Sunday, April 06, 2014
This was the processional hymn at St Paul's Cathedral, Dunedin this morning and, except as the choir processed past me, I felt like I was singing a solo.
However I needed this to restore some faith in why I, for the time being, remain committed to Anglicanism.
In searching on Youtube I began to believe it might be a Catholic hymn. There are hundreds of versions there, many as part of Catholic services, but this one, although posted by a Baptist church with obviously US spelling, is sung by the choir of Norwich Cathedral and I was pleased to learn it was composed by an Anglican, George W. Hitchin and sung in Winchester Cathedral in 1887.
It lends itself to Cathedral processions with the cross held high at the front.
Oh how I wish I could be in St Paul's Cathedral, Dunedin next Sunday when I am sure it will be packed. Present will be the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and I was offered a ticket. Sadly, several months ago I chose next weekend for our hikers' camp in the Catlins and as I am the chief organiser I can hardly absent myself.
A number of events in the past week have caused me to wonder if I want to be associated with any church anymore.
First a matter that does not really concern me, except for a number years I found consolation in a Catholic environment. When Sydney Anglicanism had me in despair, I found acceptance among the Catholic brothers and lay teachers with whom I worked. I knew then that the hierarchy were not supportive and that Cardinal Pell in particular was abhorrent.
Earlier this year there was a newspaper article writen by a previous Premier of NSW, Kristina Kenneally.
Some excerpts were very apt.
He's a product of a particular time and culture in the Catholic Church. I can't imagine he was overjoyed as Bishop of Sydney to have me, a theologically-trained Catholic feminist Premier on his hands.
Tuesday, April 01, 2014
The UN's International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled that the Japanese government must halt its whaling programme in the Antarctic.It agreed with Australia, which brought the case in May 2010, that the programme was not for scientific research as claimed by Tokyo.
Japan said it would abide by the decision but added it "regrets and is deeply disappointed by the decision".
Australia argued that the programme was commercial whaling in disguise.
The court's decision is considered legally binding.
Japan had argued that the suit brought by Australia was an attempt to impose its cultural norms on Japan.
Science 'myth' Reading out the judgement on Monday, Presiding Judge Peter Tomka said the court had decided, by 12 votes to four, that Japan should withdraw all permits and licenses for whaling in the Antarctic and refrain from issuing any new ones.
It said Japan had caught some 3,600 minke whales since its current programme began in 2005, but the scientific output was limited.
Japan signed up to a moratorium on whaling in 1986, but continued whaling in the north and south Pacific under provisions that allowed for scientific research. Norway and Iceland rejected the provision and continued commercial whaling.
Nori Shikata, political minister at Japan's UK embassy, said Tokyo would abide by the ICJ decision The meat from the slaughtered whales is sold commercially in Japan.Japan has clashed repeatedly with Australia and some other western countries, which strongly oppose whaling on conservation grounds. Japan has argued that minke whales and a number of other species are plentiful and that its whaling activities are sustainable.A spokesman for Greenpeace UK, Willie MacKenzie, welcomed the ICJ's decision."The myth that this hunt was in any way scientific can now be dismissed once and for all," he said.