Reformed Churchmen

We are Confessional Calvinists and a Prayer Book Church-people. In 2012, we remembered the 350th anniversary of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer; also, we remembered the 450th anniversary of John Jewel's sober, scholarly, and Reformed "An Apology of the Church of England." In 2013, we remembered the publication of the "Heidelberg Catechism" and the influence of Reformed theologians in England, including Heinrich Bullinger's Decades. For 2014: Tyndale's NT translation. For 2015, John Roger, Rowland Taylor and Bishop John Hooper's martyrdom, burned at the stakes. Books of the month. December 2014: Alan Jacob's "Book of Common Prayer" at: http://www.amazon.com/Book-Common-Prayer-Biography-Religious/dp/0691154813/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1417814005&sr=8-1&keywords=jacobs+book+of+common+prayer. January 2015: A.F. Pollard's "Thomas Cranmer and the English Reformation: 1489-1556" at: http://www.amazon.com/Thomas-Cranmer-English-Reformation-1489-1556/dp/1592448658/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1420055574&sr=8-1&keywords=A.F.+Pollard+Cranmer. February 2015: Jaspar Ridley's "Thomas Cranmer" at: http://www.amazon.com/Thomas-Cranmer-Jasper-Ridley/dp/0198212879/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1422892154&sr=8-1&keywords=jasper+ridley+cranmer&pebp=1422892151110&peasin=198212879

Showing posts with label King James Bible. Show all posts
Showing posts with label King James Bible. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

UK Prime Minister: Commemorating 400th Anniversary of the KJV


Commemorating the version's 400th anniversary


Check against delivery version

Prime Minister:


It’s great to be here and to have this opportunity to come together today to mark the end of this very special 400th anniversary year for the King James Bible.


I know there are some who will question why I am giving this speech.

And if they happen to know that I’m setting out my views today in a former home of the current Archbishop of Canterbury…


…and in front of many great theologians and church leaders…

…they really will think I have entered the lions’ den.
But I am proud to stand here and celebrate the achievements of the King James Bible.

Not as some great Christian on a mission to convert the world.

But because, as Prime Minister, it is right to recognise the impact of a translation that is, I believe, one of this country’s greatest achievements.


The Bible is a book that has not just shaped our country, but shaped the world.

And with 3 Bibles sold or given away every second…

…a book that is not just important in understanding our past, but which will continue to have a profound impact in shaping our collective future.

In making this speech I claim no religious authority whatsoever.

I am a committed – but I have to say vaguely practising – Church of England Christian, who will stand up for the values and principles of my faith…

…but who is full of doubts and, like many, constantly grappling with the difficult questions when it comes to some of the big theological issues.
But what I do believe is this.

The King James Bible is as relevant today as at any point in its 400 year history.

And none of us should be frightened of recognising this.

Why?

Put simply, three reasons.

First, the King James Bible has bequeathed a body of language that permeates every aspect of our culture and heritage…

….from everyday phrases to our greatest works of literature, music and art.

We live and breathe the language of the King James Bible, sometimes without even realising it.

And it is right that we should acknowledge this – particularly in this anniversary year.

Second, just as our language and culture is steeped in the Bible, so too is our politics.

From human rights and equality to our constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy…

…from the role of the church in the first forms of welfare provision, to the many modern day faith-led social action projects…


…the Bible has been a spur to action for people of faith throughout history, and it remains so today.

Third, we are a Christian country.

And we should not be afraid to say so.

Let me be clear: I am not in any way saying that to have another faith – or no faith – is somehow wrong.

I know and fully respect that many people in this country do not have a religion.
And I am also incredibly proud that Britain is home to many different faith communities, who do so much to make our country stronger.
But what I am saying is that the Bible has helped to give Britain a set of values and morals which make Britain what it is today.
Values and morals we should actively stand up and defend.

The alternative of moral neutrality should not be an option.

You can’t fight something with nothing.

Because if we don’t stand for something, we can’t stand against anything.

Let me take each of these points in turn.

First, language and culture.

Powerful language is incredibly evocative.

It crystallises profound, sometimes complex, thoughts and suggests a depth of meaning far beyond the words on the page…
…giving us something to share, to cherish, to celebrate.
Part of the glue that can help to bind us together.

Along with Shakespeare, the King James Bible is a high point of the English language…
…creating arresting phrases that move, challenge and inspire.
One of my favourites is the line “For now we see through a glass, darkly.”
It is a brilliant summation of the profound sense that there is more to life, that we are imperfect, that we get things wrong, that we should strive to see beyond our own perspective.
The key word is darkly – profoundly loaded, with many shades of meaning.

I feel the power is lost in some more literal translations.

The New International Version says: “Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror”
The Good News Bible: “What we see now is like a dim image in a mirror”
They feel not just a bit less special but dry and cold, and don’t quite have the same magic and meaning.
Like Shakespeare, the King James translation dates from a period when the written word was intended to be read aloud.
And this helps to give it a poetic power and sheer resonance that in my view is not matched by any subsequent translation.
It has also contributed immensely to the spread of spoken English around the world.
Indeed, the language of the King James Bible is very much alive today.

I’ve already mentioned the lions’ den.

Just think about some of the other things we all say.

Phrases like strength to strength…

…how the mighty are fallen…

…the skin of my teeth…

…the salt of the earth.

… nothing new under the sun.

According to one recent study there are 257 of these phrases and idioms that come from the Bible.
These phrases are all around us…

…from court cases to TV sitcoms…

…and from recipe books to pop music lyrics.

Of course, there is a healthy debate about the extent to which it was the King James version that originated the many phrases in our language today.


And it’s right to recognise the impact of earlier versions like Tyndale, Wycliffe, Douai-Rheims, the Bishops and Geneva Bibles too.


The King James Bible does exactly that…

…setting out with the stated aim of making a good translation better, or out of many good ones, to make “one principall good one”

But what is clear is that the King James version gave the Bible’s many expressions a much more widespread public presence.

Much of that dissemination has come through our literature, through the great speeches we remember and the art and music we still enjoy today.


From Milton to Morrison…

…and Coleridge to Cormac McCarthy…

…the Bible supports the plot, context, language and sometimes even the characters in some of our greatest literature.

Tennyson makes over 400 Biblical references in his poems.


…and makes allusions to 42 different books of the Bible.

The Bible has infused some of the greatest speeches…

…from Martin Luther King’s dream that Isaiah’s prophecy would be fulfilled and that one day “every valley shall be exalted…


…to Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg address which employed not just Biblical words but cadence and rhythms borrowed from the King James Bible as well.


When Lincoln said that his forefathers “brought forth” a new nation, he was imitating the way in which the Bible announced the birth of Jesus.

The Bible also runs through our art.

From Giotto to El Greco…

…and Michelangelo to Stanley Spencer.

The paintings in Sandham Memorial Chapel in Berkshire are some of my favourite works of art.
Those who died in Salonika rising to heaven is religious art in the modern age and, in my view, as powerful as some of what has come before.

And the Bible runs through our music too.

From the great oratorios like J S Bach’s Matthew and John Passions and Handel’s Messiah…

…to the wealth of music written across the ages for mass and evensong in great cathedrals like this one.

The Biblical settings of composers from Tallis to Taverner are regularly celebrated here in this great cathedral…

…and will sustain our great British tradition of choral music for generations to come.

It’s impossible to do justice in a short speech to the full scale of the cultural impact of the King James Bible.

But what is clear is that four hundred years on, this book is still absolutely pivotal to our language and culture.

And that’s one very good reason for us all to recognise it today.

A second reason is this.

Just as our language and culture is steeped in the Bible, so too is our politics.

The Bible runs through our political history in a way that is often not properly recognised.

The history and existence of a constitutional monarchy owes much to a Bible in which Kings were anointed and sanctified with the authority of God…


….and in which there was a clear emphasis on the respect for Royal Power and the need to maintain political order.

Jesus said: “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”

And yet at the same time, the Judeo-Christian roots of the Bible also provide the foundations for protest and for the evolution of our freedom and democracy.


The Torah placed the first limits on Royal Power.

And the knowledge that God created man in his own image was, if you like, a game changer for the cause of human dignity and equality.


In the ancient world this equity was inconceivable.

In Athens for example, full and equal rights were the preserve of adult, free born men.

But when each and every individual is related to a power above all of us…

…and when every human being is of equal and infinite importance, created in the very image of God…

…we get the irrepressible foundation for equality and human rights…

…a foundation that has seen the Bible at the forefront of the emergence of democracy, the abolition of slavery…

…and the emancipation of women – even if not every church has always got the point!
Crucially the translation of the Bible into English made all this accessible to many who had previously been unable to comprehend the Latin versions.

And this created an unrelenting desire for change.

The Putney debates in the Church of St Mary the Virgin in 1647 saw the first call for One Man, One vote…

…and the demand that authority be invested in the House of Commons rather than the King.

Reading the Bible in English gave people equality with each other through God.

And this led them to seek equality with each other through government.

In a similar way, the Bible provides a defining influence on the formation of the first welfare state.

In Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus says that whatever people have done “unto one of the least of these my brethren”…

… they have done unto him.

Just as in the past it was the influence of the church that enabled hospitals to be built, charities created, the hungry fed, the sick nursed and the poor given shelter…


…so today faith based groups are at the heart of modern social action.

Organisations like the Church Urban Fund which has supported over 5,000 faith based projects in England’s poorest communities…

…including the Near Neighbours Programme which Eric Pickles helped to launch last month.

And St Ethelburga’s Centre for Reconciliation and Peace in London’s Bishopsgate…

…a building once destroyed by an IRA bomb…

…but now a centre where people divided by conflict, culture or religion can meet and listen to each other’s perspective.


In total, there are almost 30 thousand faith based charities in this country…

…not to mention the thousands of people who step forward as individuals, as families, as communities, as organisations and yes, as churches….


…and do extraordinary things to help build a bigger, richer, stronger, more prosperous and more generous society.

And when it comes to the great humanitarian crises – like the famine in Horn of Africa – again you can count on faith-based organisations…

…like Christian Aid, Tearfund, CAFOD, Jewish Care, Islamic Relief, and Muslim Aid…
…to be at the forefront of the action to save lives.

So it’s right to recognise the huge contribution our faith communities make to our politics.

…and to recognise the role of the Bible in inspiring many of their works.

People often say that politicians shouldn’t “do God.”

If by that they mean we shouldn’t try to claim a direct line to God for one particular political party…

…they could not be more right.

But we shouldn’t let our caution about that stand in the way of recognising both what our faith communities bring to our country…


…and also just how incredibly important faith is to so many people in Britain.

The Economist may have published the obituary of God in their Millennium issue.

But in the past century, the proportion of people in the world who adhere to the four biggest religions has actually increased from around two-thirds to nearly three quarters…

…and is forecast to continue rising.

For example, it is now thought there are at least 65 million protestants in China and 12 million Catholics – more Christians than there are members of the communist party.


Official numbers indicate China has about 20 million Muslims – almost as many as in Saudi Arabia – and nearly twice as many as in the whole of the EU.


And by 2050, some people think China could well be both the world’s biggest Christian nation and its biggest Muslim one too.


Here in Britain we only have to look at the reaction to the Pope’s visit last year…

…this year’s Royal Wedding…
…or of course the festival of Christmas next week, to see that Christianity is alive and well in our country.

The key point is this.

Societies do not necessarily become more secular with modernity but rather more plural, with a wider range of beliefs and commitments.


And that brings me to my third point.

The Bible has helped to shape the values which define our country.

Indeed, as Margaret Thatcher once said, “we are a nation whose ideals are founded on the Bible.”

Responsibility, hard work, charity, compassion, humility, self-sacrifice, love…

…pride in working for the common good and honouring the social obligations we have to one another, to our families and our communities…


…these are the values we treasure.

Yes, they are Christian values.

And we should not be afraid to acknowledge that.

But they are also values that speak to us all – to people of every faith and none.

And I believe we should all stand up and defend them.

Those who oppose this usually make the case for secular neutrality.

They argue that by saying we are a Christian country and standing up for Christian values we are somehow doing down other faiths.


And that the only way not to offend people is not to pass judgement on their behaviour.

I think these arguments are profoundly wrong.

And being clear on this is absolutely fundamental to who we are as a people…

…what we stand for…

…and the kind of society we want to build.
First, those who say being a Christian country is doing down other faiths…

…simply don’t understand that it is easier for people to believe and practise other faiths when Britain has confidence in its Christian identity.


Many people tell me it is much easier to be Jewish or Muslim here in Britain than it is in a secular country like France.


Why?

Because the tolerance that Christianity demands of our society provides greater space for other religious faiths too.

And because many of the values of a Christian country are shared by people of all faiths and indeed by people of no faith at all.


Second, those who advocate secular neutrality in order to avoid passing judgement on the behaviour of others…

…fail to grasp the consequences of that neutrality…

…or the role that faith can play in helping people to have a moral code.
Let’s be clear.
Faith is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for morality.
There are Christians who don’t live by a moral code.
And there are atheists and agnostics who do.
But for people who do have a faith, their faith can be a helpful prod in the right direction.
And whether inspired by faith or not – that direction, that moral code, matters.
Whether you look at the riots last summer…

…the financial crash and the expenses scandal…

…or the on-going terrorist threat from Islamist extremists around the world…

…one thing is clear: moral neutrality or passive tolerance just isn’t going to cut it anymore.

Shying away from speaking the truth about behaviour, about morality…

…has actually helped to cause some of the social problems that lie at the heart of the lawlessness we saw with the riots.


The absence of any real accountability, or moral code…

…allowed some bankers and politicians to behave with scant regard for the rest of society.

And when it comes to fighting violent extremism, the almost fearful passive tolerance of religious extremism that has allowed segregated communities to behave in ways that run completely counter to our values…


… has not contained that extremism but allowed it to grow and prosper…

…in the process blackening the good name of the great religions that these extremists abuse for their own purposes.

Put simply, for too long we have been unwilling to distinguish right from wrong.

“Live and let live” has too often become “do what you please”.
Bad choices have too often been defended as just different lifestyles.

To be confident in saying something is wrong…

…is not a sign of weakness, it’s a strength.

But we can’t fight something with nothing.
As I’ve said if we don’t stand for something, we can’t stand against anything.

One of the biggest lessons of the riots last Summer is that we’ve got stand up for our values if we are to confront the slow-motion moral collapse that has taken place in parts of our country these past few generations.

The same is true of religious extremism.

As President Obama wrote in the Audacity of Hope:

“…in reaction to religious overreach we equate tolerance with secularism, and forfeit the moral language that would help infuse our politics with larger meaning.”


Frankly, we need a lot less of the passive tolerance of recent years and a much more active, muscular liberalism.

A passively tolerant society says to its citizens, as long as you obey the law we will just leave you alone.

It stands neutral between different values.

But I believe a genuinely liberal country does much more; it believes in certain values and actively promotes them.

We need to stand up for these values.

To have the confidence to say to people – this is what defines us as a society…

…and that to belong here is to believe in these things.

I believe the church – and indeed all our religious leaders and their communities in Britain – have a vital role to play in helping to achieve this.

I have never really understood the argument some people make about the church not getting involved in politics.

To me, Christianity, faith, religion, the Church and the Bible are all inherently involved in politics because so many political questions are moral questions.


So I don’t think we should be shy or frightened of this.

I certainly don’t object to the Archbishop of Canterbury expressing his views on politics.
Religion has a moral basis and if he doesn’t agree with something he’s right to say so.

But just as it is legitimate for religious leaders to make political comments, he shouldn’t be surprised when I respond.


Also it’s legitimate for political leaders to say something about religious institutions as they see them affecting our society, not least in the vital areas of equality and tolerance.


I believe the Church of England has a unique opportunity to help shape the future of our communities.

But to do so it must keep on the agenda that speaks to the whole country.

The future of our country is at a pivotal moment.

The values we draw from the Bible go to the heart of what it means to belong in this country…

…and you, as the Church of England, can help ensure that it stays that way.

Monday, November 28, 2011

Archbishop of Canterbury's Sermon at Westminster Abbey--400th Anniversary of KJV

Archbishop of Canterbury's sermon at Westminster Abbey - 400th anniversary of the King James Bible

By Rowan Williams
http://www.anglicancommunion.org/acns/news.cfm/2011/11/16/ACNS4976
Nov. 16, 2011

What is a good translation? Not one that just allows me to say, when I pick it up, 'Now I understand'. Of course, if I'm faced with a text in a strange language, I need to be able simply to read it; but a good translation will be an invitation to read again, and to probe, and reflect, and imagine with the text. Rather than letting me say, 'Now I understand', it prompts the response, 'Now the work begins.'

One of the most striking things in the wonderful Preface to the King James Bible composed by Miles Smith is the clear conviction that there is never an ideal or a final translation. To translate any work of significance is to reveal a certain range of meanings in the original; but there will always be, as the 1611 translators fully recognized, another range that hasn't yet been captured and will need another round of engagement with the text. If this is true of any important text, how much more true is it of Scripture, where the meanings are the self-communications of an infinite mind and love? The invitation that Scripture offers is an invitation to a pilgrimage further and further into the mysteries of that mind and love; and a good translation of the Bible must therefore be one that opens out on wider and wider horizons.


We have all suffered from a mindset in the last couple of centuries that has assumed there is an end to translating and understanding and thus that there is something wrong with any version of a text that fails to settle disputes and to provide an account of the truth that no-one could disagree with. But what the 1611 translators grasped was that hearing the Word of God was a lifelong calling that had to be undertaken in the company of other readers and was never something that left us where we started. Of course they believed, and said so robustly in that same Preface, that the essential lines of Christian belief were clearly laid out - belief in God the Creator, God who makes covenant with his people, God who becomes flesh and creates a new and universal community of believers by the death and rising again of the Word made flesh and the gift of the Holy Spirit, God who justifies us in freedom, not as a reward for good works. But this is not so much the revelation of a series of self-contained truths as an inundation of vision, a flooding of human language that can be strange and extreme and bewildering; it is a vision whose presence makes the sacred writers stumble and search for words at least as much as it makes them fluent and persuasive.

Doesn't St Paul say just that in I Corinthians 2? 'My speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power.' That 'demonstration' may be most powerful when it is most inarticulate by normal standards, and Paul himself illustrates this again and again. 'What shall we say then to these things?' he asks, as he lets himself be swept along lyrically by the joyful mysteries of Romans 8; and 'O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God.' he exclaims as he lays out the sorrowful mysteries of Romans 11, his agonised meditation on choice and rejection in the history of Israel and humanity and each human soul. His tortuous path towards the celebration of grace is no easy argument but a wrestling with the shattering implications of the events of Jesus' life and death. And a good translation is one that leads us through Paul's wrestling in all its clumsiness and passion.

And think too of how the Old Testament prophets cope with this shattering of their world; of Ezekiel trying to evoke the vision of the chariot of the Almighty filling the sky, awkwardly qualifying everything he says with 'as it were', and 'the likeness of', or 'the appearance of'. 'Above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it...This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. And when I saw it, I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake' (Ezek.1.26, 28b). What makes the translation a good translation is that there is no attempt to smooth over the stumbling of the original: it was if it were like the impression of something, as it were...This is the precision of revelation because it is language showing the weight it bears, the weight of a Word from outside ordinary categories. And the 1611 translators never let us down in this, never seek to make it easy. It is one of the things that gives this version its abiding importance. It remains an invitation to work, to open up our own language to this weight of presence and gift.

'In the beginning was the Word'. Before anything, God is a God whose life pours out in the intelligence of love, necessarily and always. Every created word, even the words we use to speak of this eternal truth, will be struggling breathlessly to keep up with the Word itself, himself. The English Reformation often made use of the phrase 'God's Word written' to describe Scripture. And we should not take this to mean a mechanical dictation; rather it says that when human language writes what God does and says in all his acts throughout history, the Bible is what it looks like. Wax bearing the imprint of what I called just now the weight of the Word. To read or rather to hear that Word in our reading and hearing of Scripture is not to thumb through a volume of records and commands but to absorb Scripture's language in such a way, at such a depth, that we sense that weight and accept the burden and the joy of labouring at a lifelong response to it.

I've mentioned hearing as well as reading. It's easy to forget that when the 1611 Bible was first published it was not yet a volume that everyone could be expected to own. Like its Reformed predecessors, Tyndale's Bible, the Geneva Bible, the Bishops' Bible-and unlike its Catholic parallel, the Rheims/Douai version-it was meant to be read aloud. And that means that it was meant to be part of an event, a shared experience. Gathered as a Christian community, the parish would listen, in the context of praise, reflection and instruction, to Scripture being read: it provided the picture of a whole renewed universe within which all the other activities made sense. It would not be immediately intelligible by any means, but it marked out the territory of God's work of grace. It affirmed, with St Paul in II Corinthians, that the landscape of the world was illuminated by the new and radical act of God in Jesus Christ, so that the standards of this world and society were shown to be under judgement; yet it also affirmed that this illumination was something it took time to get used to, time to find words for, and that the clay pots of custom and ritual were both necessary and problematic - and that this was simply how human beings heard and echoed the Word. 'How can man preach Thy eternal Word?' asked George Herbert a couple of decades after 1611; 'he is a brittle, crazy glass.' But, as that great poem of Herbert's goes on to claim, even in fragile material God's story can be sealed and printed, and the light come through.

So to celebrate the Bible of 1611 is not to genuflect before a timeless masterpiece, to salute a perfect translation; the translators would have been both baffled and embarrassed by any such idea. It is to recognize the absolute seriousness with which they sought to find in our language words that would pass on to us hearers and readers in the English tongue the almost unbearable weight of divine intelligence and love pressing down on those who first encountered it and tried to embody it in writing; those who like Moses and Ezekiel found themselves overwhelmed by the sheer 'density' of divine presence, those who like St Paul found themselves dizzy with the number of connections and interrelations between God's acts over the ages and unable to put it all into a theory, only into a hymn. The temptation is always there for the modern translator to look for strategies that make the text more accessible; and when that temptation comes, it doesn't hurt to turn for a moment-for some long moments indeed-to this extraordinary text, with its continuing capacity to surprise us into seriousness, to acquaint us again with the weight of glory - and, we hope and pray, to send us back to the unending work of letting ourselves be changed so that we can bear just a little more of the light of the new world, full of grace and truth.

Christopher Southgate wrote a poem for the meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature here in London last July which captures much of this, and I end with its opening words:

'To begin on the Bible
To be caught by the rise of a huge wave breaking
To know all the conflict and chaos to be faced
If their book could not command
The nation, the language, in a foment of becoming.
They heard Scripture's ancient voices, remote,
Tasting of the desert,
Its longing, in a strange land.

Their task they called
A paradise of trees of life.
Long hard years
They walked in this forest.'
So we listen in turn;
and we walk into that forest, among the trees of life.

END

Saturday, January 8, 2011

REPUBLICANS TO READ BIBLE ON HOUSE FLOOR | Weekly World News


REPUBLICANS TO READ BIBLE ON HOUSE FLOOR | Weekly World News

REPUBLICANS TO READ BIBLE ON HOUSE FLOOR
Posted on Friday, January 7th, 2011
By Frank Lake

WASHINGTON - A day after reading the U.S. Constitution, Republicans will read the Bible in the house floor.

After Republicans finished reading the U.S. Constitution on the house floor, Speaker of the House, John Boehner, announced they would follow-up today with full reading of the King James version of The Bible.

Every Democrat in the House objected to the Speaker’s decision, many of them citing the separation of Church and State.

“The U.S. Constitution was based on the Bible. Our founding fathers wanted the Bible to be an important part of daily life for members of Congress. I intend to have The Bible read, in its entirety, at least once a year, as long as I am Speaker of the House,” said John Boehner.

As lawmakers prepared for the first-ever reading of the Bible on the House floor, a brief debate erupted Thursday over exactly which portions of it should be read – and who should read it.

“We’re reading it all. From alpha to omega,” said Boehner.

Eric Cantor (R-VA), the only Jewish Republican in the House, will get things started by reading Genesis. John Boehner has decided to read Exodus – “I feel a bit like Moses. I want to lead my people out of tyranny and oppression. I want to bring the two parted sides of the Red Sea, Republican and Democrat, together and lead them to the Promised Land of small government.”

Paul Ryan (R-WI), the head of the Budget Committee will read the Book of Numbers, right after Darryl Issa (R-CA), the Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform reads Leviticus.

Former Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi has requested that she read the Book of Job. She’ll be wearing a traditional Muslim head scarf when she does so.

Although many viewed the reading of The Bible as a nod to the conservative “tea party” movement, which pushes for a return to a more religious government, many Democrats are fighting to read the part of Jesus, when Congress makes it to The New Testament.

“Barack Obama will read the Jesus passages,” said outgoing White House Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs. President Obama wants to re-establish his Christian roots and as Gibbs went on to say, “there is nobody else in America more qualified to read the part of Jesus than Barack Obama.”

There are many, many Senators and Congressmen vying to read the role of Judas. As of this writing, no decision was made.

But rest assured when John Boehner hears Michele Bachmann read Psalms, there will be weeping and wailing.

If you have any suggestions for passages of the Bible that a certain member of Congress should read, please comment here and we will forward to John Boehner.

Monday, January 3, 2011

BBC: King James Bible and its Literary Legacy


http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00xh4t4

The BBC produced an excellent story here.

James Naughtie tells the story of the King James Bible and its literary legacy.

This is part one of three. As parts two and three emerge, we will bring them to you.

Sunday, December 12, 2010

Secularists attack Bible readings on BBC--Anniversary of King James Bible


We just wrote a letter to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth 11, about 2011 and the King James Bible, the 400th anniversary. You may read that here. http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2010/12/letter-to-her-majesty-queen-elizabeth.html We are finding that there are several, on-going projects in England. We are finding few in the U.S. We bring an article from the "Telegraph" in England.



Secularists attack day of Bible readings on Radio 4

The BBC will devote nearly a whole day of Radio 4 to readings from the King James Bible to mark the 400th anniversary of its publication.

The first issue of the first edition of the 'Authorised Version' of the English Bible, printed in London in 1611 by Robert Barker. Commissioned by King James I, it is also known as the King James Version Photo.

Regular shows will be dropped from the schedule to make way for the readings, which will run from early morning till midnight.

While the move has been welcomed by the Church, it has prompted secularists to complain to the BBC at what they believe is "excessive" coverage.

The 28 Bible passages, each 15-minutes long, will be introduced by the Archbishop Rowan Williams, Simon Schama and Will Self, and recorded by actors including Samuel West, Emilia Fox and Hugh Bonneville.

The Church of England is 'living in the past', says BBC's head of religion (06 Feb 2010).

The Church warns BBC over religion (16 May 2010).

They will be broadcast next month over 16 hours with only occasional breaks for the most popular Radio 4 shows, such as the Archers and Gardeners' Question Time.

The Rt Rev Graham James, Bishop of Norwich, said the BBC's coverage was an encouraging sign it recognised the significance of the King James Bible.

"This sends out a very good signal, but it is not just about religious broadcasting, but about the Bible in the life of the nation," said the bishop who chairs the BBC's Standing Conference on Religion and Belief.

"The BBC is not being kind to Christians, but recognising the place of the Bible in the nation.

"It has had an impact on our culture, our history and our language and it has helped to create our sense of who we are as a people."

James Catford, chief executive of the Bible Society, said he was thrilled at the BBC's decision to clear so much time for the readings.

"For the last four hundred years the King James Bible has been a source of inspiration for millions of people across the globe," he said.

"This will enable listeners to hear this amazing book which still speaks to us today."

However, Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, criticised the decision to give so much time to the Bible readings.

"It is fair enough to have a programme devoted to it, but the coverage is so excessive it beggars belief," he said.

"The BBC is supposed to be for everybody, not just Christians, so to devote a whole day to a minority, which is what Christians now are, is unfair to other listeners who may want something different."

A BBC spokesman said: "The King James Bible is generally accepted to have had a significant impact on our language, the arts and music.

"A 400th anniversary is a rather special landmark, and we feel it is appropriate that the BBC sets aside part of one day's scheduling to mark such an event.

The readings will be broadcast on January 9 and will follow three programmes presented by James Naughtie, the veteran Today presenter, who will explore why James decided on a new translation of the Bible and its continuing influence on British culture.

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

King James Bible

THE AUTHORIZED KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE PART 1



THE AUTHORIZED KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE PART 2



THE AUTHORIZED KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE PART 3

Saturday, December 4, 2010

Letter to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth 11

(Mailed in the week of the First Sunday in Advent, 2010)

Donald Philip Veitch
125 Kemberly Court
Jacksonville, North Carolina
United States of America 28540

5 December 2010
Second Sunday in Advent

Her Majesty, the Queen
Buckingham Palace
London SW1A 1AA

Madam:

I write as an Anglican in a distressful, confused, and American Babylonian Exile. I forego elaboration.

I viewed your brief presentation to the General Synod of the Church of England of date 23 November 2010, including the reference to the King James Bible. As such, I was encouraged to write.

Your Majesty, I most respectfully request consideration of the following:

1. A public call by Your Majesty in 2011 to all primates, bishops, dioceses and parishes throughout the worldwide Anglican communion to commemorate the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible, so long a governing force for the Protestant and Reformed faith in the English world.

2. A public call by Your Majesty in 2012 to all primates, bishops, dioceses and parishes throughout the worldwide Anglican communion to commemorate the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, the legal book of worship for the Church of England. This would be the 350th anniversary. Notwithstanding modern currents against its use, a word from Your Majesty, suggesting one Lord’s Day--just one Lord's Day--in 2012 for use of "The Morning Prayer, the Litany and the Holy Communion" would be welcomed, recalibrative, and respectful of our common doctrine, worship and piety.

3. Upon the good news of Prince William’s and Kate Middleton’s marriage-to-be at Westminster Abbey on 29 April 2011, it is hoped that the service for the 1662 Book of Common Prayer will be used.

4. Your Majesty, the coronation oath of 1953 and 1701 brings hope and consolation for the future. “Will you to the utmost of your power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law? Will you maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England?” Your Majesty’s support would resound worldwide—as it ought.

I fully realize that Your Majesty is busy and that a form letter will be issued. Nonetheless, I pray that a staff member will present these matters to Your Majesty for your consideration.

Additionally, although an American, I use the 1662 Book of Common Prayer daily and throughout the year, including the singing and use of Psalter-lections as aided by that stellar CD-set from St. Paul’s Cathedral, London. Yes, I also pray for Your Majesty, Philip the Duke of Edinburgh, and Charles Prince of Wales—by day and night, at 10 A.M. and 4 P.M.—along with the President of the United States of America. As such, you may understand that this scribe is an American Anglican in a dry, arid, and forlorn Babylonian Exile. There is no interest in that old, goodly and godly Book in my country. We so desperately need that old doctrine, worship and piety.

I have copied Your Majesty’s two Archbishops and five Professor-Scholar-Pastors with constituencies of concern, if not fear, for the success and maintenance of the revered, lawful, biblical, Protestant and Reformed faith of the Church of England.

I have the honor to remain, Madam,
Your Majesty's most humble and obedient servant by way of prayer and support,

(Signed)

Donald Philip Veitch


Cc:
The Office of the Archbishop of Canterbury, UK
The Office of the Archbishop of York, UK
The Rev. Dr. R. Scott Clark (Professor, Westminster Theological Seminary, California)
The Rev. Mr. Richard Ingalls, Jr. (Rector, Mariners’ Anglican Church, Detroit, MI)
The Rev. Dr. Allen C. Guelzo (Professor, Gettysburg College, Gettysburg, PA)
The Rev. Dr. R.C. Sproul (Ligonier Ministries, Lake Mary, FL)
The Rev. Dr. Richard Turnbull (Principal, Wycliffe Hall, Oxford University, UK)