Protestant Croydon flock follows vicar to Catholic church

Protestant flock follows vicar to Catholic church

The parishoners who have converted to Catholicism after their parish priest did the same

Father Donald Minchew

First published in News Exclusive by , Chief Reporter

A Croydon congregation has taken an extraordinary leap of faith by switching their beliefs to follow a popular preacher.

Parishioners at a Church of England parish church have converted to Catholicism after their vicar left to join a neighbouring Catholic church six weeks ago.

Father Donald Minchew, together with 69 of his previous congregation - almost half his flock - and three new members, were received into the full communion at St Mary's Church, in Wellesley Road, on April 3.

Former Anglican bishop, Monsignor John Broadhurst, received and confirmed the group, who will now form the Croydon Ordinariate.

Father Donald was the vicar at St Michael's and All Angels Parish Church in Poplar Walk, Croydon, for 16-and-a half years.

He resigned in February because he disagreed with decisions being made by the Church of England, including the ordination of female priests and bishops.

Speaking after the service, Father Donald said: "These people are very brave because they have answered the call of God and the indignation of Pope Benedict and done it at a great cost.

"I think the reason they came across during the Ordinariate is because they don't quibble over things like the clergy, but I think there is a great comfort in the Catholic church, you know what you believe and what the church teaches.

"In the Church of England you don't know what the church believes from one synod to the next.

"What we would have taken for granted for 30 years you can't now, but in the Catholic church it's not changing.

"You know what you are getting in to."

The Ordinariate will participate in Catholic services at St Mary's church and at the start of June Father Donald and Father Ken Berry - also formerly of St Michael's church - will be ordained into the priesthood.

They will then take services for the Croydon Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham.

Father Donald added: "The Anglican bishop, Bishop Christopher of Southwark, the Archdeacon of Croydon, the Diocese and secretary have been extremely supportive and encouraging.

"There has been no animosity from them at all, and you thought there might have been but there wasn't and I've been quite comforted by this in this pastoral journey."

Parishoner Barry Barnes served for 15 years on the General Synod of the Church of England.

He also left St Michael and All Angels for the Ordinariate after being part of the congregation with his wife for about 30 years.

Mr Barnes said: "We saw where the church was going and decided we could no longer stay in the Church of England and it was about the same sort of time the Pope made the offer of the Ordinariate.

"My wife and I decided the Church of England was no longer where we wanted to be and we joined the Ordinariate for a number of reasons.

"Their [the Church of England's] attitude towards homosexuality and in light of the possible ordination of women as bishops, neither of us can accept that.

"If it hadn't been for the Catholic church, we would possibly have considered the Orthodox church."

Another parishioner, who did not want to be named, said she also joined the Ordinariate because she was unhappy with the way in which the Church of England was going.

She said: "They [gay marriage and the ordaining of female bishops] are the two main reasons most people have gone over, it's just not scriptural teaching.

"I couldn't have stayed in the Church of England.

"I have been considering what to do ever since they came out with the announcement and then the Pope made such an incredible offer."

A spokesperson for the Diocese of Southwark said: "Father Minchew and some members of his congregation felt it was right for them to continue their Christian life within the Ordinariate.

"While we regret that we are losing them as Anglicans, we wish them well for their future Christian journey."

Comments (9)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:43am Fri 13 Apr 12

christhegoth says...

Gaybashers and sexists. The sooner this generation die off the better. As a Pagan my crowd are sooo much more open-minded and mature. Maybe there is a lesson in that.

Gays are not cyborgs, so ARE naturally occurring. And there is nowt wrong with Priestesses either.
Gaybashers and sexists. The sooner this generation die off the better. As a Pagan my crowd are sooo much more open-minded and mature. Maybe there is a lesson in that. Gays are not cyborgs, so ARE naturally occurring. And there is nowt wrong with Priestesses either. christhegoth
  • Score: 0

9:19pm Sat 14 Apr 12

ANNE GILES says...

christhegoth wrote:
Gaybashers and sexists. The sooner this generation die off the better. As a Pagan my crowd are sooo much more open-minded and mature. Maybe there is a lesson in that.

Gays are not cyborgs, so ARE naturally occurring. And there is nowt wrong with Priestesses either.
How right you are!!
[quote][p][bold]christhegoth[/bold] wrote: Gaybashers and sexists. The sooner this generation die off the better. As a Pagan my crowd are sooo much more open-minded and mature. Maybe there is a lesson in that. Gays are not cyborgs, so ARE naturally occurring. And there is nowt wrong with Priestesses either.[/p][/quote]How right you are!! ANNE GILES
  • Score: 0

11:15am Tue 17 Apr 12

Mr Anthony Miller says...

christhegoth wrote:
Gaybashers and sexists. The sooner this generation die off the better. As a Pagan my crowd are sooo much more open-minded and mature. Maybe there is a lesson in that. Gays are not cyborgs, so ARE naturally occurring. And there is nowt wrong with Priestesses either.
"The sooner this generation die off the better. As a Pagan my crowd are sooo much more open-minded and mature."

Yes, very mature indeed, Chris.

People should be free to believe what they like but anyone who thinks the Catholic Church doesn't change it's teachings or practices are just terminally naive.

I remember being told very sternly that we could NEVER have married priests... yet it seems when the staff shortfall actually bites and a gun is held to its temple the Catholic Church can compromise and have married deacons.

I was also impressed in 2005 when the Vatican suddenly decided after 1970 years of it previously not being a problem that it was not just women but gay people who should not become priests. Despite the fact that when I was growing up there were quite a few priests that were obviously gay. So not really an old fashioned belief but a new piece of discrimination that has been recently bolted on.

Then there was the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary bolted on in 1950 to try to steal punters from the Russian Orthadox Church despite the fact there is absolutely no scriptural basis for it.

And of course the edict Humanae Vitae when the Pope decided that we should never ware condoms rather late in the day (1968) although this had previously not bothered that many people except Thomas Aquinas.

Then there's the fact that the very text of the mass seemed to have changed the last time I went etc etc and the sarament was relegated to the side chapel only to be put back on the alter again later ... but, of course, all these are either superficial changes (i.e. they are not doctrinal) or theological advances in the understanding of the faith (as Jesus rather thoughtlessly forgot to mention a lot of things when he was alive) not additions or reinventions. We all know that Catholic faith NEVER changes.

One is reminded of Frank Skinner's one liner about Anne Widdicombe "we shouldn't let them in" ... but I have to say on the whole I have found most people from the Nationalised Church and the one left over from the Holy Roman Empire (fore-runner of the EU) to be what Flannagan & Allen used to call "nice people".

Anyway, welcome to the abusrd mass of contradictions and reinventions that is modern Catholicism.
[quote][p][bold]christhegoth[/bold] wrote: Gaybashers and sexists. The sooner this generation die off the better. As a Pagan my crowd are sooo much more open-minded and mature. Maybe there is a lesson in that. Gays are not cyborgs, so ARE naturally occurring. And there is nowt wrong with Priestesses either.[/p][/quote]"The sooner this generation die off the better. As a Pagan my crowd are sooo much more open-minded and mature." Yes, very mature indeed, Chris. People should be free to believe what they like but anyone who thinks the Catholic Church doesn't change it's teachings or practices are just terminally naive. I remember being told very sternly that we could NEVER have married priests... yet it seems when the staff shortfall actually bites and a gun is held to its temple the Catholic Church can compromise and have married deacons. I was also impressed in 2005 when the Vatican suddenly decided after 1970 years of it previously not being a problem that it was not just women but gay people who should not become priests. Despite the fact that when I was growing up there were quite a few priests that were obviously gay. So not really an old fashioned belief but a new piece of discrimination that has been recently bolted on. Then there was the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary bolted on in 1950 to try to steal punters from the Russian Orthadox Church despite the fact there is absolutely no scriptural basis for it. And of course the edict Humanae Vitae when the Pope decided that we should never ware condoms rather late in the day (1968) although this had previously not bothered that many people except Thomas Aquinas. Then there's the fact that the very text of the mass seemed to have changed the last time I went etc etc and the sarament was relegated to the side chapel only to be put back on the alter again later ... but, of course, all these are either superficial changes (i.e. they are not doctrinal) or theological advances in the understanding of the faith (as Jesus rather thoughtlessly forgot to mention a lot of things when he was alive) not additions or reinventions. We all know that Catholic faith NEVER changes. One is reminded of Frank Skinner's one liner about Anne Widdicombe "we shouldn't let them in" ... but I have to say on the whole I have found most people from the Nationalised Church and the one left over from the Holy Roman Empire (fore-runner of the EU) to be what Flannagan & Allen used to call "nice people". Anyway, welcome to the abusrd mass of contradictions and reinventions that is modern Catholicism. Mr Anthony Miller
  • Score: 0

4:43pm Tue 17 Apr 12

christhegoth says...

It sounds barking and hate-filled to me. I'm gonna carry on hugging trees I think.
It sounds barking and hate-filled to me. I'm gonna carry on hugging trees I think. christhegoth
  • Score: 0

2:19pm Wed 18 Apr 12

markhiggins01 says...

Congratulatons to all those joining the Catholic Church this Easter and especially those in Croydon.

It is such a pity to read such ignorant comments about the true Church of Christ on such a wonderful article.

Almost everything written by Mr. Miller concerning RC is completely inaccurate.

1) whoever told mr miller as a youngster that there could never be married priests was seriously incorrect, there were already married priests in Eastern Catholic Churches. It is the Roman discipline to have married clergy and this discipline goes right back to the early church, it is a discipline though rather than dogma. Disciplines may change, dogmas cannot change anymore than God tell a lie or 1+1 start equalling 5.

As for the idea that those with deep seated same sex attraction were encouraged to the priesthood up to 2005! Again, nonsense, the writer doesn't understand that church prnouncements are usually there to reinforce something that is being forgotten or is particularily salient to that time- the 2005 announcement was such, as also was the definition of the assumption. Orthodox believe in the assumption as much as RC as this was a commonly held belief long before the schism between East and West. It might not be explicit in scripture but Cathoics and Orthodox believe that Sacred Tradition is also a source of infallible truths- Christ didn't write a book but He founded a Church to maintain His teachings.

Humanae Vitae was written not concerning condoms, which have always existed in some form or another and constantly opposed by Christ's Church, but the contraceptive pill which was in fact fairly recent to the 60s. Humanae vitae declared that the pill fell under the same ruling as the condom which was always opposed by Christ's Church. Look up elsewhere for reasons why.

The teachings of Christ's Church do not change and they are the only way to please God and get to heaven. Christ Himself founded the Church for this reason, that everyone might hear His teaching voice across history, His infallible voice and so be rescued from error and confusuion.

The flock from St. Michaels and many others have realised this and rejoice in it.
Congratulatons to all those joining the Catholic Church this Easter and especially those in Croydon. It is such a pity to read such ignorant comments about the true Church of Christ on such a wonderful article. Almost everything written by Mr. Miller concerning RC is completely inaccurate. 1) whoever told mr miller as a youngster that there could never be married priests was seriously incorrect, there were already married priests in Eastern Catholic Churches. It is the Roman discipline to have married clergy and this discipline goes right back to the early church, it is a discipline though rather than dogma. Disciplines may change, dogmas cannot change anymore than God tell a lie or 1+1 start equalling 5. As for the idea that those with deep seated same sex attraction were encouraged to the priesthood up to 2005! Again, nonsense, the writer doesn't understand that church prnouncements are usually there to reinforce something that is being forgotten or is particularily salient to that time- the 2005 announcement was such, as also was the definition of the assumption. Orthodox believe in the assumption as much as RC as this was a commonly held belief long before the schism between East and West. It might not be explicit in scripture but Cathoics and Orthodox believe that Sacred Tradition is also a source of infallible truths- Christ didn't write a book but He founded a Church to maintain His teachings. Humanae Vitae was written not concerning condoms, which have always existed in some form or another and constantly opposed by Christ's Church, but the contraceptive pill which was in fact fairly recent to the 60s. Humanae vitae declared that the pill fell under the same ruling as the condom which was always opposed by Christ's Church. Look up elsewhere for reasons why. The teachings of Christ's Church do not change and they are the only way to please God and get to heaven. Christ Himself founded the Church for this reason, that everyone might hear His teaching voice across history, His infallible voice and so be rescued from error and confusuion. The flock from St. Michaels and many others have realised this and rejoice in it. markhiggins01
  • Score: 0

3:55pm Wed 18 Apr 12

christhegoth says...

That sounds just as crazy to me. It means Ghandi went to hell rather than paradise...

Which means your god must be an utter psychopath, or one hell of a fussy git.

I'll stay hugging trees. At least they make sense and act with sanity.
That sounds just as crazy to me. It means Ghandi went to hell rather than paradise... Which means your god must be an utter psychopath, or one hell of a fussy git. I'll stay hugging trees. At least they make sense and act with sanity. christhegoth
  • Score: 0

11:08am Thu 19 Apr 12

Mr Anthony Miller says...

Mr Higgson,

1) You are right I tell a lie... the church did not categorically state there could NEVER be married priests ...except when it did ...or didn't. Actually for as long as I can remember the Catholic Church has fudged the issued stating that it can and/or definately cannot happend depending on which way the wind is blowing and whatever it thinks is best box office for as long as I can remember. For "it's a matter of dogma" substitute "theoretically but over my dead body". The idea of a married vicar joining the Catholic church and celebrating THE sacrament is the church bending its normal rules - there's no getting round that. But yes, it would say this is a matter of practice not dogma ... it's usual get out clause for anything that seems contradictory.

1b) No, the Church NEVER actively promoted the priesthood as a career path for gay men. But neither did it EVER say that non-sexually-active gay men should be barred from the priesthood in the past. This is a new addition to practice or dogma (take your pick) added by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. In his amusing new book "light of the world" Pope Benedict XVI even goes so far as to say that the problem is not whether the gay priest is indulging in gay sexual acts but "The greatest attention is needed here in order to prevent the intrusion of this kind of ambiguity and to head off a situation where the celibacy of priests would practically end up being identified with the tendency to homosexuality."
This openly contradicts the Church's well worn usual line that its problem with homosexuality is the act of it not the nature of it. Anyway the point is as far as I'm aware this rule was invented in 2005 and does not predate it. The Pope is allowed to bolt new dogma and doctrine on - what he isn't supposed to do is contradict what he previously said. Of course if you actually read the history of the church there are more pieces of retroactive continuity than in Marvel comics but then that's why they had to invent papal infallibility so they could say "that's what we said but these bits we really mean".

2) Humanae Vitae was written concerning condoms and all forms of artificial birth control - I suggest you actually read it. You may learn something about your faith.

As to the Assumption - no, this is not in scripture at all. It was "divinely revealed" to Pius XII. The church had a policy of not preventing Catholics believing in the assumption but not requiring them to do so up until 1950. When it decided ( a mere 1920 years after the death of christ ) that actually it probably did happen after all. Why? Well, a lot of people wrote in and requested this of the Pope just as a lot of people write to him to this day to pick up Marian Dogma number 5. So if anyone's motivation for becoming Catholic is that Catholicism isn't a democracy I suggest they think again...

"The teachings of Christ's Church do not change" Again this is not true of Catholicism. The position of the Vatican is that the teachings of the church can change as a deeper understanding of the scriptures and of God comes to "the Magisterium". In short the faith can be expanded but not contracted. However, that is not the same as the faith never changing ... is it?

"Disciplines may change, dogmas cannot"

No, dogma cannot be deleted. It can, however, not be mentioned any more. The affinity laws haven't stopped being part of Mosaic law - they've just stopped being implemented. Similarly the huge struggle to prevent the imposition of the Constitutions of Clarendon somehow doesn't seem as important today and Jury Trial seems accepted as normal.

The only argument I could come up with in favour of a large monothesic religion (in which God is three people in one like Dr Who but this in not polythestical at all) is that without one there'd just be loads of insane cults and I dont think that that would be a good thing.
Mr Higgson, 1) You are right I tell a lie... the church did not categorically state there could NEVER be married priests ...except when it did ...or didn't. Actually for as long as I can remember the Catholic Church has fudged the issued stating that it can and/or definately cannot happend depending on which way the wind is blowing and whatever it thinks is best box office for as long as I can remember. For "it's a matter of dogma" substitute "theoretically but over my dead body". The idea of a married vicar joining the Catholic church and celebrating THE sacrament is the church bending its normal rules - there's no getting round that. But yes, it would say this is a matter of practice not dogma ... it's usual get out clause for anything that seems contradictory. 1b) No, the Church NEVER actively promoted the priesthood as a career path for gay men. But neither did it EVER say that non-sexually-active gay men should be barred from the priesthood in the past. This is a new addition to practice or dogma (take your pick) added by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. In his amusing new book "light of the world" Pope Benedict XVI even goes so far as to say that the problem is not whether the gay priest is indulging in gay sexual acts but "The greatest attention is needed here in order to prevent the intrusion of this kind of ambiguity and to head off a situation where the celibacy of priests would practically end up being identified with the tendency to homosexuality." This openly contradicts the Church's well worn usual line that its problem with homosexuality is the act of it not the nature of it. Anyway the point is as far as I'm aware this rule was invented in 2005 and does not predate it. The Pope is allowed to bolt new dogma and doctrine on - what he isn't supposed to do is contradict what he previously said. Of course if you actually read the history of the church there are more pieces of retroactive continuity than in Marvel comics but then that's why they had to invent papal infallibility so they could say "that's what we said but these bits we really mean". 2) Humanae Vitae was written concerning condoms and all forms of artificial birth control - I suggest you actually read it. You may learn something about your faith. As to the Assumption - no, this is not in scripture at all. It was "divinely revealed" to Pius XII. The church had a policy of not preventing Catholics believing in the assumption but not requiring them to do so up until 1950. When it decided ( a mere 1920 years after the death of christ ) that actually it probably did happen after all. Why? Well, a lot of people wrote in and requested this of the Pope just as a lot of people write to him to this day to pick up Marian Dogma number 5. So if anyone's motivation for becoming Catholic is that Catholicism isn't a democracy I suggest they think again... "The teachings of Christ's Church do not change" Again this is not true of Catholicism. The position of the Vatican is that the teachings of the church can change as a deeper understanding of the scriptures and of God comes to "the Magisterium". In short the faith can be expanded but not contracted. However, that is not the same as the faith never changing ... is it? "Disciplines may change, dogmas cannot" No, dogma cannot be deleted. It can, however, not be mentioned any more. The affinity laws haven't stopped being part of Mosaic law - they've just stopped being implemented. Similarly the huge struggle to prevent the imposition of the Constitutions of Clarendon somehow doesn't seem as important today and Jury Trial seems accepted as normal. The only argument I could come up with in favour of a large monothesic religion (in which God is three people in one like Dr Who but this in not polythestical at all) is that without one there'd just be loads of insane cults and I dont think that that would be a good thing. Mr Anthony Miller
  • Score: 0

6:52pm Thu 19 Apr 12

markhiggins01 says...

The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary is at least implicit in sacred scripture, perhaps explicit in the book of Revelation with the account of the woman clothed with the sun, and the ark being received into heaven.

The teaching was part of the infallible ordinary magisterium of the church before 1950 in that it was always held by the faithful and always taught by the popes and saints of the church. The East refer to the event as the dormition. There have never been any body part relics of the Holy Virgin. The constant belief of the church was that she was taken to heaven body and soul.

Most of the teachings of the church have never been defined by popes solemnly like the assumption was, this does not mean that they are not infallible teachings.

Anything that the church has always held, that is, that was taught by the early church, was expressed in liturgical prayers, was held by the saints and mystics- these are part of what is called the ordinary magisterium of the church. The ordinary magisterium is infallible. It is the constant teaching of Christ through the ages.

Why was it defined in 1950 and not the year 950? Many reasons. The most pressing was the importance of stressing the true vocation of the human body in an age which disrespects the body and disregards its natural law. Also it was fitting that Our Blessed Mother should be honoured by having her assumption solemnly declared especially when protestants had dared to blaspheme her perogatives.
It was also seen as an important way to increase the unity of Catholic and Eastern Orthodox who have a great love of the Blessed Virgin and have always celebrated her assumption.

Humanae Vitae was not a solemn pronouncement in the manner of the Assumption, but the church's teaching on all forms of artificial contraception has always been the same. Christ's opposition to artificial contraception has been expressed in the ordinary magisterium of the church. The teaching is infallible even though there has not been an extraordinary proclamation in the manner of the Assumption.
Humanae Vitae is a fantastic document and summarises well why all forms of artificial contraception are intrinsically evil and why anyone who wants to have a happy marriage should avoid them.

The Teachings of Christ do not change, the teachings of His Church do not change. Of course over time the same teachings blossom fully, that is the Holy Spirit fulfilling the role Christ sent Him to perform - to lead us to the fullness of truth. We are not talking about evolution of dogma, but development. The same teaching becomes more focused, clearer. As a boy maturing to a man.

Blessed Cardinal Newman is excellent on this point and writes a wonderful essay on the development of Christian Doctrine you may find helpful.
The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary is at least implicit in sacred scripture, perhaps explicit in the book of Revelation with the account of the woman clothed with the sun, and the ark being received into heaven. The teaching was part of the infallible ordinary magisterium of the church before 1950 in that it was always held by the faithful and always taught by the popes and saints of the church. The East refer to the event as the dormition. There have never been any body part relics of the Holy Virgin. The constant belief of the church was that she was taken to heaven body and soul. Most of the teachings of the church have never been defined by popes solemnly like the assumption was, this does not mean that they are not infallible teachings. Anything that the church has always held, that is, that was taught by the early church, was expressed in liturgical prayers, was held by the saints and mystics- these are part of what is called the ordinary magisterium of the church. The ordinary magisterium is infallible. It is the constant teaching of Christ through the ages. Why was it defined in 1950 and not the year 950? Many reasons. The most pressing was the importance of stressing the true vocation of the human body in an age which disrespects the body and disregards its natural law. Also it was fitting that Our Blessed Mother should be honoured by having her assumption solemnly declared especially when protestants had dared to blaspheme her perogatives. It was also seen as an important way to increase the unity of Catholic and Eastern Orthodox who have a great love of the Blessed Virgin and have always celebrated her assumption. Humanae Vitae was not a solemn pronouncement in the manner of the Assumption, but the church's teaching on all forms of artificial contraception has always been the same. Christ's opposition to artificial contraception has been expressed in the ordinary magisterium of the church. The teaching is infallible even though there has not been an extraordinary proclamation in the manner of the Assumption. Humanae Vitae is a fantastic document and summarises well why all forms of artificial contraception are intrinsically evil and why anyone who wants to have a happy marriage should avoid them. The Teachings of Christ do not change, the teachings of His Church do not change. Of course over time the same teachings blossom fully, that is the Holy Spirit fulfilling the role Christ sent Him to perform - to lead us to the fullness of truth. We are not talking about evolution of dogma, but development. The same teaching becomes more focused, clearer. As a boy maturing to a man. Blessed Cardinal Newman is excellent on this point and writes a wonderful essay on the development of Christian Doctrine you may find helpful. markhiggins01
  • Score: 0

6:40pm Fri 20 Apr 12

Mr Anthony Miller says...

"We are not talking about evolution of dogma, but development" and "The same teaching becomes more focused, clearer. As a boy maturing to a man" and "Of course over time the same teachings blossom fully" just sound like me to a whole load of sophistry for the Catholic Church just changes whatever it wants when it suits it. Female alter servers - weren't they slagged off by Pope Benedict XIV who said we'd never have them? Now under Pope Benedict XVI they're okay.

I've read enough CTS pamplets to last me a lifetime I'm afraid and they've all got one thing in common - they're twaddle. Although the one thing I did learn from them was how to write really nasty vitupertive, biased self righteous dogmatic prose. A skill I would like to thank the Catholic church for cultivating as it is quite saleable.

People slag off Islam but at least Muslims dont wake up every day wondering what else is going to be bolted onto their religion next. Still you have to give up booze.

Having said all that ...cant be doing with atheism it's too depressing that after death there should be literally nothing although that probably is the truth and Dawkins militant atheism is about as emotionally intelligent as burning children's teddy bears to try and make them grow up... and unfortunately I cant be bothered to convert to anything else so I'm afraid your stuck with me.... short of excommunication.
"We are not talking about evolution of dogma, but development" and "The same teaching becomes more focused, clearer. As a boy maturing to a man" and "Of course over time the same teachings blossom fully" just sound like me to a whole load of sophistry for the Catholic Church just changes whatever it wants when it suits it. Female alter servers - weren't they slagged off by Pope Benedict XIV who said we'd never have them? Now under Pope Benedict XVI they're okay. I've read enough CTS pamplets to last me a lifetime I'm afraid and they've all got one thing in common - they're twaddle. Although the one thing I did learn from them was how to write really nasty vitupertive, biased self righteous dogmatic prose. A skill I would like to thank the Catholic church for cultivating as it is quite saleable. People slag off Islam but at least Muslims dont wake up every day wondering what else is going to be bolted onto their religion next. Still you have to give up booze. Having said all that ...cant be doing with atheism it's too depressing that after death there should be literally nothing although that probably is the truth and Dawkins militant atheism is about as emotionally intelligent as burning children's teddy bears to try and make them grow up... and unfortunately I cant be bothered to convert to anything else so I'm afraid your stuck with me.... short of excommunication. Mr Anthony Miller
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree