Saturday, November 05, 2011

Remember, remember the 5th of November

Before the meaning and significance of Guy Fawkes Night are lost forever in the forgetfulness of time – subsumed to the inexorable progression of Hallowe’en; fused irrevocably with Diwali and other festivals of lights with altogether foreign affirmations and commemorations – it is worth reflecting on the value of the remembrance.

His Grace apologises to his readers and communicants that we are not able on this day to celebrate our liberation from the Treaty of Rome. He would, however, like to pay tribute to Labour’s John Robertson MP, who believes the foiling of the Gunpowder Plot to blow up the Houses of Parliament deserves to be properly commemorated.

Apparently, only a very small plaque exists next to a bike shed within Parliament, but it is hidden from public view. Mr Robertson wants the public to be granted access to the plaque or for a new one to be installed along the route for parliamentary tours. Mr Robertson said: "It does seem strange that we teach our school children the nursery rhyme 'remember remember the 5th of November', but on the very location for why we should remember, we seem to have sadly forgotten. This is not an adequate way to properly commemorate such an important moment in our country's history. Around the country people will be gathering around bonfires this weekend to remember the 5th of November and every child is taught about it in schools, as the time when we saved our democracy from an act of terrorism. Yet at Westminster you wouldn't know this was where it all took place."

Sadly, gratitude to God for deliverance is no longer part of the national psyche: there has been no full-frontal invasion attempt by a foreign power for 70 years, and so our security and liberty are taken for granted by generations who have never experienced the threat of oppression.

The exercise of democracy has become a quaint tradition which many are content to see compromised and diminished, and in which millions no longer bother to participate at all.

The Protestants of the 16th and 17th centuries knew what it was to contend for liberty from the oppression of Rome: and so they also knew how to celebrate and commemorate that deliverance with the sort of flame by God's grace in England which they trusted might never be put out.

Guy Fawkes’ gunpowder plot failed in its objective to assassinate the Protestant King James, blow Parliament to kingdom come and restore the old religion. And that failure meant the preservation of our monarchy, of liberty and of our independence from foreign princes and potentates.

And the King and Parliament decreed that henceforth the 5th November would be remembered throughout history with fireworks, bonfires and feasts of celebration; with gratitude to God, an abundance of joy and thanksgiving, patriotic revelry and not a little drunkenness.

And here we are, four centuries later, with a Monarch who has been rendered a citizen of a foreign power and subjected to foreign courts; a Parliament which has surrendered its sovereignty and abdicated the Royal Prerogative such that it cannot even assert the primacy of its own statutes; and a Church which has forgotten what it is to be Protestant in a relativist sea of ecumenicity.

We were not bombed into submission: no bullets were fired, no hostages taken, no ransom exacted.

Our Parliament has freely conspired and our Monarch has given wilful assent to the present occupation of this Kingdom by a foreign imperium which is antithetical to our traditions, ignorant of our liberties and dismissive of our democracy.

What Guy Fawkes failed to achieve for the Pope of Rome with gunpowder, our Parliament surrendered to the Treaty of Rome with their own votes.

The Monarchy which Guy Fawkes sought to overthrow has willingly prostrated and assented to its own abdication.

The Union Flag is but a meaningless rag beneath the Corona Stellarum Duodecim of the European Union.

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom is subject to the rulings of the Supremest Court in Strasbourg.

Some might call all this 'Treason'.

If it be ‘an eternal truth’ that ‘what a sovereign parliament can do, a sovereign parliament can also undo’, then we await our Churchillian deliverer.

In the meantime, in commemoration of the miraculous deliverance of 1605, here are the verses of the celebratory pamphlet featured above:
True Protestants I pray you do draw near
Unto this ditty lend attentive ear,
The lines are new although the subject's old
Likewise it is as true as e'er was told.

When James the First in England reigned King,
Under his Royal gracious Princely wing
Religion flourish'd both in court and town
Which wretched Romans strove to trample down.

To their old plotting trade they straight did go,
To prove this Kingdom's final overthrow
A plot contriv'd by Catholics alone
The like before or since was never known.

Rome's Council did together often meet
For to contrive which way they might complete
This bloody treason which they took in hand
Against the King, and Heads of all the land.

At length these wretched Romans all agreed
Which way to make the King and Nation bleed
By powder, all agreed with joint consent.
To blow up both the King and Parliament.

For to keep secret this, their villany
By solemn oaths they one another tie
Nay farther, being void of grace and shame,
Each took the Sacrament upon the same.

Their Treason wrapp'd in this black mantle, then,
Secure and safe from all the eyes of men,
They did not fear/ but by one fatal blow,
To prove the Church and Kingdom's overthrow.

Catesby with all the other Roman crew,
This powder plot did eagerly pursue
Yet after all their mighty cost and care
Their own seat soon was taken in the snare.

Under the House of the great Parliament,
This Romish Den, and Devils by consent,
The Hellish powder plot they formed there,
In hopes to send all flying in the air.

barrels of powder privately convey'd,
billets and bars of iron too, were laid.
to tear up all before them as they flew,
a black invention by this dismal crew.

and with the fatal blow all must have flown,
the gracious king upon his royal throne,
His Gracious Queen likewise their Princely heir
All must have died and perish'd that was there.

The House of Noble Lords of high degree,
By this unheard of bloody tragedy,
Their limbs in sunder, straight would have been tore
And fill'd the air with noble bloody gore.

The worthy learned Judges grave and sagey
The Commons too, all must have felt Rome's rage,
Had not the Lord of Love crept in between
Oh! what a dismal slaughter there had been.

The King, the Queen and Barons of the land.
The Judges, Gentry did together stand,
On ruin's brink, while Rome the blow would give,
They'd but the burning of a match to live.

But that great God that sits in Heaven high.
He did behold their bloody treachery,
He made their own handwriting soon betray
The work which they had plotted many a day.

The Lord in Mercy did his Wisdom send,
Unto the King, his people to defend,
Which did reveal the hidden powder plot,
A gracious mercy, ne'er to be forgot

And brought Rome's faction unto punishment,
Which did the powder treason first invent,
And all that ever plots, I hope God will,
That the true Christian church may flourish still.


Blogger Harry-ca-Nab said...

Of course, Protestanism was a foreign and minority cult that imposed itself upon the British people - Catholic virtually to a man & woman adhering to a faith reaching back into the dawn of our recorded history.

They stripped the altars, vandalised the fabric of churches and monasteries, enriched themselves from the stolen lands and community held artefacts and FORCIBLY commanded the populace to attend protestant worship.

Worse still they murdered priests, monks, nuns. They threw the sick, elderly and poor out from the care of the church. For the ordinary people - removed as they were from the machinations of their murderous king - the central part of their religious and communal lives was swept away. Enforced adherence to an alien cult was no different to the imposition of forced conversion and a Jihad against the Christian communities of the Middle East by Islam..

Those that fought to remain Catholic (I am proud to say my English ancestors did) were persecuted, tortured, murdered and fined. Attendance at protestant worship was commanded and absence was punished.

Hmmmm. I wonder if that is why the deep Christianity of our nation has been almost wiped out. Belief was replaced by bigotry, persecution and secular interests.

Forget all the Archishop's nonsense about Kings, Queens, politics - protestantism broke this nations belief. After centuries of enforced attendance the new freedom to worship resulted in falling attendances.

The CofE, despite is massive wealth & assets, political links, membership of the House of Lords and status as the established religion has presided over the death of Christianity.

There are no excuses. A false faith cannot survive.

St Edmund Campion, before his murder by the State for his adherence to the his Caholic faith, said it all.

"In condemning us, you condemn all your own ancestors, all our ancient bishops and kings, all that was once the glory of England -- the island of saints, and the most devoted child of the See of Peter."

The Archbish' should think about that.

And the rest of us should, on this day, remember the treatment meeted out to their own ancestors by the Protestants.

So, please do Remember Remember. I do, but not for the reason the archbishop would like.

5 November 2011 at 08:37  
Blogger Newmania said...

Its far from forgotten in Lewes your Grace

5 November 2011 at 08:38  
Blogger non mouse said...

Now that's what I call fireworks, Your Grace. Thank you!

[And I know no reason,
why Westminster Treason
Should ever be forgot].

wv: suable. Interesting.

5 November 2011 at 09:12  
Blogger bluedog said...

Excellent post, Your Grace.

Mr Harry-ca-Nab, it's not obvious how you can brand Catholicism as indigenous to the United Kingdom while declaring Protestantism to be a foreign and minority cult. As you know, Protestantism derives from Catholicsm, so if Catholicsm is native so is Protestantism.

Based on your arguments you should applaud Rowan for his Druidic status. Now there's a truly British, or possibly Brythonic, religion that effortlessly predates Christianity.

How can you disparage a Druid if 'ancient' is important?

5 November 2011 at 09:35  
Blogger Albert said...

And here we are, four centuries later, with a Monarch who has been rendered a citizen of a foreign power

How many times have we got to go through all this? England was illegally subjected to a foreign power in the so-called Glorious Revolution - long before the EU. This treacherous plot over-threw the lawful (anointed from the point of view of the CofE) monarch, who was believed to be the Supreme Governor of the CofE. It was done in contradiction to the oaths made in the sight of God, and deposed such senior bishops as the Archbishop of Canterbury himself, who knew that what was going on was a treacherous conniving with a foreign power for dishonorable ends.

Harry-ca-Nab is right, there was an earlier import of (this time) German ideology, contrary to the will of the English people. It was called the Reformation.

It is really surprising to see so many people still caught up in the Whig interpretation of history.

5 November 2011 at 10:01  
Blogger len said...

I have been in Lewis during the celebrations,quite something to witness!.
If the true Church of Christ does not make a determined stand for Biblical truth then Jesus warns us what will happen “You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot."(Matthew 5:16)

And who will do the trampling?

Rome sits waiting to devour any that falter or stumble in the faith, singing a siren song to lure those away from the true faith(onto the rocks)not THE rock!Which of course is Christ!.

5 November 2011 at 10:02  
Blogger Harry-ca-Nab said...


You say "As you know, Protestantism derives from Catholicsm, so if Catholicsm is native so is Protestantism."

Having heard claims that Islam derives from Judaism and Christaanity - "the people of the book" - I think you may be on dodgy ground

Having listened to protestants constantly referring to Catholicism, and Catholics, as being a part of some "foreign" plot I merely remind you that protestantism is as "foreign".

Remember, when she joined the
Catholic Church, Ms. Anne Widdecombe recalls being asked, ‘Haven’t you joined a religion of Irish navvies and Italian waiters?

The image portrayed of Rome is of something “detached and

You can't have it both ways.

As for Rowan being "Druidic" he certainly has very dodgy Christian credentials and confused rambling - including a tolerance of Sharia Law.

As for disparaging Druids - where did I do that? That would make me protestant in my bigotry.

5 November 2011 at 10:15  
Blogger Gnostic said...

Time to roll out the barrels and finish the job Mr Fawkes started, Your Grace?

Can I light the fuse?

5 November 2011 at 10:26  
Blogger Harry-ca-Nab said...


".......the true Church of Christ"?

Some claim for a creature that sprang from Henry VIII's codpiece and perverted/devoured belief in the UK!


There are many reasons, temporal as well as spiritual, to light the fuse and finish the job.

Race you for it ???!!!

5 November 2011 at 10:37  
Blogger niconoclast said...

Church tyranny, Catholic tyranny, Protestant tyranny, Monarchy tyranny, EU tyranny - a er, plaque on all your houses.Choose Capitalism, the only non slavery system, period.(People in stained glass houses should not throw stones).

5 November 2011 at 10:41  
Blogger bluedog said...

Mr Harry-ca-nab, I concede you didn't criticise Rowan for being a druid, but you certainly critcised him in general. I merely pointed out that as you seem fixated on 'ancient', Rowan does ancient admirably and you would seem to be kindred spirits in that regard.

You personalised your post by claiming that your family fought back against the Protestant tide. Permit me to personalise my post.

Just for the record I'm an Anglican and both my grandmothers had French surnames, being of Huguenot descent. We have a family tree that on one side pointedly starts in 1685 (in English), being the year of the St Bartholemew's Day Massacres in France. So when Catholic propagandists on this website, such as yourself, portray the Roman Church as the true religion of peace its ROFL time for me. Being of Huguenot descent makes it very easy for me to sympathise with the Jews.

But isn't this a case of 'that was then, this is now?' How long do you want to bear a grudge about something that happened three or four hundred years ago?

Life's too short.

God Bless.

5 November 2011 at 10:50  
Blogger Francis Hoar said...

A plot foiled by my ancester, Lord Mounteagle - one of the overwhelming majority of the 'Roman crew' loyal to King and Country, as they have proven time and again with their blood.

His Grace should not be disheartened. It is a great thing that, four hundred years later, this day of deliverance is still celebrated throughout the land - one of the few truly native folk festivals; and now mercifully shorn of its anti-Catholic overtones.

5 November 2011 at 10:59  
Blogger Harry-ca-Nab said...


What you vaguely describe as happening three or four hundred years ago affected my family, daily, right up until present times.

The horrors and anti-Catholic bigotries in Northern Ireland and Scotland do not need airing.

As for French protestants - well just visit Brittany and the Loire Valley where I spend much time. They do not have a fond memory of protestant mobs attacking Catholics and defacing churches.

They also had the English example of what happens to Catholics if protestants get the upper hand.

As an English Catholic I too can, and do, sympathise with the Jews.

Even as a child in a CofE Infant/Junior school I and other Catholics were singled out by teachers, denied involvement in school events, worship etc; told by teachers that we didn't belive in God and jesus but worshipped a woman (Mary).

Finally, it would be far easier for all of us to "move on" if the likes of Cranmer did the same.

Cameron's recent decision, endorsed by the Queen, to begin to dismantle institutionalised discrimination against Catholics is a good move.

One that gave His Grace a seizure if his 30 Oct post is anything to go by..

For that reason I will defend my faith - and my rights as a British citizen.

So much better would it be if Christians gave up the past divisions given that we face far greater threats than doctrinal and political differences.

His Grace should "back off".

5 November 2011 at 11:23  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

Good to see sectarian triumphalism is alive and well in England.

Why not establish a 'fraternal' organisation and set up a series of lodges thrughout the land? Ever year on the 5th November there could be parades through the streets with members carrying wood aloft ready for the burning, dragging an effigy of Guy Fawkes behind them. There could be speeches proclaiming the evils of Roman domination and an anthem could be sung accompanied by brass bands.

We really must find a way of preserving our glorious past and instilling it into the minds of our children. Keep alive the wounds of our past - religious hatred, suspicion, persecution, treason and invasion.

Let us remember that the plot was uncovered because Catholic parliamentarians were warned to keep away from the House on the night of the planned attack. One of them informed the King.

Is this ritualistic burning, this 'celebration' an act of revenge? Fawkes managed to avoid being hung, drawn and quartered by jumping from the gallows, breaking his neck in the fall and avoided the full agony of his execution. He has to be made to suffer.

Meanwhile, Europe is in economic meltdown. Ah-ha, another Romanish plot!

5 November 2011 at 11:29  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

It's quite surprising that the celebration is still going after all these years although I don't suppose many people really think about its historical significance, except perhaps in Lewes.

It's 'bonfire night and fireworks' for the children rather than 'Guy Fawkes night'. I haven't seen a Guy (no jokes please, Inspector) for some years, either in its "a penny for the guy" form or as an effigy to be burnt on the fire.

All I can say is that surely we're better off without the religious wars of the past? As far as I can tell, it was a time of religious extremists and geo-political power plays, traumatising and impoverishing local populations, and to what end really?

5 November 2011 at 12:03  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


I do agree with you - apart from your concluding remark: "to what end really?"

From this morass of intrigue and bloodshed democracy and individual freedom slowly emerged. Lets not forget the honesty, bravery and courage of protaganists on all sides who died with integrity for what they believed in - even though many acted in error and under the influence of those with dishonest motives. And thank God too we didn't live in those times when one's faith and belief rendered one subject to torture and death.

Faced with the choice between the despotic 'Divine Rights of Kings' or the unrestrained 'Temporal Supremacy of Rome', both failing their true purposes because of human weakness, is it any wonder a democratic movement arose? 'God' was drawn into and used by all sides in what was essentially a nationalistic, political and economic struggle.

Unfortunately 'Secular Democracy' is the new 'God' we worship.

Every solution has a problem!

No 'Imprimatur' has been granted this post. No time for an 'Nihil obstat'!

5 November 2011 at 12:30  
Blogger Harry-ca-Nab said...

DanJ0 & Way of the Dodo.

Spot on.

We can all argue about religion or atheism etc but when the British State not only specifically discriminates against a loyal religious minority (once the majority), allows the parading of an effigy of Guy Fawkes and the Pope through the streets for a ritual burning and has people like His Grace in the Established Church who supports such medieval barbarism then its time to move on.

How would he feel if a couple of million Catholics took to the streets and ritually burnt effigies of the Queen, Archbishop of Canterbury and His Grace in the UK tonight?

Would it even be allowed?

Fortunately we are better than that. We work, pay taxes and serve in the Armed Forces.

But now, just for his Graces benefit, we will be drinking a toast to Guy Fawkes tonight as we celebrate the last man with honest intent who entered Parliament and light the symbolic blue touchpaper.

5 November 2011 at 13:30  
Blogger len said...

Don`t mention burning to His Grace (rather a sensitive subject)

5 November 2011 at 13:44  
Blogger len said...

Harry -ca -Nab
You seem somewhat fixated on Henry`s codpiece..what strange ideas you Catholics have!.(10:37)

The true Church of Jesus Christ belongs to......Jesus Christ no less.

Catholics have this weird idea that non Catholics follow a fallen being (is this because you have made it a tradition yourselves?)

5 November 2011 at 13:52  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


Wrong again ... as usual!

Do read the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church before you make 'infallible' pronouncements on its beliefs and spread your lies.

5 November 2011 at 14:10  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

Thank you, Your Grace. Breaking the power of the Roman Church and making Man directly answerable to God has shaped the English character and brought profound benefits to our way of life. As we become a less Protestant and less Christian nation, those blessings—up to now taken for granted—will become crystal clear. Our descendants will have ample opportunity to mourn their loss.

5 November 2011 at 14:31  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

Is the burning of an effigy of the Pope Paul V in Lewis on the 5th November an act of commemoration or an indication of religious intolerance? Is it offencive to those whose faith is so openly ridiculed?

Admittedly, initially, this event was condoned by way of an Act of Parliament, subsequently repealed, calling for special Church of England services in every parish. Is this a Christian act of fellowship and thanksgiving?

The riots of the Lewes 'Bonfire Boys', rowdy, drunken events, were hardly acts of Christian worship. Today the good people of Lewes display on pikes the effigy heads of those seen as the "Enemies of Bonfire". In 2001 an effigy of Obama was burned; in 2003 a Gypsy caravan.

All very Chrisitian and pleasing to the Lord! They even find time in this paganesque ritual to remember the war dead - presumably only the non-Catholic variety.

Surely its time to call an end to this nonsense? But, think on. 80,000 visitors every year. What a boost to the local economy.

5 November 2011 at 14:51  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Fascinating article Your Grace, but I doubt whether there will be many bonfires tonight, they've all been banned by the health and safety zealots. And of course Guy has been banned by the politically correct brigade. There's no fun anymore.

I think Guy Fawkes should be made into a proper festival day and night with a parade through the streets. Britain's becoming boring if you take away these traditions. I used to love the creativity and ingenuity the children showed in making their Guys. I don't see it as barbaric just as preserving tradition.

In Malta a Catholic country they have many traditional parades through the streets and festivals,
and they are a very civilised country.

5 November 2011 at 15:14  
Blogger English Viking said...

Be nice if someone blew up parliament today, with all the scum inside it.

5 November 2011 at 15:15  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

What a disparate group of commentators we have here. DanJo and Way of the Dodo have nearly got it right. Not that I would claim to have all knowledge or see all things clearly. I do feel sorry for Harry-ca-Nab with the heavy burden of bitterness concerning his views over the alleged mistreatment of his Catholic family and heritage. In Brentwood we have a monument in memory of a young martyr burnt at the stake for refusing to recant and stop reading the bible.
Guy Fawkes was about to commit a crime and he was punished for it. God forbids murder. Your Grace is right to remind us the origins of the 5th Nov. celebrations. The freedom to worship is an incalculable liberty and should be retained and remembered. I would not have wished to live at the time of Luther as a New Testament Christian, let alone in the time of the Borgia’s.
Unity of fellowship seems to be an unattainable goal and I wonder why. The Roman Catholic Church was for a while the only church for most of Europe and look at what happened to it. But how many Christian branches and denominations are there now. One might wonder whether God looked at the church and said to himself, I don’t want another Tower of Babel where man said ‘I can do anything’.
Your Grace recently wrote about the protesters at St. Pauls where placards provocatively said ‘What would Jesus do’. I might suggest what in my opinion Jesus might do, there and in many other situations. He would have ignored the Church, he would ignored the protestors; but he would have sought out the one in the crowd that had a heart for him and he would have blessed him and healed his broken heart.
Too much today we try to remedy society and end up attacking each other. Jesus taught us that we should let our light shine that others might see the hope that is in us. Can the un-churched see that in the churches of today and those that profess to be Christians?
Your Grace, I commend your work in provoking each of us to review where we stand in our faith and to understand that which had eluded us previously.

5 November 2011 at 15:30  
Blogger Oswin said...


The many strands of protestation, together with non-RCC origins of Christianity within Britain, predate Luther by many centuries:

Wycliffe & lollardy; the early Celtic Church and Pelagianism; beyond even, to the folk memories of Glastonbury and the FIRST Christian Church, whence all Christian roads lead to Britain, and NOT to Rome. The latter admitted by Augustine, the 'Apostle to the English' in his correspondence with Pope Gregory the Great:

''In the Western confines of Britain there is a certain royal island of large extent, surrounded by water, abounding in all the beauties and necessaries of life. In it the first Neophites of a Catholic Law, God hath beforehand acquainted them, found a church constructed by no human art, but by divine construction by the hands of Christ himself, for the salvation of HIS people. The almighty has made it manifest by many miracles and mysterious visitations that HE continues to watch over it as sacred to HIMSELF, and to Mary, the Mother of God.''

It seems that ROMAN Catholicism was then the ''foreign and minority cult'' ... until, with Anglo-Saxon help, the British Church was assimilated, or else murdered, hounded unto destruction.

5 November 2011 at 15:48  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

I find it difficult to believe that there are actually still people out there who continue to sincerely believe that the Protestent revolution in England had anything at all to do with any concept of liberty, particularly from the supposed 'oppression of Rome'. It is not a coincidence that the strongest Catholic 'national' churces in Europe at the time were the so-called 'Gallican' churches of France and Spain, completely under the control of their respective states; nor is it a coincidence that where the reformation was strongest - Germany and only later England - there was a very temporal advantage to be had for the ruling princes by 'throwing off Roman oppression'. To quote David Bentley Hart, the German princes didn't revolt because they had turned Protestant, they turned Protestant in order to revolt.

5 November 2011 at 15:56  
Blogger Oswin said...

Corrigan: tell that to all the murdered lollards!

5 November 2011 at 16:23  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


So you subscribe the belief that between the ages of 12 and 30, Jesus Christ visited these Islands with Joseph of Arimathea and came to Ynis-witrin, later called the Isle of Avalon, now Glastonbury?

Joseph of Arimathea is then supposed to have returned after the Resurrection and Ascension, with the eleven Disciples, and built a church. He is also said to have buried the Chalice there. The first Christian Church, not Roan but Jewish-Celtic in origin.

It looks like Moses got his geography badly wrong! The follow-on is that Great Britain is believed to be the 'Promised Land', the nation descended from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Glastonbury today is a 'New Age' centre, a magnet attracting people with a range of weird, drug induced Neopagan beliefs.

Evidence is sadly lacking to support these myths and legends.

5 November 2011 at 16:34  
Blogger Oswin said...

Dodo: ah, you've been at the ''Wiki' again! Good, it's a start, at least.

It is a ''myth'' that is repeatedly attested to, by YOUR own Church, and by many popes. You aren't turning heretic, are you?

However, in answer to your question: Yes, I do believe that the fist Church of Christ, was within our isles.

5 November 2011 at 16:47  
Blogger Oswin said...

sorry, that's 'first' and not ''fist'' ... although it has a certain ring to it! Beware the 'fist' of Christ Dodo!

5 November 2011 at 16:51  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Glorious Protestantism ! The Inspector has managed to trace back the origin of the acceptance of this German led cult as our country’s religion. And what do we find, there’s our dictator, Henry VIII in his bedroom and there is Anne Boleyn giving him the best fellatio available this side of the English Channel. Henry is in deep thought – “How can I get rid of the wife”. He conceives a plan. This protesting business doesn’t give much for the sanctity of marriage, so divorce is not a problem. The solution is that the country accept this new anti catholic religion.

So, does Henry put his plan before Parliament, to be debated by the commons, lords, bishops and abbots. Well no, what he does is make the entire English people an offer. “Accept it, and you get to live”. When he murders his best friend, Thomas More, the country is left in no doubt of the sincerity of his words...

Thankfully, when the state goes bad, there are men of principle who stand up for what’s right. We’ve seen it in Nazi Germany, Chile, Argentina and Libya to name but a few. Ours being remembered today are Catesby and his brave band including Guido Fawkes.

Not so thankfully, there are bloggers here in the UK who are more than happy with the usurpation of the one true Catholic apostolic church. Misguided and loathing of Catholics, it’s ironic they owe their religion to a mere sex act in one mortal man’s bedroom...

5 November 2011 at 16:55  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I'm not sure you have Henry's religious beliefs quite right there, Inspector.

5 November 2011 at 17:11  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Oh! I think Inspector is right. Wasn't it all about the serious business of him begetting an heir? Something you wont know about girlfriend.

5 November 2011 at 17:30  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

DanJ0. Henry wrote against Protestantism and received a papal slap on the back. The title ‘Defender of Faith’, which curiously, our present sovereign still holds. And there is the rumour he renounced all of what he had done on his deathbed. You must of heard of men “losing their head over a woman” and they say she was quite a woman...

5 November 2011 at 17:39  
Blogger Roy said...

Whatever the motives of Henry VIII, which were obviously questionable, there had been a protestant movement in England since the time of Wycliffe, i.e. long before Luther.

Henry's break with Rome opened the floodgates and the attitudes of the population by the time of the Spanish Armada show that the protestant cause had become identified with freedom. That was completely without its drawbacks. When Christianity, or a branch of it, becomes identified with a political movement there is always a danger of religious ideals being prostituted to serve the political ambitions of religious or political leaders.

Those who claim that Christianity in Britain had always been Roman Catholic not only deliberately ignore the history of the Celtic church they also ignore the history of the early church in the Middle East, Europe and North Africa. There is no evidence that the Bishop of Roman had universal authority over the early church nor is there anything in the Bible to suggest that Christ came for the purpose of founding an ecclesiastical bureaucracy modelled on the Roman Empire.

5 November 2011 at 17:42  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Marie: "Oh! I think Inspector is right. Wasn't it all about the serious business of him begetting an heir? Something you wont know about girlfriend."

You neither unless you've finally found a man who will have you. Have you tried eHarmony? I dunno if they have BNP or right wing nutter in their selection criteria though.

5 November 2011 at 19:03  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


Not even Wiki publishes this 'theory'. It's a little bit too, how shall we say, off-center even for tham.

There was as early Christian Church on these shores predating St Augustine's mission. Most serious scholars take this to refer to this arriving in Britain in the 3rd century - and most certainly not to Glastonbury in the 1st century.

Views about the degree of conformity with Rome of the varied Celtic Christian Churches tend to vary according to the predisposition of the historian.

Celtic paganism and shamanism certainly existed and is the basis of much of the neo-paganism we witness today in places like Glastonbury.

5 November 2011 at 19:06  
Blogger non mouse said...

Very well said, Mr. Roy @17:42. The Church has been politicized for most of its history and, consequently, riven by schisms, power struggles, and/or doctrinal controversies. Those fights have beset every potentate who ever set himself up in Rome, Alexandria, Constantinople, Aachen, Avignon, Belfast, Dublin, or wherever.

The people presently duking it out with us on His Grace's site drag us back into the distress those disagreements engendered. The attackers exacerbate civil fragmentation and, ultimately, they threaten to perpetuate (or re-invigorate) horrors like those of Roman occupied Britain, the Irish invasion, the Bastard's Harrowing of the North, Northern Ireland, or the English battles of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries ...the ones that drove our people to seek freedom in colonies: as far away as possible.

And, speaking of Tudor/Jacobean times, who can forget Bloody Mary? Contrary Mary, the half-Spanish daughter Henry didn't want as his heir? The one who came after the poor boy king, who suffered the fate of all boy kings at the hands of his "Christian" "keepers"?

I thank God that Henry and Anne gave us Elizabeth, who understood the machinations of religio-politicians better than anyone here (except His Grace)... and who helped us along the road to common sense. But even she couldn't pre-empt the Jacobean mess her frog-educated cousin Mary bequeathed.

All my life, the sublime imagery of Guy Fawkes night has amused us. It's also drawn us to a deeper level by reminding us that we found ways to lay the strife to rest, ways to live with our differences and to enjoy freedom of choice and freedom from harrassment- in our own place. The Church of England has been part of that solution.

5 November 2011 at 19:34  
Blogger non mouse said...

PS: Anyone who knows only the Irish version of events can graduate from Wikipedia. Project Gutenberg makes available all kinds of primary texts, including Fox's Book of Martyrs ... Those with access to university websites can view even more texts from all sides, especially on EEBO(Early English Books Online).

Incidentally - for anyone who hasn't read it - Baldwin's Beware the Cat, a contemporary take on EVI's day, brilliant, funny, and also sublime. I tend to think of it as slightly reflecting Chaucer's House of Fame; but then, Tudors were always conscious of their Lancastrian and fourteenth century connection. They nurtured the British side of their heritage; they championed its revival, and our independence from foreign intervention.

5 November 2011 at 19:57  
Blogger Anglican said...

It is very sad that some Protestants and some Roman Catholics cannot forget the past - as bad as some Irish! The present problem with the EU has little or nothing to do with the controversies of 500 years ago.

Almost everyone then knew the Church badly needed reforming, but men, being sinful, began behaving in extremely unchristian, indeed diabolical, ways, burning & executing each other.

The Anglican lectionary, on November 8th each year, at least honours the 'Saints and Martyrs of England' - of all Churches (I recently heard an RC Abbot commend the C of E for this). The RC's seem only to commend their own martyrs, totally ignoring the martyrs under Queen Mary.

Incidentally, why do Anglicans always accept the RC claim that they alone are the only true Catholics? 'Catholic', from the Greek, simply means Universal. All orthodox, Trinitarian Christians, who accept the Creeds, in which we say we believe in the 'One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church', are part of the Catholic (Universal) Church. Those who do not accept the Creeds as a basic summary of their Faith will not of course wish to do this. Surely His Grace, who incorporated the Nicene Creed in his Book of Common Prayer, does not omit to say it at Communion?

5 November 2011 at 20:00  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Anglican. You are of course right sir. Really can’t see why the CofE can’t return to Rome. All this about freedoms under threat. Not in this day and age...

5 November 2011 at 20:35  
Blogger Roy said...

I missed out the word not when I wrote the lines below:

"by the time of the Spanish Armada show that the protestant cause had become identified with freedom. That was not completely without its drawbacks."

I agree with non mouse that the right side won but that it is a good thing that religion is not normally misused for political ends in Britain today.

Nevertheless there are some weak parallels between Britain today and in the time of Guy Fawkes. Political Correctness has become a secular religion and heretics can be punished, e.g. the case of the Christian who was demoted, suffering a huge reduction in salary, for the "thought crime" of making a brief statement opposing the idea of "gay marriage".

He got into trouble after one of his colleagues and Facebook "friends" reported him, just like the behaviour of the myriad sneaks and informants who worked for the Stasi in East Germany when that country was in the grip of a secular religion.

5 November 2011 at 20:48  
Blogger bluedog said...

Well said, non mouse @ 17.34.

Thank you, too, Mr Roy @ 17.42.

Somehow we never hear about the Great Schism of 1054 from our RC friends, wherein Constaninople refused to submit to Rome. Just because Canterbury refuses to re-submit to Rome it seems the RC Church is mounting a vicious propaganda canpaign against Anglican resistance to Rome. The recent catalyst for Roman anger appears to have been the marriage of William and Catherine. How dare a break-away sect of heretics put on a 'Christian' marriage ceremony that draws 2 billion viewers around the globe? That should have been a triumph for Rome.

What to do?

Ensure that the law is changed so that ultimately the British monarch is Catholic, then Rome can bask in the global popularity of the British monarchy. As a media event, any ceremony involving the British monarchy out-sells the Roman church three to one.

Now Prince Phillip was an Orthodox convert to Anglicanism, and Charles has visited Mount Athos.

Where could this lead?

5 November 2011 at 20:55  
Blogger non mouse said...

Oh -- and here's a neon firework:

Hello darkness, my old friend
I've come to talk with you again
Because a vision softly creeping
Left its seeds while I was sleeping
And the vision that was planted in my brain
Still remains
Within the sound of silence

In restless dreams I walked alone
Narrow streets of cobblestone
'Neath the halo of a street lamp
I turned my collar to the cold and damp
When my eyes were stabbed by the flash of a neon light
That split the night
And touched the sound of silence

And in the naked light I saw
Ten thousand people maybe more
People talking without speaking
People hearing without listening
People writing songs that voices never shared
No one dared
Disturb the sound of silence

"Fools," said I, "you do not know
Silence like a cancer grows
Hear my words that I might teach you
Take my arms that I might reach you"
But my words like silent raindrops fell
And echoed in
the wells of silence

And the people bowed and prayed
To the neon god they made
And the sign flashed out its warning
In the words that it was forming
And the sign said "The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls
And tenement halls
And whispered in the sound of silence"

Paul Simon, of course (1964).

And He who said: "He that hath ears to hear..." etc.

5 November 2011 at 20:55  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

non mouse said ...
"The people presently duking it out with us on His Grace's site drag us back into the distress those disagreements engendered."

We're surely entitled to challenge your partisan presentation of the past? You say we "exacerbate civil fragmentation" and proceed to pour out your poison! Are we not entitled to tell our ancestors history? And then, " ... we found ways to lay the strife to rest, ways to live with our differences". Yes, now how did you do that? Not by persecuting Roman Catholics!

Anglicn said ...
"It is very sad that some Protestants and some Roman Catholics cannot forget the past ... The present problem with the EU has little or nothing to do with the controversies of 500 years ago.",

Some on here wouldn't agree with you and keep the past conflict alive as part of a wider anti-Europe agenda. Sad, but true.

By the way, Roman Catholics do not regard themselves as the only 'Catholics'. Hence the Roman bit. Some Anglicans seem to have issues with calling themselves Catholic. Can't imagine 'The Catholic and Reformed Church of England' being univerally popular. Do all CofE adherents accept the Nicene Creed?

5 November 2011 at 21:09  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

bluedog sid ...
The recent catalyst for Roman anger appears to have been the marriage of William and Catherine.

What? Did I miss something in the press?

I thought the ceremony a wonderful celebration of Christian marriage.

I know of no criticism from Rome. A few eyebrows were raised about the Archbishop of York's comments. He compared William living with Catherine before their marriage to 'tryin the milk before buying the cow'.

5 November 2011 at 21:17  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

William living with Catherine before their marriage

And granny supreme governor of the CofE !! Wouldn’t find the Pope’s children doing this....

5 November 2011 at 21:27  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


You are incorrigible!

5 November 2011 at 21:59  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Roy: "Political Correctness has become a secular religion and heretics can be punished, e.g. the case of the Christian who was demoted, suffering a huge reduction in salary, for the "thought crime" of making a brief statement opposing the idea of "gay marriage"."

I agree that he was very badly treated from the facts that have been reported. However, this happened within the company's disciplinary procedures, not in law. I can't see an employment tribunal backing his employer unless there are significant unreported facts. Also, the main point seems to have been that he had his employer identified on his facebook page. Really, if you have a facebook page identifying your employer and with colleagues as facebook friends then I think you're asking for trouble. It's 'layer pollution'.

5 November 2011 at 22:02  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Was trying to make a point with a bit of humour thrown in. The Inspector is supportive of the CofE, but it’s going to be difficult for any CofE parent stopping their children fornicating when royals are doing it. And of course, when a young couple are shacked up together, holy matrimony is often thrown to the wayside, sometimes for “as long as they both shall live”.

5 November 2011 at 22:23  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

DanJ0. Agreed, that Christian was incredibly foolish for breaking his cover in public. If the Inspector did the same, he would be given a talk featuring the phrase ‘position untenable’, and that’s for sure !

5 November 2011 at 22:27  
Blogger ZZMike said...

I'm grateful for the mention of Guy Fawkes Day (or as the tourist asks, Who is this guy, Fawkes?").

"What Guy Fawkes failed to achieve for the Pope of Rome with gunpowder, our Parliament surrendered to the Treaty of Rome with their own votes."

It's true, but not entirely unexpected. A Russian leader once said of the West that they will sell us the rope by which they will hang us. He was not entirely incorrect.

Formerly Great Britain gave itself away, in bits and pieces. In a foolish desire to be charitable and not offend anyone, you handed the Keys to the Kingdom to those who would destroy you.

"Religion flourish'd both in court and town"

No longer. At least, not your own.

"barrels of powder privately convey'd,
billets and bars of iron too, were laid."

Merciful days!!! That would certainly have been a Terrorist Act.

5 November 2011 at 22:39  
Blogger Oswin said...

Dodo @ 19:06 : I'm forever amazed at your pretense to knowledge.

Do read the Augustine/Gregory correspondence and/or Bede's Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum.

YOUR popes believed it to be so; thus the importance of their clinging hold to Britain, above and beyond any other country. I'd have thought a Jesuit assassin would know this stuff?

6 November 2011 at 01:13  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


Is it really that bad?

I work in the public sector and make no secret of my Roman Catholic and Christian religious convictions. I openly express my views about a range of issues eg homosexuality, abortion and divorce. Nobody has ever reported me to the 'thought police' or accused me of being homophobic or sexist. Whenever any conflict between my faith and my public duty arises I identify this, inform my employers and withdraw on the basis of conscience.

I do often preface my remarks with: "according to my beliefs and the teachings of my faith".

As Christians we should take a stand. Nowadays we are a minority and can claim protection under the Equality Act!

6 November 2011 at 01:13  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


You give me the precise references?

My recollection is that references to early Christianity were 2nd century and to people such as St Alban. They are generalised and non-specific.

You point me towards something tangible supporting your proposition that the comments refer explicitly to Joseph and Jesus, a 1st century community at Glastonbury formed in the immediate aftermath of Christ's death and resurrection.

As I said,most reputable scholars hold that the 'Celtic Church' dates from the second and third century.

6 November 2011 at 01:23  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

"My recollection is ..."


6 November 2011 at 07:54  
Blogger Harry-ca-Nab said...

Well, Guy Fawkes night went well with a MASSIVE display at my friends house - all synchronised to music from a wrist-mounted iPhone linked to a sound system/Spotify by his way too clever son.

We all drank a toast to Guy and ceremonially sent Parliament sky high.

Meanwhile the CofE, the Dads Army of Christianity, continues to prevaricate and bumble its way to oblivion.

6 November 2011 at 09:58  
Blogger Roy said...

Harry-ca-Nab said...


What you vaguely describe as happening three or four hundred years ago affected my family, daily, right up until present times.

The horrors and anti-Catholic bigotries in Northern Ireland and Scotland do not need airing.

Only a very biased person can write about Northern Ireland in that manner and not mention the IRA. Presumably the people affected by their activities right up until present times do not count, just as the protestants killed during the reign of Bloody Mary do not count, not to mention all the "heretics" and adherents or suspected adherents killed during the Spanish Inquisition do not count.

No doubt if Guy Fawkes had succeeded there would have been an Inquisition in England too, and quite possibly a subsequent invasion of Scotland to enforce Roman Catholicism there.

I do not want to criticise the Catholic Church too much, it has many admirable members. However certain adherents give the impression of being more interested in Catholicism than they are in Christianity. People should be Christian first and then Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox etc. a very distant second.

6 November 2011 at 10:17  
Blogger bluedog said...

Well said indeed, Mr Roy @ 10.17. The caesaro-papist tendencies of the RCC have resulted in its adherents convincing themselves that they alone travel first class and us lesser mortals are in cheaper berths. The Church, surely, consists of all those who have put their faith in Jesus Christ over the ages. Let's not be too picky about how each individual chose Christ.

6 November 2011 at 10:37  
Blogger len said...

It would seem that Catholics and Non Catholics are entrenched within their own particular denominations projecting their own religious World view on/or at/the other trying to batter them into submission.

Each citing the other as being 'more evil',and having carried out 'more atrocities'.
Each claims to have an 'infallible' interpretation of Scripture.Many wars have been fought over issues such as these and countless deaths.
The hardest thing(in my estimation at least)is to approach Scripture with a completely open mind.If we view scripture through a particular World view we will distort Scripture to mean what we want it to!.
This is like having pure water and pouring it through a dirty filter and ending up contamination in the water.
That is why I am grateful not to belong to any denomination.

Roy has got it exactly right!.

If your denomination stands between yourself and the Truth as revealed in Scripture then it is doing you and all you come into contact with a great disservice.

I have been accuse(on more than a few occasions of' Catholic bashing'but my main arguments are on the Catholic interpretation of Scripture.
The Anglicans to all intents and purposes seem to be wandering in the Wilderness but this IMO is because it has ceased being 'salt and 'light'.
As Roy states if we belong first to the Body of Christ and lastly to wherever that Body gathers much would be set right.

6 November 2011 at 10:56  
Blogger len said...

To add further to my comments(10:56)

The question God will be asking you when you stand before Him is certainly not going to be " What Denomination ?"
But "How did you respond to My Son?"

(The following comments are slightly off thread but enormously relevant to explaining most of the conflicts between the' born again' and the' religious Christians'.

In the Old Covenant there were certain things you must do and things you cannot do, rewards for good conduct, and punishments for bad conduct.Basically following a 'rule book.'This is God`s Law and is still applicable today for all who do not rely entirely on Christ alone for salvation.This 'law keeping'is the essence of 'religion'.Problem being only a perfect person can fulfil ALL of the Law, break one part and you have broken the entire Law.

In the New Covenant brought in by Christ,
God places HIS Life into the believer enabling the Believer to live the Christian Life.

(this is of course an over simplification but space forbids more explanation, but the Bible explains this fully.(Romans Galatians etc.)

6 November 2011 at 11:44  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

Come now - tongue in cheek though this might be.

Thank God the plot was uncovered and prevented. That it was a Roman Catholic who reported this act of planned terrorism to the King gives me some comfort.

Can you imagine the consequences for Europe if it had succeeded? The ramifications would have been far greater than 9/11 and the aftermath would have led to a blood bath on a massive scale.

Terrorism and indiscriminate murder can never be justified no matter how great the perceived injustice.

The books of the New Testament were written initially as teaching aides to accompany evangelism and strengthen the faith of the new church community. Reading them 'cold', without some understanding is a dangerous endeavour. Look at all the strange and heretical interpretations that have been placed on them. But then, you probably don't accept 'heresy'as a concept. How can you?

6 November 2011 at 11:51  
Blogger IanCad said...

After being offline in a foreign clime (US) for the past month, it's good to see you still in such good form YG.
You are indeed a bright light in a dark land.
Haven't yet read all the comments but Mr. Roy is right on target.

6 November 2011 at 13:28  
Blogger Jon said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

6 November 2011 at 13:42  
Blogger Jon said...

I think I've worked out how the comments get so far away from the original thread of the discussion - by the time you've been bludgeoned by the trading of wikipedia references 40 or 50 times over events which may or may not have happened as documented by -insert supportive theologian here- you've been forced to take a position and that's what you'll feel like commenting upon.

For what it's worth, I attended Battersea fireworks display, which was excellent (although the choice of theme - Fire and the resulting music was a little curious and the police's virtual kettling of everyone trying to leave without explaining why they did so was annoying). As we watched our ticket money go up in smoke - I remembered the Houses of Parliament, and was grateful.

I agree with Mr Robertson. The French have Bastille day, the Americans Thanksgiving and independence day. Surely it's not inappropriate to grant the British, or maybe even just the English, Parliament day on the 5th (or the Friday before it) to celebrate.

For whether you believe Protestantism or Catholicism to be a foreign invention (and since Jesus wasn't from these shores, my view is that neither of them are Made In England!) the 5th November should mark our deliverance from the evil of the destruction of our political system as was and should remind us to cherish the freedoms we have inherited, and to fight for their preservation and enhancement all the harder.

6 November 2011 at 13:43  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Dodo 6 November 2011 01:13 Is it really that bad?

Afraid so old chum. During the riots, when your man jokingly expressed his opinion that it would have been better if the Windrush had been torpedoed on route from the West Indies, he was taken aside and informed he was being offensive ! Bunch of softies down south don’t you know. You are a hardier in lot in Scotland...

6 November 2011 at 13:52  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

If you are being honest, you got off quite lightly! The comment, albeit intended to be humerous, about the death of thousands of black immigrants, with many of those on board having fought in the war, was insensitive at best.

Your family hail from the Emerald Isle. Imagine hearing jokes about the potato famine.

I doubt I'd get away with a similar comment in Scotalnd.

6 November 2011 at 14:03  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Jon. Surely it's not inappropriate to grant the British, or maybe even just the English, Parliament day on the 5th

Best call it ‘EU’ day, at least until we leave. What !

6 November 2011 at 14:03  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Dodo. Temporarily forgot you’re a stern man ! What the Inspector displayed was digging humour. The presence and influence of certain parts of the black population in England is there for criticism. Had they not come in the first place, there would be people who wouldn’t have been murdered, young men who wouldn’t have been stabbed. Women who wouldn’t have been raped, people who wouldn’t have been mugged, drug victims who wouldn’t have been supplied, riots that wouldn’t have happened. They really are the ‘wouldn’t be’ people – please don’t try and defend them. And yes, it’s young black males responsible, but they taint all their race.

Right, where’s that ‘Gansta’ CD the Inspector was listening to. Ah yes, here we are, “Going to smack my no good woman, going to waste the effing police...” Altogether now..

6 November 2011 at 14:20  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


Ummm ... but not all black youth are the same and the first generation of West Indians were, in my experience, God fearing, hard working Christian people. Their reception on these shores isn't something to look back on and be proud of. That said, I fully agree the current gang, rap culture needs to be heavily stamped on.

6 November 2011 at 15:09  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Dodo. The Inspector is so concerned about this immigrant group that he would like to see a Royal Commission on the case. He’s always one for encouragement you know. All the way from self help initiatives, community projects, national policies (...hopefully temporary, we don’t want any particular group enjoying permanent assistance), all the way to the gallows ( get to the stage where you can't go any further, and it saves on the public purse this way).

6 November 2011 at 15:36  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


With the right to a fair trial and ultimately an appeal to the European Court? We wouldn't want to impose any cruel or unnatural punishments, would we?

6 November 2011 at 16:34  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Dodo. All the way the the UK Court of Appeal. The ‘European Court’ will hopefully be set adrift soon. Their clever lawyers can make a mockery of what’s right somewhere else...

6 November 2011 at 16:54  
Blogger Oswin said...

Dodo @ 01:23 :

You want me to do your work for you? 'Wiki Oswini' I am not! I've already given you a quote from St.Augustine:
'Epistolae ad Gregoniam Papam' - so go check it out.

However, if you have a serious interest, beyond that of your more usual ya-boo-sucks attitude to owt that might come within half a mile of treading on Jesuit tootsies, then I'd be happy to compile a list of books based upon the subject, that might more readily supply all your reference requirements.

There have been a couple of recent books, that I have not yet caught up with, as well as a recent TV programme too.

To be going on with, try King Ina's Charter and/or William of Malmesbury, which reads: ''To the ancient Church, situated in the place called Glastonbury, which Church the Great High Priest and Chiefest Minister formerly through His own ministry, and that of his angels, sanctified by many an unheard-of miracle to Himself and the ever-virgin Mary as was formerly recealed to St.David...''

Similarly, the award of land, given to Joseph of Arimathea by King Arviragus, at Glastonbury; is recorded as such, in the Doomsday Book, as being free of all tax, in perpetuity. (Domesday Survey, folio p.249b)... although I don't suppose they still retain Joseph's VAT returns! (Sorry, that's HM Revenue and Customs). Although many Tax Returns are indeed more myth than substance, official Tax notifications are not; especially when designated 'Tax Exempt'! :o)

Anyhows, let's not get too far off-subject, as my original contention, carefully avoided by yourself, was that the roots of Protestantism lay not in some Germanic swamp, but were inherent within Britain, for many centuries beforehand.

It is interesting to note, that Henry VIII's ''Asserto Septem Sacramentorum'' - the first two chapters a 're-hash' of his earlier writings, clearly shows Henry as a semi (?) 'Pelagian' verging upon heresy, and that as a response/refutal to Luther's ''De Captitivate Babylonica''!!! For which Henry was awarded, by Pope Leo X, the title of 'Fidei defensor' ... Leo X also acknowledged England's right, in history, of being the first Christian nation. An admixture of Papal desperation/confusion and, inconvenient truths, coming home to roost?

6 November 2011 at 17:07  
Blogger Roy said...

DanJ0 said...
Roy: "Political Correctness has become a secular religion and heretics can be punished, e.g. the case of the Christian who was demoted, suffering a huge reduction in salary, for the "thought crime" of making a brief statement opposing the idea of "gay marriage"."

I agree that he was very badly treated from the facts that have been reported. However, this happened within the company's disciplinary procedures, not in law.

DanJO, I was pleasantly surprised to find that we are largely in agreement. If I had known that you were going to oost a broadly supportative message I would, as a gesture, have omitted the quotation marks that I put around the phrase gay marriage.

However, I do think that the individual's Facebook comments should have nothing to do with the organisation's disciplinary procedures. Lots of academics speak out on social, ethical and political issues but nobody supposes that what they say reflects an official policy of their university.

Suppose one of the many Moslem organisations in this country started a campaign to legalise polygamy (I know that Islam in general does not actually encourage polygamy but it is compatible with Islamic beliefs) and they had the backing of non-Moslems from countries where polygamy has always been accepted and the Tibetan community in this country, if there is one, jumped on the bandwagon and demanded that polyandry should also be legalised.

If the man who was demoted had objected to polygamy would his employers have disciplined him then? I don't think they would now but in 10 years' time ...?

The obsession with being seen to support "equality" has resulted in some people having a right to be "offended" (indeed they are often encouraged to be offended) while others have no such rights.

However we are wandering away from the subject of "Archbishop Cranmer's" posting (or at least I am!)

6 November 2011 at 17:21  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Roy: "However, I do think that the individual's Facebook comments should have nothing to do with the organisation's disciplinary procedures. Lots of academics speak out on social, ethical and political issues but nobody supposes that what they say reflects an official policy of their university."

Universities tend to operate on principles of open debate and student unions usually make a very big thing about defending freedom of speech and expression. That is, it's part of the ethos of the place. That's quite key to this I reckon.

I don't know what this company has in its Ts&Cs but my own employer has clauses about bringing it into disrepute. I advise all my students not to put its name on their facebook pages or to discuss work-related things on there.

Part of my work is safety-related and we have very strict policies regarding drugs and alcohol. If I were (say) to boast about smoking pot on my facebook page and it contained my employer's name then I expect I'd be sacked.

The company in question is a housing association. I expect it serves a diverse section of society. I also expect they wish to promote their lack of bias or prejudice at the very least. Had he written about 'benefit scroungers' or made moral judgements about single, unmarried mothers on his facebook page then I bet he'd have come to the same point. All that said, if all he wrote was what was reported then it seems very unjust.

I also have very strong reservations about the injunctions against membership of the BNP for policemen or prison officers. I sneer at the BNP and I am uncomfortable that people with power might be members of it. But, really, people ought to be seen to act improperly on their beliefs before they are chastised.

6 November 2011 at 17:40  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Roy: "The obsession with being seen to support "equality" has resulted in some people having a right to be "offended" (indeed they are often encouraged to be offended) while others have no such rights."

It may surprise you again but I'd ditch any laws about giving offence in a second if I could. There's a large difference between being threatening and being merely offensive. I'm a liberal in the style of John Stuart Mill so this all chimes with that.

6 November 2011 at 17:43  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

Most Catholics had no idea, and would have disapproved in the strongest possible terms. They, of course, paid the price.

Let us take this opportunity to consider that 80 per cent of the laws to which we are subject are made by a supranational body which meets in secret and publishes no Official Report. A foreign power maintains a huge military presence here, accountable to nobody. We have no intelligence capability apart from that power's largesse, and we are about to spend an eye-wateringly obscene amount of money on yet more nuclear weapons wholly dependent on it.

Several of our MPs are openly, and probably the majority is more-or-less covertly, signed up to the cause of European military integration under overall American command. Those MPs openly so signed up, at least, are under the day-to-day direction, as to the conduct of their parliamentary duties, of a cabal of cranks and crooks an ocean away, people who are no longer in government in their own country.

Behind them, however, is the eye-poppingly racist party of the Israeli Foreign Minister, which is very much in government. For having been caught running a parallel foreign policy in that interest, Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Defence was recently required to resign. But there have been no prosecutions. There have been no deportations. One fake charity has been closed down, but several more are still operating, with considerable, and always hugely deferential, media exposure. Scores, probably hundreds, of MPs from the Prime Minister's own party remain in point of fact members of that other, foreign party, using the time-honoured Tory label for little or nothing more than electioneering purposes.

Meanwhile, a fully armed terrorist organisation is in government in Northern Ireland while still proclaiming its own Army Council to be the sovereign body throughout Ireland. A party at best ambivalent about the Union is in government in Wales. A party whose activist base is ferociously opposed to the Union is the only party of government in Scotland. We have the (often desperately ignorant) African-American takeover of our black politics, which is of overwhelmingly Afro-Caribbean or African origin, and barely, if at all, related to African-American culture.

All political parties in certain Midland, Yorkshire and North-Western towns and cities run as, by no means always predictable, proxies for rival factions in Pakistan. So much so, that the rally designed to name Asif Ali Zardari's son as sole Chairman of the Pakistan People's Party was held in Birmingham, with a large rival demonstration outside; Glasgow is heading the same way, as both Labour's selection of a candidate for its safe seat of Glasgow Central, and the scramble for the Conservatives' list seat at Holyrood, made abundantly clear. The Pakistan People's Party: "Islam is our Faith, Socialism [by which they do not mean Keynes, Beveridge and a bit of pragmatic public ownership] is our Economy, and the man who ran our London office right up until Benazir Bhutto died is now a rising star among Conservative MPs."

We now have an entire London Borough in which political life is being directed from Bangladesh, even if one does have to laugh at the implicit suggestion that the East End was somehow a model of probity before the Bengalis shipped up. We now have thriving scenes loyal to each of Hindutva and Khalistan, both of which were significant at the Ealing Southall by-election.

And so on, and on, and on.

Bring on the bonfires.

6 November 2011 at 17:43  
Blogger non mouse said...

Seconded, Mr. David Lindsay; thank you.

At least we can still say so on Dr. Cranmer's blog, despite the vanguard of the thought police.

6 November 2011 at 18:27  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

David Lindsay. Don’t be downhearted old chap. When the bon fires start as you predict, there is one organisation to put them out, one organisation we’ll always be able to trust - step forward our brave boys and girls who are the British Army...

6 November 2011 at 18:31  
Blogger Anon said...

The Gunpowder Plot was organised by Lord Cecil.

The Guy Fawkes plotters Catesby, Percy and Tresham were working for the government.

King James I's spymaster, Robert Cecil, blackmailed Robert Catesby into organising a plot to discredit Catholics.

6 November 2011 at 18:50  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Len. Any of this down to you...

6 November 2011 at 19:05  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

non mouse, indeed we have.

Whereas the national newspaper executive who deprived me of a platform for pointing out the existence of the treasonable network that has since caused the Defence Secretary to resign, and who then collaborated with its notionally Labour or Labour-inclined figures in a demented and deranged campaign of abuse and defamation against me, has not so much as been removed from his position, never mind punished in any way more severe than that.

That same network, of which he is manifestly part, is also funding and directing the English Defence League, so that its utterances and its actions should be attributed to them and to him.

6 November 2011 at 19:31  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


Thanks for the offer of a reading list but I don't intend making this myth my life's study.

As I understand it when the Saxons reached Glastonbury in A.D.658 the “old church” was there, dedicated to Our Lady. I believe this is the first documented reference to it.

King Ina's Charter was issued in A.D.725 and refers to the 'Wattle Church' as the “Ecclesia Vetusta Beatissimae Virginis” and describes it as the “foremost Church in Britain, the fount and source of all religion”. Some (most?) historians attribute the fuller quote you've provided as being that of St Dunstan's biographers and written no earlier than 1000 AD, and not by St Augustine. And the Doomsday Book was written in 1086, wasn't it?

Whatever it's origins, Henry VIII dissolved the Abbey in 1539 and the statue of Our Lady that had been there for centuries was lost.

Define 'protestantism'. Pelagius, like numerous early Christian theologians, had his own views on scripture. If we describe everyone who held opinions inconsistent with Rome's as a 'protestant' then it's history is centuries old.

Part of the development of the Church was defining doctrines and dogma, a necessary process to spread the Gospel faithfully and protect it from error. The Celtic Church was no treated no differently in this respect. The process continues to this day.

A 'protestant' is surely someone who publically denounces and refuses to accept the Church's teaching and in Britain this dates back to Wycliffe and the Lollards centuries before Luther.

What sets the 'Reformation' apart was the success of the movement and not necessarily it's 'message'
The political situation was such that protestantism took off - in Germany. The condition of the Roman Catholic Church required an overhaul too - in behaviour, though not necessarily in doctrine.

6 November 2011 at 20:09  
Blogger Roy said...

DanJO said:

It may surprise you again but I'd ditch any laws about giving offence in a second if I could. There's a large difference between being threatening and being merely offensive. I'm a liberal in the style of John Stuart Mill so this all chimes with that.

Once again we are in agreement, and I am pleasantly surprised. I don't believe in being deliberately offensive to anyone although human nature being what it is it is not always possible to avoid giving offence.

However I agree with you that "offence" should not be a matter for the law. If it were then the only people who would be safe would be those who did not have strong views on anything - although perhaps some people might be offended by their apathy!

Anyway, in your arguments you remind me of Peter Thatchell, one of the few gay activists whom I respect (although to be fair I only know one - and he is OK too - and I have not heard of many others apart from Thatchell) although I still disagree with him on quite a few things.

6 November 2011 at 21:21  
Blogger Penn's Woods, USA said...

Pardon me Archbishop. Guy fawkes day used to mean riots in London and other English cities when crazed mobs would attack known or suspected Catholics on the streets. These same thugs would beat and sometimes kill innocent English Roman Catholic citizens. Later in the day when these same mobs had their fill of gin they staggered through the cities and looted and burned known Catholic homes and estates. When you talk about the "Britishness" of the present Queen, please remember she has 50% German blood and her family name was the House of Hanover until after the First World War started when they instantly became 100% British when their name became The House of Windsor. The future King Of England, The Prince of Wales, has 75% of his family tree rooted in Germany which makes the average English farmer more "English" than either the present Queen or the future King. Have a Happy Guy Fawkes Day.

6 November 2011 at 21:54  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

"her family name was the House of Hanover"

Well, strictly speaking the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.

6 November 2011 at 22:01  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

The House of Wettin?

6 November 2011 at 22:16  
Blogger G. Tingey said...

It's not forgotten in LEWES!


( Or any other sort of religion,adds, this ex-Cliffe member... )

6 November 2011 at 22:34  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

We Brits are European anyway! Up until 8,000 years ago we were joined to the continent.

The original 'Britons' were Celts from central Europe. Then the Angles and Saxons arrived from Germany. Thereafter the Normans from France - with Viking and Frankish/Germanic roots.

So the only 'True Brits' are the Celtic peoples of Cornwall, Wales, Ireland and Scotland. The majority of British folk have Germanic hereitage.

Why not reunite with our German brothers and sisters and let the Celtic nations govern themselves?

6 November 2011 at 22:38  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


I wouldn't be too proud of your past. The Dorset Arms has a lot to answer for. Take your banners and shove them where the sun don't shine!

What makes me laugh is that these silly little societies were formed as late as the mid-1850's. Must be slow in Sussex.

6 November 2011 at 22:45  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Penn's Woods, USA. Do look up the ‘Gordon riots’. See what us peaceful RC types have put up with in the past...

From a ‘true Briton’

6 November 2011 at 22:54  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

Penn's Wood

Are the bears still defecating in the sylan?

6 November 2011 at 23:01  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


Lord Gordon converted to Judaism several years after the riots and, aged 36, was circumcised. Now that's faith!

Do you think our buddy weatsop might follow suit and sort out the Jewish faith?

6 November 2011 at 23:15  
Blogger Oswin said...

Dodo @ 22:48 : 'history' ain't what it was, as when you were at school.

The whole Celt/Saxon thing has been stood on its head following the genetic research of the last ten years or so. The 'Celts' (?) migrated up the Atlantic sea-board (that's Western Europe to you) advancing/retreating according to the ice fields. Whilst the mid-to-Northern Europeans crossed over the mid to northern section of the land bridge. The latter being, genetically, early Angle/Scandinavian types, a couple of thousand years or so earlier, than was previously believed to be the case.

Yes, the 'Celts' (?) arrived on the western fringes long before the Northerners arrived to populate the eastern and north-eastern regions. Those regions being largely empty of any peoples. Any pushing or shoving occuring when east met west, as it were.

However, and by your reasoning, the only ''true Brits'' were those charming Neanderthal chaps... whose genetic demise seems counter-intuitive to one's own observations! ;o)

7 November 2011 at 00:45  
Blogger Oswin said...

Dodo @ 20:09 :

I could counter your off-the-cuff Wiki-type blurbiage, but to what point? You just won't have it, is all. Neither can I be arsed to correct some of your errors. It's a subject I'd love to discuiss, but I guess it ain't going to be with no duck ...sighs...

7 November 2011 at 00:59  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

Your Grace may be correct that the Gunpowder was concocted by Catholics to eliminate James I. However, there is a point of view that the whole affair was planned and controlled by Robert Cecil see Proof positive of either theory does not appear to exist but as they say history is written by the victors so we had 500 years of anti-Catholicism on what was possibly an espionage operation to ensure that Catholics continued to be persecuted. Hilaire Belloc makes the point that those individuals who had been immensely enriched by the dissolution of the monasteries were fearful that a return of Catholicism was a grave threat to their wealth. Claire Asquith in her book Shadowplay describes how Cecil used very devious means to use the anti-royalist Puritans to persecute Catholics who were loyal to the crown. Here is a quote from my book “The End of Heresy”:

In addition to the coffers being empty, James had a more serious problem to his kingdom. Catholics were not opposed to the idea of monarchy but the Puritans were and were intent on curbing his royal powers if not deposing him.
To all these domestic difficulties the Privy Council, led by Robert Cecil, supplied a characteristic solution – to divert the Puritans onslaught and increase the royal income by once again declaring open season on Catholics. The deal for Puritans was, in Lingard’s words, ‘if they were not suffered to purge the [Anglican] church from the dregs of superstition, they might still advance the glory of God by hunting down the idolatrous papist’. … The penal laws were not only revived – they were extended, … The slightest default in payment incurred forfeiture of all goods and chattels and two-thirds of any property. … ‘they complained in vain. The exaction of the penalties was too profitable to James and his minions to admit of redress by the king. Shadowplay, Clare Asquith

If the plot was the brainchild of Catholics, that would be a matter deserving great condemnation but prior to the plot, one would have thought that it would be more sensible to persecute your enemies rather than your loyal subjects. Asquith reveals the deviousness of Cecil. It seems to be accepted generally that Cecil had an espionage system that would have made Stalin envious so the idea that the plot was planned and orchestrated by the Secretary of State himself is perhaps not too far-fetched.

7 November 2011 at 15:12  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

I’ve just read up on the Gordon Riots. It is interesting and unfortunate that even though the last 500 years of history confirm the continuous violence of Catholics by Protestants, the general perception is that historical violence in this country has been perpetrated mainly by Catholics. Even until fairly recently it was Protestant Northern Ireland which institutionalised discrimination against Catholics as the main political policy of the administration throughout virtually the whole of the last century whereas such discrimination did not occur against Protestants in the South. It shows the power of propaganda but unfortunately lots of people seem to prefer lies. I wonder what would happen to the people of Lewes if they burnt effigies of Mohammed on their bonfires. I suspect the power of the state would be employed to prevent them doing this.

7 November 2011 at 15:44  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


So where do 'we' Brits (homo sapien variety) originate from? I know it's Africa but more recent. Europe?

Nevertheless, you wouldn't argue with the later invasions of Angles, Saxons and Normans - and their Germanic descent?

About Glastonbury. We'd never agree and there is no conclusive evidence.

7 November 2011 at 15:55  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Shacklefree: "I wonder what would happen to the people of Lewes if they burnt effigies of Mohammed on their bonfires. I suspect the power of the state would be employed to prevent them doing this."

Ah, but it's Tradition to burn the current effigy and Tradition is all important we're usually told by right-wing Christians. Hence, a break with tradition by burning a Mohammed effigy is justifiably stoppable.

7 November 2011 at 16:47  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

Danjo, You normally give better arguments than that.

7 November 2011 at 20:11  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

Len, I'm disappointed with your comment about your visit to Lewes. Burning effigies is something we associate with witchcraft not mainstream Christianity and yes I know that you don't believe in institutional churches but are you really in favour of burning effigies? Is this something that your spiritual experience approves of?

7 November 2011 at 20:16  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

"Danjo, You normally give better arguments than that."

It was a spoof argument.

Burning effigies of Mohammed borders on incitement as it'll almost inevitably be reported as such and taken as such. I'd be happy to see the Lewes thing go as it's a bit weird but I'm not convinced it's incitement in its current form. The job of the authorities is to prevent public order in my opinion, not maintain the sanctity of religious symbols or regulate offence. Of course, the two things are heavily related and so things get a bit mixed up at times.

7 November 2011 at 21:46  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

^ "to prevent public order incidents"

7 November 2011 at 21:47  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

Danjo, I would not support the suppression of the Lewes event for the sake of political correctness. We have to be able to take some offensive criticism. However, on the positive side, I do not think that the revelery at Lewes is something that is generally supported among Christians or people of your own persuasion.

7 November 2011 at 22:10  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

len said...
I have been in Lewis during the celebrations,quite something to witness!"

Yeah, I'd be interested to learn why you support this sectarian celebration? Does your spirituality extend to the ceremonial burning of effigies and open anti-Catholic hostility?

7 November 2011 at 22:13  
Blogger Oswin said...

Dodo : 15:55:

Best read Stephen Oppenheimer's book ''Origins of the British'' - which basically charts our genetic origins: the 'celts', Palaeolithic Iberian peoples advancing up the Atlantic sea-board; and the Scandinavian input, via the east etc. The latter input having been previously massively underestimated, and arriving significantly earlier that we first imagined...the later Anglo-Saxon/Scandinavian invasions being little more than a change of political hierarchy.

The book is not without its faults, but it is sound as the most important points; and, is absolutely essential reading.

However, I found it rather a difficult read, but well worth the effort ... I could just about manage a chapter a day, without fear of my head exploding! So much cross-referencing between charts, maps, diagrams and, the rereading of sections, made it a painfully slow process.

I truly recommend this book to you Dodo, but beware of your head! I take no responsibility for any explosion of defunct duck effluvia!

8 November 2011 at 16:52  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


Thank you.

Ummm ... so we Brits have Iberian Basque roots? You do know where the 'Company' first started?

9 November 2011 at 00:56  
Blogger Oswin said...

Nah, no worries; by then they were just a bunch of overly excitable dagos. :o)

9 November 2011 at 01:27  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...


That's very bad of you.

9 November 2011 at 19:10  
Blogger Oswin said...

...but not unexpected? ;o)

10 November 2011 at 14:04  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

Oswin, it was actually. It's the first time I can recall you using an offensive term, Dodo's and Jesuits aside.

The Basques are a proud people.

So who were/are the Celts in Wales, Scotland, Ireland etc and where did they originate?

10 November 2011 at 18:50  
Blogger Oswin said...

Don't stand on your already trampled dignity Dodo. As ethnic slurs go, 'Dago' is comparatively mild.

As for your question, I've answered that at length; or were you making some subtle point that escapes me?

11 November 2011 at 16:49  
Blogger len said...

Dodo,(7 Nov.22:13)

Regarding festivals at Lewis.

Despite being baptised as an infant and confirmed at a later date I now know that I definitely was not a Christian( as I am now) when I attended the festival at Lewis.

As I have explained (several times) it is the Catholic religious system that I oppose(as every Christian should) not the people trapped within the catholic system.

12 November 2011 at 08:30  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older