Thou shalt not whinge

According to this minister, Jesus was a commie

The Catholic Church, Birth Control and the Poor       

Written by John Berthelsen    
Monday, 13 February 2012  
 

The Bishops' Kind of President

As they say, what would Jesus do?

Authorities in Philadelphia in the United States announced Saturday that no full autopsy would be performed on Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua, a key witness in a Catholic Church sex abuse trial who died on Jan. 31.

It is an affair that Asia’s 120.9 million Catholics should take careful note of.

The late Catholic leader is one of scores of top church leaders who have been ensnared in a decades-long sex scandal so vast that it is almost unimaginable, stretching across at least 27 countries including the Philippines, Australia and New Zealand in Asia as well as Ireland, Belgium, Germany, Austria, Norway and the United States.

Bevilacqua, the retired Archbishop of Philadelphia, died at age 88 the day after a judge ruled that he was competent to testify in an upcoming sex abuse trial involving priests as well as a Catholic school teacher.

His sudden death has raised questions on the part of critics that Bevilacqua, might have taken his own life and thus the vain call for the autopsy although he appears to have been suffering from cancer and dementia.

In the United States, according to a 2004 report commissioned by the US Conference of Bishops, 10,667 reports were made of allegations of sexual abuse against minors by 4,392 priests between 1950 and 2002.

In far too many cases, the priests’ superiors in the church ignored reports of sexual abuse outright or ordered the priests transferred to other dioceses, where they continued to remain in close proximity with young boys.

After publicity roused victims across the world, a cascade of clerical sexual abuse cases against minors were reported and prosecuted. It is estimated that the church in the US alone had paid out more than US$1 billion by 2002 in jury awards, quiet settlements and legal fees.

The cases ranged up globally as high as the Archbishop of Vienna, who was forced to resign his archbishopship -- but was allowed to remain a Cardinal.

This is the same Catholic church whose leaders believed they had the moral authority to block the United States government from requiring religious employers' health plans to cover contraceptives under the so-called Obamacare health plan, accusing the White House of betraying them on the issue.

Ultimately, with the church apparently handing the Republican opposition a potent campaign issue for the November election, the Obama administration was forced to back down in the face of the church’s antagonism, allowing religious employers opposed to birth control to opt out although insurance companies would be required to offer such care, without charging either the religious employer – read Catholic schools, service organizations and hospitals.

But that wasn’t enough for the bishops, who declared Saturday that the president’s compromise didn’t go far enough.

Thus a thoroughly corrupt church foisted its archaic superstitions onto the US government, seeking to deny the right of millions of Catholic women to make decisions regarding their own bodies.

This is despite the fact that according to the Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit sexual health research organization, 98 percent of sexually active Catholic women have ignored their church and used banned contraceptive methods.

Only 2 percent of Catholic women, even those who regularly attend church, rely on natural family planning.

Nearly 70 percent of Catholic women use sterilization or the birth control pill or an IUD regularly, according to the research.

This is not an irrelevancy in Asia, the home of 120.9 million Catholics, according to the CIA Factbook.

Some 75 million of them live in the Philippines, where, as in the United States, the Council of Bishops has waged perhaps an even more implacable war on family planning, using its power to drive politicians from office for opposing them.

The Catholic Church has blocked the passage of a reproductive rights bill for 15 years despite the fact that the ban on birth control not only sentences its families to penury from more children than they can afford to feed and sentences the country to being unable to marshal its resources because its population is growing so fast – 3.23 live births per woman, one of the fastest growth rates in Asia.

This is the same Council of Bishops that in 2002 was forced to apologize for the involvement of 200 Filipino priests in cases of adultery, homosexuality and child abuse, which is considered to be only a fraction of reality. In 2003 at least 34 priests were suspended in a sex abuse scandal involving sexual harassment of women, 20 from a single diocese.

As Asia Sentinel reported on July 11, last year, church leaders were forced to apologize for a 2006 scandal involving allegedly illegal donations of cars to bishops by former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo in what appeared to be an effort to gain church support in the face threatened impeachment for a long series of corruption charges including vote fraud.

Despite the church’s support in her 2006 go-around with the authorities, Arroyo now faces a long list of charges of having plundered her country’s coffers during her 10 years in office.

This is the same Catholic Bishops Conference that has threatened to excommunicate President Benigno S. Aquino III if he supports the reproductive health bills, a package aiming to provide universal access to women for birth control and maternal care.

There is no doubt that ability to control family size is directly correlated to poverty, and that the church is ignoring its duty to the poor.

Jesus, in his Sermon on the Mount, said: “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

There is nowhere in that sermon, considered Jesus's most important, where he said women should be forced to continue to have babies they couldn't feed, couldn't take care of, were ruining their health and lives and didn't want.

The world’s bishops and cardinals would do well to go back and read it for clues
 

The Inquisition,

Inquisitio Haereticae Pravitatis (inquiry on heretical perversity), was the "fight against heretics" by several

institutions within the justice-system of the Roman Catholic Church.

It started in the 12th century, with the introduction of torture in the persecution of heresy.^[1]

Inquisition practices were used also on offences against canon law other than heresy.

Ancient Koran goes on display

 

HISTORY: One of the oldest known copies of the Koran went on show at the British Museum today ahead of a new exhibition.

The Koran, believed to date from 8BC, has been lent by the British Library for the exhibition Hajj: Journey To The Heart Of Islam.

The exhibition opens to the public from Thursday January 26 and runs until Sunday April 15.

Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams' Christmas Message 
 
First Posted: 25/12/11 07:48 GMT Updated: 25/12/11 15:31 GMT   

stumble The Archbishop of Canterbury spoke today of the "broken bonds and abused trust" in a British society torn apart by riots and financial speculation.

Delivering his Christmas Day sermon from Canterbury Cathedral, Rowan Williams asked the congregation to learn lessons about "mutual obligation" from the events of the past year.

"The most pressing question we now face, we might well say, is who and where we are as a society.

Bonds have been broken, trust abused and lost.

"Whether it is an urban rioter mindlessly burning down a small shop that serves his community, or a speculator turning his back on the question of who bears the ultimate cost for his acquisitive adventures in the virtual reality of today's financial world, the picture is of atoms spinning apart in the dark," he said.

It is not the first time the Archbishop has referred to last August's disturbances, which spread from Tottenham, north London, to cities across the country.

Writing in The Guardian this month, Dr Williams spoke about the "enormous sadness" he felt during the riots.

But he also said the Government should do more to rescue young people "who think they have nothing to lose".

The Church of England has also been caught up in the struggle between anti-capitalist protesters camped in front of St Paul's Cathedral since October and the Corporation of London, which is fighting a legal battle to disband the campsite.

After the Church initially gave support to the protesters, the canon chancellor of St Paul's, Dr Giles Fraser, resigned from his position on October 27 following reports suggesting a rift between clergy over what action to take concerning the activists.

And Dr Williams suggested last month he was sympathetic to a "Robin Hood tax" on share and currency transactions.

Today he used the Book of Common Prayer - which will celebrate its 350th anniversary next year - as an example of how ideas of duty and common interest can be expressed.

The archbishop quoted the Book of Common Prayer's Long Exhortation to say: "If ye shall perceive your offences to be such as are not only against God but also against your neighbours; then ye shall reconcile yourselves unto them; being ready to make restitution".

Archbishop speaks of 'broken bonds' in society

Dr Rowan Williams will speak of "broken bonds and abused trust" in his Christmas sermon.
 
It is not the first time the Archbishop has referred to last August's disturbances, which spread from Tottenham, north London, to cities across the country.

11:59AM GMT 25 Dec 2011

Delivering his Christmas Day sermon from Canterbury Cathedral, Dr Rowan Williams will ask the congregation to learn lessons about "mutual obligation" from the events of the past year.

Dr Williams will say: "The most pressing question we now face, we might well say, is who and where we are as a society.

Bonds have been broken, trust abused and lost.

"Whether it is an urban rioter mindlessly burning down a small shop that serves his community, or a speculator turning his back on the question of who bears the ultimate cost for his acquisitive adventures in the virtual reality of today's financial world, the picture is of atoms spinning apart in the dark."

It is not the first time the Archbishop has referred to last August's disturbances, which spread from Tottenham, north London, to cities across the country.

Writing in the Guardian this month, Dr Williams spoke about the "enormous sadness" that he felt during the riots.

But he also said the Government should do more to rescue young people "who think they have nothing to lose".

The Church of England has also been caught up in the struggle between anti-capitalist protesters camped in front of St Paul's Cathedral since October and the Corporation of London, which is fighting a legal battle to disband the campsite.

After initially giving support to the protesters, the Canon Chancellor of St Paul's, Dr Giles Fraser, resigned from his position on October 27 following reports suggesting a rift between clergy over what action to take concerning the activists.

And Dr Williams suggested in November he was sympathetic to a "Robin Hood" tax on share and currency transactions.

Today he uses the Book of Common Prayer - which will celebrate its 350th anniversary in 2012 - as an example of how ideas of duty and common interest can be expressed.

The Archbishop quotes the Book of Common Prayer's Long Exhortation to say: "If ye shall perceive your offences to be such as are not only against God but also against your neighbours; then ye shall reconcile yourselves unto them; being ready to make restitution".

Is religion in terminal decline in Britain? 
 
A groundbreaking social survey seems to suggest 'yes', but there is still a role for faith in our lives, argues author.
Last Modified: 20 Dec 2011 07:55

 
The number of British who identify themselves as Christian has significantly declined since 1983 [EPA]

Is religion fading in Britain? According to the latest influential British Social Attitudes Survey (BSA), just released this December, half of us Brits do not belong to any religious grouping or affiliation.

What's more, more than half (56 per cent) of those who identify themselves as belonging to a religion never attend religious services. The ratio gets worse for the young: 65 per cent of 18-24 year olds do not belong to a religion, compared with 55 per cent of the same age group (18-27) in 1983.

Previous reports had already raised a number of interesting issues for humanists and a number of challenges to faith communities.

Between 1983 and 2009, British attitudes toward religion, Christianity in particular, shifted significantly. For example, those who professed no-religion rose from 31 per cent in 1983 to 51 per cent in 2009. Those who identified as Christian fell from 66 per cent in 1983 to 43 per cent in 2009. And those who identified as belonging to "other" religions rose from two per cent in 1983 to five per cent in 2009. Perhaps less surprising was that women, the old and less educated were more religious compared to men, young and better educated people.

There is no dearth of people who, with gleeful smiles, have long-expected that religion will have a slow but certain demise. The growth of New Atheism has joined a chorus of humanists and secularists advocating that religion should be "countered, criticised and exposed by rational argument wherever its influence arises". In 2008, a group of them came up with a £140,000 ($216,972) advertisement campaign in London's bendy buses and across England, Scotland and Wales, with the message that "there is probably no God… now stop worrying and enjoy your life". In a tit-for-tat advertisement the Christian Party came up with the rebuttal: "There definitely is a God. So join the Christian Party and enjoy your life". Ignore the word "probably" and "definitely" from these adverts, and you expose a great divide that splits the population down the middle.

"There would be little or no modern education system without the Biblical (New and Old) Testaments, as well as the Quranic injunctions 'to learn'."
 

It is true this decline of religion is not only in Britain, but across Western Europe. According to the Centre for the Study on Global Christianity at the Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in South Hamilton, Massachusetts, "Every major religion except Islam is declining in Western Europe."

What we are talking about here is the decline of organised religions that have existed for millennia (not the new religious movements, beliefs, faiths or cults). To be more specific, for Europe, this is about the three Abrahamic religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam - all originating from the same source, Prophet Abraham's pure monotheism. In spite of some secondary differences on theology and rituals, these three religions have had a phenomenal impact on Europe. As Britain has a predominantly Christian legacy, any shift in social attitude towards religion here is primarily about Christianity. However, as Judaism and Islam are now integral parts of British life, the social trend affects them as well. And in our hurry to distance ourselves from religion's failings, we ignore its many successes too - particularly in a time of social hurt and economic confusion, when the need for belief and belonging is more crucial than ever. We risk throwing the baby out with the bathwater, if you will.

Take the issue of education. Education is at the heart of human progress. There would be little or no modern education system without the Biblical (New and Old) Testaments, as well as the Quranic injunctions "to learn". Monasteries, synagogues and mosques have been at the heart of the historical educational infrastructure that has helped shape the learning we have today. The cross-fertilisation of the pedagogy and philosophy of Christian Europe with the Islamic world shaped European Renaissance and Enlightenment. Al-Khwarizmi invented algebra to work out religious inheritance laws, while Isaac Newton wanted to discover and describe the perfect mathematical order of the Creation.

Religion provided the inspiration for their works. Any Muslim with basic Islamic knowledge would be aware that the first revealed word of the Quran was "Read". Albert Einstein in his speech, "My Credo", in 1932 said: "To sense that behind anything that can be experienced there is a something that our mind cannot grasp and whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly and as a feeble reflection, this is religiousness. In this sense I am religious."

No one can deny the fact that religion has been used to create intolerance, not only between people but within the same religious groupings, too. Europe faced this problem in the past; the Inquisition and Spanish Reconquista were blots on its history. The sectarian killings among Muslims in some countries and al-Qaeda's terrorism in recent times remind us how Islam is constantly in danger of being used in un-Islamic way.

In fact, all religions can be used to foster fanaticism and hatred. While this is unacceptable, we should not accuse religion itself per se. The fact is, throughout human history more killings and cruelty have been carried out for political conquests, economic greed, perverted sense of nationalistic or racial superiority and ideology than for any "religious" notion. Religion is often a convenient scapegoat used by those who wish to cloak their actions in some form of righteousness, by rulers who wish to stir up a populace. The 20th century wars, destruction, banishment of people, ethnic cleansing and other cruelty has surpassed probably all the so-called "religious" atrocities of the past.

As for the question whether God exits or not: This has perturbed the human mind throughout time, including even Abraham's quest for God. Is there any scientific or empirical evidence to prove or disprove this existence? There is none. Science is not in the business of finding "truth", let alone finding God. Science is about statistical probabilities based upon the experimental evidence. All scientific experimentation is subject to errors, because of confounding factors and multiple parameters. The "truth" of Newtonian physics was no longer held to be absolute once it was taken over by Einsteinian physics. However, this "truth" of the last century is now being questioned because of the recent experiments in CERN. When a new "truth" comes up, the previous "truth" gives way. There cannot be orthodoxy in science.

"Religion can be a source of tranquil hearts and inspiration for fight against tyranny, inequality and injustice."
 

The nature of the scientific method - which has undoubtedly led to much technological advancement over the few centuries - is that it cannot answer many questions, let alone the most difficult question of the existence of God. Probability, not truth, is science's language and jargon. An empirical approach can never answer the question whether or not the universe was created by an external force or whether it emerged from forces within itself. One cannot test this scenario. The most that those who reject the idea of a creator can offer are "theories".

This is not about rubbishing science and its method: I come from a background in physics. Nor is it to deny the respect for those who try hard to understand the processes that drive the universe and the nature of things - as Newton and Einstein both did in their time. It is about reminding ourselves of the limitations of science and conclusions one can infer from it. To apply science beyond its remit is bound to bring unnecessary disrepute to both itself and its practitioners.

The question is: How does religion know that there is definitely a God? Well, there is no "proof" here either. Religion starts with belief, based on the same message from all the prophets who were known as truthful in their life. Religions, particularly Islam, demand critical autonomy from its adherents in order to see the observable world, the "ayat" or signs in the creation. Prophet Abraham observed these signs, used his critical autonomy, and "discovered" God. The Quran is replete with exhortation to keep an open mind, observe, reflect, contemplate and act for the benefit of all humans and the creation. Religion's premise is different from that of science. Religion, when properly understood, brings ease of heart and mind and teaches love and care for all.

Religion may be on the decline in Europe, but it is flourishing among some communities and in many other parts of the world. Religion can be a source of tranquil hearts and inspiration for fight against tyranny, inequality and injustice. For argument's sake, even if there is no God, human beings need one to behave responsibly on Earth.

Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari is a parenting consultant. He is a founding member of The East London Communities Organisation (TELCO), Chairman of the East London Mosque Trust, and former Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain (2006-10).

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy
 

Prime Minister’s remarks ‘bizarre’ and ‘deeply concerning’

 

Archbishop says sorry over abuse scandal

No peace on road to Armageddon

Key facts about the Church of England:

 

Church attendance and visits

 

1.7 million people take part in a Church of England service each month, a level that has been maintained since the turn of the millennium.

Approximately one million participate each Sunday.

Approaching 3 million people participate in a Church of England service on Christmas Day or Christmas Eve.

Thirty-five per cent of the population attend a Christmas service of some sort, rising to 42 per cent in London, nationally, and 22 per cent among those of non-Christian faiths.

The Church of England has the largest following of any denomination or faith in Britain today.

More than 4 in 10 in England regard themselves as belonging to the Church of England, while 6 in 10 consider themselves Christian.

People support their local churches in many different ways at different points in their lives.

Each year 3 in 10 attend regular Sunday worship and more than 4 in 10 attend a wedding in their local church, while still more attend a funeral there

In 2009, 43 per cent of adults attended a church or place of worship for a memorial service for someone who has died and 17 per cent were seeking a quiet space. 

Both these proportions are increases on 22 per cent and 12 per cent respectively in 2001.

85 per cent of the population visit a church or place of worship in the course of a year, for reasons ranging from participating in worship to attending social events or simply wanting a quiet space.

Every year, around 12 million people visit Church of England cathedrals, including 300,000 pupils on school visits.

Three of England's top five historic 'visitor attractions' are York Minster, Canterbury Cathedral and Westminster Abbey.

 

Different Sects Have Different Commandments

 

Jewish
Protestant - Lutheran
Catholic + Lutheran

Exodus 20:1-17
Deut 5:1-22

So which sect is using the correct set?

We know three things
(1) given by god to moses
(2) written on stone tablets
(3) and called ten commandments

So lets see if we can find them in the bible

(7) Which version would Jesus have known?

Archbishop of Canterbury says riots will return unless we reach out to young

UK must rescue those who think they have nothing to lose or face further civil unrest, says Rowan Williams

Bishops bash £500 a week benefits cap

Archbishop Rowan Williams backs revolt against coalition's welfare cuts

Church of England bishops unite to take a moral stand against controversial policies that they say will hit the poorest hardest

Daniel Boffey

St Paul's branded 'laughing stock' as Dean Graeme Knowles resigns

 

St Paul’s Cathedral was derided as “a national laughing stock” as it was plunged into disarray with the resignation of its dean amid mounting criticism of its handling of the protest camp on its doorstep.
 
 
By Richard Alleyne, Victoria Ward and Martin Beckford
9:00PM GMT 31 Oct 2011

 

The Rt Rev Graeme Knowles, the Dean of St Paul's, stepped down after becoming ever more isolated in his bid to take legal action to evict the Occupy London activists.

He became the third and most senior victim of the debacle, following in the footsteps of the Rev Dr Giles Fraser, Canon Treasurer, in resigning as his position became “untenable”.

Last night, the Rt Rev Dr Richard Chartres, Bishop of London, England’s third most senior cleric, was forced to take charge of cathedral operations as Mark Field, Tory MP for Cities of London and Westminster, said the charade had turned St Paul’s into a “national joke”.

He said: “The whole thing is farcical. You couldn’t make it up.

 It’s gone from the sublime to the ridiculous.

This tented community has been there for two weeks and has hardly brought the foundations of capitalism to its knees.

“Ironically, the only capitalist organisation that has lost out is St Paul’s.

I suspect that these resignations will only ensure that these protesters become more entrenched.”

The Dead of St Paul's had pushed hard for the church hierarchy to back legal action by the Corporation of London to remove the 200 or so tents from St Paul’s churchyard.

But the seven-strong chapter, depleted by the loss of Dr Fraser, were increasingly getting cold feet, concerned that the process would end in violence.

Eventually, the dean, already facing criticism over the closing and subsequent reopening of the Church, felt his position was “untenable”.

The development resulted in the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, wading into the fray for the first time, warning that “urgent” issues raised by the protesters needed to be properly addressed.

He said the resignation was "very sad news" and that the events of the past fortnight had shown "how decisions made in good faith by good people under unusual pressure can have utterly unforeseen and unwelcome consequences".

Dr Williams added: "The urgent larger issues raised by the protesters at St Paul's remain very much on the table and we need – as a Church and as society as a whole – to work to make sure that they are properly addressed."

The dean, 60, informed Dr Chartres, of his decision just hours after facing a barrage of questions from protesters as he addressed them directly on Sunday.

In a statement, he said that “criticism of the cathedral” in the press, media and in public opinion” had forced his hand and that a “fresh approach” from “new leadership” was needed.

"I do this with great sadness, but I now believe that I am no longer the right person to lead the chapter of this great cathedral," he said.

His resignation led to an emergency meeting of the chapter which is expected to immediately withdraw support for any eviction.

The Daily Telegraph has been told that the Rt Rev Michael Colclough, Canon Pastor at the cathedral and a former Bishop of Kensington, has been appointed acting Dean but it will take several months for a permanent replacement to be made.

A source said: “Mr Knowles was the strong one.

He was pushing for eviction albeit peaceful but the others were having major doubts.

“Many felt they should have gone with Giles.

They are very, very uncomfortable with the idea of using force to evict the camp.

“The dean knew that if push came to shove, the other members would cave in and the legal action would be dropped at the last minute.”

Dr Chartres, said it was a “tragedy” for the man and “challenging times” for the church.

"I was very saddened and shocked last night to hear his decision,” he told a press conference. “It's been one of the most challenging weeks in the recent history of St Paul's and I think you can understand and sympathise with the decision the dean has taken.

“The organisation of the Church of England is a great mystery to me, so nevermind for (those) outside.”

He evoked the image of the cathedral surrounded by smoke during the Blitz and that it was a symbol of “freedom”.

“The question is now in the 21st century what is the role of St Paul’s,” he said.

He denied that the church would now distance itself from the legal action.“

We are not taking a softer line, the camp site has to disappear at some point,” he said. “It has to scale down.

But I am told by the Chapter that they would not wish to condone violence.”

The Archbishop of Canterbury’s former spokesman, Rev George Pitcher, said the dean had fallen on his own sword after “naively and unwittingly” embarking on a course of action that could only lead to violence.

He said: “The Corporation of London has adopted a very traditional, hawkish City role and I suspect the dean’s feet were held to the fire.”

The Occupy London movement issued a statement saying that the management of St Paul's Cathedral was “obviously deeply divided over the position they have taken in response to our cause – but our cause has never been directed at the staff of the cathedral.”

Dr Fraser, who last week warned that to evict the anti-capitalist activists would constitute “violence in the name of the Church”. said last night: “The dean is a great man and it will be a sad loss to the cathedral.”

He said he had played no part in the chapter meetings as he was on “gardening leave”.

Dean of St Paul's cathedral quits

OccupyLSX protesters face St Paul's eviction bid

Who holds the purse strings?

How did American Jews get so rich?

Since the mass immigration some 100 years ago, Jews have become richest religious group in American society.

They make up only 2% of US population, but 25% of 400 wealthiest Americans.

How did it happen, and how crucial is their aid to Israel?

Tani Goldstein

Published:  10.26.11, 15:23 / Israel Business

World Jewish Congress President Ronald Lauder sparked a row recently by calling on Israel to launch immediate peace negotiations with the Palestinians.

The statement was perceived as criticism against Lauder's personal friend, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Later, Lauder reiterated his "unequivocal" support for Netanyahu and "policies that seek to create a lasting peace in the Middle East".

Lauder's remarks made headlines and sparked both enthusiastic and angry responses not just because of his important role, but also – and mainly – because he is a very rich man.

 

Wall Street: Many Jews

Forbes magazine estimates his wealth at $2.7 billion.

His family owns the Estée Lauder cosmetics giant, he is one of the biggest art collectors in the world, and owns dozens of television channels and media outlets in the United States and worldwide, including 25% of Israel's Channel 10 TV.

He is a heavy donor to countless Jewish and Israeli organizations, bodies and officials – including Netanyahu.

Jews in all centers of power

Lauder is definitely not the only American Jew funneling money to Israel while influencing the country.

Many Israeli adults used to receive a parcel from "the rich uncle in America" during their childhood.

Thousands of organizations, including hospitals and universities, receive billions of shekels in donations from the US.

A Hebrew University study found that they make up about two-third of all donations in Israel.

Each new immigrant receives aid from the Jewish Agency, whose budget is mostly made up of donations from the US.

Many of us live on lands the Jewish National Fund bought from Arabs by Jewish-American money.

A haredi yeshiva student gets NIS 1,000 ($295) a month from the Israeli government, and another NIS 3,000 ($885) from haredi American donors.

The online Jewish Encyclopedia says some 5.6 million Jews live in the United States (not including half a million Israelis) – about 1.8% of the population.

Most of them reside in rich cities: Miami, Los Angeles, Philadelphia and Boston, and mainly New York.

A study of the Pew Forum institute from 2008 found that Jews are the richest religious group in the US: Forty-six of Jews earn more than $100,000 a year, compared to 19% among all Americans.

Another Gallup poll conducted this year found that 70% of American Jews enjoy "a high standard of living" compared to 60% of the population and more than any other religious group.

Hollywood: Many Jews

More than 100 of the 400 billionaires on Forbes' list of the wealthiest people in America are Jews.

Six of the 20 leading venture capital funds in the US belong to Jews, according to Forbes.

Google founder Sergey Brin has a Jewish father, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is Jewish, as is his deputy, David Fischer, the son of Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer.

The chairman of the Federal Reserve, Ben Shalom Bernanke, is Jewish too, as is he predecessor, Alan Greenspan, and the Fed founder, Paul Warburg.

Jews are well represented in Wall Street, Silicon Valley, the US Congress and Administration, Hollywood, TV networks and the American press – way beyond their percentage in the population.

From town to Brooklyn alleys

The United States is among the richest countries in the world, making American Jews one of the wealthiest ethnic groups in the universe.

Their success story is even more phenomenal considering the speed in which they became rich.

Only several thousand Jews lived in the US upon its establishment on July 4, 1776, most of them Marrano and people who were exiled or escaped from Spain in favor of colonies in North America.

In the mid 19th century, some 200,000 Jews immigrated to the US, mostly from Germany and central Europe.

Most of them were Reform Jews, well-established, who saw themselves as Germans and Americans more than as Jews.

They scattered across the continent and set up businesses, from small stores and factories to financial giants like Lehman Brothers and Goldman Sachs.

The great wave of immigration began in 1882.

Czarist Russia, which was home to about half of the world's Jews, went through a failed industrial revolution and was on the verge of collapse, while the Jews living in small towns became impoverished and suffered from cruel pogroms.

Within 42 years, some two million Jews immigrated to the US from Ukraine, western Russia, Poland, Lithuania, Belarus and Romania.

They made up 25% of the Jewish population in those countries, about 15% of the world's Jews, and 10 times the number of Jews who immigrated to the Land of Israel during that period.

The US became the world's biggest Jewish concentration.

The mass immigration to Israel began in 1924, when the US enacted tough laws which halted the immigration.

The immigrants arrived in the US on crowded boats, and most of them were as poor as church mice.

Dr. Robert Rockaway, who studied that period, wrote that 80% of US Jews were employed in manual work before World War I, most of them in textile factories.

Many workplaces were blocked to the Jews due to an anti-Semitic campaign led by industrialist Henry Ford. Most of them lived in crowded and filthy slums in New York – Brooklyn and the Lower East Side.

Many films and books describe the world established in those neighborhoods: Vibrant, but tough and brutal.

There was a lively culture of cabarets and small Yiddish theaters, alongside a Jewish mafia with famous crime bosses such as Meyer Lansky, Abner "Longie" Zwillman, and Louis "Lepke" Buchalter, who grew up in the filthy alleys.

Many of the Jews, who were socialists in Europe, became active in labor unions and in workers' strikes and protests. Many trade unions were established by Jews.

The Jewish immigrants, however, emerged from poverty and made faster progress than any other group of immigrants.

According to Rockaway, in the 1930s, about 20% of the Jewish men had free professions, double the rate in the entire American population.

Anti-Semitism weakened after World War II and the restrictions on hiring Jews were reduced and later canceled as part of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, thanks to the struggle of liberal activists, many of whom were Jews.

In 1957, 75% of US Jews were white-collar workers, compared to 35% of all white people in the US; in 1970, 87% of Jewish men worked in clerical jobs, compared to 42% of all white people, and the Jews earned 72% more than the general average.

The only remnant of their poverty is that most of them still support a welfare policy and the Democratic Party.

As they became richer, Jews integrated into society.

They moved from the slums to the suburbs, abandoned Yiddish and adopted the clothes, culture, slang and dating and shopping habits of the non-Jewish elite.

Most Jews left religion when they immigrated to the US, but returned to it later on and joined Reform and Conservative communities, becoming more alike the Americans, most of whom are religious Christians.

'Jews always studied more'

Alongside the Jews, millions of immigrants arrived in the US from Ireland, Italy, China and dozens of other countries.

They too have settled down since then, but the Jews succeeded more than everyone.

Why?

All the experts we asked said the reason was Jewish education.

Jewish American student organization Hillel found that 9 to 33% of students in leading universities in the US are Jewish.

"The Jewish tradition always sanctified studying, and the Jews made an effort to study from the moment they arrived in American," says Danny Halperin, Israel's former economic attaché in Washington.

"In addition, the Jews have a strong tradition of business entrepreneurship.

The Irish, for example, came from families of land workers with a different mentality, studies less and initiated less.

"The Jews progressed because many areas were blocked to them," says Halperin.

 "Many Irish were integrated into the police force, for example, and only few Jews.

The Jews entered new fields in which there was need for people with initiative.

They didn't integrate into traditional banking, so they established the investment banking."

"The cinema industry was created from scratch in the 1930s, and the Jews basically took over it.

To this day there are many Jewish names in the top echelon of Hollywood and the television networks.

Later on, they took high-tech by storm too – another new industry requiring learning abilities."

'Grandpa arrived with $2, dad completed PhD'

"The Jews were the first people to undergo globalization," says Rebecca Caspi, senior vice president of the Jewish Federations of North America (JFNA).

"They had a network of global connections way before other nations, and a strong and supportive community.

"The Jewish communal organization is considered a role model for all other ethnic groups.

 It helped the Jews everywhere and especially in the US, which was always more open than other countries and provided equal opportunities, while on the other hand –wasn't supportive of the individual."

How do community institutions help people succeed in business?

"The mutual help allowed poor Jews to study.

My family is an example of what happened to millions.

My grandfather arrived in New York with two dollars in his pocket. He sold pencils, and then pants and then other things, and in the meantime studied English, German and Spanish and established ties.

"He had five children, and the family had a small store in Brooklyn.

They got help from the HIAS Jewish organization, which allowed them to study.

They were so poor that they didn't have money for textbooks, so the siblings helped each other.

My father was the youngest, and until he started university the four older siblings had already managed to settle down, so they all helped him complete his medical studies."

"The Jews had to excel in order to survive," says Avia Spivak, a professor of economic and former Bank of Israel deputy governor.

"I once had a student of Russian descent, who told me that his parents said to him, 'You must be the best, because then you might get a small role.'

"That was the situation of the Jews abroad, and in America too until the 1960s.

 The most prestigious universities didn't take in Jewish students, so they studied in colleges and got the best grades.

When the discrimination disappeared, the Jews reached the top."

Is that why they succeeded in the US more than in other places?

The discrimination lessened in most countries.

I think Jews succeeded in America in particular because capitalism is good for the Jews. Jews have a tendency for entrepreneurship, they study more and have quick perception, know how to seize opportunities and have networking skills.

A competitive environment gives Jews an advantage."

Is that the reason Israelis are not as rich as American Jews?

"I think the 'Jewish genius' – which is not a genetic issue but a cultural issue – is expressed in Israel in other areas. The Jews in America arrived in a country with existing, stable and strong infrastructure.

Here they had to build the entire infrastructure from scratch, under harsh conditions."

'Government hurting aid, but it'll continue'

There is no doubt that American Jews' huge success helped Jews survive in Israel.

"The help is beyond the actual donations," says Caspi.

"The federal aid arrives largely thanks to the Jewish pressure. Israeli businesspeople use their connections in America to open markets and raise funds, especially for the venture capital industry."

The American aid strengthens the connection between the two communities – which together make up about 80% of the Jewish people – but also creates discomfort on both sides:

The Americans view Israel as a "shelter for a rainy day" and feel committed to help the State, but some feel their money is being wasted due to wrong moves; the Israelis live in fear of what will happen if and when the aid stops.

The fear is increasing, with one-third of US Jews marrying non-Jews and stating that they feel less connected to Israel.

"Israel would have been established and would have survived even without the American aid, but it would have been poorer," says Halperin.

"There are areas, like higher education, in which the aid is critical – and if it suddenly disappears, things will be difficult."

Every time there are arguments between the Israeli government and Jews in America, Israeli and American public figures warn that "one day they'll have enough and stop donating."

 Can that happen?

"The scope of donations is decreasing in the past few years," says Halperin.

"The Jews have a sense of belonging to the American society and give their donations to American organizations.

They want to see their names at a New York museum rather than at Jerusalem museum.

"As the Holocaust becomes more distant, the fear for Israel's existence drops.

In addition, Israel is no longer perceived as a poor country. And the Americans have their own problems:

The financial crisis and education in the US, which is becoming more and more expensive.

The donations will gradually drop, and may eventually disappear.

"But it's hard for me to believe that the donations will disappear at once because of a political crisis.

It looks like our government is trying to make it happen with all its might, but fortunately, it can't even do that."

Ramadan begins in United Kingdom

Quick Facts

Name

Philadelphia cardinal quits amid abuse allegations

Teens take on Met over kids' 10-hour kettle ordeal

New Statesman Leader

Thursday 9th June 2011

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has guest-edited the New Statesman in an edition published on 13th June 2011.

The full text of his Leader, widely reported in the press, follows.

I can imagine a New Statesman reader looking at the contents of this issue and mentally supplying: "That's enough coalition ministers (Ed)."

After all, the NS has never exactly been a platform for the establishment to explain itself.

But it seems worth encouraging the present government to clarify what it is aiming for in two or three key areas, in the hope of sparking a livelier debate about where we are going - and perhaps even todiscover what the left's big idea currently is.

The political debate in the UK at the moment feels pretty stuck.

An idea whose roots are firmly in a particular strand of associational socialism has been adopted enthusiastically by the Conservatives.

The widespread suspicion that this has been done for opportunistic or money-saving reasons allows many to dismiss what there is of a programme for "big society" initiatives; even the term has fast become painfully stale.

But we are still waiting for a full and robust account of what the left would do differently and what a left-inspired version of localism might look like.

Digging a bit deeper, there are a good many on the left and right who sense that the tectonic plates of British - European? - politics are shifting.

Managerial politics, attempting with shrinking success to negotiate life in the shadow of big finance, is not an attractive rallying point, whether it labels itself (New) Labour or Conservative.

There is, in the middle of a lot of confusion, an increasingly audible plea for some basic thinking about democracy itself - and the urgency of this is underlined by what is happening in the Middle East and North Africa.

Incidentally, this casts some light on the bafflement and indignation that the present government is facing over its proposals for reform in health and education.

With remarkable speed, we are being committed to radical, long-term policies for which no one voted.

At the very least, there is an understandable anxiety about what democracy means in such a context. Not many people want government by plebiscite, certainly.

But, for example, the comprehensive reworking of the Education Act 1944 that is now going forward might well be regarded as a proper matter for open probing in the context of election debates.

The anxiety and anger have to do with the feeling that not enough has been exposed to proper public argument.

I don't think that the government's commitment to localism and devolved power is simply a cynical walking-away from the problem.

But I do think that there is confusion about the means that have to be willed in order to achieve the end.

If civil society organisations are going to have to pick up
responsibilities shed by government, the crucial questions are these.

First, what services must have cast-iron guarantees of nationwide standards, parity and continuity?

(Look at what is happening to youth services, surely a strategic priority.)

Second, how, therefore, does national government underwrite these strategic "absolutes" so as to make sure that, even in a straitened financial climate, there is a continuing investment in the long term, a continuing response to what most would see as root issues: child poverty, poor literacy, the deficit in access to educational excellence, sustainable infrastructure in poorer communities (rural as well as urban), and so on?

 What is too important to be left to even the most resourceful localism?

Government badly needs to hear just how much plain fear there is around such questions at present.

It isn't enough to respond with what sounds like a mixture of, "This is the last government's legacy," and, "We'd like to do more, but just wait until the economy recovers a bit."

 To acknowledge the reality of fear is not necessarily to collude with it.

But not to recognise how pervasive it is risks making it worse.

Equally, the task of opposition is not to collude in it, either, but to define some achievable alternatives.

And, for that to happen, we need sharp-edged statements of where the disagreements lie.

The uncomfortable truth is that, while grass-roots initiatives and local mutualism are to be found flourishing in a great many places, they have been weakened by several decades of cultural fragmentation.

The old syndicalist and co-operative traditions cannot be reinvented overnight and, in some areas, they have to be invented for the first time.

This is not helped by a quiet resurgence of the seductive language of "deserving" and "undeserving" poor, nor by the steady pressure to increase what look like punitive responses to alleged abuses of the system.

 If what is in view - as Iain Duncan Smith argues passionately on page 18 - is real empowerment for communities of marginal people, we need better communication about strategic imperatives, more positive messages about what cannot and will not be left to chance and - surely one of the most important things of all - a long-term education policy at every level that will deliver the critical tools for democratic involvement, not simply skills that serve the economy.

For someone like myself, there is an ironic satisfaction in the way several political thinkers today are quarrying theological traditions for ways forward.

True, religious perspectives on these issues have often got bogged down in varieties of paternalism.

But there is another theological strand to be retrieved that is not about "the poor" as objects of kindness but about the nature of sustainable community, seeing it as one in which what circulates - like the flow of blood - is the mutual creation of capacity, building the ability of the other person or group to become, in turn, a giver of life and responsibility.

 Perhaps surprisingly, this is what is at the heart of St Paul's ideas about community at its fullest; community, in his terms, as God wants to see it.

A democracy that would measure up to this sort of ideal - religious in its roots but not exclusive or confessional - would be one in which the central question about any policy would be: how far does it equip a person or group to engage generously and for the long term in building the resourcefulness and well-being of any other person or group, with the state seen as a "community of communities", to use a phrase popular among syndicalists of an earlier generation?

A democracy going beyond populism or majoritarianism but also beyond a Balkanised focus on the local that fixed in stone a variety of postcode lotteries; a democracy capable of real argument about shared needs and hopes and real generosity: any takers?

LAMBETH PALACE

Dear

 

Thank you for contacting Lambeth Palace about the Archbishop of Canterbury's recent guest-editorship of the New Statesman.

 

As you can imagine, we have received many hundreds of emails and letters, some two-thirds of which have been positive about what the Archbishop had to say.

This is very many more than Archbishop Rowan can reply to personally, much as he would like to, and as he’s currently away in Africa your message has been passed to me for reply.

 

The Archbishop believes very strongly that the Church is commissioned to stand by the most vulnerable in our society and that means that we have a duty to join the public discourse.

We won’t always agree with each other’s views, but Archbishop Rowan much appreciates your taking the time to express yours.

 

With sincere thanks again for writing to Archbishop Rowan.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

The Revd George Pitcher

The Archbishop’s Secretary for Public Affairs

Lambeth Palace, London , SE1 7JU

www.archbishopofcanterbury.org

Christians use Bible to predict end of statisticians

Rowan Williams: no one voted for coalition policies

Archbishop of Canterbury issues broadside against 'radical policies' and 'big society' project in New Statesman editorial

EARLY RELIGIONS

TAKEN FROM JD BERNAL – SCIENCE IN HISTORY

FROM THE FIRST CENTURY ONWARDS PHILOSOPHIC MYSTICISM FUSED WITH THAT OF SALVATION RELIGIONS.

CHRISTIANITY WAS THE MOST SUCCESSFUL.

THEIR COMMON INTELLECTUAL FEATURE WAS A RELIANCE ON INSPIRATION AND REVELATION, AS A HIGHER SOURCE OF TRUTH THAN THE SENSES OR EVEN THAT OF REASON.

AS TERTULLIAN EXPRESSED IT :-

“I BELIEVE BECAUSE IT IS ABSURD”

THE RISE OF THESE RELIGIONS WAS ITSELF A SYMPTOM OF HOPELESSNESS OF THE SLAVE AND EVEN OF THE CITIZEN, IN THE FACE OF A SYSTEM THAT GROUND HIM DOWN AND FROM WHICH IT SEEMED IMPOSSIBLE TO ESCAPE.

HE COULD TAKE HIS CHOICE OF INDULGING IN ALMOST REVOLUTIONARY DENUNCIATION OF THESYSTEM, SUCH AS FOUND IN THE APOCALYPSE,AND STIRRING UP RESISTANCE OF OFFICIAL WORSHIP;OR OF RETIRING TO THE DESERT TO AVOID CONTAMINATION OF THE EVILS OF THE WORLD.

TO THE RELIGIOUS IT WAS NOT ONLY IDOLATRY BUT ALL THAT WENT WITH THE HATED,THE UPPER CLASS STATE, THAT WAS ABOMINABLE;THE LUXURY, THE ART,THE PHILOSOPHY, THE SCIENCE WERE ALL SIGNPOSTS ON THE WAY TO HELL.

From a "Science in History" by J.D. Bernall