Not particularly impressed by this article.

“The underlying racist (or, more probably, theocratic) ideas which permit supposedly God-fearing men and women to think that a racist party might have the answer”

You don’t say anywhere what these ideas are. Can you elaborate?

It isn’t the actual ideas, it’s the culture and tradition of Britain as nominally Christian that the BNP like. To the extent that they attract any people who regard themselves as Christians at all (and I’ve never heard anyone in any church expressing sympathy with the BNP) it’s the idea that Britain is becoming less institutionally Christian, that many children grow up without learning Christian stories etc, that some Christians find a threat. (Goes without saying that many Christians see this as a good thing and think that bastardised institutionalised forms of faith put more people off Christianity than attracted them.)

“It’s a good idea, since it prevents the BNP from using the name of the Church of England at any meetings or six-person rallies they might hold, but it rather misses the point.”

Change the rules to ensure that the BNP (and indeed any political party) has to be stated at relevant meetings…if it makes any difference in the first place.

I’ll say what I always do…this doesn’t help fight the BNP, it helps promote them.

Mr. Semple,

You write:
“More importantly, while banning BNP membership will give people something to think about, the next time the BNP stands up for Christianity, it won’t change the fact that numerous CoE devotees sympathize with them.”

This is quite a remarkable claim. Please could you link to the evidence that “numerous CoE devotees[sic]” sympathize with the BNP? Does devotees refer to the laity, the clergy, or just people who self-identify as CoE?

I’m not at home so I can’t answer at length – but as for the claim that various Anglicans are in favour of the BNP, the five (former?) clergy (google it) who are on the list of 12,000 BNP supporters may have something to do with it. There were also, according to the Independent article linked to, or possible the BBC, a bell ringer and a tour guide, among a couple of other church-related positions sympathizing with the BNP. Not counting the individual members of the BNP who are Anglican – which is hardly a stretch to imagine.

If they’ve got such a problem with ethnic minorities, why don’t they ask their god to sort it out? Because he doesn’t exist, that’s why.

Mr. Semple,

Thank you for your response. You write:
“but as for the claim that various Anglicans are in favour of the BNP, the five (former?) clergy (google it) who are on the list of 12,000 BNP supporters may have something to do with it.”

Respectfully, I am addressing your claim in the above article that
“it won’t change the fact that numerous CoE devotees sympathize with them.”

Regarding the so-called BNP clergy, I would refer you to the Guardian:

“Five “Reverends” were identified on the list, but the Church of England said none were licensed or serving Anglican clergy although one was a retired priest.” [source]

As we don’t have five members of the clergy on the list, let alone “numerous” Anglicans, I don’t think your claim is supported by the evidence.

“Not counting the individual members of the BNP who are Anglican – which is hardly a stretch to imagine.”
It may or may not be “a stretch to imagine”, but it is conventional to provide evidence for claims – this is all the more important when smearing groups of people as BNP members.

“rather misses the point”

You have indeed.

Well Edmund, allow me to direct you towards the BBC, which stated:

“Miss Gnanadoss’ proposal followed the publication last year of a list of 12,000 names of BNP members, which included five clergy.

The Church of England said none of them was a serving Anglican priest.”
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7880313.stm)

Whatever “five clergy” means, they have some association with the Anglican church, and the Anglican church General Synod is obviously worried enough to attempt to forestall any BNP member occupying a position where they could speak on behalf of the church. The BNP response, which I’m not going to quote or link to, replied to this move in religious terms; a collapse in morality, declining church attendance etc. The BNP obviously have a self image of being a Christian party.

To extrapolate from this that a fair number of BNP members are Anglican (which is hardly a stretch, since it is the largest denomination in England) is not a stretch. As actual evidence, apart from knowledge of the history and evolution of fascism in the UK, I also know several Anglicans of position who have on numerous occasions expressed great sympathy with the BNP programme of repatriation, though thankfully the BNP don’t stand in these parts.

You can take that or leave it. Incidentally, pull the stick out of your arse and stop calling me “Mr. Semple”.

@ 7: Who are you talking about?

It may be enough for your with your unexamined prejudices to say the magic word BNP and assume universal repulsion it is not for me . I am going to remind you again this is the second choice Party of 30 % of Labour voters and according to research by the Rowntree organisation a choice One in four are considering . This being the case the time has come to engage with what they say and stop this absurd pretence that there is something uniquely evil about the BNP as compared to equally racist groups like the Muslim community. Not all Muslims are racists you will say , well not all BNP members are either .In fact for the voter it is a low consideration and I would be prepared to bet there are more mixed race BNP members than there are mixed race Muslims or , very likely mixed race Liberals ( who would they mix with?)

Personally I agree that racism is an especially dangerous and unpleasant but the utopian intolerance you practice has been responsible for far more death and misery and it is equally to be feared . Neither the BNP or the SWP advocate murder , we might have our suspicions of both .Muslims that do are happily hosted by this country. The BNP are , they say , leaving that aspect of their message behind and becoming a Nationalist Party. It would not be for me as I am dislike socialism but I can certainly understand the need for a socially Conservative working class Party such people having been disenfranchised by the elitist manipulation of the Labour movement by its Fabian bourgeois careerist leaders

This was a comment I found on the BBC under the article on the Rowntree research

“am married to a british born jamaican and have a mixed race baby ,i am white.we live in overcrowded property which the council tell me my children can doss down on the living room or kitchen floor and i have a 10 yr wait for a transfer. meanwhile refugees/asylum seekers over the road waited 2 weeks and got a bedroom each for their children,things like this anger british people whatever their colour.queue jumping.due to bnp promising that this wont happen anymore if u vote for them i can really understand how and why they are getting support…”

What have you to say to that ? Were this any other group you would be quick to say we cannot have group condemnation based on one aspect of what they are . The part of the BNP people respond to is both Nationalist and socialist and as you have no answer to their allegation that you have betrayed the country they have a place , anywhere they wish to be . As for Christianity being in some way either Liberal or Sociologist that is such a moronic approach top what the Church I can only extend my pity.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/1xtra/tx/bnp.shtml

Will they be banning the clergy from becoming members of anti-religious far-left parties too?

Dave,

You write:

‘Whatever “five clergy” means, they have some association with the Anglican church,’

No, this is not the case. “Reverend” is not a protected title. Four of the five do not appear to be “reverends” any more than Gilliam McKeith is a “doctor” [1]. I will grant you that one is a former Anglican priest – indeed, I have already done so, in my message timestamped 8:08pm – but this proves nothing. After all, while there may be “numerous” atheists amongst the Church of England clergy, I would hesitate to produce a former vicar who has lost his faith as evidence of this.

“and the Anglican church General Synod is obviously worried enough to attempt to forestall any BNP member occupying a position where they could speak on behalf of the church.”

And of course if they hadn’t, they would stand accused of ignoring the BNP. Damned if you do…

“The BNP response, which I’m not going to quote or link to, replied to this move in religious terms; a collapse in morality, declining church attendance etc. The BNP obviously have a self image of being a Christian party.”

I have no intention of seeking out the BNP response, but I suspect you are correct: or at least, a sort of fascistic-Daily Mail version Christianity, with Nativity plays in all our schools and no-one bothering about the the obligations to the Widow, the Orphan or the Stranger. The BNP so-called “Christian Council of Britian” is clearly an entryist organisation, but if the highest level of penetration is “bell ringer and a tour guide” then I think we don’t have too much to worry about. [Too be honest, I rather assumed the motion was a move against the BNP and it’s creature, the CCB].

You write:
“As actual evidence, apart from knowledge of the history and evolution of fascism in the UK, I also know several Anglicans of position who have on numerous occasions expressed great sympathy with the BNP programme of repatriation, though thankfully the BNP don’t stand in these parts.”

I’m not in a position to comment your personal experience. Perhaps we could put some numbers on this. There are projected to be 8,300 stipendary clergy (i.e. people paid by the church of England) in 2009[source] However, there are 13,000 parishes [source]. As the population of the UK is currently just short of 61 million [source] we would expect, if CoE clergy are as likely as anyone else to be BNP members, there to be between 1 and 3 CoE clergy appear on a list of 12,000 people[2]. As there is only one person who can be described as a member of the the CoE clergy – a former priest who has no current licence to preach – we certainly cannot claim that there are “numerous” BNP supporters amoung the CoE clergy.

Regarding the broader claim (“the fact that numerous CoE devotees sympathize with them.”), the religion blogger Richard Bartholemew notes that “About half-a-dozen or so further persons on the list are identified as Christians, including one person who runs a British-Israelite group ” [source]. As current monthly church attendence runs at about 1.7million [source], so one would expect there to be about 330 church goers listed, rather than 6 including a British-Israelite.

“Incidentally, pull the stick out of your arse and stop calling me “Mr. Semple”.”

It’s my usual form of address for someone I’ve never spoken to before. It was not my intention to give offence, and I am sorry if I have done so.

[1] Some of them appear to run “house churches”.

[2] Clearly, there are problems with sample size. However, this will do as an initial estimate.

Why would they do that? I’d say socialist internationalism is probably more in keeping with the underlying basis of Christian teachings than an authoritarian state that will attempt to impose morality on its citizens, or part of its citizens anyway, since the rest will be deported according to colour.

I agree that Edmund shouldn’t call David Semple “Mr Semple” – looking at his biography, I think Master Semple would be more appropriate.

“I’d say socialist internationalism is probably more in keeping with the underlying basis of Christian teachings than an authoritarian state that will attempt to impose morality on its citizens”

I must chuckle.

Is it legal for the state church to ban people from holding positions in the church on the basis of their private political views? I suppose it must be.

The Pope excommunicated one of the Nazis during WWII.

Just the one, for adultery.

My opinion of the church of England has vastly improved, good to see they’re not so easily misled by the BNP’s lies, in contrast to the BNP the Church generally see all humans as equal and don’t fight people just because they’re a different shade