Monday, November 05, 2012

Remember, remember the 5th of November


To conspire against the Monarch, Lords and Commons is treason. To attempt to blow up the Houses of Parliament, as Guy Fawkes did in 1605, is the act of a traitor. To foment civil strive and incite a religious rising is an attack upon the peace and security of the Realm.

Five conspirators, including Catesby, Percy and Guy Fawkes plotted their evil for at least a year, meeting in an isolated house behind St Clement's, London. They all swore an oath of secrecy, and were given privates masses by two Jesuit priests.

They weren't short of supporters or financial means - they needed to rent a number of houses and cellars to store some 30 barrels of gunpowder for almost a year. Two wealthy Roman Catholics were particularly helpful - Sir Everard Digby and Francis Tresham, the latter of whom tried to warn his co-religionists in Parliament. He wrote:
My lord, out of the love I beare to some of youere frends I have a caer of youer preservation therefor I would advyse yowe as yowe tender youer lyf to devys some excuse to shift of youer attendance at this parleament... for thowghe theare be no apparance of anni stir yet I say e they shall receyve a terrible blowe this parleament and yet they shall not seie who hurts them.
This letter led to the exposure of the conspirators and to the ultimate foiling of the plot. An order was given for the cellars beneath the Palace of Westminster to be searched on the night before Parliament was to sit. The gunpowder was discovered, along with Guy Fawkes.

There was no act of terrorism, no assassination and no Roman Catholic insurrection. Catesby was killed by the sheriff's men, Percy was fatally wounded, Digby was imprisoned, and Winter and Lyttleton were eventually betrayed by their servant. The Jesuit priests were also caught hiding.

Fawkes was tortured, and so was one of the priests. All were eventually executed, except Tresham, who died in prison before his trial.

The effect of this conspiracy against the King and the Protestant Faith was to increase hostility against Roman Catholics. Penal laws were enforced, and recusants were prosecuted. Roman Catholics were expelled from London, and forbidden to practise law or medicine. They could not be executors of a will or the guardians of children. They were, to all intents and purposes, excluded from public life: the Gunpowder Plot had sealed their fate.

Today we celebrate our national freedom, and remember the many innocent observers who were caught in the fray. Never again must a foreign prince have authority in this Realm, and never again must religion be a tool of hatred, oppression and persecution.

161 Comments:

Blogger John Chater said...

A noble sentiment Your Grace, but in error I fear.

‘Never again must a foreign prince have authority in this Realm...’ The same realm that has seen its national church surrender to modern liberalism, its political power shift to Europe, its trading power surrendered to China and its culture degraded by America?

Now, where did we leave those barrels?

5 November 2012 10:35  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

Never again must a foreign prince have authority in this Realm

What, you mean like James VI? So, does this mean Cranmer is encouraging his Scottish readers to vote 'yes' in 2014?

5 November 2012 11:44  
Blogger outsider said...

Your Grace,
We now that many evil things were done in those days in the name of a religion that advises us to love our enemies. But there was a basic difference between, say, your own horrible judicial murder and the Gunpowder Plot. The Plot aimed for a uniquely awful act of terrorism, far worse in that league than the IRA Brighton bombing.
When I was a child brought up in an nominally Anglican background in non-denominational English schools, the Plot and its commemoration were never linked to Catholicism or anti-Catholicism (at least until the politics surfaced later in history lessons). It was about a terrorist attack on our country that was thwarted. And it was, of course, equally an attack on most English catholics of the time (hence Tresham's letter).
I am sorry that Guy Fawkes Night has been repressed as a health-and-safety offending, politically incorrect attack on Catholics (which I realise did exist in a few traditional ceremonies).

It is time that this largely irrelevant element was forgotten and November 5 was reborn as anti-terrorism day, showing our resolve never to be beaten by terrorists, which is exactly how I naively understood it as a child.

5 November 2012 11:49  
Blogger outsider said...

Sorry, I meant know, as in "we now know", or not.

5 November 2012 11:51  
Blogger Katie said...

Jesus seems to be a very foreign prince in the parts of Blighty with which i am acquainted.

5 November 2012 12:36  
Blogger OldJim said...

The authors of the gunpowder plot were committing treason against a duly constituted government. That they were affiliated with my Church is of no consequence to me. I have no less contempt for them than for Jacobins, Bolsheviks, Republican Roundheads or the protagonists of the Glorious Revolution.

A little more contempt in some ways, for they didn't even appear to make provision for a replacement government, which would have left the country in complete anarchy. But a little less contempt in others, in that, for this very reason, and unlike those other unsavoury types, we know that they weren't simply swine seeking advancement.

Fools, nonetheless.

5 November 2012 12:57  
Blogger Chantry Priest said...

In addition to John Chater....
...And what about Martin Luther, John Clavin, John Knox et al..William III, George I, Prince Albert, not forgetting the calls for Sharia Law and the 'cultural colonialism of the USA?
Methinks my Lord's Grace past disagreements with the Bishop of Rome are still getting his rochet in a twist.
Given that Protestantism splits and splits and creates either extreme literal fundamentals or liberals so secular they make atheists seem religious, perhaps its time to return.
Give me Benedict PM XVI anyday!

5 November 2012 13:05  
Blogger Recusant said...

Well since a foreign prince - William of Orange - had authority in this realm a mere 83 years later your statement is not even moot.

Thy say that treachery never prospers, because if it does it ceases to be called treachery and yet there were few more treachourous acts than the invitation to a foreign prince to invade these shores. And why? Because Catholics might have been give the righ to be tolerated. Not endorsed; just tolerated.

5 November 2012 13:14  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

The divisions among Protestants are greatly over-stated, Chantry Priest, As is the Unity of Rome. Temporal organization is not true unity. In any case, I should prefer the division of Protestantism to the condemnations of the Gospel found in Trent, the idolatry of Marian devotion, the Gnostic mist that is Sacred Tradition, and the tyranny of the Pope.

carl

5 November 2012 13:24  
Blogger non mouse said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

5 November 2012 14:41  
Blogger non mouse said...

Today we celebrate our national freedom, and remember the many innocent observers who were caught in the fray. Never again must a foreign prince have authority in this Realm, and never again must religion be a tool of hatred, oppression and persecution.

For me, we could modify that slightly, Your Grace. I'll say: "Today we should celebrate our freedom"-- but we can't because of the euSSR.

I say so especially because the Angel of the euSSR (who was nurtured under the Communists) is today in London. Reputedly, she is "running out of patience" with our attitude to her imposition of power, and she's essentially telling us how much more money we have to pay the government she imposes.

And she's being entertained by those traitors who have succeeded where Guy Fawkes (and Hitler) failed. It's just that they used subterfuge instead of gunpowder. So our freedom has vanished under smoke and mirrors.

And we haven't even the wit or courage to make a bonfire and guy ... out of her blue and yellow rags. At the very least, we should all go knocking on door of her german residence, begging for "a penny for that 'Guy'. " We need the money more than Antichrist does.

5 November 2012 14:48  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

"To conspire against the Monarch, Lords and Commons is treason ... To foment civil strive and incite a religious rising is an attack upon the peace and security of the Realm."

Yep.

Now tell that to all those who conspired to entice William III of Orange-Nassau to invade England and overthrow King James II of England!

5 November 2012 15:06  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Gnostic mist?LOL
The only mist is your blindness Carl, in refusing to acknowledge that there is no idolatry in the Catholic Church.

This has been explained on countless occasions to Protestants on this blog. Were you raised to hate Catholics or did you learn it from the Klan?



5 November 2012 15:15  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Cressida

Mr Jacobs explained his position a while back. His early Christian formation was uncertain and he came to Calvinism later in life whilst reading the bible - as I recall, words to the effect: "it just made sense".

Of course he despises what he does not comprehend. Various observations of his on Catholicism have demonstrated his lack of understanding about the Church.

And, as he knows, protestantism is far more divided than the theological discussions taking place within Catholicism. Should these ever reach the point where clarity is required to avoid division, schism or heresy, the Magisterium, the Pope or an Ecumenical Council will exercise the authority given the Church by Christ.

5 November 2012 15:58  
Blogger OldJim said...

Cressida,
If Carl means to say that our veneration of Mary is in fact adoration, or that there is no distinction, he is simply incorrect. It is a very tired protestant trope, and to my mind a flippant smear that doesn't address Mary's role in Catholic theology in any detailed or context-sensitive way. It is a failure of imagination.

That being said, Carl is a monergist. And if monergism is true, then mere veneration of Mary would itself be idolatry. Carl could take us absolutely on our word, understand the theology and context fully, and still make that pronouncement on the basis of our veneration alone. That would not be trivial or flippant, it would be consistent with Carl's theological understanding, and it would then be an informed and charitable denunciation of the manner in which we believe and practice Christianity.

I don't believe a word of it, naturally. But it is important that we understand what others are saying in the most charitable way possible. What Carl said doesn't necessarily involve his "hat[ing] Catholics" or his being "blind". And because it doesn't necessarily involve it, it behoves us not to suggest it does.

5 November 2012 16:10  
Blogger OldJim said...

(and the corollary follows... any proponent of synergism accusing Catholics of Mariolatry is making an opportunistic and uninformed attack, and not a principled objection)

5 November 2012 16:15  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Mr Cranmer said ...

"The effect of this conspiracy against the King and the Protestant Faith was to increase hostility against Roman Catholics ... the Gunpowder Plot had sealed their fate."

Yes, indeed, and there is some evidence it was a set-up by those eyeing the finacial benefits that resulted from all this.

All rather *convenient* the way the *plot* was discovered.

5 November 2012 16:16  
Blogger Nowhere man said...

Yawn. The same Nov 5th diatribe.

Now, Catholics have freedom in this country. The Church goes from strength to strength.

Meanwhile the CofE is divided, attendance is falling, it faces disestablishment and is,frankly. a laughing stock.

Not much to celebrate really.

5 November 2012 16:17  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Old Jim,

If I may say so, you are a Catholic who seems to know his faith and be able to explain it to non-Catholics in a way which doesn't confuse people. I feel that I get more out of religious conversations that way.

I think you are quite correct that Carl Jacobs seems to be a sincere man and doesn't post stuff here to be hateful to people.

5 November 2012 16:22  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Old Jim

That's all very charitable and understanding and quite correct too.

However, a comment such as this has to be addressed in the same manner it is thrown out:

"I should prefer the division of Protestantism to the condemnations of the Gospel found in Trent, the idolatry of Marian devotion, the Gnostic mist that is Sacred Tradition, and the tyranny of the Pope."

To prefer protestant confusion, including the Arminian divide, to Catholicism and to misrepresent the Church in this way is just unacceptable.

Wouldn't you agree?

5 November 2012 16:28  
Blogger John Magee said...

"Never again must a foreign prince have authority in this Realm, and never again must religion be a tool of hatred, oppression and persecution"

In 2012 Islam is invading Britain through massive immigration with their ultimate goal someday to dominate and convert the indigenous Christian population to worship Allah (the pagan moon god of Medina and not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob)and turn Westminster Abbey into a mosque. Whole sections of British cities are dominated by Islam...


"Happy Guy Fawkes Day!"

5 November 2012 16:29  
Blogger William said...

Thank you Your Grace. It is indeed vital to remember, remember the 5th of November, despite (or perhaps because of) the Pavlovian responses from most of the Catholic commentators. For the sovereignty of this realm is slipping away and its people may not wake up in time.

5 November 2012 16:46  
Blogger OldJim said...

Dodo,
there are at least three questions here
1)what is the most Christian way in which to interpret the comments?
2)what is the most Christian way in which to respond to the author of the comments?
3)what is the most Christian way in which to respond to the content of the comments?

To answer the first, we must compare Carl's theological position as we understand it to the content of his post. We find

- justification by merely fiduciary faith alone ("The Gospel" to a Calvinist) was indeed condemned at Trent.

-Marian devotion would be idolatry if monergism were true.

-"gnostic mist" would indicate that something simultaneously invited someone to imagine that there was secret knowledge to learn, and that this knowledge, once learned, would be obfuscatory. If you interpret the Gospel as a Calvinist, this phrase is very apt indeed. Sacred Tradition does indeed entirely obfuscate a Calvinist understanding of the bible! We just differ on the subject of why that might be...

- If you have a non-sacerdotal church then the Pope's claims to authority would be tyrannous.

So, is Carl misrepresenting the Church? Certainly not intentionally. What he says follows from what he believes.

Objectively? Yes and No. No insofar as the meaning of what he is saying is brought out, because once his own assumptions are rendered in full, the meaning he gives what he is saying becomes clear. Yes insofar as, without those assumptions, "Marian devotion is idolatry!" seems to mean a lot more than it does in fact mean, which is simply that, were monergism true, then veneration in general would be idolatrous.

My answer to the second question is, having interpreted the text as charitably as possible, we must respond as charitably as possible. I don't think that making accusations or interpreting the comments as though they said something psychological about the author rather than addressing the content would be either helpful or charitable.

My answer to the third question is that we should make sure that any errors are corrected, any assumptions of the authors' are brought out, and, where desirable, good counterarguments are made. I haven't done this. If you would like me to, I should be more than happy to do so.

I just don't think it's helpful to assume the worst of the author, and, even if the worst were true, I don't see that it's helpful to respond in kind.

Most importantly, it's not Christlike, but it's also true that these comments aren't person-to-person, so there is also scandal to the "audience" to consider. As scheming jesuitical types, we both ought to know that you "catch more flies with honey than vinegar.."

5 November 2012 17:21  
Blogger Anglican said...

YG – I fear you are too fixated on the past, however understandable on your part. The enmities that existed hundreds of years ago are not our present day problems. While the RC Church (rightly) commemorates its 40 martyrs, it would be welcome if they also remembered the hundreds of Anglicans & protestants burnt under Mary’s reign (I actually heard the abbot of an RC monastery commend the CofE lectionary for its commemoration of all reformation martyrs).

But Guy Fawkes and Titus Oates belong to the past. The real and increasing danger we face today is the rapid paganisation of most of Europe (including Britain), the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The French government has just announced that it will introduce lessons on homosexual behaviour to primary children; the British government will not be far behind. (The attempt to make Muslim schools comply with this should prove interesting).

The western world is rapidly moving back to some of the pagan beliefs of the Roman Empire. Christians may not be thrown to the lions, but if they dare proclaim their beliefs they are likely to be excluded from all public office – civil service, education (it is already happening in some American universities), police, armed forces, etc. An American RC Bishop recently said that while he expected to die in his bed he expected his successor to die in prison, and his successor to die a martyr.

It is today’s very real anti-Christian sentiment in western governments that we have to confront.


5 November 2012 17:24  
Blogger OldJim said...

If your question wasn't rhetorical, though, then my answer is yes, to prefer protestant confusion to Catholicism is unacceptable. Of course.

5 November 2012 17:24  
Blogger Damian said...

To conspire against the Monarch, Lords and Commons is treason.

Even if they are traitors?

5 November 2012 17:30  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Old Jim "charitable denunciation" is an oxymoron and insulting in support of an attack on the Church. Carl's belief system is hostile to the Catholic Church. I choose to defend my faith.You don't.

For example if a belief system were to regard jews as subhuman scum ( and there is one that does)I would support a jew's right to protest vehemently.

Just a reminder Old Jim your religion? believes Mary to be the Mother of God.We are supposed to defend our faith. You would not be a convert by any chance?

5 November 2012 17:35  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Just read your latest post OJ. LOL at the reference to your fantasy about being Christlike and jesuitical.
Apart from insulting Our Lord,It is not Catholic to be a manipulative unctious coward. honey without truth = vinegar and draws no one to the light.

5 November 2012 17:47  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Whilst trying to be as charitable as possible to Roman Catholics on this blog, I just don't like Roman Catholicism or believe it's the true Church, but I don't mean to denigrate those, as illiterate half wits, who do.
And for the people who like Roman Catholicism and believe in its statements about itself, denigrate means 'put down'. Trust that helps?! ;-)

Blofeld

5 November 2012 17:52  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Yet as time moves on the characters we prefer to burn on the fire change with the times

5 November 2012 17:59  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Shut up Blofeld..or I'll poke you with sharp nails!

5 November 2012 18:05  
Blogger John Magee said...

Blofeld

Are you aware that the Roman Catholic Church is the backbone of Western Christian Civilization and preserved the Bible for almost 1,500 years until the Reformation? The Catholic Church during the Middle Ages gave us our college system and the first universities in Europe as well as the great cathedrals of Western Europe and later the beauty of the Italian Renaissance which revived classical Greek and Roman architecture, knowledge, and philosophy which evolved into our moderm world giving us the freedoms we all enjoy today. Let's not forget the Roman Catholic Church is the Mother Church of all Protestant churches.

5 November 2012 18:08  
Blogger OldJim said...

Cressida,
I am actually a revert. I consider that I was blessed to have been raised within the beauty of the Church, and, having strayed, doubly blessed to have had the privilege of also feeling the joy of entering the Church from the outside as an adult. In a less hostile thread, I should quite enjoy sharing these experiences with you.

I confess I do not quite understand the intent of your question, though.

I did not support an attack on the Church. I insisted we discern between a malicious attack, an attack from ignorance and a "sincere" attack. We do no-one any good by treating them as the same thing, and to differentiate between them does not involve countenancing any of them.

If a belief system were to regard Jews as subhuman scum, I would also support their right to protest vehemently. But I don't see the relevance.

We are indeed to defend our faith, as we are to live it. The two, properly conceived, oughtn't to clash. If we act uncharitably in order to defend our faith, then we have already betrayed it.

Defence of the faith also doesn't consist purely in attacking those who attack it. The whole point of "turn the other cheek" and the witness of the martyrs is that through Christ's sacrifice the position of weakness and meekness has become the position of strength. We don't need to shout louder. Allowing our opponent to shout is often the more effective witness.

The assumption lying dormant there is also that Carl is outside the faith rather than within it. I don't see how you can believe that. As far as I know, he is baptised and confesses Christ's Lordship. That we consider him to be erring does not mean that he is not a brother.

I do not believe myself to be Christlike. Far, far from it. I think we must retain sight of the fact that we are called to be Christlike, though. it should inform the way in which we act and speak. I'm sorry if you misinterpreted what I said.

I hope I am not a manipulative, unctuous coward. I promise you that I will dwell upon it for the next couple of days.

5 November 2012 18:11  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...



hmmm. Think of Guy Fawkes as the Nelson Mandela of his day. There you go, he’s a good man now see - the toast of the international community, isn’t he ?

Then again, maybe not. After all, Fawkes was a mere Catholic trying to rescue his country from a bloody religious tyranny of a century previous. Be a different story if he was attempting to blow up our Islamic leaders in the Mosques of Westminster in 1605, wouldn’t it. He be a bloody hero then !

As it is, he’d have been much better off as a black man trying to collapse White civilization. Move over Thomas Cranmer schools, you’re all to be renamed “Guy Fawkes, Freedom Fighter”

As for To foment civil strive and incite a religious rising is an attack upon the peace and security of the Realm, couldn’t agree more. Henry VIII and his cohorts should have been be-headed for that. God knows they deserved to be…

A crime against the people, bringing that continental protesting over here, don’t you think. And you’d be damn right !



5 November 2012 18:18  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

I say chaps, anyone out there brave enough to pull Cressida off Old Jim !

5 November 2012 18:20  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Good!

5 November 2012 18:23  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

My lord, out of the love I beare to some of youere frends I have a caer of youer preservation therefor I would advyse yowe as yowe tender youer lyf to devys some excuse to shift of youer attendance at this parleament... for thowghe theare be no apparance of anni stir yet I say e they shall receyve a terrible blowe this parleament and yet they shall not seie who hurts them.

Reminds one of the standard of English our comprehensive system achieves nowadays. Bloody marvelous isn’t it. Everybody passes, even those who can’t even write their names, and nobody is stretched…

5 November 2012 18:24  
Blogger OldJim said...

And Cressida, "charitable denunciation" is manifestly not an oxymoron. If you wished to procure an abortion, it would only be charitable for me to denounce it.

Again, that Carl is objectively wrong to denounce Catholicism doesn't make him subjectively vindictive in denouncing Catholicism. And whether someone is speaking vindictively or charitably should inform the way in which we reply to them as much as whether they are right or wrong in what they actually say.

I don't see how that principle could be controversial.

5 November 2012 18:25  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Gentlemen, raise your glasses...

“Guy Fawkes. English hero and general all round good egg”

Chars !

5 November 2012 18:38  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

If Fawkes where around today, he would only need sit back and watch them implode

5 November 2012 18:40  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

... and to Catesby and the rest of the team.

“For they were jolly good fellows” and so on...


5 November 2012 18:40  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Cressida

Carl's belief system is hostile to the Catholic Church.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

I choose to defend my faith.

Well then, perhaps you should try it some time. This ...

Were you raised to hate Catholics or did you learn it from the Klan?

... really isn't much of an apologetic. And it's astonishingly ignorant since I am the only person on this weblog who consistently challenges OIG about his racist statements. I do believe that Avi Barzel pointed that out to you. He's a Jewish man, btw. You know, Jews and blacks being the principle focus of Klan rage. It doesn't quite fit with your Klan analogy.

Neither is this much of an apologetic for that matter.

Shut up Blofeld..or I'll poke you with sharp nails!

You seem to think contempt and derision constitute a defense of the Catholic faith. In fact, they just make you look small and petty.

carl

5 November 2012 18:42  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I just like the sparklers at this time of year. So pretty. :)

5 November 2012 18:46  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Old Jim

Thank you for your kind words on this thread. I appreciate your understanding.

Of course, it goes without saying that I am not objectively wrong about the RCC. The objective authority is Scripture and not the pronouncements of the Roman Magisterium. By the standard of Scripture, Rome fails. It fails in those four principle areas that I listed above.

carl

5 November 2012 18:47  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

A public condemnation 'denunciation' by its nature cannot be charitable.Your abortion example is not apt.

Carl's comments are hostile towards Catholicism.There was nothing charitable in his comment
It was an attack.

There is nothing charitable in you at all.You're a phoney.I have had no desire to engage you. You have initiated it on a couple of occasions and quite frankly I find you a very unpleasant person,hypocritical and deceitful very much like your supporters here.



5 November 2012 18:50  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Cressida,

Yeah defend your faith, but do you have to personally attack Carl by repeatedly calling him part of the "Klan"?( I assume that you mean the Ku Klux Klan?).

You know and I know that is a complete load of bull because Carl is one of the lonely figures (along with Dodo) that combats racist views on this blog and if he were seriously a Klan member he wouldn't be robustly pro-Israel or take an interest in other cultures, which as he pointed out yesterday extends to watching Japanese Anime.

I can't say how Carl is going to vote in the American election tomorrow, but either way he will be voting for a Catholic VP... so I doubt you'll see him burning crosses outside of people's homes.

5 November 2012 18:54  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Blofeld knows I'm joking..he understands about the nails.


How do I know about the sheets?
iza juz feelin' it honey!


5 November 2012 18:59  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

{AHEM} The rascal Jacobs is attempting to smear this man with anti Semitism. Nothing could be further from the truth. An extremely successful race. The Inspector salutes the Jewish people and their achievements. We won’t mention the controversial situation of Israel, but chin up, it could be worse. Islam running the place.

5 November 2012 19:00  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Why don't you know how he is going to vote? That is what your crystal ball is for grotsbag.

5 November 2012 19:04  
Blogger OldJim said...

Carl,

You're welcome

Of course, it goes without saying that, fortunately and miraculously, the Catholic Church is everything she claims to be. The bible does not canonise itself, the creeds do not formulate themselves. Imputation, monergism and fiduciary faith are not the plain word of Scripture. They are rarely even the most natural reading of Paul. The formulations of the 1520s were not restorations but entirely novel doctrines.

The problem is that we're both sincere, have good reason to think that the other would be at least a little safer on our side of the Tiber, but both seem to know enough to have formed unassailable judgements. Oh well. Can't be helped.

5 November 2012 19:30  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Old Jim

A helpful and interesting outline of the themes; thank you.

In days gone by such blatant heresy expressed by Mr Jacobs, be he baptised or not, would be vigorously tackled for the sake of protecting the souls of others.

Giben his position is fixed and not open to revision, I say, as did Trent, an anathema (banishment and denouncement) on him and his ilk!

5 November 2012 19:54  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

"Revert" - I like that!

5 November 2012 19:55  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

So the 'Reformation', if I understand Old Jim correctly, was really a 'Deformation'.

Now, how can I find a way to say this kindly?

5 November 2012 20:06  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

You know, I'm still not convinced that Cressida isn't Avi...

5 November 2012 20:07  
Blogger len said...

There have been many attacks on the British Isles some successful some not.The direct attacks have probably been the easiest to decide what course of action to take to repulse.
After Centuries of direct attacks there is a far more insidious and affective plan being pursued....to invade and subjugate by subterfuge.. Sovereignty, power, and authority has been stolen under our very noses and transfered to an unelected 'elite' in europe.





5 November 2012 20:07  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Cressida,

As per your standard line of attack you have resorted to argumentum ad hominem against me, carl and old Jim and for that I feel sorry for you.

Even though I am not actually arguing against you regarding any principal, but trying to (help?) you understand that your cause in defence of your faith is in no way helpful in the way you comport yourself here.

I will admit that I have not exactly crowned myself with glory either, but I have taken on the positive and negative criticism of that both here and amongst my family and have tried to correct that.

Old Jim and Carl Jacobs clearly have their theological views and they will never agree. But at least they can both acknowledge this and discussion a few issues, whilst also respecting their opponent's views. Which is why they are clearly gentlemen.

For the record Judaism prohibits witchcraft, so I doubt you'll find me with a crystal ball. And in any case if I knew the outcome, I'd stick a thousand bucks on the right winner.

You also said to Old Jim :

"There is nothing charitable in you at all.You're a phoney.I have had no desire to engage you. You have initiated it on a couple of occasions and quite frankly I find you a very unpleasant person,hypocritical and deceitful very much like your supporters here."

That's right, when you cannot win an argument you throw your toys out of the pram. How mature of you.

See Ya'all as my American relatives would say.

5 November 2012 20:08  
Blogger len said...

Catholics seem to have a very poor defense of their religion...mostly resorting to insults and taunts (when they can get their attention of Gay Lame hotpants)
Is this because they do not really understand their religion but were born into Catholic families?.Are Catholics merely standing at the sidelines and shouting for their 'home team' just because it is Catholic regardless of the character or even the performance of their 'team'.

I cannot ever conceive of anyone reading a' New Testament' and exclaiming " I must become a Catholic ".

5 November 2012 20:18  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Hannah.How mature of you.

More like “how manure of you”.

Inspector checks his calendar. Yes, it’s every fourth week. Anything you wish to add Cressida ?

5 November 2012 20:20  
Blogger William said...

Corrigan 1

Would that be the "No true Scotsman" argument?

5 November 2012 20:24  
Blogger Span Ows said...

Great post YG...and great comments too, mostly a bit prejudice but hey, that's the way we humans are.

I think many would have more time for the Catholic Church if it wasn't so obviously corrupt and patently wrong...oozing riches with gold, jewels and fine expensive robes abounding: have you all been to the Vatican? Jeez (oops)

5 November 2012 20:30  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

Uh, no William: that would be me speculating that Cressida is actually Avi.

5 November 2012 20:37  
Blogger OldJim said...

Dodo

You understand me right.

Hannah

Thank you for the kind words.

Len

I wholeheartedly mean what I say. If I did not think that Christ and the Catholic Church were linked, I would not defend, praise or extol the virtues of the Catholic Church. You can think me mistaken, but please take me on my word on that. This is no mere defence of a "team"

Span Ows

"For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor."

5 November 2012 20:48  
Blogger William said...

Corrigan1

How intriguing! Can you elaborate?

5 November 2012 20:51  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Inspector your vileness knows no bounds. You always get stroppy when you have abstained from poofta bashing for a day or so!

The desperate old men on this blog may find your saccharine ingenue performance endearing grotsbag but I find it repugnant. Go Away!Find another obsession.





5 November 2012 21:04  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Cressida. You first tear into respected Old Jim, then you persecute Hannah for having the temerity of posting on the same blog you do.

Madam, control yourself.

5 November 2012 21:10  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

Oh, it's been a suspicion of mine for some time, William, ever since she joined Avi in the standard Zionist "agghh!! Anti-smite!!! "rant once when I criticized Israel. If you read them both, the "not-quite-as-erudite-as-the-author-thinks" tone is strangely similar.

5 November 2012 21:32  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

OldJim said...

"Dodo
You understand me right."


I do indeed understand you and particularly the point about these comments not being person-to-person and there being the question of the "audience" to consider.

Do you understand my position and the problem I have with this comment?

"The problem is that we're both sincere, have good reason to think that the other would be at least a little safer on our side of the Tiber, but both seem to know enough to have formed unassailable judgements. Oh well. Can't be helped."

5 November 2012 22:12  
Blogger John Magee said...

carl jacobs

Since the mood today here is celebrating an anti Catholic Guy Fawkes festival in the UK with verbal bon fires have you ever heard of the "Know Nothing" bigots who preceeded the KKK in the USA? I will enlighten you about these nativist bigots who showed their Christian charity and feelings by hatred of Catholics in the USA before the Civil War.

The Know Nothing was a movement by the nativist American political faction of the 1850s, characterized by political xenophobia, anti-Catholic sentiment, and occasional bouts of violence against the groups the nativists targeted. It was empowered by popular fears that the country was being overwhelmed by German and Irish Catholic immigrants, who were often regarded as hostile to republican values and controlled by the Pope in Rome. Mainly active from 1854 to 1856, it strove to curb immigration and naturalization, though its efforts met with little success. Membership was limited to Protestant males of British American lineage. There were few prominent leaders, and the largely middle-class and entirely Protestant membership fragmented over the issue of slavery.

Know Nothing mobs burned Roman Catholic Churches, monasteries, and convents. One of their riots in Boston atcually trapped nuns in a convent and several sisters were killed. If you look at RC Churches built during this period they look like fortresses. With good reason. To keep the Know Nothing mobs from entering them and trying to wreck or burn them.

By the way. The KKK hated in this order: Blacks, Roman Catholics, and Jews.

One feature of Guy Fawkes day that isn't celebrated" in Merry Old England these days are riots by drunken mobs that attacked Old English Catholic homes in London and other cities and burned them.

God help Catholics these Guy Fawkes mobs found in the streets of London on this day.

5 November 2012 22:22  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

len said ...

"I cannot ever conceive of anyone reading a' New Testament' and exclaiming " I must become a Catholic "."

No? But might they say: "I must know more about Christianity!" and then: "I must examine which church was actually that appointed by Christ?"

Just where exactly in the New Testament does it say that all Christian truth is plainly disclosed within its pages?

Did Christ say: "Write all my words down"? Is everything Jesus said and did contained in the New Testament?

No. Indeed, the opposite is contained in the Gospels.

Jesus commissioned the Apostles to preach and teach - not write. Saint Paul himself refers to the significance of tradition, the different gifts of the Spirit and leadership.

5 November 2012 22:23  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

I say !

One has always had the idea that Cranmer is a gentleman's club.

What the dashed hell are ladies doing here !

The odd bender is no problem, but the dames are an awful distraction, what !



5 November 2012 22:25  
Blogger William said...

Corrigan1

That seems a bit flimsy. Two people accuse you of being anti-semitic therefore they must be the same person? Not sure I buy that. Also the "not-quite-as-erudite-as-the-author-thinks" tone is fairly ubiquitous. I use it all the time.

5 November 2012 22:28  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Cressida,

Yes well, you are aptly proving the point in your latest post to me. Poor old you.

5 November 2012 22:53  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

5 November 2012 22:59  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Well I believe that Avi is Avi and Cressida is Cressida. All this speculation about identity seems to be counter productive. We are here to discuss matters theo- Political and religious, aren't we?

His Grace gives us plenty of slack here, but some people seem to want to push things too far and abuse the scope His august Ecclesiastical Eminence gives us.

5 November 2012 23:07  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Inspector,

LOL, it is impolite to talk of womanly affairs like that.

But, if this is a gentleman's club, it's members, aren't exactly like what one would expect of Boddles, The Carlton or The Diogenes, even if our host is a gentleman of absolute proprietary and learning?

5 November 2012 23:12  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Sorry Hannah but:

" ... aren't exactly like what one would expect"

This from a lady of breeding, class and education? "D'u 'no wot I mean, like?"

Really, I do apologise. I am, according to at least one person, a moral degenerate, so couldn't resist.

You do make me laugh!

5 November 2012 23:43  
Blogger outsider said...

"who cares for you" said Alice "You're nothing but a pack of cards".
Great blog,pity about the comments.

5 November 2012 23:58  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

Cranmer writes "Never again must a foreign prince have authority in this Realm..."

I take this to be a candid announcement that he has joined UKIP?

6 November 2012 00:01  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

The Way of Dodo said "Jesus commissioned the Apostles to preach and teach - not write. Saint Paul himself refers to the significance of tradition, the different gifts of the Spirit and leadership."
But surely you only know that because it's written in the Gospels or Epistles?

6 November 2012 00:11  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

You do make me laugh too grotsbag.
You and your poor impersonation of
Lady Muck.
A well bred girl would never consider discussing her pubic hair in a public forum and particularly not on a predominantly male religious blog.

The Inspector is drooling no doubt eager for a repeat performance . Although finally he admits to preferring the 'odd bender'.

6 November 2012 00:18  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Dodo,

'ause, I speek the Queen's Engluish... LOL (!).

6 November 2012 00:19  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Ms Gasper

Yes, but that's the very point. It is not all written in scripture.

Christ established a teaching authority and commissioned the Apostles to spread and explain the faith once all the truth had been revealed to them.

Do pay attention.

6 November 2012 00:33  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Cressida,

I do wonder whatever happened to 'Judge not, that ye be not judged' which is Christian teaching according to The Gospel according to St. Matthew Chapter 7 vs 1?

I have already said above that I regret previous instances of my poor behaviour here and when I am in the wrong or some one has misunderstood me and taken offence I have quickly apologised , so I am at least girl enough to admit it. It is a pity you are unable to reflect on that.

6 November 2012 00:36  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

"A well bred girl would never consider discussing her pubic hair in a public forum and particularly not on a predominantly male religious blog."

Oh, I don't know cressida, there is far greater openness these days concerning 'private' matters. This is especially so amongst the younger generation. Tampons are even advertised on television these days!

I mean, we live in a culture now where pubic hair is "vejazzled" and "pejazzled". Who knows the next trend maybe "anjazzled". Talk of neat trimming started with 'bikini line' debates in the 60' and was accelerated by the wearing of miniskirts and hotpants.

Anyway, why is it called a 'Brazillian'? This has always intriqued me.

6 November 2012 00:43  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Dodo

Yes, that last comment would be worth deleting. You just undermined Hannah's apology, and confirmed everything Cressida said about desperate drooling old men.

carl

6 November 2012 00:49  
Blogger OldJim said...

Dodo,

if you mean that I might be viewed as advocating indifference in religion, then I can understand your concern.

I do not think Carl imagines that I consider Calvinism to be some sort of viable alternative to Catholicism, but you're right, I will affirm it again:

the fullness of Salvation lies only within the Catholic Church, which is the Body and Bride of Christ. That someone can be sincere in denying this does not mean that they can be blameless for failing to enter into it or remain within it. The valid Sacraments of the Church are the ordinary and only sure means of receiving Grace.

6 November 2012 00:50  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Gannah said ...

"I am at least girl enough to admit it."

Woman enough, surely ....?

6 November 2012 00:51  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Old Jim

Always remembering that those who are not formal members of the Catholic Chich might be saved if they:

- are validly baptised, and
- have not committed a mortal sin, without repenting, which means a sin concerning a grave matter committed with full knowledge and consent of the will, and
- are animated by charity and a supernatural Faith in God's existence, and
- seek Him, and
- firmly believe that their religion is the true religion such that there is no conflict or doubt about such in their ill-formed conscience, and
- are not formally outside of the Church in spite of uninvestigated doubts about the possibility that the Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ.

This still places a responsibility on us to engage in a debate about doctrinal differences - that's how I've alays understood ecumenicalism anyways.

6 November 2012 01:05  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Dodo,

You are being tiresome today, but OK I should have used the phrase 'woman'. I have no idea what to say about your post regarding things from Brazil, so I don't think I will even attempt to do so.

6 November 2012 01:18  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Hannah

Please, the term is "tedious"!

I am the life long holder of the award for the being, without doubt, "the most tedious communicant on His Grace's blog." I have a reputation to maintain.

I have a confession to make. Mrs Dodo and I regularly give one another a quick 'tidy up'. I have consulted my priest about this and he has assurred me it is permissable - though he did urge caution.

I have been researching this.

According to Wiki:

"In Middle Eastern societies, removal of the pubic body hair has been considered proper hygiene, necessitated by local customs, for many centuries ... Evidence of pubic hair removal in ancient India dates back to 4000 to 3000 BC.

The removal of pubic hair by Western women became more common when bathing suits became abbreviated, starting in 1945. Changes in lingerie styles have also encouraged the removal of pubic hair throughout the years."


But why 'Brazilian'?

6 November 2012 01:39  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Carl

Do lighten up!

6 November 2012 01:43  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

... Hannah had nothing to apologise about regarding the post under discussion given the context in which it was made. That's my point.

So before loading that shot-gun of yours in defence of a lady's honour think 2012, not 1512.

6 November 2012 01:53  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Dodo

I was actually thinking about how you came off in that post. You are (by your own admission) 60, and you are talking to a 26 year-old woman about such subjects. If a 60-year old man talked to my 22 year-old daughter like that, I would be looking for that shotgun and some rock salt.

Just sayin...

carl

6 November 2012 02:25  
Blogger John Magee said...

carl jacobs

Nice to know you support gun ownership.

6 November 2012 03:38  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Katie
Blighty is a word deriving from Persian velayat and ultimately from Arabic wilayah, originally meaning something like "province".
A corruption of the Hindi विलायती (vilāyatī, "foreign").
In India the term came to refer to Europe, and more specifically England and Britain.
In their 1886 dictionary, Hobson-Jobson, Sir Henry Yule and Arthur C. Burnell explained that the word came to be used in British India for several things the British had brought into the country, such as the tomato and soda water.
So it seems apt that you use the word blighty.
I shall be in Blighty for Christmas.
As for Guy Fawkes, that is mostly myth founded in the intrigue and politics of England in the years of the past.

6 November 2012 04:43  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Katie
Don't forget Diwali is on 13 November.

6 November 2012 04:48  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

Dodo says "Do pay attention".
What gives me the impression that he is a prep school master?
Somebody at the back of the class is using their mobile phone, sir.

6 November 2012 08:15  
Blogger IanCad said...

Carl @13:24,

Excellent, and in a nutshell too!
Your second sentence gives a little hope that, despite six of the nine Supreme Court justices being Catholic, they might not vote en masse for any legislation that would clearly benefit their religion.

To get back to the thread; the true duplicty and single-mindedness of Rome in its quest to rule over all can be illustrated by the character of one of the minor figures executed for his part in the Gunpowder Plot.

Henry Garnet, a Jesuit priest,was also author of the minor classic "A Treatise of Equivocation."
Today it would have borne the title "How to Lie While Appearing to Tell the Truth."

That such a book could be accepted and celebrated by an organization claiming to be the successor of Peter further gives lie to the myth that Christ so ordained it.


Rome never changes, it will show a fair face when it can do none other.

6 November 2012 08:37  
Blogger William said...

Carl

Unfortunately, Dodo has been trying to "sex-up" DanJ0 on another thread and it appears to have back-fired rather dramatically.

6 November 2012 08:39  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Len

"I cannot ever conceive of anyone reading a' New Testament' and exclaiming " I must become a Catholic "."
I think that's called a pearl!

The bird;"No? But might they say: "I must know more about Christianity!" and then: "I must examine which church was actually that appointed by Christ?"
You can hear them thinking this thought right now, 'To be free from sin and guilt I must run to the Roman Catholic Church. Where is the nearest priest'? *chortles aloud*

Blofeld

6 November 2012 09:25  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

Oh, it's not quite as flimsy as that, William. Cressida's support for Israel is more reminiscent of an American fundamentalist than a Catholic, and running a 'Catholic' sock-puppet would certainly tickle Avi's sense of superiority. Besides that, the passionate intensity of filth which they jointly poured over me regarding the Israeli problem was so indistinguishable as to make me suspicious of a unified source.

Of course, I could be wrong - it wouldn't be the first time - but as they say in Scotland, 'I hae ma doots'.

6 November 2012 11:54  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I'm showing uncharacteristic restraint. :)

6 November 2012 11:57  
Blogger John Thomas said...

Sadly the foreign prince who has considerable authority in this realm is lord Rompuy, or whatever he's called, or whoever he's been succeeded by.

6 November 2012 12:58  
Blogger William said...

Corrigan1

"Cressida's support for Israel is more reminiscent of an American fundamentalist than a Catholic"

Is there an official line that Catholics are supposed to take on Israel?

" ...and running a 'Catholic' sock-puppet would certainly tickle Avi's sense of superiority."

Strange, I've haven't had the remotest indication of Avi's "sense of superiority". I've always found him to be funny, charming, interested, and interesting.

6 November 2012 14:30  
Blogger Gladiatrix said...

There is no acknowledgement in this post that the Catholic population of England and Wales had spent decades being terrorised by the Crown, for no reason other than religious hatred.

Guy Fawkes' and his co-conspirators' plot demonstrates just how desperate the Catholic citizenry had become. if the Crown had not behaved so badly and with such malice there would never have been a Plot.

6 November 2012 17:36  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Carl said ...

"If a 60-year old man talked to my 22 year-old daughter like that, I would be looking for that shotgun and some rock salt."

Which says more about your state of mind than mine, I'd say. Not only a gun-touting, puritan but a sexist and ageist one.

And the "offensive" comment you advised me to delete was actually addressed to Cressida, who's age I do not know. The second one may have offended Hannah. If she indicates so I will pay attention.

As I said, do lighten up!

6 November 2012 18:06  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

6 November 2012 18:21  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

IanCad said ...

" ... the true duplicty and single-mindedness of Rome in its quest to rule over all can be illustrated by the character of one of the minor figures executed for his part in the Gunpowder Plot.

Henry Garnet, a Jesuit priest,was also author of the minor classic "A Treatise of Equivocation."


Oh dear, your knowledge of history is shocking!

Garnett is known for preferring a passive approach to the problems Catholics faced in England, exhorting English Catholics not to engage in violent rebellion.

In summer 1605 Garnet met with Robert Catesby, who, unknown to him, planned to kill King James I. The existence of Catesby's Gunpowder Plot was revealed to him in July 1605, but as the information was received under the seal of the confessional, he could not speak out. Instead, without telling anyone of what Catesby planned, he wrote to his superiors in Rome and urged them to warn English Catholics against the use of force.

What a villian!

Following the plot's failure Garnet was eventually arrested. His guilt was a foregone conclusion. Criticised for his use of equivocation, which Coke called "open and broad lying and forswearing", and attacked for not warning the authorities of what Catesby planned, he was sentenced to be hanged, drawn and quartered. He was executed on 3 May 1606.

And you've read his defence of the practice of equivocation? Originally it was titled A Treatise against lying and fraudulent dissimulation.

Equivocation it not the same as lying whilst appearing to tell the Truth.

"Mental reservation" is a form of deception which is not an outright lie. It was argued for in moral theology, and now in ethics, as a way to fulfill obligations both to tell the truth and to keep secrets from those not entitled to know them (for example, because of the seal of the confessional or other clauses of confidentiality). Mental reservation is unjustifiable without grave reason for withholding the truth.

Understand?

6 November 2012 18:51  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

John Thomas said:"Sadly the foreign prince who has considerable authority in this realm is lord Rompuy, or whatever he's called, or whoever he's been succeeded by."
Yes I was trying to steer the conversation in that direction and away from a fruitless argument about religious persecution in the 16th century.
It is quite pointless now to complain about all the suffering Protestants inflicted on Catholics by for instance, struggling too hard when tied to a stake, or screaming too loudly when burnt, or using shocking language when being dismembered. Let's put it behind us, shall we?

6 November 2012 20:13  
Blogger len said...


Amo 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

I would like to see the Christian Denominations unite in Harmony...But they cannot do that unless they can agree scripturally.

For Catholics to 'unite ' with Protestants means that Protestants become Catholic....which no Protestant who holds to the Truth of the Gospels can do!.
The Reformers were former Catholic Priests who could no longer deny the Truths of Scripture and decided that they must 'break away' from Catholic theology and be true to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.


6 November 2012 20:24  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

len

Protestants themselves can't even agree on the Truth of the Gospels, can they?

Oh, and remind me, just when was John Calvin ordained a Priest?

6 November 2012 20:59  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

So what are you doing here on Cranmer's blog if you have no respect for these hopeless infidels and lost souls?
Can't you find a Catholic who writes a blog?

6 November 2012 21:21  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Julia, Cranmer has an astonishingly large RC following. No, this man can’t work it out either. Thought you should know this old thing.

Cheery pip !

6 November 2012 21:42  
Blogger William said...

It's a good question Julia. I think he's here to make sure the hopeless infidels and lost souls show some respect to the one true church.

6 November 2012 21:44  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Ms Gasper
With your evident skills of diplomacy and persuation you really should consider a career in politics.

Now, did you have a point to make?

William
It's to see that Church beliefs and history is not misrepresented. Protestants need a sensitve and gentle push in the correct direction to overcome all their confusion.

And to have some fun too.

6 November 2012 22:13  
Blogger John Magee said...

len

Christianity will probably never unite at least in a form of unity known as Christendom before the Reformation. It's all about history. Just like a family fight we all caste up stuff from the past to point our finger at the other side and their faults and how they abused us. The Guy Fawkes article here is an example. Both sides go at each others throats over this act of treachery or defense of the persecuted RC's in England at the time depending on which side of history you inherited because of your religion. when this story is remembered every Novenber 5th.

I will gladly admit the RC Church, which I belong to has more than it's share of hypocrisy, contributed to religious wars and persecution, covered up acts by a few corrupt leaders over the centuries. This is all true.

But I have yet to see here Protestants step forward and admit the record of the several thousaand Protestant denominations, sects, and cults who have contributed over the past nearly 500 years an equal share of their own guilt similar to those I listed above for RC's. The KKK is sometimes brought up here as an example of bigotry in the USA in the past. Of course the fact this organization was founded by white Protestants who hated blacks AND Roman Catholics, as well as Jews is not mentioned.

The KKK was no different than the aims of the Inquisition or Guy Fawkes Day rioters in the past who burned English Catholic homes in English cities or the Guy Fawkes mobs back then who singled out identifiable Catholics who dared go out in the streets on November 5th where they were chased down and beaten up or worse.

When I see Protestants here have the honesty and the courage to admit their religious ancestors acts of perscution, bigotry, and hatred that will be a step in the right direction along with Catholics who do the same.

Until that happens I won't hold my breath.

7 November 2012 00:43  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "With your evident skills of diplomacy and persuation you really should consider a career in politics."

You've been reading my comments for too long, you're picking up my style. :)

7 November 2012 07:41  
Blogger len said...

The ONLY hope for Christian denominations is to unite behind the Head of The Body which is Christ.

Which was God`s original(and only) intention.

Man has taken the Gospel and used it for their own ends and it is this fact which has split the Body of Christ and caused disunity.

7 November 2012 07:47  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Office of Inspector General said...

" Julia, Cranmer has an astonishingly large RC following. No, this man can’t work it out either. Thought you should know this old thing.

Cheery pip !"

His Grace is like a fine light and bloggers tend to be moths or butterflies. Believers are beautiful butterflies who dance around the light whereas moths tend to head straight at the source with some venom, hence them smacking into it , to get back up and try all over again or and falling on the ground or else burning their wings and tumbling to the floor...and Butterflies are typically larger and have more colorful patterns on their wings. Moths are typically smaller with drab-colored wings.

Moths have a frenulum (latin for Tradition and Magisterium), which is a wing-coupling device. Butterflies do not have frenulums, tending to rely on The Almighty to guide their flight. Frenulums join the forewing to the hind wing (Catechism + self righteous living), so the wings can work in unison during flight (They tend to try to save themselves rather than rely on The Almighty).

Some moths may try and fool you into thinking that they are butterflies such as the Urania leilus BKA the Dodo DeathHead Moth!!!!
If you know the story by Jose Rizal then you understand why moths fly at lights, isn't that so dear bird.*Huge Guffaws*

Ernst

7 November 2012 09:04  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

"If you know the story by Jose Rizal then you understand why moths fly at lights, isn't that so dear bird."

Answer: They never listen to their early church elders (PPJJ) such as Paul, Peter, James and John!!!*massive chortles*

7 November 2012 09:17  
Blogger William said...

Ernst.

Thanks for *chortles*, *guffaws* and *sniggers* this morning. A wonderful metaphor.

7 November 2012 10:04  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Nah...liked the Scarlet de Borgia story much better. Who could mistake Dodo the giant Doodlebug Deathhead Moth for a Butterfly? Someone with a drinking problem I suppose.You don't think people here...Oh!Ernst...how could you

7 November 2012 11:21  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

William said...

:-) ;-) :-O

Just waiting for the onslaught from me RC Brethren..*Ho Ho Ho*

Ernsty

7 November 2012 11:21  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Cressida

"You don't think people here...Oh!Ernst...how could you" As the vultures exclaimed to each other after getting confused in The Jungle Book..
" So...Who are you?

I don't know, Who are you?
So..I say to you who are you and you say to me I don't know who are you. So I say you must know who you are and you say I don't know, Who are you?

NOW DON'T START THAT AGAIN!!!!"

As Dodo loves all things Liverpudlian, he will surely like the link to the vultures based on his Fab Four...Wonder which one he is...Hmmm?

Ernst

7 November 2012 11:31  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

My dear Ernsty, having abandoned the sleuthing trail you are now endeavouring on a new 'career' as a teller of tales. Well, not new really as you've been playing fast and loose with scripture for some time now. That's as may be, let's hope you prove more successful using your imagination in this way.

Not a bad start, I admit, as a first draft, but you have confused the characters.

Have another go once Matron has administered your medication.

Cressida

Being so very cruel and mean again, I see.

7 November 2012 11:33  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Now Ernsty it has become critical you accept your medication before making any further comments!

7 November 2012 11:35  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dear Urania leilus BKA the Dodo DeathHead Moth!

"Well, not new really as you've been playing fast and loose with scripture for some time now."

How so. Ernst has answered yours and your 'mate' Albert's questions unstintingly and perfectly but self beautification does always appears to be in the eyes of the Tiberian beholder.

"Not a bad start, I admit, as a first draft, but you have confused the characters."

Dear bird
Your species is called Saturniidae IgnorANUS after it's pagan added beliefs to scripture, with various sub species such as leperousidopteran, as seen commenting on this blog!!

Ernsty

7 November 2012 11:43  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

IgnorANUS; Definition -a person who can read but is disinclined to derive information from literary sources other than his rear. *Like A Glove*

Ernst

7 November 2012 11:46  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

William, you say " I think he [Dodo]'s here to make sure the hopeless infidels and lost souls show some respect to the one true church."
I take it that is intended as irony. Yours is one of the very, very few voices here I would recognize as - well you know what I mean. No need to explain.

7 November 2012 12:03  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

@ William. "For the sovereignty of this realm is slipping away and its people may not wake up in time."
See you at conference!!

7 November 2012 12:06  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Cruel and mean...You say this with some regularity Dodo.Is there a purpose to this?Are you trying to diminish my popularity rating?:)

Jungle stories are a bit tame ernst..write that one where you and len kill all the catholics with big chains and pointed sharp nails.Plenty of blood and gore.Maybe a few burnings and poisonings.Scarlet de Borgia has to be given a very cruel dark role in it. Ernsty must keep Dodo happy in reinforcing Cressida's negative image.


7 November 2012 12:18  
Blogger William said...

Hi Julia

Yes, I was being ironic. No, you won't see me at Conference, but yes, I will probably be voting UKIP at every opportunity.

7 November 2012 12:37  
Blogger Weekend Yachtsman said...

" Never again must a foreign prince have authority in this Realm, and never again must religion be a tool of hatred, oppression and persecution."

What a nice little sting in the tail of your post.

"Foreign Prince" = Barroso, Rumpy-Pumpy, Merkel, Draghi, etc etc.

That's easy.

Religion as a tool of hatred etc - well who on earth could this be aimed at, I wonder?

7 November 2012 13:52  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Cressida

No, your 'popularity ratings' are entirely in your own hands.

I am a sensitive soul and harsh comments do so upset me. I ignore the 'usual suspects' - but from you?! It is too much to bear.

Ernst

A little ditty for you from Liverpool (with a little editing):

Happiness, happiness, the greatest gift that I possess
I thank the Lord I've been blessed
With more than my share of happiness

To me this world is a wonderful place
And I'm the luckiest human in the whole human race
I've got no silver and I've got no gold
But I've got the Lord in my soul

Happiness to me is an ocean tide
Or a sunset fading on a mountain side
A Chrch with guidance from up above
And held in the arms of the One who Loves

Happiness is a field of grain
Turning its face to the falling rain
I can see it in the sunshine, I breathe it in the air
Happiness, happiness everywhere

Happiness, happiness, the greatest gift that I possess
I thank the Lord I've been blessed
With more than my share of happiness


Enjoy when you next on the commode.

7 November 2012 16:37  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dear Urania leilus BKA the Dodo DeathHead Moth!

"Enjoy when you next on the commode. "

Should guarantee a complete clearance!

Ernst

7 November 2012 17:22  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Blofeld old fellow. You’ve reminded the Inspector he spent a quarter of a century as a motorcyclist. In the summer months, one would don open faced helmet and goggles, then ride around with that familiar look on two wheels of grim determination. Had to. Open your mouth and your risked a gob full of moth. You’d then spend a few minutes pushing moth paste through sealed lips and of course, the creature’s wings. Happy days indeed !



7 November 2012 18:45  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Just hope you make it on time, dear old Ernst. No nasty accidents now, or Matron will scold you. Best not to laugh or chortle for a while. One never knows ....

*Guffaw*

7 November 2012 19:23  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

William
Please go not use the expression "sex-up" in relation to DanJ0 and myself, especially with the term "back-fired". It could be misconstrued.

DanJ0 said ...
"You've been reading my comments for too long, you're picking up my style. :)"

Are you flirting with me? Please, you must understand and accept I am a happily married heterosexual man and a Roman Catholic. There can be no future in this obsession of yours.

Besides, I trust I never get close enough to risk "picking up" anything from you.

7 November 2012 19:41  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Ms Gasper commented to William ....

"Yours is one of the very, very few voices here I would recognize as - well you know what I mean. No need to explain."

Personally, I'd be a little bit worried by a comment like that.

7 November 2012 19:45  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Blimey, someone's got their plain, white, unfashionable, 60 year old's Y fronts in a bit of a twist today by the look of it. :O

7 November 2012 21:16  
Blogger William said...

Dodo

"Personally, I'd be a little bit worried by a comment like that."

Well, if you didn't spend half your time chasing after and making lewd and inappropriate comments to a gay may, (and now a gay woman half your age) on this site then I might be able to take your worries a bit more seriously. As it is, I think I'll take them with a huge pinch of Carl's rock-salt.

7 November 2012 21:51  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

DanJ0, so now you want information on my underwear! Have you no shame?

Mrs Dodo buys these for me and I can assure you she has very good taste. I confess they're not quite up to your Gold Lame standards but then I'm not attempting to be "mutton dressed-up as lamb".

William, touchy, touchy! What's "lewd" about a discussion on pubic hair? Are you a puritan or just a prude? And really, what has age or sexual preference got to do with it?

7 November 2012 22:26  
Blogger William said...

Dodo

"What's "lewd" about a discussion on pubic hair?"

That was the inappropriate bit.

"Are you a puritan or just a prude?"

Probably neither.

"And really, what has age or sexual preference got to do with it?"

That's true actually. As a Catholic (correct me if I'm wrong) I guess that you shouldn't be making lewd and inappropriate comments to anybody. The fact that DanJ0 is gay should be irrelevant.

7 November 2012 22:55  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

William, but what is "lewd" or "inappropriate" about a discussion amongst adults about fashion in pubic hair?

And you really think I was coming on to DanJ0 or Hannah? Please, spare me!

8 November 2012 01:43  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo, put the shovel down. The hole you're standing in is too deep as it is.

8 November 2012 05:14  
Blogger len said...

Dodo people would have more(or at least some) respect for you if you admitted when you were wrong rather than trying to convince others that you were right(against all odds)

Is your self esteem really that low?.

8 November 2012 07:51  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

len

Climbing.or should I say slinking, aboard the bandwagon yet again, I see. Explain how such comments were offensive.

I note you and others fail to comment on your friend's vivid and explicit descriptions of homosexual practices and his prowess in these, er, areas. Now, call me old fashioned, but to me that is disgusting. Somewhat revealing, I think.

8 November 2012 09:53  
Blogger William said...

Dodo

"I note you and others fail to comment on your friend's vivid and explicit descriptions of homosexual practices and his prowess in these, er, areas. Now, call me old fashioned, but to me that is disgusting. Somewhat revealing, I think."

This, in a nutshell, is your problem. You are supposed to be the Christian, DanJ0 is not!

Can you not see the rank hypocrisy at being offended by DanJ0's "explicit descriptions" and then coming back and at him with inappropriate, lewd and sexual taunts? And then calling others prudes when they pull you up about it?

There ain't no bandwagon to climb aboard here Dodo. This whole blog is littered with examples of you chasing DanJ0 around like he's a dog in heat! Tedious doesn't really cover it.

8 November 2012 10:48  
Blogger William said...

By the way, I shouldn't have put "explicit descriptions" in quotes. They were indeed explicit descriptions.

8 November 2012 12:32  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

There are usually two reasons why I'm occasionally uncouth here. The first is my inclination to wear a donkey jacket to a dinner party if I think the hosts are snobs. The second is to be deliberately brutal in response to various types of provocation. I'm quite comfortable being uncouth when I think the situation demands it.

8 November 2012 13:13  
Blogger len said...

William has answer you comments Dodo(8 November 2012 10:48) I have nothing to add as he has done it comprehensively.

8 November 2012 18:59  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Has he len?

William

What comments exactly were "inappropriate, lewd and sexual taunts" to DanJ0?

This:

"Ooooo .... I love it when you're mean to me ... chase me!
Mwah."
?

Or this:

"You're soooo terribly mean to people - that's what I find attractive about you."?

Perhaps this:

"Actually, I'm inclined to believe he is a closet homosexual who only occassionally indulgences his morally disordered passions and is then racked with self loathing."?

This maybe:

"Big hugs and kisses to you darling.
Mwah."


After his rank suggetions that Albert, the Inspector and myself were repressed homosexuals, often accompanied by gross and foul descriptions of his predilictions, I'd say my taunts were tame and appropriate.

He calls it "uncouth". I call it filth.

8 November 2012 20:45  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

A recent example of matey being "uncouth":

" ... we can just, well, shag around like young heterosexuals anyway without too much opprobrium these days"

Trouble is DanJ0 you're not young anymore, are you, and time is running out for you - fast.

8 November 2012 21:13  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo, you're obviously in another of your post-humiliation meltdown phases again.

8 November 2012 22:29  
Blogger William said...

Dodo

"After his rank suggetions that Albert, the Inspector and myself were repressed homosexuals, often accompanied by gross and foul descriptions of his predilictions, I'd say my taunts were tame and appropriate."

I totally agree with you. By DanJ0's standards your taunts were tame and appropriate.

"He calls it "uncouth". I call it filth."

And presumably taunting him was your way to let him no this yes?

8 November 2012 23:06  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

William

I take it you mean "know"?

My actual motives are really none of your business. I trust you now accept my comments were neither lewd nor sexual but merely taunts?

(I note above he is attempting to keep this going for his own ends.)

DanJ0

Yes sweety, I know you're there still.

Mwah.



8 November 2012 23:21  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Well, I try and see the funny side with Mr Dodo.

I think that the comments on pubic hair were raised by Cressida De Nova as a way of attacking me (see above), although initially Cressida sited it as a reason for me to be 'homosexual of the year' along with Danjo.

I think Dodo was simply trying to defend me from this unfortunate attack,after I had admitted that my initial comments like that on previous posts were wrong- albeit I might add, as a response to Mr Inspector- who thought I was a hairy 'butch' lesbian sterotype or something like that.

Not that I'm taking sides because I like reading William's and Danjo's posts. If only we could, on this blog, discuss things like views and arguments, rather than argument for its own sake, although there should be times of jokes, irony, wit and stuff.

I for one and interested In Danjo's fusion of atheism and classical liberalism or William's views on stuff. But that never really has a chance to air itself unfortunately.

8 November 2012 23:41  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Ms Hannah K

Mr Dodo?

Are you showing deference and respect to me as your elder whilst gently suggesting I act my age?

Dodo will do!

8 November 2012 23:59  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Dodo,

Nope.

As far as I am concerned you should conduct yourself as you see fit.

9 November 2012 00:06  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Hi Mr. Dodo

Looks as if sweet thing is hunting with the hounds this week and foxy is running on his own.Tsk tsk

Never mind Darling.It's never too late to learn to stand on your own.

9 November 2012 16:41  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Hi Ms. de Nova

You're being very naughty again.

9 November 2012 22:23  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older