Divine questions about reparations intentions

THE Archbishop of Canterbury has announced that the church will give £100 million to countries in the Caribbean and communities in reparations for its role in slavery.

So, we have people who have never been slaves being given money for acts of slavery, hundreds of years ago, by people who have never been involved in slavery?

The archbishop says that such action is pleasing to God; really, because he needs to revisit the 39 articles of faith, which clearly say (articles 13 and 14) that it is not.

By implication, he is really saying that (good) works put him in God’s good books, and by implication contribute to saving him, whereas the Bible tells us that only the grace of God will save us.

As I understand it, the church is using the Queen Ann endowment, which was given to the church in 1704 for the benefit of parishes facing hard times.

The suggestion is that this endowment

may be tainted, by the accusations of having been derived from slavery, in some way.

The church’s involvement was receipt of the money, hundreds of years ago.

As parishes close for lack of funds, Christianity on the decline, with Christians being arrested on our streets, and parishes having been told for decades that synod has no money to help them; the archbishop pleads for parishioners to give more money to sustain the church: how can he justify such a contribution to a material world, but more importantly, can he be trusted with our offerings?

Oops, I forgot, the book of woke says he can, and, as we are told, the Bible is now irrelevant: but not to the likes of me.

The implications for other people and organisations in trying to give legitimacy to what looks like an act of extortion, clearly, as usual, has not been thought through, with a prima facie case of misuse and misappropriation of funds, in response to amoral unjust demands with no basis in law.

Does this mean that the church will now give reparations to the church of Rome for the reformation,

and where does one stop, because already the wokes are saying it isn’t enough, and the same principle of woke can be applied to countless historic situations?

Steve Vickers