ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ

My guest blogger today is John Wright. Born and raised in Belfast, John now lives in Arizona with his wife Melissa and son Tyler, where he presents an afternoon radio show on KLPZ 1380. This post finds him wondering how to draw the line between faith and superstition. Any comments suggesting an answer to that question are welcome.

The other day I was having a conversation with a secretary in my office at work who was telling me about her thyroid problem for which she takes prescription medication. When she said, "I haven't had any real problems in the last few years..." she paused, and started fumbling around the office as though looking for something. I looked on, dumbfounded, as she reached far down underneath her desk and knocked three times on the wooden skirting board that ran around the base of the office walls. "Knock on wood," she said soberly, before resuming what she was saying as though nothing had happened.

Read the rest of this entry

Meet Nezareth Castillo Rey. To some, he's a religious freak show; to others, he's a prophet in formation; to still others, he is walking, screaming evidence of the dangers of indoctrination. You decide.

(Thanks to Davy Sims for the link.)

Today's Times asks the inevitable question following the in the French Alps: What kind of God would allow something like this to happen? The question seems more pointed given the context -- a group of devout believers making a religious pilgrimage -- but the same question is struggled over every day by people of faith who experience suffering or have to watch a loved one suffer. Less sceptical commentators may point to mechanical -- and possibly human -- failure on a notoriously dangerous road. Some will even argue that God has a purpose in allowing the accident and will use this tragedy to provoke moral growth in the world (though one hopes that this explanation will not be offered in the hearing of any grieving family members). It is difficult to know how to theologise about a tragedy of this order without descending into cliche, trivialisation or offensiveness. There are many kinds of silence, and one of them is a humbled, respectful, listening silence.

But if anyone dare speak in response to this tragic accident, they could learn much from , the American justice activist who died last year, about what not to say to someone whose heart is breaking. In 1983, Dr Coffin's son Alex was killed in a car accident. Ten days after Alex's death, he delivered this extraordinary sermon to his congregation at Riverside Church in New York City.

Read the rest of this entry

Hat tip to Cyberscribe for sending me this link. It's a review of "Peacemakers in Action: Profiles of Religion in Conflict Resolution" (Cambridge University Press), a new book edited by David Little, a conflict resolution specialist at Harvard Divinity School, which narrates the stories of "16 courageous women and men who have been inspired by their spiritual convictions to ease tensions and accomplish good in places as diverse as the Middle East, Colombia and Kosovo". One of those profiled is the Reverend Roy Magee, the Northern Irish Presbyterian minister who talked with the Loyalist paramiliaries 'about the legacy they wanted to leave their children, pointing to religious texts to remind them, "You may escape the court of the land, but you will not escape the judgment of God."'

The article linked makes much of the fact that Christopher Hitchens (and the other new atheists) do not incorporate stories like these in their accounts of the "poisoning" effects of religion. Let's be clear about one philosophical point at least: the fact that some people are motivated by their religious commitments to do good in the world does not volidate or substantiate those religious commitments (any more than the good deeds of an atheist can be taken as evidence for the truth of atheism). There are some less-than-subtle analyses of religion currently on the market and some, at least, appear to ignore the many positive contributions to peacemaking by people of faith around the world. A balanced analysis must surely grant that religious belief can be a powerfully positive motivating force in many people's lives -- and a powerfully negative and devisive force in many other people's lives.

Martin Luther King, Gandhi, Thich Nhat Hanh, the Rev. Roy Magee and Fr Alec Reid -- all fail to merit a mention in Hitchens' analysis, but their lives stand for something important in a world scarred by conflict, and their stories need to be told and re-told.

If you're on Facebook, you might like to join the "I Listen to the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ's Sunday Sequence programme" group. Right now, DΓ‘ithΓ­ is trying to organise a tour of the programme and is even offering to make pins for everyone. I kid you not. Given his comments on Sunday morning's programme, I won't expect the media analyst Paul Moore to be signing up anytime soon. Can Paul really be right in his assertion that Bebo, MySpace and Facebook are already doomed as social networking venues?

On an unrelated matter, my old friend Paul Bailie has asked me to make it known that he is not the "PB" who often posts on Will & Testament. Apparently, people now come up to him on the street and say things like, "It's you, isn't it?" Someone previously suggested that "PB" was in fact President Bush. The White House confirms that this is not the case. (OK, it was "PB" who confirmed that.) The identity of Shiboleth, the hermeneutical stig who often posts here on contentious textual matters, also remains shrouded in mystery.

Bart Ehrman's book, , defends something like that claim. It's not exactly an original idea, but it is a novel repackaging of an old one -- namely, that the authors of the Bible, some of them "barely literate", edited and re-edited one another's documents to produce the texts now regarded as "canonical" (i.e., authoritative). The task of the textual critic is, in part, to examine the history of that editing in order to uncover the ealiest versions of well-known texts.

Some biblical authors were plainly concerned that their words may be altered in subsequent "printings". Thus, Ehrman notes that the last book of the New Testament, the book of Revelation, contains one of the first copyright warnings in the history of publishing: "I testify to everyone who hears to the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book; and if anyone removes any of the words of the book of this prophecy, God will remove his share from the tree of life...."

This approach to biblical texts will, of course, be anathema to biblical literalists, and to othres who take a "high view" of biblical inspiration and authority. Nevertheless, it is difficult to ignore the signs of multiple authorship in the books that make up the Bible (however you define "bible"). The question is whether multiple authorship, editing, and revising challenge the place of the Bible in people's lives today. Does the mere fact that a text has been written and re-written, edited and revised, across a number of versions, reduce its moral or religious authority in the eyes of the contemporary reader?

Update: Ehrman's book continues to provoke controversy. Some have asked about his own background. He is a former evangelical Christian, now heading the department of religious studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Ehrman now desciribes himself as "agnostic". You can read a transcript of a debate ("Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus?") between Ehrman and the evangelical scholar William Lane Craig .

joined me on the programme this morning to talk about , the Ulster Unionst MP for North Belfast who led the movement for homosexual law reform within Parliament in the 1950s and paid for his efforts with the loss of his political career. Jeff recently presented a paper on Hyde at a conference in King's College, London, marking the 50th anniversary of the . is quite remarkable. You can listen again here.

I've just recorded an interview with Dan Hind, whose book "The Threat to Reason" explores the place of Enlightenment thinking in the contemporary world. He argues that the so-called "war on terror" is often portrayed as a clash between Enlightenment thinking and pre-Enlightenment thinking (or modern Western liberal values versus medieval Middle Easten illiberal values); but, in reality, this supposed culture class is little more than a mask to disguise what is really going on in the "war". We also had a chance to talk about the place of faith in Enlightenment cultures. Faith and reason are often presented as mutually-exclusive options, but Dan Hind regards this as a false dichotomy and accepts that faith can have a valid role to play within an "enlightened" life. We've a pretty full programme already this Sunday morning, so you may have to wait until the following Sunday to hear Dan outline his approach to some fascinating ideas.

Ok, it's not a competition. I posted on a great T-shirt which John Toal saw in Belfast ("I BRING NOTHING TO THE TABLE") and you've been suggesting other, suitably philosophical, legends emblazoned on the said garment. If this was a competition, the winner would be Samuel Be, who suggested some terrific religious T-shirt legends. Let me know if you come across one of these this summer.

CATHOLIC:
Father forgive me for this T-shirt.

PRESBYTERIAN:
Calvin rocks my world.

METHODIST:
Oh for a thousand T-shirts.

BUDDHIST:
Teeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

BAPTIST:
I totally immerse this T-shirt every day.

Pentecostal:
Hands up if you love my T-shirt.

HUMANIST:
No-one designed this T-shirt.

The rebranding of Ian Paisley continues. Now named at Westminster, he's looking like quite the statesman in the eyes of many these days. Even Martin McGuinness refers to him as "our First Minister". But when the Presbytery of Ulster meets in September to elect its Moderator, will Dr Paisley be re-elected unopposed, as has been the case since the founding of the church? It's unlikely, I think, that any significant challenge will be mounted, but there is a slim (ok, very slim) possibility that the First Minister will decide to stand down as Moderator and allo the church. A significant minority of Free Presbyterian ministers and elders are struggling to understand how their Moderator appears to have pulled off a theological and political U-turn on the question of power-sharing with Sinn FΓ©in.

Dr Paisley's willingness to share power with Sinn Fein has alienated a section of the Free Presbyterian Church, not least his old friend and colleague the Other previous critics of power-sharing within the church, including the Rev David McIlveen, have made a theological journey with their Moderator and regard the new Northern Ireland executive as a "moral government". But the rumblings continue, often voiced in private conversations (perhaps in coded comments) and sometimes fleetingly on internet sites (such as ). A sign of the sensitivities involved here is the unwillingness of Free Presbyterian ministers and elders to talk in public about their unhappiness with their Moderator's new political stance. In private, some are quietly fuming. In public, they are the soul of discretion and keen to distinguish between Dr Paisley's political and ecclesiastical roles.

[Picture: Previously arch enemies are seen enjoying a laugh together at the commencement of power-sharing between Sinn FΓ©in and the DUP, and Ian Paisely protests during the 1974 Ulster Workers' Council Strike, which was organised in opposition to the Sunningdale Agreement which would have given the government of the Republic of Ireland a direct say in the running of the region. The strike succeeded in bringing down the power-sharing Northern Ireland Executive.)

John Toal told me today that he saw a T-shirt in Belfast this week bearing the legend, "I BRING ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO THE TABLE."

is still the most admired man on the planet. He was born on this day in 1918. The in the Rivonia Trial of 1964 remains one of the great speeches of the 20th century:

During my lifetime I have dedicated myself to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.

Here's a fitting tribute to the spirit of Prisoner 46664:

The High Court has ruled that a school in England by requiring that she remove her "purity ring" during class time. Lydia Playfoot is a member of the movement known as "", which encourages young people to refrain from sex until they are married.

Lawyers for the 16 year-old argued that her chastity ring was an expression of her Christian faith. The school argued that it was not an essential part of her faith, but rather a symbol of a lifestyle or personal choice, and they are simply honouring their uniform policy. Pupils at the school -- Millais School in Horsham, West Sussex -- are permitted to wear crosses or other essentially religious symbols.

I interviewed one of Lydia's sponsors a few weeks ago and it became clear that there are more issues at stake in this case than whether a pupil should be permitted to wear a ring in school time: behind the legal case there was the question of sex education in schools and what precisely young people should be taught.

Set aside the ethical issue for a moment and focus on this empirical question: do abstinence programmes actually work? The UK joins the US in having the highest rates of teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections in the world, but does a programme like The Silver Ring Thing actually impact those figures -- or can it make matters worse?

Medical evidence is still being gathered, but found that young members of abstinence groups are one third less likely to use a condom when they do become sexually active than those who were not members. And research published in the British Medical Journal concludes that the partners of boys in abstinence programmes are more likely to become pregnant than than the partners of boys who are not members of those groups.

We should all be concerned about SDI rates among teens and about the UK's teen pregnancy rate, but are abstinence groups really the way to deal with those problems? Or should we put more resources into school-based sex education programmes?

It was the longest military campaign ever undertaken by the British Army. It lasted more than 30 years and eventually led to the deployment of almost 30,000 soldiers based in more than a hundred locations. 763 military personnel died and 6,100 were injured. Operation Banner is the name the Army gave to its support role for the police in Northern Ireland during the Troubles -- and it officially comes to an end in August. The Army recently published its review of Operation Banner. You can read it . We'll by examining the report on this week's Sunday Sequence.

What's on your mind?

Pope Benedict has been annoying Protestants again. This time, he's given his approval to which essentially reaffirms the key points of the controversial millenium year declaration "". The document describes non-Catholic Christian denominations as merely "ecclesial communities" rather than "churches". The Reformed world fired back with decidely undiplomatic language. The World Alliance of Reformed Churches, for example, said the document β€œmakes us question the seriousness with which the Roman Catholic Church takes its dialogues with the Reformed family and other families of the church”. The Presbyterian Church in Ireland's spokesman said his church could simply reply by reaffirming its historic view that the Catholic Church is "in error", but then wondered aloud where this kind of theological tit-for-tat would get anyone. The Church of Ireland's Archbishop of Dublin told Patsy McGarry of the Irish Times that his church enjoyed full apostolic succession -- which is the ecclesiastical equivalent of saying, "Take that!" Not a good day for Catholic-Protestant relations. It's ecumenism as a gunfight.

But there are deeper questions involved in this day-long theological skirmish: What exactly is "the church"? How should we define this mysterious entity? Traditionally, the criteria are said to be "one, holy, catholic and apostolic". But different churches understand those criteria in different ways. Reformers in the 16th and 17th centuries argued that the church existed where the word of God was rightly proclaimed and the sacraments were properly administered. Some revised this definition to include church discipline. But even here there is room for disagreement: Protestants disagree among themselves about what constitutes the proclamation of the "gospel", the number of sacraments (and how they are to be understood) divides Christians across the world; and churches approach "discipline", "leadership" and "authority" in widely differing ways. Is the Salvation Army a church? This is a church without sacraments, so presumably John Calvin, the founder of Presbyterianism, would have serious trouble recognising it as such. Yet many others outside the Salvationist movement have no qualms in recognising -- and celebrating -- their common fellowship with that "church".

Perhaps a church is like an elephant -- impossible to define, but you know one when you see one?

The award-winning Guardian columnist Polly Toynbee, who has been named as the most influential columnist in the UK, is the new . She argues that religion is a "clear and present danger" to Britain and the world. You can hear her explain why she believes that on next Sunday morning's programme.

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never harm me? . An Catholic school in Melbourne allegedly refused entry to a five-year-old boy because his surname is "Hell."

I wonder what the weather-watching would make of this. Two minutes into this piece to camera, ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ News 24's chief political correspondent James Landale is soaked to the bone under an unexpected deluge. Is this the judgment of God on the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ or just a sudden shower?

Incidentally, Bishop Graham Dow continues to be too indisposed to be interviewed. Some might wonder if he is now uncharacterically nervous about defending his colourful theological claim, earlier this week, that Britain's recent floods were sent by God because of the country's alleged abandonement of biblical values. On today's programme, his official spokesman, Canon Richard Pratt, made a valiant effort to explain his boss's words against any suggestion that Graham Dow has lost the plot. Alas, he didn't appear to persuade either the Cambridge philosopher Simon Blackburn or the Church of Ireland's Bishop of Connor, Alan Abernethy.

I can't argue with of sites which represent global heritage throughout history, announced today by the .

ChichΓ©n ItzΓ‘, Mexico
Christ Redeemer, Brazil
The Great Wall, China
Machu Picchu, Peru
Petra, Jordan
The Roman Colloseum, Italy
The Taj Mahal, India

A will now try to identify the 7 Wonders of the Natural World. Anyone planning to nominate ?

When Spinal Tap reunite you know the global warming crisis is pretty bad.

in today's Daily Mail. Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens are in his sights -- along with the church leaders who have refused to do battle with the "new atheism". Money quote:

Why has no one joined in the battle against these warriors for atheism? Where are the Defenders of the Faith that they ridicule? Are our bishops and cardinals, our preachers, imams or rabbis too supine, too complacent or too scared to argue back? Have they no arguments? In the past there have been eloquent fighters for Christian belief: churchmen such as Cardinal Newman and Archbishop Temple, writers like G. K. Chesterton or C. S. Lewis, of Narnia fame. Where are their successors?

If you are anywhere near Belfast tomorrow, Saturday, try to get a ticket for the final night of Dancing at Lughnasa at the I finally managed to see the production tonight and the performance won a well-deserved standing ovation. More than one critic has described this as "a perfect play". Luckily for us, this is a perfect production as well.

At lunchtime today, I recorded an interview with, which you can hear on Sunday morning's programme.
A couple of weeks ago, we reviewed SinΓ©ad's new albulm Theology. It's a beautiful collection. "'Theology' is an attempt to create a place of peace in a time of war," says SinΓ©ad. "It is my own personal response to what has taken place and is affecting everyone around the world since and including September 11, 2001. I simply wanted to make a beautiful thing which inspires me." Enjoy.

died . Jazz legend, art historian, broadcaster, critic, memoirist, and cultural icon, he lived every second of his eighty years.

In his Guardian column on 20 April 2006 ("Zimmertime Blues") he wrote these "Last words":

It was my intention to end this column with a dramatic conclusion and a visit to see my lung specialist, Dr Kohn, offered the perfect fodder. He, the most frank yet honest of men, was to tell me the results of all the tests I've had. There were three possibilities:

1. The escalating cancer dangling from the bottom of my lung had increased its pace.

2. The cancer had stayed as it was, like a nasty fish waving its whiskers about, and with my irregular heartbeat, no surgeon, anaesthetist or nurse would agree to even think of removing it.

3. The cancer had turned out benevolent rather than malevolent and I wouldn't need treatment after all.
I've had many scans over the past few years and have come to rather enjoy them. As an almost life-long surrealist, I delight in being laid out and positioned on my back, arms behind my head and being put into a tunnel with pretty coloured lights. My wife, Diana, in her role as my supervising wing commander, is always present at Dr Kohn's consultations. This is because she doesn't trust the accuracy of my own reports, my mishearings from deafness and my inability not to make jokes in public or to lapse into regional accents. These last two compulsions she especially hates and, after 45 years of a sometimes difficult marriage, who can blame her?

On this occasion Diana had bad news. I had got muddled up and the doctor was on a fortnight's holiday so I still don't know my fate. And here I am, feeling not too bad, but increasingly hungry for sleep. When the good doctor returns I shall no doubt hear the answers to my questions, but you won't. Whatever they are, I doubt they would justify what my mother, when we told her any piece of news of no special interest, used to cry: "Ring up the papers! Stop the front page!"

Goodbye now.

Bertie Ahern has now apologised for his " He told a Trades Union conference that he didn't understand how economic nay-sayers didn't "commit suicide".

After , mostly spent in solitary confinement, , our ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ Gaza correspondent, is free. He is now at the British Consulate in Jerusalem and is expected to be reunited with his family in the next few days. 200,000 people signed the online petition that helped to keep Alan's plight on the international agenda. appears to have been extremely significant in securing his release.

Alan was released on the very day his parents are to receive an award on his behalf from Amnesty International. See pictures .

I know there's a moral to somewhere. Sajani Shakya, a who was previously considered to be divine has lost her claim to divinity because she made a visit the United States in order to film a TV documentary. Incidentally, this is no criticism of the United States: her offence was leaving Nepal to travel to any other country.

to intervene to keep Scooter Libby, a former White House aide, out of prison throws light on another constitutional proposal in Gordon Brown's today: the need to politically decontaminate the judicial process. The Prime Minister said:

The role of Attorney General which combines legal and ministerial functions needs to change. And while we consult on reform, the Attorney General has decided, except if the law or national security requires it, not to make key prosecution decisions in individual criminal cases.

This significant change may still return to haunt Gordon Brown's predecessor.

While Gordon Brown is in the mood for constitutional change, he might consider removing the bizarre historical anomaly which prohibits MPs from resigning their seats. Instead, they are required to make an application to serve as stewards and bailiffs of the . Thus, of that esteemed troop of former MPs. Surely if even the monarch is permitted in law to abdicate, MPs should be allowed to step down without the need for a Monty-Pythonesque office of the Crown?

Incidentally, perhaps you saw Will Hutton's excellent documentary "The Last Days of Tony Blair" last night on Channel 4. Hutton and his camera crew followed the current Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds during his last weeks in office. In one scene, the PM, on a visit to an IT unit, is heard reading out a website address. Seconds later, he is heard asking an aide, "What does WWW mean?" He was obviously very busy for the past decade.

As part of a comprehensive today, Gordon Brown to remove the executive from the appointment of Anglican bishops. Instead, Parliament will approve episcopal appointments. Last week, some commentators suggested that the new prime minister (the son of a Scottish Presbyterian minister) would go even further and remove politicians entirely from the appointment of bishops, thus allowing the Church of England to select its own leaders without political interference. Presumably the Church would have welcomed that more far-reaching change in constitutional arrangements.

The Sunday Herald is reporting that the Scottish Qualifications Authority is considering a proposal to on the country's science curriculum. The English curriculum authority has already ruled that ID should not be taught in science classrooms, but may be examined in religion classrooms. Opponents of ID in Northern Ireland may now be concerned that if Scotland makes space for ID in its science curriculum, Northern Ireland curriculum authorities may be tempted to do the same -- a kind of "ID drift". Hat tip to Bill Corr for the link.

Since the bishop of Carlisle now has us talking about whether God sends storms as a judgment for sin, now is probably a good time to mention the storm that is currently engulfing the American evangelical activist (pictured). It all began with an article published last October in -- an article (or the "Barticle" as it's now become known) which some Evangelicals in the United States say is "heretical".

is a keynote speaker at this year's festival at the King's Hall in Belfast, which ends tomorrow, and came into the Sunday Sequence studios today to talk about the controversy ("listen again).

You can read "The Limits of God's Grace" and Bart Campolo's attempt to quell the storm of protest following its publication .

Christianity Today writer Collin Hansen has written that Campolo is an , the rationalist atheist in Dostoevsky's . Hansen writes:

Campolo explains that he reached these views while processing the rape of a 9-year-old girl, whose Sunday school teacher said God must have allowed it for a reason. Again, the parallels with Ivan Karamazov stand out. Ivan denounces God, whose justice he refuses to trust. "And if the sufferings of children go to well the sum of sufferings that was necessary to pay for truth, then I protest that the truth is not worth such a price." Campolo likewise favors his conscience over the biblical view of justice. "I am well aware that I don't get to decide who God is. What I do get to decide, however, is to whom I pledge my allegiance. I am a free agent, after all, and I have standards for my God, the first of which is this: I will not worship any God who is not at least as compassionate as I am."

So what is Bart Campolo actually saying? I asked him this morning, "Why didn't God intervene and stop the appalling gang rape of the nine year-old girl? What answer do you give her when she asks?"

He told me, "If God pre-ordained that rape, I hate him, and I won't worship him. If God stood by and allowed it, I want nothing to do with him." The explanation he appears to have arrived at is this: God loves the nine year old completely and (he writes) "the suffering of that poor little girlβ€”evil’s doingβ€”will somehow be redeemed, and she herself will be healed as part of the complete redemption and absolute healing that is to come for all of us". But God is unable or unwilling to force his way into people's lives; and sometimes God's will is thwarted in our world."

All of which adds up to an extremely difficult series of questions for many evangelicals to even countenance. If God's mercy wins out in the end -- here, there and everywhere -- doesn't that mean that everyone is eventually saved?

Universal salvation as the ultimate gift of a God whose power is temporarily limited in this world, and whose character is only partially revealed in a sacred text whose meaning is re-negotiated by every generation: these are claims that will not seem outrageous to many contemporary theologians. Some (though not all) within the evangelical community of faith may cry theological foul play and get angry with Campolo for raising these discomfitting questions, but that nine year-old girl deserves an answer, doesn't she?

One of our reviewers on this morning's programme spotted in the Sunday papers. Some senior Anglican bishops are apparently claiming that the "floods that have devastated swathes of the country are God's judgment on the immorality and greed of modern society". The Sunday Telegraph reports that the Bishop of Carlisle, the (pictured), believes "laws that have undermined marriage, including the introduction of pro-gay legislation, have provoked God to act by sending the storms that have left thousands of people homeless".

This isn't the first time a religious figure has connected a natural disaster with gay people. Last year, Rabbi David Basri shocked some commentators by arguing that the deadly bird flu in Israel was sent by God in response to calls in election campaigns to legalise gay marriages. Hurricane Katrina attracted a host of competing religious explanations, including Fred Phelps, who saw the hurricane as God's judgment on American sexual immorality, Mayor Ray Nagin, who argued in his famous "Chocolate City speech" that God was "mad at" black America, and Muhammad Yousef Al-Mlaifi, a Kuwaiti government official, who claimed that God sent the hurricane as retribution for US foreign policy under George Bush.

Jerry Falwell and Pat Roberston famously alleged that the September 11 attacks were a sign that God was no longer protecting America in response to feminism, abortion rights and the sexual revolution. Attempts to link natural tragedies with divine retribution are as old as religion itself in human history.

But, in this case, those labelling the natural disaster as divine punishment are (oddly enough) Church of England bishops. I note that because these kinds of moral explanations for natural events are more usually the terrain of American televangists. Bishop Graham Dow may soon tell us why he thinks God has decided to send a flood as a judgment -- particularly since the Noahic flood narrative contains an apparent commitment never to do so again (). His defenders will point out that the Genesis 9 commitment refers to a flood that would destroy the world, not to localised floods.

A more significant theological question is this: What kind of divine being would punish innocent people because of the perceived sinfulness of others? Or, to put it another way, doesn't the Bishop of Carlisle's wrathful God look strangely vindictive? Many theologians specialising in will caution against any attempt to read supernatural punishment into floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, viruses or other naturally occuring phenomena. Are all floods examples of divine punishment? All diseases? Is every tragedy in human history an expression of God's wrath? Or only tragedies that befall people we don't like? And who gets to decide which sin God is punishing in any particular flood or earthquake?

These kinds of questions have often encouraged critics to simply dismiss moralistic readings of natural disasters as ethical humbug. But perhaps some commenters here are prepared to offer the Bishop of Carlisle some theological arguments that deal with these kinds of problems. Any takers? In the meantime, we must all hope that the bishop's palace in Carlisle does not fall victim to freak weather in the next week or so; otherwise some of his supporters (though clearly not his critics) may discern the hand of divine displeasure at work.

This is very strange. A wikipedia user to mention that the subject's wife has died more than 14 hours before police found her body. I suspect a novelist somewhere is already developing this one into a murder mystery.