Intercessory Insights from the Isles 2004 Part Two

Much though he wanted to write something that would encourage the saints, the Spirit put it on Jude’s heart to focus on burdens that were on the Lord’s own heart. False teachers were even then ‘speaking abusively against whatever they do not understand’ (Jude 1:10) and leading many astray in the process, just as liberal theology in our own day robs people of their cutting edge. The Lord is angry when people present alternative gods as equal to Himself, and claim it doesn’t matter what we do, because He is so forgiving. (Peter addresses this matter in 2 Peter in much the same way that Jude does). Pray for the Lord to alert you to the issues He wants you to take a stand on – and give you wisdom to know how to ‘contend for the faith.’

It is increasingly a shock to us from the security of our island fortress when we return to the mainland and have to remember to lock our car doors! Large football crowds rely on four figure numbers of police and stewards to control capacity Premiership games. Every Saturday night thousands more flock into our city centres. Hundreds are still there many hours later, much the worse for wear – yet the number of police on hand to supervise them is often tiny. Because of the fear of violence, these people often 'arm' themselves with a weapon when going out for the night primarily for self-protection. But,as Tim Rawe points out, this does mean that any confrontation is far more likely to flare up into violence, and indeed often does.

Praise God: prayer works! Some friends sent us a report the other day from the notoriously 'iffy' London borough of Haringay. They have on record that the crime rate drops regularly whenever the church prays together. The local police even contact them to ask for prayer before they launch their raids: sometimes with really spectacular results. That is really being salt and light in the community. It is making a difference and causing the people of Haringay to feel different about their borough.

We have heard before how the crime rate goes down when people go on marches for Jesus. The needs are so intense, however. Increased affluence and easy access to credit has made it possible for people to do things that previous generations could only have dreamt of doing. A discouraging forty per cent of 18-24 year olds are now officially classified as ‘binge drinkers.’ There is some comfort in remembering the depraved state Britain was in before the Wesleyan awakening, when the gin house reigned supreme - but such a diagnosis is a very long way from being any true sign of revival! It will take exceptional grace for this awakening to pierce the deadness of our lager-touting society.

Kim Rawe, from Haringay, has written:

'It’s when the ordinary believers from various denominations all get together to pray across the whole borough that we see the crime rate drop. It’s not particularly the numbers involved, but the unity of purpose.

'We pray like this specifically for a week in September, as well as praying across churches at other times. The intercessors pray weekly and see very specific answers to prayer . . . usually by reading the local paper later in the week. When you’re short of money you see God meet specific needs. If you live somewhere where you need God to work on a frequent basis He does (but you tend to hanker after a more relaxed location!).

'At first we tried to shield our children from local problems, but they’ve been in the post office whilst its being robbed, and been unable to go into our house because the police are keeping the crime scene outside our gate from the public. They have school acquaintances who have lost family members, and are affected by my concerns as local cars are stolen at gun or knife point – one with a baby inside. (The baby was later handed in at a police station.)

'The Israelites used their concerns about their children as one of the reasons for not moving to the Promised Land, but God is with our children as well as with us You know well how parents feel when its their children who need protecting. Interestingly the number of people who would call themselves Christians in Haringay is a high percentage of the population, mostly from the people not born in this country. God has definitely got a plan and a purpose here.’

May the Lord help us to get a handle on this issue by praying about the matter in our fellowships and with our prayer partners, and make a difference in our region too!

When David Pawson asked the Lord what He particularly disliked some years ago, the Lord gave him a one word answer: "Christmas!" You can hardly have failed to notice other ways in which Christmas continues to be secularised at a galloping rate.

I was shocked the other day to see a large advertisements in British train stations. The scene would have been a fairly conventional Nativity scene with the Holy Family gathering around the crib – were it not for the fact that the baby Jesus was wearing a Father Christmas outfit! Unbelievably, the caption beneath the advertisement was, ‘Go on, ask Him for something this Christmas!’ The Churches Advertising Network actually spent a quarter of a million pounds promoting this consumerist message! Where can we find in it even a hint of what the gospel is really all about?

The Scottish Executive is considerably further down the secular PC road than its equivalent in Whitehall. The Executive actually banned its officials from sending Christmas cards with a religious theme ‘in case it causes offence . . .’ High Wycombe went one stage further and refused to advertise a carol service in case it offended non Christians. This is so dishonouring to the Lord. His Son is being deposed more and more in our society. What wonder if we reap the fruit of this betrayal in the years to come?

This issue looks set to become more and more divisive, following the Anglican Churches’ increasing willingness to allow ‘marriages’ between same sex partners in both America and Canada. This decision makes out that things that the Scriptures state clearly, and that the Church through the ages has consistently condemned, are actually positive in God’s sight. It reminds me of a brilliant article Matthew Paris wrote in The Times this year. Even though he describes himself as a ‘convinced non Christian,’ he argued with great clarity and persuasion that the Bible does not tolerate the idea of homosexual priests.

It is important to stress that the groups that met to decide this issue in New Hampshire are convinced that they were being led by the Spirit in their appointment of Canon Gene Robinson, and that people are reacting so strongly simply because it is never comfortable when God begins to do something new. They also believe that evangelicals are simply ganging up to condemn the one sin that they themselves feel they are in no danger of falling into for themselves.

Additional fallout from the appointment came in the shape of a high-powered group of Islamic scholars from Al-Azhar university in Cairo withdrawing from a two day meeting with Anglican delegates in New York. The issue of homosexuality could seriously undermine relations between the faiths. As Bishop Nazi-Ali of Rochester said, ‘The Muslims can’t understand why Christians are ignoring the revelations given to us. This is very serious in the present international situation.’

However much Lambeth Palace would prefer to keep this issue out of the media headlines, there are sure to be more such storms ahead. Especially since the Anglican bishop of Vancouver has acted to close churches that oppose homosexual marriages, telling them that they are not real Anglicans! (This has forced the ten conservative churches in this liberal diocese to become reluctant dissidents).

The Archbishop of Nigeria has castigated the rich (Anglican) churches in Europe America and Canada, ‘who have long used their wealth to intimidate the financially weak churches in Africa. Our boldness in condemning the spiritual bankruptcy of these Churches must be matched by our refusal to receive financial help from them.’

Joel Edwards, general director of the Evangelical Alliance, writes:

One of the things we have found in the last few years is that the Lord is networking key ministries at this time to present a united front to the secular challenge that we face as a nation. We invited representatives of the Lawyers Christian Fellowship to share with us on where this nation is up to in God's eyes at our last Malvern conference. They in turn expressed their desire to 'take the battle to the gates of the enemy,' by vigorously upholding what is left of the Christian heritage in this country. The urgency for this has never been greater. Although the cases we have featured here may not seem in themselves to be the most vital being contested in the nation, the principles behind the issues are exceptionally important.

Harry Hammond versus the Director of Public Prosecutions

We have also heard that the House of Lords has rejected an appeal about the Harry Hammond Case. If funds are available, this will have to be taken now to the European Court of Human Rights.

Between 2nd July, 2001 and 31st July, 2002, the Lambeth Cannabis Warning Pilot Scheme (the “Lambeth Experiment”) was implemented in Lambeth. Under this scheme, the police adopted a ‘softly softly’ approach to offences involving the possession of cannabis whereby anyone caught in possession of cannabis would generally be cautioned instead of being arrested.

On 12th September, 2003, the Association of Chief Police Officers ("ACPO") issued its nationwide policy guidance (the "Policy Guidance") in relation to cannabis enforcement in which it stated that cannabis is not a ‘policing priority.’

In November 2003, the Rev Eddie Brookes of Raleigh Park Baptist Church, Brixton issued proceedings against the Chief Superintendent of Lambeth and the ACPO. The ground of the legal challenge is that the police have no legal power to introduce a ‘policing policy’ that would result in the law not being adhered to.

The police are taking the legal challenge seriously. They have appointed Rabinder Singh of Matrix Chambers, a leading human rights QC, to defend their case. The Home Secretary, David Blunkett, has intervened to oppose the legal challenge. It is understood from Rev Brookes that, subject to sufficient funding, he is willing to take the challenge all the way up to the House of Lords. Although the result could go either way, there are good legal grounds to the challenge.

James Dingeman QC (of Hutton Enquiry fame ) was instructed to lead the legal team in response to the police’s decision to instruct Rabinder Singh QC. He has written, “In my opinion both the policy pursued by the [Chief Superintendent of Lambeth] and the guidance issued by the [ACPO] are reviewable by the Courts . . . I estimate, at present, that the prospects of succeeding on the claim are just less than 50 per cent. However it does seem to me that, on any view of the case, the Courts will make it clear that the law relating to `simple’ possession of cannabis must be enforced, whether by arrest or other means.”

Therefore, subject to funding of the case brought by Rev Brookes, a possible path of the case through the courts might be as follows: (1) the challenge succeeds or fails in the High Court; (2) the decision is appealed; (3) the challenge succeeds or fails in the Court of Appeal; (4) the decision is appealed; (5) the matter is ultimately concluded in the House of Lords.

This legal challenge is necessary for the sake of protecting society now, and for safeguarding Christian freedoms for the future.

Since the inception of the Lambeth Experiment, there has been a noticeable decline in the welfare of the local community. Cannabis and harder drugs have been more widely and openly available in Brixton. There is a more notable presence of people involved in drug dealing, begging and prostitution. Rev Brookes has witnessed cannabis being openly smoked in the presence of police officers without any action being taken by the police. Although cannabis is illegal, people in Brixton and beyond believe that possession of cannabis is now legal.

There is clear scientific evidence that cannabis is harmful. Dr Peter Saunders, General Secretary of the Christian Medical Fellowship, speaking in support of the legal challenge says: “cannabis is not a harmless drug. It produces disinhibition, cognitive difficulties, emotional disturbances, poor motivation and (sometimes) addiction. Cannabis smoke also contains carcinogens, particulate matter and tar, which suggests that in regular users it will produce a similar spectrum of respiratory, circulatory and neoplastic diseases to tobacco smoke.”

In a Parliamentary Consultation in the House of Commons in October 2003, Professor Robin Murray of the Institute of Psychiatry stated that there is now considerable clinical evidence linking cannabis use to mental illness, especially schizophrenia, psychosis, anxiety and depression. The risk of developing mental illness, especially psychosis, is increased with earlier and heavier cannabis use. 18 year olds who have used cannabis 50 times have a nearly seven-fold increased risk of developing psychosis over the next 15 years. Up to 80% of new cases of psychosis currently seen in some psychiatric hospitals are triggered by cannabis abuse.

According to Dr Hans-Christian Raabe, a GP who works with the Maranatha Community, “The Government itself admits in one of its reports that cannabis is “unquestionably harmful”. It accepts that in some cases, “the taking of cannabis can be a gateway to the taking of more damaging drugs” and considers helping young people a “priority”. Society is further harmed by drug addicts turning to theft, robbery and burglary to feed their addiction.”

Consequences of the Legal Challenge
If the challenge is successful, the High Court will:
1. Make a declaration that the policy in relation to the Lambeth Experiment pursued by the Chief Superintendent for Lambeth was unlawful; and
2. Make a declaration that the Policy Guidance issued by the ACPO is unlawful.

In short, it will be made clear that the police must enforce the law in relation to drugs for the protection of society.

If you have any queries in relation to this case, please do not hesitate to contact Andrea Minichiello Williams, Barrister, andrea@williamsa.force9.co.uk; Peng Voong, Solicitor, pengvoong@f2s.com

Andrea Williams of the Christian Lawyers Fellowship sent me details of the Debate that Lord Alton initiated on March 16th 2004 in the House of Lords on late terms abortions for disability. Law Lord Stoddart, a peers who one would by no means deem "pro-abortion" or "pro-choice", made the following noteworthy comments:

"...it seems to me that we have gne a long way from the intentions of the
1967 Act. Those of us who supported it believed that we were supporting a
Bill to outlaw back-street abortionists, for example, which was good, and to protect women's health and welfare and the prevention of severely disabled births where there was no prospect of any viable, decent lifestyle. Those were the bases on which we made up our minds.

But we have gone a long way beyond that now... We have gone beyond what we thought we were doing. We now have virtually abortion on demand. We have a woman's absolute right to have an abortion irrespective of other interests and the interests of other people. I believe that we have come a long way too far.

When I was supporting these measures I did not dream that we would reach a figure of 155,000 abortions every single year. That is an enormous number. It is almost the same number of people that the Government say we are short of and wish to allow to immigrate into this country to work. We are allowing the abortion of 155,000 souls every year.

We have now reached a new, alarming situation where viable foetuses which could live a good and useful life-perhaps even be geniuses-are killed
unnecessarily. They could live a viable life if allowed to be born. I believe that it is now time to revisit the whole issue of abortion. I am going rather further than the noble Lord, Lord Alton. Perhaps it is people like myself who should be saying that at this time. I believe that we have gone too far and that now is the time to look at things. " (Lord Stoddart)

Full full report, click on this link: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds04/text/4

Sadly, Britain continues to have the highest rate of teenage pregnancy in Europe. Nearly 42,000 girls under eighteen became pregnant in 2002. The government's strategy of giving out more and more contraceptives is clearly not working. (The Scottish Executive are urging explicit guidance on homosexuality to be given to the under 7s!) Compare this with the millions of dollars that President Bush has invested into 'abstinence education.' Combined with an active faith (and reduced welfare payments for early motherhood) the percentage of teenage pregnancies in the US has dropped by nearly a third in the past decade.

Pray for all agencies, churches and fellowships that are seeking to support the institution of marriage.

Apart from prayer, what is there we can do to help marriages to ‘work’ more smoothly? Many marriage counsellors recommend an exercise that we have found most beneficial. It focuses on identifying what we, and our partners, really need and ten top 'need's (qualities and characteristics such as admiration, appreciation, touch, respect, comfort, etc)

To make the support we give each other in marriage relevant, we need to know what forms of emotional support we are most in need of. Have a go at itemising your top three or four needs from the list below. Then, before moving on, write down what you consider to be your partner’s most important three or four needs.

Understanding our own, and our partner’s real needs will cause us to reappraise the way we relate to them.

Step 1: Take time out as a couple for you and your partner to work out your top three needs. Keep these lists to yourselves for the time being!

Step 3: This is the most interesting bit: comparing notes! Again and again, we find that even people who thought they knew each other really well end up missing or mistaking their partner’s top needs altogether.

Over a period of time, the effects of ‘missing the mark’ in this way can cause attritional damage. Partner X may have put in a huge amount of effort giving quality ‘y’ to Partner Z. After some years of doing so he (or she) starts wondering (and perhaps resenting) why so much output has yielded so little return – almost as though these considerable efforts have not been appreciated.

It’s simple really; what we were giving wasn't what partner Z really wanted! (Though it may very well have been what partner X themselves would have wanted, and therefore assumed that their partner craved too).

Doing this exercise will help us to focus our efforts where they will be most appreciated. It doesn’t have to be with our marriage partners. We can use it with our children, colleagues or ministry partners to see where their (and our) real needs are.To identify these needs is therefore absolutely crucial. If you think you are too busy to find time to do this exercise, it may indicate just how much you really do need to make time to do it!

Successive governments have taken advantage of the peace dividend since the end of the Cold War. It is now pared to the bone. Only half of Britain’s battle tanks are now capable of operation service. 40 Challenger 2 tanks, costing £40 million each had to be ‘cannibalised’ for spare parts during and after the Iraq war. Many of these will take over a year to be fully operational again.

You may have missed it, but Gordon Brown has frozen any recruitment into the army until further notice. That is alarming enough in itself, but further cuts are anticipated, with even such illustrious regiments as the Black Watch under threat. The Defence Secretary was full of words about these representing savings not cuts. Max Hastings described the review as ‘full of weasel words and techno-babble; a document so vague that turkeys could endorse it for Christmas.' Meanwhile 40 new Apache helicopters that cost over a billion pounds remain stored in a warehouse on Salisbury plane, (for £6,000,000!) because the Ministry of Defence failed to train enough pilots!

In Shetland we are concerned for white fish and the oil industry; in terms of the overall economy, the search for ‘soft’ spending targets was inevitable when you remember the huge spending spree Gordon Brown has been on recently. More than 350,000 new public sector workers have been hired (more than half of whom could be labelled bureaucrats). The present policies of "tax, spend and borrow" (as opposed to the ‘prudence’ which characterised his earlier years in office) are fundamentally unsustainable. At some point, borrowing will have to cease and a difficult choice be made: to cut spending or impose further tax rises.

Pray for the Lord to be at work in the heart of our armed forces: both in terms of their size and shape, and what the Lord does in the hearts of the people (and their families) who are serving in them.

I was shocked to skim read a book the other day that looks set to be a best seller about a man imprisoned in an American prison in which bestial practices one would have associated with the Gulag were commonplace. America has proved that it can be tough on crime; can it now be compassionate with those caught up in crime?

Successive prison inspectors in the UK, such as the late Sir Stephen Tumim, have made entirely sensible suggestions for utterly needed reforms. They did this on the basis that a humane prison regime is the one most likely to reduce the volume of crime in the long run,’ and that inmates needed to train in marketable skills and express themselves artistically. They could only watch in dismay as next to nothing was done about their suggestions.

The fact is that our prisons are not geared for reforming people. At the moment, reformers are the exception rather than the rule (but praise God for the wonderful work of Alpha courses in the prisons right across the land)! Two million Americans are likewise currently incarcerated many in truly appalling conditions.

Pray for the power of God to oversee all that happens inside prisons; to protect the vulnerable and to bring many to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus.

Curriculum requirements are causing the role music and art play in primary schools to be downgraded.

I can understand why Prince Charles has made an appeal for the history of the British Empire to be introduced onto the curriculum. Studies on Hitler and Stalin are so widely taught in schools but most children know very little about the influential and sociologically important role the British Empire played not so long ago when it ruled a quarter of the earth.

By the way, plans are again under way to introduce a single religious education curriculum. Pray for space for the Lord to work in this. As a tiny example of how unbalanced the whole thing is becoming, Divali received full attention in our local pre-school play group, while the ‘Christian’ element was represented by a single visit to a cold and empty church!! (The committee turned down my suggestion that a local minister should come and explain the gospel and the meaning of Christmas to the children).

Pray for every aspect of our schools and universities, not least spiritually.

(I wrote this article a few weeks ago, and have been pleased to see the matter hit national headlines since then).

Throughout the time Sally Clark was wrongfully imprisoned for supposedly ‘murdering’ her children, Ros was praying for her to be vindicated. Only her intense belief in her innocence enabled her to withstand the torrents of abuse she received in prison, where she was branded a baby killer. Several other women have now been acquitted. At the centre of these convictions lay the so-called expert evidence of Professor Sir Roy’ Meadows. His contention was that ‘two cots deaths are highly suspicious and three murder.’ The statistics he based this on were entirely specious: that the chances of two cot deaths happening in one family was 73,000,000:1.

Rosie Waterhouse pointed out that what is particularly disturbing is that decisions about these women were taken in family courts, in which proceedings are confidential, and parents are barred from speaking out publicly to defend themselves.

Pray for all the parents who have had one or more children forcibly removed from them. These children will now be growing up in other families as a result of false evidence. And pray for the cases of the fifty plus who are still in prison as a result of what has become known as ‘Meadow’s Law’ to be fast tracked. May very great wrongs be put right!

Some years ago Ros and I were listening to a horrendous fight between neighbours. It began by furniture throwing at each other and quickly progressed to something much worse. It was at this stage we felt we had no alternative but to call the police. But they did not want to take action because it was between a married couple who, when the doorbell sounded, instantly pretended that all was well between them. Much is likely to change with the introduction of the domestic violence bill which proposes that courts should have the power to keep suspected people away from their partners, even if they have not been convicted.

Amongst other key proposals, common assault will become an arrestable offence. Police will be able to remove anyone suspected of hitting their partner from the home, and placing them on a register of domestic violence offenders. Given that the vast majority of abuse cases occur ‘in house’ this is a long overdue move. At the same time, it needs under girding in prayer that it will not be used inappropriately, but only in cases of actual abuse.

(The anti-social behaviour bill is also badly needed, not least for tackling gangs of kids and excessive neighbour noise – but beware pendulum swings even there. New Yorker George Pulido was charged a few weeks ago with ‘making unreasonable noise’ after his son’s Winnie-the-Pooh balloon popped in a public place!)

Even as you pray for situations in the UK, don’t forget the millions who live under Sharia law, where there is far less redress for victims in a society that requires four male witnesses to prove that a woman has been abused. Think of the hidden agonies suffered by countless women in Pakistan and so many other countries. Spain, for example, has one of the worst records in Europe for domestic violence. According to leading newspaper El Pais 50,000 complaints were made to the police last year – and these surely represent only the tip of the iceberg.

Spanish judges are notoriously reluctant to take any action against 'male machismo,' but they did have the courage to imprison Mohamed Kamal Mostafa, the Egyptian born imam of Fuengirola whose book 'Women in Islam' contains detailed information on how to beat your wife. The imam is planning to appeal against the decision.

Pray for all those affected by violence, and for the action that is taken against the perpetrators.

I have always nursed a secret hope that maybe one day the academic world would wake up and realise what an ass political correctness and ‘newspeak’ really are. As Anne Robinson pertinently asked, why do people have to speak of ‘marketing access equipment’ when what they really do is make ladders?

Students are not to be permitted to fail their exams; they will be awarded the grade of N for Nearly. Stock markets take ‘corrections; rather than tumbles and companies are downsized and collateral damage is noted when Allied bombs demolish civilian houses. All of which helps one to avoid having to think of real people facing real suffering.

Unfortunately, what looks like mere tweaking of words often covers over something much more serious. To continue for a moment at the batty end of the spectrum, try going to Batley, where a head teacher has banned the story of the ‘Three little Pigs’ in case it offended the Muslims. A Muslim spokesman made the perfectly sensible reply that whilst Muslims may choose not to eat pork, they have nothing against pigs appearing in stories!

Meantime, an Ofsted inspector has ticked off a child minder in Salisbury for not providing children in her care with ethnic or disabled dolls to reflect the diversity of our society. The book ‘The Friendly Dolphin’ has been banned in America because it discriminates against pupils who do not live close to the sea, and Harry Potter is banned for being anti-family, for owning an owl (taboo to a certain Indian tribe) and for being an orphan. It was thought that this might potentially upset readers! And just for still more bad measure, back in Sutton Coldfield, a school has replaced sports day with ‘group problem-solving exercises’ because losing was too traumatic for the losers.

Lives and livelihoods are being wrecked by such nonsense. Political Correctness is driving people to make more and more insane decisions! We don’t need to lose any sleep over J K Rowling’s income, but it is a sad thought that society is paying people to take other peoples livelihoods away in such ways. Perhaps it was inevitable that having ditched the Lord’s ways we would end up with such nonsense!

‘Political Correctness’ does not spread evenly. Certain people and institutions benefit from its umbrella protection, whilst others suffer. The old adage holds true that for one (person, cause or course of action) to be right, another has to be seen to be in the wrong. Mark Steyn illustrates this point by showing how quick the BBC was to drop Robert Kilroy-Silk’s television series. It made no protest, however, when someone else declared, in what Steyn described as a ‘non-factual emotional rant’ ‘hat Brooklyn-born Jewish settlers – towards whom I feel nothing but hatred – should be shot dead because they are Nazis.’

What message does all this send? That multi-cultural Britain will not stand for such things! Criticising Muslims is totally unacceptable, and will involve the Commission for Racial Equality and a police investigation that could end in a long jail sentence. Criticising Jews, however, is apparently kosher!

Concerning the role of the Commission for Racial Equality, one of its spokesmen, commenting on Kilroy-Silk’s inadequate apology, encouraged the guy to learn something about Muslims and Arabs, and to make a generous donation to support a Muslim charity. Here, perhaps, are early warning signs of something we have seen in so many other societies around the world where governments have ‘leant’ on trouble-making citizens. Steyn categorises these remarks by deliberately enlarging them to show where they could lead to: ‘extravagant public contrition, re-education camp; "voluntary" surrender of assets.’ Where have we heard this before? Steyn concludes, ‘I don’t know about you, but this ‘multicultural Britain’ business is beginning to feel like an interim phase.’

Pray that our God-denying, form-filling, spirit-cramping society does not commit the ultimate sacrilege as a nation and make it illegal to declare that Jesus is Lord.

On Wednesday 17 November Peers voted by 251 to 136 to reject the amendment by Lady O'Cathain on the Civil Partnership Bill.

We are, of course, very saddened by the result. It is a clear indication of the moral state of our political parties. All three of the main party political leaders opposed Lady O'Cathain's amendment.

There was an incredibly strong three line whip on the Labour and Liberal Democrat side. Not a single peer from either party voted with Lady O'Cathain.

Only the Conservatives had a free vote and even then the Party Leader, Michael Howard, made clear that he did not support Lady O'Cathain. However, most Conservative Peers who were present ignored his advice.

We are very thankful to all our supporters. Thousands of Christians wrote letters to Peers. This was an excellent Christian witness. It is absolutely imperative that Christians are salt and light.

Civil partnerships are identical to marriage in terms of their legal benefits. But we are thankful that at least they are separate schemes. Christian opposition to this Bill may have set back proposals for full gay marriage by several years. The thanks for this must go to Christian Institute supporters.

During the debate on Wednesday evening the Bishop of Chester spoke very eloquently in support of Lady O'Cathain's amendment.

He pointed out that, if the amendment was rejected, the Civil Partnership Bill would be gay marriage in all but name. This is precisely the point.

The Bishop of Southwell also voted with Lady O'Cathain.

Prayer

We asked you to pray for a clear witness to the truth during the debates. This prayer was certainly answered. Virtually every speaker - even those who opposed Lady O'Cathain's amendment - agreed that the Bill created injustice for family members. Her opponents argued that this injustice should be rectified at a later date.

We asked you to pray that Lady O'Cathain would be granted great wisdom and boldness as she spoke. This prayer was also answered. Lady O'Cathain spoke very powerfully indeed.

The voting on Wednesday night

Two Bishops voted with Lady O'Cathain, but 8 bishops voted against her. These included the prominent pro-gay bishops - the Bishop of Oxford and the new Bishop of Chelmsford, John Gladwin.

From looking at the voting figures it is clear that both the Labour and Liberal Democrat Parties exercised an extremely strong three line whip against the amendment. Usually there are 10 - 20 Labour 'rebels' who defy the party line on a Christian issue. On Wednesday night there were none who voted with Lady O'Cathain.

From other votes later that night, we know which peers might have been present in the House for our earlier vote on family members. Based on this information it looks as though as many as 21 Labour Peers might have abstained on Lady O'Cathain's vote. For Peers under pressure from their Party whips, this may be the most they feel they can do to show their sympathy.

On the Conservative side there was a free vote, but the Party leadership made clear in the debate that they did not support the amendment. Despite this some 97 Conservative Peers backed Lady O'Cathain. In effect they ignored Michael Howard's line on the amendment. Very few Conservative peers (only 11) voted against her, but it is possible that as many as 50 Conservative

Peers abstained.

Cross Benchers voted for and against Lady O'Cathain in equal numbers (33 either side). This is unusual. Normally cross benchers vote 2 to 1 in favour of a Christian issue. However, it is also unusual for the Government to specifically pressurise cross benchers as they did on this occasion through meetings and letters.

Opposition

For many months Lady O'Cathain endured a campaign against her by Stonewall, the gay rights group. Their campaign was so nasty that even prominent supporters of gay rights disassociated themselves from Stonewall's tactics.

Several MPs attacked Lady O'Cathain, claiming she was motivated by 'prejudice'. The Christian Institute also came in for fierce opposition from some MPs.

Our approach

When MPs voted on the principle of the Bill on Second Reading, only 49 MPs voted against the Bill with 426 voting for. Of course, we wish that the Parliamentary arithmetic was different.

Given that humanly speaking the Bill could not be stopped, we decided that the priority must be to drive a wedge between this legislation and marriage and to make the Bill less hostile to ordinary families.

We continually argued that the legal rights for civil partners were absolutely identical to those given to married couples.

The Bill was gay marriage in all but name. We sought to undermine the Government's main argument that the legislation was necessary because of cases of hardship. We pointed out that family members experience equal if not worse hardship because they cannot marry.

Our approach was vindicated by the fact that Lady O'Cathain won the vote in June against all expectations.

Lady O'Cathain

What Lady O'Cathain achieved was quite remarkable. Her stance and the work and prayers of Christian Institute supporters meant that there was strong opposition to the Civil Partnership Bill. It did not slip through quietly and even supporters of the Bill were forced to admit that it created injustice for ordinary family members.

We must continue to witness to the truth. There are so many issues where we will need to take a stand over the coming year. Take, for example, the Home Secretary's proposal to legalise prostitution. The need to act on this is urgent.
It is essential that we maintain our stand for what is right.

Yours in Christ,
Colin Hart
Director
THE CHRISTIAN INSTITUTE Back to Contents

The proposed repeal of Britain’s ancient blasphemy laws and the proposed new offence of ‘incitement to religious hatred’.

Britain’s blasphemy laws, which originated centuries ago, were last used in 1921 and in 1976. In 1921 a person was sentenced to 9 months hard labour. In 1976, a newspaper editor was given a nine months suspended sentence and a fine of £500. He appealed, but the sentence was upheld and Lord Scarman then urged that the blasphemy law should be updated to cover all religions.

The laws invoked in these cases reportedly had their origins in medieval courts and defined blasphemy as "the publication of matter which vilifies or is contemptuous of or which denies the truth of the Christian religion or the Bible or the Book of Common Prayer." Furthermore, the blasphemy has to be couched in indecent, scurrilous or offensive terms likely to shock and outrage the general body of Christian believers and it carries a maximum life sentence.

Britain's law commission had already recommended the abolition of the blasphemy laws in 1985. The case to scrap the blasphemy laws received a boost in 1997 when the report from the Runnymede Trust's commission on British Muslims recommended that a new offence of incitement to religious hatred should be created rather than extending the blasphemy law to all religions.

In 1996, Nigel Wingrove, a film director, appealed to the European Court of Human Rights over a film banned in Britain because of its depictions of the crucified Christ in sexual situations and he challenged Britain's blasphemy laws.

Wingrove argued that the laws infringed his freedom of speech guaranteed under the European Convention on Human Rights, and since the laws only apply to the Church of England, and not other religions or Christian denominations, it unfairly discriminates against religions. Wingrove lost.

The Home Secretary, David Blunkett, said three years ago that he favoured scrapping the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel. "This particular provision has not been used for a very long time," he told MPs on the Commons Human Rights Committee in 2001. "It is my own view that there will come a time when it will be appropriate for the blasphemy law to find its place in history."

More recently, he has said "As part of the consideration being given to the new offence of incitement to religious hatred, we have been considering the wider context, including the findings of the House of Lords Select Committee".

The committee considered a number of religious offences, including the issues of blasphemy and incitement to religious hatred.

It said any prosecution for blasphemy laws was likely to fail or be overturned on appeal because of the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights Act in British law.

This is because blasphemy only offers protection to the Church of England and thus effectively differentiates between different religions as well as curtailing the freedom of expression.

It is intended that the offence of inciting religious hatred will close the "unacceptable loophole" that multi-ethnic faith groups are not protected in the same way as Jews or Sikhs are by laws against incitement to racial hatred.

The offence of ‘incitement to religious hatred’ is a new one. It is supposed to be the case that freedom of speech and the freedom to criticise religions will not be curtailed. This is of concern to, for instance, comedians who crack religiously-based jokes and secularists who wish to retain the right to criticise all religion. It is also obviously of concern to Evangelical Christians, who teach that Jesus is the only way to God!

It would be a new criminal offence of inciting hatred against groups or individuals on the grounds of their beliefs, carrying a maximum seven years in jail. In this connection, certain remarks made by the Home Secretary are rather worrying. In July 2004, Blunkett said ‘the intention is to deal with those who deliberately stir up dissension and hate and not those who criticize beliefs with which they disagree.’

With reference to pluralism and openness in society, he is reported to have said ‘it’s what distinguishes us of every faith from those who would take our lives because they reject our faith. It applies equally to far-Right evangelical Christians as to extremists in the Islamic faith.’

On being asked what he meant by ‘far-Right evangelical Christians’ he said something about Christians in America who picket abortion clinics, but clearly his thinking could go well beyond that.

1. Under the proposed ‘incitement against religious hatred’, homosexual activists will argue that speaking against homosexuality should also be a crime. (A Pastor in Sweden is currently serving a jail sentence for preaching against homosexuality).

2. If the blasphemy laws are abolished, and the anti religious incitement bill becomes law, the House of Commons is likely to include sexual orientation in the list and Jesus will be openly blasphemed- but anyone who preaches against homosexuality or Islam will become a criminal.

3. In the State of Victoria in Australia, a law forbidding ‘vilification’ of other religions has been passed. This has resulted in Christians and Muslims being virtually at war with each other, rather than achieving the peace and harmony the advocates of the law said it would achieve. One Christian, a former Muslim, from that State has gone back to his native Pakistan to escape persecution from Australian Muslims!

4. It is clearly possible that these proposed changes would have adverse reflections on many forms of Evangelism, especially the more overt ones such as open-air preaching.

First the good news! It was possible that the Queen’s speech in the penultimate week of November could have included the proposed repeal of the blasphemy law. However, Home Office Minister Fiona Mactaggart has said ‘the Home Office will continue to keep blasphemy laws under review but at the moment we have no plans for repeal’.

This has met with fierce criticism and renewed calls for the abolition of the blasphemy laws. Christians now have a window of opportunity to oppose this- but for how long? The Government did, after all, say at one time that they had no intention of completely outlawing foxhunting!

Now the bad news! Plans have been accelerated for the new religious incitement law. A bill is under consideration under the title ‘Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill’ and Clause 119 seeks to amend sections 17-29 of The Public Order Act 1986. That section deals with ‘Racial hatred’ and the proposal is to add to that ‘Religious hatred’.

The details are a little convoluted but a version has been produced where the proposed amendments to the Act have been inserted in red. Instructions are:Copy and paste the following link into your Internet Browser:

1. PRAY!!!!!! Individually and corporately, fervently and persistently. Pray particularly about the Commons debate on December 7th.

2. Write to or ring our MPs. Keep it relatively short and non-judgmental. Do not quote scriptures, just point out the fallacies and dangers about the proposed changes and explain your concerns. If the MP does not reply, chase him/her! People who are not good letter-writers can ‘crib’ from people who are- but change the words round. MPs are ‘switched off’ by groups of people sending identical letters.

Letters to MPs should be addressed to the MP at House of Commons, Westminster, London SW1A OAA.

3. Sign the enclosed Petition to the Queen and return completed pages to the address at the bottom of the form. Stephen Green of Christian Voice hopes to have at least 100,000 names on it by the end of 2004. The Petition can be downloaded from the home page of www.christianvoice.org.uk

4. We may need to consider action such as demonstrations, marches or other public-profile activities. If we had half the passion of the pro-hunting lobby we would be doing a lot more than we are now!

5. PRAY!!!!!! Pray especially for David Blunkett. It may be that God will use the current storm about his ‘private’ life.

More detailed briefing papers on the Blasphemy Laws are available on request from the author of this summary- contact David Evans on 0116 2215094 or daveevo73@hotmail.com

Sources of Information:1. M Ziauddin, DAWN International 20 10 2004.
2. Catholic World News, 27 03 1996.
3. The Guardian 18 10 2004.
4. BBC News, 18 10 2004.
5. Philip Johnston, Home Affairs Editor, Daily Telegraph July 2004. 6. Christian Voice newsletters, October and November 2004.
7. Andrew Woodcock, PA News Political Correspondent, 27 11 2004.

In this section we will be continuing to look at some of the ways in which the ‘fog’ of political correctness is spreading.

One of the saddest cases I have come across in the last few months concerns the prison officer of 21 years unblemished record – who was sacked for making an allegedly insulting remark about Osama bin Laden. The man was told that three Muslim visitors to the prison might have heard his ‘insensitive’ comment. There is no evidence that they did hear anything, but he lost his job anyway – and this at a time when substantial numbers of people are openly inciting British citizens to disregard existing British laws because they are seen to be in conflict with Islamic law.

This is likely to become a much more pressing issue in the next few years. Cases in Canada launched by the Muslim Council are causing western judges to jump to defend Islamic sensitivities. One evangelical Christian was sentenced to several hundred hours of Islamic indoctrination for speaking out against Islam. The shadow of the imans is spreading over the Western nations.

Back to Contents

I have recently trawled through half a dozen different interpretations of the book of Revelation. It is a fascinating study and a feature in its own right. To focus for a moment on just one ‘episode,’ we see a beast who emerges as a lamb but speaks like a dragon (Rev. 13:11). Anti-Christ does not always come as rowdily and as raucously as, say, Hitler’s original storm troopers.

The book of Revelation is one that believers tend to leave to one side during times of peace and prosperity. In times of distress and persecution, however, people are much quicker to see it for what it really is: an inspired word from heaven to sustain and empower us through hard times.

Most generations have identified the "anti-Christ" as some tyrant or tyrannical regime that has been oppressing the saints. For the first four hundred years of the Church’s existence, it was automatically assumed that it meant the Roman Empire. After all, the Emperor had ordered people to worship images of him or lose their life for their impudence. But the language used by John in Rev. 13 goes beyond the mere worship of a statue of Caesar. Later generations identified the Papacy in Luther’s day, Napoleon, and, more recently, Hitler and Stalin, to name but a few.

The original reference to Nero Caesar whose combined letters can, with some creative stretching of the imagination, be made up to 666, has led many to assume that there will be a latter day rise of Imperialism – a revived Roman Empire in fact. When one thinks how close Hitler got to achieving that goal it begins to sound rather less far-fetched! Others see in Islam the‘ obvious’ counterfeit.

It seems much more likely that John was calling for divine discernment rather than mathematical cleverness. Rather than worrying too much about the specific name of the person or institution referred to, what is clear is that we are looking at the sum total of apostasy and wickedness focused on a particular person or system. Wherever there is blasphemy and bestiality, there is the beast. What comfort would it have been to the victims of Soviet communism, Pol Pot or Idi Amin to know that he wasn’t the real Anti-Christ? What more evil could these regimes have done?

Discriminatory sanctions against Christians have long been practiced (cf Rom. 15:26, Heb. 10:34). John had earlier referred to the poverty of the Church at Smyrna, and to the fact that although the Christians in Philadelphia had very little they were faithful with what they did have. Those who are faithful to Christ during the Great Tribulation are portrayed as never again hungering in heaven (7:6) – whereas the great harlot wallows in her obese luxury (18:3).

What could be more plausible than that the systems which anti-christ will make his own will be introduced into society as being necessary for national security? The many forms of ID and fingerprinting currently being mooted by national governments mark a point of transition. The ultimate ‘security’ that will be advocated consists of something that cannot be snatched from your bag or pocket. The ‘mark’ is from start to finish a counterfeit of the seal of the living God (Rev. 7:2-4)

The ‘mark’ reflects something new, however, in that it goes beyond speaking of tacit worship or ‘ownership’ of the prevailing cult. It appears to be something placed directly on the person’s hand or forehead.

The beast forced all the people, small and great, rich and poor, slave and free, to have a mark placed on their right hands or on their foreheads so that no-one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number that stands for the name. (Rev. 13:16-17)

The Evening Standard published an article recently that sounds much in line with all too many warnings from Christian sources, that we are very close now to being able to enter the cashless era. The VeriChip, smaller than a tiny pea, can already be implanted in the forearm under local anaesthetic and quietly forgotten about. But all manner of data radiates from it through low-powered radio waves so that you can pay your bills just by standing close to a till or cash point.

It goes without saying that ‘Applied Digital’, the company responsible for developing the chip, will market it primarily under the security banner, of being so much freer from the risk of credit card fraud. But civil liberties groups are appalled at the thought of having it embedded in people’s skin. One commented, ‘this is an invasion of privacy on a level we have never seen before. This chip could allow companies to track your every move.’

Whether or not the coming of the cashless society is marked by peace, the Bible warns us clearly that spiritual warfare and tribulation will continue on Planet Earth until the Lord returns.

Again, to focus on just one issue alone, take the sixth woe in Rev. 9:14-16. This is where we find four angels, the instruments of God’s judgement being released from the river Euphrates, which was the traditional place from which the enemies of Israel began their advance. The language is explicit enough to indicate genuine historical-political events, and fearsome destruction. The author adds that the number of the mounted troops was two hundred million. (Rev. 9:16) If this is in any way a literal figure, it makes one wonder whether China may be involved. It is the only country in the world with an army of such a size.

Suddenly, the vision changes from the harassment of believers in Revelation 13 to a glorious vision of the Lamb in His glory in 14:1, in which the Lamb stands in direct contrast to the dragon. Even though the battle continues on Earth, the presence of the Lord God Almighty fills the universe. There are many satanic onslaughts still to come, but God’s grace can keep us faithful so that we too will stand before the throne of the Lamb one day and join the angelic choirs in singing songs of redemption and vindication.

LOOSELY DRAFTED MENTAL CAPACITY BILL PROVIDES INADEQUATE PROTECTION FOR VULNERABLE PATIENTS, WARN CHRISTIAN DOCTORS AND LAWYERS
Government efforts to force Bill through could allow euthanasia in by the 'back door'

The Mental Capacity Bill, which begins its report stage in the House of Commons [14 December 04] is loosely drafted and in its present form leaves open a door whereby some mentally incapacitated patients could be starved, dehydrated and left to die, the Christian Medical Fellowship and Lawyers' Christian Fellowship have warned today.

Peter Saunders, General Secretary of the CMF, which represents over 4,500 UK Christian doctors, said; "The Bill gives statutory force to 'advance refusals' and 'proxy decisions', meaning that doctors will be legally required to withhold food and fluids in some situations where they believe such action clinically inappropriate. CMF believes that advance refusals should be only advisory, not legally binding, or they could force doctors to practise with a hand tied behind their backs."

Saunders continued, "Clinical circumstances exist where it is entirely appropriate to withhold food and fluids: when their burden outweighs any benefit to life or health, or when they confer no clinical benefit for example, but this should never be on a long term basis as it will inevitably lead to the death of the patient."

"CMF is concerned that patients will make unwise and hasty advance decisions to refuse food and fluids without being properly informed about the diagnosis and the expected course their illness will take or the treatment and palliative care options. It is too easy for patients to be driven by fears of meddlesome treatment and 'being kept alive', into making advance
decisions that later might be used against them. "Commonly patients change their minds about what care they would like, as
their condition changes, and for this reason advance decisions must be kept constantly under review. It is also noteworthy that the majority of patients who make advance refusals actually prefer doctors to override those which they feel prejudice their care.”

Andrea Williams is the Public Policy Officer of the LCF, a body that represents 1,500 lawyers in the UK. She said; "The Mental Capacity Bill leaves far too many loopholes that could be abused by unscrupulous doctors and other health professionals or those with an interest - financial or otherwise - in the patient's death. Other doctors may feel pressure to abide
by advance refusals, against their better judgement, in order to avoid the possibility of prosecution"

"Advance refusals of food and fluids should not be legally binding nor should food and fluids be withdrawn without strong clinical indication. Mentally incapacitated patients should not be experimented on when the research provides no clinical benefit to them. Several key amendments enacting these provisions are needed to tighten up the bill and alleviate the legitimate concerns raised by CMF and LCF, but the Government has so far been reluctant to listen", Williams commented.

Both Saunders and Williams concluded; "It would be a great tragedy if the Government used its large majority to force through this Bill without a proper opportunity for MPs to hear the arguments for themselves and debate appropriate amendments. If this happened we might look back and see this as the moment when euthanasia entered the UK by the back door."

NB: Christian Medical Fellowship was founded in 1949 and is an interdenominational organisation with over 4,500 British doctor members in all branches of medicine. A registered charity, it is linked to about 60 similar bodies in other countries throughout the world. The CMF exists to unite Christian doctors to pursue the highest ethical standards in Christian and professional life and to increase faith in Christ and acceptance of his ethical teaching. For further information visit
www.cmf.org.uk

Lawyers Christian Fellowship: Originally founded in 1852, in London, as the Lawyers' Prayer Union, the Lawyers Christian Fellowship [LCF] has grown to become a national organisation with around 1,500 members at every stage of the legal profession. LCF works to encourage and equip Christian lawyers to be effective in their life and work, and to promote Christian principles within the UK legal system.

The Lawyers' Christian Fellowship (the “LCF”) welcomes the news that on Thursday 16^th December, at 9pm, a programme called ‘If ... Cloning could cure us’ will be shown on BBC2 and will be followed by a debate on Newsnight with a chance for viewers to cast their vote (see also news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/if/4065719.stm).

This is being billed as a well-balanced presentation of the arguments for and against cloning and stem cell research, thereby making a valuable contribution to this highly controversial and topical debate. The more attractive alternative of using adult stem cells over embryonic stem cells is discussed. Adult stem cell therapies, largely overlooked up to now despite their better track record (for example, 56 disease conditions in humans have been treated with adult stem cell therapies, whilst none have been treated with embryonic stem cells) are now receiving some of the attention they deserve.

Embryonic stem cells are designed to grow rapidly. This is why embryonic stem cells generate fast growing cancers when implanted and why they are so hard to control. On the other hand, adult stem cells exist throughout the adult body and have a long term role in the replacement of damaged tissue throughout our development. This is what makes adult stem cells, and not embryonic stem cells, ideal for use in cellular replacement technology.

This debate is timely because Peng Voong, who works as an LCF Public Policy Analyst, initiated judicial review proceedings against the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority last month over its decision to grant Professor Murdoch of the Newcastle Fertility Centre at Life a licence to do human cloning. One of the arguments raised by Mr Voong’s legal team is that the scientific case for the cloning authorised under the licence has not been made out, as required by Parliament.

“There is a real need for the truth to be exposed in response to the inflated claims of those who support so-called therapeutic cloning and embryonic stem cell research. Not only do these claims mislead the general public as to what may be achieved, they also give false hope to many people who suffer from serious diseases.”

The LCF encourages everyone to engage in the debate on such highly important and topical issues as human cloning; as many people as possible should watch the program on Thursday night, 9pm, and vote in the Newsnight debate.

To liaise with the solicitor acting on the case or to contribute financially towards this legal challenge, please contact:

David Foster Barlow Robbins Solicitors 55 Quarry Street Guildford Surrey GU1 3UE davidfoster@barlowrobbins.com Tel: 01483 464 243 Fax: 01483 573 325
LCF media enquiries: Andrea Minichiello Williams,Barrister, andrea@williamsa.force9.co.uk 0771 259 1164 Back to Contents

Praying for the UK - April 05

In 2 Chronicles 21 there is a powerful picture of the angel of the Lord with his sword drawn and stretched out over Jerusalem. As a result of wrong actions and heart allegiances, judgment was upon the nation. ‘The prophet Gad went to David and said to him, "This is what the LORD says: `Take your choice: three years of famine, three months of being swept away before your enemies, with their swords overtaking you, or three days of the sword of the LORD--days of plague in the land, with the angel of the LORD ravaging every part of Israel.` Now then, decide how I should answer the one who sent me."

David said to Gad, "I am in deep distress. Let me fall into the hands of the LORD, for his mercy is very great; but do not let me fall into the hands of men."

From the mouths of many messengers the Lord is warning that this is a decisive moment for the UK. Chuck Pierce declares the ‘enemy has a plan to suppress the vision of God in this land. Do not get discouraged. Keep saying what needs to be said, even if no one is listening.’

Clifford Hill, Moshe Lawrie and Wendy Alec are amongst many other powerful voices being raised in warning. The Lord’s longsuffering patience with us is on the point of running out as the result of the wrong allegiances and alignments that we are now taking.[1]

One obvious form that judgement could take is the imposition of fresh burdens upon ourselves; the consequences of wrong lifestyles on the one hand, and restricting legislation on the other. We can rejoice that the government has just announced that it has dropped the Incitement to Religious Hatred clause in order to get the rest of the bill through, but this may only be a reprieve: it could come back again later on.[2] In that context, and even though the political analysts would tell us that the forthcoming election is a foregone conclusion, we should pray for the Lord to be at work on, and leading up to, May 5^th. There is little that is edifying in the sight of the Conservatives stoking up resentments against Labour, or of Labour raising the fear-spectre of what the Conservatives did last time round. May the Lord go one step further and appoint those who will be most open to the workings of the Lord and least susceptible to the setting and following of wrong ways.

Above all, may He hold this shield of prayer and praise in place over the nation to keep away the sword that is stretched out towards us. This will mean each one of us playing our part: longing for the things He longs for and keeping our heart-sympathies away from the things that He is judging. As Chuck Pierce put it, ‘Do not just sing songs with your mouth, but allow the message of these songs to pierce and activate your spirit-man for war.’

[1] In terms of national alignments, Chuck Pierce warned particularly against siding with Syria against Israel.

[2] A friend pointed me yesterday to a book by Baroness Helena Kennedy, herself a QC and a New Labour peer. Just Law: The Changing Face of Justice and Why it Matters to Us All’ (Vintage UK, Random House) reveals the authoritarianism that lies below the surface of our present government (thus endangering civil liberties). It contains a scathing attack on those one would have expected to be her political soul mates. See the book reviews on www.amazon.com.

We continue to feel extremely concerned about the directions the present administration is poised to take the country in.

v To take the issue we have featured on several occasions, the Incitement to Hatred on religious grounds, the Charles Clark, the Home Secretary, has written to Muslim leaders apologising for failing to get the bill though, and blaming the opposition parties for this. How discriminating is that? See the article below.[1]

v Clark has also said that he will invoke the Parliament Act to reduce still further the influence the House of Lords can have in checking the progress of such bills. He has also promised to remove the last of the hereditary peers.

v All in all, this is a foretaste of acts and actions that promise not only to be bad for democracy but to have a seriously spiritually weakening effect on the nation. It still appears that the nation has not really woken up to the constitutional and other changes that have been stealthily inflicted during the last few years of damaging spin and intrusive bureaucracy.

v The Lord is warning that 5/5/05 is a serious date in His sight for the future of this country.

Barnabas Fund are letting people know that the Victoria Council in Australia, which previously took Daniel Scot to court, is now considering calls to ban the Alpha course.

Robin Fletcher, a self described witch, called for the ban under the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act passed in the state of Victoria in 2001. This is the same law that pastors Daniel Scot and Danny Nalliah were convicted under for "inciting hatred" in December 2004. In that case it was hatred against Muslims; in this case, Fletcher claims, it is hatred against witches. "It constitutes a personal danger to my health and safety within the prison system," he said, citing negative references to witchcraft in the course material. He is currently serving a 10-year prison sentence for sexually abusing two teenage
girls.

The government in the UK has tried to introduce similar legislation that will also ban incitement to religious hatred. However in order to pass an important bill through parliament before the general election, the government removed the hotly contested clause. Nevertheless, if re-elected, they have committed themselves to bringing it back in, and next time will use the Parliament Act to force it through. From the outset Barnabas Fund has claimed that such legislation presents unacceptable restrictions on religious freedom of expression in Britain. The usage of the law in Australia suggests that this will certainly be the case.

* Pray that the VCAT will use sense and not allow the complaint to go
any further.

* Pray the next British government will abandon plans to introduce a
law banning incitement to religious hatred.

[1] British Home Secretary apologises that Religious Hate Law is not passed – in a bid to win Muslim voters and set them against the opposition. Omar Al-Jundi, London; Asharq al-Awsat, 13 April 2005

The ruling British Labour Party is pursuing its ongoing efforts to restore favour with the country’s Muslims before the election. The Home Secretary Charles Clarke has officially apologised for the government’s about turn on its decision to pass a law criminalising incitement of hatred against Muslims on the grounds of their faith. The law was to have been passed during the parliamentary session which ended last Monday. He made a careful point of mentioning the Liberal Democrat Party’s antipathy towards the law. Commentators accused Clarke of exploiting the issue of Muslim rights in order to make political gain. This unprecedented apology comes around four weeks before the general elections on 5 May. Yesterday’s message to all mosques in the length and breadth of the country placed the blame for the failure of the legislation with the two main opposition parties. The Home Secretary started his letter, obtained by Asharq al-Awsat, by expressing deep regret that the Liberal Democrat and Conservative opposition had forced the government to drop the measure before the parliamentary session ended. He pledged to bring the measure to a vote in the next session. He stressed his party’s commitment to supporting Muslims and making sure they were treated the same as other religious adherents.

In a clear attempt to turn Muslims against the other parties he said “They bare the full responsibility for blocking this law”*. He pointed out that they had never hidden their intention to vote against the law. To the mosque leaders he added “I believe that you and rest of British Muslims will carefully weigh up the situation, especially with respect to the opposition shown by the Liberal Democrats”^*.

Significantly, in some areas where there are a number of potential voters opposed to the Iraq war, it is the Liberal Democrats who are poised to defeat Labour. Most Labour and Conservative MPs voted in favour of the war, while the Liberal Democrats opposed it, increasing their level of support among British Muslims.

Inayat Bunglawala, Secretary of Media Affairs for the Muslim Council of Britain, said that the failure of the other two parties did not excuse the government for not passing the law. He pointed out the bill had not been given enough time for sufficient parliamentary debate. In a telephone conversation with Asharq al-Awsat, he confirmed that British Muslims feel profoundly disappointed that the measure was withdrawn. He added “We are waiting for the Labour manifesto tomorrow. If it doesn’t mention the incitement to religious hatred legislation as part of their commitment if they form the next government, they are clearly not interested in supporting Muslims”^*. In 2001 the Labour Government backed off an attempt to introduce a similar law.

The idea behind the Stability Pact was that member countries of the Eurozone were obliged to keep their inflation rate within very tight order or face sweeping fines. No country was to run a budget deficit in a year of more than three per cent. From the start it reminded me of those man made set of rules that may look good from the outside but which produce nothing but bondage and resentment.

Many nations (such as Portugal and the Czech Republic) took extreme action to prepare their economies for the eurozone – so much so that they plunged themselves into recession. But now France and Germany have broken the rules themselves and haughtily declare themselves above such things. No action against them has been taken. The smaller states are livid. On the face of it the Stability Pact is dead in the water. But the European Central Bank is terrified of this prospect, fearing that it will weaken the resolve of the smaller nations to carry out what they perceive as entirely necessary reforms.

Look on it from the point of view of these smaller countries though. They were asked to stick within tight guidelines. They saw France and Germany arrogantly ignoring the rules – and are then asked to sign up to the new draft of the EU Commission which will change the voting rules in order to give the big powers more power. No wonder that Poland played it tough.

The fact that Poland would exercise considerable voting power in the Council was one of the reasons why the Policy electorate had given the green light to joining the EU in the first place. It could hardly turn round now and tell people that the rules have changed even before we join and that they will have less say in how things happen from now on. No, Poland stood up for its own people at a time when Britain seemed willing to hand everything over on a plate. Matters quickly reached such an impasse that even Europe’s ‘Floundering Fathers,’ as Matthew d’Ancona termed them, could neither sweet talk nor horse trade their way around the differences.

This was a federal constitution for Europe in all but name, and its rejection will have set the federalising tendencies back a long way. Knowing the way Europe works, though, it will doubtless find ways to bounce back in a slightly different guise sooner rather than later. President Chirac responded by saying that a ‘pioneer group’ of states would push ahead with integration regardless, thus putting the concept of a two tier Europe back in centre stage. The Suddeutsche Zeitung weighed in by comparing and contrasting ‘those who are committed to . . . the weighty role Europe plays in the world’ with the ’second rate group who mostly just fight for their subsidies’ – a barely coded reference to Poland and Spain.

For the first time, more than half of the EU’s population claims to have lost faith in its institutions. This does not suggest a high turn out for the elections to the European Parliament next June?

A year or so ago Heidi Campbell prophesied that God was going to cause Brussels to 'bow down'. I wonder if this wasn’t part of the outworking of this prophecy.

Over all of Europe a spectre remains: the fact that far too little has been done to prepare the continent for the genuinely serious effects of the demographic time bomb. With fewer children being born, and fewer citizens being conventionally employed, the burden of paying for the elderly is a problem that is looming ever larger and coming ever closer. Not every young person wants to be spending a huge percentage of their income paying the benefits of those who have completed their working life. This is a huge issue that will be convulsing European coffers in the not so distant future.

Pray for France. Following the intense heat wave that claimed many lives in the summer, the south of France was beset in December by its worst floods on record. Pray for the work of all who are active in making Christ known in France.

France is looking less well placed than it was a year or so again when it was the toast of the Arab nations because of its stand against America. It has lost most of that support through its clampdown against Muslim women wearing headscarves, who view this stand as open persecution. Other European nations consider that its refusal to honour the EU Stability Pact (qv) makes it as high-handed as the Americans it has so vigorously denounced. (Whereas American relationships with Germany and Russia are gradually recovering, France remains in the 'not to be trusted' category, specifically excluded from lucrative deals in Iraq. And the government of President Chirac has lost much of its popularity by biting a necessary bullet and slashing pensions and benefits.

The European Constitution in the Balance: Pray for the French referendum, on May 29^th

It has astonished American and French onlookers that the usually internationally minded British people have paid so little attention to European matters thus far in the election. (By contrast, the issue of the European Constitution has become a major talking point in France).

v Anatole Kalestky argued brilliantly in the Times (13-04-05) that a No vote is the most probable, not because the average French voter is really any more up to speed on the intricacies of the constitution than were the Spanish voters who nodded it through, but because they are fed up to the back teeth with Giscard d’Estaigne and Jacques Chirac. (He compares it with watching Parliament on TV and seeing Harold Wilson still slugging it out decades later with Ted Heath).

	UK News May God have mercy on our backslidden nation and yet bring revival to our shores	Contend for the Faith Violence in City Centres (and what God is doing about it) Christmas Homosexual Issues Freedom of Expression at Stake Legal Challenge to the Lambeth Experiment (Cannabis) The Abortion Debate Pray for Marriages to meet real needs Prisons Schools and Universities Injustices in Cot-Death Cases Initiatives to Reduce Domestic Violence The Political Correctness Channel The Thought Police are Out in Force Cashless Society? Civil Partnership Bill Blasphemy/Incitement to Religious Hatred Mental Capacity Bill Human Cloning and Stem Cell Research Civil Liberties Erosion Law Lords vs ID cards Binge Mania Jerry Springer - The Opera: Additional Response Items Prayer for the UK - AP05 05/05/05-Landmark Date for UK Religious Hatred Bill Update-MAY05
	Europe	The EU Stability Pact and the Constitution Fiasco France AP05 UPDATE Switzerland Turkey Referendum on the European Constitution In Brazil . . . 3000 Intercessors raised up for Europe
	Miscellaneous	Cyber Warfare Global Trafficking Stressed-out? Tired of Church? The Passion

Praying for the UK - April 05

The European Constitution in the Balance: Pray for the French referendum, on May 29th

The European Constitution in the Balance: Pray for the French referendum, on May 29^th