Christmas appeal chairman resigns
Tuesday 1st December 2009, 2:59PM GMT.
Edward Trevor, who has resigned as chairman of the Christmas Appeal
THE chairman of the Joint Charities Christmas Appeal has resigned following a storm of criticism over remarks about Aids sufferers.
Edward Trevor had at first insisted that he would not step down, despite many calls for him to do so, including one from Treasury Minister Philip Ozouf. Mr Trevor said last night that he would be staying after receiving lots of messages of support.
But late this morning he issued a statement saying: ‘In order to reduce any further damage to the Jersey Christmas Appeal I have resigned both as chairman and from the committee. I would like to thank those who have contacted me, more in support than against, and ask all to continue to give the appeal their assistance to ensure that the needy in Jersey do not suffer at this time of year. I trust that my resignation will mean an end to the adverse publicity for the appeal and trust it will be completely successful.’
Read the full story in the Jersey Evening Post. Click here for subscription details. Individual editions are also available online.
Travel
To, from and around the Island
Airport Arrivals & Departures
Harbours Arrivals & Departures
Bus Information & Timetables
JOIN US ON...
Facebook and Twitter
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Got a story? Get in touch
GET INVOLVED WITH... KIT 4 CLUBS
Win a share of £10,000
2012 is the year of the London Olympics and to celebrate this great event the Jersey Evening Post, in association with sponsors Ogier is giving all sporting clubs a chance to win a share of £10,000.
This is Jersey
Jersey Evening Post
Useful links
Thank god for that.
Report abuse
Clearly the language used was inappropriate and insensitive.
Given his performance to date, we should look forward to seeing Mr Trevor running in the next Senatorial elections on a platform and manifesto of tolerance and understanding.
Report abuse
Can someone explain why the boy Phil felt it necessary to contact Ted Trevor, I bet if someone asks him to resign because of one of his many faux-pas he would not have the decency to go !!!
Report abuse
What happened to the freedom of speech?
Report abuse
“What happened to the freedom of speech?”
Freedom of speech is not a licence for expression of bigotry.
Report abuse
@JERSEYBEAN #1
“…Thank god…”
Mr Trevor believes he and God are on the same side of this issue; I suspect *if* God was real he would be proved wrong, but of course neither his belief in God or his beliefs on this issue are correct.
@Mogit #3
I can’t speak for the Sen., but I suspect it was because he was as disgusted as everybody I know with what Mr Trevor was saying.
Care to name a single ‘faux-pas’ of Sen. Ozouf’s of this sort of hatred and bigotry?
@piston broke #4
It won. He was free to say these hatful things with prosecution, but he has to accept the consequences that just because he’s free to say it doesn’t mean people will want to listen to him, or do so without challenging his opinion.
Report abuse
Edit: of course I meant to say above;
“…@piston broke #4
It won. He was free to say these hatful things with*out* prosecution…”
Report abuse
A report in the Daily Telegraph said yesterday that apparently a fifth of all Aids infections in sub-saharan Africa are actually caused by dirty needles and infected blood supplied by the medical profession and not wreckless lifestyles. That alone should be enough for people to support collections for the relevant agencies. Let alone a bit of Christian sentiment at this time of year.
Report abuse
And good riddance…
Its amazing that a bigot such as Mr Trevor was allowed to head the Jersey Christmas Appeal.
His statements have harmed the reputation of the island and, most importantly, have done much harm to the Christmas Appeal itself.
Report abuse
@J Lamborrari #6
“Mr Trevor believes he and God are on the same side of this issue; I suspect *if* God was real he would be proved wrong”
I find it incredible that someone who does not believe in God feels they have the authority to determine what God’s thoughts, feelings or opinions are on a given subject. Mr. Trevor, like many other human beings, has used religion to serve his own purpose.
I do not believe in a God who is uncaring and unloving. I believe in a God who is all loving and all caring regardless of lifestyle, race or disease.
Therefore, J Lamborrari, I find it diffcult to see how God could be proved wrong. Proved wrong for what?? Proved wrong for what Mr. Trevor has said of late?? Proved wrong for saying that all with Aids/HIV should be abandoned. No, as those words were not God’s words.
I think the best way to sum up God’s word and God’s love is in John 3 v 16:
“For God so LOVED the WORLD, he gave his one and only Son.”
However, just to make things even more clear, God also said “Love thy neighbour, as thy love thyself.” Leviticus 19 v 18.
He did not, and I stress DID NOT say, “Love thy Neighbour, but only if they do not have Aids/HIV or participate in sinful and worldly activities”. This is MAN’s judgment of others, not GOD’s!
Report abuse
I don’t know this man but I know he is a man and men make mistakes.
I know that he has stepped down so as not to damage the Jersey Christmas Appeal.
I imagine that he and those he works with believe that the people of Jersey are fickle and will withdraw their support for a very worthy cause simply because of some inept remarks.
Not a compliment for the usually charitable folk who inhabit the island, is it?
Report abuse
H Oliver (no. 10) should perhaps consider a different Gospel verse for his or her next sermon.
John 8:7 springs immediately to mind.
Report abuse
@ H Oliver #10
“…I find it diffcult to see how God could be proved wrong. Proved wrong for what??…”
To clarify: what I was saying was that *if* God were real, Mr Trevor would be proved wrong in saying that his views matched His views.
Personally I don’t believe in any god, but my understanding of, and what I believe, those that created the fictional Christian story didn’t intend their character to be used by people like Mr Trevor to justify their own hatred and bigotry. I think from your post this is something we can agree on.
Report abuse
No apology whatsoever.
Report abuse
J Lamborrari 13.
I don’t believe in God either, but one can hardly call the Christian story (i.e. Christ) “fictional”. However, if by “fictional” you mean “what you have no proof of”, then you must also consider as fictional the lives of Sophocles, Socrates and others whose ‘stories’ have come to us from ancient times.
Esperto credite (Virgil).
Report abuse
H Oliver #10
Perhaps if your all loving god had said,
Love your neighbour but use a condom, there would not be so many dying of AIDs
Or how about
For God so LOVED the WORLD, he gave us AIDs
And you call him /her/whatever, ( I note you have unquestioningly given god a sex, “For God so LOVED the WORLD, “he” gave his one and only Son”)
“all loving and all caring”, IF there is a god this surely is not a description of IT.
Report abuse
Me auld ma saying to me (dressed in me sunday best after getting found out i,d skipped church for a month)If you don,t go to church today the devil himself will catch you and take you straight to hell.LOL i skipped church and the devil has,nt caught me yet.
Report abuse
why has god been bought into this, its a simple matter. the man said something stupid and is now paying the consequences, deservidly or not. the same happened in higher profile cases with russel brand and jonathan ross, who both undertook their actions with malicious intent. Mr trevor was a public figure and should have realised what he was saying, yet did not take the time or care to watch his mouth, whether or not he directly meant to or not. he has now payed the price!!
Report abuse
#9 Tony, what harm has been done to the Christmas Appeal?
I feel the need to say that if any harm has been done to the Christmas Appeal and if people are walking by the fundraisers just because of the comments made by Mr Trevor then THEY should be ashamed of themselves! How pathetic is that?
If the Christmas Appeal suffers this year then it will be the fault of the PEOPLE living in Jersey, NOT the fault of Mr Trevor.
Report abuse
#5 “Freedom of speech is not a licence for expression of bigotry.” It wasn’t bigotry. It was an opinion (which most people seem able to accept had a little bit of truth to it in the Western world) that was offensive to many people. That is not the definition of bigotry. The reaction to Mr Trevor has, however, promted a lot of bigoted comments on another thread. You have the right to your opinion, he has the right to his, to deny Mr Trevor the right to express his opinion just because it differs from yours? Well THAT would be bigotry!
As for the statement itself, rightly or wrongly ‘freedom of speech laws’ are used on a regular basis by minority groups to back up their right to spread hatred for other religions, ‘the West’, or to disparage heterosexuals… Of course, these freedom of speech laws are ONLY allowed to be used by minority groups, i.e. the majority are NOT allowed freedom of speech! Freedom of speech laws do not really exist, they are just an easy way out when Governments do not have the guts to tackle extremely offensive opinions put forward by minority groups. Governments are more in fear of minority groups than they are of the majority!
Report abuse
@ Born Warrior #15
“…one can hardly call the Christian story (i.e. Christ) “fictional”…”
Why not; it is made up?
I make no claim that either other written account you mention has any more factual base than the Bible, what’s your point?
And you mean ‘Experto’ I think; not too bothered by spelling, but if you must use latin you should try harder to be correct, as not everybody has it as a first language.
Report abuse
Whoops I made a typing error!
Whatever will people think?
My life will never be the same!
I really expected a better answer than that from you, but as they say “Trahit sua quemque voluptas”…and for those who missed ‘a few latin lessons’: “Everyone is dragged on by their favourite pleasure!”…and I fear yours is looking for typing errors and spelling mistakes!
By the way, my point is, that, if you call the Christian story “fictional”, then you must also call the lives of Sophocles and Socrates (et al) “fictional”.
P.S. I would be grateful for your thoughts on the matter and please be my guest and run “YET ANOTHER” spelling check…I’m rather proud that you can even be bothered. Thank you!
Report abuse
@Born Warrior #22
Having explained your point, I’m still none the wiser as to why you bothered to make it??
I made the point that the Bible is a work of fiction, you seem to be countering my argument by saying that if what I say is true I must also say that the lives of Sophocles and Socrates are also fiction; as if this would imply I was wrong in my original statement.
If I said black was not white, would you argue I was somehow wrong unless I also said that blue, yellow, green etc. were also not white?
You argument is pointless.
And I really don’t see what your problem is over spelling etc. This is not the first time today I seem to have been accused of being pedantic on this issue, when I haven’t been; surely you can agree that where you mis-quote in a foreign language, especially Latin where little differences in spelling can make huge differences to meaning(as I understand it) that’s more of an issue for the reader than tying ‘their’ instead of ‘there’?
Report abuse
Born Warrior #22 Some people prefer to ignore that Jesus’ existence is spoken of outside just Christian texts. It seems to be easier for them somehow. The only question is really whether or not someone believed that same man to be the son of God, and that is for each individual. However, if someone cannot even distinguish between the whole of the Bible and the ‘Christian story’ then you’re wasting your time even trying to get through to them.
You know when people on here start on about your spelling that they’re struggling to come up with an intelligent retort.
Report abuse
J Lamborrari 23
Re: You argument is pointless.
Should that not be “YouR argument is pointless”?
…easy to make a mistake, isn’t it?
Report abuse
@ Born Warrior #25
It is easy to make a mistake, and as I’ve saying all along it’s not me that’s making a big issue of it, it’s you; I picked up your typo because you used Latin, and not speaking Latin I had to look it up, which is much harder if spelt incorrectly.
So put aside your obsession with spelling and address the issue in hand; do you accept that your argument was pointless?
It could be seen that your argument over spelling is just a smoke-screen to hide that you having nothing of real value to say.
Report abuse
If you read my post (15) using the ‘interested’ tone I intended (and not the fault-finding tone you so obviously assigned to it), you may discover that I was not contradicting you, but was merely puzzled by your comment.
And to think, I actually thought you were interested in honest debate…my mistake, yet another one!
Still, to make you a little wiser as to why I even bothered to make a ‘point’ in defence of ancient history, please, let me just say, that most of what we know about Sophocles is the result of probability and clever guesses (made by ancient-history researchers whose information-sources are often directly contradictory)…yet the majority of scholars are certain about his existence.
There is also some question about whether Socrates really existed, or was simply a creation of Plato…but even though the existence of Socrates is uncertain, it does not affect the ideas attributed to him.
The existence of Jesus Christ has also been challenged (especially of late), but the enormity of early manuscripts referring to him is far and above any record relating to anyone whose story has come to us from ancient times…yet you call him “fictional”.
Therefore, as a genuine truth-searcher, I would still like to hear how you came to your conclusion.
P.S. I’m still blushing at the thought of my unforgivable ‘S’ for ‘X’ error…but I’m sure the ‘pain of shame’ will pass…in time.
Report abuse
Born Warrior, J Lamborrari
Apart from the infighting about orthography a very interesting debate.
how about “possibly fictional” ?
Report abuse
PJG 28
As I said, most of what we know about ancient history is the result of probability and clever guesses. Researchers have the arduous task of piecing together a very complicated puzzle…but no scholar would consider the result of their work ‘fiction’.
However, you are right in part. This is because no-one can rely 100% on ancient information-sources (often directly contradictory) which, for understandable reasons, have been translated over the centuries and thus impoverished or enriched by interpretation…or even deliberately altered by religious people to suit their own ends.
Report abuse
@ Born Warrior #27
“If you read my post (15) using the ‘interested’ tone I intended (and not the fault-finding tone you so obviously assigned to it), you may discover that I was not contradicting you, but was merely puzzled by your comment…”
You make a statement which does, as I read it question, if not contradict, what I’d written; and you sign off your post “believe one who has had experience”
Hardly the type of language I would would expect from somebody ‘puzzled’, you clearly believe you view has more value than mine, or why sign of in that way?
Whether Socrates etc. are fictional or real is not material in the debate as to whether the story/ies in the Bible are fiction.
“…Therefore, as a genuine truth-searcher, I would still like to hear how you came to your conclusion…”
I come to the conclusion that the Bible is a work of fiction, rather than acurate historial account, because I don’t believe and see no evidence to support much of what is written therein:
Angels
A virgin birth.
A man who walked on water.
A flood during which the only creatures to survive(globally) were those gather together by Noah.
The feeding of 5,00 people with only a few loaves.
The rising of the dead.
Parting of seas.
The creation of the universe by an all powerful sentient being.
The promised afterlife.
etc. etc.
Report abuse
J Lamborrari 30.
Firstly, you have changed:
“the fictional Christian story” (in post 13)
to
“whether the story/ies in the Bible are fiction” (in post 13)…
So, I would be grateful if you would make yourself clear, because these are two very different affirmations.
Still, I shall continue along the lines of the original point: “the fictional Christian story”…and answer your questions.
The events you mention are considered (by most unbiased scholars) as purely symbolic, as they simply convey concepts and actions and not realistic accounts of events.
They are the ‘fables’ (for want of a better word) within the real report.
Also, please consider, as mentioned in 29, what was lost (or gained) in translation.
For example, the Hebrew text of Isaiah which uses the word ‘almah’, meaning young woman and not ‘betulah’ meaning virgin. This indicates that Isaiah was talking about a normal conception and birth.
Nonetheless, no great work (from ancient times) approaches the Bible’s documentary credibility, including those of accepted historical fact.
I do not believe in gods or religions, therefore, I am unbiased. However, my understanding of ‘works of antiquity’ goes much deeper than simple knowledge of their existence.
Re your comment: Whether Socrates etc. are fictional or real is not material in the debate as to whether the story/ies in the Bible are fiction.
This debate actually started because I challenged your comment: “the fictional Christian story”…clearly denoting disbelief in a historical character. Therefore, the inclusion of Sophocles, Socrates (et al) in this debate is ‘fundamental’ to its continuation.
By the way, I used the words ‘Experto credite’ (which is commonly used in my profession) simply to say “Trust me”.
Report abuse
@ Born Warrior #31
“…Firstly, you have changed:
“the fictional Christian story” (in post 13)
to
“whether the story/ies in the Bible are fiction” (in post 13)…
So, I would be grateful if you would make yourself clear, because these are two very different affirmations…”
I’m very sorry, but I fail to see how those two affirmations are ‘very different’, at best (and I think it’s quite a stretch) they’re subtly different… very, very subtly different, to the point where I have difficulty in seeing how you could interperet them as different at all.
But let’s see how you try and argue that what I believe to be fiction is, as you claim, not fiction:
“…The events [are] purely symbolic, as they simply convey concepts and actions and not realistic accounts of events…”
Sound kinda like fiction to me.
“…They are the ‘fables’ (for want of a better word)…”
Hmmm it is hard sometime to find the right word to convey what you mean, isn’t it? sometime it help to use the definition of a word, while long winded it can be more precise, so lets define fable:
(from wiktionary.org)
‘Noun: 1. A ficticious narration… 3.Fiction; untruth; falsehood…’
Oh dear, as a noun it kinda sounds like it means fiction to me, maybe your argument would be better support using it as a verb?
‘Verb: 1.To compose fables; hence, to write or speak fiction ; to write or utter what is not true… 2.To feign; to invent; to devise, and speak of, as true or real; to tell of falsely…’
Not still smelling of fiction to me.
“…Also, please consider, as mentioned in 29,…”
Okay, now we’re getting somewhere, quoting yourself to support your argument! Even you have to agree that:
“…or even deliberately altered…” -Born warrior, #29
Sounds incredibly ‘fictiony’.
“…This debate actually started because I challenged your comment…”
Funny, in #27 you claimed to be only interested and puzzled, not fault finding or contradictory; I’d say a challenge falls closer to the later.
“…clearly denoting disbelief in a historical character…”
I went further than just an individual character btw, and you say that; “the fictional Christian story” and “whether the story/ies in the Bible are fiction” a very different affirmations, yet you then condense one/both/either down to a character??
You also claim not to believe in God, pretty much fundamental to the story, and that this disbelief in the main character allows you an unbiased position to argue that what you don’t believe in is not fiction??
Report abuse
J Lamborarri 32.
I asked you not to bother, but I knew you would…you are so very predictable.
Still, for ‘good-manners sake’ I’ll close by repeating that “I do not believe in god”, but I trust HISTORY…and there’s an enormous difference.
I believe that a character named Jesus Christ once existed…is that clear or should I write it in latin?
I must also underline the fact that your ‘fictional-Christian-story’ theory is essentially without supporters in academic circles and amongst biblical historians and scholars (who often compare its advocates with Holocaust deniers)…but don’t let that shake your beliefs!
However, if you don’t mind (and also as your arguments border on delirious) I’ll stick with the academics and historians.
Oh, and by the way, the same goes here: “Dictum sapienti sat est!”
Report abuse
@ Born Warrior #33
“…I asked you not to bother, but I knew you would…you are so very predictable…”
I answered 13hrs before you asked me not to; stop being such an arse.
You’re arguing that the story isn’t fiction because:
“…I believe that a character named Jesus Christ once existed…”
but a character is generally, in literature, a representation by an actor, or narrative: surely lending credibility to my argument that it’s a work of fiction. I have not argued that there was not a person called or known as Jesus Christ, just that the story commonly told as his is fiction.
BTW, I just checked the phone book, there’s a John Connor living in St Helier; should I see The Terminator as a prophecy!!
Report abuse
J Lamborrari 34.
You might not know any Latin but your bad language seems to be up to scratch!
What a vulgar thing to say! It’s going to take me ‘goodness-knows-how-long’ to get over your insult……….Oh, that was quick! I’m over it already!
P.S. Character happens to be a synonym of important person.
Report abuse