mention the many miracles he worked -- are convincing to a good number of Muslims. Of course Islam teaches that the Christian and Jewish Scriptures are muharraf -- corrupted. But after a fair reading of the Gospels, sometimes the integrity and wisdom found therein can break through this Islamic doctrine. Incidentally, Muslim background believers from my experience tend to center their thought on the Gospels much more than Paul's epistles--very different than the evangelical tradition which has, in practice at least, tended to give primacy to the Pauline epistles.

2) Dreams, Miracles: What can I say? They are happening, and folks here don't have the initial inclination that Westerners do to "disprove" or "figure out how it was done." A miracle is from God--it's that simple. Often times in dreams people see Jesus, though at times it is one of the saints. This may not result in conversion, but it opens a path of inquiry that sometimes leads to conversion.

3) Charity: "They will know that we are Christians by our love." One refugee from a neighboring country received some help from some Christians, and he said, "We come here and we receive nothing form the Muslims. The Christians are the only ones who take care of us. I know nothing of your religion, but I will become a Christian." We think of the things like the Inquisition and the Crusades, but we forget the quiet, persistent witness of kind, caring Christians from all traditions. Which brings to mind something that Saint Francis, another apostle to the Muslims, said, "Let us not seek to be loved, so much as to love others."

4) Christian Community: Islam teaches that a man should not speak to a woman unless they are married or of the same family. It is a witness to the beauty of the Christian community, and thus its faith, when Muslims see genuine respect and friendship between men and women who are neither related nor married to each other. The assumption among Muslims is that this sort of thing must lead to fornication or adultery; on the other hand, young men and women sincerely yearn for fellowship with members of the opposite sex. When they see this among Christians it reveals that we are a peculiar people, that there is something different about us: fellowship, conversation, and friendship but without all the adultery and fornication they are told must result.

There are other reasons as well, but my experience is that these are the main ones. The challenge is getting people to think. Islam teaches that it alone
is the reasonable and logical religion. Since people in the Middle East have extremely weak critical skills due to various reasons, this assertion is simply
accepted. These are four things which I know have been important in challenging that assumption, which have led people to ask new questions and venture down
new paths.

The "Clash of Civilisations"

This article is a modified and shortened version of a sermon given by me on Trinity 13 2006 at St Hilda's Mission, Maitland, NSW, Australia.

Sin, like virtue, has many manifestations. And so, when sinners fight, it is often possible to see fault on each side, as one type of selfishness battles another. Unfortunately, the sins and errors of men, though often incompatible with each other, will unite against their common enemy: Christ and the Church. A modern example of this is the so-called “clash of civilizations” between Islam and the post-Christian West.

The modern West, as it sees itself, stands for individual freedoms and human rights, equality, democracy, and for freedom of inquiry and technological advance. Whereas, from the West's perspective, Islamic fundamentalism stands for oppression, tyranny and ignorance.

But the Islamist sees things differently. He sees politically active Islam, at least potentially, as the means to harmony with God and between people through submission to God’s will. And human reason is one of the things that must also submit. He sees respect within families and orderly authority as guarantees of a successful society when in conjunction with Sharia law enforcing moral health. On the other hand, the West is perceived as devoted to sexual corruption, social disorder, impiety, and thus hypocrisy when it claims superiority.

But what does the Church say? Or, more to the point, what does Christ say through the Scriptures? With Islam and against the secular West we reject the idea that freedom means freedom from responsibility or freedom to sin (Gal. 5.13-15). And we also reject putting individual above the community (1 Cor. 5.1-6), ignoring or artificially undermining traditional gender roles (1 Cor. 11.2-16, 14.34-38), and allowing science or industry carte blanche (1 Cor. 6.12) in their manipulations of nature.

But against the Islamism, and with the West that we helped create, we reject the view that virtue can be coerced by all-encompassing law (Mt. 5.5, Rom. 8.3a, Gal. 3.21) and that women's lives must be utterly submerged as inferiors beneath an overwhelming and self-serving exercise of raw male power (Pr. 31.10-31). Similarly, we do not accept that the egalitarianism, liberty and respect for others consciences which underlie democracy are too risky to allow (cf. Gal. 3.28, 1 Co. 7.23, 8.7-13).

Instead, what the church is for is both liberty and moral order within society (Lev. 25.10, Mic. 4.4, Rom. 13.1-7), and both submission and sacrificial chivalry within the family (Eph. 5.22-29). And so we must be willing to criticise both the West's devotion to lust and the Islamist's devotion to coercive violence, while appealing to both sides to abandon their common illusion: that, with enough moral effort or the right social, economic or technological programme, humanity can solve its fundamental problems and establish near Utopian conditions on Earth. In other words, we must preach the Gospel, including the doctrine of Original Sin, and place our trust in God's grace, not human works.

Ironically, as we do this, even if we “speak the truth in love” (Eph. 4.15), both the secular West and radical Islam will probably still join in despising us. The Islamists pretend to blame us for the sins of the West, while the secular West often pretends to equate devout Christians with Islamic suicide bombers! And it is pretence or self deception. We should not be surprised. The World hates us, just as Jesus predicted. But “greater is he that is in you than he that is in the world” (1 Jn 4.4). So, let us take courage and remember to pray for all those who are deceived.

Update: I wrote the first version of this more than a fortnight ago. Since then, events have perhaps made it seem to some that the "Clash" is primarily between Islam and the Church, rather than Islam and the West. But it is still worth remembeing that many of those in the West criticising Islam (and its recent reactions) are hungering for a showdown with "Islamofascists" out of unChristian hate and a deeply committed libertarianism, whether of the left or the right. It is dangerous for Christians to think "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". We must be careful with whose rhetoric we ally ourselves. I am sure the Pope understands this, judging from what he has said and how he has handled himself. He knows that some of the Muslim criticisms of the modern West are valid and that Islam retains much of value from its Judeo-Christian background. Indeed, this correlates with the point that the Byzantine quoted by the Pope was making: that it was what was new in Islam that was distorted. He was willing to grant there was good in it, but only insofar as it drew on the true Revelation both Christians and Muslims accepted.

Weak gods

I had posted this thought as a comment (Misty Battlefields...), but now think that it ought to be a separate piece, so as to be more visible. All of the killing to defend Allah shows that he must be a very weak god who needs people.

"Then the men of the city said unto Joash, Bring out thy son, that he may die: because he hath cast down the altar of Baal, and because he hath cut down the grove that was by it. And Joash said unto all that stood against him, Will ye plead for Baal? will ye save him? he that will plead for him, let him be put to death whilst it is yet morning: if he be a god, let him plead for himself, because one hath cast down his altar. Therefore on that day he called him Jerubbaal, saying, Let Baal plead against him, because he hath thrown down his altar."-Judges 6:30-32

Baal and Allah are both of them very weak gods who need people to kill in their defense.
7:58 PM

I Will Not Submit

Various commentators on the reactions in the Muslim world to Pope Benedict's address last week have noted how increasingly media savvy the protestors are, at least in the West. Witness the impeccably printed signs in English proclaiming, for example, that "Jesus is Allah's Slave."

Okay, so they got it wrong. Jesus is the Son of God, Incarnate. He is the Lord of the Universe. And I am His slave, Christodoulos, as the Greeks would say.

I will never submit to the sub-Christian sect that is Islam, which denies the Trinity, the Incarnation, the passion and death of Christ on the Cross and His Resurrection. Deo volente, I will also not submit to the bullying carried out by the more extreme members of that sect nor be intimidated by the terror they seek to sow in an attempt to cow us into submission.

That is what the Arabic phrase above says: "I will not submit."

If you never learn any other Arabic, which would be a shame, learn this: "Lan estislam." I will not submit.

And notice that the root of the verb is "islam," which means submission.

So here, for all the Arabic-speaking world to see is my message to them, in their own language: I will not submit.

And now, unto God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost, be ascribed, as is most justly due, all might, majesty, dominion, glory and power, now and forever. Amen

Here We Go Again?

No sooner do certain Muslims perceive that they are being accused of belonging to a violent religion than they react, well, by resorting to violence.

On a day when voices around the Muslim world were denouncing Pope Benedict XVI for linking Islam with violence, someone threw a hand grenade into the compound housing the oldest church in the Gaza Strip. Mercifully there were no casualties.

Should we now expect another wave of violence, as witnessed following the publication of cartoons of Mohammed, to demonstrate how peaceful Islam is?

Watch this space.

Kyrie eleison.

All Ye Holy Martyrs, Pray For Us

Taking advantage of a quiet day here in Beirut last Saturday, I was surveying the blogosphere, only to find something that left my head spinning.

Regular readers will recall that, on August 27, I posted an item entitled Fox Journalists 'Convert' to Islam. In it, I raised some questions about the moral implications of 'conversion' at gunpoint, and received some very enlightening answers.

The bottom line was that, as Christians, we are commanded to stand firm in our faith, even to the point of death. But we are also assured that if we crack in the moment of testing, we can count on God's forgiveness.

But it appears that for Canon Andrew White, forced 'conversion' is not a matter of faith but one of political expediency.

An Anglican priest, Fr White is one of the leaders of the Foundation for Reconciliation in the Middle East. He has been accused of actually suggesting to the kidnappers that the release of American Steve Centanni and New Zealander Olaf Wiig might be granted in exchange for their forced conversion.

Over at Get Religion, I found the following, which purports to be a letter written by Canon White and included in an August 27 press release by the FRME. I could not find a link to the press release on the FRME web site, and contacted the organization to enquire. My email was addressed to Canon White, or to anyone at the FRME authorized to speak on his behalf. Having received no reply from anyone, I have decided to publish this post.

Here is the text of the letter, as provided to Get Religion by a commenter:

Dear Friends,

It has been an exhausting few days working flat out on getting hostages released from Gaza. These kinds of things always come at the wrong time. Last Christmas and now the very days we had chosen to have our holiday. Last week I was contacted by Roger Wiig. A Methodist minister from New Zealand who just happens to be working in Bromley. He is in New Zealand at the moment but his son was one of the people taken in Gaza.

I felt we had to become involved after this news.... We eventually made contact with the hostage takers. We then managed to form links between Hamas and the Hostage takers. We had to then find a way out and advising to convert at gunpoint to Islam was the only option. (My emphasis) As in all these cases we must have no publicity. Our work is always behind the scenes.

So my holiday in Disney Land Paris has been mainly hostages but that is part of our life. With the help of Mickey Mouse we succeeded and will return to the Middle East soon.

Blessings,

Andrew

I truly hope that the letter is bogus, and that the accusations against Canon White are therefore unjustified.

It the letter is genuine, and Canon White indeed did propose to the kidnappers a forced conversion, I still welcome him to argue his case here.

Fox Journalists 'Convert' to Islam

I have yet to see the videotape of the two Fox journalists freed today in which they announced their "conversion" to Islam, but I did hear one of the two men, Steve Centanni, say that they read their statements with guns pointed at them.

Their plight might be compared to those of early Christians, many of whom were commanded to renounce their faith and burn incense to Caesar, or die.

One might say that if these two men were "real" Christians (and I have no knowledge whatsoever about their faith, or lack thereof), they would now be in the presence of God.

Such a thought troubles me, and causes me to make the following observations:

1. They were captive, and cut off from the eyes of the world.
2. They were being forced at gunpoint to make a statement that was being videotaped
3. They could assume that videotape would be used for propaganda purposes
4. If they refused to make the statement, they had every reason to believe they would be shot
5. They also had every reason to believe that no videotape of their refusal and subsequent deaths would ever be made public
6. Hence, their martyrdom would be lost to the wider world, though not to their murderers
7. They had reason to hope that if they did consent, they would be freed
8. As free men, they would have the opportunity to repudiate their "conversions"
9. Tough call

Any comments?