The Wound

 "Having an appearance of godliness, but denying its power".       2 Timothy 3:5.

The ascension of disobedience is a very real hardship - we don't have to look very far around to see how this so readily freezes out even what Paul defines as 'natural affection' (normal care and concern for each other). In the secular realm, it has become commonplace to not only criticise but to entirely expel and ostracise anyone and everyone who does not comply with the acceptable narrative of the day - a generation of a "merciless cauldron of blamers", as one minister put it.

We would hope that this emptying of mercy would be something foreign to the church, but what happens when "religion" is employed in such a fashion that certain scruples and beliefs cripple the very nature of the faith in respects to how it is understood and practiced.

In my last entry here, I touched on how a notion of Christianity views itself as correct, even when it is comparing itself with the actual revelation of God in Christ as witnessed by scripture.

It is imperative to understand both the implicit meaning of such 'adjustments' and the actual truth that scripture is expounding, so, in the case I raised last time, the essential maxim that establishes our redemption is the ramifications of Christ's incarnation (birth, life, death, resurrection and ascension) as beautifully noted here by Athanasius:

"not that we might become such as the Father, for to become so is impossible for us creatures, who have been brought out of nothing... there is only one true Son by nature, true and only begotten, hence we become sons, not as He in nature and truth, but according to the grace of Him that calls, and though we are men from the dust of the earth, yet we are referred to as 'gods', not as the true God or His Word, but as he has God who has been given such grace" (Against the Arians 3.25.19).

When we allow 'other' notions to arise which effectively undermine and thereby replace such truth, we find the faith readily slipping into alternative views of God's revelation and the ramifications of this, and this leads us away from Christ's true work into a cul-de-sac of error.

Which brings me to the issue of the trouble of 'weaker brother' theology, as spoken of in Romans 14.

Dr R C Sproul provides a helpful examination on the general themes of this here, and touches on when it is charitable to accommodate the needs of an individual's troubled conscience and when it is essential to renounce such troubles when they threaten the very nature of faith and truth.

These past two years have provided us of a very clear application of 'weaker' belief and practice in the main body of the majority of churches. By succumbing to these 'necessary' requirements, the church closed its doors - quite literally in most cases - to the ministry and 'stronger' application of God's living word.

Think for a moment how anaemic our faith would be if God Himself had applied the same criteria in respect to our tragedy as we have employed in actively segregating ourselves because of 'health concerns'. Can we imagine where we would be if God had refused to engage with our fallen race because they had become entirely defined by the awfulness of sin? What consolation would there have been for our first parents if a fiery sword had merely expelled them, with no promise of help, and such a wrath had continually been evidenced by all throughout the ages. What if God had continually closed Himself off in the fashion that Christianity willingly chose to do in 2020 and 21?

As I've noted before, the premise for this was a poor reading and understanding of Romans 13, but the application is clearly an equally poor use of Romans 14, and these impoverished notions have not gone away - they have not even been questioned or challenged in most cases, hence the main body of believers remain exactly where they were before and during the crisis - woefully poor in their application of Gospel truth and, clearly, unprepared to do the necessary 'spade work' of repenting and reforming.

It is entirely because such folly reigns that Christians cannot grow to deepening their faith or provide a viable and radiant witness to the world of Christ's true saving Lordship in times of crisis.

There must be genuine reform if this is to be different in the future.

An Inferno of Apotheosis

"How many were killed?" "That's Incidental".

Zoe vs Clarice - Caprica: Apotheosis.

"Professing themselves wise, they become fools".

Paul - Romans 1.

(Please bear with me in this post - the 'destination' won't be obvious at first, but the diverse themes at the beginning are going to help us get to where we need to go...)

Sometimes, the various strands combine to grant a grander view of what's taking place around us.

This morning, I came across this interesting conversation between Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson on the distinctions between Judaism and Christianity - but it says quote a bit more.

Notice, first, Peterson's definition of the key themes of Christianity (in the first two minutes) where 'redemption' becomes all about what 'we take on' (in respect to things like suffering). Then notice Ben Shapiro's telling response to this (2:40 mark) - that Christianity isn't, crucially, about our 'imitation' of the divine, but is about GOD SAVING US. He then goes on, after defining what Christianity teaches (God saving us through Jesus Christ) to state that he personally, as a Jew, agrees with Peterson's ORIGINAL statements, because for him, "salvation"  is 'taking responsibility for his own sins' without a mediator.

So that sets out the boundaries, but what comes next is really interesting.

Peterson decides to zone-in on what he defines as the 'confusion' on this issue (how we are saved) in the Christian community (around the 3:30 mark onwards). He states that Shaprio's definition of substitutionary atonement as "Protestant", and the Roman Catholic but especially Orthodox views would be far more akin to his definition of what makes the Christian religion tick. Notice how he defines this - "it is their sense", he states, "Of the imitation" (of Jesus) "that is of primary importance" (4 minute mark). Then he goes on to say that, in reality, Protestantism belongs in this basket as well, because although it may teach Christ died for our sins, that does not "alleviate the moral burden". In other words, Christianity 'gets it' when, like Judaism, it sees Jesus as a great example of what we should be like, and through suffering and the like, seeks to mimic His manner of behaviour. He then goes on to conclude his argument by quoting from Dostoevsky about how the church 'lowers' the high moral calling of Christ because it was too high. Peterson sees this as the church's compromise - to make the religion viable, and therefore more like Judaism, but Shapiro then comes back and states again, that 'theological' (protestant) Christianity isn't like that - it is about believing in Jesus.

The important thing to notice here is an underlying idea that essentially defines the abrupt arrival of the sacrificing work of Jesus as, well, pretty unnecessary and, spiritually, almost certainly irrelevant.

The basic notion goes like this - yes, we have this nagging little problem we define as sin, which, at its worst manifestation, is something aligned with real evil, but don't fret, God has given you a free will and with some help from His trove of mercy, and with some good resolve on your part (along with some suffering to hammer all this into place), you can become fit for eternity - religion just becomes an aide to help get you there.

The thorn in this otherwise "wonderful" little elixir is an Apostolic Christianity that refutes this by stating that only faith in Christ makes the ungodly acceptable to God - it's trust in Christ's singular atoning work, or it's judgement (See Romans chapter 1 to 5).

The thing which fascinates me here is what happens when we ask what transpires in our world when the Peterson/Shapiro preference is given precedence as THE Christian faith? How does this 'manner' of Christianity seek to "deliver' itself amongst us?

The other item I came across today was this insightful article by Giles Fraser on the nature of the vision behind the actions of Vladimir Putin.

Beginning with the historical sources of the world as we now find it, Fraser shows not only what is now motivating the invasion of Balkan regions in 2022, but how this derives from a very particular rendition of religious belief which causes Putin to view himself as a virtuous agent of God in what he is seeking to achieve. This may bring bloodshed, may take the world into war, and may even bring a major division into a manner of belief which is supposed to be indissoluble, but that is all viewed as inconsequential in the light of what is viewed as a 'divine' mandate.

The church has, of course, been there many times before (a brief reading of Peter De Rosa's 'Vicars of Christ' will show how often this same folly was evident amongst the Popes), and it has allowed the same powers to go as far as to anathematise the very gospel (The Council of Trent articles on Justification by Faith alone), but this all leads us to one very telling and disturbing point.

How much of today's Christianity is revolving around "Christ and Him crucified", and how much of it has left that universe entirely?

The opening conversation by Peterson and Shapiro is telling.

So many want Christianity to be something that it isn't - a "form" of godliness that we can identify as "our" righteousness, but that won't come anywhere close to making the grade. It was Him who was 'bruised for our transgressions' that singularly heals us 'by His stripes' (Isaiah 53). If our focus isn't on that complete and perfect work, then we're going to find ourselves severely wanting on the last day.

The Letter

"This story has been attributed to Mr. Conan Doyle: A friend of his had often been told that there is a skeleton in the cupboard of every household, no matter how respectable that household may be; and he determined to put this opinion to a practical test. Selecting for the subject of his experiment a venerable Archdeacon of the Church, against whom the most censorious critic had never breathed a word, he went to the nearest post-office, and dispatched a telegram to the revered gentleman: ‘All is discovered! Fly at once!’ The Archdeacon disappeared, and has never been heard of since".  The Strand - 1897.

Following through from my prior mailings here which focused on the fact that American Evangelical leaders have been actively involved in promoting and supporting the Government line on the pandemic whilst denouncing any alternatives, it is time to bring the issue closer to home...

In this week's Irreverend Podcast, the regular team examined Justin Welby's latest statement in which he sought to distance himself from his words back in 2020, requiring churches to close.

I was pleased to hear the words of Daniel French in the podcast in respect to his own experience as an Anglican minister:

"Ministry is the one main vocation that I have had, and after 23 years - now 25 - and to read that letter (Welby's original in 2020 requiring all churches to be closed) I burst into tears, I stormed out and I thought 'what the heck am I doing in this job?' There's a part of me that has never recovered from that. There's a part of me that remains broken. What on earth happened....

In some dioceses, the threat of CDM - 'safeguarding' or de-frocking clergy - was definitely there, evidenced in letters that were sent to the clergy. If that isn't dictatorial, I don't know what is".

I entirely share Daniel's anguish.  I left the church I had been attending for eight years as a consequence of that original missive, because I understood that mere men had done something they had no authority to do - the termination of Christian ministry. 

The question I still find unresolved today is why is it that none of the local or national ministers I know felt as I did - why didn't they respond like Daniel, but entirely complied with the requirements made and continued to do so right throughout the events of the last two years? Why was nothing done, nothing said, beyond a few conversations, to hear and take on board the concerns of those who were voicing that such approaches were wrong?

There's something even more dreadful, however, in Daniel's candour. The Anglican churches in my region have behaved as if the terrible requirements of March 2020 are irrelevant - that the 'church' can merely move on from all of this as if nothing has happened of any relevance and thereby, just like Welby's latest letter, detach itself from any significant role or ramifications caused by the rupture - but the wounds are there!

Do they really think that God is going to just overlook such actions and the compounding of this evidenced in this present, pervasive neglect of those broken by the behaviour of such bodies?

What troubles me so deeply is there is not even a thought amongst the many in respect to suggesting some manner of repentance in regards to this - 'you merely misunderstood what we we doing', appears to be the general line about to be held by those in authority.

In America this week, Douglas Wilson noted that there are those "Reformed Evangelical" ministers who have begun blaming those who left their churches during the crisis as being, at the very least, 'wrong' to have done so, because their 'political' stance was challenged. Wilson notes, correctly, that this wasn't the core issue for such 'leavers' - it was the Gospel; the very nature of truth provided by God. "The authority of scripture is measured, not by an affirmation that someone believes in that authority, but is demonstrated by your submission to and your obedience to it" - you demonstrate your view of what is authoritative, in other words, by what you do.

If you submit to decrees and edicts which order the closure of your church, the severance of your church body, the silencing of your ministers, then you are showing to all that you believe that there are powers which have more validity in what you say and do as a Christian than the requirements of scripture.

The response to this is, 'but the opening of Romans 13 says', and we are then presented with an exposition that requires submission to evil, but the faithful church has always argued that this is not so - the response to evil is to reject it, especially if and when such seeks to diminish the authority of God in relation to the service of the church and the administration of the message of the gospel.

The lesson of the last two years is not learned at all - the gaping wound is very real and has not begun to heal, and there is no escape from the consequences of this - the conforming church will continue to be the toy of the state, and the world will look on with the sting of such a reality clearly evident in their gaze.

Some of us will continue to speak up.

Some of us will continue to seek to draw lost ones into the everlasting kingdom, but for so, so many, that gathering will have to proceed without any reference to what was once deemed to be a 'local' church, whatever its denominational stripe.

Perhaps this will allow a new more refined, less socially conformed, expression of the faith to be seeded.

Let us hope this can be.

R E F O R M A T I O N

"One is not righteous who 'does' much, but the one who, without work, believes much in Christ. The Law says 'do', and it is never done. God's grace says 'believe in this', and everything IS done".  Martin Luther.

The Lord sets apart 'the godly' (Psalm 4:2 & 3), but we need to pause right there. We assume that term is probably derived from the word for 'God'... but 'chasid' comes from another source - 'chesed', a Hebrew ocean of a term which seeks to express the unfathomable depths of love, fidelity and mercy. The 'chasid' are actually the recipients of 'chesed' - they are beloved - that is why they are set apart... they are simply and wondrously blessed.

That's not the end of the significance of this. The chasidim are those who sing - their receipt of such mercy causes them to extol and delight in the one who has given them  such beauty, and this reciprocity brings joy and the genuine richness of life.

Christianity is about just this.

Christ comes, full of such grace and truth to us, and gives Himself for us, and we become the beneficiaries of the splendour, that we might be adopted into the beloved.

May this be the good care that enriches this day!

(With many thanks to Chad Bird).

 

Calamity

 "Men do not know their time - like a fish caught in a net, or an animal in a snare, so is the evil that falls suddenly upon them". Ecclesiastes 9:12.

The evil that men do is at its worse when what it does, supposedly, is in the name of what is 'good'. So much of what is now beginning to unfold concerning the various policies and requirements of the past two years unveils that behind all the rhetoric of 'doing what was best' for others, there was a clear program of abuse and manipulation, still being so wickedly expressed in the 'official actions' now taking place on the streets of places like France, New Zealand and Canada.

Watching a human chain put in place on a major crossing into America yesterday as those placing their bodies between the police and the truckers loudly said the Lord's Prayer spoke volumes about the nature of the humanity at the core of this vital action. The world has indeed witnessed something astonishing in these past few weeks, and yet, the majority of Christian groups remain not only silent, but actively avoiding any proper support for these everyday men and women seeking to restore freedom to their normal lives.

Stultified by their warped allegiance to a miss-application of the opening of Romans 13, these church groups have done something far worse than remain silent or 'neutral' in this lengthening struggle - they have actively supported a regime which is intent on the execution of truth and the end of the proclamation of the image of God.

The depth of the wickedness involved in this process is shocking - a deliberate series of actions which have intended to abuse the church's message in regards to the God-given autonomy of people in respect to their identity and value, evidenced in every facet of the official 'social controls' deemed necessary for 'health' purposes.

Further enquiry into Megan Basham's astonishing piece last week has unveiled just how deliberate and evil this scheme was amongst Christians, and, just like prior times when such abuse has steered entire movements into diabolical error, this current marriage of church and state has killed the church's cardinal role into a broken and needy society at the very moment when it was most required.

As Rod Dreher notes in his own analysis of the Basham revelations, the disclosure "shows how we can allow ourselves to be used and deceived by those we place in authority... whatever your belief, if you rely on the particular role of certain authority figures, you are likely to discover you have made a very terrible mistake. Such 'grit' runs very deep in such institutions". Christians, he notes, are supposed to do much better than this because of the very clear message that scripture gives us, but the terrible truth here is that so many have, on this occasion, as with others, clearly, naively assumed that they just accept the rules from 'on high' as the Christian thing to do and thereby not engage with the truth - the depths and imperatives this crisis has produced - nor 'test' for themselves what has been the truth behind the guise of 'necessary' public policy.

It shows that the church has learned nothing amidst this storm. The few voices that have sought to speak out have been marginalised and ostracised by the general consensus, and are now excluded from the mainstream denominational expressions, which continue to remain silent yet vehemently holding on to their arrogant stance - there is no repentance here.

The brightness of what is good and necessary has now moved elsewhere. Ottawa has shown that, and that is why its radiant message of 'good will to all' has been the infection that has danced out across the world. People have been wanting - needing something that brings better health than the crushing weight of social incarceration, and it has now broken out outside of churches that merely added their voices to the call for such terrible chains.

The days ahead will be marked with struggle. The church in general will remain 'closed' in all but name. God will work elsewhere, as history shows.

Christ calls us to go out with good news, to gather in joy, to live richly together. May that be the beauty we see arise amidst these troubled days.

The Council of Fools

"Our choices are these: Either we can play the game and enjoy the honor that comes from being players in the political arena, or we can become fools for Christ. Either we will ignore the silent screams of the unborn so that we might be heard, or we will identify with the suffering and speak for those who are silenced. In short, either we will speak for the least of these, or we will continue to sell our souls for a mess of political pottage.” R.C. Sproul Jr.

“For the simple are killed by their turning away (from truth), and the complacency of fools destroys them.” Proverbs 1:32.

So, finally, the truth is out, and it's bleak for evangelicalism. Megan Basham has released a startling piece in the Daily Wire this week regarding how the Government in America used evangelicalism as a vehicle to actively promote Covid-related policy in a highly assertive manner.

Just as UK Christians were hounded by the like of Justin Welby to adhere to all the Government requirements, Francis Collins was continually wheeled out in a 'Christian' context as an "authoritative" source in respect to what church-goers needed to heed by various evangelical and reformed leaders as the correct course to take in respect to obeying lockdowns, wearing masks ('life-savers', according to Collins), and readily accepting MRNA treatments as the sound course to recovery.

Churches and individual believers who raised concerns or refused to adhere to such actions for various reasons, many of which were soundly Gospel-driven, were deemed by Collins and others to be conveying the "Ugly" side of Christianity, openly deemed to be promoting a 'conspiratorial' approach that was defined as erroneous.

What is astonishing about this, as Basham shows, is that Collins is no friend of key Gospel truth itself. In his work leading the NIH, he has actively been involved in projects that have engaged in the harvesting of organs from aborted children (one project was funded to the tune of three million dollars) and has vocally applauded the 'celebration' of "Gender Transition" activities, speaking of those engaged in such as to be honoured as brave.

In his numerous appearances within Christian churches and events during the pandemic, he promoted a manner of behaviour and 'restraint' as necessary for the faith which is in clear conflict with the imperative of the Gospel, but the most dreadful aspect of this theological 'leveraging' is the manner that it has been welcomed and transmitted as essential by the mainstream evangelical leadership itself, ostracising many believers who have seen such an approach and behaviour as highly unbiblical.

The reality is that all these manner of restrictions were a process that left the nature of the faith in the mainstream devoid of any Gospel vitality in a day of trouble, when it was vitally needed. 

There can be little doubt that the dreadful consequences of this will be felt for many decades to come.

Postscript.

Dr Tom Godfellow has published a superb piece today on the UK side of this trouble. Also now available is an excellent examination of this issue in the latest Irreverend podcast, which includes a highly insightful interview with Lord Frost.

W o n d e r

 The home we all want, and so deeply need. Gorgeous truth from Chad Bird as threaded throughout the scripture.

WMD's

 "The hearts of the sons of men are full of evil - there is a madness in their hearts whilst they live, until they are taken away by death". Ecclesiastes 9:3.

"Saddam's Secrets" - A BBC 'Horizon' documentary in the 90's, supposedly showed to the world the 'shocking truth' of the vast arsenal this tyrannical figure had ready to unleash upon his neighbours at any moment; hence the operation to destroy his regime. Then came the truth - nothing like what was stated by the invaders was found, and never has been.

Media and "science", hand in hand, validating a particular policy - changing forever the lives who would become the victims of such action.

Fast forward to 2022.

Take a look at this image, released in Australia this week:

This isn't displaying life in a place usually ruled by a dictator or a tyrant - this is just a normal religious service in a 'free' country, where even the emergency laws do not allow for this manner of intrusion - checking papers during the service - to happen, and yet, it is.

Lockdowns, PCR tests, Masks, Screens in places of work - they have all been shown on the basis of evidence to entirely fail to protect amidst a pandemic, and yet, they are still everywhere in our world.

Then there's the vaccination program.

Take a look at this:

It says pretty much everything we need to know about this, especially when you combine this data with what's shown here:

So, that's the story we should be focused upon - the trouble of the last two years, aside from some peripheral issues, is over, but as Mr Oliver showed last night, the authorities won't let this now sleeping dog lye, because if they do, it means that their 'control' drains with it, and they cannot allow this.

The madness of this tyranny has now become our 'de-fault' - a week after the lifting of all principal social restrictions here in England, people generally continue to live as though there is something terrifying to keep at bay, as if the virus was some malignant thing from a bad science fiction movie, just waiting to devour them the moment they relax. All of this shows the level of fear that was deliberately instilled into our society through the 'official' health campaign - even now, we are continually reminded that the "dreaded' thing is everywhere, and can strike anyone (hence the latest ad campaign, stating the virus is still all around us). When such misery becomes policy, it kills what is good.

The events of the last few weeks in respect to the swell of normal people in numerous parts of the world to say to those in power that they have had enough is commendable. The narrative - in respect to the hard data, as shown above, is clearly with them, and we can only hope that this yearning for what was wins out for all of us, but as I noted in my previous post, what is so chilling is how the majority almost everywhere wishes to be ruled and controlled by a violent cessation of civil freedom and be 'guided' by a 'reason' that wants us compliant to what it states as 'sound'.

The spiritual dimension of this is particularly troubling. The 'leadership' of the national church in the UK has designated those Christians who refuse to accept the national recommendation of being jabbed as "Immoral", without any reference as to why this may be a serious problem for them.

One sight published this very apt and insightful response to Mr Welby's words: 

"Dear Bishop Welby, I recently heard an interview you gave in the run-up to Christmas (2021) in which you said you couldn’t understand people who don’t want the COVID 19 vaccine and that people declining the vaccine are “immoral. I couldn’t agree more. In fact, 

I would say that “immoral” isn’t strong enough. 

So what if they’ve had medications that made them dangerously ill in the past, or they had an aunt who took it and died, or they’ve looked at the data and are concerned that the COVID vaccines have killed more people than all vaccines combined over the last 30 years? 

Boo-hoo, I say. None of their “reasons” are relevant. You’re either moral or immoral. I’m with you completely, there’s no place for nuanced thinking on this one. As for the Anglicans among those crying off from getting a little needle in their arm, let’s not even bother finding out why they feel that way, let’s just label them conspiracy theorists and kick them out of the church altogether. 

 I can’t bear to listen to these so-called "Christians" bleating on about how these vaccines use science derived from the cells of an aborted foetus. Surely it makes sense to kill the odd foetus here and there to save loads of old people? 

Forgive me for phrasing that as a question when I already know your answer. Your position is clear. Not having the jab makes a person immoral and having it makes moral – end of discussion. Let’s not pander to these people any longer with their "constellation of variables", "ethical dilemmas”, "analysis of the data.” To my mind, one is either trying to be a decent Christian or you’re not, and if not we should call them out, so well done you. You definitely showed them a thing or two about the way a Christian ought to be behave. 

 I’m not surprised you don’t understand why they don’t take the vaccine, it makes no sense to me either.  I asked a couple of these "anti-vax" types from my neighbourhood over to explain themselves. I didn’t let them in the house obviously, but spoke to them at a distance over the fence. Neither of them wore a mask, predictably, so to compensate I wore a triple layer. You’ll be pleased to hear that on my outer mask I had printed the words, "Jesus saves", so even from behind my fence and underneath three face coverings I was still able to bring them our Christian message of love over fear. 

 I began the conversation by asking them why they were murderers now, when, up until 2021, they had always seemed two of the nicer people in the neighbourhood. They seemed a bit put out by this. One of them even tried to show me scientific studies that unvaccinated people don’t transmit the virus at a higher rate than the vaxxed! Do they really think I’m so gullible I’d believe mumbo jumbo they obviously got from the internet? One of the studies they cited was from somewhere called Harvard (wherever that is) and had appeared in some dodgy conspiracy rag called the European Journal of Epidemiology. The other chap claimed to have read a study by the Oxford Research Group that found the vaccinated were spreading the virus more than the unvaccinated! Don’t worry, I didn’t fall for any of their so-called “science” from Harvard and Oxford, I just repeated your accusation of immorality at them. 

 After a while, one of them asked me if I was worried that the introduction of vaccine passports could be a mechanism for controlling the population by a tyrannical government.Here we go, I thought, just as Archbishop Welby had told me to expect, it was conspiracy theory time! No, I told them. No, no, no! Vax passports are for your health and the health of everybody and that’s all there is to it. Any potential for misuse that happens to be designed into the mechanics of the system is purely coincidental. They kept arguing, of course, coming out with rubbish like,"But there is no credible medical logic underpinning such measures!” You’ll be proud of me, I didn’t let that go unchallenged and outlined what seems to be your argument back to them. I told them in no uncertain terms that they are missing the point. It doesn’t matter that the vaccinated make up two-thirds of those in hospital with the virus. Nor does it matter that the data now shows that the vaccinated are more likely to catch Omicron and get hospitalised than the unvaccinated. Nor does it matter that coercing people to have a medical intervention (especially one in an experimental phase) contravenes the Nuremberg Code and Declaration of Human Rights. These details are peripheral to the point. The unvaccinated are immoral. The church says so, and that’s good enough for me. 

What they couldn't grasp is that there will always be a bit of collateral damage with even the best health policies. Like the 200,000 deaths resulting from the economy-crashing lockdown policies, or the catastrophic fall in the IQ of our young children, or the nearly half-million injuries from the 100% safe vaccines. Overall, the COVID response strategy has worked perfectly. And hats off to the church for lending her support to such policies in this time of crisis. The good old C of E can always be relied upon to run with the prevailing sentiment of the age. It’s this kind of modern approach to the Gospels that has kept our churches packed to the rafters every Sunday morning! 

As for the whinging anti-vaxxers on the other side of my fence pleading with me to see that "the current erosion of our liberties is far more dangerous to us all than this virus,” western civilisation is at risk,” Freedom will still exist if we have vaccine passports, you’ll just have to buy your freedom by agreeing to have some unknown materials injected into you every few months. 

In a sense, it’s a very similar system to the one outlined in the Gospels where Jesus says, "Follow me for I am gentle and humble of heart (– unless you’re immoral, then you must leave without further consideration or forgiveness.”). I don’t remember the scripture exactly, but judging from the interview you gave this is probably pretty close. In summary, we must count our blessings. 

I for one go to bed every night these days thanking the Lord that I am a moral Christian – unlike some.  I always thought that God and the corporate giants of the pharmaceutical industry were obvious bedfellows, but I didn’t have the nerve to speak out until I heard your interview. Thank you so much for helping me find my Christian voice. 

 Yours sincerely, 

 Triple-vaxxed Trevor from Trimley St Mary".

Once such evil has nestled into the fibre of what we are, it will take a major change to rid us of its horrible consequences. Let us hope that enough wake up now to eject this menace before it becomes continually owned amongst us.

"Neutral"

“We were all little children with respect to the situation which had developed… None of us had been educated or conditioned to exist in this situation, and we had to make our rationalisation and our code of conduct as we went along.” John Von Neumann - 1954 - on the A bomb.

What steers your social ethics? What guides your spending habits? What determines if you're healthy enough to go to work today?

If I'd asked those kind of questions just a couple of decades ago, the answer would have been something along the lines of "I am captain of my own soul", but there's been a radical shift since then.

I can recall people telling me prior to 2020 how 'weird' it was to talk about the notion of people "chipping" themselves to monitor their general health and provide a current database of their related records, but this year will see growing numbers of people in parts of Europe doing just that, as was witnessed recently amongst the Swiss.

Biometrics are rapidly engulfing the conventional side of life, and we came very close in the recent pandemic to this becoming 'the norm' for everything - from shopping (facial recognition on check outs) to attending the workplace (track and trace). Technocracy has truly embraced us, whether we like it or not, and there's no escaping the enormous social impact that is having, and much of it is highly addictive and soberingly deadly.

Many want to 'stop the machine' and re-set what's happened, but the inexorable pace of A I and algorithmic development is relentless. In just the time you take to read this piece, further implementation of this juggernaut will mean even more of the new global "reality" will be opening 24/7 in the virtual sphere, overseen by the Neuromancer's of our day.

The hellish 'ghost' in all of this is how this web is enslaving and draining the world of its colour, not because it's incapable of showing us wonder, but because that display is always barbed with a hook of drawing from the soul, draining us into 'the machine' until there is no true (external) identity that remains.

The problem is that we are autonomous beings, needing space and privacy - something we have been fooled into thinking we can gain virtually 'on-line', when we cannot. The genuine manner of this necessity is invaluable - it's the only way we can be renewed to handle the social dimension. Additionally, genuine social engagement must by derived from real and meaningful time spent with actual people - that's one key lesson we must take from the last few years - and yet, we now live in a society more splintered than ever.

The reality is like so many troubling issues of modern life, real discussion and examination of what's happened - and what is vital in the light of this - is evaded by those in power, and most of the institutions which should take up this requirement, especially the church, have elected to avoid any discussion beyond the 'set text' by the powers that be, and this will palpably cripple their validity in the times ahead.

The 'voices' of the moment have proven to be those on the brunt of the social changes recent events have fostered, having to shout much louder than normal as most of their reasonable requests have been muted, 'fact-checked' (expelled) or simply entirely silenced in the majority of mainstream media.

This is the new realm of 'technology ethics' - a place where the human voice is often the most disrespected and tagged as almost irrelevant.

One thing is clear - that voice, especially in regards to meaningful social inter-action, is going to become little more than a dying background sound as the virtualisation process expands. We are going to have to fight hard just to gain a hearing in a manner that counts.

The 'landscape' of this new realm evidenced of late is very troubling. The majority of people not only conformed to every requirement without question, but were highly content to remain there, and desire this continue, even as their vital social freedoms and rights were taken away. This presents a chilling truth of just how deeply the 'new' social order has cut into mens souls, and how dependent the culture has become upon this single source for its sustained 'input'.

The warnings of where this was going were there - the very plans prior to 2020 warned to avoid the very place we've now reached - but 'the powers' just ploughed on regardless, and although there's now a measure of slowing in the aftermath, the overshadowing truth is that all the menace of what is coming is just over the next brow, and the voices are clear... bring this upon us.

What was once viewed as at least undesirable but generally as armageddon is now eagerly expected very soon - a utopia where the new state determines everything - what to say, watch, renounce, believe and hate. There will be no other law tolerated, because that would amount to troubling oneself to the 'pain' of making unsanctioned choices, and that cannot be permitted.

The social retreat from the realm of public space, coupled with the almost insatiable dependancy on artificial environments for 'living' will allow the vast majority to continue to presume that the hub of "life" is now predominantly virtual. Kitchens and spare rooms will become spaces where that manner of living continues to be focused, where we are 'wired' into something that is not us, but is continually conforming us to a new existence.

Our age is marked by this fundamental dilemma, which commenced before the first computers were marketed - we broke from our forefathers pattern of life, and the vast divisions from that have become our accepted lifestyles.

Machines have become chosen as our mentors, because we believe we are placing trust in something more capable, more wise than other people, but the reality is that these systems feed us what others, with their own agendas focused around our addiction, require us to believe to continue the illusion of our new autonomy.

We can only hope that amidst this burned culture, some will continue to push and reach outside 'the net' and find each other. That essential "knowing" is what we are actually made to do - spiritually and socially - so we can truly love and be loved. That recovery is crucial if we are to exist beyond the machine.