‘Christianophobia’ and The BBC

In recent years two particular ‘phobias’ have been increasingly highlighted in this supposedly ever-so ‘politically correct’ world that we are now living in. These two phobias are ‘Islamophobia’ and ‘Homophobia’. A search of the Internet under ‘Dictionary’ led me to this site – http://dictionary.reference.com/

A search using the word ‘ISLAMOPHOBIA’ revealed one entry, defined as follows – ‘prejudice against Muslims’ and the source for this definition was listed as WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University.

A search using the word ‘HOMOPHOBIA’ revealed three entries, defined as follows –

First entry:-

  • Fear of or contempt for lesbians and gay men.
  • Behaviour based on such a feeling.

The source for this definition was listed as The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition.

Second entry:-

  • irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals.
  • The source for this definition was listed as Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary, © 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

Third entry:-

  • prejudice against (fear or dislike of) homosexual people and homosexuality.

The source for this definition was listed as WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University.

  • A search using the word ‘CHRISTIANOPHOBIA’ produced this message –
  • No entry found for Christianophobia. No suggestions were found.

So, according to this website there is no suitable word to define –

‘Fear of or contempt for Christians. Behaviour based on such a feeling. Irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against Christianity or Christians. Prejudice against (fear or dislike of) Christian people and Christianity’.

That being the case perhaps I may be permitted to officially coin the word ‘CHRISTIANOPHOBIA’ and ascribe to it the official definition of –

‘Fear of or contempt for Christians. Behaviour based on such a feeling. Irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against Christianity or Christians. Prejudice against (fear or dislike of) Christian people and Christianity’.

Why have I felt the need to introduce the word ‘CHRISTIANOPHOBIA’? Well, it seems to me that what is construed to be any ‘phobia’, by Christians in particular, against non-Christian faiths or beliefs or against unconventional or what are officially termed ‘alternative’ life-styles simply will not be tolerated in today’s world. In contrast to this the world at large is zealous to sanction, by whatever means, all efforts to stamp out the exclusive, biblical, Christian message that salvation is only found in “Jesus Christ and him crucified” [1 Corinthians 2:2].

In the days of Noah, God determined that He would destroy all that was evil and wicked and displeasing to Him by means of a global flood and we read of how “the fountains of the great deep [were] opened up and the windows of heaven were opened’ [Genesis 7:11]. This in part describes how that global flood engulfed the entire world in those days. Well as I look at events around the world today it would appear that ‘the fountains of great and deep depravity have been opened up and the windows of hell have been opened’ with the purpose of destroying all that is good and righteous and pleasing to God. My Bible speaks of such a time in Revelation 12:12 “Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and of the sea! For the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time’. The forces of evil seem determined to wipe out all preaching of the Christian Gospel and to totally discredit and render illegal the proclamation of righteous living that is demanded by and pleasing to the God of the Bible. I want now to highlight just two events that point to and identify the role of The BBC in ‘Christianophobia’.

1. On Saturday 8th January 2005, BBC2 Television, despite having received, in advance of its screening, an unprecedented record number of protests in excess of 45,000 went ahead with a 2 hour broadcast of Jerry Springer – The Opera. The Director General of The BBC, Mark Thompson, who described himself as a ‘practising Christian’ stated that in his view the programme was not blasphemous. The Collins English Dictionary defines blasphemy as ‘any action that insults, offends or vilifies the Deity, Christ of the Christian Religion’. In this ‘opera’ one sequence portrayed the Lord Jesus as using vile and profane language and He was also quoted as alleging that He was sexually immoral and thus sinful. By allowing this blasphemy, for that is what is was, to be broadcast, The BBC was guilty of ‘Christianophobia’.

2. On Tuesday 26th October 2004 the Pause For Thought slot on BBC 2 Radio’s Wake up to Wogan was presented by retired Anglican Bishop Roy Williamson. This contribution occurred during The BBC’s ‘World of Faith Week. Would this presentation by Mr Williamson lift high the unique Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ in the midst of a week of devilish promotion of Multi- Faithism? Here is the text of what Roy Williamson said –

Terry, for most of our schools this is half-term week, so I’ve been surrounded by a relaxed family having a ‘wail’ of a time looking through old photographs and pulling my leg. The children just couldn’t stop laughing and making rude comments like ‘would you look at that hair-cut‘ and, ‘Dad, where on earth did you get that hat?’ But there was one family photograph that grabbed their attention for a totally different reason. It was taken at the time of the first Gulf War and pictured the leaders of another family, the Family of Faiths in Bradford. Together with Jewish, Muslim, Sikh and Hindu colleagues, I sat around a small table on which stood a single lighted candle. We had spent an hour in silent prayer holding in our thoughts a common concern for reconciliation and peace. It was a photograph that drew lots of media attention – and rightly so, for it spoke volumes about the shared values that unite faiths rather than divide them. Some are hesitant about relating to people of other Faiths lest they have to compromise their own. But my experience in Bradford and elsewhere has taught me that in working for peace through reconciliation no faith need lose its integrity.

Like the spokes of a wheel that come together the closer they get to the hub, so, the closer people of faith get to their God, the centre or hub of their faith, the closer they get to one another. That is something which is not just desirable, it is vital for the peace of the world; for the only future we have is a future together.

The Word of God totally rejects and demolishes the underlined lie peddled by Mr Williamson that as people get closer to ‘their God’ whether that ‘god’ be Allah, Krishna, Shiva etc or the One True God revealed in the Scriptures and Incarnate in the Person of Jesus Christ [‘Immanuel – God with us] the closer they get to one another and that such ‘closeness’ ‘is vital for the peace of the world’. The Christian truth on this issue is found in the words of the Lord Jesus Christ Who said “Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth, I tell you, Nay, but rather division” [Luke 12:51].

By putting out such an unchallenged broadcast The BBC are once more guilty of ‘Christianophobia’. My personal hope is that the days of the compulsory BBC licence fee may be numbered for it seems grossly unjust that Christians should be compelled to fund people and programmes that are guilty of being part of a deliberate strategy of ‘Christianophobia’.

Cecil Andrews – ‘Take Heed’ Ministries – 13 January 2005

THE FOLLOWING NEWS CAME TO MY ATTENTION JUST A FEW HOURS AFTER THE ABOVE ARTICLE WAS POSTED TO OUR MINISTRY WEBSITE

  • BBC PRODUCER RESIGNS OVER SPRINGER ‘BLASPHEMY’

Antony Pitts, a senior producer at BBC Radio 3, handed in his resignation after watching the BBC2 broadcast of Jerry Springer – the Opera, despite two personal interventions by director general Mark Thompson trying to persuade him to stay. This is the text of Mr Pitts’ resignation letter –

Following the broadcast of ‘Jerry Springer – The Opera’ on Saturday night on BBC 2 I have decided that I can no longer be a member of the BBC staff. I made my position clear to the Director-General of the BBC, Mark Thompson on Friday morning. Mark kindly took the time to telephone me on Friday evening and over the course of nearly 40 minutes we discussed the nature of the broadcast – which I had understood from news sources such as BBC Radio 4, bbc.co.uk, The Independent, The Daily Telegraph to contain elements that were clearly blasphemous in any ordinary understanding of the word. Mark, however, persuaded me (if I could bear it) to watch the broadcast before making any further decision. Having now watched the show in its entirety and the hour-long introductory broadcast, my conclusion was that the blasphemy was far, far worse than even the most detailed reports had led me to believe.

Here are a few specific examples out of many – although words even now do not convey the offensiveness of these elements in their context:-

The introduction of and dialogue with the Jesus figure containing all kinds of abuse, insults, profanity and deliberate mockery of the Lord’s Name.

  • The ridiculing of the figure of Jesus on the Cross, dressed to imply sexual perversion.
  • The repeated mockery of the wounds (stigmata) of Jesus, linked to acts of crudeness.
  • The singing of “Jerry eleison” as a contemptuous travesty of an act of worship.
  • As I understand it, the current legal definition of blasphemy is as follows

“Every publication is said to be blasphemous which contains any contemptuous, reviling, scurrilous or ludicrous matter relating to God, Jesus Christ, or the Bible, or the formularies of the Church of England as by law established. It is not blasphemous to speak or publish opinions hostile to the Christian religion, or to deny the existence of God, if the publication is couched in decent and temperate language. The test to be applied is as to the manner in which doctrines are advocated and not as to the substance of the doctrines themselves. Everyone who publishes any blasphemous document is guilty of the [offence] of publishing a blasphemous libel. Everyone who speaks blasphemous words is guilty of the [offence] of blasphemy.” (article 214 of Stephen’s Digest of the Criminal Law. 9th ed., 1950 – confirmed by Lord Scarman, 1979, and the European Court of Human Rights, 1996).

Mark Thompson himself gave me an impromptu definition of blasphemy, which tallies well with the above.

One of the arguments used before the broadcast was that the stage show had not been attacked for blasphemy. My answer before watching the show was that by the time the blasphemous elements were introduced, any member of the audience would have been so desensitised by the continuous swearing and gross sexual references that nothing would shock any longer. My answer after watching the show is that anyone likely to pursue a case for blasphemy would not have remained in the theatre long enough to witness it.

I am very proud to have been part of the BBC, one of the UK’s most important institutions, and particularly to have worked for BBC Radio 3 (90-93FM) since 1992. I would like again to be part of the BBC, but a corner has been turned. I feel a corporate responsibility for what has happened – aggravated by the fact that we, the BBC, did not give sufficient attention to the overwhelming level of listener protest in advance. The BBC was intended to be a beacon of inspiration to the country. The Latin inscription on Broadcasting House reads –

“This Temple of the Arts and Muses is dedicated to Almighty God by the first Governors of Broadcasting in the year 1931, Sir John Reith being Director-General. It is their prayer that good seed sown may bring forth a harvest and that people, inclining their ear to whatsoever things are beautiful and honest and of good report, may tread the path of wisdom and uprightness”

My prayer is Kyrie eleison.

Antony Pitts

Senior Producer, BBC Radio 3

9 January 2005

Mr Pitts is to be commended for this very personal and courageous stand against the stubborn wickedness of the BBC and I commend him and his family to you for your prayerful remembrance. Just reading over ‘The Latin inscription on Broadcasting House’ was a sombre reminder of how quickly the Godly intentions of those first Governors were trodden underfoot in the battle for ‘ratings’. ‘What is any man or corporation profited if they gain the largest viewing figures in the whole wide world and lose their own souls’.

Cecil Andrews – ‘Take Heed’ Ministries – 14 January 2005

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusmail