mrs proudie

Militant Calvinists at Snowflake College, Oxenbridge, demand closure of Science Faculty for being “harmful, intimidating and predatory to Christian students”

Goodness! When is a Conservative not a Conservative? Why, when she is a neo-Marxist deep-state Stalinist surveillance-addict out of her depth in a puddle now occupying the Home Office, of course. ‘Forever Amber’ Rudderless has set out the next phase of the government’s Pretend Strategy for tackling terrorism, as I discovered when I called into Barchester’s Central Post Office yesterday.

“Good Morning, Mrs. Proudie,” said Mrs. Besom, the Postmistress, “How may I help?”

“I would like to post these letters first class,” I replied, “and collect this parcel, which I believe has been delivered here whilst I was out.” I handed her the letters and parcel docket, noticing for the first time a boiling kettle on the desk beside her. Odd time to be taking a tea break, I thought to myself, it being just past 9 a.m. Without further ado, Mrs. Besom proceeded to steam open each and every envelope and read its contents.

“Those are private!” I protested.

“Not any more, Mrs. Proudie. According to new directions from the Home Secretary, privacy is a thing of the past. Terrorism can rear its ugly head anywhere and anytime, even in the most unlikely of quarters. We have to apply these new rules equally and without favour – all are suspect.”

At this point she placed the parcel in front of me. It had of course been opened, and the pair of red flannel long johns ordered for my Lord the Bishop from the Army & Navy exposed to the world, and to ridicule!

“This is outrageous!” I exclaimed, “I shall write to Sir Roland Hill and complain.”

“Won’t do any good,” sniffed Mrs. Besom, “Anyway, what’s that you are carrying under your arm?”

“It is this week’s copy of the Barset Exchange and Mart… what of it?”

“How do you know that isn’t a Far Right publication? They could be advertising guns and explosives alongside plans for home-made bombs and the like… you could get fifteen years imprisonment for reading that sort of thing… I might have to report this to my superior.”

Has the world taken leave of its senses? What sort of Conservative government promotes such nonsense? I left the Post Office in a state of considerable agitation, which of course I took out on the hapless Mr. Slope the moment I arrived home.

As you know, the way of the world leaves me nonplussed at times, but none more so than the strange goings-on in Sweden, the Land of the Gathering Darkness. The government there has just legalised child marriages for ‘New Swedes’ (spot the euphemism) – but not for ethnic Swedes, who would be deemed paedophiles and locked up if they indulged. Not a peep so far out of the Swedish Lutheran Church, but as they are headed by a motley collection of leftist lesbians somewhere on the smorgasbord spectrum of genders, I am not surprised. ‘Suffer little children’ has become a directive.

The Archdeacon, fresh from a visit to Snowflake College, Oxenbridge, to inspect the neo-Gothic Safespaces recently installed by Pugin, had much to say on recent rumblings there. A small group of Militant Calvinists in the Junior Common Room demanded the closure of the Science Faculty as being harmful, intimidating and predatory to Christian students. Furthermore, they raided the library for the complete works of Mr. Darwin and set fire to them in the quadrangle whilst shouting, ‘We are not monkeys!’

“It was most heartening, dear lady, most heartening indeed!” beamed the Archdeacon as we strolled across the Cathedral Close towards the small medieval chapel of the vicars choral, dedicated to St. Brexita the Visionary, where the old gentlemen of Hiram’s Hospital were practising for this year’s Mystery Play under the direction of Mr. Slope. They were dramatising the Parable of the Foolish Virgins – foolish they certainly looked, but as for virginity… I am not so sure. The beards will have to go, however. Mr. Slope said goodbye to his beard a long time ago.

“Surely, Archdeacon, you don’t approve of wanton vandalism,” I replied.

“Ah, but this was not wanton, this was good old-fashioned smiting! It marks the resurgence of muscular Christianity, the long-awaited fight-back against secularism and degeneracy as peddled by these rabid Dawkinsites!’


It was then that I woke up and realised the whole conversation had been a dream. Silly old me. Imagine, intolerance at a higher seat of learning… impossible!

Sometime later I was accosted by Mr. Bunce in the High Street. He seemed somewhat alarmed and was waving a copy of Old Moore’s Almanack in the air.

“We’re doomed… doomed… doooooooooomed, I tell ye!”

I attempted to calm him down with a stale hobnob I happened to carry in my décolletage for such emergencies, and asked what was the matter?

“I’ve consulted the Almanac and it say here, plain as day, that we are about to collide with a massive heavenly body, something alien and out of this world heading straight for us!”

I assured him that Ms. Diane Abbott was nowhere near Barchester, ascribing his use of the word ‘heavenly’ to advanced years and poor eyesight.

“No, no… it’s called Nibiru!”

I must confess I had no idea she had a middle name. Ah well, you live and learn.

“It’s the end of the world!”

“Only if Labour get elected again,” I replied, at which point I left him.

And now, my dear friends, I shall take my leave for this week. As the friends of Mr. Weinstein disappear faster than the Hildabeast’s emails and the conkers of concession drop from the old Horse Chestnut of Appeasement, it’s time for bed. May the Blessings of St. Viagra stiffen your resolve and the Torments of St. Linus be ever a warning unto you.

  • Manfarang

    I have to show my passport when I send a parcel at the post office in case there is any horse (crazy as it is now know) medicine in it. Of course there are plenty of Thailand Post offices., they haven’t been closed as in Britain.
    Of course Bishop Mark, the new Burmese Anglican bishop, doesn’t have to worry about what is happening at the University of Yangon.

  • Chefofsinners

    One notes that our land has been blessed as of old, by the arrival of Mrs Clinton on these shores. No doubt in years to come she will recall how she ‘landed under sniper fire’. How edifying to watch the BBC fawn at her feet, leading us in mourning for the Hillacaust, that darkest hour in the history of humanity, when the Americans elected a vain, womanising, lying president, rather than the wife of a vain, lying, womanising president. Now she finds herself as possibly the only woman to have met Harvey Weinstein and not been propositioned. I just can’t understand it.

    And what the faculty is going on at Balliol? The Christians are ‘predatory’? I suppose they pre-date any other influences. I suspect that Balliol’s greatest alumnus, Wycliffe, the morning star of the reformation, will forever outshine Dicky Dorkins and his ‘Brights’.

    • Anton

      Dawkins is an emeritus fellow at New College, not Balliol.

      • Chefofsinners


        • Anton

          In case anybody got the impression from your post that he too was at Balliol, which is not unlikely.

    • Father David

      Hillary’s many media appearances while in the UK shew that she would have made a much better President of the USA than the present “moron” occupying the White House

      • Chefofsinners

        Yes, fawning BBC presenters and the book promotion merry go round make you really good at stopping evil dictators from developing nuclear weapons.

        • Father David

          Yes, Mrs Clinton was indeed an excellent Secretary of State under the Obama Administration. It’s poor Rex Tillerson I feel sorry for having to serve under the erratic moronic Trump.

          • Chefofsinners

            That’s not how the electorate saw it. Neither does it accord with the current reality of North Korea and Iran both developing intercontinental missiles

          • Father David

            That is precisely how the electorate saw it – Hillary received almost 3 million more votes that Trump.

          • Chefofsinners

            Only 28% of eligible voters voted for Clinton.

          • James60498 .

            And some of those weren’t eligible.

          • Anton

            Too bad they weren’t illegible.

          • Father David

            Ergo – considerably less voted for Trump if Hillary received almost three million votes more than him.

          • Chefofsinners

            I was replying to your assertion that “Clinton was indeed an excellent Secretary of State under the Obama Administration.” When saying “That’s not how the electorate saw it.”
            The fact that fewer voted for Trump does not alter the fact that the overwhelming majority of the US electorate did not vote for her. Ergo, they did not think she had been “an excellent Secretary of State”.

          • Father David

            Nevertheless she’d have made a far better President than the present incumbent.

          • Chefofsinners

            That is simply your value judgment. It is untestable.

            My value judgment is that Trump is more likely to prevent Iraq and North Korea developing the ability to threaten the world with nuclear weapons. In foreign policy, that is great gain.
            On domestic policy, I vastly prefer Trump’s stance on abortion to Clinton’s. Don’t you?

          • Father David

            All human life is sacred and a gift from God.and that is why the threat to totally destroy the entire population of North Korea is not a helpful suggestion towards peaceful coexistence on this fragile God given planet.

          • Chefofsinners

            The threat was to totally destroy the country, not the population. And that threat was of course made to defend the lives of US citizens who had been threatened.
            Not quite the same thing as tearing babies from the womb.

          • Father David

            Pray, how does one “Totally destroy North Korea” without having a disastrous effect on the innocent population of that rogue nation? Methinks you split hairs

          • bluedog

            You don’t want to be a US ambassador in somewhere like Benghazi when Hillary is in office.

          • Anton

            I don’t want to be anybody’s ambassador in somewhere like Benghazi anytime.

          • Father David

            Had I not received the call then an Ambassador would have been a most delightful alternative career.

          • bluedog

            Is it too late? Or have you deservedly soared to episcopal rank and feel committed? Sometimes one needs to do something for oneself, you know, give in to a little temptation.

          • Father David

            Far too late and far too long in the tooth.

          • bluedog

            Come, come FD, you’re only as old as you feel.

            Here’s a little Test Act to put a spring in your step. Given a choice, which would you prefer:
            1) A British republic outside the EU
            2) A British kingdom inside the EU.

            If your answer is a British republic inside the EU, you automatically fail.

          • Father David

            But “a British republic inside the EU” isn’t one of your two options?
            Like David Davis, you need to get a grip!
            Of the two options that you do actually give me to choose from – I’d definitely go for the second one – “A British kingdom inside the EU”

          • bluedog

            On the assumption that a Corbyn government would initiate a republic, particularly if Charles ascends the throne, was just checking your preferences.

          • Father David

            Neither the Labour Party nor Mr. Corbyn have any plans to abolish the monarchy – so, your comments about a republic are simply a figment of your vivid and over-active imagination.

          • bluedog

            Well there’s the official policy, which won’t frighten the voters, and then there’s the under-the-counter brown envelope stuff. Remember the adolescent reaction of Corbyn on learning that as Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition he had to wear a suit and tie and join the Privy Council? His immediate response was to refuse to swear an Oath of Allegiance. And why not? Everyone knows the Windsors and the Rothschilds are a cabal that is committed to ruling the world. The weakness of the British Constitution is that it exists at the PM’s discretion, and with a PM like Corbyn, that can lead to catastrophe. Whipped on by his former concubine Diane Abbott, one can only guess at how eagerly Corbyn might seize the opportunity to issue a P45 to HMQ or her successor.

          • Father David

            Pure fantasy! As for the brown envelopes – I seem to remember that the recipients of Mr Al Fayed’s generosity were two Tories Tim Smith, M P for Beaconsfield and Neil Hamilton M P for Tatton

          • bluedog

            Al Fayed? What did he have to do with Corbyn? Are you telling us something we should know?

            Hamas, tick, Hezbollah, tick, Al Fayed, tick?

          • Father David

            Perhaps Mr. Corbyn buys his nice bright red ties from Harrods maybe?

          • Dr. Professional

            Or any of the more than 100 other State Department employees she abandoned in Benghazi.

            Four died, but many more were abandoned and forced to make it out on their own.

          • bluedog

            Dereliction of duty.

          • Anton

            Benghazi and the Clinton Foundation, aka policy for sale, to you.

            Trump has meanwhile:

            * purged the Environmental Protection Agency of global warming zealots and taken the USA out of the Paris accord. A month ago the climate establishment (finally) admitted that its computer models were exaggerating the warming caused by CO2. We all know that our electricity and gas bills have risen hugely because of subsidies to green energy; not many realised the damage done to industry and that the rises to date were set to accelerate.

            * rescinded Obama’s law which demanded that large organisations provide free contraceptives for their employees, regardless of whether the organisations were Catholic, protestant or whatever and regardless of the marital state of the employees.

            * given notice to UNESCO that he will with draw the USA from it by next year, following UNESCO’s declaration that Temple Mount was a historic Arab site but not a historic Jewish one. (The entire Old Testament, about the Jews, is centred on Temple Mount. NB UNESCO is a funder of the abortion movement in the third world.)

            Time for some credit where it is due.

          • Father David

            A total disaster. Mercifully the nuclear agreement with Iran is multilateral and all other nations completely disagree with what the fool in the White House is attempting to do unilaterally. Never was a truer word spoken than that uttered by Rex Tillerson when calling his boss a “moron”. i believe it was prefixed by another word which most probably began with “F”.

          • Anton

            Which of the three things I list do you consider wrong and why?

          • Father David

            All three – the man is hel-bent on destroying every good thing that Obama achieved. It’s time for the 25th amendment.

          • James60498 .

            Destroying every good thing that Obama achieved shouldn’t take very long.

            Incidentally how come everyone in Hollywood seems to know what Weinstein was up to but Obama and Clinton didn’t?

          • Manfarang

            They were busy in Washington DC.

          • Cashing his donations.

          • James60498 .

            I would have thought that if he made the effort to visit the White House 13 times in just 3.5 years then Obama could have gone to visit him just once.
            After all, he was never shy at being seen with actors.

          • James60498 .

            If you were President of the USA with all the Security Services that the job makes available, would you not find out who you were letting your 18 year old daughter work for ?

          • Manfarang

            Neither Chelsea Clinton or Obama’s daughters worked for worked for Weinstein.

          • Father David

            Ask the BBC – if they knew what Mr. Savile was up to before his crimes came under public scrutiny.
            Come to that what was Trump “up to” before he became President of the USA?

          • James60498 .

            Yes. I would like to know who at the BBC did know. Clearly some people did. Or at least had very strong suspicions which they should have followed up.

            And as loathe as I am to defend the BBC, it doesn’t have access to quite the same level of Security as the President of the United States.

            All your friends in the Media have been all over whatever Trump was “up to”. You can be quite sure that if someone who funded Trump was found to have behaved anything like this, he would have “Trump supporter” attached to his name on every mention of the story. Particularly at Jimmy Savile’s old employer.

          • Anton

            You didn’t answer why to any, though. I look forward to a good discussion of atmospheric physics with you, and no doubt the Catholic here will appreciate a discussion of freedom of conscience about point 2.

          • DespiteBrexit

            It’s now clear that you’re the moron.

          • Father David

            Come, come, such personal abuse is unbecoming. I wonder if you are delighted with the way that the Brexit talks are progressing – for after weeks of discussions they have achieved precisely nothing and seem to be going nowhere except heading relentlessly for the cliff edge. Surely, even you must realise that talks are afoot among senior Republicans in Washington as to how to get rid of the worst President in the history of the USA?.

          • Phil R

            There is no cliff edge.

            Having lived and worked in Europe in many counties for nearly 25 years, they will do a deal. It might well be the 11th hour but they will do a deal, provided we do no budge on our one bargaining chip (the one that they want settled first of course, because from their perspective everything else is irrelevant), money.

            Trump the worst President or the best. There are three things that he needs to do. Build the wall, not just the physical one but to protect the US from dumping. Enforce the drug laws, with the death penalty for supplying and to repeal all of the Obama anti family legislation in particular gay marriage and trans “rights”.

            Jobs, law and order and family. That will make him a great President.

          • Manfarang

            They will do a deal-with China.

          • Father David

            There is no divorce settlement either. Until Double D the Brexit negotiator says how much we are going to pay – then, no progress will be made. So, may I suggest a sum of £350,000,000 per week in order that the stalemate may be broken?

          • Dominic Stockford

            We’re already paying that. And more.

          • Father David

            You ain’t seen nothing yet – just wait for the final bill to appear – I reckon it will make your eyes water.

          • Phil R

            There is no bill. At least no bill that we have any obligation to pay.

            The EU knows that and unless we are completely stupid we do not agree to money until we get the deal we want on trade.

            Otherwise what is the point of doing a deal?

          • Father David

            No bill Phil, then what about an Invoice seeing as we haven’t yet got an estimate from Double D as to what it will cost us to disastrously leave the EU? You have hit the nail on the head and why we have this stalemate situation. The cliff edge gets ever nearer and Mrs. Dismay has seen the writing on the wall and has stopped using her mantra “No deal is better than a bad deal” which proved to be about as useful and effective as her disastrous election mantra “strong and stable”. Both mantras prove to be both weak and wobbly.

          • James60498 .

            You were the first one to use the word “moron” to describe someone.

            Whilst I would absolutely not encourage DespiteBrexit or anyone else to use you as a role model, it’s a bit much for you to suddenly decide that it’s inappropriate to use the term.

          • Father David

            I think I was quoting from Mr.Tillerson’s description of the Donald. Thank goodness for the three ex Army Generals Kelly, Mattis and McMaster who have seen through Trump’s idiocy in trying to renege on Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran. Thankfully more and more people are coming to see Trump in his true colours and he is becoming increasingly isolated.

          • DespiteBrexit

            And there we see it laid bare – left-wing hypocrisy in all its “glory”. Happy to give it out, but not able to take it. And apparently too stupid to realise how transparently obvious it would be.

          • Father David

            Dear boy, I think you should remove the “De” from your anonymous handle and simply make do with “spite” as your comment is so full of malicious venom and bile that such outpourings simply cannot be good for your soul’s true weal

          • DespiteBrexit

            I don’t give a flying toss what you think. You think the rules of the game are that you can call others “fools” and “morons”, but woe betide anyone who does to call you the same. Your opinions are therefore of no merit because you appear to have no perspective or awareness.

            If you really are a “Father” then I suggest you look up what Jesus had to say about hypocrites.

          • Father David

            Dear Boy, best wishes as you come to take your GCSEs next summer – I presume by the puerile nonsense that you write you must by now have reached adolescence?

      • James60498 .

        100% approval rating from “Planned Parenthood ” for both her and her Deputy.

        Not surprising you think she’s great, is it “Father David”?

        • Father David

          If it is a contest between Hillary and The Donald – then it’s what they call a “No Brainer” – as we are now learning to our great cost with that chump in the White House.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Better that chump than the putative supporter of killing newly born babies.

          • Father David

            Personally, I always try to look for the good in everyone – although you have to search hard and deep with some people.

      • CliveM

        What is truly moronic is Hilary’s policy of imposing a no fly zone over Syria. Still she was probably lying, we know that because she’s a Clinton and her lips were moving.

        • Father David

          A politician who tells porky pies? Heaven Forefend! Next you will be telling me that the gang of Be-Leavers told fibs in the Referendum campaign about a certain infamous £350,000,000 for the NHS, a claim that was plastered all over that big red bus.

          • CliveM

            So what are you saying? It’s alright for Clinton to tell moronic lies because of a dubious use of a true figure by the leave campaign? Don’t see the link.

            Anyway you must have laughed your socks off when Hilary condemned sexual assault by a porky media mogul, but dismissed it as unimportant when it was done by her husband!

          • Father David

            You should be employed by the BBC on the Today programme for attempting to put words into other people’s mouths. I’m NOT laughing.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Didn’t just dismiss it when it was done by her husband, but reportedly/allegedly joined in the cover-up and threats against those he abused.

    • Dominic Stockford

      I thought that the Americans voted for someone who thinks that killing in war is fine, rather than someone who thinks killing unborn (and even freshly born – ‘postpartum abortion’) babies is fine?

  • Father David

    Ah, the People’s Party has Forever Amber’s Hastings and Rye constituency firmly in their sights next time round – Tory majority a mere 355. Of course, if she truly has her eyes on Mrs.Dismay’s job then she might well be advised to join the Chicken Run and move next door to Bexhill and Battle where little Mr. Merriman has a far healthier Tory majority of 22,165.
    By the by, shouldn’t that read Saint Brexita the Mad?

  • IrishNeanderthal

    The whole Conservative Party seems rudderless. I am reminded of the Archpoet’s “Confession”:

    similis sum folio
    de quo ludunt venti.

    Feror ego veluti
    sine nauta navis,

    “Like enough a withered leaf / For the winds to scatter. // Hither, thither, / masterless ship upon the sea”

    In this poem, the main complaint of the Archpoet himself, who lived and wrote in the 12th Century, was, in the words of Chuck Berry

    I want to play with my ding-a-ling

    but law and society imposed restrictions on this behaviour.

    I wonder if that is what lies at the root of the Party’s disorientation?

    (The “Confession” itself is in the Carmina Burana manuscript. Here it is, set to music by Carl Orff:

    Carmina Burana. Estuans interius. Josue Ceron. Baritone – YouTube )

  • Inspector General

    It’s everywhere today, Mrs Proudie. This security business…

    The Inspector finds himself regularly being stopped-and-searched on his way to work most mornings. The indignity of undergoing a full intimate body search without screens at the side of the road takes some getting used to, I can tell you! And its not made any easier by motorists sounding off their horns either.

    Prior, the Inspector had always been a keen supporter of this lawful tactic, but then, it didn’t apply to him!

    Anyway, one will fire off another letter to the local Police Colonel asking for a letter of exemption, and inquiring as to what would constitute a suitable bribe to secure such an instrument.

  • Martin

    Now there’s a good idea. Though Evolution isn’t science so it shouldn’t be part of the science faculty.

    • Sarky

      Evolution isn’t science??

      Creationism isn’t science.

      • Anton

        The scientists that Creationists do is certainly full of holes.

      • Don Benson

        Perhaps he just expressed it badly?

        Real objective science is simply the observation and understanding of the physical world (which obviously includes the biological processes within it). Evolution is clearly scientifically demonstrable all around us; the growing ineffectiveness of antibiotics, for example, is a real and present result of evolution. Perhaps he meant ‘evolutionism’ which is a scientific theory of the origin of species.

        Christians who try to present science (or certain parts of it) as antagonistic to their faith are being illogical. If you believe that the world is God’s creation, why would he have stuffed it with millions of misleading scientific clues about how it works and how it was formed! I would suggest that if the Bible and science don’t always appear to be on the same page, that’s because our understanding of one or both of them is not yet complete. Atheists and agnostics will understandably take a different view!

        • Sarky

          Are you a ‘god of the gaps’ kinda guy?

          • Don Benson

            No, Sarkey, I’m as straight evangelical CofE as you’re likely to find! And that doesn’t mean kicking my brain outside the church door when I go in. It means neither ditching parts of the Bible nor parts of science which don’t fit in with what makes for a nice cosy narrative.

            Because, if you want to find God, you have to be of a frame of mind to follow the truth wherever it (He) leads. And there comes a point where it is in fact he who finds you; and what he gives you is amazing but it’s not the end of the road, it’s just the start. It may even be a bit daunting, but it certainly doesn’t mean that you have to become some kind of wacko (if you’ll pardon the expression).

            Changes are part of the deal, and in today’s world that can be uncomfortable, counter-cultural and inconvenient. But the world takes on a new brilliance, whether in the incredible physical world around you or the eternal world which you start to see for the first time. And you are never expected to pension off your brain or your interest in the world around you (unless you make a very unfortunate choice of church to attend!).

            Here endeth the sermon!

        • Dominic Stockford

          So bacteria have evolved into something other than bacteria? Or is it merely that they have changed (within their bacterianess) into something that the current anti-biotics can’t hurt. A bit like me getting into a tank so the man with the rifle can’t shoot me any more.

          • Don Benson

            Dominic: it’s your second suggestion. Evolution is a stepwise change in an organism over generations. In bacteria, resistance to an antibiotic is achieved through this evolutionary process but it doesn’t necessarily mean that the result is something that isn’t a bacteria. It’s a very well known phenomenon, demonstrable all around us.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Oh, right. So the first organism that decided it wanted to be land-borne instead of water-borne had to wait for multifarious generations of unknown number to pass by before it was adapted to step out onto land?

            I’m sorry. Belief in the hundreds of billions of ‘chances’ occurring that are needed for evolution to be true is simply far too much for me. I find I can only believe in Creator God who has told us exactly how he created it.

      • Martin


        Can you demonstrate the descent of all life from the LUCA by breeding from said LUCA?

  • CliveM

    One of your best, Mrs P.

    Which is more then can be said of our present government. I don’t need ideological purity, I’d settle for competence. Even occasional competence.

    But give it its due, it’s got stupidity and uselessness down to a fine art.

  • bluedog

    Simply super, Mrs P. One wonders where you get such brilliant ideas and vivid imagery. Walking past the palace, one catches a waft of what may be autumn leaves burning, or is it a more exotic substance?

  • Sybaseguru

    When I first read this I thought its maybe far fetched, but remembered posting parcels at the local PO. You get the full interrogation treatment. In fact its easier to get on a plane – at least their rules for things with batteries in make some sense. And never tell them its a phone or its the last you’ll see of it.

  • TropicalAnglican

    I had occasion to tangle with the atheistic, pro-evolution oncologist who was treating my terminally ill father.
    He said, “Do you really believe in Adam and Eve and all that?”
    I said (OK, I may have said it a bit shortly), “I do think it is rather more logical to believe we are descended from human beings than from apes.”

    • Chefofsinners

      Heard on Thought for the Day yesterday:
      “And yet lust cannot be wrong, because without it there would be no evolution.” – Richard Harries, sometime Bishop of Oxford.

      • Anton

        He has said worse than that; he was blathering on about the call to prayer from mosques being a wonderful manifestation of the riches of multicultural society the other year.

        • john in cheshire

          I wonder if that’s what priest Jacques Hamel thought before a muslim slit his throat?

          • Demon Teddy Bear

            The question is who on earth it is that continually appoints charmless idiots like this to bishoprics?

          • Dominic Stockford

            Other charmless idiots.

      • writhledshrimp

        He wrote a book, “Godless Morality” The longest, most boring, hardest to read book that said nothing, that I have ever read. I read it 20 plus years ago and I am still bored by it.

        • Anton

          You have a good cure for insomnia, anyway, and an emergency supply of toilet paper.

      • IrishNeanderthal

        I remember Richard Harries appearing on “Who’s afraid of the Ten Commandments”, hosted by Melvyn Bragg. Lord Ahmed, who appeared in the same episode, screwed up his face in a look of disgust at the unbelief of the then-bish.

    • Sarky

      Descended from apes?? Since when??
      We come from the same branch as apes, but don’t descend directly from them.
      Christians really need to have a proper understanding before shooting their mouths off.

      • Dominic Stockford

        You’re right – evolutionists believe we’re descended from amoeba.

  • As the friends of Mr. Weinstein disappear faster than the Hildabeast’s emails

    Weinstein’s antics are the least of it. Corey Feldman talked last year about the sexual abuse of child actors, saying that his friend Corey Haim was first raped at the age of eleven. In this Twitter video Feldman says, ‘I was surrounded by them [pædophiles] when I was 14 years old…they were everywhere, like vultures.’

    • Anton

      Is Weinstein said to have had sex with child actors?

      All this Weinstein crap isn’t news. What is the government doing that it doesn’t want us to know about?

      I don’t know if he actually raped anybody but certainly in most cases the sex was consensual, because the actresses wanted the parts in his films more than they didn’t want to have sex with him. Nobody seems prepared to say that at the moment. Doubtless the feminists will want the definition of rape extended further.

      • @ Anton—Is Weinstein said to have had sex with child actors?
        As far as I know, Weinstein took no sexual interest in children of either sex.

        What is the government doing that it doesn’t want us to know about?
        Amber Crud is probably the creature to ask.

      • “I don’t know if he actually raped anybody but certainly in most cases the sex was consensual, because the actresses wanted the parts in his films more than they didn’t want to have sex with him.”

        You don’t think such abuse of power involving young women constitutes non consensual sex? The fact he didn’t physically overpower and force himself on them means it wasn’t rape? If he’d held a knife to their throats and they agreed to sex, this would be different because they wanted to live more than they didn’t want sex with him?

        • Anton

          If the woman is able to walk away from the man at any time without physical violence or its threat then the sex is consensual, is it not? What is your definition of rape?

          • Jack is no lawyer but the capacity to exercise free choice without constraint would be certainly be included.

          • Anton

            You’re on a slippery slope. Can you define free choice and do you regard constraint as meaning more than physical?

          • Have a read. A decent prosecutor could advance a case that consent to sexual activity was not given:

            Context is all important to the consideration of freedom and capacity to choose. It is necessary to focus on complainant’s state of mind in the context of all the relevant circumstances. These will include:
            – their age, maturity and understanding;
            – whether s/he knew or understood the position they were in and what they were being asked to do;
            – the history of the relationship between the complainant and suspect;
            – position of power over the complainant; and, especially for younger and/or vulnerable victims:
            – any earlier provision by the suspect of any gifts, alcohol or drugs;
            – promises by the suspect of a more secure or exciting way of life;
            – insincere compliments and/or kindness shown by the suspect;
            – any other evidence of exploitation or grooming so that s/he may not understand the full significance of what they are doing.

            Vulnerable victims
            Vulnerable victims are targeted by offenders for a whole range of reasons, including the belief by offenders that:
            – the complainants are more likely to succumb to pressure or intimidation on them to “comply” with the offender’s sexual advances;
            – in some cases they may be less likely to have “home support” where the suspected abuse will be noticed or acted on;
            – they are less likely to report the abuse in the first place due to their vulnerabilities;
            – if they do report, they are less likely to follow it through to giving evidence;
            – they will not be believed by those to whom they report it, the CPS when deciding if to charge and, ultimately, the jury;
            – overall, the likelihood of detection and prosecution is low.


            Go ahead, make a case for the defence.

          • Manfarang

            “promises by the suspect of a more secure or exciting way of life;”
            That is Donald Trump done in.

          • Many of the young women who Weinstein preyed upon were at the start of their careers, away from home, attending job interviews in an industry dominated by a man who could ruin their future prospects.

          • Manfarang

            The Rules-
            “One: when you have to talk business, stick to offices—and office hours. Two: refer invitations and offers to your agent. Three: don’t give your home phone number, give your agent’s.”

          • Anton

            Yes it is disgusting, disgraceful and sad. But is it rape?

          • Well, Jack is still waiting on your defence according to the criteria he presented.

          • Anton

            You’ll wait a damn long time then. You see everything in terms of law but not everything is. Someone explained that about 2000 years ago, I recall.

          • Well he clearly breached the moral law of God … no argument there, Jack trusts. What’s disturbing is your suggestion these women were equally culpable.

            We’re dealing here with a civil, criminal issue. That’s why we have governments ordained by God. You’re claiming these women were willing, if somewhat reluctant, participants in Weinstein’s assaults because they had something to gain and were not physically restrained, nor was violence used. However, the law is somewhat broader.

          • Anton

            If you want to restrict it to matters of law then my interest is whether it is rape or not, and only one party is culpable in rape. Carl has already pointed out the relevance of employment law and it may be that blackmail is relevant too. I don’t know and never pretended to.

          • Which is why Jack posted guidance on the legal criteria above.

          • Anton

            There’s more to this than the law as I have repeatedly said, and even in regard to law I’d want advice from someone who’s expert and not part of our exchange.

          • Well you felt free enough to pass judgement on these women and are insistent it is not rape – as defined in civil law.

          • Anton

            Tell me this definition which you seem to regard more highly than the Bible.

            Men like Weinstein might still be nailable on grounds of employment law or blackmail; suits me but I don’t know as I’m not a lawyer.

          • The Mosaic law assumed a Holy People living in a normative society where sex was taking place within marriage. You think this is suited to a secular, increasingly pagan culture?

            It’s not a question of regarding one more highly than another.

            Here’s the English definition:

            (1) A person (A) commits an offence if—

            (a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
            (b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
            (c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

            (2) Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents.
            (3) Sections 75 and 76 apply to an offence under this section.
            (4) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life.

          • Anton

            The biblical definition of rape good enough for you? Or do you want to categorise prostitution as rape too?

          • The Hebrew definition of rape being?

          • Anton

            In your own words, Jack: check it out for yourself.

          • Oh, Jack has. He’s interested in your understanding of how it might apply to Hollywood in the 21st century.

            Go ahead, make the case for the defence.

            [Btw, the New Testament is clear that Christians are to obey the laws of their governing authorities]

          • Anton

            When it comes to burning incense to Caesar, Acts 5:29 cuts in.

            Case for the defence? You endlessly think of Christianity in terms of law. This is about the meaning of rape. Please see the dialogue I posted above to Magnolia.

          • Jack did see your post to Magnolia. You should be ashamed of yourself. You’re basically saying: “They’re all whores.”

            You are placing responsibility on the women he sexually assaulted, claiming: “the actresses wanted the parts in his films more than they didn’t want to have sex with him.” You don’t know this. Have you read any of their accounts? Conveniently, you omit context and the pressure and power this man wielded before, during and after the assaults.

            Yes it is about the meaning of rape, not Christian law, (what a ludicrous comment) and this is defined and codified in civil statute which we are all obliged to follow unless it contravenes divine law and then we should be prepared to face to consequences.

          • Anton

            I consider that you should be ashamed of yourself. Your worldview is a lot more infected with modern secularism than you realise. Rape means physical coercion or its threat and it is extraordinary that the dilution of that definition by militant feminists is something that a Catholic is willing to go along with. Carl gets it. I am calling nobody a whore who does not take money for sex, and that is not the issue regarding Weinstein. I would add, though, that if a daughter of mine wanted to make it in films and said that she slept with the producer to get on set then I should consider I had brought her up badly rather than consider she had been raped.

          • Again, you’ve placed responsibility on your daughter:
            ” …. if a daughter of mine wanted to make it in films and said that she slept with the producer to get on set then I should consider I had brought her up badly rather than consider she had been raped.”
            You would entertain the idea that she had acted under duress or fear and that she’d been exploited?

          • Anton

            Fear of what? If fear of physical force then it’s rape. If fear of not getting on set then she’s letting herself be exploited. Answer me this: in the latter case, what’s stopping her walking away?

          • In the word’s of one victim: “being crushed.” That’s why they were passive and stayed silent after the event. Not to mention the attitudes you are displaying here. Young people are vulnerable to all sorts of fears and inhibitions that predators exploit.

          • Anton

            Does “being crushed” mean “being beaten to a pulp” or does it mean “having my career crushed before it began”? The former is rape. The latter might invoke blackmail law or employment law and I’d not be sorry to see a man like that get his come-uppance but the casting couch has been notorious for decades. One would do better to say No, to walk away in disappointment, get over it and try again elsewhere or find another career.

          • “Crushed” as is psychologically, materially, one’s reputation, self esteem etc.

            If a person is “blackmailed” into sex then that is sex by extortion using fear i.e. rape. If a woman says she does not want to have sex, then it would be against her will.

          • Anton

            But she can say No, can’t she?

            In this present evil age, in which men like Weinstein flourish, there is sadly a price to doing the right thing. The right thing is to say No. If she can’t say No out of physical fear then let her bring rape proceedings, and I’ll be shouting for her. If she wishes to bring employment law or blackmail proceedings against him then I’d support her too. But No is what she should say, unconditionally. It may cost her, the career she hoped for but doing the right thing doesn’t come cheap in this present evil age. We learn that throughout the Bible.

          • But they do say “No” and this is ignored. And, at the time, reporting to the authorities would be pointless and merely compound the harm they suffered. Do you know how difficult it is to report a sexual assault?

          • Anton

            If she said No and it was ignored then it was rape.

          • Even though she submitted unwillingly and didn’t physically wrest herself free from him?

          • Anton

            If the reason is fear of physical coercion then it’s rape as much as actual physical coercion. Otherwise not.

          • “Coercion” is not restricted in law to physical coercion or the threat of physical coercion.

          • Anton

            As I have said how many times here, I am interested in the moral aspects of this issue. The law may or may not match good morality; we are all aware that there are evil laws today.

          • You don’t consider this man’s behaviour immoral or having women submit to his will for sex without consent, wrong?! Read the accounts.

          • Rhoda

            When Potiphar’s wife tried to seduce Joseph, he escaped leaving his coat behind so that she accused him of the very thing he had been avoiding. He made the right choice and paid a very high price. Doing the right thing will cost.

          • Indeed it does but not all of us are as blessed as Joseph. We have to tread a more difficult path and learn lessons the hard way.

          • Rhoda

            We have to tread a more difficult path?
            Joseph had been sold into slavery by his brothers, and then spent many years in prison for something he didn’t do.

          • magnolia

            Seems to me Mr Weinstein was the one on the slippery slope. Even had these relationships been consensual they were adulterous, shallow, lustful and immoral. There is no reason to suppose Jesus gives a free pass to arty types or Hollywood types on such issues, though to read the gossip mags you might think so.

            Like any such issue it is above all sad, and not the fulness of life Jesus came to bring- either for Weinstein or the women. Young women are often heavily encultured with a desire to please, and tendency to look up to powerful talented men. In such circumstances the bar for consent is probably rather higher, and the men are not innocents and should know that well. After all it is these things which they rely upon, is it not?

          • Manfarang

            I hate to tell you this Harvey Weinstein is Jewish and Jews don’t tend to take little notice about someone they see as a false messiah.
            That being said Weinstein is a great embarrassment to the Jews.

          • magnolia

            Nevertheless there are the ten commandments, and I believe everyone meets Jesus after death anyway, without any discrimination as to what they did or did not believe nor what faith they held!

          • Manfarang

            Dust to dust.

          • Anton

            “Will you sleep with me next week if I let you star in a film?”


            “Will you sleep with me now for ten dollars?”

            “What sort of woman do you think I am?”

            “You already answered that.”

          • So all these women were whores?

            In the meeting, Evans recalled, “he immediately was simultaneously flattering me and demeaning me and making me feel bad about myself.” Weinstein told her that she’d “be great in ‘Project Runway’ ”—the show, which Weinstein helped produce, premièred later that year—but only if she lost weight. He also told her about two scripts, a horror movie and a teen love story, and said one of his associates would discuss them with her.

            “At that point, after that, is when he assaulted me,” Evans said. “He forced me to perform oral sex on him.” As she objected, Weinstein took his penis out of his pants and pulled her head down onto it. “I said, over and over, ‘I don’t want to do this, stop, don’t,’ ” she recalled. “I tried to get away, but maybe I didn’t try hard enough. I didn’t want to kick him or fight him.” In the end, she said, “he’s a big guy. He overpowered me.” She added, “I just sort of gave up. That’s the most horrible part of it, and that’s why he’s been able to do this for so long to so many women: people give up, and then they feel like it’s their fault.”

            Sexual assault or the behaviour of a whore?

          • Anton

            If you actually read what I wrote, you will see that the woman in my hypothetical scenario declined sex for money, and is not therefore a whore. She is, however, perfectly prepared to use her body to get what she wants.

            I do not know if Evans was *physically* coerced. If so then it was certainly rape.

          • “Will you sleep with me next week if I let you star in a film?”

            That’s selling your body for material gain i.e. prostitution.

          • Anton

            I do not have to conform my definitions to your made-up dictionary.

          • You gave it here:

            “Will you sleep with me now for ten dollars?”
            “What sort of woman do you think I am?”
            “You already answered that.”

          • Anton

            The point that my hypothetical mogul was making is not that she is a whore but that there are situations other than love and marriage for which she will give her body and he is probing where she draws the line.

          • carl jacobs

            I don’t know about the UK but in the US making sex a condition of employment falls under the category of sexual harassment. It will get you fired and sued and arrested. But it’s legally not rape. “Sleep with me or I will ruin your prospects” still offers the option of “No, I will let my prospects be ruined and do something else.” It is not equivalent to and should not be equated with the woman who is dragged into an alley with a knife at her throat.

          • Weinstein’s behaviour was subtle and sinister – and as much a violation as forcing himself on a woman. A man who can ruin your future prospects if you refuse his advances is more pernicious than an offer of employment conditional on sex. The law in Britain extends rape beyond physical force and violence – and so it should.

          • carl jacobs

            Withholding something you desire is not the same as taking something you possess. These are two very different concepts.

          • A person’s future, self esteem, reputation and aspirations, is a valued

            If a person is “blackmailed” into sex that is extortion, using fear, and constitutes rape. If a woman says she does not want to have sex, then it is against her will.

          • carl jacobs

            Jack, when I was 25 years old, I sacrificed a settled secure future to include my reputation and my self-esteem. I had to completely rebuild my life from scratch. Every vision, every dream I had harbored since the age of 11 was dead by my own hand and for the sake of moral principle. I have done what you are saying people cannot do. You are demeaning those women who, when confronted with this circumstance, would bear the cost and say “No.”

          • Well, thank God you were given His grace to do so and had the integrity of character to do so, Carl.
            However, not everyone is as blessed, mature, determined and driven by moral principles as you are. We’re not talking about a Faustian Pact here. We’re considering young women, lured to be unexpectedly alone in a room with a persistent sexual predator who then uses surprise, intimidation, mental pressure and degrees of physical force to get them to submit to his desires. They are not saying “Yes” and their “No” is ignored. And both he and they both know reporting his assaults to the authorities will achieve nothing but compound their shame. If they failed, it was here. But then reporting sexual assault, let alone in an inhospitable environment, believing your report will go unheard, is expecting great fortitude at a time when one’s self dignity and esteem has been ravaged.

          • Hi

            Unfortunately this stuff also goes on in other environments and the threat is of career ruination and the fear that no male colleague would trust her again, complete with a collective wall of silence by colleagues who fear rocking boats .

            My sister Rachel was a successful merchant banker in the city and got causal sexism and antisemitism. She regularly got her bottom fondled and was called “the kike” (rather ironic as anti Semites think Jews run the banks) and was heavily criticised by male colleagues for not “showing off her hot body” i.e. wearing short skirts , tops showing cleavage, high heels & was forced to work during Shabbat . She gave it up. Their loss.

            But it shouldn’t be that way.

          • Dominic Stockford

            These men are the best buddies of those who ‘run’ this country – some of them even become those who ‘run’ this country. its no wonder we’re in such a stew.

          • bluedog

            Rachel was clearly in the wrong bank and made the mistake in working in the institutional/wholesale area. The only hope is private banking which is where the grown-ups live and the clients are very interesting indeed.

          • carl jacobs

            Producer: “If you want the part, you must sleep with me.’

            Aspiring Actress: “No.”

            Producer: “I also have the power to destroy your acting career. You should think again.”

            At this very moment, Jack, with whom does volition reside?

          • But you and Jack both know this is not how Weinstein operated.

          • carl jacobs

            Is that a concession of defeat? Because it sounds like a concession of defeat. You must answer “With the aspiring actress” but if you do so then your case collapses. So instead you appeal to “surprise, intimidation, mental pressure” without ever explaining how they remove volition. And you also add “degrees of physical force”. Well, if you have the last condition, you don’t need the other three. Answer clearly. Did they possess the physical ability to leave his presence?

            You also side-stepped the fact that you demeaned women who make a different decision by attributing it to some superlative attribute of character. Why does it take special character to make the right choice? You do agree it is the right choice, correct?

            So let me change my scenario a little.

            Producer: “If you want the part, you must murder my wife.’

            Aspiring Actress: “No.”

            Producer: “I also have the power to destroy your acting career. You should think again. And don’t think of telling anyone. They won’t believe you.”

            Are you still going to appeal to “surprise, intimidation, mental pressure and degrees of physical force” as justification? Or are you suddenly going to demand a much more constrained answer?

          • Again, if you read any of the accounts about Weinstein then you would know he didn’t operate in this way. He didn’t pose questions allowing for an act of free will. Here’s what Jack posted below:

            In the meeting, Evans recalled, “he immediately was simultaneously flattering me and demeaning me and making me feel bad about myself.” Weinstein told her that she’d “be great in ‘Project Runway’ ”—the show, which Weinstein helped produce, premièred later that year—but only if she lost weight. He also told her about two scripts, a horror movie and a teen love story, and said one of his associates would discuss the with her.

            “At that point, after that, is when he assaulted me,” Evans said. “He forced me to perform oral sex on him.” As she objected, Weinstein took his penis out of his pants and pulled her head down onto it. “I said, over and over, ‘I don’t want to do this, stop, don’t,’ ” she recalled. “I tried to get away, but maybe I didn’t try hard enough. I didn’t want to kick him o fight him.” In the end, she said, “he’s a big guy. He overpowered me.” She added, “I just sort of gave up. That’s the most horrible part of it, and that’ why he’s been able to do this for so long to so many women: people give up, and then they feel like it’s their fault.”

            This is his modus operandi. Now, use your imagination.

            Let’s see how Rose McGowan’s allegations of rape pan out.

          • carl jacobs

            That’s a clear cut case of rape. “He assaulted …” “He forced …” “He pulled …” “He over-powered …” You don’t need to make any other case because volition is removed by force. That fits the definition rape that Anton is defending.

            What if he said “Submit or I will beat you.” “Submit or I will kill you.” “Submit or I will kill your parents.” That is also rape. Clear cut and non-controversial. That also fits the definition that Anton is defending.

            But “Submit or I will deny you your aspiration to be an actress”? That is the condition that you seem to assert counts as rape by itself. Am I mistaken?

          • You are mistaken, yes, although reading the thread Jack overstated the psychological, manipulative dimension and not the use of force in initiating these assaults. It was playing on the aspirations that prevented the women reporting these assaults in the context of this man’s power and influence in his industry and the degenerate culture of Hollywood. All the victim accounts have this same pattern. A defence attorney would probably seize on this: “I tried to get away, but maybe I didn’t try hard enough. I didn’t want to kick him or fight him.”

            This one is maybe not so clear cut, though Jack would contend it is assault:

            At first, Weinstein was solicitous, praising her work. Then he left the room. When he returned, he was wearing a bathrobe and holding a bottle of lotion. “He asks me to give a massage. I was, like, ‘Look, man, I am no f*cking fool,’ ” Argento told me. “But, looking back, I am a f*cking fool. And I am still trying to come to grips with what happened.”

            Argento said that, after she reluctantly agreed to give Weinstein a massage, he pulled her skirt up, forced her legs apart, and performed oral sex on her as she repeatedly told him to stop. Weinstein “terrified me, and he was so big,” she said. “It wouldn’t stop. It was a nightmare.”

            At some point, she stopped saying no and feigned enjoyment, because she thought it was the only way the assault would end. “I was not willing,” she told me. “I said, ‘No, no, no.’ . . . It’s twisted. A big fat man wanting to eat you. It’s a scary fairy tale.” Argento, who insisted that she wanted to tell her story in all its complexity, said that she didn’t physically fight him off, something that has prompted years of guilt.”

          • carl jacobs

            You are mistaken, yes

            Then I don’t think we disagree.

            It was his playing on the aspirations of these women that prevented them reporting the assaults in the context of this man’s power and influence in his industry and the degenerate culture of Hollywood.

            That is a hugely important point. You are absolutely right about that.

            A defence attorney would …

            Yes, well. First we kill all the lawyers.

            And why wouldn’t “submit or I will ruin your life” qualify as rape?

            It very well might. What does “ruin your life” mean? This is why I focused on the difference between:

            a. Having something you possess taken from you.
            b. Being denied something that you desire.

            The latter circumstance cannot ruin your life.

          • As Jack answered above:

            “A person’s future, self esteem, reputation and aspirations, is a valued

            If a person is “blackmailed” into sex that is extortion, using fear, that constitutes rape. If a woman says she does not want to have sex, then it is against her will.”

          • carl jacobs

            And I am the living refutation of that argument. Futures can be altered. Self-esteem can be rebuilt around a new plan. Aspirations can be re-directed. You cannot be ruined by not achieving what you have not yet achieved.

          • No, you’re not. Perhaps morally these women should have walked away. The Catholic Church has canonised women who have allowed themselves to be murdered rather than submitting to rape. But the civil law doesn’t set the bar quite so high – it considers the actual person in a particular situation and the intention of the alleged perpetrator. One can be fairly certain Weinstein selected his victims carefully and tested their resolve in stages. It’s highly unlikely he would make a move on a resolute woman with confidence and determination. Predators prey on the weak and know how to spot them.

          • Anton

            Stop conflating the physically weak and the morally weak.

            It is despicable that these women were faced with the choice of career or chasteness. But choice it was, unless it was denied them physically.

          • Do you comprehend the concept of “consent.” It wasn’t about a “choice” career/prospects and consensually submitting to sex. Read the two accounts Jack has posted.

          • Royinsouthwest

            I agree that it must be illegal according to some law or other, and despicable by any standards of morality, but except where physical force or threats of force are involved wouldn’t it be a case of blackmail rather than rape? Either way it should be punished.

          • Anton


          • Sarky

            Don’t make excuses for that piece of crap please Anton.

          • Anton

            I’m not doing. I’m insisting on the proper definition of rape, a much more important issue.

      • meltemian

        The US media appear to be using it to avoid telling us the truth about the ‘Las Vegas Massacre’ ………Look, a squirrell!!

    • IanCad

      Twitter vid didn’t play Johnny. Tried this link instead:

      The hostility shown towards Harvey Weinstein may backfire big time.

      “Let all the poison that lurks in the mud, hatch out.”
      Robert Graves

  • carl jacobs

    We, the Militant Calvinists for a New Reformation, are deeply offended by this weblog post. We therefore issue the following NON-NEGOTIABLE demands.

    1. The immediate resignation of the so-called “bishop” in Barchester.
    2. The immediate adoption by the weblog of the Regulative Principles of Argument.
    3. The right to edit the posts of ne’er-do-well Catholic commenters, especially those who live in Scotland.

    If our demands are not met within 24 hours, we will launch a Denial of Presupposition Attack that will bring this weblog to its knees.

    You have been warned.


    • Stercus accidit.

      • carl jacobs

        No one believes you know Latin, btw. We all know you are skulking off to Google Translate.

        • Royinsouthwest

          Surely Jacob Rees Mogg isn’t the only person in Britain who knows Latin? Jack does appear to be the erudite type who the Moggster would get on with. At any rate I think they would have more in common with each other than either does with the Inspector.

          • A fine upstanding man and politician.

        • Quid quid latinae dictum set, altrum sonar.

    • Chefofsinners

      If it’s meant to be, it’ll happen.

      • A confluence of events with a predetermined end, so to speak.

        • Chefofsinners

          Definitely not anything to do with free will.

          • Yes, Will should be freed immediately. He is innocent.

    • Mrs Proudie of Barchester


      • carl jacobs

        You have been sentenced in absentia to read the Westminster Confession of Faith until you can recite it from memory without error. Including the part about the Pope being the anti-Christ.

        And no hobnobs,


        • What is this: “in absentia”?! A “dead” language perchance?

          • carl jacobs

            Nice try. It’s in Webster’s.

          • But what language is it?

            Oh — “This expression is Latin for “in absence”; its use in English dates from the late 1800s.”

          • carl jacobs

            But what language is it?

            That would be the English language since it appears in an English language dictionary. It’s in the OED as well. The word has been absorbed, as it were. Its origin may be Latin but it is now wholly part of the English language.

          • It’s remains Latin; its meaning is fixed. It’s used on official, formal documents. Just as many Latin words and expressions are used in medicine and the law for the very same reason. Jack has never heard anyone – ever – saying: “I knocked on his door and left the note in absentia.”


          • carl jacobs

            Yes, just like “ergo” is still a Latin word. Oh, wait.

            “In absentia” may normally be used in a legal context, but that doesn’t make it any less an English word. And that doesn’t mean in could never be applied in other contexts. It just normally isn’t.

            Dead, Jack. Latin is dead, dead, dead. It’s kicked the bucket. Shuffled off this mortal coil. Joined the choir immortal. It’s an ex-language.

          • Daemon is in the OED too. It may not be commonly used, being old fashioned, but it is still a legitimate extant word – albeit its origin is a language fixed in meaning, now only used by the erudite, scholars and is the official language of the Vatican State and the Roman Catholic Church.

          • carl jacobs

            It’s an archaic spelling of “demon”. The word “daemon” has been absorbed by the Tech world and that will drive its meaning in the future. It is now a word of Latin origin in the process of being completely severed from its roots.

          • Archaic simply means old fashioned. It is not “dead”. When you’re old and grey you will be archaic too and probably set in your ways.

            English spelling and meaning of words change constantly – that’s what the analogy “living” signifies. Words develop, shift meaning, as does spelling. Latin, on the other hand, being fixed, has meanings that are stable, do not change in meaning or spelling , and transcend cultures. This gives constancy and stability in a changing world. As Jack said, it is the language of scholars …. and thus, probably unsuited to Americans.

          • carl jacobs

            And does anyone actually speak Latin in the Vatican, or do they just publish official official documents in it?

          • One’s sources inform him: “Ascendo tuum!” is heard quite frequently these days.

            Yours is an … (ahem) argumentum ad ignorantiame. So let’s have no … (cough) argumentum ad nauseam about it. You have failed to demonstrate your case and may be tempted to use … (splutter )argumentum ad hominem.

          • Chefofsinners

            Fifty percent of the words in the OED are from Latin roots. Your roots are your great grandparents. But they are dead.

  • IrishNeanderthal

    For those who approve of the Hildabeast, a Twitter chain drawn to my attention:

    Donald J.Trump:

    . . . We cannot keep FEMA, the Military & the First Responders, who have been amazing (under the most difficult circumstances) in P.R. forever!

    Governor Howard Dean:

    What we should do is turn over the rehab of Puerto Rico to the Clinton Foundation. They know what they are doing. You have no clue.

    Julian Assange

    Brilliant idea! They can use all the money they looted from Haiti

  • Royinsouthwest

    These Calvinists get everywhere and they are still as ill-mannered and intolerant as ever. Some of them even walked out of a dinner with the Pope.

    Prisoners walk out on lunch with Pope Francis

    Two inmates from the coastal city of Napoli have escaped after having lunch with the pope in the historic city of Bologna. Pope Francis has long advocated for prisoners’ rehabilitation into society. Two inmates escaped during a lunch event with Pope Francis at the Basilica of San Petronio earlier this month, Bologna-based newspaper Il Resto del Carlino reported on Wednesday.

    The report did not give the prisoners’ names but does anyone know if Len has been in Italy recently?

    • carl jacobs

      Len? A Calvinist?


      • Faciem durum cacantis habes.

        • carl jacobs

          Len will pop a blood vessel over this.

          He said I was a WHAT!?”

          • You understand it? Jack isn’t sure what it means!

          • carl jacobs

            What, your Latin phrase? No, I was referring to Len discovering that someone thought he was a Calvinist. The concussion from his reaction might temporarily take down our weblog host’s server.

          • Be far worse if he was mistaken for a Roman Catholic. He’ll go along with it because it opposes Catholicism.

    • Dominic Stockford

      I’m glad they left – such a meal is a cruel and unusual punishment, above and beyond what any man should have to endure.

      • Fear not; it’s unlikely you’ll ever be invited – although with Pope Francis anything is possible. Just hope and pray you respond to the invitation to the Lord’s banquet and not then booted out for lack of the garment of righteousness – self righteousness does not count.

        • Dominic Stockford

          I am sure and certain of the resurrection to eternal life through my Lord Jesus Christ – I trust in the promises of Christ.

          • “I trust in the promises of Christ. Made of course, to those who have an understanding that NOTHING WHATSOEVER THEY DO makes them righteous, and nothing makes us righteous.”

            Christ’s promise was conditional on a mental understanding?
            So who claims that man’s works can make them “righteous”?

  • Subucula tua apparet.

  • not a machine

    A dream Mrs Proudie ? did you not know that Mr Oggle already knows most of what you and the deacon and everyone else does , I mean my favourite question of the moment , is why when you press the delete button is it not deleted ? Dear dear now I hear people now worried being permanently attached to phone may not be any good for them ,still I perhaps pondered some time ago that people living in 2 realities would have a casualty of one place or another .
    other news models so far show SW of Ireland and W coast of N Ireland will take the brunt of currently graded hurricane Ophelia , whilst track can move its just been graded at a cat 3 although when it makes landfall it is expected to be cat 1 , mmm so whats the big deal Atlantic storms have always happened , well a cat 3 this far N is very very rare , however in the future may not be as the weather patterns change .

  • Be as prerogative as you like – Carl and Martin deserve it. As we Latin types say: Potentia vobiscum.

    • carl jacobs

      Be as prerogative as you like – Carl and Martin deserve it.

      That’s true. As Calvinists, we do deserve the prerogative. It’s derived from our bearing witness to the Truth. Glad you agree, Jack.

      Prerogative – noun : a right or privilege exclusive to a particular individual or class.

      • Deodamnatus!

        Tace atque abi.

        • carl jacobs

          Heh heh heh.

          • Puto vos esse molestissimos.
            [This app is great fun]

          • Dominic Stockford

            Ad multos annos…

            No, forget I said that.

  • IanCad

    As always, a delight Mrs. P.
    I perceive a little militancy emerging within your lessons. About time someone is talking about a clean sweep being made of the cabinet. Apart from Davis the entire sorry lot need replacing, including Michael Fallon – surely the biggest money waster of them all.
    Civil liberties are in danger; drip by drip they disappear. The Conservative Party is no longer to be trusted with what was bequeathed to us with blood and treasure.

  • In Jack’s experience, many, if not all, psychological and psychiatric problems have a spiritual dimension. One cannot separate the soul and mind – they interact with each other. Imagine the damage to soul and mind of sexual abuse at the hands of God’s representative on earth! How can the pain, suffering, broken lives and spiritual and mental turmoil be adequately “compensated” for?

  • Dominic Stockford

    Most people are doomed. Sad.

    • “Time is but a shadow, a dream; already God sees us in glory and takes joy in our eternal beatitude. How this thought helps my soul! I understand then why He lets us suffer.”

      “My whole strength lies in prayer and sacrifice, these are my invincible arms; they can move hearts far better than words, I know it by experience.”

      (Saint Theresa of Lisieux)

      • Dominic Stockford

        I much prefer God’s Word: “…the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.”

  • DespiteBrexit

    “From memory the CU was full of fundamentalist* Protestant Evangelicals , their shindig didn’t like liberal Anglicans or Catholics, so there was a separate “angsoc” (liberals and high church types) and “cathsoc” (who predictably had their own bar).”
    When were you there? I recall it being somewhat more welcoming than that.

  • Father David

    Isn’t it marvellous news – Mrs. Hillary “What Happened” Clinton has been given an Honorary Doctorate from Swansea University. It would be even better news if Mr Donald “We’re gonna build a wall” Trump were to be given a similar Doctorate from Pyongyang University.

    • Rhoda

      Not really. There is much better news from the church in Lebanon of many Syrian refugees turning to Christ and continuing in their new found faith wherever they have ended up around the world.

      • Father David

        Praise God!

        • Rhoda


          • Father David

            So be it!

    • Chefofsinners

      Mortar boards off to the subtle sarcasm of Swansea University in awarding Hillary a doctor of law degree. For she and her husband have doctored the laws of the United States more than most.
      And then some card suggested they rename their centre for criminology the ‘Hillary Rodham Clinton Centre’! Genius.

      • Father David

        Gweddw crefft heb ei dawn

        • Chefofsinners

          You don’t have to tell me. I took my first degree at Swansea. It is distressing to see how standards have plummeted.

  • Father David

    Hooray, the Brussels Brexit talks are now going to “accelerate”!
    From nought to five MPH in 16 months.

  • Maxine Schell

    Mrs. Proudie, you can be rather naughty !!