SHE may be the youngest voice of Islamic fundamentalism to be broadcast in Australia.

[sambuau2015]

http://mobile.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/video-of-8-year-old-jihad-girl-urging-islamic-uprising/st...

[sambuau2015]

---

@*julia*2010 wrote:

i'm intrigued.

can you say what you're suing them for?

without too much detail, if you can.

---

Actually Julia,when people say that there is a separation of church and state that is not true.Federally yes but not at State Govt level.

The Anglican Church of Australia Constitution Act 1961 sets out in legislation the doctrine of the Church as well as the Creeds and the book of Common prayer etc.

It shows that a person cannot be a priest in the Anglican Church unless they believe the doctrine.

So the doctrine,i.e that Jesus died upon the Cross for the salvation of mankind and rose on the third day and ascended into Heaven is not only the doctrine of the Church but enshrined in State Legislation.

It is not a game although there appear to be what is called "progressive Christians" who think they can preach anyu old thing they like.They cannot.Breaking the doctrine is a serious issue.

Too often it is done and thechurch wont act.I told the Primate the ArchBishop and the Bishop that if they do not act I will and I will take action against the Bishop for breeaches of doctrine and vows.

He could very well be thrown out for this.There is a special section of Canon Law that states that the Commission on such an application can move to immediate suspension.

[sambuau2015]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@sambuau2015 wrote:

---

@*julia*2010 wrote:

i'm intrigued.

can you say what you're suing them for?

without too much detail, if you can.

---

Yes Julia I will tell you.

There is a priest of the Anglican Church from Gosford NSW.He preaches that Jesus did not die on the cross and that Heaven does not exist and if it did it would be like the mardi gras.He doubts Jesus as an historical person,says the Bible is not inspired by the Holy Spirit and several other things.

That is blasphemy and a breach of Faith and constitution and doctrine.

The Bishop refuses to act.So I have taken an action against the Bishop for breach of faith,constitution,doctrine and vows.

I have sent the forms in to the Episcopal Commission.They have to start an investigation and can either throw it out or send it to the Tribunal.

---

I have sent the forms in to the Episcopal Commission. Would that be the Christian equivalent of a Sharia Law Council? And are its decisions legally binding?

---

They are binding in the Church.The State cannot intefere.

[Anonymous]

thanks for answering my question.

let us know how it goes.  

[the_great_she_elephant]

They are binding in the Church.The State cannot intefere.

It's sounding more like the Sharia Law Council by the minute.

[chuk_77]

baskins, az. Go to baskins

[imastawka]

Never tried Baskins.   But I lub choklit

             

[freshwater-2]

After reading this thread........

Thank god I'm an atheist.

[bluecat*dancing]

Poor Chucky. * Gives her a big squishy hug and a pat on the head*

I was just driven home by  SHOCK! HORROR! a MUSLIM MAN, after spending the evening with MUSLIM MEN! However, did I make it home alive?

Nothing like a good laugh before going to bed.

[sambuau2015]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

They are binding in the Church.The State cannot intefere.

It's sounding more like the Sharia Law Council by the minute.

---

It is nothing like sharia law.

1)It is Christian not muslim so it is based on truth not lies.

2)It purpose is to hear into matters of breach of faith doctrine vows or constitution or drunkedness ,failure to pay debts etc and things that bring the church into disrepute and sexually crimes or other criminality.

3)It is bindinging on members of the church and clergy.

4)In matters where a crime is alleged there is nothing to prevent the person seeking redress elsewhere.

But in most matters this is a matter for the church and the courts cannot  get involved.It has nothing to do with sharia law and your irrational need to defend muslims at every turn is showing again.

This is a system of running the church.Not the country.

More importantly this is ECCLIASTICAL. The used to be Eccliastical courts.So this has simply been moved bt the Legal System from being heard before  the Court in THEIR building as to being heard in ours.There will still be a Retired or sitting Supreme Court Judge in most cases 3 Bishops and 3 priests.

This was the law and no less than Common Law,.

[colic2bullsgirlore]

Interesting paper... I commend it to you

https://www.murdoch.edu.au/School-of-Law/_document/WA-jurist-documents/2014/Zimmermann---A-Christian...

The purpose of this article is to trace and evaluate the Christian influences upon the Australian legal system.

This is contrary to the growing trend of suppressing and denying the Christian heritage of law in Australia.

There is however strong evidence of this religious influence in the interpretation of the Australian constitutional

history, even though the inclusion of freedom of religion clause in the Commonwealth Constitution may be mistakenly

argued asindicative of constitutional secularism.

As this article intends to demonstrate, nothing could be further from the truth

While the Australian legal tradition cannot lay claim to the historical depth of America and England, it too was built on

solid foundations derived from the Christian worldview.

These foundations were largely inherited through Australia’s reception of the English common law, as  well as in

addition to the adoption of the American system of federalism. As with the American and English examples,

Christianity was embedded in Australian society during its major movement of legal reform namely, Federation and

Christian ideology penetrates both the legal and governmental customs that were developed.

As this article also indicates, many of these Christian legal traditions have endured till the present day.