Jews in Britain “own” the Church of England, says report

Published by carolyn on Sun, 2019-11-24 14:40

By Carolyn Yeager

THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND HAS PUT OUT an authoritative document titled “God's Unfailing Word” that shockingly calls on Christians “to repent for centuries of antisemitism which ultimately led to the Holocaust,” according to The Guardian news of November 21.

The document says it seeks to promote a new Christian-Jewish relationship.

Justin Welby, the archbishop of Canterbury, wrote a foreward to the official document in which he said the chief rabbi of Britain Ephraim Mirvis, who was given the privilege of writing an afterword to the C of E report, was “a friend,” and his comments were received in a spirit of friendship, “however tough they are to read.” The two men are said to be personally close.

In his afterword Rabbi Mirvis criticised the church for its “purposeful and specific targeting of Jews for conversion to Christianity.” He pointed to a 2015 Vatican document that made clear that the Catholic church would not attempt to convert Jews, and complained that his ancestors were “faced with the brutality of the Crusades; it meant being forced to choose between converting to Christianity or certain death”.

My own position on this is that as long as Christians (white Europeans) continue to accept collective blame for “persecuting Jews” throughout the centuries (much of which exists only in the imaginations of militant and/or power hungry Jews) and retreat in the face of Jewish demands, so long will our culture, our nations be further judaized culturally and politically ... "owned" is the word I used in this article's title. The mainstream churches are increasingly in the lead of this capitulation, with the Church of England standing out as the foremost capitulator, along with the entire British government and citizenry. Independent Britons have become a rarity.

Antisemitism being outlawed as a crime against the Faith

The C of E document says that attitudes towards Judaism over centuries had provided a “fertile seed-bed for murderous antisemitism.” And that theological teachings had helped spread antisemitism, and Anglicans and other Christians must not only repent for the “sins of the past” but actively challenge such attitudes or stereotypes.

“The attribution of collective guilt to the Jewish people for the death of Christ and the consequent interpretation of their suffering as collective punishment sent by God is one very clear example of that.” […] “Within living memory, such ideas contributed to fostering the passive acquiescence if not positive support of many Christians in actions that led to the Holocaust.

“Christians have been guilty of promoting and fostering negative stereotypes of Jewish people that have contributed to grave suffering and injustice. They therefore have a duty to be alert to the continuation of such stereotyping and to resist it.”

The document acknowledges that two Church of England cathedrals, Norwich and Lincoln, were associated with the spread of the “blood libel” in the late Middle Ages, which held that representatives from Jewish communities were found to have abducted and drained the blood from living Christian children for use “in the making of Passover matzos (unleavened bread)” or for other purposes. Some of these events are well-documented and never convincingly refuted, however much they are now downplayed and rejected by mainstream authorities, such as the Christian clergy and churches.

Both cathedrals now have signs apologizing for their role in the "blood libel." In Lincoln Cathedral, a plaque says: “This libel against the Jews is a shameful example of religious and racial hatred which, continuing down the ages, violently divides many people in the present day.” Why is libel and hatred only said to be from the Christians and never the other way around? The so-called Holocaust is a blood libel against the entire German nation, for which it was punished and continues to be punished, in spite of considerable evidence to the contrary that is supressed. This shows only one thing: that it is the Christians who have suffered under the Jews far more than any Jewish suffering under Christians. But who is calling for Jewish attitudes of repentence?

Israel an eternal thorny problem

On the subject of Israel, the document says that Christians should accept that:

(a) most Jews consider Zionism an important and legitimate aspect of Jewish identity,

(b) the state of Israel has a right to a secure existence within recognised and secure borders according to the common principles of international law,

(c) the principles of international law also guarantee the rights and security of the Palestinian people,

(d) the current apparent impasse presents grave moral difficulties and is ultimately untenable.

This is hypocritical, because admittedly impossible to accomplish. It basically advises that Christians must be “sensitive” to all parties, but cannot suggest any viable solution because Israel's “right to a secure existence” is based entirely on lies. Who gave Jews the right to form that state where it is? The English played a very large role in giving them that right. The English are also major players in keeping alive the “holocaust" myth that buttresses Israel's so-called "right to exist.” The Guardian news organization is highly supportive of both.

The document concludes with this advice to British Christians:

“Conscious of the participation of Christians over the centuries in stereotyping, persecution and violence directed against Jewish people, and how this contributed to the Holocaust, Christians today should be sensitive to Jewish fears.”

You can read the entire document as a PDF at this link: or read key passages here.

Listen to Carolyn on The Daily Nationalist podcast about this post and topic.


Two and a half years ago, the archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby discovered his father was NOT a Jew as he had believed all his life.

This article was sent to me by Sven Longshanks. I'll be discussing my above post with him on his Wednesday podcast, The Daily Nationalist.

What strikes me as most pertinent is that while those born illegitimately, and perhaps for other reasons too, were barred from becoming archbishop -- being born half Jewish was no barrier at all.

I guess that illegitimate meant "born in sin" (without the sacrament of marriage) and that meant more than having a different, and opposed, faith. It was in the 1950s that that illegitimacy rule was quietly dropped.

In an article in the Times Ephraim Mirvis, Britain's most senior Jewish leader, accused Corbyn of allowing a "poison sanctioned from the top" to take root in the [Labour] party ..

Archbishop Welby posted on Twitter a few hours later: "That the chief rabbi should be compelled to make such an unprecedented statement at this time ought to alert us to the deep sense of insecurity and fear felt by many British Jews. They should be able to live in accordance with their beliefs and freely express their culture and faith."

What compels the chief rabbi?? Are Jews being murdered or 'pogrammed' in Britain today? No, they are just feeling 'uncomfortable' with what they perceive as "shifting" attitudes. In support of Mirvus, fellow rabbi Lady Neuberger complained on BBC about "this insidious antisemitic tone to quite a lot of what's happened ..." without any specificity. God forbid Jews should have to feel uncomfortable.

The British Left is deeply divided over this, see here (I wouldn't bother reading that article - which is confused and badly written - all the way through, suffice to say that it shows how muddled the Left has become over the Jewish question). On the one side the philo-Semitic Left, who want Corbyn to win but wish he would do something about this anti-Semitism (real or imagined), on the other, an anti-Israel Left who are pro-Corbyn and want Corbyn to defy the Jews. In the middle stands Corbyn himself, who always plays his cards close to his chest.
 Many on the British Left will attempt to evade accusations of anti-Semitism by pointing out that a difference exists between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. But British Jews themselves recognise no such distinction. The argument that 'NOT ALL Jews support Israel and Zionism, therefore, it's okay not to like Israel' doesn't fly with Jewry either. They want a 100% loyalty and are always sniffing about for the faintest sign of insubordination. (But what have they ever done to deserve such loyalty?). The Left are beginning to recognise this. They may be crazy, but they do have half a brain.
Many commentators make the observation that it's the high number of Muslims, Pakistanis in Britain and the Labour Party, which is responsible for all this 'anti-Semitism'. But many of those expelled from the Labour Party (or threatened with expulsion) over anti-Semitism seem to be white. I can't help but wonder if the steady drip-drip of Holocaust and WWII Revisionism on the Internet has seeped into world view of these leftists, whether they know it or not. (No leftist gives voice publicly to revisionist views, but I read it between the lines). But this makes sense, as you can't keep a lid on the truth forever...
Anti-Semitism in Britain is more widespread today than in the 1930s. But back then, the likes of Arnold Leese didn't have the Internet.

Well, David, you seem to be going along with the notion that anti-Zionism is okay, but anti-Semitism is not so okay. I repeatedly made the point in the podcast with Sven (Daily Nationalist) on this that Whites who care about Whites must stop going along with the anti-Semitic label. That is, treat it as if it has no meaning at all.

Slapping 'antisemite' on whatever doesn't support Jewish desires is what Jews do. It works very well for them, that's why they do it. What if we change it to anti-Jewish and force them to say that? Then it's like: Does everything have to be pro-Jewish? If my position is pro-White, then those opposed to that would be anti-White. Are Jews ever called that? I think they would consider our labeling them as 'anti-White' to be antisemitic! Funny, huh. Interesting that we think we have to continue to be punching bags and can never fight back. If we did, we'd be nazis.

I guess the difference is, I don't care if I'm a 'nazi'. In Britain, they're trained to see 'nazis' as their enemy during their glorious Second World War, thus the worst thing they could be called other than 'racist.' That's a box they're stuck in. But we need to accept that we are racialists (as distinct from racists) and stop denying it. I think what you say about the drip-drip of holocaust revisionism on the internet having an effect is true. I think the time is right/ripe for big, big change. Surprising change. But our people are hardly up to it.

Tonight, in a long segment, Tucker Carlson brought up Baltimore and Haiti and showed a lot of black faces as news people who refuse to tell the truth about things as they are. He said what the Left hates about Donald Trump is not what he lies about but what he tells the truth about.

We've GOT to stop going along with things like "antisemitism"--that word especially we have to refuse to accept. Pick another, Jews. What can you come up with?

Hi Carolyn!
Former Labour mayor of London Ken Livingstone was kicked out of the party and crucified for telling the truth that Hitler was a zionist!
Germany was 100% supportive of a homeland for the Jews and helped financially with the creation of the state of Israel. Fact!
It's only the commies who are anti-Israel!  All the commie countries in eastern Europe and Russia had no diplomatic ties with Israel and always supported the Arabs/Palestinians. The same today with the leftists!
So if the Jews were behind communism in Russia and its satellites, as some claim,  why were they against Israel and persecuted the Jews?
Note that Israel - and Japan etc..-  is a good example of a nationalist state! It was always the Arabs that started wars against minuscule Israel, which is smaller than Belgium or New Jersey.!  Israel kills Arabs only in self-defense while Arabs are always  busy killing each other (Syria etc...)
The reason Nationalists, e.g. the AFD, don't accept  anti-zionists as members is justifiable: One issue antisemites can't contribute with the nationalist cause as the only thing they do - all day long -is whining about jewish power (Jews control the world blah blah...)
Antisemites, leftists, Christians all have one thing in common: They are obsessed with Jews. 
Support Trump, the AFD and the Brexit!

Gilson, Hitler was not a Zionist in the sense that Jews are Zionists! Let's get that straight from the beginning. During that time, Zionism (identified as a Jewish homeland in Palestine, nowhere else) was something of a new thing which was opposed or just not supported by the leadership of World Jewry who were heavily infiltrated into and financially benefiting from participating in White, Western countries. Today, these two groups of Jews have learned to tolerate each other and even work together for their mutual benefit.

Early on, Hitler saw that trying to solve Germany's Jewish problem by sending it's Jews to Palestine was not going to work, and he stopped it. Once he saw how they tried to dominate the Palestinians instead of living as equals with them, he tried to find a place where they could be "quarantined" as much as possible, so to imply that Hitler "had no problem" with jews is false. He always saw Jews as a major problem.

You say:"It was always the Arabs that started wars against minuscule Israel" - False.

"Israel kills Arabs only in self-defense" - False

"Arabs are always busy killing each other" - False  (Whites have certainly been busy killing each other.)

"Antisemites, leftists, Christians all have one thing in common: They are obsessed with Jews." - Your advice is to ignore what Jews do, to follow the "nothing to see here" policy. We need to do just the opposite, to call them out. Hitler and his government did. He was not a jew-booster, by any stretch of the imagination.

Supporting (an ever-expanding) Israel as a homeland for Jews will never end Jewish takeover and control of White, European countries ... especially the richest ones. That will continue no matter how stable and protected Israel is. Nothing to do with Jews is good for us and the less we can have to do with them the better. But we have to know what they're up to.