You are currently browsing the monthly archive for July 2020.
During July, there were several British news items I did not have time to cover.
Without further ado, here they are …
St Swithin’s Day
July 15 was St Swithin’s Day, traditionally thought to successfully predict the weather for the next 40 days.
It was cool and cloudy.
So it is two weeks later.
The Mirror tried to debunk centuries of tradition that day by saying temps would reach 29° C that weekend. They never did, at least in the UK. We had a maximum of 24°.
Since then, it’s been cool, cloudy and rainy — with a few hours of sunshine here and there.
The Mirror was wrong. As my late grandmother-in-law always said: ‘The old ways are the best’.
This isn’t the first year I’ve tracked the weather following St Swithin’s Day.
Trust what happens on July 15 in the UK. That’s the weather for the next six weeks.
Admittedly, we might get the odd, sunny, warm day, such as today — but, that might be a rarity during the month ahead.
Friday, July 17
This was the day when temps reached a maximum of 24°.
More importantly, Princess Beatrice was married at Windsor. Her father, Prince Andrew, stayed out of the photos.
The wedding was small, in keeping with coronavirus guidelines:
Another wonderful event took place that day at Windsor. Captain Tom Moore, 100, received a socially-distanced knighthood from the Queen:
Captain Sir Tom Moore raised tens of millions of £££ for the NHS during the height of the pandemic by walking around his garden 100 times on a zimmer frame (walker). I am sure that was not easy for him, yet he persevered.
Afterward, the Second World War veteran said:
It’s been an absolutely outstanding day and you could never have believed I was never going to get such an honour as I have today. I really believed never ever would I be so privileged I could be so close to the Queen and speak to her, and that really was something absolutely outstanding.
Fantastic! May God continue to bless him abundantly.
Boris’s first anniversary as PM
Thursday, July 23 marked Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s first anniversary.
This delightful video shows clips of him promoting the 2010 Olympics when he was Mayor of London:
Although it’s been a miserable year, he has achieved the impossible, as Guido Fawkes reminds us:
- Defeated Corbyn
- Delivered Brexit
- Won an 80 seat Conservative Party majority
Boris listed many more achievements over the past year. He could not even list them all in two minutes:
But there was no time to rest, as Boris was busy planning for the best and the worst in the months ahead:
Conservatives are still happy with his performance:
Writing for UnHerd, Matthew Goodwin, professor of politics at the University of Kent, analysed Boris’s appeal among his supporters (emphases mine):
To find a similar degree of constant and tribal support for the Conservative brand, you have to go all the way back to the spring of 1987 when Margaret Thatcher began a similar period of total dominance in the polls that lasted for around two years. Though even that is a little misleading — Thatcher might have had a lot going on, but she never had to grapple with a global pandemic and the shutdown of the entire economy …
… why have Johnson’s voters stayed so loyal? …
The first thing to remember is how Boris Johnson achieved power. He pushed through what David Cameron had little interest in and Theresa May never really understood — the “realignment” of British politics. By organising around Brexit, which was itself an expression of a deeper fault line, Johnson was able to consolidate the Leave vote.
By doing so, he was able to anchor his party far more securely in a cross-class coalition of traditional “true blue” Tories and instinctively socially conservative blue-collar workers. By doing so, Johnson injected a greater degree of tribalism into his electorate and, by extension, a greater degree of “cultural polarisation” into the country. In a country where six in every ten constituencies broke for Brexit, this strategy makes sense. You might not like it but, electorally, strategically, it makes complete sense.
It also brings us to a point that many of his critics have failed to grasp. What unites Boris Johnson’s voters is not so much their economic experience, as their values. They prioritise the nation and the national community. They prefer stability over change. And they favour continuity over disruption and discontinuity. This is why they cherish Britain’s history, heritage and collective memory and are more sensitive to attempts to deconstruct them. And while they acknowledge that this history is complex, they believe that, on the whole, it was positive and that Britain has been a force for good in the world. In short, they believe in their country. They are proud of it. And they are proud of their fellow citizens …
… Johnson is offering a positive and forward-looking creed that is more interested in national renewal and salvation than decline and repudiation. He is proud of the country and its people. And until his opponents figure this out and change track, then I suspect that many of those voters will continue to stand behind him while keeping their distance from his critics.
Boris’s war on fat
Boris has been on a diet since recovering from coronavirus. So far, he has lost a stone (14 pounds):
Now he wants all of us to lose weight — five pounds each — and save the NHS an estimated £100m. Hmm.
Guido Fawkes reported (emphases in the original):
Boris promises his health push will “not in an excessively bossy or nannying way, I hope” persuade Britons to lose a few pounds. Which is a curious line given the now-almost imminent, nonsensical ban on pre-watershed ‘junk food’ ads…
Agreed.
Last summer, London’s mayor Sadiq Khan banned what he termed ‘junk food’ adverts across the capital. Last June, when Wimbledon was in full swing, Guido reported:
London’s blanket ban on ‘junk food’ advertising is not only ineffective, inconsistent and impractical, it’s going to cost a fortune too! Estimated at a whopping £35 million, it will deprive dilapidated public services of desperately needed investment. Who’s decided that chicken burgers are not junk food but olive oil is? And no mince pies allowed at Xmas? No strawberries and cream for Wimbledon?
The simple truth is ad bans don’t work – there’s no proof they reduce childhood obesity. However, there is clear evidence that wide-ranging, collaborative and positive approaches are an effective solution. In Amsterdam, childhood obesity rates fell by 12% between 2012-15, through investment in positive lifestyle and education campaigns.
Telling people what they can do is much more effective than hectoring them about what they can’t. Evidence-based solutions are more effective than political ones.
One year later, Boris thinks this is a great idea for television:
British artist David Hockney, who opposed the UK’s smoking ban in 2007, was less than impressed:
I said to my far better half on Monday that they will probably target all the good foods, e.g. butter and meat.
The next day, I drank my morning coffee while waking up to this:
I love hummus! It’s good for you, too.
Guido posted an extensive list of what falls under the category of junk food, based on UK government guidelines.
In addition to hummus and raisins we find butter (as I predicted), more than half of all meats (mm-hmm, also as predicted), margarine, pesto, tomato soup, nearly all cheese, most yoghurts and, strangely, the driest, blandest thing on the planet: cream crackers, which have no cream in them, by the way. Hell is a cream cracker.
Something’s gone very wrong with this Conservative government. Most of us thought Boris was a libertarian.
Whatever the case, there must be a better way than another ban:
Maybe Boris is still frightened from his serious illness. I suspect it took him a long time to recuperate, judging from his appearance in the weeks that followed.
Cat contracts coronavirus
On Monday, July 27, Reuters reported:
The British environment ministry said “all available evidence” suggested the cat had contracted the coronavirus from its owners, who had both tested positive for COVID-19.
Both the cat and the humans made a full recovery and there was no transmission to any other animals or people in the household, the ministry said without identifying the individuals involved.
“This is the first case of a domestic cat testing positive for COVID-19 in the UK but should not be a cause for alarm,” said Yvonne Doyle, medical director at Public Health England.
“The investigation into this case suggests that the infection was spread from humans to animal, and not the other way round,” Doyle added.
The government said the infection was confirmed in lab tests on Wednesday, adding there was no evidence that cats could transmit the virus to humans.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) has said cats are the most susceptible animal species to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus and are able to transmit it to other cats.
Delays in getting stranded Britons home explained
When the pandemic broke, the Foreign Office pulled out all the stops to get stranded Britons back to the UK.
Arranging flights for some tourists overseas took longer than for others because hundreds were in remote places of the world.
Now it emerges there were other factors involved:
NHS relaxes self-isolation for patients entering hospital for treatment
Not so long ago, the NHS wanted all patients attending hospital for treatment or operations to self-isolate for 14 days beforehand.
Thankfully, as of Tuesday, July 28, that is no longer the case. The Daily Mail reported:
Updated guidance says strict social distancing and hand washing is enough to cut the risk of patients taking the virus into hospitals in England.
NHS patients will only need to self-isolate for a few days after taking a test in the run-up to them entering hospital, health bosses now say.
Surgeons hope the relaxation of rules will help them to tackle the huge waiting lists that have built up during the Covid-19 crisis.
But they called for all patients to be given tests for the coronavirus before and after their operation to keep a lid on any potential outbreak.
The change in advice was made because the virus is circulating at much lower levels than it was during the peak of the crisis in March and April.
Lewis Hamilton opines on a COVID-19 vaccine
Formula 1 champion Lewis Hamilton had to walk back a video and post he made on social media regarding a COVID-19 vaccine:
On Monday, July 27, The Guardian reported:
Hamilton has since deleted the video and published a statement saying he hadn’t seen the comment attached to the clip, but wanted to show there is “uncertainty around side effects” of vaccines.
“I’ve noticed some comments on my earlier post about the coronavirus vaccine, and want to clarify my thoughts on it, as I understand why they might have been misinterpreted,” he said.
“Firstly I hadn’t actually seen the comment attached so that is totally my fault and I have a lot of respect for the charity work Bill Gates does.
“I also want to be clear that I am not against a vaccine and no doubt it will be important in the fight against coronavirus, and I’m hopeful for its development to save lives.
“However after watching the video, I felt it showed that there is still a lot of uncertainty about the side effects most importantly and how it is going to be funded. I may not always get my posting right. I’m only human but I’m learning as we go.”
I agree with the highlighted bit 100%.
Holidays abroad
Whether it’s a good idea or not right now, Britons want to enjoy a summer holiday in Europe.
Some made their reservations early in the year, before the pandemic arrived. Understandably, they want to get what they paid for.
Transport Secretary Grant Shapps and his family managed to arrive in Spain hours before the UK declared a quarantine for British travellers returning from that country. Shapps flew back to the UK on Wednesday, July 29:
He is returning early to get through a 10-day quarantine and, in the meantime, from home, to ‘handle this situation’. The Foreign Office has advised against all non-essential travel to Spain.
Presumably, Europeans are travelling all across the continent.
The result is that coronavirus cases are rising again:
On July 28, RMC’s Les Grandes Gueules (The Big Mouths) interviewed Dr Robert Sebbag, a specialist in infections who works at La Pitié Salpêtrière hospital in Paris. He said that, although the COVID-19 ward is seeing a small uptick in hospitalisations, no one is on a ventilator and most cases are ‘mild’ compared to what they were only a few months ago. If I understood correctly, the hospital has 24 patients in that particular ward. He said that the uptick in non-hospitalised cases points to those that can be treated safely whilst self-isolating at home.
Dr Sebbag wasn’t too concerned and said that it was the normal progression of the cycle of a virus. The question remains, he said, whether or how COVID-19 will mutate.
For now, we will have to find ways of learning to live with the virus. Dr Sebbag does not see that herd immunity will become widespread. He estimates that only 6% to 10% of the French are immune.
Lockdown in the north west of England
As of Thursday, June 30, a lockdown is now in place in parts of the north west of England.
Matt Hancock should have announced it via a formal press conference. Instead, he did so via a pooled television interview, leaving it to Boris to do a coronavirus briefing from Downing Street on Friday to further explain the new measures.
Because of this new lockdown and rises in cases elsewhere, the proposed measures for reopening more facilities and close-contact beauty services are on hold for the foreseeable future.
Masks must now be worn in nearly all enclosed public spaces, not only in shops, but also in museums and houses of worship.
Boris also encouraged Britons to enjoy a staycation in the UK rather than abroad.
Brexit
Meanwhile, in Brexit news, the international trade secretary, Liz Truss, announced that she would like to get haggis with meat into the US as part of a trade deal:
Earlier this year, exports of Macsween’s vegetarian haggis — branded as Scottish Veggie Crumble — were allowed into the US just in time for Burns Night on January 25. That was the first time in 49 years that any type of Scottish haggis was allowed in America.
And that concludes my roundup of the second half of July 2020.
Roll on August, come what may.
Last Thursday, I wrote about Bevelyn Beatty, who painted over provocative street signage in front of Trump Tower around two weeks ago.
A few days later, Eric Metaxas, a Christian conservative, interviewed her at length. I would like to thank one of my readers, michaelh, for this link:
This is an excellent video, just over half an hour long:
She discusses her personal Christian journey, helped along by her good friend Edmee, who was also part of the group of ladies smearing black paint over the B in BLM in front of Trump Tower.
She explains why no Christian should be associating with or supporting BLM: they don’t believe in family, they don’t believe in saving black lives and they do not like black men.
She discusses the horrific crime rates in New York, particularly under Mayor Bill de Blasio and says that she is seriously considering leaving.
And, yes, Bevelyn talks about her and her friends’ experience in front of Trump Tower, their arrest and their excellent treatment by the police.
Bevelyn is feisty. She’s got spark. She’s a committed Christian.
Eric Metaxas says that the US needs a thousand more like her.
I couldn’t agree more.
When she and her friends finish helping to ‘take back’ America, maybe they can come to cities in England. I am sure many would like to hear her speak and learn more about her journey in faith.
Last week, I bought a clear mask along with a set of lightweight cotton masks.
I normally speak to our local shopkeepers, so I would like for our conversations to continue as normally as possible.
For the deaf and even for those who are hard of hearing though, masks that cover the face make communication difficult for them. The people affected explain the issues in the short video below.
I bought a clear mask similar to the ones on the right (see the second tweet). Those are for cycling purposes; they do not do anything to combat the virus. Yet, the government has asked us only for face coverings, not surgical-grade masks:
No one in the medical arena or in government has mentioned clear masks, which seems strange. I found mine by chance.
No one in authority has said anything about visors, either. Hairdressers wear them. Our local greengrocer did, too, at least early in the pandemic.
I guess one has to do one’s own research:
Opaque masks are an issue …
… so I am glad to see there is a petition to remove the mandate for face coverings:
While it is well-intentioned, this video from Matt Hancock’s Department of Health and Social Care offers questionable advice in dealing with hearing impairments: removing one’s mask to speak and inclining one’s ear towards the person talking. Both are supposed to be no-noes, aren’t they?
We’ve had two deaf workmen come and work on our house. Both relied upon looking at us as we spoke because they need to lip-read. One carried a notebook and pen, so that we could clarify some instructions for him.
I hope they and others with hearing problems are doing well, because not everyone will appreciate their difficulties in communicating:
That is a very real possibility.
One of the more disturbing aspects of lockdown and mandatory face coverings during the coronavirus crisis is their effect on children, particularly infants:
This is a highly abnormal development.
Other people have reported the same thing:
Mandated face coverings have altered family activities, such as trips on public transport:
Agree on the bus rides, all fond memories from my childhood. They were great.
Shopping is different, too:
I agree, because not being able to see a mother’s face can have an impact on a child’s development:
Dr Edward Tronick, a University Distinguished Professor of Psychology at the University of Massachusetts Boston, is director of the Child Development Unit, a research associate in Newborn Medicine, a lecturer at Harvard Medical School, conducted the Still Face Experiment in 2009.
This is a short video of the experiment. Watch how the baby’s expressions and reactions change as the mother does not interact with her:
I truly hope this mask thing is a very temporary measure.
This is one time I can honestly say, ‘Think of the children!’
On Friday, July 24, 2020, I wrote about England’s mask requirement in shops, which came into effect that day.
From what I have been reading online and hearing from people I know, things could get worse for retail, because it seems as if half the population does not wish to comply. Consequently, they will be going out less often to shop.
Now they might turn to online purchases which help the economy but not the local family-owned shops.
Since I was born decades ago, there has been scope creep in all sorts of regulations on people’s personal conduct: mandatory seat belts, severe restrictions on smoking (including in people’s own homes) and now we have mandatory masks, which some rightly call ‘muzzles’ or ‘nappies’.
Yet, some people do not mind scope creep — moving the goalposts — as this tweet from ex-footballer Matt Le Tissier and the reply show:
I’m with Matt Le Tissier and the ‘No’ voters.
I grew up in a world where seat belts were either a) non-existent (yes, I’m that old) or b) optional.
I still wish they were optional — front and back.
But I digress.
Let’s look at how the scene unfolded on Twitter on Friday, July 24.
I do not think this mask regulation can be rightly called a law. A number of fines that police imposed during lockdown had to be overturned. Masks won’t be any different. The police have said so:
Then there are the arcane rules about visiting a takeaway with tables and chairs.
If you go up to the counter to purchase a takeaway, you must wear a mask.
If you wish to dine in that establishment, you do not need to wear a mask provided you head straight for a table and sit down. You will then be waited upon.
However, you cannot go up to the counter without a mask and tell the salesperson that you want to dine in.
Madness.
I took a look at supermarket sites on Twitter because, last week, rumours circulated in the media that our major chains didn’t care one way or the other.
That really isn’t the case.
Tesco might be losing footfall, but perhaps gaining an online customer or two:
That’s the sort of interpersonal conflict that’s been running for weeks, long before mandatory masks.
It’s completely unnecessary.
This must be the only time a competing supermarket has commented on a Tesco site. This comment is about Scotland, where masks were mandatory before they were in England:
Asda’s announcement illustrated how masks should be worn:
Lidl tweeted a short video about the mask requirement:
Lidl was one of the chains rumoured to not actively enforce the requirement.
A few customers are annoyed with Aldi:
If supermarket staff do not enforce this requirement, the general public will! They’re even worse!
Sainsbury’s is taking a more relaxed approach, which didn’t meet with some customers’ approval:
However, other customers were relieved:
If this is contentious online, how much worse will it be in person?
As for Waitrose and M&S, this Sainsbury shopper is likely to be disappointed (see below):
Waitrose has a thread on masks and exemptions. Well done:
Interestingly, M&S (Marks and Spencer) has no tweet about face coverings.
Perhaps that is the place for the maskless to shop in peace.
The three-year Lectionary that many Catholics and Protestants hear in public worship gives us a great variety of Holy Scripture.
Yet, it doesn’t tell the whole story.
My series Forbidden Bible Verses — ones the Lectionary editors and their clergy omit — examines the passages we do not hear in church. These missing verses are also Essential Bible Verses, ones we should study with care and attention. Often, we find that they carry difficult messages and warnings.
Today’s reading is from the English Standard Version with commentary by Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.
16 If the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, so is the whole lump, and if the root is holy, so are the branches.
17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root[a] of the olive tree, 18 do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. 19 Then you will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. 22 Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. 23 And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, be grafted back into their own olive tree.
——————————————————————————————————-
Last week’s post discussed Paul’s explanation of why the Gentiles were brought into the Church and his delight in ministering to them.
Now Paul tackles a very important topic: our attitude towards the Church and other people, especially the Jewish community and those with no faith.
Paul begins by speaking of the ancient offering of the firstfruits, referencing Numbers 15. John MacArthur explains this ceremonial part of Mosaic law (emphases mine):
Follow verse 16 to begin with, and Paul’s logic here is unarguable. “For if the first fruit be holy, the lump is also holy and if the root be holy, so are the branches.” Now let’s just take the first little analogy he gives. If the first fruit be holy, the lump is also holy. Now this comes from Numbers chapter 15, back in the Pentateuch, verses 17 to 21. And I’ll just read you a portion of that. “Of the first fruits of your dough.” D-o-u-g-h, referring to that which they would use to make bread. “Of the first fruits of your dough you shall give to the Lord an heave offering in your generation.” In other words, the objective was that each time dough was prepared for baking bread among the Jewish people, a little piece of that dough was pulled off the larger portion and that little piece of dough was to be given to the Lord, which is to say it was taken to the temple or it was given to the priest. And it became sustenance for the priest. But it was an offering given to the Lord. It was a first fruits. You pulled off a little and you gave it to the Lord. God was always teaching them how that everything really belonged to Him. Everything really was consecrated to Him. Everything was set apart to Him. And when they took off a little piece of that larger lump and gave it to the priest, it was a symbolic way of saying, “Yes, I offer all of this to the Lord. I want this all to be set apart unto Him. I want it all to be consecrated to Him and this symbolizes that desire.” All the dough then was dedicated in the act of giving a small portion. It was a way of saying, “Thank You, I realize this is Your provision, all of it. I offer it back to You in the sense that as it nourishes my body, I offer myself to You. I want it to nourish me to do Your will and Your purpose and the things that would honor Your holy name.” And each little piece was a symbol of the dedication of the whole. And that’s what he’s saying. If the first fruit is set apart, and “holy” here means set apart, consecrated, devoted to God, separated, if you will, the idea of consecrated from profane use to the use of God, he says if the first fruits is set apart then the whole lump is consecrated. See that? If the first fruits is set apart, it is saying, the whole lump is consecrated. That is the sense.
Now the second analogy in verse 16 is this. If the root is set apart, so are what? The branches. It’s the same idea. If one part of a thing is consecrated to the Lord, so are the branches. If you go out in your field and you say, “I’m planting this tree and I’m putting this little seedling in, as its roots go down I dedicate it to the Lord,” then all that comes out of that is going to be dedicated to Him as well. “I put it there for Your glory, for Your honor, I want everything that comes from it to nourish me that I may serve You more fully.” And so in the dedication of the root, there is the implication that the branches belong to God as well. So when any small part is devoted to the Lord, it is emblematic that the whole is devoted to the Lord. That’s essentially a principle that was very much a part of Jewish thinking.
For example, when they came and gave the first fruits of their grain to the Lord, they were saying, in effect, “This is but a representative token of the fact that I dedicate all my grain to You.” When they gave the Lord the first fruits, as it were, of their week and they came in on the Sabbath day and they say, “We want to give our…this day to You, we want to acknowledge that time belongs to You and worship belongs to You,” it was like consecrating all of their time. When they gave an offering of money to the Lord it was like saying, “This is but emblematic that all of that which I possess would be for Your glory,” see. And I trust that you think that way when you give as well.
That idea also appears when some Christians bring food to be blessed by a priest on Holy Saturday for their dinner on Easter Sunday. In the Polish culture, it is a long-standing, traditional practice.
Paul goes on to say that, when some of the branches of an olive tree — his analogy for the Church, the community of all believers — go bad, they are replaced with grafted on branches which are healthy (verse 17). Paul is referring to the Gentiles as being the grafted-on branches.
Matthew Henry explains the profundity of that verse:
Those that are grafted into the good olive-tree partake of the root and fatness of the olive. It is applicable to a saving union with Christ; all that are by a lively faith grafted into Christ partake of him as the branches of the root–receive from his fulness. But it is here spoken of a visible church-membership, from which the Jews were as branches broken off; and so the Gentiles were grafted in, autois–among those that continued, or in the room of those that were broken off. The Gentiles, being grafted into the church, partake of the same privileges that the Jews did, the root and fatness. The olive-tree is the visible church (called so Jeremiah 11:16); the root of this tree was Abraham, not the root of communication, so Christ only is the root, but the root of administration, he being the first with whom the covenant was so solemnly made. Now the believing Gentiles partake of this root: he also is a son of Abraham (Luke 19:9), the blessing of Abraham comes upon the Gentiles (Galatians 3:14), the same fatness of the olive-tree, the same for substance, special protection, lively oracles, means of salvation, a standing ministry, instituted ordinances; and, among the rest, the visible church-membership of their infant seed, which was part of the fatness of the olive-tree that the Jews had, and cannot be imagined to be denied to the Gentiles.
Paul then counsels the Gentiles to avoid pride in being grafted in (verse 18). Instead, they should be thankful for the immense privilege they have received in becoming members of the Church. That holds true today. He says that, as members of the Church, we do not support the root; rather, the root supports us!
Therefore, we should realise that faithless branches were removed so that we could be grafted on (verse 19).
Henry extends this all the way back to Abraham, who along with his descendants, incidentally, features largely in the readings from Genesis in the season after Pentecost this year (2020, Year A). He is our father in faith. Henry says:
Abraham, the root of the Jewish church, is not beholden to thee; but thou art greatly obliged to him, as the trustee of the covenant and the father of many nations. Therefore, if thou boast, know (this word must be supplied to clear the sense) thou bearest not the root but the root thee.”
MacArthur agrees with that and has more on Abraham and his descendants:
… who were the first fruits? Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, the fathers, the patriarchs. And I believe he has, of course, here mainly in mind Abraham. And if God set apart the first fruits, then He was setting apart the whole lump. And if God set apart the root, who was Abraham, then He’s setting apart the branches. In other words, this is Paul’s way of saying, “You Jews know very well that a part of a thing consecrated intends to say that the whole is consecrated. And if God sets apart the root and God sets apart the first fruit in the case of Abraham and the fathers, it is to say that He has consecrated to Himself the whole.” It’s a beautiful thought.
This is why Israel will come to be grafted into the Church, which Paul explains later in Romans 11. Jews have been coming to Christ throughout history, of course, but, as I wrote last week, mentioning MacArthur’s citation of Revelation 7, the day will come when 144,000 of them, drawn from all twelve tribes of Israel, will believe in Christ then evangelise en masse throughout the world.
Paul goes on to say that, although faithless branches were removed so Gentiles could be grafted on, the Gentiles should consider this in fear — awe (verse 20). We should never take our standing in the Church for granted.
If we become faithless, God can cut us off, too (verse 21).
Henry sounds this warning, which seems apposite, considering the state of today’s churches which worship political movements instead of the Lord:
The patent which churches have of their privileges is not for a certain term, nor entailed upon them and their heirs; but it runs as long as they carry themselves well, and no longer. Consider, (1.) “How they were broken off. It was not undeservedly, by an act of absolute sovereignty and prerogative, but because of unbelief.” It seems, then, it is possible for churches that have long stood by faith to fall into such a state of infidelity as may be their ruin. Their unbelief did not only provoke God to cut them off, but they did by this cut themselves off; it was not only the meritorious, but the formal cause of their separation.
Paul counsels us to remember God’s kindness in grafting us onto the Church. His kindness extends to us as long as we are faithful (verse 22).
If we lose our faith, Paul says, God can remove us from the Church and graft on those who were previously mired in unbelief but who later came to believe (verse 23).
Matthew Henry offers this summary:
The sum of our duty, the condition of our happiness, is to keep ourselves in the love of God. Fear the Lord and his goodness. Hosea 3:5.
Paul says that Israel will be grafted on to the Church. They are the natural branches of the tree God created for Himself, whereas Gentiles are wild branches (verse 24).
MacArthur says:
The final restoration then, listen, of Israel is guaranteed by the consecrating love of God for Abraham. It is implied in God’s love of Abraham and His setting Abraham apart as a covenant progenitor …
And if there’s to be no future for the nation Israel, then what Paul is saying here is just not true. But it is true and there is a place for Israel.
MacArthur concludes his sermon by putting the emphasis on faith:
What is the issue here? The issue is one simple thing. Faith, isn’t it? Jew or Gentile, if you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, you’re grafted into the place of blessing, where the life of God flows through and produces fruit. … Those Jew and Gentile, along with all the others of all the ages who have come to faith in God, who have embraced the Savior, are grafted in, be they natural branches or unnatural, they’re in the place of blessing. The issue for you is faith. Do you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ? … I hope you do. Let’s bow in prayer.
Father, we… We even said more than we intended tonight but oh how wonderful it is. Your Word, we love it, thank You for it. Thank You for the great confidence in our hearts that faith is the issue. O we know You’re a sovereign God and we know that You make choices out of that sovereignty, but, Lord, You repeat so often that faith is the issue and “Him that comes unto Me,” said Jesus, “I will in no wise cast out.” And so anyone coming with faith to embrace Christ will be received. We thank You for that. We pray there might be hearts even now opened in faith to Christ. Now, Father, do send us from this place with happy hearts, fulfilled because we have been participants of the kingdom, we have been branches of blessing, to bear much fruit for the glory of the Father. May we be all that You want us to be. Fill our hearts with love for You and for those that need to know You, and we’ll thank You for what You’ll do in each life, for Christ’s sake. Amen.
I haven’t read this passage from Romans privately for a long time. Henry’s and MacArthur’s exegeses have helped me to realise how profound Paul’s words truly are.
Let us pray for those who have not yet converted that they may see the Light that is Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns forever.
Next time — Romans 11:25-28
Below are the readings for the Seventh Sunday after Trinity, July 26, 2020.
These are for Year A in the three-year Lectionary used in public worship.
There are two options for the First Reading and Psalm.
Emphases below are mine.
First Reading and Psalm — Option One
Readings about the life of Jacob, one of Abraham’s grandsons, continue. Jacob continued on from Bethel (last week’s reading) to the home of Laban, his uncle (his mother Rebekah’s brother). This is the story of how Jacob came to be married to Leah and, seven years later, to Rachel, his first love. From the two women, eight out of the Twelve Tribes came into being. The other four sons of Jacob were born of Zilpah and Bilhah, two sons apiece. It is a complicated family tree. Rachel gave birth to Joseph, which caused problems when Jacob considered Joseph to be his heir. Jacob had one daughter, Dinah.
Genesis 29:15-28
29:15 Then Laban said to Jacob, “Because you are my kinsman, should you therefore serve me for nothing? Tell me, what shall your wages be?”
29:16 Now Laban had two daughters; the name of the elder was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel.
29:17 Leah’s eyes were lovely, and Rachel was graceful and beautiful.
29:18 Jacob loved Rachel; so he said, “I will serve you seven years for your younger daughter Rachel.”
29:19 Laban said, “It is better that I give her to you than that I should give her to any other man; stay with me.”
29:20 So Jacob served seven years for Rachel, and they seemed to him but a few days because of the love he had for her.
29:21 Then Jacob said to Laban, “Give me my wife that I may go in to her, for my time is completed.”
29:22 So Laban gathered together all the people of the place, and made a feast.
29:23 But in the evening he took his daughter Leah and brought her to Jacob; and he went in to her.
29:24 (Laban gave his maid Zilpah to his daughter Leah to be her maid.)
29:25 When morning came, it was Leah! And Jacob said to Laban, “What is this you have done to me? Did I not serve with you for Rachel? Why then have you deceived me?”
29:26 Laban said, “This is not done in our country–giving the younger before the firstborn.
29:27 Complete the week of this one, and we will give you the other also in return for serving me another seven years.”
29:28 Jacob did so, and completed her week; then Laban gave him his daughter Rachel as a wife.
There are two choices of Psalm.
David wrote Psalm 105 for Asaph to use in the daily service of the sanctuary, which pertained to the Ark of the Covenant.
Psalm 105:1-11, 45b
105:1 O give thanks to the LORD, call on his name, make known his deeds among the peoples.
105:2 Sing to him, sing praises to him; tell of all his wonderful works.
105:3 Glory in his holy name; let the hearts of those who seek the LORD rejoice.
105:4 Seek the LORD and his strength; seek his presence continually.
105:5 Remember the wonderful works he has done, his miracles, and the judgments he uttered,
105:6 O offspring of his servant Abraham, children of Jacob, his chosen ones.
105:7 He is the LORD our God; his judgments are in all the earth.
105:8 He is mindful of his covenant forever, of the word that he commanded, for a thousand generations,
105:9 the covenant that he made with Abraham, his sworn promise to Isaac,
105:10 which he confirmed to Jacob as a statute, to Israel as an everlasting covenant,
105:11 saying, “To you I will give the land of Canaan as your portion for an inheritance.”
105:45b Praise the LORD!
The second choice of Psalm is one for families to pray together in obedience to God. These verses are but an excerpt of a long Psalm.
Psalm 128
128:1 Happy is everyone who fears the LORD, who walks in his ways.
128:2 You shall eat the fruit of the labor of your hands; you shall be happy, and it shall go well with you.
128:3 Your wife will be like a fruitful vine within your house; your children will be like olive shoots around your table.
128:4 Thus shall the man be blessed who fears the LORD.
128:5 The LORD bless you from Zion. May you see the prosperity of Jerusalem all the days of your life.
128:6 May you see your children’s children. Peace be upon Israel!
First Reading and Psalm — Option Two
Solomon, David’s son, asks the Lord for wisdom.
1 Kings 3:5-12
3:5 At Gibeon the LORD appeared to Solomon in a dream by night; and God said, “Ask what I should give you.”
3:6 And Solomon said, “You have shown great and steadfast love to your servant my father David, because he walked before you in faithfulness, in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart toward you; and you have kept for him this great and steadfast love, and have given him a son to sit on his throne today.
3:7 And now, O LORD my God, you have made your servant king in place of my father David, although I am only a little child; I do not know how to go out or come in.
3:8 And your servant is in the midst of the people whom you have chosen, a great people, so numerous they cannot be numbered or counted.
3:9 Give your servant therefore an understanding mind to govern your people, able to discern between good and evil; for who can govern this your great people?”
3:10 It pleased the Lord that Solomon had asked this.
3:11 God said to him, “Because you have asked this, and have not asked for yourself long life or riches, or for the life of your enemies, but have asked for yourself understanding to discern what is right,
3:12 I now do according to your word. Indeed I give you a wise and discerning mind; no one like you has been before you and no one like you shall arise after you.
We have another excerpt from the excellent Psalm 119, read or sung in parts throughout the Lectionary year.
Psalm 119:129-136
119:129 Your decrees are wonderful; therefore my soul keeps them.
119:130 The unfolding of your words gives light; it imparts understanding to the simple.
119:131 With open mouth I pant, because I long for your commandments.
119:132 Turn to me and be gracious to me, as is your custom toward those who love your name.
119:133 Keep my steps steady according to your promise, and never let iniquity have dominion over me.
119:134 Redeem me from human oppression, that I may keep your precepts.
119:135 Make your face shine upon your servant, and teach me your statutes.
119:136 My eyes shed streams of tears because your law is not kept.
Epistle
Readings from Romans 8 conclude. Some of these verses will be familiar, even to novices of the Bible.
Romans 8:26-39
8:26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but that very Spirit intercedes with sighs too deep for words.
8:27 And God, who searches the heart, knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.
8:28 We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose.
8:29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn within a large family.
8:30 And those whom he predestined he also called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified.
8:31 What then are we to say about these things? If God is for us, who is against us?
8:32 He who did not withhold his own Son, but gave him up for all of us, will he not with him also give us everything else?
8:33 Who will bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies.
8:34 Who is to condemn? It is Christ Jesus, who died, yes, who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us.
8:35 Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will hardship, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
8:36 As it is written, “For your sake we are being killed all day long; we are accounted as sheep to be slaughtered.”
8:37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.
8:38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers,
8:39 nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Gospel
Matthew 13 contains eight parables. We heard the Parable of the Sower two weeks ago and, last week, the Parable of the Tares. Today’s brief parables conclude the chapter.
Matthew 13:31-33, 44-52
13:31 He put before them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed that someone took and sowed in his field;
13:32 it is the smallest of all the seeds, but when it has grown it is the greatest of shrubs and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches.”
13:33 He told them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed in with three measures of flour until all of it was leavened.”
13:44 “The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which someone found and hid; then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.
13:45 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls;
13:46 on finding one pearl of great value, he went and sold all that he had and bought it.
13:47 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was thrown into the sea and caught fish of every kind;
13:48 when it was full, they drew it ashore, sat down, and put the good into baskets but threw out the bad.
13:49 So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous
13:50 and throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
13:51 “Have you understood all this?” They answered, “Yes.”
13:52 And he said to them, “Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like the master of a household who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old.”
Verse 50 contains the second mention of the ‘furnace of fire’, which Jesus also mentions at the end of the Parable of the Tares (Matthew 13:42).
Be in no doubt: the day of judgement will come for everyone.
Today, Friday, July 24, 2020, face coverings became mandatory in shops in England.
Early in the pandemic, Dr Jenny Harries, the Deputy Chief Medical Officer for England, told Prime Minister Boris Johnson that masks were not necessary for the general population and could make people more vulnerable to COVID-19, because they would be adjusting them, thereby touching their faces, potentially spreading the virus. This video first appeared in March, if I remember rightly:
On Thursday, March 12, The Independent reported on what Dr Harries told BBC News (emphases mine):
Jenny Harries, deputy chief medical officer, said the masks could “actually trap the virus” and cause the person wearing it to breathe it in.
“For the average member of the public walking down a street, it is not a good idea” to wear a face mask in the hope of preventing infection, she added …
Asked about their effectiveness, Dr Harries told BBC News: “What tends to happen is people will have one mask. They won’t wear it all the time, they will take it off when they get home, they will put it down on a surface they haven’t cleaned.
“Or they will be out and they haven’t washed their hands, they will have a cup of coffee somewhere, they half hook it off, they wipe something over it.
“In fact, you can actually trap the virus in the mask and start breathing it in.”
Asked if people are putting themselves more at risk by wearing masks, Dr Harries added: “Because of these behavioural issues, people can adversely put themselves at more risk than less.”
However, she said those who are advised to wear one by healthcare workers should follow their guidance.
Sir Patrick Vallance, the Chief Scientific Adviser to the Government of the United Kingdom, gave testimony on COVID-19 last week. When asked about the apparent change on face covering advice, he said that, early on, it made no sense for people to wear masks during lockdown because no one was on the streets. He said that the advice had never changed: masks provided some benefit. Now that lockdown has been lifting, he explained, it makes sense for people to wear them.
Of course, earlier this year, there was also a worldwide mask shortage, so it could also be that officials discouraged the general public from buying them because medical staff needed them badly.
This happened not only in England, but also in other countries.
In the United States, Surgeon General Dr Jerome Adams did an about-face on masks early in April. Since then, they have been mandatory in some states:
President Trump said the advice from the Center for Disease Control (CDC) was only an advisory, yet the public wondered how such a change could have come about in so little time, only a matter of weeks:
The same change in advice occurred in Germany:
Yet, at that time, Good Morning Britain‘s long-time, trusted Dr Hilary Jones stated that masks were a no-no for the public, citing the same reasons as Dr Jenny Harries did. On April 28, Metro reported:
If there is one thing Hilary has been consistent on, it is that the general public do not need to wear a mask.
He has previously explained how the particles of coronavirus are so small, they can easily pass through the fibres of a mask or scarf, making them completely useless to the average person.
‘For healthy people who are doing their essential journey who are socially distancing, the use of masks is not effective,’ he recently told Piers Morgan.
‘Most masks have gaps in them to which the virus can drive a bus through. When you are inhaling in a mask the virus can come in.’
The GP added: ‘It can do harm if you do wear a mask, you adjust it, it gets itchy and moist – which means you are putting your hand to your face more often.
‘If the mask gets moist it traps the virus.’
A week later, Guido Fawkes reported that PPE items, including masks, were plentiful in Britain and available to medical as well as care home staff:
By the end of May, Good Morning Britain‘s Piers Morgan criticised London mayor Sadiq Khan for not mandating face coverings on the capital’s public transport. The policy at the time left the option open to passengers, putting more emphasis on social distancing.
In England, masks became mandatory on all public transport on June 15.
On June 6, some in the NHS criticised Health Secretary Matt Hancock for giving them only a week to get all hospital staff to wear masks. The Daily Mail reported that NHS England had been apprised of the new rules before Hancock made a public announcement:
The Department of Health and Social Care said NHS England had known Mr Hancock was going to make the announcement, adding that hospitals still had more than a week to prepare.
On Monday, July 20, in France, masks became mandatory in all indoor spaces as well as some outdoor venues. Fines start at €135. The original date was August 1, but that was brought forward.
This is what one French shopping mall looks like since the requirement came into force:
Some people have been wearing them in the street and inside commercial premises.
This is what one observer has noted, proving what Dr Harries said earlier this year:
Dr Rashid Buttar has posted several videos to YouTube on the dangers of healthy people wearing masks. This is a short but instructive clip from one of them:
On April 7, the BMJ featured an article which said that, while masks might make members of the public more comfortable psychologically, face coverings can also help to spread the virus.
Excerpts from statistician Karla Hemmings’s ‘Covid-19: What is the evidence for cloth masks?’ follow:
… the question of whether facemasks work is a question about whether they work in the real world, worn by real people, in real situations …
There is little doubt that masks works in controlled settings – they stop particulates penetrating the air [Leung 2020]. Facemasks also seem to prevent infection spreading when worn by people who are infected [Brainard 2020]. Yet, this doesn’t tell us if they will work in the real world …
Systematic review of facemasks vs no mask [Brainard 2020]
There are three RCTs identified in this review where people wore masks to try to prevent other people becoming infected (primary prevention). The authors of the review interpret the evidence from these three RCTs as a small non-significant effect on influenza like illness. But, this is an incorrect interpretation of the result (RR=0.95, 95% CI: 0.75 to 1.19) as this result is compatible with both benefit and harm. The evidence from these three trials should therefore be interpreted as uninformative (or consistent with either benefit or harm). There are observational studies in this review, but these do not allow us to answer the question of whether the masks provide protection as they will be subject to confounding. The largest of the three RCTs was a pragmatic cluster trial in pilgrims [Alfelali 2020]. This is a well conducted pragmatic cluster randomized trial with low risk of bias, but suffered from low compliance. This found OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.88-2.07 which although non-significant, is more suggestive of harm than benefit.
Conclusion: The largest and most pragmatic trial (which informs on how facemasks will perform in the real world) assessing the benefit of facemasks vs no mask is suggestive of more harm than benefit.
Evidence from trials comparing different sorts of facemasks
(This is not based on a systematic review, so there may be other evidence that I am unaware of) …
Conclusion: The evidence from pragmatic trials (people wearing masks in everyday settings) suggests wearing of facemasks both induces risk compensation behavior and increased virus spreading from poor mask quality.
England’s new rules on face coverings do not mandate actual masks. We can wear what we want, within reason.
I still believe all the advice from March and early April stated above.
Here — and no doubt elsewhere — this has been a political decision taken to get more people shopping and putting money into the economy and businesses.
On Tuesday, July 14, Matt Hancock made a statement in Parliament about mandatory face coverings, which included the following:
Local action is one way in which we can control the spread of the virus while minimising the economic and social costs. Another is to minimise the risk as we return more to normality. In recent weeks we have reopened retail and footfall is rising. We want to give people more confidence to shop safely and enhance protections for those who work in shops. Both of those can be done by the use of face coverings. Sadly, sales assistants, cashiers and security guards have suffered disproportionately in this crisis. The death rate of sales and retail assistants is 75% higher among men and 60% higher among women than in the general population. As we restore shopping, so we must keep our shopkeepers safe.
There is also evidence that face coverings increase confidence in people to shop. The British Retail Consortium has said that, together with other social distancing measures, face coverings can
“make shoppers feel even more confident about returning to the High Street.”
The chair of the Federation of Small Businesses has said:
“As mandatory face coverings are introduced, small firms know that they have a part to play in the nation’s recovery both physically and financially, and I’m sure this will welcomed by them.”
We have therefore come to the decision that face coverings should be mandatory in shops and supermarkets. Last month, we made face coverings mandatory on public transport and in NHS settings, and that has been successful in giving people more confidence to go on public transport and to a hospital setting when they need to, providing people with additional protection when they are not able to keep 2 metres from others, particularly people they do not normally come into contact with. Under the new rules, people who do not wear face coverings will face a fine of up to £100 in line with the sanction on public transport and, just as with public transport, children under 11 and those with certain disabilities will be exempt.
The liability for wearing a face covering lies with the individual. Should an individual without an exemption refuse to wear a face covering, a shop can refuse them entry and can call the police if people refuse to comply. The police have formal enforcement powers and can issue a fine. That is in line with how shops would normally manage their customers and enforcement is, of course, a last resort. We fully expect the public to comply with these rules, as they have done throughout the pandemic.
I want to give this message to everyone who has been making vital changes to their daily lives for the greater good. Wearing a face covering does not mean that we can ignore the other measures that have been so important in slowing the spread of this virus— washing our hands and following the rules on social distancing. Just as the British people have acted so selflessly throughout this pandemic, I have no doubt they will rise to this once more. As a nation, we have made huge strides in getting this virus, which has brought grief to so many, under control. We are not out of the woods yet, so let us all do our utmost to keep this virus cornered and enjoy our summer safely. I commend this statement to the House.
I agree that we need to stimulate the economy by shopping. I disagree that face coverings are the answer.
I also wonder about shop staff dying. I see the same smiling faces week after week in my local shops. I never heard anything on the BBC News about shopkeepers dying: it was front line medical staff and bus drivers.
This is purely a political decision. Purely political.
I had looked forward to visiting a garden centre. I now think I’ll shop online for the plant pots I’d planned to buy.
Bill de Blasio, the mayor of New York City, allowed — in fact, advocated — that a pavement message be painted outside Trump Tower two weeks ago:
This tweet comes from de Blasio’s wife:
Since then, the message has attracted much opposition — and, no, it is NOT A MURAL:
New Yorkers continued to take action against the message.
On Friday, July 17, 2020, a few people painted over the first part of the ‘Lives Matter’ message with blue paint, in support of the police, which De Blasio is starting to ‘defund’:
Four arrests and charges were made.
Not surprisingly, the blue paint met with opposition, from people who no doubt want to defund the police.
Gateway Pundit reported (emphases mine):
Onlookers shouted at them hysterically as they did it.
NBC New York reports “the alleged vandals threw the paint in what appeared to be a coordinated effort involving about 10 people around 4 p.m. Friday. There were plans going around on social media with a group of people discussing doing the stunt.”
This is the second time the mural has been defaced since it was painted with the assistance of New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio. On Monday, it was splattered with red paint.
Unlike the rioters and looters that took over his city recently, he has made it a priority to arrest those who dare to vandalize it. In fact, Mayor de Blasio has seemingly been more concerned with protecting the tacky painting than about the rising crime in the city since he tied the hands of his police force.
“Maybe our GREAT Police, who have been neutralized and scorned by a mayor who hates & disrespects them, won’t let this symbol of hate be affixed to New York’s greatest street. Spend this money fighting crime instead!” President Donald Trump tweeted …
I left off the end of the sentence which included the word ‘mural’.
Please. It’s not a mural. A mural is painted on a WALL, not a pavement or sidewalk.
But, as Gateway Pundit stated, de Blasio wants more of the same pavement signs going up around the city.
On Saturday, July 18, a small group of black women, led by Bevelyn Beatty — wearing Jesus Matters tee-shirts — staged more civil disobedience in front of Trump Tower, protesting the street signage:
Ms Beatty and her friends were widely supported by other Americans as she tried to douse the first part of ‘… lives matter’ with black paint:
Here’s the full video — 12 minutes long — showing how a woman drove the small group into Manhattan with a lot of black paint, gloves and paint rollers in the back of a station wagon:
Bevelyn Beatty says at the end of her commentary:
Trump 2020!
During the painting, her friend Edmee says that ‘the devil’ is in charge of the country. Too right. Her friend means protesters and those trying to destroy America.
During Beatty’s attempt to deface the first word in the message, one policeman slipped on the thick paint and fell over.
Look at the number of cops present:
Beatty is from At The Well Ministries:
She offers online Bible studies:
Instead of yelling ‘Defund the police’, she was saying ‘Refund the police’ as law enforcement officers tried to stop her:
She also shouted, ‘Jesus matters’ while spreading welcome paint over the street message.
It’s unbelievable that de Blasio allows all this mess around what once was a great city:
Despite what de Blasio claims, horrific crimes are still taking place in New York City boroughs, such as this one involving a man who stabbed his ex-girlfriend and hurt her little boy, a toddler. This happened in the Bronx:
Both mother and son are all right, fortunately. You would not know from the video, though:
Back to Trump Tower now. The mayor, as he said above, gets clean up crews in to wash the paint off before it dries. The yellow paint looks pristine before the next group paints over it.
This is what happened to Bevelyn and Edmee:
The two women are likely to be charged with criminal mischief. The policeman who slipped and fell on the paint was treated at Bellevue Hospital.
It looks as if the paint protest is likely to go on for the foreseeable future:
Sure enough, another defacing happened afterwards:
A pro-police Back the Blue march took place on Brooklyn Bridge the same day:
More to come, I hope.
With a hat tip to the Q Tree, here is a moving video of a United States Marine who is in his last hours in this temporal life:
He thanks President Trump for his quest to restore the United States to the Founding Fathers’ original intent for a nation.
He says that he gives thanks for being able to participate in his final mission and says that he is sorry for being ‘out of ammunition’. He means that figuratively, not literally, in case anyone objects.
He gives his Commander in Chief a final salute and ends with ‘Semper Fi!’
Please circulate and share. This was one of the most moving two-minute videos I’ve seen in a long time.
This good man has served his country in all good faith.
May he rest in peace with our most merciful Lord, Jesus Christ.
My commiserations to his family and friends on their loss.
Churchmouse Campanologist 