This makes me happy for many reasons, a big one being that, should she reach the level of saint, bigoted Christians will have to come to terms with the holiness of *gasp* an Arab who *gasp* helped other Arabs!!!
@TransFat: Vague I realize, but a nun in an arab nation made me think that Switters will be rolling up any time now. Tom Robbins' fans in the house tonight?
I read the Daily Mail article and I'm confused as to what exactly this is supposed to achieve.
I don't think that baptising illegitimate children is uncommon in the Anglican church (I know plenty of Anglican bastards, including myself, who were baptised), so I don't see how this two-for-one deal does anything new to "effectively giv[e] its blessing to living in sin", as the Daily Mail puts it.
Is it supposed to be an incentive to get people married as in, "Yeah, we'll only baptise your kids if you get married"? Or is it supposed to be an incentive to get people baptising their kids (and thus, in theory, encouraging the growth of the Church) as in, "We'll only marry you if you get your bastard kids baptised"?
I don't think either one applies, because I don't think the Anglican church in the UK is especially hard-line on issues like that. And this is the sort of thing that people could arrange with their priest anyway (Eric Clapton did it, years ago, to cite one famous example), it doesn't need a special programme to make it happen. The whole thing just seems silly and pointless. I don't see the purpose.
yep I did this. I baptized my daughter and got married in the RC Church at the same time to please my mother. And ... it is one of my bigger regrets in life
@Grim Reaper of the Forest: doing them at all. I was already married by a civil ceremony, but did both the religious ones to please ma. That's a bad reason to do anything
Maybe if this couple had been married, their son wouldn't be a vampire. Oh sure, you'll look at the picture again and think he's just "missing teeth" because he's a "child." No. He's a day-walking vampire who sucks the blood of the innocent, all because his parents procreated out of wedlock. For shame, hippie mom and nattily-dressed dad. For shame.
@Maritsa: ahahahahaha - thank you, that really truly made my morning. Bad bad parents, they will regret it when he eats their other offspring one dark night.
@Maritsa: oh absolutely, that's why the little girl is cowering. The parents think it's sweet but she's thinking 'nooooo not only am i am an after-thought doomed to being cut out of family photos and ignored for long stretches of my teenage years but now I've got to learn how to defend myself from brother vampire as well, oh the sparkles, the sparkles."
@Ailatan: indeed - the Catholic Church proved more accomodating than The London Times newspaper when my goddaughter was born. They had no problem with baptising her while The Times refused to announce her birth as back then they didn't carry the birth announcements of 'illegitimate children'. Yes, really. This was 15 years ago, I think they do now.
@Ailatan: Yeah, this is not uncommon. I went to a ceremony recently where the bride was baptized, confirmed, had her First Communion, and got married, all at the same Mass. (Their child was already baptized and had already had her First Communion.)
@curiousgeorgiana: ha i sometimes do wonder you know. Strictly speaking we didn't 30 years ago but that was because the country was on strike rather than because we'd retreated into caves to rediscover fire...maybe.
11/23/09
11/23/09
2. There are already loads of Arab saints.
11/23/09
#tips
11/24/09
11/24/09
@CollegeCamel: I still comes across as really judgmental of religious people.
11/24/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
Just kidding, I'm not a nun. I've thought about it, though. Oh, man, I wish I could have seen the looks on your faces!
11/23/09
Just kidding! It is a really hilarious comment though.
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
07/24/09
I don't think that baptising illegitimate children is uncommon in the Anglican church (I know plenty of Anglican bastards, including myself, who were baptised), so I don't see how this two-for-one deal does anything new to "effectively giv[e] its blessing to living in sin", as the Daily Mail puts it.
Is it supposed to be an incentive to get people married as in, "Yeah, we'll only baptise your kids if you get married"? Or is it supposed to be an incentive to get people baptising their kids (and thus, in theory, encouraging the growth of the Church) as in, "We'll only marry you if you get your bastard kids baptised"?
I don't think either one applies, because I don't think the Anglican church in the UK is especially hard-line on issues like that. And this is the sort of thing that people could arrange with their priest anyway (Eric Clapton did it, years ago, to cite one famous example), it doesn't need a special programme to make it happen. The whole thing just seems silly and pointless. I don't see the purpose.
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
Oh. God damn it.
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
On that note, I'm gonna start advertising my "Hatch, Match, Patch" deal. Only this one includes free marital counseling if need be.
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
This seems like a good plan, and nice way to have a celebration for the whole family.
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09