European Union

Bishop berates poor, deluded Brexiteers who voted “quixotically” to leave the EU

Initial coverage looked very encouraging. The BBC reported that the Rt Rev’d Christopher Chessun, Bishop of Southwark, had exhorted the House of Lords to pass the European Union (Notice of Withdrawal) Bill un-amended; that for better or worse, in sickness and in health, they should allow the Prime Minister to just get on with it. So promising did this BBC report of the Bishop’s speech (Hansard [Col. 24]) seem that it earned a tweet (and quite a few re-tweets) with epithets of wisdom: Sensible Bishop. Alas, the appreciation was a little premature.

Bishop Christopher did indeed exhort the Lords Temporal and Spiritual not to weigh the Bill down with tedious Remainiac amendments, but not without taking a swipe at those who voted Leave:

Despite the vagaries of the European Union Referendum Act, it was clear that voters understood that they were, in effect, making a decision, not merely expressing an opinion. They did so in sharply differing numbers riven by age, income, qualifications and location. Regrettably, many parts of the country that have most benefited from EU funding voted decisively, if quixotically, to leave.

Why, O why did he juxtapose recipients of EU funding (ie poorer areas) with quixoticism?

Quixotic: extremely idealistic; unrealistic and impractical; resembling or befitting Don Quixote; impulsive and often rashly unpredictable; actuated or swayed by emotional impulses; foolishly impractical especially in the pursuit of ideals.

Ah, these poor, deluded, foolish Brexiteers.

Lord Hunt of Wirral was incredulous:

I say to the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Southwark that I am not sure where he got the word “quixotic” from; the decision had nothing to do with tilting at windmills or Don Quixote. Perhaps he was just expressing an anacoluthon.

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean just added the insult to his cache:

My Lords, the supporters of Brexit have been called many things: ignorant, gullible, naive, uneducated, bigoted—the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Southwark has added a new one, which is quixotic..

But Quentin Letts in the Daily Mail was scathing:

A bishop (Southwark, from the moist, church-emptying end of the Anglican spectrum) called the referendum result ‘quixotic’.

It was almost with a sigh that he said the Archbishop of Canterbury and a majority of the Lords Spiritual had decided to vote for Brexit to be triggered.

Oliver Wright in the Times focused on the Bishop’s warning of a Brexit apocalypse:

Others, however, lined up to criticise the government. The Bishop of Southwark said that to ignore the views of those who voted to remain risked creating “regional divide, generational resentment and a threat to the union”.

And so, in one fell swoop (actually two snobby sweeps) the Bishop of Southwark clipped the wings of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s new-found Brexit-means-Brexit conviction, and exposed an(other) episcopal hypocrisy: his words flew up; his thoughts remained below.

We return to the thoughts of the Rt Rev’d Philip North, now Bishop-Elect of Sheffield, whose concern is that the Church of England really needs to learn to speak Greek to the Greeks. Of those just-about-managing families in areas of great social deprivation which are judged foolish and idealistic by Christopher Chessun, Philip North observes:

Such people feel frozen out of the post-crash economy, their wages shrinking in real terms while the rich get ever richer. They are routinely accused of xenophobia, or worse, when they express concerns about changes imposed on their com­munities by those who live far away. In the UK, they feel abandoned by the institutions that were formed to represent them: austerity-stricken local government, the Labour Party, and the demutualised building soc­i­eties.

..We then listen to the poor on condition that what they say backs up our own pre-conceived argu­ments. They have become for us an illustration, or a theological idea — anything other than people.

The Bishop of Southwark is clearly wedded to his theological idea of Europe, now heaping ‘quixotic’ onto the tired old charges of ‘xenophobic’ (‘racist’, ‘bigoted’, etc). The poor, ignorant, uneducated people who regrettably voted Brexit really must learn better from the episcopal elite, whose antiquated vocation it is to sustain an ancient code of belief, undo a myriad of wrongs, and bring justice to the world.

Ah, what idealism.

  • This is more like it, Your Grace. Less of the wishy-washy ‘did God really say’ defences of non-committed sexual relationships, more of the sticking the boot in to the loony ideologues who seem determined to drive our country off a cliff.

  • Bernard from Bucks

    “…but not without taking a swipe at those who voted Leave:”
    Fine by me.
    To be finally rid of the EU, I would not only ‘turn the other cheek’
    but also allow a swipe across my two other cheeks lower down! 😉

  • dannybhoy

    “Despite the vagaries of the European Union Referendum Act, it was clear that voters understood that they were, in effect, making a decision, not merely expressing an opinion. They did so in sharply differing numbers riven by age, income, qualifications and location. Regrettably, many parts of the country that have most benefited from EU funding voted decisively, if quixotically, to leave.”

    And Yea! did the immigrant Habiru slaves labouring night and day for the Egyp-tian construct-ion companies enthuse and rejoice over the message of Moshe Rabbeinu.
    “Followeth thou me and I will lead thee out of this Egyp-tian led Union into a land of milk, honey and international trade agreements..”

    But the wisest and most brainwashed amongst them -also known as “trusties” muttered and whispered,
    “They knoweth not what they are letting themselves in(eth) for.
    Moses understandeth not the demographics of our slavedom. Let us remain here until he sorteth out his head….”

    • ChaucerChronicle

      Brilliant!

  • Sybaseguru

    When on Synod I didn’t always agree with Philip North, but I did always listen to his speeches as I could agree with a lot of what he said and respected his integrity. His Brexit analysis in the Church Times was excellent and puts a lot of the other Bishops to shame. One bishops comment (on another subject, but still relevant) was “how can I face my friends in the House of Lords after this vote” – a very strange criteria for a Bishop to use.

    • Paul Greenwood

      The fact he is there at all shames modernity itself

      • CliveM

        And modernity is where we want to be, why?

        • Paul Greenwood

          No. I don’t think so necessarily, but I find the House of Lords to be an odd institution when 106 years after Sir Edward Grey had a Preface in the 1911 Parliament Act calling for an Elected Upper Chamber, the only ones allowed to vote for Membership are Hereditary Peers !!!

      • Sybaseguru

        And you get to define Modernity for everyone? Isn’t that a rather Fascist view of life?

        • Paul Greenwood

          Have I defined it for “everyone” ? Thank you for the compliment: I had thought I was expressing my own personal opinion

    • Sigfridiii

      That’s why the Bishops should not be in the House of Lords. They should take their cue from the Bible, not the Lords’ dining room.

  • IanCad

    How dare he!! Some damn fool priest has the temerity to tell the sturdy British peasant that they are wrong in thinking that they have been well and truly screwed by the EU beast, its accolytes, its promoters, its profiteers, politicians, and other assorted shysters.
    In brief, he is assaulting the very system of capitalism that once brought prosperity to all levels of society. He is, by denying working people of all levels, their claim to a portion of the market value of their productivity, siding with those who are sowing the seeds of civil war.
    Wretched man that he is, preaching for gospel the commandments of Brussels. Who will rid us of this turbulent priest?

    • Paul Greenwood

      He is in the legislature because his employer put him there

      • Little Black Censored

        He looks rather like Hilary Benn, did you notice?

    • David

      That was said with the force of truth, reason, justice and passion. Well said Ian !

      • IanCad

        Mighty nice of you and Geoff. Thanks.

        • betteroffoutofit

          Some scholars insist he’s “Jeff,” I note. [[Actually, the ones I’ve seen are americans 🙂 .

    • ChaucerChronicle

      Superb!

    • Agreed with you up to this: “Who will rid us of this turbulent priest?”

      Quell the spirit of Henry II. Beckett’s loyalty lay with the Church and not the state. King Henry could not impose his will upon him so these angry words resulted in the Archbishop’s brutal murder.

      • IanCad

        You are quite correct Jack; I should have used the word “rescue” instead of “rid” to be more in harmony with the first sentence of the last paragraph. Not my intention to incite murder, nor to diss Beckett.

        • Jack suspected it was an innocent oversight, Ian. As he said, other than that it was an excellent comment.

      • Anton

        Beckett’s loyalty lay with a church that was encroaching on what was properly the State’s turf.

        • You agree with those who murdered him?

          • Little Black Censored

            That is not what he said.
            (However, whose turf it was was precisely what was in question, and it was not till Henry VIII that the matter was settled in the State’s favour.)

    • jsampson45

      How so, assaulting capitalism?

      • IanCad

        Because the very essence of capitalism depends upon a free market. Such is not the case when the labour market has no, or little, influence in the supply and demand of its services; thus rendering it without the power to improve – or diminish – its value.
        The unlimited supply of foreign workers essentially strips millions of our subjects from increasing their wealth, even when their productivity increases.

  • Maggie Thatcher

    Bishop berates poor, deluded Brexiteers who voted “quixotically” to leave the EU….

    Hold on a sec… this man is a fully grown adult and yet he devotes his life to an imaginary sky wizard. based on zero evidence whatsoever.

    And we’re the deluded ones?? Really?

    • Paul Greenwood

      He is a public schoolboy who thinks the 7% are morally superior to the 93%

      • ChaucerChronicle

        There is nothing wrong with being a public school boy. The poor long to be able to afford such schools for their boys.

        • Anton

          Such day schools, yes. But boarding schools?

          • ChaucerChronicle

            Yes.

        • Paul Greenwood

          I never said there was anything “wrong” simply that there is an observed tendency for people who describe the broader mass of people as “quixotic” displaying a “moral superiority” that is inappropriate.

        • The poor long for many things. Public boarding school is not near the top of their priorities.

          • ChaucerChronicle

            All right, Jack. It’s not near the top of their priorities.

          • dannybhoy

            Sheer sour grapes Jack..

          • The poor would be happy with a shipload of grapes, sour or otherwise. Add copious sugar and some yeast and all is well with the world.

          • dannybhoy

            Spoken like a true public school boy..
            Btw, may Danny inquire as to your general health these days?

          • Fair to middling, Danny. No cancer, thank God. However, the treatment has taken a heavy toll. Nevertheless, Jack is in good spirits.

          • dannybhoy

            Thank God indeed, I do remember you shared about the cancer some time -a year or more ago?
            I genuinely wish you good health Jack and peaceful days..

          • Cressida de Nova

            That is good news Jack.

    • Albert

      What’s your evidence that he has devoted his life to an imaginary sky wizard. based on zero evidence whatsoever?

    • The Explorer

      “yet he devotes his life to an imaginary sky wizard.” You’re remarkably optimistic about the beliefs of Anglican bishops.

      • Albert

        If only I could uptick more than once.

        • CliveM

          I’ll do it for you!

      • ChaucerChronicle

        Yeah!

      • *Kapow*

      • Seadog

        Marvellous

    • ChaucerChronicle

      Presumably, you mean by ‘evidence’ that which is observable in space and time?

      Scientific instruments: cannot measure, that which is infinite.

      • Maggie Thatcher

        That cleared that up then… not

        • ChaucerChronicle

          Ignoramus.

    • Inspector General

      Well I never! A talking microbe…

      But then, even that is pushing the realms of possibility. Without intelligent design, it’s debatable as to whether even something as humble as your mono-celled good self would ever have emerged on its own…

      But let’s for arguments sake say you did manage it. You live and then you die, and that’s the end of your freak existence, because no one thought of the marvellous concept of reproduction. There being no sky wizard as you put it to arrange for it.

      And we’re the deluded ones?? Really?

      • Maggie Thatcher

        Yes oh really…

        Debate this one then my slightly retarded friend…

        Why would the intelligent designer (AKA Sky Wizard)…. create the Dinosaurs around 200 million years before he created humans?

        What would be the point of creating creatures that are unable to praise him or acknowledge him in anyway?

        • Inspector General

          But – dim one – can’t you see? The dinosaurs are our ancestors, silly. Part of the journey of design that ended with your shining intellect today.

          Well, when one says ‘ended’ let’s hope we can continue to improve on your example thereof, shall we…

          • Maggie Thatcher

            So you believe in evolution then? Which is ironic, because that totally removes the need for a creator.

            Not very good at this are you… 🙂

          • Inspector General

            Oh, how disappointing to find you back…

            Evolution, the tool by which our creator achieves results in this universe of our physics is clearly the product of a higher intelligence that lies outside of said universe. Using the universally accepted law, whereby nothing can not begat in itself anything at all, this positive force is in its way a computer program, if you will, that achieves the same as man’s limited efforts on his PC smallness…

            Jaw dropping, what!

          • Maggie Thatcher

            “Evolution, the tool by which our creator achieves results in this universe of our physics is clearly the product of a higher intelligence that lies outside of said universe….” Of course no mention of Physics or Evolution in the Bible.. not a sausage. And besides the ‘watchmaker’ argument is old hat and has already been put to bed some time ago so there’s no need for me to revisit.

            What I will say is evidence suggests that Humans have only been around for couple of hundred thousands years – The Universe is 13.7 Billion years old.

            Whats all that about? That’s a terrible plan by any standard – very inefficient. Which means either…

            A: Our Universe must have the laziest Creator ever.
            B: Or there inst a plan or a Creator

            A couple of questions for you:

            Do you believe in the Bible as God’s word?
            I am going to hell because I don’t believe in Father Christmas… erm Baby Jesus I mean.

          • Maggie Thatcher

            So you believe in evolution then? Which is ironic because that completely removes the need for a creator 🙂

    • Martin

      MT

      You’re ignoring that label ou have which says “made by God”

    • betteroffoutofit

      And you’re the daughter of a Methodist preacher? — From before the marxists took over . . .

      • Maggie Thatcher

        And you have the mentality of a 7 year old child that still believes in Father Christmas.

        Grow up, and leave the Politics to the adults

        • Little Black Censored

          You should have left off – well not while you were still ahead, because you weren’t, but after your first contribution which more entertaining that your subsequent ones.

          • Maggie Thatcher

            I have read your comment three times and it sill makes no sense.

            Would you like to try again?

          • Little Black Censored

            No, not really.

        • betteroffoutofit

          Dear me; you really need to tear yourself away from the mirror.

          • Maggie Thatcher

            If you have ‘faith’ then you will believe absolutely anything you are told, but obviously I am not the real Maggie Thatcher, in the same principle that your name isn’t really betteroffoutofit

    • Little Black Censored

      “Imaginary sky wizard”; I think I prefer him to the usual fairy.

  • MikeL

    He thinks there is such thing as EU funding – as if there is a money tree somewhere that is paid for by nobody.

    • Arden Forester

      This is half the problem. Bishops who put politics of the world before the Tradition of the Faith. In fact, most want to unravel the Faith to appease the Barabbas tendency. They may think they are being “kind” but a house built on sand will fall.

      • writhledshrimp

        I linked it before, John Ortberg preaches brilliantly about pastors unqualified in economics undermining the authority of scripture. It is a great sermon, preached to his divided congregation after the US election. Well worth a listen.

        from=outro-embed

  • Has the Bishop of Southwark grasped that ‘EU funding’ is our own money that Brussels gives back to us? Or that, because Britain is a net contributor to the EU, when we leave we shall have even more money to spend on poorer areas?

    If Sheffield’s Bishop-in-Waiting is honest with himself, he must add the Church of England to his list of institutions which have abandoned the people. The C of E washed its hands of the British when it threw in its lot with diversity and Islamization.

    • john in cheshire

      Quite correct that it’s our money, given back to us after the EU mafia have taken their slice off the top, forcing us to be grateful for not taking more for themselves.

    • Coniston

      I’ve no time for the EU, but it has funded, with our money, some investments in poorer parts of the country (Cornwall for example). I hope that when we no longer have to fund the EU we can continue to fund worthwhile developments in such places.

    • Royinsouthwest

      But surely the money is much more productive after it has been sanctified by the EU!

  • The Explorer

    The EU Funding Principle. You have £100 to spend on yourself. You give it to the EU. The EU gives you back £80 of it. You say, “Wow, the EU has given me £80 to spend!”

    But without the EU you’d have had £100.

    • Paul Greenwood

      Best part is to pencil in spending plans that are unfunded

      • Sarky

        And don’t bother getting your accounts written off.

    • MikeL

      And they decide how the £80 is spent – not your decision.

      • Bernard from Bucks

        And you have to put up a big blue notice saying –
        “Thanks to EU funding…”
        No notice – no funding next year !

    • CliveM

      Socialists the world over use the same lie.

    • saintmark

      Surely you give £100 and get £20 back?

  • Paul Greenwood

    Southwark ? Is that a Virtual Diocese ? It doesn’t have any real people there does it ? I mean 30,000 people and 5 bishops !! I still think you can administer England with 8-10 bishops

  • Anton

    Right-thinking people want to get rid of an extensive cabal of wrong-thinking bishops… same headlines as in the 1630s!

    • So get a Cromwell in amongst them, sword in hand. That’ll work.

  • Albert

    Does it ever occur to these bien pensant remainers that their condescension towards and ignoring of people they think their inferiors is part of the reason people voted to leave the EU? Philip North is a wise man.

  • The Explorer

    The EU is about more than money.

    The EU Parliament building was deliberately designed to look like Brueghel’s Tower of Babel; the early slogan associated with it, “Many tongues one voice”. Agendas other than financial going on there.

    Show me any politician, and my instinctive question is, ‘Do we have a mechanism for getting rid of this person?’ That is sound survival policy. I remember the announcement on TV a few years back that Herman Van Rompuy had been appointed first President of the European Council. That made him, in some sense, our president. Did we appoint him? No. Could we get rid of him? No. Would we have any say about his successor? No.

    • Albert

      ‘Do we have a mechanism for getting rid of this person?’

      Exactly. At the end of WWII, despite all he had done, the British people voted Churchill out of office. And he took it. That’s how democracy works, we can rid of whoever. The EU on the other hand…

      • Holger

        ‘Do we have a mechanism for getting rid of this person?’

        So what’s the mechanism for getting rid of the queen? Or a pope you don’t like?

        • Albert

          The queen does not have decision making authority. You can rid yourself of the pope by not being a Catholic.

          • Holger

            The queen may not have decision-making authority but she’s still there, supposedly representing the whole country as head of state whether the country likes it or not.

            It so happens the country does (inexplicably) seem to like it. If required to run for election she would almost certainly win. But she never has and never will. She was foisted on the nation by an accident of birth, which is fine when the nation decides it likes its monarch. But what happens when it doesn’t? Where’s the mechanism for getting rid of an unsuitable monarch? Edward VIII jumped, but had he been bloody-minded enough, he could have dug his heels in and refused to budge. There was no mechanism for obliging him to do so.

            And as for the pope, we can (and do) repudiate his authority – or more precisely, we refuse to acknowledge that he ever held authority over us at all. I was born to Catholic parents who tried to raise me as a Christian, but their religion just slid off me like water off a duck’s back. It never felt right or true and always made me doubt and scoff, even as a very young child. The pope has therefore never held any authority over me, so it was never possible for me to repudiate that authority. Yet he’s still there pontificating away and telling the world we’re all sinners and are going to hell unless we kiss his ring and do everything he tells us to. So what’s the mechanism for getting him to shut the f@(k up and stop torturing the less strong willed among us with visions of hellfire and damnation?

            I know gay Catholics who weren’t as lucky as me. Their parents managed to coerce them into faith, so they continue to suffer at the hands of the pope and his evil band of priests, whose sole mission in life seems to be to make them feel so bad about themselves, they turn into gibbering wrecks. For their sakes I would like to see a mechanism for ridding the world of the papacy.

            Come to think of it, it may already exist and be in the process of operating, but it’s taking a long time to get the job done. Apathy is a weapon with a very slow fuse. I wish for the sake of my fellow man that it might burn a little quicker.

          • Albert

            The queen may not have decision-making authority…It so happens the country does (inexplicably) seem to like it. If required to run for election she would almost certainly win.

            Quite, so there’s not really much comparison with unelected EU people.

            The pope has therefore never held any authority over me

            Exactly. So again, not much comparison with unelected EU people.

            Yet he’s still there pontificating away and telling the world we’re all sinners and are going to hell unless we kiss his ring and do everything he tells us to.

            It’s called freedom of speech – something that enables you to say what you want – as here – even though what you say isn’t true. Would you kindly cite the last five occasions in which Pope Francis has said we’re all going to hell unless we kiss his ring and do everything he tells us to ?

            So what’s the mechanism for getting him to shut the f@(k up and stop torturing the less strong willed among us with visions of hellfire and damnation?

            Even if you were truthfully articulating what he says, there still wouldn’t be a mechanism for shutting him up, because to have one would be to deny freedom of speech.

            I know gay Catholics who weren’t as lucky as me.

            And here’s the root of your anger. Look if you don’t want to be a Catholic don’t be a Catholic, but please don’t in your hatred for other people, misrepresent us or try to shut down our freedom of speech.

            For their sakes I would like to see a mechanism for ridding the world of the papacy.

            There is a mechanism, it’s called ISIS.

            Come to think of it, it may already exist and be in the process of operating, but it’s taking a long time to get the job done. Apathy is a weapon with a very slow fuse. I wish for the sake of my fellow man that it might burn a little quicker.

            Sorry to disappoint, but the Catholic Church is growing relative to the population. Currently, the figures say 1.2 billion.

          • seansaighdeoir

            ‘…it’s called ISIS.’

            Zactly.

          • Holger

            Freedom of speech does not stretch to making unfounded and unproven allegations that certain groups of people are going to a place that nobody can prove exists to be punished for all eternity in flames that nobody has ever seen.

            If any group except a religion tried such tactics, it would be closed down immediately. If in order to influence people to do what I wanted them to do, I threatened them with violence and torture, the law would silence me pretty quickly. But it lets religions keep on making their threats and scaring the weak-willed and credulous.

            Religion is just an excuse for organised manipulation, extortion and discrimination. As such it cannot claim the protection of freedom of speech laws. In civilised societies this is starting to be recognised with decisions favouring the rights of minorities over the rights of Christians to attack them and deny them full economic participation in society. Soon enough we’ll be seeing people sue the Church for blackmail and extortion – give us money and bow to our threats or you’ll burn is a pretty bald attempt to defraud, don’t you think?

            Religion’s protected status is being chipped away at little by little. Inexorably we will bring it down. Freedom of speech allows us to do this. And once the global population has been educated to understand just what a massive fraud you’ve been perpetuating over the past two milennia, you can say goodbye to growth. You already have in the West. In the rest of the world it’s just a question of time.

          • Albert

            Freedom of speech does not stretch to making unfounded and unproven allegations that certain groups of people are going to a place that nobody can prove exists to be punished for all eternity in flames that nobody has ever seen.

            So just to be clear, you want people who preach such things to be prosecuted.

            If any group except a religion tried such tactics, it would be closed down immediately.

            Actually, when you look at the correlation between improved health, happiness and religion, you reach the conclusion that if anything else had that effect, governments would invest in it. As Andrew Sims, formally president of the Royal College of Psychiatrists puts it:

            If it were anything other than religious belief or spirituality resulting in such beneficial outcomes for health, the media would trumpet it and governments and healthcare organizations would be rushing to implement in practice.

            You say:

            Religion is just an excuse for organised manipulation, extortion and discrimination.

            Just an excuse? Nothing more than that? Ignore the fact that the Catholic Church is the largest charitable organisation in the world, you want it shut down because you don’t like its stance on homosexuality. How selfish are you?!

            give us money and bow to our threats or you’ll burn

            Something I have never heard said in any church. And yet you set that up as if Christianity is fairly represented by the claim. Do you actually believe the stuff you write?

          • Holger

            Hate speech is hate speech and should be prosecuted accordingly. Religion is no defence.

            Yes, religion can be a powerful trigger of the placebo effect. But so can many other things. This does not serve as grounds for encouraging religion. Let psychiatric patients grasp at some other straw to prevent them from harming themselves.

            Catholic charity is just a front for evangelization activities. Nothing the Church does is disinterested. It’s all done with a view to manipulating people into the Catholic faith and providing the Catholics who undertake such activities with instant haloes.

            There are plenty of secular charity organizations and when the Catholic Church fades away, they’ll plug any gaps that exist and do the job better, more efficiently and less ostentatiously than any Catholic agency.

          • Albert

            Hate speech is hate speech and should be prosecuted accordingly.

            Where’s the hate speech? I mean apart from in your own posts? Something isn’t hate speech because it disagrees with a position you firmly hold.

            Yes, religion can be a powerful trigger of the placebo effect.

            The weird thing about placebos is that they work. But, to ensure you are able to control what other people say, you want other people not to benefit from what you seem to acknowledge is at least a placebo. How selfish are you?

            Catholic charity is just a front for evangelization activities.

            You just think the worst of anyone who disagrees with you. But in any case, if the Catholic Church ceases to do this work, who will do it? But that’s a price worth paying just so that no one is allowed to disagree with you.

            There are plenty of secular charity organizations and when the Catholic Church fades away, they’ll plug any gaps that exist and do the job better, more efficiently and less ostentatiously than any Catholic agency.

            It’s hardly ostentatious given that hardly anyone knows about it. As for efficiency, what is your evidence? Take this:

            The health analyst Kenneth White, of Virginia Commonwealth University, found Catholic hospitals in the US to be on average more efficient than equivalent secular hospitals. This was a particularly remarkable finding given that he also discovered evidence that Catholic hospitals, reflecting their mission to reach out to disadvantaged communities, were providing more compassionate care and stigmatised services (to groups that often face discrimination) than other providers.

            In Africa, a recent research review found not only that maternal care at Church-run mission hospitals was of the same or better quality than at public facilities, but that Church hospitals were also more likely to offer services accessible to the poor.

            Looking at education, although it is well established that Catholic schools perform exceptionally well on standard academic criteria, it is harder to establish a causal effect: do Catholic schools do better because they are Catholic or because they admit more children who are motivated to do well anyway? Research from Australia suggests that, even with controls for such “selection effects”, attendance at Catholic schools raised the probability of both completing higher education and doing well in the job market. Andrew Morris of Liverpool Hope University similarly finds that English schools perform relatively well, even when measured by “contextualised value added”, which takes account of social background of pupils. Most intriguingly, the University of Chicago Law Review recently concluded that the closure of Catholic schools in poorer areas of Chicago led to a significant increase in urban social disorder and crime.

            But it would be fine to lose all that, a price worth paying just so that no one is allowed to disagree with you.

          • Holger

            “Objectively disordered” and “grave depravity” when used to describe my sexuality, which I experience as something beautiful and wonderful and which forms an integral part of who I am, are insulting, belittling and hateful.

            Those who use such terms, or any of the other derogatory and slanderous phrases used to describe homosexuality or to characterise us as sick or disabled, are committing acts of hatred against gay people.

            There are many kinds of placebo. If one is no longer available, another will do well enough in its place. What you want is for the placebo you prefer to be given protected status even though its use harms other people. In other words you’re happy to see others suffer as long as you get what you want. How selfish are you?

            Secular aid agencies will fill any gap left by Christian charities. And they’ll do it without the emotional blackmail, manipulation and coercion doled out by the Jesus freaks. Claims that Catholic hospitals and schools give a better quality of care or education are just that: claims. But even if they’re established beyond all doubt, they must be set against the harm caused by the perpetuation of sexist and homophobic values.

            One solution might be to secularise such instititions. But considering the resistance this would probably meet, I doubt it would work. When equal marriage was enacted in the UK, Catholic adoption agencies could have carried on had they agreed to abide by the law, but their desire to discriminate against gay couples was stronger than their desire to help straight couples, so they preferred to deprive everyone of their services rather than dirty themselves by dealing with gays.

            That’s the reality of Catholic charities. They’re dominated not by love and a desire to help, but hatred and a desire to discriminate. If forced to treat everyone equally, they refuse to help anyone. Christian love, mon œil ! Christian hatred and desire to punish, more like.

          • Albert

            “Objectively disordered” and “grave depravity” when used to describe my sexuality, which I experience as something beautiful and wonderful and which forms an integral part of who I am, are insulting, belittling and hateful.

            I get that you don’t like it. But the fact that you don’t like it doesn’t mean that you get to shut down the discussion. After all, lots of things may be felt by those involved as beautiful, but it doesn’t make them right. Thus we must be allowed to discuss these things.

            Those who use such terms, or any of the other derogatory and slanderous phrases used to describe homosexuality or to characterise us as sick or disabled, are committing acts of hatred against gay people.

            I don’t hate gay people. The issue here is one of truth. Are the statements true? Your position can only be possible true if the statements are false. But we cannot know if they are false until they are discussed. Which is of course, why you don’t want them discussed, for if they could be false, they could be true.

            There are many kinds of placebo. If one is no longer available, another will do well enough in its place.

            The evidence does not support you. If it did then, since the non-religious do not have what you regard as the religious placebo available to them, they would find it somewhere else.

            What you want is for the placebo you prefer to be given protected status even though its use harms other people. In other words you’re happy to see others suffer as long as you get what you want. How selfish are you?

            That’s not at all my position and you have no evidence for claiming that. You only say such things because you desperately desire to take the moral high ground to justify your hatred.

            Secular aid agencies will fill any gap left by Christian charities.

            Why don’t they already then? And if it comes to that, don’t you realise that it isn’t the fact that Christianity offers aid agencies, it’s the fact that we are already on the ground as part of the community.

            And they’ll do it without the emotional blackmail, manipulation and coercion doled out by the Jesus freaks.

            Interesting, because your posts seem replete with emotional blackmail, manipulation and coercion.

            Claims that Catholic hospitals and schools give a better quality of care or education are just that: claims.

            No they’re not, they’re based on evidence. In my previous post I gave at least three academic examples. Like every fundamentalist, you simply seek to deny the evidence that disagrees with you. Unfortunately, like the Islamic type of fundamentalist, you do so to justify your hatred.

            equal marriage

            That’s just rhetoric. It’s not equal and it isn’t marriage.

            When equal marriage was enacted in the UK, Catholic adoption agencies could have carried on had they agreed to abide by the law, but their desire to discriminate against gay couples was stronger than their desire to help straight couples, so they preferred to deprive everyone of their services rather than dirty themselves by dealing with gays.

            Oh dear. The lack of responsibility. People like you decided to deprive children (not just adults) of Catholic adoption agencies. You placed people in a situation where they had to choose between conscience and the service. Anyone with a conscience knows there’s only one outcome to such a conflict. And so the immorality of your position is at least doubled.

          • Holger

            And I get that Jews hate being targeted with anti-Semitic propaganda.

            According to your argument, that doesn’t mean they get the right to shut down discussion. Nor should they be allowed to object when bigots lob insulting and racist terms at them. No, Jews should simply take it on the chin and let anti-Semites keep on defaming them.

            The time comes when the targets of defamation will take it no more. Why do you think so many cases of homophobic discrimination have come to court lately? And why do you think we’re winning far more often than we lose?

          • Albert

            And I get that Jews hate being targeted with anti-Semitic propaganda.
            According to your argument, that doesn’t mean they get the right to shut down discussion.

            No. The cases are entirely different. If you wish to explain how they are not, please.

            The time comes when the targets of defamation will take it no more.

            Who’s defaming you?

            And why do you think we’re winning far more often than we lose?

            There could be any number of explanations. Some good, some bad.

    • Little Black Censored

      The Lord is even now looking down on that Tower and saying “Go to…”.

    • Doctor Crackles

      Also, the Europa and Zeus statue in Strasbourg:

      http://bit.ly/2mlncrV

      The symbology of the EU is defiantly anti-Christian:

      http://bit.ly/2lo7lLU

  • Sigfridiii

    People voted Brexit precisely in order to get rid of people like the “Lord” Bishop of Southwark and all who live in his little South Sea Bubble.

  • Sarky

    With Europe, people voted with their feet.
    With the CofE, people are voting with their feet.

    This person Is of no relevance.

    • CliveM

      I voted with a pencil.

      • Sarky

        Is that the sound of two drums and a cymbal falling off the back of a lorry???

        • CliveM

          Maybe.

  • The Explorer

    ‘Quixotic’ is a way to describe Remainers like the Bishop. The Brexiters, looking at the world as it actually is, tend to have the realism of Sancho Panza.

    • Sigfridiii

      A startling proportion of these bishops are public schoolboys. “Floreat Etona!” is the cry!

    • Dominic Stockford

      Should that be pronounced ‘Bre-hit’?

      • betteroffoutofit

        Only if you accept Hispanic Hexemony!

  • David

    If anyone is quixotic, it is the fools like this bishop, who fell for the hyper-idealistic political theory that one can run a continent of over 660 million peoples, of diverse languages and traditions, with justice and equity from one central, undemocratic institution dominated by just one country.

    Truly these snobbish condescending bishops are becoming caricatures of themselves.
    They totally lack any understanding of how the world is and how it is changing.

    Most damning of all, this “Christian” leader shows no warmth, care, love or concern for the ordinary people of this country and the way that they, their values, beliefs and their communities have been destabilised by destructive, remote, greedy, power hungry globalist forces that treat people with disdain.

    As an Anglican Christian I stare with incredulity at the ignorance, coldness and sheer folly of these people.

  • magnolia

    I think the word “riven” is less than fortunate. It is really only the loudmouths and aggressive folk on both sides (though the remainers more so, partly because on the losing side) who do lots of rifts, anger and squabbles. Most people were less emotive and got on with life, realising it was largely a question of what the tiers of government over us should be, not anything about zenophobia, racism and economic meltdown!! Awful debating tactics, which irresponsibly created unnecessary division, angst and ill-feeling. So much for caring about the well-being of your nation.

    Where are the prophets of economic doom? Interestingly silent, now the debate is over, and the markets are up!

  • carl jacobs

    The EU is the prototype for the post-nationalist cosmopolitan future. It’s not first and foremost about money. It’s about the vision and Europe’s pride of place in delivering it to the world. Only subsume the nation-states and peace and tranquility will follow. This (dare we say) quixotic idea is what Brexit truly threatens.

    Those who suffered loss because of the EU are of little consequence compared to this overriding imperative. They are threatening to derail the future of global governance with their parochial interests.

    Hey, but that’s why they have bishops – to put them on the straight and narrow.

    • magnolia

      Ah your irony grows acute… Do they still understand you in the States!?

      • The path is still a long one for Grasshopper but he is making steady progress.

      • len

        Probably more so since Trump?

        • Must certainly dent one’s faith in American Exceptionalism.

    • Maalaistollo

      Not all bishops are straight, it seems.

    • Afternoon Sancho.

  • CliveM

    “Bishop of Southwark said that to ignore the views of those who voted to remain risked creating “regional divide, generational resentment and a threat to the union”.”

    I wonder if the result had gone the other way, he would be exhorting fellow Peers to not ignore the views of Brexiters?

    • Merchantman

      Of course to say to the Bishop that his comment is ‘dumbass’ would be insulting. Pray what did he see before the Brexit vote? Did he see – ‘a regional divide, generational resentment and a threat to the union’? Seems to me we had been building on all these three quite adequately as members of the EU. Is it just the Bishop didn’t see ‘the little people’ suffering?
      Maybe he should resign and get out more.

  • The Bishop of Southwark is the Quixotic one around here with his support of an idealistic, unrealistic and impractical United States of Europe.

    Less of the insults Bishop Christopher and a little more humility. Of course Brexiters knew exactly what they were voting for.

    • Anton

      Yes, and voting for it for the first time.

    • Bernard from Bucks

      Blair said the ‘Leavers’ voted “without knowledge of the true terms of Brexit”.
      That may be true, but the implication is that the ‘Remainers’ were also without those ‘true terms’ before casting their vote.
      Both sides knew what they were doing – and the ‘best man won’.

  • Mrs S wilson

    Reading this bishop’s comments makes me despair. No wonder people are leaving the C of E.

  • Sybaseguru

    The interesting thing about Bishops is that they each run their own patch of Britain as they like – their boss is God (supposedly) via the Queen (Gods appointed representative on Earth). You don’t see them giving up their power, they guard their own geographic “sovereignty” fiercely. Is it not rather hypocritical of them to suggest we should be subject to the EU in worldly matters.

    • Inspector General

      Magnifico !

  • Loved that interchange between the Bishops. Just brilliant.

  • len

    we’ll never get another referendum, so many people voted ‘the wrong way’.

  • The Explorer

    I remember reading somewhere that the Royal Navy now has more admirals than it has ships.

    With bishops like him to empty pews, the C of E could soon have more clergy than it has worshippers.

  • Always enjoy this:

    The Impossible Dream – Man of La Mancha

    • dannybhoy

      The beautiful Sophia Loren and our own dear chef at the height of his acting career. sadly cut short by an unfortunate freak accident in which both his legs were broken when in a moment of misguided passion he tripped over his eyebrows..
      He was offered various roles in “The adventures of Tom Thumb” and “Toulouse Lautrec Rides Again.”
      Sadly he wasn’t up to either of them….

    • carl jacobs

      Just for you, Jack

      • Why thank you, Carl. Unfortunately, the video is not available to UK viewers.

        • carl jacobs

          Fine. You try to do something nice for some people …

          Google “Gordon Lightfoot Don Quixote”.

          It’s my third favorite Lightfoot song after “Edmund Fitzgerald” and “Sit Down Young Stranger”.

          Use caution. He’s Canadian.

          • A most excellent song with splendid lyrics, Carl. Thank you.

          • carl jacobs

            Should I infer from this that you have never heard of Gordon Lightfoot?

          • Jack is familiar with him and his songs. However, he would prefer it if some were given a Bruce Springsteen makeover. This song would be a good choice for this.

          • carl jacobs

            Sure. And next we could let Mick Jagger rewrite the Hallelujah Chorus.

          • That can’t be improved. Jack likes a bit of oomph in inspirational songs.

  • chefofsinners

    One burning question dominates all else in this debate…
    Why is Quixote pronounced “key-oh-tay” but quixotic is pronounced “kwiks-ot-ik”?

    • You try saying “key-oh-tay-ik”.

      • chefofsinners

        Speaking of Americans, could we replace it with “Trumpic”?
        Two Dons separated by centuries but otherwise remarkably similar.

        • Trumpoxotic ….

          • chefofsinners

            The man of Mar-a-Lago. Slightly less popular in Mexico than the man of La Mancha.

          • Don Quixote remains a hero of Jack’s because of his (misdirected) selfless quest for truth, nobility and honour. He stayed true to himself. These are not attributes of Don T.

          • dannybhoy

            “Don Quixote remains a hero of Jack’s because of his (misdirected) selfless quest for truth, nobility and honour..”
            Ah, That never ending quest.

      • dannybhoy

        Hey!
        It’s started raining…

        • Anton

          In England you get it to rain by dressing 22 men in white around a mown green with six sticks of wood sticking up from it.

          • dannybhoy

            One of the reasons I dislike cricket.

    • carl jacobs

      It’s pronounced “key-AH-tick”.

      • “kay-ot-tick” – lose the twang.

        As Manuel might say: “Que?”

        • chefofsinners

          Chaotic?

        • Holger

          The correct phonetic rendering of quixotic is /kwɪkˈsɒtɪk/.

          Quixotic is an adjective derived from a foreign proper noun. Although in English proper nouns of foreign origin often retain at least an approximation of the original language pronunciation (e.g. for Don Quixote we would usually say /dɒn kiːˈhoʊ̯teɪ̯/ rather than /dɒn ˈkwɪksoʊ̯t/), when it comes to derived adjectives, the convention is to pronounce them according to the rules of English.

          Things may be done differently in the US, of course. They so often are.

          In the case of quixotic, they’d probably pronounce it portmanteau-fashion, starting in execrable New World Spanish until they reached the voiceless alveolar plosive that defeats all speakers of ‘Murrican. This would force an abrupt shift back into the voiced nasal grunting of their native tongue, so the remainder of the word would sound as if they were bringing up phlegm while attempting to speak, with a pair of duck whistles stuck up their nose. The result would be something along the lines of kiːˈhoʊ̯dʌg/: an appalling chimera of a word that shouldn’t exist in nature, but which does exist in America.

          oʊ̯! maɪ! gɑd!

          • Very informative. Thank you.

          • chefofsinners

            How would the French pronounce quixotic? Or would they just say “francais” instead?

      • chefofsinners

        Not around these parts.

        • carl jacobs

          Hence my continuing efforts to instruct you in the ways of civilization.

    • IanCad

      Unless I’m mistaken it’s meant to be pronounced in what is the simplest form – “Quick Shot.”

      • betteroffoutofit

        No, they don’t. And it’s unwise to defer to them on anything: they’re the most ignorant, stupid, nasty, hypocritical invaders anywhere. DO NOT TRUST THEM.

        • carl jacobs

          Was it something I said?

          • Lol …. that told you. Bravo!

          • carl jacobs

            So … Now that you are deferring to me, I can start giving you instruction on proper English.

          • Jack will show respectful and deferential attention and give due consideration to any advice you might offer.

        • IanCad

          Now my memory is being perked, the discussion did mention the BBC’s rules of pronunciation, and the consensus was that it was the better form.
          As to “hypocritical invaders,” I understand that, in the last century, they twice came to our shores in large numbers to help us defeat stronger men than we. Apart from taking with them upon their departure a few unmarriageable women, the Norton Bombsight, Radar, jet engine technology, and a disgust for warm beer, they left us with far more; Our liberty, hamburger technology, and an aspiration toward better things in life.

          • betteroffoutofit

            Oh, Mr. Cad … it’s all an illusion. Britain is not presently free, is it? And . . . after the war, my father was among many who maintained “We haven’t won a thing. They have given us away; the people have fought their hearts out, and the ba*****s have betrayed them utterly.” My Ma protested, “But Churchill wouldn’t do that!”
            Pa: “Churchill did the best he could, but he couldn’t control Stalin and Roosevelt once they got together [esp. Yalta]. He may have delayed them a little …”

            In a similar vein, yanks believe they won the “Cold War.” O yeah: so where’d our present boss-person (Merky) come from? What about all the aliens who’ve since infiltrated our government and education — a la Bezmenov?

            Oh and your “aspiration toward better things in life” … surely it was the British element in their pioneerdom that initially motivated them in that direction!!!! 🙂 .

          • IanCad

            To address your last paragraph first; Yes, it was from the British that the Bill of Rights, the notion of English Liberty, and Common law was enshrined in their constitution. Present day Americans should be eternally grateful that we were the first among generations of immigrants to go there.
            Most certainly the West won the Cold war.The policies of containment as proposed by George Kennan and Ernest Bevin ensured an uneasy peace until the USSR ran out of money.
            Yalta was a terrible policy mistake and should never have happened. And; No! Britain isn’t free, and we have no First Amendment either.

          • betteroffoutofit

            Re the Cold War … yes, the Wall came down; but then the commies flooded freely onward. The False Angel (Merky) is one of those, and look where it’s got her !!!!! [Still, I bet she has an Almighty Headache, especially if we judge by the state of her aging phizzog 🙂

        • Albert

          That’s not true. Churchill said:

          You can always count on Americans to do the right thing – after they’ve tried everything else.

          • Good one ….

          • betteroffoutofit

            Thing is, when will they realise that they’ve tried everything?

          • Albert

            December 7th 1941, I guess.

          • betteroffoutofit

            Pearl Harbor.
            So In 1941 they were still able to build air-bases at places like my grand-uncle’s Essex farm … and they knew that would help them prevent Hitler’s advance across the Atlantic. Wot with all that and German sympathisers to the South of America … and the incipient threat over the Pole, yes, they could anticipate being surrounded. So they reckoned they’d better try another thing.

            And let’s not forget all those Germans in Vespucci-land … the ones who campaigned against their joining us in either the first (Rev. War) or the second place (WWII)!!!

          • bluedog

            ‘Vespucci-land’! Excellent point, since when was a continent named after the Christian name of a sea-captain. This communicant has always felt that the etymology of America owes a great deal to Armorica and Morocco.

          • betteroffoutofit

            Yes. Also not turning a blind-eye to one of its presently prevailing cultures – Italian, especially that rooted in Chicago and the ‘liddle id’ly’ of New York. That tree has, of course, branched globally.

          • carl jacobs

            American History. You should try learning it sometime.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Doesn’t count as proper History until you’ve got at least 500 years on the clock…

      • carl jacobs

        It is usually wise to defer to the Americans on the subject of speech. They usually speak it much better than we do.

        This. It really is time for you to come in from the cold, Jack.

    • Dominic Stockford

      Key-oh-tick doesn’t have much of a ring to it, does it?

    • Politically__Incorrect

      Yes, I was awake all night worrying about that one. I think the bishop would say “to facilitate it’s pronunciation by Brexit supporters, as it sounds a bit like Kwik-Fit”

      • “Kwiksotic” and “dzhunta” for junta not only keep me awake nights, they drive me stark-raving, foam-spluttering mad.

        • Excuses, excuses ….

        • bluedog

          Not forgetting the US invention of the ‘Zerk’ as a euphemism for Nipple, as in grease-nipple. One cannot imagine the level of puritan prudery needed to conceal a nipple thus.

          • IanCad

            Pulling our legs are you bd?
            US Patent Nos, I,697,217, 1,748,819, 1,883,282. All relating to his development of an improved way of introducing a fluid into an orifice.

          • bluedog

            Not really, IC. Was unaware of the patents you quote, or indeed of the inspiring life of Oscar U Zerk. It’s just that the operating manuals of US machinery have for years referred to zerks rather than nipples. One assumed it was the US penchant for avoiding anything remotely indelicate or potentially offensive that was the cause. wiki does not distinguish between the two terms, and grease-nipple is the British standard.

          • IanCad

            If anything bd, I would say they are more verbally raunchy than we are. They don’t gild the lily over there.

    • I thought “kwiksotic” was a uniquely Canadian media contribution by our illiterati. But seems to be everywhere now.

      • chefofsinners

        Stupidity knows no limits.

  • Peasant Farmer

    ‘A bishop (Southwark, from the moist, church-emptying end of the Anglican spectrum)’

    There’s not much output from the Daily Mail worth bothering with, but Letts has absolutely nailed the hand wringing bishop there.

  • Inspector General

    The tears of self pitying bitter regret, Cranmer dear fellow. Tis all. No doubt on referendum results morning, the grief stricken bishop plunged his head in his hands and informed his butler that he “would not be in to visitors for the rest of the day”.

    The following days must have awful for him. On his desk, a pile of papers relating to his lesser work, other than being his flock’s political leader – his job as Christ’s representative in the manor of Southwark. But no, he just pushed them away. This was no time to be dealing with such matters spiritual, not when the here and now had gone so wrong.

    How could those wretches do this to me, he whimpered to the rest of the disappointed thinking the same, in the House of Lords…

    • Anton

      Don’t try to do subtle, Inspector, tis not you…

      • Inspector General

        You will pay for that…

        • Jack thinks it suits you, Inspector.

        • Anton

          I meant it as a compliment!

  • Inspector General

    A timely reminder for fellows to appreciate what we are coming out of…

    A senior European diplomat has directed that all European countries must move towards allowing same-sex unions.
    http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/02/21/europe-rights-chief-says-all-states-must-approve-same-sex-unions/
    In case you think that is an exaggeration –
    —————–
    In it, he draws on existing international human rights protections to assert that the 47 member states of the Council of Europe must all provide protections same-sex couples.
    He wrote: “The 20 member states of the Council of Europe that still do not provide any legal recognition to same-sex couples should enact legislation to create – at the very least – registered partnerships that ensure that privileges, obligations or benefits available to married or registered different-sex partners are equally available to same-sex partners.
    “All states should ensure that legislation exists to provide registered same-sex couple with the same rights and benefits as married or registered different-sex couples, for example in the areas of social security, taxes, employment and pension benefits, freedom of movement, family reunification, parental rights and inheritance.”
    ——————–
    · The Council of Europe is distinct from the European Union and has a broader membership – including Ukraine, Russia and Turkey.
    · The body has little power to enforce the recommendation, but oversees the European Court of Human Rights. (So that would be immense power, then)
    ——————–
    There you go, bishop of Southwark. We leave ‘rule by diplomat’ behind us, hopefully…

    • Anton

      Doubt that the Eastern Europeans will go for this.

    • The Council of Europe (CoE; French: Conseil de l’Europe) is an international organisation focused on protecting human rights, democracy, rule of law in Europe[2] and promoting European culture[3]. Founded in 1949, it has 47 member states, covers approximately 820 million people and operates with an annual budget of approximately half a billion euros.[4]

      The organisation is distinct from the 28-nation European Union (EU), although it is sometimes confused with it, partly because the EU has adopted the original European Flag which was created by the Council of Europe in 1955,[5] as well as the European Anthem.[6] No country has ever joined the EU without first belonging to the Council of Europe.[7]

      Unlike the EU, the Council of Europe cannot make binding laws, but it does have the power to enforce select international agreements reached by European states on various topics. The best known body of the Council of Europe is the European Court of Human Rights, which enforces the European Convention on Human Rights.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Europe

      It “promotes European culture” …. and enforces the European Convention on Human Rights through the European Court of Human Rights.

      We need to dismantle European human rights legislation.

    • Politically__Incorrect

      Marine Le Pen has vowed to repeal the legalisation of SSM in France. It is good that some leaders are at last openly saying this, even if doesn’t happen just yet. It might also encourage some Easter European countries to resist the move. Forget Russia. They are more likely to join NATO than legalise SSM.

      • Dominic Stockford

        Some Eastern European countries have already resisted, we pray they will continue to do so.

      • bluedog

        It will be a long wait before the Turks legalise SSM.

        • Politically__Incorrect

          Absolutely. I am sure it will never happen.

  • betteroffoutofit

    l Quixotically? Quixotically? Don Quixote? The British People standing up for their rights against the invader are like a Spanish nobleman tilting against his own windmills? Is “Chessun” British? Or does he just spend most of his time in Spain, basking in eurocracy?

    • Politically__Incorrect

      I guess some people on the leave side would say Winston Churchill and the RAF were quixotic for being unkind to all those nice Germans who wanted nothing more than to rule us from mainland Europe and impose an ideology on us through political bodies we did not elect. The appeasement mentality is alive and kicking in this country

      • betteroffoutofit

        I know. And all I ever hear about now is “Dresden” – poor, dear, beautiful “Dresden.” I’m sick of it.
        So what about Coventry? What about St. Paul’s Cathedral? Thing is, I grew up watching films about the London Blitz – and I knew it was true (not only because the V2’s used to fly over our farm, when I was a kid.) I also listened to first hand accounts of bombings in various parts of our industrial North; I also spent my early years walking past the bomb-sites.

        Why, and how, have we failed to convey this truth and reality to the Snowflakes?

        • Politically__Incorrect

          It seems the snowflakes and those who labour the story of Dresden are only happy when wringing their hands with faux-guilt. The irony is that those same people wanted us to declare war on people like Assad, resulting in yet more Dresdens

  • Politically__Incorrect

    As I heard others say, you know what your enemies are guilty of by what they accuse you of.

    • betteroffoutofit

      Yes … they’re blind to everything they don’t see in the mirror!!

  • William Lewis

    It’s funny how often the more one’s personal integrity is impugned, the more one appears to be right.

    • Dominic Stockford

      I find that too….

    • chefofsinners

      You liar!

      • William Lewis

        *preens*

  • Martin

    Seeing the bishops can’t even get their clergy to agree wit them ….

  • 1642+5thMonarchy

    I rather suspect that the achingly liberal Bishop’s faith in the elitist secularised EU is rather greater than it is in the Scriptural teachings and theology of He who is his ultimate boss. A classic case of not even trying to serve two masters?

    • In 2007, Cardinal Biffi stated: “the Antichrist presents himself as pacifist, ecologist and ecumenist …. He will convoke an ecumenical council and will seek the consensus of all the Christian confessions, granting something to each one. The masses will follow him, with the exception of small groups of Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants.”

      He continued: “Today, in fact, we run the risk of having a Christianity which puts aside Jesus with his cross and resurrection … [If Christians] limited themselves to speaking of shared values they would be more accepted on television programs and in social groups … they will have renounced Jesus, the overwhelming reality of the resurrection.”

      He believed that the danger facing Christianity today is reducing the Son of God to” … a series of good projects sanctioned by the prevailing worldly mentality …. There are relative values, such as solidarity, love of peace and respect for nature. If these become absolute, uprooting or even opposing the proclamation of the event of salvation, then these values become an instigation to idolatry and obstacles on the way of salvation … If Christianity, on opening itself to the world and dialoguing with all, dilutes the salvific event, it closes itself to a personal relationship with Jesus and places itself on the side of the Antichrist.”

      Pope Benedict had made similar comments in 2006, when he spoke of a new false religion. “Modern society is not simply without morality, but it has, so to speak, ‘discovered’ and professes a part of morality. These are the great themes of peace, non-violence, justice for all, concern for the poor, and respect for creation … [these] great moral themes [have] become an ethical complex that, precisely as a political force, has great power and constitutes for many the substitute for religion, or its successor.”

      Are we, as Pope Saint John Paul, prophesied in 1976, referring to secular humanism, “Standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has ever experienced. I do not think that the wide circle of the American Society, or the whole wide circle of the Christian Community realize this fully. We are now facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-church, between the gospel and the anti-gospel, between Christ and the Antichrist.”? That was 40 years ago and Jack believes orthodox Christians are now aware of this and the direction the world is heading in.

      • 1642+5thMonarchy

        All sound men and true Christians Jack. They are to be found in all Trinitarian denominations.

        The relativist liberals are the treasonous ones inside the Holy City trying to open the gates to the howling heathen hordes of Mo outside.

        • It’s the enemy within that’s opening the doors to evils of all sorts.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            These other evils reduce our moral defence against Christendom’s worst foe, that is why they are being promulgated so energetically by the traitors within.

          • Jack believes the bishops and their cohorts are deluded rather deliberately conspiring with those of the left that have a wider agenda.

            “He will come, when he comes, with all Satan’s influence to aid him; there will be no lack of power, of counterfeit signs and wonders; and his wickedness will deceive the souls that are doomed, to punish them for refusing that fellowship in the truth which would have saved them. That is why God is letting loose among them a deceiving influence, so that they give credit to falsehood; he will single out for judgement all those who refused credence to the truth, and took their pleasure in wrong-doing.” (2 Thessalonians 2: 10-11)

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Agreed, but the left are deliberately introducing Islam into the West. When we see apparent ‘miracles’ and the requirement for sub-dermal chips to make financial transactions then we will know for sure.

          • Jack wouldn’t go quite so far as expecting sub-dermal chips.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Already being mooted by European central bankers.

          • betteroffoutofit

            Yes; and some yank ones too, I understand.

          • Then the Lizards must be resisted.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Moneyweek have been running a campaign about it.

          • Anton

            You read that too? And the “war on cash” series…

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Yep, all the same thing Anton. State control of the means of exchange.

          • chefofsinners

            It takes more than that to get under your skin.

          • Sarky

            Hmm cant see the third world getting ‘chipped’. Or does the end times only apply to the west?

      • Anton

        Sounds like it’s Pope Francis!

  • Inspector General

    Important announcement from the Inspector General…

    “My lord chicken-hearts that are bishops who so occupy the House of Lords. Immorally, one might add after the Same Sex Marriage fiasco you blighters disgraced yourselves with. We the people still need Christian clerics, but get this, you will OBEY the flock on matters political, who are more worldly wise than you effetes will ever be!”

    IS THAT CLEARLY UNDERSTOOD!

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      Are the Bishops just another form of expert IG, like the economists who said we’d all be at subsistence levels by now post Brexit, that the Russkis would invade and that no foreigners would invest here?

      • Inspector General

        The bishops are no more expert on the ways of the world as they are on scripture, 1642.

        We will take no more from them, sir!

        Let them who deny us be seized, stripped, and flogged!

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          Sorry, I meant to put ‘expert’ in inverted commas.

        • chefofsinners

          Not that, Inspector. Most of them have to pay for that sort of excitement.

          • bluedog

            Remember the French cardinal who was given the last rites in a Paris brothel?

          • Cardinal Daniélou’s death occurred in 1974 in the home of a woman who was alleged to be a prostitute. After an investigation, it was determined that he was bringing money to pay for the bail of the woman’s husband.

            His brother said:

            “His death and the scandal provoked by it, when he had become one of the leading figures of the Church, was a sort of posthumous vendetta, one of those favors that the gods bestow on those whom they love. If he had died just a little while sooner or later, or if he had been visiting a lady of the sixteenth arrondissement under the pretext of works of charity, instead of bringing the revenue of his theological writings to a poor and needy woman, there would have been no scandal.

            “Jean had always dedicated himself to disregarded people. For a certain period he had celebrated a Mass for the sake of homosexuals. He tried to help prisoners, criminals, troubled young people, prostitutes. I deeply admired this ending of life similar to that of the martyrs, whose fragrance rises to heaven amid the opprobrium and sarcasm of the crowd. He died as true saints die, in ignominy, in mockery, in the disdain of a spiteful and vile society.”

          • bluedog

            One learns to recognise a bucket of odour free white-wash when one sees it. Let’s face it, Danielou was a member of the establishment, and your cut and paste from wikipedia is clearly designed to protect the reputations of the Catholic Church, the Jesuits and the Academie Francaise. An alternative suite of facts may be that His Eminence had a long relationship with a particular poule de luxe whose ‘husband’ was a petty criminal. While making a house call, as was his wont, His Eminence reached a climax in the celebration of the agreed sacrament, inadvertently leading to his tragic demise. What the wiki entry doesn’t attempt to explain is why a Cardinal should visit one prostitute out of many, favouring her husband with a ‘bail payment’. But then paying a pimp for services rendered doesn’t read too well.

          • That’s one perspective and the one preferred by the public and media who enjoy a good scandal.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Hey…settle down pup !

          • bluedog

            See below.

          • len

            Just the one Cardinal?.

          • Mike Stallard

            :0)

        • Paul Greenwood

          Cromwell removed them in 1646

  • bluedog

    It’s almost as though the CoE is part funded by the EU, as is the case with the BBC. Then one could understand Bishop Chessun’s position on the basis that he who pays the piper calls the tune. One thing is absolutely clear, despite backing the wrong horse in the Brexit race, the CoE bishops still don’t understand that insulting your customers is not the way to win their business, spiritual or temporal. And they wonder why their churches are empty.

    • Paul Greenwood

      Bishops do not view parishioners as “customers” rather more as “captive clientele” obliged to fund them……….rather like Albert of Brandenburg selling Indulgences to repay the Fugger loans that had enabled him to buy his Archbishopric at 24

    • Royinsouthwest

      The bishops think they have to impress “opinion formers” such as the Guardian and the BBC. Their flocks, or the sheep as they probably think of them, don’t count.

      • bluedog

        Christian Socialists to a person.

        • Royinsouthwest

          That would be an improvement, assuming that the adjective really did apply.

  • Politically__Incorrect

    Since we’ve been talking about the BBC, some of you might want to sign this parliamentary petition to abolish the TV tax. Just needs a few hundred names to reach 100,000 and force a parliamentary debate…

    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/170931

    • Paul Greenwood

      I think people should be allowed to pay what they think it is worth

      • David

        Then they’d owe me for inflicting propaganda on my innocent television.

      • Anton

        They are. Nothing is stopping you sending a donation to the BBC.

    • Anton

      Yes, the point is the BBC. Let’s get it.

    • Watchman

      At this point over 100k

    • Signed.

  • Paul Greenwood

    Actually it is much much worse than the Southwark prelate thinks. If you correlate UK Public Spending on Infrastructure etc with BreXit Voting you see those areas with biggest Spend London, N Ireland, Scotland voted majority Remain.

    However, if you consider Cameron removed Public Spending from N England to bribe the Scottish Voters in the 2015 Referendum you can see why 5 million people in Yorkshire have far lower Public Spending than 5 million people in Scotland with Councils cutting back savagely to compensate.

    Then again if you look at EU Spend. Since it is Matched Spending the Treasury does not want to have too many EU Projects which reduce the UK Rebate pari-passu and increase UK Public Spending Net. Thus the North of England finds it does not get projects approved or rolling forward to save UK Rebate from EU.

    All round it is men like the Southwark Prelate who live rather like medieval clerics in luxury oblivious to the suffering of those tithing to keep his luxury intact. He has stated just why Bishops should be culled and why the bloated Church hierarchy needs savage pruning. It is questionable if men like thus making provocative statements will survive a potential Civil War; they did not survive the last one !

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      Well said.

    • David

      Interesting and useful financial analysis, so thank you. These men represent the blind leading the blind.

  • Manfarang

    After Brexit lots of British pensioners who live in Spain will return permanently to the UK, they are too poor to pay for private medical treatment.

    • William Lewis

      Spain is keen on guaranteeing Spanish citizens’ rights to remain in the UK.

      • Manfarang

        Of course.There are no jobs in Spain.

        • Mike Stallard

          Do you come from Thailand yourself? I am going by the name you use.

          • Manfarang

            Farang means westerner.
            There are a few young Spaniards here in Thailand because of the high youth unemployment.

          • Mike Stallard

            I bet there are! Poor devils! I emigrated to Spain at the height of the boom. Luckily we got out with our savings intact when we sold our little house in San Pedro. My wife nearly went mad there! All those sixth form students beavering away in the library after school ready for a life on the dole! Parados every one!
            My son works in Singapore and goes back to Bangkok for R&R with his family from time to time. When he lived there, we visited regularly.

    • David

      In my experience many fly back home already for all but day patient care. I don’t know why given the state of the NHS.

    • Holger

      Too poor to pay for medical treatment, eh?

      So how will they pay for accommodation?

      Good to know that a flood of penurious pensioners will stretch your public services to the limit and beyond just as your trade-based economy starts to feel the full effects of loss of access to the Single Market. It will be a salutary lesson for any other country that may be tempted by dreams of nationalist isolation.

      The Spanish health service must be looking forward to getting rid of its most obese, unhealthy and drunken patients in one fell swoop. British pensioners are famous for their refusal to adopt the healthier lifestyles and diets of the countries they settle in. They keep on eating egg and chips and sinking gallons of beer and expect to be treated like royalty by doctors and hospitals in the countries that are unfortunate enough to be burdened with their care.

      All your birds of ill-omen are coming home to roost. Good luck footing the bill for dealing with them.

      • Manfarang

        “So how will they pay for accommodation?”
        They won’t be paying for rooms in nursing homes in Britain that is for sure.

        • Holger

          Ah, I see. So Brexit heralds a return to Victorian values in their fullest sense, does it? As described in the hymn “All Things Bright and Beautiful”:

          The rich man in his castle
          The beggar at his gate
          He made them high and lowly
          And ordered their estate

          The elderly and infirm living in cardboard boxes under railway arches just as God intended they should. A very British vision of the perfect society.

          • Manfarang

            Well they could try going to the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela but I don’t think things will be better there.

          • Anton

            The peasantry ceased to exist in England long before it did on the continent; check the work of Alan Macfarlane. He’s secular, by the way, an emeritus prof of social anthropology and history.

          • Holger

            And your point is what exactly? That you’re quite happy to see poor old people living rough because it will encourage them to become entrepreneurs?

            I see. So you predict that 80 year old cancer patients turfed out of Spain will launch stellar new careers from cardboard boxes under viaducts all over Britain, do you?

            I know you live in Cloud Cuckoo Land, but this is taking absurdity to new heights even for you. For every lucky destitute who managed to turn his life around, make a fortune and earn acceptance as a member of the bourgeoisie, there were thousands if not millions who died early deaths in total poverty. And I’m willing to bet that few who did succeed were cancer-ridden octogenarians.

            I see your strategy though. You want to see hundreds of thousands of destitutes camped out in the street because your miserable little bible-bashing church is short of pew-fodder, so its opportunities for evangelisation would increase exponentially. Nothing like a bit of meagre charity doled out by posturing Christians to encourage miraculous conversions, is there? And if along the way you collect much praise as a selfless and holy alms-giver, well so much the better. Got to do something to build up that treasure in heaven, don’t you? What better way to persuade your god that you really do deserve a place in heaven than to get out there and piously condescend to refugees?

          • Anton

            My words do not imply what you say without many extraneous assumptions, which you are not free to suppose I believe. Almost nobody could jump class in ancient England but nobody at all could on the Continent; and I’m not claiming that either was Christian. (Take that last point up with Jack, if you like.) If you do not wish to take the opportunity to learn something unexpected from a fine (and incidentally secular) scholar, I’m not going to press him on you.

      • William Lewis

        Haven’t you realised yet that your bluff has already been called?

      • Anton

        They keep on eating egg and chips and sinking gallons of beer and expect to be treated like royalty by doctors and hospitals in the countries that are unfortunate enough to be burdened with their care.

        Death is not IF but WHEN, old chap, and the average medical cost in the months preceding it is high no matter what your lifestyle. Then there’s afterwards…

        • Holger

          Death may be preceded by a longer or shorter period of ill health depending on how you live your life. The average Englishman suffers for longer than the average Spaniard because of his unhealthy diet and sedentary lifestyle.

          Fat Englishmen are draining health budgets across Europe. You send us obese alcoholic pensioners who need a lot of expensive long-term care. We send you fit and healthy younger people who consume a far smaller proportion of the health budget than the broken down old wrecks you foist onto us.

          Brexit can only be a good deal for us as far as health budgets are concerned. Geriatric care units and alcohol management programs across Europe will breathe a sigh of relief when the English are repatriated. As far as your health service is concerned, their arrival en masse may be … not so much the straw, but rather the heaving great blubbery whale … that breaks the camel’s back.

          Of course once they’re dead, the problem is solved. The UK doesn’t fund many of the cancer treatment drugs that are freely available at no cost to patients here in France. One assumes the rationale must be that human life isn’t worth spending money on to save when it’s going to end anyway, so why waste resources prolonging the existence of those who’ll be dead soon anyway. The extra five or so pain-free years they can expect if they live in France just aren’t worth the investment.

          If this is a symptom of the morality of a nation with Christianity as the established religion, I thank your imaginary god I live in a secular republic. The British attitude seems to be “the quicker they croak and become God’s problem, the cheaper it will be for us”. The French attitude is “life is precious because it’s all we have, so make it last.”

          If you’re willing to die younger on the unsubstantiated promise that you’ll then enjoy an eternity of bliss, more fool you. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, doubly so if the bush and the birds perched in it are so completely invisible that you have no guarantee they even exist.

          • Anton

            I’m uninterested in lessons on healthy lifestyle from someone with yours, thank you.

      • len

        Injurious to your personal health to carry around such vitriol Holger…I suppose spewing some out on the blog relieves you somewhat?.

    • William Lewis

      lots?

      1,2,3…10s…100s…1,000s…10,000s, 100,000s, millions, billions, gazillions?

      What says your crystal ball?

      • Manfarang

        300,000. Private healthcare is very expensive.
        No doubt some kind of arrangement may be made between the British and Spanish governments.

      • Watchman

        Reminds me of the story of G W Bush when he heard that 3 Brazilian soldiers had been killed in Iraq. He immediately sent for his chief of staff and said “tell me, exactly how many is a Brazilian?”

        • len

          Sounds like a typical Bush remark.

  • Mike Stallard

    I wonder if the noble Lord Bishop of Southwark has ever been on this blog – or even heard of it?
    http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=80999

    If he hasn’t, he might perhaps read it before making his speech.

    • dannybhoy

      I don’t think Bishops in general are used to being questioned by laity. Sucked up to, yes….

  • layreader

    It can’t be long before someone questions why Bishops are in the House of Lords at all. It might be me that questions it. If, as they assume, they actually are the Conscience of the Nation, then perhaps they ought to know what the Nation actually thinks, rather than assume that their small-minded obsessions are the Nation’s Conscience Writ Large.
    As Quentin Letts observed, +Southwark is of the liberal, pew-emptying persuasion. Not that he worries about that – he is right and that’s all anyone needs to know.

  • Royinsouthwest

    The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people–robbers, evildoers, adulterers – or even like this Brexit voter.

    Luke 18:11, slightly amended to make it easier for the Lord Bishop to understand.

    • Merchantman

      I have noticed that the C of E is highly selective in its readings from the Gospel. Not only this but they dodge the true meaning of a passage even when its the topic under discussion.
      What are the seminaries teaching? If I was ++ Canterbury i would overhaul the whole system and enforce what is or S/B enforceable.

  • len

    The Tower of Babel was built in in rebellion against God.
    The EU is another godless construction.What is it about this that some Bishops do not understand?.Its bad enough with politicians such as Blair praising this godless edifice but the Bishops indeed even the church should know better?.

    • Manfarang

      The EU has its roots in the Catholic social theology of its founders.

      • Watchman

        I think they missed out any actual theology.

      • len

        The battle for control of Europe has swing back and forth over the centuries.A defining moment ,was when “In 1798 General Berthier made his entrance into Rome, abolished the papal government, and established a secular one.” -Encyclopedia Britannica 1941 edition

        The Papacy has been doing all in its power to regain the position it lost, which was greatly helped by Benito Mussolini.

        • carl jacobs

          The EU is not a Papal plot to restore power to the Vatican. Rather the EU is rooted in a profoundly secular vision. The deity of the EU is Man himself.

          • Anton

            Exactly, Carl.

          • len

            Debatable.

          • carl jacobs

            There’s no debate about it. The idea that the major states of Europe are in thrall to or being manipulated by the Vatican is the stuff of “black helicopters”. Where is your evidence?

          • len

            Show me yours?.

          • carl jacobs

            You mean besides the rampant secularism? But, no, that isn’t how this works. I don’t have to demonstrate the absence of a Vatican conspiracy. You made the positive assertion. The burden is on you.

          • len

            Are you reading my posts?.

          • carl jacobs

            Yes. You haven’t even tried to substantiate your assertion. I want evidence that the Vatican is the power behind the EU.

          • len

            You provide evidence that my assertion is untrue.

          • One cannot prove a negative, Len.

          • William Lewis

            Actually you can. You can prove that there are no 18 year old members of parliament, for instance.

          • True. But how do you disprove a theory where there is no evidence on either side and just speculation and narrative?

          • William Lewis

            With great difficulty.

          • carl jacobs

            That’s a disguised positive assertion. You can prove the positive that everyone is over 18.

          • William Lewis

            It is not a disguised positive assertion. It is a negative assertion on a known domain. The question is; are all the schemes of the Vatican knowable. If not then you cannot disprove Len’s assertion. Len, on the other hand, can prove his assertion. If he does not then one is left with a subjective assessment as to the veracity of his claim.

          • carl jacobs

            The assertion “No one is 18 or younger” is the negation of the statement “Everyone is over 18”. You prove the former by proving the latter and asserting the equivalence partition.

          • William Lewis

            This is true but the assertion “There are no 18 year olds” is still a negative assertion. In this case it can be proven by knowing the age of everyone in the domain. The only way that one can get to a negative assertion from a positive assertion, and vice versa, is if the domain is known. I could say that the statement “Everyone is over 18” is the “disguised negative assertion” that “No one is 18 or under”.

          • Len, on the other hand, can prove his assertion.”

            That’s what is being requested.

            “If he does not then one is left with a subjective assessment as to the veracity of his claim.”

            Without any facts to back his claim, there can be only one objective conclusion.

          • Yes, Jack meant to say that ….

          • len

            You imply that your assertion is not a positive one?.

          • carl jacobs

            All these questions only serve to demonstrate your inability to defend your position.

          • len

            You will provide evidence in due course then?. You also allege that Adrian Hilton has written an untrue article.

          • carl jacobs

            Len

            In the first place, I already have made the prima facia case that you are wrong. The Govt’s of Europe are sovereign entities that control their own territory. That’s a given. You have to demonstrate 1) that this is untrue and 2 ) that the Vatican is the power behind the throne. You have done neither. In fact, as soon as I asked you to defend your assertion, you immediately tried to shift the conversation to me – precisely because you can’t defend your assertion. A child could see this tactic in your posts. It’s is very obvious and very old.

            You started this by saying “The Papacy has been doing all in its power to regain the position it lost, which was greatly helped by Benito Mussolini.” I said “No, it isn’t. That’s conspiracy nonsense.” My case is that Europe is rampantly secular and composed of sovereign states that don’t take direction from the Vatican. So at this point you need to demonstrate 1) and 2) above.

            Good luck doing so.

          • len

            You have proved your case’ because’ Carl said ‘it was a conspiracy?.’

            Any idea what this sounds like ?

          • Now, now, Len. A disagreement over how to interpret a situation does not mean a person with a different perspective is lying.

          • How rude!

          • len

            LOL. Not that!.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Len may be taking mind altering substances. He has undergone a complete change in personality.It seems he has lost all of his inhibitions. In your experience is there any hope of recovery ( apart from recognising and accepting the true apostolic Christian Church?)

          • len

            Mind altering substances?.
            ‘I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh’.(Ezekiel 36:26)
            (Religion can do many things(not all good) but cannot do what only God can do)

          • Professional ethics prevent Jack from responding on a public forum.

          • len

            Surprised you didn`t use ‘lizards’ to shut down any debate…What are you scared of?..

          • Do not make light of the Lizards. They are here, among us.

          • Now, Carl, if there was evidence of a conspiracy it would be a very poor conspiracy. The world needs access to the Vatican archives. The CIA should set up surveillance equipment and monitor all conversations, emails and phone calls and learn to decode the language being used.

          • carl jacobs

            I forgot. The lack of evidence is the first sign of conspiracy.

          • len

            The lack of evidence is sometimes a sign that somebody couldn`t be arsed to look?.

          • carl jacobs

            Look at what? That would be your cue to provide something … anything … to support your contention.

          • len

            This would be your cue to start’ looking’.
            Many, many others have been able to find out things for themselves.It is those who cannot be arsed to look who shout ‘conspiracy’ because they haven’t bothered to look for themselves…Or are too afraid to look?.
            The history of the church is people being bothered to look at things themselves then having the courage of their convictions.

          • carl jacobs

            My view is that the quote is irrelevant to the subject at hand.

          • len

            My view is that it is.

          • len

            “the issue of European religious union is one that has been concealed even deeper than the plans for political union, but the ratchet towards a Catholic Europe is just as real. The Pope’s recent demand that ‘God’ be featured in the emerging European constitution has been echoed by many leading Catholic politicians and bishops. While on the surface such a reference may offend only Europe’s atheist and humanist contingent, it must be observed that when the Vatican refers to God, she sees herself as God’s infallible vice-regent upon earth, the leading organ of divine expression; indeed, according to its publication Dominus Iesus [5 September 2000], as the only mediator in the salvation of God’s elect, insisting that all other Churches, including the Church of England, ‘are not Churches in the proper sense’.”

            Adrian Hilton.

          • Nothing fundamentally wrong with that analysis by Adrian Hilton, except for one or two issues Jack would want to clarify.

            Not sure the Pope made a “demand” for the constitution to include reference to God. More a suggestion. Was it a “power play” or an attempt to get Europe to recognise and hold onto its Christian heritage?

            The Catholic Church is God’s steward and vice-regent on earth. No secret about that fact. However, it does not believe that temporal and spiritual power should be exercised through one body or in the establishment of a theocracy.

            Finally, the Catholic Church does not consider all churches separated from her as not being churches in the proper sense. Just those without Apostolic succession and those with invalid ordinations and thus incapable of celebrating the Mass and dispensing the Eucharist – the heart of our faith. The Orthodox Church, on the other hand, whilst is schism, is a Church, in the proper sense. The Church also acknowledges that Protestant churches may serve as imperfect paths to salvation for God’s elect. Indeed, it believes that God may draw His elect to Him regardless of membership of any church or Church.

          • IanCad

            Now Jack! You are just putting into fewer words the same premise exposited in Dominus Lesus. That is, those churches not conforming to the doctrines and dogmas of Rome, are not true churches.
            According to you and the Papacy, churches not accepting that Peter was the Pope, those not viewing the mass in a different light. The millions of Protestants who do not accept that we need a priest for confession; nor accepting the Pope as vice – regent. All these are lesser folk without the law of Rome.

          • Its not lack of conformity to all the doctrines and dogmas that render churches improper. It’s the absence of the Eucharist because of invalid ordinations.

          • Anton

            Relax, Ian. We’ll explain it to him in heaven.

          • len

            The RCC lost its way centuries ago….

          • IanCad

            Whether or not Rome is to be a significant factor in eschatology it surely cannot be denied that, given again the power to rule principalities and powers, it would not exercise to the fullest that prerogative.

          • Anton

            “Cannot be denied that it would not exercise…”

            Takes some decoding!

          • IanCad

            When it gets bad enough for me to confuse myself – it happens – I will then edit accordingly. I don’t think my comment quite reaches that threshold.
            I’ll add a comma or two.

          • IanCad

            I’ve just looked again. You are right!! “Not” sneaked in. Oh Well! I’ll leave it there as a reminder for me “not” to be so careless in the future.

          • It sees its proper role as influencing temporal decisions by teaching the Gospel and how best to apply it in changing political, social and economic circumstances – not in directly exercising temporal power.

          • IanCad

            Understood. Condemn heretics to the flames but get the state to pile the faggots and light the match.

          • Did you see the reference to “changing political, social and economic circumstances”?

            The ‘job’ of the Church is to ensure our insights about the physical, social and individual ‘world’ are moulded by scripture and remain true to its message as defined in dogma and doctrine – the Deposit of Faith, preserved and developed since Christ walked amongst us. To preserve truth among its members, teach it, inform public debate in the public square and find ways to reach those individuals in the world who have strayed from the path or not yet found it.

            Imagine having that level of responsibility! It’s mind blowing! But we are not alone. Enter the Holy Spirit, promised by Jesus, to lead us into all truth, ensuring our growth and protecting us until His return. But the Spirit works with as we are, as a Body, and He chooses to whom and how He dispenses the necessary graces and gifts.

            To a Catholic, this process is conducted and orchestrated through the Magisterium of the Church and the Bishops, the successors of the Apostles, whole carry ultimate authority and responsibility, and who are God’s instruments.

            So, when you refer to the past and the human errors of this Church, and there have been many, remember to consider their decisions in context and take note of the political, economic and social conditions of the time and how the Church understood herself and the “signs of the times” she discerned.

          • len

            Pity ‘the church’ has failed so dismally in its mission.
            The Holy Spirit has done a much better job!.The two ,Church and Spirit are not mutually inclusive(as you suggest)

          • Where did Jack suggest the power of the Holy Spirit is limited to the Catholic Church?

          • len

            I think it was the Pope jack…you know that ‘infallible’ fellow….

          • Hmm …. Pope Jack. There’s a thought.

          • len

            Pope ,Jack…not Pope Jack…not yet anyway 😉

          • Anton

            Have you read Peter de Rosa’s satirical novel Pope Patrick about an Irish Pope who gets elected by accident?

          • len

            No, but sounds interesting.

          • bluedog

            Now you are advocating a theocracy in which the Magisterium is the supreme temporal exposition of government. May not win popular support.

          • It’s not a theocracy because the Church recognises different bodies have different responsibilities. Plus, these are general principles, applicable in whatever political structures the Church finds herself. In Medieval Christian Europe the Church would act differently than in a secular-humanist democracy or a Communist state.

          • bluedog

            Of course the Roman Church denies it wishes to impose a theocracy. But while there is still democracy, electorates will see through the stunt and reject it, absolutely. The DNA of the RC is SPQR. Always has been, always will be.

          • What’s wrong with SPQR?

            Isn’t that what Constantine the Great, the first Christian Roman Emperor, was aspiring to? He said to the Church: “Get your act together; stop squabbling, sort out how you make decisions and what it is you believe. Then we can go together and build this empire and establish order and peace, Me, to govern, according to the those precepts. You, to spread God’s word and provide the glue necessary for the good of all.” It was words to that effect.

          • bluedog

            Looks impressive on the manhole covers in Rome, but stops there. Doesn’t reconcile with democracy unless legitimised by popular vote. Implies rejection of the Common Law and loss of sovereignty. If you voted for Brexit, and we know you didn’t, SPQR is simply an earlier manifestation of EU. We can do Christianity without resurrecting the Roman Empire to tell us how.

          • Yes, the popular vote. That’s working fine, as is Christianity.

          • bluedog

            Don’t like the outcome of the popular vote? Interested in your suggested options for replacing democracy. Christianity grows everywhere except in the West; it has the advantage of being a very intelligent religion. It is just possible that the rejection of post-modernism implied by Brexit, Trump and possibly Le Pen will trigger a resurgence in traditional beliefs in Christian values. Would you still deride the popular vote then?

          • One doubts the recent turn towards national populism is being fuelled by a rejection of post-modernism or by Christian beliefs. Democracy can’t be peacefully “replaced” but it could fall if things continue on their current trajectory and social and economic chaos ensues. Ordinary people are fearful about their future and have become alienated from the political classes. Jack would feel more hopeful if democracy remained founded on Christian principles rather than empty competition for votes and political promises which raise expectations and feeds resentment and division.

          • bluedog

            ‘One doubts the recent turn towards national populism is being fuelled by a rejection of post-modernism or by Christian beliefs.’ Consciously, possibly not. Subliminally, very much so. There is a deep yearning across the West for a return to ‘the way we were’. Look at the TV programmes, dripping in nostalgia for a pre-multicultural Britain.

          • Nostalgia’s not what it used to be.

          • len

            Constantine was the first Pope…

          • Anton

            Bishop Sylvester of Rome made a BIG mistake by letting Constantine sit in authority over ecclesiastical decisions. Constantine had legitimate right to demand good order from his Christian subjects and punish them otherwise, but to let him meddle in church affairs was contrary to 1 Tim 3:6 about spiritual authority not going to new converts and contrary to Christ’s words about Render unto Caesar. Sylvester saw the prize of State Christianity and was tempted by the worldly wealth that Constantine showered on the church. Temptation is the devil’s oldest trick, far older than the one he had tried to that point, ie persecution, and it proved more effective. The church in Europe still hasn’t recovered.

          • He knocked the heads of the bishops together and told them to get their collective act together. There may not have been a universal Church in Europe without this – just a series of competing local churches each following their own understanding of scripture. God uses people as He chooses.

          • carl jacobs

            Now. After all its pretentious infallible claims to temporal power have been falsified.

          • “… pretentious infallible claims to temporal power.”g with

            Nothing wrong with Unam Sanctum, Carl.

            The Bull lays down dogmatic propositions on the unity of the Church, the necessity of belonging to it for the attainment of eternal salvation, the position of the Pope as Supreme Head of the Church, and the duty arising of submission to the Pope in order to belong to the Church and thus to attain salvation. It emphasises the higher position of the spiritual in comparison with the secular order.

            It then lays down some principles and conclusions concerning the spiritual and the secular power. Under the control of the Church are two swords, that is two powers. Both swords are in the power of the Church; the spiritual is wielded in the Church by the hand of the clergy; the secular is to be employed for the Church by the hand of the civil authority, but under the direction of the spiritual power. The one sword must be subordinate to the other: the earthly power must submit to the spiritual authority, as this has precedence of the secular; for the spiritual power has the right to establish and guide the secular power, and also to judge it when it does not act rightly. When the earthly power goes astray, it is judged by the spiritual power; a lower spiritual power is judged by a higher, the highest spiritual power is judged by God. The Bull thus proclaims the subjection of the secular power to the spiritual as the one higher in rank, and draws from it the conclusion that the representatives of the spiritual power can exercise judgment over their administration, should it be contrary to Christian law.

            The modern state differs from the Medieval state. In the Medieval state the Papacy was central in the Christian national family of Western Europe. Now the state claims complete independence from all authority other than its own. The Medieval state regarded itself as part of Christendom and bound by the morals and arrangements of Christianity.

            The absolutism of the modern state began in the sixteenth century with the affirmation of the Protestant princes that their power was not responsible to Christendom or its officers, but independent of them. It led initially to the “Divine Right of Kings,” and now the claims of modern government to undivided allegiance and authority.

            Think of the Church as the Jedi Council informing and guiding the Senate.

          • carl jacobs

            The reason the RCC doesn’t exercise temporal power is because temporal power was removed from its clasping hands. By force and against its will.

          • Yeah, and separated from Christianity, Europe and the West is going to hell in handcart.

            Imagine the difference if the family of European states was governed by leaders of state making decisions according to Christian principles.

          • carl jacobs

            Ah. The mask falls.

          • No mask at all. You must prefer the legacy of the reformation, secular-humanism and the absolutism of the modern liberal-democratic state, submitting to no authority other than man’s autonomy.

          • len

            You swallowed a dictionary Jack?.
            What does that mean in lay mans terms?.

          • Catholicism – good.
            Protestantism – bad.

          • Anton

            Secular humanism is an abuse of the freedom that began to be won at the Reformation.

          • By his very nature man will abuse freedom. The question is what “freedoms” should be contained, by what means and according to what criteria?
            Where did the idea first gain traction that man had a “right” to live however he wanted and to be able to find this “right” protected and expressed by government, and enforce this “right” violently?

          • Anton

            Jesus valued freedom to refuse him more highly than coercion to accept him – or else he would have used coercion. As it is he simply reminded people of their responsibilities before God, and told his followers that if a place refused him they should simply move on.

          • Is universal suffrage and democracy in the bible? Jack must have missed that bit.

          • Anton

            That’s a pretty transparent attempt to change the subject having taken a hit, isn’t it? I never mentioned those things and my comments do not presuppose them either.

          • Freedom to reject God does not require universal suffrage and democracy.

          • len

            What sort of ‘Christianity’ would that be then?.

          • The one passed to the Apostles by Christ and developed and protected since then, under the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit. Is there any other?

          • len

            Phew, glad you left the RCC out then…

          • Anton

            Development? The possibility of continuing development of doctrine means that potential converts are asked to sign up to something that might change in the future.

          • So what? One of the beliefs they sign up to when being received into the Church is the indefectibility of Catholic defined doctrine through the Ordinary Magisterium and the infallibility of the Extraordinary Magisterium. Doctrine and dogma develop within the established parameters of previous ones – they don’t contradict them or introduce novelties.

          • len

            RCC speak.
            ‘Means we make it up as we go along’.

          • Mind how you play with that mincer, Len.

          • Anton

            But it’s not authentic Christianity if there isn’t an opt-out without secular penalty. (NB That’s true in protestantism too.)

          • Yes, but that doesn’t mean that in the 15th century, on withdrawing from the Church, people were free to attack and undermine the established order without lawful authority addressing this in a way it saw fit. Today a person may become a Mormon; this doesn’t give them the right to polygamy. A person may become a communist; they have no right to take another’s property. A person may be consider him or herself a homosexual; they have no right to marry or adopt children. A person may want to abort their child; they have no right to do so.

            We’re into parameters of acceptable behaviour, by what processes these should be determined, what the consequences might be for the common good and how to address these. And this requires context, context, context.

          • Anton

            But withdrawal from the church was itself seen as an attack and an undermining of the established order.

          • And so it was.

          • Anton

            So you do support the punishment by secular means of such people. Now you have contradicted yourself.

          • Depends on the level of disorder and the circumstances.

          • Anton

            And Europe was in a great way in 1917? 1943?

          • Rise of fascism in a protestant nation – fuelled by greed and promoted by hatred and fear. Nothing to unify a continent of competing states intent on furthering their own interests at the expense of others. All very zero-sum.

          • Anton

            Except that the Nazis marched up to Berlin in 1933 from Catholic Bavaria.

          • Oh, please.

          • It’s the Lizards controlling the Masonic-Jesuit-Jewish cabal. They are seeking a suitable man to become President of a European State who will then become a Cardinal and be chosen as Pope.

            A new plan was formulated in Canterbury on Saturday.

          • len

            ‘Lizards’ are soooooooooo last week.

          • Anton

            At Babel God aimed to prevent Man United.

          • len

            ‘The deity of the EU is Man himself’.

            You shall be’ as gods’….this is the root of all false religion.
            False religion linked with political power…sounds familiar?.

        • Manfarang

          The Papacy regained its sovereignty helped by Mussolini.
          There was a strong anti-clerical movement in the 19th century Papal States.

          • len

            Spot on .

        • IanCad

          The Deadly Wound?

          • len

            Yes Ian.

    • David

      Totally agree Len. From the Tower of Babel through to Revelation the Bible teaches us to live in our own nations, and for us to live in peace (with justice) with the surrounding nations. But so many Church leaders support the left’s deceits of moral and cultural relativity, which argues that borders should be porous or even non-existent. This doctrine to abolish Europe nation’s is of course one of Cultural Marxism’s many tools, all designed to destroy family, community, nation and faith, especially the Christian faith.
      These bishops represent the blind leading the blind. So badly informed are they that they don’t realise that they have allowed themselves to become mere pawns in the evil hands of the uber-wealthy globalists, prominent amongst which is the notorious Mr S….

      • Anton

        There is no such thing as cultural marxism. Marx called for bloody revolution. The correct name for the creeping version of those beliefs has always been Socialism.

        • dannybhoy

          But folk like Antonio Gramisci recognised that violent revolution wasn’t going to happen in Europe and formulated a plan to destroy democracies from within.
          Saul Alinsky worked along similar lines in the US. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama studied his ideas.
          Which are working well btw….

          • IanCad

            Also true of most social transitions, except the few changed by conflict. Here a little, there a little. Proposition, counter, compromise. Then its starts again; A bolder proposition is faced off against the agreed compromise – and so it goes until the goals of crafty men are achieved.
            It didn’t start with Gramsci, nor with Marx, Hegel or Fichte. Canny businessmen and politicians learned it from experience. The principle was known to every young man intent on deflowering a maid.

          • dannybhoy

            I’m not sure that all social transitions come about as part of an overall plan. I think Christian evangelists, philanthropists, scientists and philosophers had flashes of God given inspiration that made life a little better, a little fairer, a little safer; but they were trying to improve things.
            Whereas ot seems to me the Marxist/anti democracy/ anti capitalists are wanting to destroy free will, enterprise and self determination, and they work to an agenda.

          • IanCad

            Danny, I did say most, and agree entirely with your comment.

          • dannybhoy

            I was thinking more about your last three sentences..
            “It didn’t start with Gramsci, nor with Marx, Hegel or Fichte. Canny businessmen and politicians learned it from experience. The principle was known to every young man intent on deflowering a maid.”
            I think businessmen, politicians and horny young men plotted more towards their own ends rather than a political goal.
            I think it takes great discipline to achieve a goal that may take years to bring to fruition.

          • IanCad

            True, but the principle remains, whether in the collective or the individual. So much has been made about the “Hegelian Dialectic” which, to me is merely a complication of the laws of commonsense, known from the year dot.

          • Anton

            We are all on the same side; this is a matter of definition. Please see my reply to David, above.

          • dannybhoy

            Shan’t!
            I don’t need to read ‘your reply to David above…’
            I don’t need to be reminded we’re all on the same side either, that’s a given.
            You’re an intelligent and educated chap and we all appreciate your contributions.
            But you don’t need to be right all the time. it’s not a competition to see who knows the most..

          • Anton

            You’re the chap who doesn’t like cricket, aren’t you…?

          • dannybhoy

            Indeed, but if your inference is that I have somehow not played the game, you are welcome to explain how.

          • Anton

            Playing a straight bat?

          • dannybhoy

            Anton, you can use Cricket terminology or preferably Christian terminology. You really don’t need to tell me we’re on the same side, I know that.
            Your assertion that
            “The correct name for the creeping version of those beliefs has always been Socialism.”
            is debatable.

          • Anton

            Then let’s debate it. In the 19th century the endgame of communism and socialism was ownership of the means of production by the people and a ‘fair’ distribution of profits from the goods manufactured and sold. The State would be involved as an intermediary. Communism aimed to get their by violent revolution, socialism aimed to get there by universal plebiscite and the ballot box, since the working class outnumbered everybody else.

            That is my thesis. I welcome correction if it is wrong.

          • Gramsci’s concept of cultural hegemony is a sound one. The role of the anti-capitalist revolutionary is to create a proletarian culture whose value system counters the cultural hegemony of the bourgeoisie.

            Power to the people …………

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Wasn’t it all devised as a reaction to the collapse of the Communist Hungarian regime of Bela Kun after WW2? Having failed militarily they learnt to work through infiltrating the opinion forming institutions?

        • David

          When the violent revolution that succeeded in Russia didn’t spread to the west, what became the Frankfurt School generated a more “softly, softly, catch your monkey” approach. They recognised that until they destroyed the moral framework of the west, economic Marxism would not occur. So Cultural Marxism is the tool box they created to corrupt, confuse and undermine western society. Critical Theory is the general term for its many strands, all designed to destroy the west’s Christian based morality. We are now witnessing a century of such undermining and the results on our society are indeed very ugly.
          But ignore it all if you want to close your eyes.

          • Anton

            I know all that; we are really talking about definitions. It’s not the Frankfurt School who invented the term “cultural Marxism”. This term has become popular in recent years, and I abhor what it refers to. What I am saying is that “Marxism” by definition involves a bloody revolution toward a certain type of utopia, whereas the softly-softly approach to the same end was known as Socialism. These assertions are matters of historical fact. it follows that “cultural Marxism” is an incoherent term for what should properly be called Socialism. By doing that, we are enabled to see socialism for what it really is.

          • Manfarang

            Classical Marxism predicted the collapse of capitalism which would be followed by a new era of socialism.

          • Anton

            Yes, and specifically in a bloody revolution.

          • Manfarang

            The October Revolution was more of a coup d’état. Of course it was followed after a couple of years by a civil war.
            The Communist victories in Russia and China were more a result of war weariness(Russia WW1, China WW2) rather than an uprising.

          • Anton

            Those are indeed complex historical events, but all I said was that classical Marxism involved a bloody revolution.

          • Manfarang

            The revolution was more Leninist in thinking. Dictatorship of the proletariat and all that.

          • Hi

            As I understand classical Marxism said that the socialist revolution would occur in the industrialised countries first, as an inevitable “fact” of history , e.g. the US, UK, and Germany.

            Hence Lenin had to produce Marxism-Leninism in order to fit in “scientifically” the revolution in Russia , i.e. imperialistic capitalism was the ultimate form of capitalism and that there needed to be a vanguard of the people , i.e. an elite of workers who would bring in said revolution .

            Also because the Russian empire was he least industrial country of the great powers & basically an absolutist monarchy, primary producer and semi feudal state with modern guns (not much has changed). Must add “all hail Tsar Vladimir” for all the Putin Boys here.

            In the same way chairman Mao adopted the theory to Marxism-Leninism- Maoist.

          • Anton

            This excellent episode from the Oxford historian John Roberts’ 1980s TV series Triumph of the West sets the October revolution and its outworkings in the deeper history of Russia:

          • In Marxist theory, socialism proceeds communism.

          • Anton

            Typo alert, Jack! Precedes, or proceeds after?

          • Ah! Corrected. Thank you. Good job it was not Jack who composed the Filioque clause.

          • David

            It’s like trying to spell Isiaih, I mean Isaiah.
            Spelling is not my strongest point.

          • Anton

            It’s a lousy rendition into English of how it’s pronounced in Hebrew, anyway.

          • David

            An obscure point.
            The term “socialism” is the shop front to harvest votes. Socialist leaders would prefer you not to know about its method, trajectory and end result. The thinkers and methodology behind the shop front, the evil “philosophers” and tacticians who designed its methods, constitute the Frankfurt School.
            By all means point to Socialism, but by ignoring the think tank and its methodology, you obscure socialism’s tools, playing into their hands.

          • Anton

            I’m not ignoring it. If I were writing a cultural history of Western Civ in the last 100 years, I’d write an entire chapter about the perniciousness of the Frankfurt School. My one and only point is that “cultural Marxism” is a phrase that contains an internal contradiction. As I do not wish to be accused of incoherent thought, I prefer not to use it.

  • Dominic Stockford

    The man’s a Welsh carrot.

    • Maalaistollo

      I’d heard about the Welsh leisure centre, but what’s a Welsh carrot?

      • Royinsouthwest

        “Moron” is the Welsh word for carrot. Thank God for Babel!

        • Maalaistollo

          Thank you. I shall never look upon a carrot in quite the same way again. Or upon a Welshman, if it comes to that.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Roy is a star. I hoped someone would be…

          • Royinsouthwest

            Thank you, or diolch yn fawr.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Bore da.

            (Meaning ‘nice doing business with you’)

          • Royinsouthwest

            Are you in Australia? Bore da = good morning. Nos da = good night!

          • Dominic Stockford

            No, just practicing being bad at being a polyglot

    • David

      Or do you mean a Welsh tarot ?

  • Anton

    Jean-Claude Juncker expects Britain to pay a 51 billion Euro exit fee from the EU…

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39042876

    Whistle for it, mate. What’ll you do when we don’t pay – invade? We know you are bluffing. You’ll do what Merkel says, and she’ll do what German big business says, and they want to continue good trading relations with Britain because we are a larger European economy with which Germany trades than any other.

    • IanCad

      Up Yours EU!! If there will even be an EU after Joan of Arc wins in France.

      • David

        With the riots in Paris continuing and growing she must be lining up more and more votes. So that’s why the socialist establishment have set up the police raid. They are nothing if not predictable.

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          44% in latest poll, up 6% since the previous poll.

          • David

            Thank you for the stats.
            That’s a very steep upward curve, and most encouraging.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Add in the shy FN factor and it’s squeaky bottom time for the establishment.

          • David

            Yes the shy factor could be considerable.

    • Maalaistollo

      The suggestion has already been made that a precondition of any such payment is the production of fully audited accounts for the EU’s last 10 years or so.

      • Anton

        Excellent!

      • David

        That’s the spirit !

    • Royinsouthwest

      Apart from Germany, whose exporters benefit from the Euro (which keeps the prices of German goods in the rest of the world, including the rest of the EU, lower than they would be if they still had the Deutschemark) Britain is the largest net contributor to EU funds. Will the EU cut its budget or increase the contributions of other members after Britain leaves? Not if they can persuade us, or rather our government, to keep on paying!

      By the way, what is our share of EU assets and how can we cash them in? What about a refund of some the money we have paid in over the years despite getting less benefit from membership than Germany and France? I know we have had a partial rebate since Margaret Thatcher demanded one but Tony Blari, that great statesman and would-be saviour of Britain, Europe, the Middle East, Heaven etc. etc. sacrificed some of the rebate in return for a promise of “reforms.”

      Blair got the promise so the EU kept its side of the bargain. As for the “reforms” …

      • Dominic Stockford

        I believe that after our present contributions we now own Spain and Portugal.

        • Anton

          And their debts? No thank you.

        • Royinsouthwest

          It is nice to own places which, for part of the year at least, have good weather. No disrespect to the Falklands intended.

      • 1642+5thMonarchy

        Send them the bill for saving them twice in one century from German fascism.

    • len

      The EU desperately needs cash to prop up its failing economies.They are going (I suppose) to try and force the UK into giving them cash?.
      Better out of the EU on all accounts, who wants to deal with people like that?

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      Heard a senior German CDU politician interviewed on the radio today. He was quite clear that Merkel will not let this issue damage relations with the UK and was extremely acerbic about the European Commission.

      • Anton

        Good. I thought you’d uptick me after a hard day’s brewing!

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          Board meeting all day! Just signed the audited accounts, planning a major visitor centre investment expansion etc. Busy busy busy.

          Our beer quality is best I can remember at the moment. When we re-propogate our yeast early in the cycle the cask beer, if kept just right, develops a slightly clotted cream taste quality that i have never seen anywhere else. It’s extraordinary, having a pint now, quite superb. Lucky boy!

          • Anton

            I shall be passing close by the brewery on March 10th en route to a weekend houseparty another half-hour onwards; time for a swift half of your finest around the end of office hours before I drive on?

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Alas I am not around, but if you pop in I’ll arrange some discount for you.

          • Anton

            Thank you!

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            If you spend £500!

          • Anton

            Not quite that large a weekend houseparty…

          • bluedog

            Woops! Back to home brew.

          • Cressida de Nova

            You are more of a champagne type Bluedog…leave the ale to the peasants.

          • bluedog

            True. One does have expensive tastes, no point in pretending otherwise.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Quote “Protestant Privilege”!

          • Mates rates. People will talk.

          • Hey; this isn’t a dating site.

          • Darter Noster

            Perhaps not, but I’ve often wondered what would happen if the regular posters all met in person :o)

          • Anton

            But how to verify identity and exclude impersonators?

          • Jack would need several invitations covering all possibilities.

          • Sarky

            The inspector will be the quiet woman in the corner!

          • Sarky

            Just log a comment in front of everyone?

          • We’d all have a good laugh ….

          • Cressida de Nova

            God Almighty….you cannot be serious Jack !

          • len

            Be really interesting to meet people face to face.
            Bet there would be a few surprises. Who would guess I double for Daniel Craig?.

          • Anton

            Work out which brewery it is and ask him yourself!

          • Now why would Jack wish to do that?

          • Anton

            Resolve the Reformation over a beer?

    • chefofsinners

      I’m feeling quitsotic.

      • David

        With that headgear you could convince me !
        Best to take a lie down old chef.

      • William Lewis

        I’m feeling Brexotic.

    • David

      Spot on Anton !
      But this will unsettle the weak minded who like to be “nice”.

    • bluedog

      A bi-lateral trade deal, UK-Germany, would mark the end of the EU and lead to the realisation that the European Commission is simply an expensive and redundant overhead.

      • 1642+5thMonarchy

        Listening to this CDU politician one got the impression that that’s what the German government think already. He mentioned that the UK is Germany’s second biggest export market (20% of total) and that we buy 500k cars a year (largest I believe), and basically said they’re not going to let the EU Commission screw up an orderly exit and decent trade deal.

        That’s why Juncker is so depressed and not wanting to extend his term. He knows the Germans will cut a deal, the Scandies want to as well, as will the Spanish (agricultural exports and tourism), the Eastern Europeans want the UK on side because of defence, and the Mediterraneans don’t count as they’re all broke anyway.

        The UK has a magnificent negotiating hand if only our useless politicians don’t screw it up. I’d do it for free and kicks.

        • Anton

          I think Theresa is on to it. She hasn’t wavered an inch from Brexit. She first said it will be done by herself; then when forced to consult parliament she told the House of Commons that they had better vote for what the people decided, and this week personally bullied the Lords into the same with her presence. It’s nice to have a PM with balls. Hasn’t happened since Thatcher.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            She’s a line of least resistance sort of politician I’m afraid.

        • bluedog

          The German economy has a critical vulnerability in that 47% of GDP is dependent on export activity. Here’s a report that discusses the nexus between German exports, the shipping industry and the German banking system.

          https://geopoliticalfutures.com/german-exports-banks-and-the-shipping-industry/

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Thanks. Germany’s lack of domestic consumption is both a strength and a huge weakness, while its commercial banks are very weak and vulnerable to external shock. Add in the fact that the latest wave of migrants is reported to be a net drag of £33 bn per annum and one has apotential for a nasty upset.

          • Anton

            Add to that the energiewende – green energy policy which means that German electricity is increasingly unaffordable by businesses and by the poor. The entire basis of the industrial revolution was the intelligent application of generated energy.

    • chefofsinners

      €51 billion sounds like a bargain.

  • Sarky

    Breaking news. The met have just appointed another Dick!!!

    • IanCad

      Thought it would happen. The dykes are on the march. Pushback is needed.

      • Inspector General

        Not fair Ian. If the lady was one of the exulted crowd of our betters, PN would have triumphed it…

        • Sarky

          Gonna be a bit more nervous getting the tube now.

          • Inspector General

            No vaulting ticket barriers then…

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Just don’t have a Brazilian. Mandelsime’s boyfriend will be worried.

          • Brazilians are not confined to homosexual men. One understands they are quite popular across society.

    • len

      Thought they had enough by now?.

  • Chairman Jack, if you please.

  • CliveM

    Currently in gay Paris. Surrounded by armed Police and had to change Hotel as the one I was booked into was evacuated over a bomb scare.

    Can’t go anywhere as the roads are gridlocked. The whole area is in lockdown ☹️

    Had a measly 3 pints of Belgium beer. Went to pay “Ahh beaucoup de bier” says the guy on the tills.

    “Beaucoup de bier ” ! I don’t think! He has any idea what “Beaucoup ” is.

    Anyway, currently surrounded by more armed Police then the British army. Can’t leave the Hotel so off to bed!

    • Inspector General

      Nothing about the on going riots on our Marxist BBC news site. No surprise then. We already know the News Room must be privatised…

    • bluedog

      Trump planning to deport 11 million illegals, dumping them in Mexico irrespective of origin. If Le Pen gets in we may see something similar in France, which has the military capacity to dump illegals anywhere it chooses in North Africa. No nation can live forever in a state of emergency.

      • Inspector General

        The good thing about righting wrongs is that those who do cannot be condemned…

      • “Trump planning to deport 11 million illegals, dumping them in Mexico irrespective of origin.”

        Well, we’ll see how that pans out.

        • bluedog

          Likely to boost Trump’s flagging ratings. After all, there’s not much point in running a sovereign state if anybody can walk in and help themselves to the benefits. Allowing that to happen sets an example which undermines the rule of law. Chucking out the illegals defends the rule of law and protects the status of the US electorate. If the illegals have flouted US laws when entering the country, they shouldn’t expect any sympathy when expelled.

          • Anton

            I agree, although what’s not said is that a blind eye was turned in the southwestern states of the union because they provided abundant cheap labour that had no rights.

          • dannybhoy

            This is what I don’t understand.
            Why is it only the nations of the Western world who are expected to accept refugees/economic migrants/other nation’s problem people and chancers of all kinds?
            Is Asia inviting them in, or Africa, or the rich nations of the Islamic world?
            No.
            The West needs to realise that if they continue this policy of misguided compassion it will be destroyed for ever. In the light of modern humanistic thinking one wonders why on earth our ancestors fought wars..

          • bluedog

            Western electorates fully understand the problem ‘cos they live cheek by jowl with the Third World chancers. It is the elites, men like Bishop Chessun, who are quarantined from reality and so utterly brainwashed by Marxist thought that they can’t even recognise the opportunity for their own calling presented by Brexit. This is a post about the CoE. Having screwed up by opposing Brexit and thus alienating 52% of the British electorate, we now have a leader of the CoE compounding the error by mocking the Brexit vote. Chessun obviously thought he was being clever in doing so, but his emotional intelligence is non-existent.

            Any politician who still doesn’t understand the extent to which the rules have changed is going to lose their job. The supra-national experiment has failed and the people want the security of their old nation states returned. They don’t want distant and unaccountable experts in places like Brussels telling them what to think and what to do either. Politics has returned to being local. ‘Populists’ intuitively understand this and offer solutions that directly oppose the proscriptions of the elites. If the Euro implodes and triggers an economic crisis leading to falling living standards, it’s going to get messy.

          • dannybhoy

            “The supra-national experiment has failed and the people want the security of their old nation states returned. They don’t want distant and unaccountable experts in places like Brussels telling them what to think and what to do either. Politics has returned to being local. ‘Populists’ intuitively understand this and offer solutions that directly oppose the proscriptions of the elites. If the Euro implodes and triggers an economic crisis leading to falling living standards, it’s going to get messy.”
            I like that because it fits in with my belief that man is essentially tribal. Even early in Genesis we see that family or blood ties are important and worth fighting for as when Avram fought and rescued his nephew Lot..
            Men need something that explains who he is and his place in that explanation.
            Man is more than just an expression of a philosophic theory. His human-ness i.e. his physicality means that he feels an attachment and therefore loyalty to those closest to him, and ultimately to the leadership that best represents what he himself believes and gives meaning to his existence.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Well said.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            How many Muslim refugees have the Gulf States and Saudis admitted during the crisis?

            Zero.

            Why? Because they see them as a threat.

          • dannybhoy

            So all the more reason for the Western political and religious leaders to ask themselves why they feel obliged to take them in.
            For what it’s worth my feeling is that our religious leaders emphasise compassion towards refugees and the poor, because compassion is all that remains of their Christian faith; and without the poor and the dispossessed they can’t justify their (Christian) existence…
            What think ye 1642?

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Agreed, and they conveniently forget Paul’s strictures on hard work to provide for oneself. They are socialists more than they are Christians.

          • dannybhoy

            Because their faith is not really in Christ our Lord, they are fearful of upsetting or offending (especially) the establishment, so they focus on the things which will cause least offence and greatest unanimity..

          • Jack agrees a state should control its borders. However, America and American businesses have tacitly accepted illegal immigrants for decades. The idea of simply uplifting and deporting (dumping) millions of people back in Mexico and separating children, who are American citizens, from their parents is both impractical and, dare Jack say it, unchristian. Fine, deport the criminals. Fine, secure the borders from future illegal immigrants. But, having allowed the problem to develop unchecked, find a more practical and workable solution. This is pure scapegoating and Trump focussing the fear and hatred of the dispossessed and alienated on a group of ‘outsiders’.

          • Pubcrawler

            The previous administration deported record numbers of people. I guess the media didn’t report all the marches and howls of anguish at the time. And unless US citizens are somehow barred from entry into Mexico, there is no reason for families to be split up. Amnesties only encourage more to try, just as picking up illegal migrants out of leaky boats and not returning them to their poiint of origin but ferrying them to their intended destination only encourages more to follow and increases the number of deaths from drowning of those who put themselves at the mercy of the people smugglers.

          • bluedog

            Supra-nationalist.

          • Cressida de Nova

            To separate American born children from their illegal immigrant parents is unchristian…I agree. You should dare to say it.

    • William Lewis

      Thanks (our man in Paris) Clive. Paris is getting a name for being a rather unpleasant place to live these days. I work with several French people who do not have much desire to return. Two have already applied for and gained indefinite leave to remain in the UK.

      • 1642+5thMonarchy

        LOL. I thought all the City bankers were planning to move there?

        • Royinsouthwest

          They could stay here and move their underlings to Paris.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Shame. The Muslims were so looking to burning Maseratis and Bentleys in the streets for a change.

        • chefofsinners

          ‘City bankers’ – Good to see you experimenting with rhyming slang.

        • William Lewis

          Well that’s the point. Is it to Paris or is it to Frankfurt. Is it Dublin or is it Madrid? What they need is somewhere in the European timezone, where English is the main language and there are strong legal, IT and various other infrastructure facilities in place. But where could one find such a city?

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            London?

          • William Lewis

            Good thinking.

          • chefofsinners

            English is no longer the main language.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Good point.

      • CliveM

        Your man in Paris fell asleep after raiding the mini bar in room! Nothing like a bomb scare to build a thirst!

    • len

      ‘Holger’ described France as the nearest thing to paradise on earth.

      • Royinsouthwest

        An optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. A pessimist is afraid that the optimist is right.

      • chefofsinners

        Yes. It is very near to England.

      • CliveM

        Contrary to mythology it isn’t!!

      • Linus, as we know, has strange ideas about paradise and hell.

      • Holger

        Paradise only exists in the fevered imaginations of religionists.

        Here in the real world, I’ve lived in London and I’ve lived in Paris, and I know where I’d rather be. Right here in Paris, which despite all of the recent negative media coverage, is still by far the best European city to live in.

        London is quite simply unliveable. Ugly, difficult to get around, expensive and chaotic. It can be enjoyable when you’re young and earning enough to enjoy the nightlife and live in a decent area. But how many can do that?

        Paris remains affordable, well-organised and clean. You can live a real life here rather than slogging your guts out and then blowing all your money on sky-high mortgage payments and exorbitant, futile entertainment.

        Today I’m meeting a friend for lunch in a quiet neighbourhood restaurant that serves excellent food at reasonable prices. Everyone knows me there and I”ll be warmly and genuinely welcomed. I’ll eat a healthy, balanced, delicious and leisurely meal that won’t cost me the monthly salary of an average working man. The service will be impeccable yet relaxed. No stress. No worries. No problems.

        If I were in London I’d have to fight my way to an overpriced low quality eatery serving faddy uninteresting food where novelty counts for everything and quality and taste for nothing. The service would be slapdash and intrusive, the table tiny and the wine something perfectly horrid from a dull little Commonwealth country, or worse yet, from California or Chile. Screwtop probably. I rest my case.

        Yes we have problems in Paris, but you have problems in London too. You’re just as much a target for Islamist terrorism as we are. Your politics are just as unstable as ours are at the moment. You’re crowded into your tiny island like sardines in a tin, and you see about as much sunshine.

        And then you come here on holiday and weep into your beer because we won’t enable your alcoholism by badgering you to order pint after pint.

        Why not have a valve surgically implanted in your navel so we can hook you up directly to the barrel? The nine months pregnant look favoured by the average British male over the age of 40 would be so much easier to achieve and you wouldn’t rot your 16th century teeth with all that sugar.

        Just be sure to wear a nappy so that when you pass out from alcohol poisoning, you don’t void the contents of your bladder and bowels all over our pavements.

        Among the worst things in Paris are the English tourists it attracts. If Brexit causes a fall in their numbers, the advantages will outweigh the disadvantages, so we’ll deal with the loss of income philosophically.

        • Anton

          There’s a lot more crap on Parisian pavements than here, thanks to the French fetish for small dogs in urban flats. And a lot more bullshit from bloggers who live there.

          • Oh, Jack doesn’t know. He makes some valid points. Pity he wraps them in vitriol.

          • Anton

            Yes, there is much good about the French lifestyle. What they don’t have, unlike England, is longterm political stability. I know what I value more highly.

          • You think England is facing a secure political future?

          • Anton

            Another deft subject change, from past to future in this case.

          • You did say “long-term political stability”. That’s past and future tense. So no, Jack didn’t change the focus. Where do you think France got the idea from of executing their Monarch and destroying the Catholic Church in the name of “freedom”?

          • Anton

            That need never have happened if Louis “l’etat, c’est moi” XIV hadn’t kicked out hundreds of thousands of France’s best citizens in 1685, leaving a choice between repressive Catholic absolutism and secular humanism.

          • Your advocating a similar treatment for Muslims and yet their behaviour is no way comparable to the subversive Huguenots.
            France was a Catholic nation. The Calvinists were fanatically opposed to the Church and attacked priests, monks, nuns, monasticism, images, and church buildings. Most of the cities in which the Huguenots gained a hold saw iconoclast riots in which altars and images in churches, and sometimes the buildings themselves were torn down. Ancient relics and texts were destroyed; the bodies of saints exhumed and burned. The Huguenots became a political movement with a separate army and cavalry.

            Some were nobles trying to establish separate centres of power in southern France. There were eight civil wars between 1562 and 1598. Further uprisings occurred following the death of Henry IV. The Huguenots by this time were establishing independent political and military structures, establishing diplomatic contacts with foreign powers, and openly revolting against central power.

          • Anton

            Yes, France was a Catholic nation – because Louis XIV kicked out the Huguenots. Henri IV was a wise man, brought up protestant, converted to Catholicism to gain the throne and promptly declared that he would tolerate both. What your airbrushed version of French history doesn’t say is that the reason for subsequent unrest was denial of freedom of worship to Huguenots.

            Catholic France birthed virulent secular humanism because it tolerated no peaceful dissent. And you have the gall to blame it on protestantism!

          • Er …. there were 2 million Calvinists in France, 10% of the population, before the expulsion of the Huguenots and they were subversive”in your face” types. The causes of the French Revolution were many and varied.

          • Anton

            As I have said here many times, Christianity is about being changed for the better from the inside in ways that we cannot do ourselves. Neither can legislation do it. This is not a political process. Politicised churches are inauthentic churches. Yours is the largest such.

          • Are you denying the Calvinists and Puritans didn’t have a political agenda? Really?

          • Cressida de Nova

            Anton does not give Yes or No answers. Brevity is not one of his strong points.

          • Anton

            When did you stop scolding your husband?

          • Anton

            How many times must I type here before it gets in that I am against all politicised churches including protestant, a statement fully consistent with my comment to which you are replying?

          • bluedog

            ‘Your advocating a similar treatment for Muslims and yet their behaviour is no way comparable to the subversive Huguenots.’ The Huguenots were native French Christians who didn’t share the Catholic view of Christian worship. Their conservative values gave them great success, and they were skilled artisans and small businessmen providing employment to the feckless Catholics. To suggest that the Huguenots were ‘subversive’ and that the current French Muslims are not, is a complete misreading of history and a misrepresentation of the facts. The Muslims are immigrants or descendants of immigrants, the Huguenots were not. It seems necessary to point out that the metaphysics of Islam are utterly opposed to those of Christianity. To suggest otherwise in any way is profoundly dishonest.

          • ” … the feckless Catholics.”.
            Oh, dear.
            Yes, the religion of Islam is opposed to Christianity and their religion has a vision for society inconsistent with liberal-democratic values. However, Muslims, apart from a small fanatical minority, are not forming their own militias or attacking the institutions of state. So what if they are the descendants of immigrants? They’re French citizens.

          • bluedog

            Well, if you foolishly introduce pejorative adjectives, why the surprise when you get one back? Probably a mistake to descend to your level, one concedes.

            The revocation of the Edict of Nantes is an interesting precedent in the context of French co-habitation with the large Muslim minority. If Catholic France can cold-bloodily force the expulsion of Protestant French, it is not too fanciful to such suggest that Secular France will one day expel Muslim French. Expelling the Muslim French would be easier to justify and rationalise than expelling the proddies. There was a formerly Protestant French King who became Catholic for expedient reasons, but there has never been a Muslim president of France.

            It will prove to be relevant in the political context that the Muslims are a migrant community. Like Muslims everywhere in the West they prefer not to integrate and are seen as living on benefits, while at the same time pressing for the host society to change on their terms. If ever there was a cocktail of reasons for expelling an alien demographic, the Muslims succeed in ticking every box.

            And they do conduct a low-level civil war against the host state. Just look at the security burden of protecting the non-Muslims from terrorist acts by the Muslims. Yet another own goal by the Muslims.

        • len

          Sounds really nice , apart from the terrorists…and the riots …

        • William Lewis

          It’s funny how you claim to be living a real life whilst others, apparently, pursue “futile entertainment” when all you can offer is a certain affluent leisure as you spend your fleeting time before the abyss. Tick tock.

          • Holger

            What abyss is this? Where is it? How deep is it? What’s at the bottom of it? Does it even have a bottom? Does it exist at all?

            You don’t have a single piece of hard evidence to back up your absurd claim, so how can you expect anyone to take it seriously?

            In Columbus’s time there was an abyss at the edge of the ocean into which the waters plunged endlessly. If you took a ship too far from land, you risked being dragged over the edge into oblivion.

            Only it turned out to be a myth, didn’t it? Not surprising given there wasn’t a single shred of evidence to support such an absurd idea.

            Place your faith in unproven superstitions and you blind yourself to the truth. Future generations will remember you as we remember the ancient mariners who told tall stories about a mega-Niagara at the end of the world. Superstitious and ignorant fools inventing fairy stories to try to make sense of a world they just didn’t understand. We pity them for their ignorance.

            Will anyone pity you?

          • William Lewis

            Tick

            Tock

          • Holger

            A Ke$ha fan, are you?

            Surprising. Bleak, dour and unpleasant evangelical Christians don’t generally like that kind of music.

            Maybe there’s hope for you yet.

            Tick tock on the clock but the party don’t stop…

          • Pubcrawler

            “In Columbus’s time there was an abyss at the edge of the ocean into which the waters plunged endlessly. If you took a ship too far from land, you risked being dragged over the edge into oblivion.”

            Poppycock

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth

        • CliveM

          Whilst you clearly have some knowledge of London, im beginning to doubt you’ve ever been to Paris.

    • chefofsinners

      First World problems. Brought to you by Third World immigrants.

      • These riots were caused because four policemen “accidently” shoved a baton up a young black man’s backside.

        Marine Le Pen has gone has branded the radicals as scoundrels, adding: “The government is silent. A silence that reflects both its cowardice and its impotence.” What would she do? Send in the tanks?

        • chefofsinners

          Possibly some have missed the irony in my comment.
          Police violence is a heinous crime in any society, but here seems to be racially aggravated.
          Whether it is linked to Clive’s pressure cooker bomb remains to be seen. It could have just been a forgotten sausage casserole.

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          A combination of all three?

        • bluedog

          ‘…live in a bleak, insular world that is cut off from mainstream French society. ‘

          By choice.

        • Anton

          The locations of the riots are rife with poverty, high unemployment, and grim concrete housing projects. Their young residents (many the children of immigrants from North and West Africa) live in a bleak, insular world

          Let’s rewrite that.

          The locations of the riots are filled with migrants given benefits and housing off the French taxpayer, yet who hold to an ideology that commands they not integrate and take over by violence wherever the message is not accepted freely.

          Le Pen is the only French politician who sees the truth of the situation.

          • Goats and sheep.

          • Anton

            Wolves and sheep, more like.

        • David

          If they feel oppressed, and are not enjoying their lives in France, then they are free to organise and emigrate in groups to an Islamic country, where they can build new futures for themselves and their children ? It would be a challenge to relish. English Christians, Catholics and Dissenters, who felt oppressed, risked everything to set up colonies on the eastern seaboard of North America. Other European nationalities did the same. If finance is lacking then they can appeal to the oil rich Islamic states for assistance. But perhaps it is easier to continue living off the French taxpayer.

          • Ethnic cleansing by any other name, eh? Let them stew in their poverty and alienation until they leave – forcibly or voluntarily. Meantime, use police brutality to suppress them. It’s the stuff of revolt and civil unrest.

          • Anton

            Poverty when they are on benefits gleaned from the hard work of others? They can go back to the lands of their fathers at any time, so why don’t they? Answer please…

          • Because their homes are here? Do you have any idea of the impact on the psych of “sink estates”, denial of access to employment, police violence and racism, and the evils they breed? You’re sounding like a fascist. The Cromwell solution – convert them; crush them; annihilate them; or deport them.

          • David

            But they refuse to integrate !

          • Anton

            I had hoped a Catholic would have a bit more sense of history regarding Europe’s most implacable and longest-standing foe. My solution is none of those. Declare a certain religion a subversive political movement and restrict benefits.

          • Well good luck with that one. It must be your inner Cromwell.

          • Anton

            And your solution is?

          • “Muddling through” …. it’s a science and vindicated by history.

          • Anton

            Well good luck with that one.

          • It’s what the Empire was built on – small steps and modifications in the light of results.

          • Anton

            But the Empire is no longer around. Neither will France as we know it be if people stick their heads in the sand in the way you are doing. Muddling through depends on having a vision to muddle through to.

          • That’s the problem and danger at present. All the Western world and its people stand confused at present.

            Now Jack doesn’t always agree with Pope Francis but there seems to be truth in one of his recent addresses. One doesn’t agree with everything
            he says and there is much to discuss, yet the central theme is sound.

            http://popularmovements.org/news/pope-francis-grassroots-leaders-neither-paralyzed-fear-shackled-within-conflict/

          • David

            Calm down, you’ve gone into imagination rampant overdrive !
            The main point is that if they follow a creed that demands they stay separate, how can they possibly prosper !

          • Pubcrawler

            Not just stay separate, but regard benefits (and anything else they take a fancy to) as jizyah.

          • David

            You’ve said it !

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          I suspect that back in their home countries being baton inserted by a policeman would be considered somewhat light weight and getting off lightly.

          • You’re indirectly condoning such depraved violence. And, their “home country” is France – a consequence of Empire.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Muslims have no ‘home’ other than the Umma.

            Given the low grade war Muslims are conducting on the police, throat slittings, car burnings, shootings etc, I’m not in the least surprised that police discipline is starting to fray. They are tired and lacking in support from the Socialist government. Sweden’s even worse, their police are resigning in such large numbers that politicians are mooting bringing the army on to the streets. Police are humans too.

          • So are immigrants.

          • Cressida de Nova

            You must expect this from a brute who likes to horsewhip women and takes delight in violence and depravity.

            A message to the non Christians who read this blog:

            We (Christians) do not allow persons of this ilk into our homes or near our children. We do not recognise them as Christians. They are antithetic to all Christian values.

    • Sarky

      You’ve had the full Kardashian experience then.

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      Paris tourist visitor numbers down 1.5 million. I wonder why.

      • William Lewis

        Clive’s pressure cooker has a lot to answer for.

      • Royinsouthwest

        Probably because of the climate of uncertainty created by Brexit. What other explanation can there possibly be?

        • David

          It’s all down to those beastly Brits !

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Well if we’re going to be blamed anyway we might as well pick up our long bows and go on a good chevauchee through France to Bordeaux via Paris and the Dordogne.

          • David

            “chevauchee”
            That made me reach for my medieval French dictionary !

          • Anton

            I didn’t know it but it was workable out from the first syllable as a horseride, and in context a belligerent one.

          • David

            Well yes Anton.
            Even my limited knowledge of “O” Level French enabled me to do that.
            Knowledge doesn’t always have to be paraded, to its Nth degree.
            But you obviously think it should be, and it’s your choice.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Sorry David!

          • David

            Thank you, 1642, but an apology ’twas not needed, as yours was only a single word, said in jest.

          • Pubcrawler

            I knew the word. I’m also very keen on any excuse to go back to Bordeaux, one of my favourite cities. But can I miss out the Paris excursion? Nasty place.

          • Anton

            You can always block me.

          • David

            Block – for a minor thing ! I hope that I never need block any reasonable person, let alone a Christian.

          • Anton

            I have never claimed to be reasonable!

      • dannybhoy
        • David

          Some of those photos, from a February ’17, DT, show a Christmas tree being erected in Brussels !

          • dannybhoy

            Different time zone?

          • David

            Or different dimension ?

          • dannybhoy

            Could be…
            (Danny hums ‘the twilight zone’ through his ears..)

    • David

      Stay very alert Clive.

  • betteroffoutofit

    Hmm. At least they admit (If only subliminally) that something’s cooking under all the pressure!

  • Sarky

    5.28 pints of guiness?
    Mmmmmmmmm

  • John Wrake

    I am concerned at the apparent inability of senior clergy to fulfill their role as leaders of their flock in accordance with their promises. Every beneficed clergyman has, at his institution to a parish, given his public assent to the tenets of the Church of England as set out in the 39 Articles of Religion printed in the BCP, which are to be read in their plain sense, according to the preamble.

    Article 37 states unequivocally that the Monarch is not, nor should be, subject to any foreign jurisdiction. To state that a vote to leave the EU is ‘quixotic’ suggests that conformity to one’s oath is quixotic!

    it would seem that clergy in the Church of England, from the Archbishop of Canterbury downward, either, do not understand the oaths they have made, or consider the breaking of oaths as perfectly acceptable. I have raised this matter with the Archbishop in a letter, to which he has not replied. perhaps that is not surprising.

    John Wrake.

  • Holger

    It’s funny to hear a group of people who spend their lives despising everyone else complain about how they are despised.

    Conservative Christians want the freedom to hate at will but demand love and respect in return.

    It doesn’t work that way. Your own bible tells you so. You reap what you sow.

    Enjoy the bitter harvest of Brexit.

    • len

      Bitter ?, you seem to have cornered the market in that respect.