Rioting as a way of life.

From Theodore Dalrymple

I’ve only ever been in one political riot, and it soon became apparent to me in the course of it that there are few pleasures known to man greater than that of smashing shop and car windows for the good of humanity. (Here, incidentally, I really do mean man rather than woman, for women are but poor and unenthusiastic rioters.)

The rioters are, of course, young men, between 18 and 30, which raises the question of the role of testosterone in the causation of riots. If male children were castrated at birth, I very much doubt that there would ever be any riots though, of course, the cure would be worse than the disease. Also, they never riot in the rain or snow, which suggests that good, or at least clement, weather is a cause of riots, or perhaps I should say a precondition of them.

In my experience beer plays a major role in rioting. When I was in university a number of my acquaintances were drunken sots and cared for little other than alcohol, girls and creating havoc wherever they went. I recall watching a demonstration – I have forgotten on whose behalf the revellers were despoiling the property of others –  on TV and identifying a significant number of my fellow students. I knew them: they had given themselves to destruction for destruction’s sake.

A number of years later, in the 70s, I was in San Francisco minding my own business when a man in a long coat sidled up to me and advised me to cross the street. A number of ne’er do wells were preparing to vent their disapproval of something the USA was doing somewhere by igniting an American flag. The flag was duly ignited; I watched with interest; the police moved towards the protesters; the media rolled their cameras; the protesters, before being touched by anyone, writhed in mock agony and screamed “police brutality”; the pyromaniacs were arrested.

All this gave me an appetite, so I went for a seafood dinner on Pier 5.

Swimming against the tide

Andrew Roberts, author of the excellent “A History of the English-Speaking Peoples Since 1900“

Has this to say about President Bush – read it all here:

History will show that George W Bush was right

The American lady who called to see if I would appear on her radio programme was specific. “We’re setting up a debate,” she said sweetly, “and we want to know from your perspective as a historian whether George W Bush was the worst president of the 20th century, or might he be the worst president in American history?

“I think he’s a good president,” I told her, which seemed to dumbfound her, and wreck my chances of appearing on her show.

In the avalanche of abuse and ridicule that we are witnessing in the media assessments of President Bush’s legacy, there are factors that need to be borne in mind if we are to come to a judgment that is not warped by the kind of partisan hysteria that has characterised this issue on both sides of the Atlantic.

Films such as Oliver Stone’s W, which portray him as a spitting, oafish frat boy who eats with his mouth open and is rude to servants, will be revealed by the diaries and correspondence of those around him to be absurd travesties, of this charming, interesting, beautifully mannered history buff who, were he not the most powerful man in the world, would be a fine person to have as a pal.

Instead of Al Franken, history will listen to Bob Geldof praising Mr Bush’s efforts over Aids and malaria in Africa; or to Manmohan Singh, the prime minister of India, who told him last week: “The people of India deeply love you.” And certainly to the women of Afghanistan thanking him for saving them from Taliban abuse, degradation and tyranny.

Sneered at for being “simplistic” in his reaction to 9/11, Bush’s visceral responses to the attacks of a fascistic, totalitarian death cult will be seen as having been substantially the right ones.

Iraq has been a victory for the US-led coalition, a fact that the Bush-haters will have to deal with when perspective finally – perhaps years from now – lends objectivity to this fine man’s record.

By all that is sensible, Christians should have supported Bush for his staunch opposition to abortion, his aid to Africa (higher than any preceding president), his opposition to embryo destruction through stem cell research, his defense of traditional marriage  and for the fact that he is himself a Christian. Regrettably, many Christians took their cue from leftist secularists and heaped obloquy on Bush, confirming the fact that faith does not inoculate against bigotry.

Dancing the Clergy Conga in Orillia

Having escaped from St. Hilda’s, Martha Tatarnic has become a compulsive building sharer and is now borrowing a Lutheran congregation in Orillia.

Anglican, Lutheran churches merge

The merger of two local churches is a sign of the times – and it just makes sense, say congregation heads.

St. David’s Anglican and Holy Cross Lutheran churches recently joined to become St. David’s Anglican/Lutheran Church.

“We were sharing a building and resources and decided that was working well. We thought we could go one step further and become one congregation,” said Pamela Harrington, diaconal minister.

The notion of a merger was presented to the two congregations, as well as the one at St. Athanasius’ Anglican Church. That congregation decided to remain independent.

Average attendance at Holy Cross was 30 to 35, while it’s about 50 at St. David’s.

Rev. Martha Tatarnic said it’s important to put a “strong emphasis on grassroots decision making.”

“A bishop isn’t going to get far with a top-down approach,” she said.

The last sentence is a lesson Martha learned from Niagara bishop Michael Bird’s top-down approach; even though his top isn’t too far from his bottom.

Faith and Doubt in the Land of My Fathers

From the Telegraph

The Welsh Assembly has just announced that it intends to allow sixth-formers to withdraw themselves from daily collective worship if they so wish. This would bring Wales into line with England, which relaxed the rules for older pupils in 2007.

Dr Geraint Tudur, general secretary of the Union of Welsh Independent Chapels, responds by saying that the Assembly was throwing “1,500 years of Welsh Christianity to the winds.”

I spent my schooldays in the Welsh education system and was subject to morning assembly – ostensibly Christian worship – and RI, Religious Instruction. By the time I reached the sixth form I had decided I was an atheist and refused to participate in the morning assemblies: the headmaster informed me that, by law, he was obliged to demand my attendance. I’ve forgotten how this was resolved; I may have attended and contented myself with disrupting the proceedings by making rude noises from the rear – pun intended.

What I do remember is that it was transparently apparent that almost none of the teachers wanted to be at morning assemblies either. The RI lessons were conducted by a well-meaning but weak Anglican clergyman whose weakness was mercilessly exploited by the class of sadistic teenage schoolboys.

What did have a lasting effect on me were two teachers who actually believed something with enough intensity that they felt they had to share it with their pupils. One was a math teacher who instilled in me sufficient curiosity to convince me to read Satre and Camus and the other was the chemistry teacher, an evangelical Christian, with whom I argued vigorously, but who made me think.

If this legislation comes into force, the shame would be not that a nominal morning exercise that almost no-one believes in is no longer mandatory, but what could come next: teachers no longer being allowed to stimulate nascent faith by discussing their own beliefs.