Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Cameron nails his 95 Theses to the door of Europe


David Cameron's speech on Britain's future in the EU is a game-changer: vote Conservative in 2015 and you will get an In/Out referendum within two years. This is contingent on nothing but his premiership: whether he wins the election outright or leads another coalition, the Prime Minister will attempt to re-negotiate a path of subsidiarity with our EU partners, in which he may or may not be successful. But whatever the outcome, he will be put it to the people, and the choice will be In or Out.

This is seismic. Really, truly momentous. For the first time since 1962, the British leader of a major political party talked in terms of the geography that has shaped our national psyche; of our island history being antithetical to the continental drive for 'ever closer union'. It was exactly 50 years ago that Hugh Gaitskell talked of discarding 1000 years of history, when he warned: ‘You may say, “All right, Let it end!” But, my goodness, it’s a decision which needs a little care and thought.’

And David Cameron has clearly been applying some thought:
From Caesar’s legions to the Napoleonic Wars. From the Reformation, the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution to the defeat of Nazism. We have helped to write European history, and Europe has helped write ours.
But England and the UK has always faced out to the high seas, not gazed longingly at European empires. The Prime Minister is 'not a British isolationist' because Britain never has been isolationist. But he is concerned with the 'lack of democratic accountability and consent' in the EU, which, he says, is 'felt particularly acutely in Britain'. And taking up his Reformation theme:
The biggest danger to the European Union comes not from those who advocate change, but from those who denounce new thinking as heresy. In its long history Europe has experience of heretics who turned out to have a point.
Casting himself as Luther, Calvin or His Grace, he called for 'fundamental, far-reaching change' to the Europe steeped in Roman Catholic Social Teaching. He demanded more competitiveness - a healthy dose of the Protestant work ethic supported by the Anglo-Saxon drive for free trade. This is his 'driving mission' - to prioritise 'the tasks that get European officials up in the morning – and keep them working late into the night'. The alternative is 'sclerotic, ineffective decision making that is holding us back'.

Then he talks of flexibility; a kind of evangelical alliance 'that can accommodate the diversity of its members'. There must be, he said, 'a common set of rules and a way of enforcing them'. But he insisted that 'we also need to be able to respond quickly to the latest developments and trends'.

Eschewing rigid catholicity, he expounded: 'We must not be weighed down by an insistence on a one size fits all approach which implies that all countries want the same level of integration. The fact is that they don’t and we shouldn’t assert that they do.'

And striking at the heart of temporal power, he made a momentous 'heretical proposition':
The European Treaty commits the Member States to “lay the foundations of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe”.

This has been consistently interpreted as applying not to the peoples but rather to the states and institutions compounded by a European Court of Justice that has consistently supported greater centralisation.

We understand and respect the right of others to maintain their commitment to this goal. But for Britain – and perhaps for others – it is not the objective.

And we would be much more comfortable if the Treaty specifically said so freeing those who want to go further, faster, to do so, without being held back by the others.
Welcome to the new EEC - the Eurosceptic Eurovision of Cameron. It has vision, but no mechanism for ensuring it. Power must flow back to Member States, but not an inch of subsidiarity has ever been achieved by any British prime minister. He is about to implement a complete audit of EU competences (which is, in itself, a seismic development). This will reveal 'where the EU helps and where it hampers'.

An in this great new Reformation, 'nothing should be off the table'. There must be 'a bigger and more significant role for national parliaments' because 'there is not...a single European demos'.

At last, the truth has been articulated. We are not European citizens, but diverse peoples across many nations, with different histories, traditions and values.
It is national parliaments, which are, and will remain, the true source of real democratic legitimacy and accountability in the EU.
Power should flow up from the people. He is right to point out that 'people feel that the EU is heading in a direction that they never signed up to'; that they 'resent the interference in our national life by what they see as unnecessary rules and regulation'; and that they 'wonder what the point of it all is'.

He is even more right to observe that many 'feel that the EU is now heading for a level of political integration that is far outside Britain’s comfort zone'.

And he admits the reality of 'referendums promised – but not delivered'.

And so, for the first time since 1975, we are to have a referendum. He will campaign for an 'In', based on the success of his renegotiations. But the inference is clear: if he is not successful, he can conceive of a UK exit from the EU. And there is a simple reason for a post-election referendum:
The European Union that emerges from the Eurozone crisis is going to be a very different body. It will be transformed perhaps beyond recognition by the measures needed to save the Eurozone. We need to allow some time for that to happen – and help to shape the future of the European Union, so that when the choice comes it will be a real one.
Of course the referendum is contingent on a Tory victory. But he was adamant that should another coalition be the result, as long as he remains Prime Minister 'this will happen'.

So, there you have it: a real choice; deep blue water. 'The next Conservative Manifesto in 2015 will ask for a mandate from the British people for a Conservative Government to negotiate a new settlement with our European partners in the next Parliament.' After that, there will be an In/Out referendum. And the Prime Minister made it clear: 'Of course Britain could make her own way in the world, outside the EU, if we chose to do so.' David Cameron has given eurosceptics (and democratic europhiles) every reason to vote Conservative in the General Election of 2015.

Unfortunately, he has given absolutely no reason not to vote UKIP in the Euro elections next year.

69 Comments:

Blogger David Lindsay said...

This speech was drivel.

Oh, well, a warm welcome to the Conservative Party as the third party out of three to support a referendum, not that there is any real need for one, or for renegotiation, rather than for plain and simple primary legislation. Unlike the other two, the Third Party, which based on the Rotherham by-election result may also be called the Fifth Party, is still entirely closed to a referendum on the real issue.

But, like so many other things, it only counts when the Tories say or do it. Everyone else does not exist. Apart from UKIP, obviously. Fleet Street's and the BBC’s beloved eccentric uncles who are therefore saturated with affectionate, wholly uninquiring coverage.

But for serious people, unlike David Cameron, legislation now, next week if possible, with six simple clauses. If playing about with the succession to the Throne can be rushed through both Houses in two days, then so can this.

First, the restoration of the supremacy of British over EU law, and its use to repatriate agricultural, industrial and regional policy while also reclaiming our historic fishing rights (200 miles, or to median line) in accordance with international law.

Secondly, the requirement that, in order to have any effect in the United Kingdom, all EU law pass through both Houses of Parliament as if it had originated in one or other of them.

Thirdly, the requirement that British Ministers adopt the show-stopping Empty Chair Policy until such time as the Council of Ministers meet in public and publish an Official Report akin to Hansard.

Fourthly, the disapplication in the United Kingdom of any ruling of the European Court of Justice or of the European Court of Human Rights unless confirmed by a resolution of the House of Commons, the High Court of Parliament.

Fifthly, the disapplication in the United Kingdom of anything passed by the European Parliament but not by the majority of those MEPs certified as politically acceptable by one or more seat-taking members of the House of Commons.

And sixthly, since apparently we must, the provision for a referendum on the question, “Do you wish the United Kingdom to remain a member of the European Union?” The first five would come into effect at the same time as this provision, and would not be conditional on that referendum’s outcome.

Over to the Opposition Front Bench. Clearly, no one else is going to make the move.

23 January 2013 at 10:23  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace


No one is going to believe Cameron. He promised a referendum before and then failed to deliver.


Does he really believe that none of the other 26 countries will veto the results of renegotiation?


Only by invoking Article 50 (the threat to leave) will the EU take him seriously - he has not done so.

23 January 2013 at 10:54  
Blogger graham wood said...

Excellent Post David Lindsay. It was the speech that should have been made this morning but was not.
Instead of which we got the at least four "IF"s from Cameron

1. IF my promise of a referendum can be believed.

2. IF our "partners" in the EU (actually competitors) kindly agree to dismantle the whole ramshackle EU edifice they have built over the past 40 odd years simply to accomodate the demands of one out of 27 member states.

3.IF the Eurozone lasts long enough to warrant a new Treaty from which the UK would be excluded - leaving us where?

4.IF I am elected back into office.

The non delivery of any ONE of these will scupper all the rest, Mr Dreamyland's empty hopes, and equally empty promises.

23 January 2013 at 10:58  
Blogger gentlemind said...

When the devil makes a compromise it is because he is already guaranteed to get what he wants.

23 January 2013 at 11:53  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

David Lindsay, you have been a prolific writer of number of comments all over the place, and this must be the best of the lot.

23 January 2013 at 11:55  
Blogger Ars Hendrik said...

Listening to Cameron this morning was like being punched in the face by a man with very soft hands. His summary of British history was nonsense, as was his explanation for the origins of the EEC.

As much as I could make out from the drivel and rhetoric, his "Please vote for me and I promise to give you a referendum" is contingent on his renegotiation of our membership in advance of the referendum. Questioned as to whether or not he would recommend a stern "Out" if the renegotiation was unsuccessful, he smiles his dippy smile and offered "I remain optimistic".

That serial nudist Bernard Jenkins was on the radio this morning trumpeting a new dawn was the final six-incher in the coffin.

Oh Gaitskell, where art thou now?

23 January 2013 at 12:11  
Blogger Demetrius said...

Less 95 Theses than a bakers dozen of humbugs.

23 January 2013 at 12:19  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

Cranmer, you are an intelligent man yet you fall for all this?

Seems like the speech has had the desired effect - won back some of the disenchanted True-blues.

Can I remind you that we were promised a referendum on the constitution - so they renamed it a treaty!!!!

There will be no In/Out referendum on EU membership as long as there is an EU

23 January 2013 at 12:19  
Blogger Owl said...

YG, you, of all people, should have learned a lesson from history.

You have been sceptical of Dave in the past, for good reason.

Nothing has changed, this is not even a "caste iron" promise. It is just very soft plastic.

Please understand, Dave wants to stay IN. In power and in the EU (good pensions you know).

How can such a knowledgeable, celestrial body as yourself be taken in by this charlatan.

To be in the slightest bit believable, Dave has to use Article 50 now, not in some imaginary future with 65 ifs and buts.

Sell out does rather come to mind when I even think about his speech.

Back to UKIP then folks.

23 January 2013 at 12:55  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Your Grace,
2017? Why not now?
Cameron has no desire to leave the EU. There may be some logic in seeking changes to our membership but the fundamentals will not change and he knows his proposals will be rejected.
So why wait? It's purely so he can be re-elected as PM. His motivation is to still the backbenchers and the disaffected Tory voters. He is what is known as a scheming B........d.

23 January 2013 at 13:31  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

So wait, we're to believe that a man who has already broken an equally unambiguous promise on a similar issue will now keep his word so long as we all dutifully march out to re-elect him (and of course don't try to stab him in the back)?

No.

23 January 2013 at 14:16  
Blogger Albert said...

This is not a game changer. Cameron knows that the idea of a referendum on these terms is virtually out of the question, because it is highly unlikely that he will be PM after the next election. Like the Lib Dems, he can promise what he likes, because he knows he will not have to deliver. The most he will achieve by this is less back-bench unrest before the election and more Tory seats after the election. It might also give him more power in renegotiation (if this happens at all before the election). But it will not come to pass. Putting it back to 2017 seems like a kind of blackmail.

The other that is weird about your article, Dr Cranmer is the anti-Catholic stuff:

Casting himself as Luther, Calvin or His Grace, he called for 'fundamental, far-reaching change' to the Europe steeped in Roman Catholic Social Teaching.

but then you say applaudingly:

the Prime Minister will attempt to re-negotiate a path of subsidiarity with our EU partners

Apart from the fact that subsidiarity is an integral part of Catholic Social Teaching, in many respects, the Catholic Church practices this doctrine much more effectively than does the CofE. In the end, the administration of the CofE is much more centralised (as per the EU) than is the Catholic Church. When I converted, I was astonished to discover how many things local bishops did differently on administrative levels, which stood under some kind of national policy in the CofE.

23 January 2013 at 14:20  
Blogger Pcm979 said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

23 January 2013 at 14:52  
Blogger Charles Dawne said...

Why wait until 2017 when you can have a referendum in 2015 by voting UKIP?

Cameron knows he will not get a majority next election which is why he is now playing the referendum card. He will not be in power after the next GE so he can say what he likes.

23 January 2013 at 15:39  
Blogger Recusant said...

Pcm979

"I'm reminded of the Spartan's response to Philip II of Spain when he threatened to level Sparta"

Sparta? Philip II of Spain? Well I suppose that, despite being seperated by over 1500 years, you might be right!

As for those frothing about Cameron's reneging on his previous promise to hold a referendum, you might do well to remember that he didn't actually win the election in 2010. He's in a coalition and stood zero chance of getting LibDem backing for a referendum on a treat that Gordon Brown had already signed and parliament ratified. Be realistic. His speech today was a game changer.

Small point, Cranmer. I know it's tempting to try and cram this speech into a framework of 'Brave Plucky Protestant England Takes On The Mad Papist Despots' but this really isn't the 1580's rerun.

23 January 2013 at 16:13  
Blogger Pcm979 said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

23 January 2013 at 16:28  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

You are all very kind. And not half bad yourselves.

But who needs a referendum, anyway? "Miliband has ruled one out! Miliband has ruled one out! Forever and ever and ever!" Thus shrieked the BBC. Even though the man from The People's Pledge on The Daily Politics had not heard him do any such thing. Even though David Cameron only feet away had not heard him do any such thing.

And even though Douglas Alexander tried valiantly to explain simple concepts to Martha Kearney, including that "We never say never," but merely continued to hold, in no change whatever to previous policy, that such a thing would not be appropriate at the present juncture. So, never absolutely ruled out, as it had been repeatedly and emphatically by Cameron and Hague until mere hours ago.

The BBC might have thought that Peter Mandelson and Tony Blair were the appropriate people to interview. But the Labour Whips Office, when not campaigning for Departments of State to take the Morning Star, managed to put up at PMQs the figures of Ian Lavery and Dennis Skinner. They asked about other (and very timely) things, but they made the point by standing up and speaking at all. Seated alongside each other, they had first been elected 40 years apart. The aberration in the middle is now well and truly that: an aberration.

David Cameron is not going to be holding a referendum until the end of 2017. Or, rather, he is not going to be holding a referendum at all, because he is not going to win the 2015 General Election. Nor need Ed Miliband hold one. Already committed explicitly to two more specific powers for repatriation than Cameron is, and also implicitly committed to the repatriation of agriculture and of fisheries, he could and should simply legislate to those and many more such effects.

Backed up by Ed Balls, by Jon Cruddas, by John Cryer, possibly still by Dennis Skinner now that there are not going to be boundary changes after all, and certainly by Ian Lavery's 2010 intake and by that of 2015.

23 January 2013 at 16:40  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Well the promise is 5 years in the future, 2017, that's a long time to wait !

23 January 2013 at 16:57  
Blogger JimS said...

Trying to change the direction of the EU would be like trying to persuade the MCC that they ought really to be playing Rugby football.

23 January 2013 at 16:59  
Blogger Naomi King said...

"But David Cameron is right to warn that this is a battle for our values and way of life which will take years, even decades. It is also a battle we cannot shirk."

Tony Blair writing in The Sun today (in a different context).

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4758188/We-must-back-fight-against-extremists.html#ixzz2IoqnNXRe

I now understand that the Great Britain of which I was once proud, is rotten and controlled by a rotten government and establishment elite.

Even our churches and religions have been corrupted. I woke up to realise that much of what I learned and believed about the Conservative Party is false. What do I believe is happening?

A dictatorship is forming with increasing speed and the UK establishment and government is a major part of the malevolent force helping to create it. Mr Cameron does not want to leave Europe, nor indeed does he intend to. This speech is just a rouse to win back UKIP voters and TRY and obtain another 5 years in power. It won't work of course, we understand the colour of the man now.

If we want to stop the dictatorship, of which the EU is a prime example, we have to understand how it thinks, plans and acts, and we have to take action against it. Such action most certainly cannot be entrusted to David Cameron. The man is a lier.

The controlling networks for the emerging British dictatorship rely on embedded sexually perverse networks. They are ‘respected’ people, both men and women, at high levels of position and power. These people are sexually corrupted or perverted, powerful and dangerous.

On the path to the dictatorship, the most dangerous agenda is that of violence on the streets and we have already seen this in Mr Cameron's reign.

Any day now, we expect Mr Cameron's Government to introduce its Bill which seeks to redefine marriage. On the day that the bill is introduced the Government will go on a charm offensive, telling the media that people who believe in traditional marriage have nothing to worry about. We know that’s not the case, European judges have recently determined that people who believe in traditional marriage will be forced out of their jobs !

5 years is far too long to wait to leave the EU. David Cameron and the Conservative Party ... RIP.


23 January 2013 at 17:25  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

We know all about Call me Dave's promises thank you, he's only saying this as a teaser to get re-elected in 2015. He tells us one thing and does another when he's with his EU compatriot colleagues in Brussels. We know what he's like and quite frankly we've had enough.
UKIP are fresh and inspiring.

Well said David Lindsey a realistic approach.

23 January 2013 at 17:28  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Ha ! Wants to roll back 50 years of pan European socialism does he. Not a chance. The EU is as it is now because that is how socialism works. We didn’t just arrive at this juncture. If you closed the whole lot down, left it for another 50 years, and started again, we would again find ourselves in a similar mess. Countries are very much like races of people. You have successful ones, and the less successful. If you mix them all together, EVERYONE ends up firing on only 3 three cylinders, not just the basket cases…

Cameron has all the gravitas of Walt Disney’s Tigger. Bouncing around all over the place as he spills out his exuberant schoolboy’s wish list. And yet the EU WILL listen to him. Not for what he says, but because he leads one of the strongest economies in the world, despite the strangling European red tape.

So, this is how to proceed. You don’t ‘negotiate’, you TELL them what we want, which is nothing short of EFTA. And if they can’t or more likely they won’t comply, then off we jolly well go. Back into the real, trading world, and leaving a financially flattened Europe to the Germans, which is what they always wanted. It really is third time lucky for them, as they say, and it only took 100 years to get there.

(A happy aside: If your man wants to be PM in 2017, he’s going to need ALL the support he can get, so we’re not going to tamper with marriage then, PM)

Right then, back into the shadows shall the Inspector go…





23 January 2013 at 17:48  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

Office of the Inspector General, only in Britain does anyone ever use terms like "pan-European Socialism", and then only because the people who have been consistently opposed to the EU from the very start have been systematically blacked out by the media for 20 years now, ever since three times as many Labour MPs as Tories voted against Maastricht but no one was allowed to know.

Do you think that the Left is really satisfied with whatever can secure the approval of every Government represented in the Council of Ministers at the given time?

Manifestly not: in Britain alone, there exist the Socialist Labour Party, No2EU - Yes to Democracy, the Trade Union and Socialist Coalition, the Campaign Against European Federalism, the Labour Euro Safeguards Campaign, and many more besides. Never heard of them? Oh, they are not allowed on the radio or the television. Obviously.

Underneath Owen Jones's recent article calling for a new left-wing party, Ken Bell, who formerly blogged as The Exile, writes: "Another set of initials, that's what's needed! I don't think so, and that is why I joined UKIP last October. Opposition to the EU is hardly a rightist position. It was the Tories who took us in and the CBI who are now screaming that we should remain in. If something is good for the bosses then it is bad for the workers which is as good a reason as any to join UKIP, the only game in town at the moment. Most of my old mates from Oldham Labour days are now in the party as are quite a few old Communists. Come and join us."

Riven between the Old Right and the New Right, each of which thinks of the party as its own and no one else's, UKIP was unstable enough without this. But now Ken informs me that, "UKIP is a strange bird at the moment. With only 20,000 members it has attracted a weird libertarian wing who will probably be brushed to one side as the party grows. As things stand they have left the party with some cracked policies that I just ignore. To my mind UKIP is the new party of protest and I reckon that this year will see it begin to increase its membership and, hopefully, move to the left on economic matters."

Ken is as Old Left as you could possibly imagine; I had vaguely assumed that he was in Arthur Scargill's SLP, about which it says a great deal, and not in a good way, that he and many of his long-time associates are in UKIP instead.

"Identity politics", as if there could ever really be any other other kind, have been, will be, should be, and are being appropriated, deployed, transformed and transcended by heterosexual males, by Christians, by the White British ethnic group, by those who identify specifically as English, and by people of mixed ethnic heritage.

Perhaps an expression of the first, third and fourth of these, at least, is the accession of Ken and his comrades to UKIP? And what does that mean for UKIP?

23 January 2013 at 17:56  
Blogger Berserker said...

Cameron in his pseudo John of Gaunt-ish speech forgot the bit about 'against the envy of less happier lands'.

So our beloved leader has gone from the cast iron frying pan to the fire of Mr Optimistic. Is there anything in the man that is other than total bombast? But what he has done is put Labour and LibDems into a bit of a tizzy. That surely is a plus.

As another post points out, the referendum will be in 2015. By that time of course the Eu will have fallen apart and every Northern Country rat will try to leave the ship.

Our net contribution is probably in the region of about 35 million a day. We are now second to Germany in our largesse. So in a month, that's about one billion pounds!
What could we do with that? See that all our A & E Departments are staffed with permanent consultants at the week-end and public holidays. I'm sure the list is endless of what we could do with the dosh.

Just supposin' Mr Optimistic had his way and got the concessions and opt outs (impossible I know) he says he wants... for this would we then get our net £35 million a day reduced?

23 January 2013 at 18:19  
Blogger John Magee said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

23 January 2013 at 18:21  
Blogger Preacher said...

I feel that we've already had a 'Cranmer' in/out referendum & the people's wishes are clear. I only hope Mr Cameron is reading Cranmer today.
The Prime Minister is running scared, no petrified of U.K.I.P, so he's back to resorting to vague promises about when & if in an effort to barter with us to re-elect him & probably his lap dog Clegg again,
Sorry Dave, No Sale. You have no credibility with the majority of the electorate that you've treated so scornfully for two & a half years. We've heard it all before & seen all the tricks, not only from you, but from others before you.
The E.U have already said that they are not allowing 'Cherry Picking', (They've already picked them all) so where does that leave you now?.

There is only one way out of the corner that you & Clegg have painted us into, that is if you REALLY want to be rid of the Clegg family of Whitehall (AKA as the lost cause) & have any hope of re-election in 2015. Be a man, call an in/out referendum now! & stop fiddling with SSM & Church matters that you have no authority or business to be meddling with, while the U.K burns.

23 January 2013 at 18:31  
Blogger len said...

A promise is worthless until it is fulfilled, and what chance of that with Cameron`s past record?

23 January 2013 at 18:51  
Blogger Naomi King said...

You might all enjoy this (4 mins)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=p52BofOIHUQ#!

SkyNews: Nigel Farage on Cameron's Europe speech (23Jan13) UKIP party leader Nigel Farage talks about PM David Cameron's wishy washy Europe speech.

23 January 2013 at 18:53  
Blogger John Magee said...


"Casting himself as Luther, Calvin or His Grace, he called for 'fundamental, far-reaching change' to the Europe steeped in Roman Catholic Social Teaching."

"Casting" is the key word. HG is casting Cameron into a role he does not represent and putting words into his mouth he never said while trying to reincarnate him as a some sort of modern day Protestant Reformer. The words "Roman Catholic Church", so far as I know, have never been spoken by Cameron comparing this Church it in anyway as an inspiration for the modern EU. I may be wrong so please correct me and I will apologize.

Luther, Calvin, and the original Archbishop Cranmer were tyrants. Luther sided with the German Lutheran Princes against the pheasants in bloody religious wars after the Reformation and late in his life he became a vicious anti-Semite, Calvin controlled a brutal theocracy in Geneva, Switzerland, and the original Archbishop Cranmer has a lot on his conscience doing more than his share of dirty work to force Englands's "conversion" to Henry VIII's national church. Cranmer's execution of the 27 Carthusian Monks in London who refused to take the oath of allegiance to Henry VIII's new national church is something not mentioned today.

Are these really the type of men Cameron should look back to in history as an inspiration for opposition to the EU?

St. Thomas Moore would be a man I would use as an inspiration to oppose the EU megga state.

The Protestant work ethic? Medieval Catholic Europe was prosperous and it's people worked very hard. You see parts of their cities and examples of their architecture almost everwhere you visit or live in today in Europe. During the Middle Ages the Guild System was created, great architectural achievements like the great cathedrals of France and England and in other countries were constructed, free trade between England and the Low Countries and other places in Western Europe existed andcreated a booming economic conditions in Western Europe. The trade in wool with the Low Countries alone made parts of East Anglica wealthy as the beautiful parish churches there testify today. The Hansa League was a major economic force in Northern Europe and built many beautiful cities such as Ghent,Belguim, Lubeck,Germany, Danzig (Gdansk) in East Prussia now Poland,, and Visby on the Island of Gotland in Sweden. The Protestant "work ethic" is in reality a Northwestern European work ethic.

I forgot. Almost all the great modern European Universities were founded during theera of the Medieval Roman Catholic in Europe.

Then there were the pagan Romans and their Empire, the Egyptians, ancient China, India, even the Inca's. We can assume those great civilizations had a "work ethic too? Archeological evidence says they most certainly did.

If the EU wants to ensure the rights of individual it should look at it's wayward child, the USA, and take a hard look at it's founding documents. They are all based on the writings and traditons of the great European philosophers, from the Italian Renaissance, and the Age of the Enlightenment. They were even inspired by the pagan Greeks.

It appears 21st century Europe has forgotten about it's own great minds from it's unique and wonderful past. The EU must rediscover it's own lost philosophical and religious roots concerning the rights of the individual if it wants to talk about real freedom. Modern political correctness and socialist ideals are not the way to guarantee the freedom of the people who live in the nations of the EU. The modern EU state looks like something from a George Orwell novel.

23 January 2013 at 18:53  
Blogger michael north said...


Sad to see HG perpetuating the libel that the EU is some sort of vestige of Catholic Christendom. If only it were; it might connect with human realities like the heterosexual family and people in crucial specialisms like medicine being required to speak the same language as their patients.

It is a deracinated, managerialist bureaucracy, actively trying to eradicate the religious culture that created Europe in the first place.

23 January 2013 at 19:39  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

Imagine, just imagine, that Cameron pulled this one off. Imagine that we arrived at a point where the two options on a ballot paper were a renegotiated settlement acceptable to his lot, and outright withdrawal.

It would unite the Left on the EU like nothing since a section of it first inexplicably decided that it was a bulwark against Thatcherism (several years later, Thatcher herself even more oddly seemed to begin to agree with them), as there have always been a few people on the Old Right who have thought of it as a bulwark against Americanism.

For if the only alternative were whatever can be sold to the remains of the Conservative Party, then the only viable option would be whatever else was on offer. Namely, withdrawal.

As would then be advocated in the strongest possible terms by the whole of the Left. It would be the Thatcherites who were campaigning to stay in. Well, of course. It was ever thus.

23 January 2013 at 19:49  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Michael North,

The real sadness is your ignorance - along with that of some of your co-religionists - who persist in the fatuous assertion that to allude to the Roman Catholic Social Teaching which lies at the heart of EU economic/welfare policy is some sort of anti-Catholic bigotry. Of course the EU has become a secular beast, but its historic development is founded upon papal encyclicals. This is history, undeniable and irrefutable. Perhaps you might ask (or explain) why the Pope and his bishops are so vehemently supportive of (say) Irish membership of or Croation accession to the EU if it is, as you say, a 'deracinated, managerialist bureaucracy, actively trying to eradicate the religious culture that created Europe in the first place'. Instead of hurling insults or false allegations of libel, please enlighten. What's in it for the Vatican?

23 January 2013 at 19:54  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

In the debate surrounding the nature both of the European Union and of the United Kingdom's relationship with it, which latter is really the question of what it is to be British, there is a total absence of any profound attention to the nature of the identity that civil and political institutions are supposed to express.

Any such attempt must draw on resources philosophical and theological, ethical and aesthetic, historical and literary, natural-scientific and social-scientific,"religious" and "secular", spiritual and humanist, Biblical and Classical. It is strikingly, and terrifyingly, failing to do so.

The same is true of the debates surrounding both the nature of the United Kingdom and the relationship to it of each of its constituent parts, which latter is really the question of what it is to be English, Scots, Welsh or (Northern) Irish.

23 January 2013 at 20:01  
Blogger bluedog said...

Your Grace, Cameron's speech will be a game changer in one sense only, and that in itself unintended. That the British are standing aside from the EU will give other nations pause for thought about the whole enterprise.

In so far as Cameron has already commissioned the FCO to analyse the cost-benefit of Britain's position in the EU, one has to presume that Cameron already knows exactly how he should negotiate in 2018, 2019 or whenever he imagines he will get the chance. Why not start now?

The British people won't wait for Cameron's timetable, they want action this day.

In this regard David Lindsay's posts, particularly that of 17.56, are truly fascinating and commendable. UKIP finally appears to be the party which can unite the Left and Right across a spectrum of shared values that define the British people. Stirring stuff and a force to be reckoned with. We must pray the Nigel Farage can live up to the great hope with which he is being entrusted.

The great host now assembling behind the quirky banner of UKIP is the true game changer.

23 January 2013 at 20:13  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

Your are very kind, bluedog. But I am afraid that my main point at 17:56 was that UKIP was always an unstable coalition of conservatives and libertarians, and is now even ore so if there really is an ongoing influx of old Bennites and Scargillites. That might do for a single-issue pressure group. But such is precisely what UKIP professes not to be.

23 January 2013 at 20:16  
Blogger Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh said...

John Macgee writes (18:53):
"Calvin controlled a brutal theocracy in Geneva, Switzerland"

Regarding the above common assertion (and with apologies for being somewhat off main topic), Cranmer readers may find the following two quotes of interest:
____
Q 1)
Allen C. Guelzo reviewing book on Calvin by Alister McGrath:

"There is no sense in which McGrath’s Calvin could be mistaken for a Geneva Jim Jones: Calvin had little personal authority with the city council and no legal political standing or following (as a foreigner, he had no vote or voice in Genevan politics), and could rely only on the persuasiveness of his own ideas and preaching to carry his reforms forward. In making these points, McGrath clearly throws the notorious arrest and execution of Michael Servetus into the lap of Geneva’s secular leadership at a time when that leadership was hardly more sympathetic to Calvin than it was to Servetus; and he rightly stresses (as other biographers have not) that Servetus’ execution was due as much to his anarchical Anabaptism as to his disagreements with Calvin on the Trinity." (From Allen C. Guelzo's review of "A LIFE OF JOHN CALVIN: A Study of the Shaping of Western Culture" by Alister E. McGrath, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990.)( See following link, 4th para from end):
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=05-04-038-b
____
Q 2)
Prof Roy Clouser (author of "The Myth of Religious Neutrality", University of Notre Dame Press 2005) posting on Thinknet public forum (10 Oct 2003):

"Re the execution of Servetus:
Since Calvin is often accused of ordering Servetus be burned at the stake, I think it apropos to mention that it is one of the many lies about the Reformers that has been repeated over and over.
First, it is important to note that Calvin never held a political office in Geneva. Indeed, as a foreign national and not a Swiss citizen, he was not even eligible for office. Geneva was ruled by a town Council, which hired Calvin to perform certain duties. One of these was to interview Servetus after he'd been asked to leave Geneva and refused. I have read (a translation of) the letter that Calvin wrote to the Council following the interview. In it he confirms that Servetus is a heretic, but recommends that 'the sentence not be carried out'. I also found the letter he wrote to the Council after it condemned Servetus to be burned. In it Calvin said that if they insisted on executing Servetus it should not be by burning 'which is a cruel and inhumane method of execution'. The council again ignored Calvin.
BTW, I've also read accusations about how Calvin was supposed to have used state power to enforce church attendence. The fact is, however, that he opposed the political party that wanted to make the church of Geneva (in which he was a pastor) the state church. When that party was elected anyway, Calvin left Geneva for 6 years in protest and returned only after it was voted out. He regarded such a law was an intolerable intrusion of the state into matters that belonged properly to the church.
There is a fine recent book on the Reformation that I've found helpful titled "The Reformation World", Ed Pettegree London: Routledge, 2000). Roy."

23 January 2013 at 20:23  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

David Lindsay. You are quite correct. Indeed, it can be argued that few have heard of UKIP for the same reasons you display, yet everybody has. Left wing is so yesterday, don’t you think. Left wing has brought hundreds of thousands of immigrants who shouldn’t be here, here. The people notice that, or hasn't anyone informed the politicians ? Probably not – when was the last time politicians had their ear to the ground ?

The Inspector is not a natural UKIP man. Used to be Conservative, until this slippery character Cameron came to be in charge.

You do realise of course that Cameron has not only won the next election for the Conservatives, and outright at that, he has also maintained his position as PM for years to come. Absolutely astonishing really, but he has spent six months on plan B, and it’s paid off. To offer the UK public a referendum on what the likes of Milli whatever considers not our business, our future, what a strategy !

UKIP has been stopped in it’s tracks by what has happened. To think that Cameron has achieved this – well no, he has some clever behind the scenes people, pulling his strings...

23 January 2013 at 20:32  
Blogger bluedog said...

Mr Lindsay, UKIP appears to be a party for social conservatives that believes in the unique outlook and values of the British people.

Even David Cameron belatedly recognised these qualities in his speech.

There is nothing inconsistent in being a Scargillite and a social conservative, indeed the old white working class is the epitome of social conservatism. That is why the working class and the old Tories have so many shared values. Not sure about the Bennites, after all Benn was an aristocratic pretender, essentially an actor, but a very good one.

And how many Bennites are there, one taxi or two?

23 January 2013 at 20:34  
Blogger michael north said...


Your Grace

I know little about Catholic Social Teaching other than that the European economy most based on it - that of Germany - is also the most stable and resilient. The origins of the EU may well lie in that system, but that was more than half a century ago, in the age of people like Attlee and Bevin, who now seem like figures from another planet.

I cannot explain the Vatican to anyone and take little notice of it. The Pope often gets things wrong, and I have a neo-Protestant attitude to the generality of bishops. I go to Mass and say my beads.

The brute fact is that the EU is following the Parkinsonian dynamic of all bloated corporations, promoting one value: its own growth. The vacuum at its heart will be filled by a culture that possesses the coherence and confidence that Christianity once had - Islam.

23 January 2013 at 20:35  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

bluedog, you would be amazed. And they are very highly organised; the numbers are not really the point.

A lot of the Old Left have a socially conservative streak, often a very pronounced one.

All in all, their collision with the anarcho-capitalists who are mighty in UKIP is inevitable, will be bloody, and must be coming very soon.

23 January 2013 at 20:39  
Blogger Berserker said...

A horse called: 'Mr Optimistic' won the last at Kempton tonight.

So you see you can make money under the Tories. Was I on it? Unfortunately, not. I had my dosh on a stupid nag called: 'Greek Island'

Oh dear! Those Greeks again.

23 January 2013 at 20:59  
Blogger bluedog said...

Mr Inspector @ 20.32, how can you be so gullible? Has the Old Islingtonian leopard really changed its spots? Where is the recantation of the SSM heresy? The earnest beseeching for the remission of the sin of secularising the CofE? Nada. And never will be.

Cameron is just indulging in salami tactics, recognising that the EU threatened his prospects of retaining the leadership until 2015.

It's all just a long dated IOU by a man who knows when to play for time.

23 January 2013 at 21:04  
Blogger IanCad said...

At the heart of this piece of skullduggery is the carrot of a referendum. This bait, if taken, will ensure our perpetual thrall to the EU because, most assuredly the vote will be to stay in.
I have bleated about this many times but I cannot understand why so many consider that a referendum, which is an affront to our system of representative governance, should be viewed as some kind of panacea for the decline of our civilization.
We need leadership, new leadership. Cameron is not the man. He must go ASAP.

23 January 2013 at 21:04  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

His Grace. What's in it for the Vatican?

Your pummelling of the humble michael north and your terminal statement is damn astonishing you know. Let’s get one thing straight Archbishop. The RCC is our STRENGHT of belief, but it doesn't rule our bloody lives. What on earth makes you think it does. You can also forget about the so called ‘Protestant work ethic’ too. It’s a NORDIC work effort, and why ? Because in the north of Europe we have to work that much harder than the south to stop ourselves and our families FREEZING TO DEATH ! And we are all liable to that up here, whether Protestant or Catholic.

Really, you so annoy a fellow at times....


23 January 2013 at 21:14  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Bluedog. Cameron has the integrity of a criminal, but in that scheming vortex of his mind, he wants to be PM for at least 7 years, not just 3. One can deduce that he will do ANYTHING to achieve that, including leaving the EU. If and when he achieves it, we’ll make him Lord Protector of England for life – he’ll have earned it...


23 January 2013 at 21:19  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Mr Cranmer

This is 2013 and the driving forces behind the bureaucratic nightmare that is Europe are most certainly not Roman Catholic today! A family of European nations, a confederation welded together by a common Christian faith and striving to achieve social justice, was a brave vision. The project appears to have failed for a range of reasons - not least secularism, socialist ideology and the crisis facing modern capitalism.

It really isn't about Roman Catholicism v's Protestantism anymore. There's a very different struggle going on.

Anyways, I will resist the temptation to comment on you having compared Cameron to Luther/Calvin/Thomas Cranmer and this speech to Luther's 95 thesis.

23 January 2013 at 22:05  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

My fundamental problem with Cameron is that how can you accept the word of a man who has reneged on it, and who is simultaneously lying to the country about other affairs?

There's a certain amount of chutzpah in Cameron's statement to the effect that we'll get a referendum if he's still PM after the next election - but what that relies on is our acceptance that we will only get a referendum from Cameron.

I no longer believe him - nor do I believe the adulterous Prince over the Water who is equally duplicitous about fulfilling promises. At least I believe Ed Miliband when he says he is against it - it's just a shame he's another elitist lefty.

24 January 2013 at 02:19  
Blogger Manfarang said...

David Lindsay
The old left is mostly dead as is the new left.
Who has heard of The Daily Worker?

24 January 2013 at 03:04  
Blogger non mouse said...

Your Grace,

He may have given us reasons to do as you suggest. However, he's given us no reason to believe in his reasons.
Perhaps his speechwriters think we're all opportunists too.




24 January 2013 at 03:38  
Blogger Naomi King said...

No non-mouse it is worse than being an Opportunist he is a Deceiver.

Very interesting link to the Spectator, AiB, about David Cameron lying to us over the National Debt and only yesterday too ! Thank you.

Correspondents may remember that I made it personally to the front page of Pink News when I exposed Mr Cameron's then PPS, now Whip, Desmond Swayne MP for lying over the assurance he gave me in the Palace of Westminster in February last year, that the homosexual so called 'marriage' idea would be "Kicked into Touch". If the Monkey lies his Organ Grinder most certainly does too.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/fraser-nelson/2013/01/david-cameron-tells-porkies-about-britains-national-debt

I once heard Tony Blair speak at a large Christian Leadership conference (why he was there I can't imagine other than to promote himself which was hardly appropriate). What came across was a huge ego and self satisfaction. With Mr Cameron what comes across is slippery and dishonest.

Cameron is not even pretending to be Christian and as we all know, if you are not a follower of Jesus Christ then you are sold out to the Devil. It is as simple and stark as that my Friends.

Trust him at your peril, he is leading us into darkness.

24 January 2013 at 06:18  
Blogger Naomi King said...

This is truly shocking...

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that David Cameron and Nick Clegg have an agreed strategy: that it is important not to tell the truth about how much debt their government is saddling voters with.

There view, at best, is that deception is no bad thing. Financiers are, quite literally, prosecuted for this kind of thing.

Only 6 per cent of the public realise that the national debt is still rising and fast. Why might this be? Is it because the Cabinet – even the Prime Minister himself – keep telling them that it’s falling?

The truth is David Cameron’s policy is to increase Britain’s debt by 60 per cent.

Mr Cameron has increased the national debt more over five years than Labour did over 13 years !

Just yesterday, we learned the national debt had hit £1,111 billion and it’s heading to £1,400 billion.

However the Conservative party election broadcast just yesterday is so astonishingly dishonest that it really would have disgraced Gordon Brown. In it, the Prime Minister tells an outright lie. He says:-

“So though this government has had to make some difficult decisions, we are making progress. We’re paying down Britain’s debts.”

Cameron won’t be paying this debt back – the voters will. Ministers really do have a moral duty to be honest with the people who will be repaying the debts they are running up on our behalf. The Prime Minister has a greater duty than anyone.

When Mr Cameron claimed debt was falling on an ITV sofa recently, you might have put it down to a slip of the tongue. But on a carefully-scripted party election broadcast it is nothing more than a rehearsed lie.

Here is the full Conservative Party Political Broadcast launched yesterday, entitled "Is this country going in the right direction? (Party Political Broadcast)"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAT_RW693BQ&feature=player_embedded

24 January 2013 at 06:47  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

So basically we have to take it on trust that in the distant future, the conservatives will agree to hold an in/out vote on Britain's membership of the EU.

But in 2013, the EU is still in crisis and is changing fully into a sub national state of its own- look at how the ECB and Germany have managed to topple OR dictate to Ireland, Portugal, Greece, Italy and now Spain. So why wait?

If it is so important then surely legislation could be passed in a day (see article below)?

And the manifesto commitment means nothing, if we have another coalition government.

Besides which this is the same 'cast iron guarantee' guy that promised a lot of euro sceptic things before the last election and quickly forgot about it once he'd got into bed with the liberal democrats? And let us not forget the controversy of the gay marriage issue.

As it stands Cameron's opportunistic politics is good for the short term cover of getting his rebel Euro sceptics to shut up and a Daily Mail headline, but in the longer term means nothing.

I think if Britain began now to discuss terms for an exit from the EU, it would be better.

I think it would lance the boil of ill feeling between us and the European countries and would allow us to adjust to being a relatively isolationist free trading state, with our own laws and Parliament being the focus of national debate, rather than carping on about the Empire or feeling as if we are being dictated to by the unelect politburo that is Brussels.

We would also need to put in place a free trade system with the old Commonwealth partners, America and the growing markets of Brazil and Asia (despite the arguments regarding our trade, we have a deficit with the EU and Britain is now Germany's biggest trading partner, so a deal could be made).

This might upset our American friends- I think Obama's minions have already said they want us in Europe to do their bidding, but as Obama doesn't seem to care about Britain and would probably side with the Argentines over the Falklands, then his government can do that for themselves.

24 January 2013 at 09:30  
Blogger non mouse said...

Mrs. King --- I never said I trust, or like him. I don't.

I'm the one who's posting about 'shadow shows' remember.

24 January 2013 at 11:59  
Blogger John Magee said...

David kavanaugh

Your post might "upset "some" Americans" but I can assure they are not your friends. The other 49% (atcually it's more like 62%) here, who loath Obama, know exactly what his plans are. His goal as a Marxist is to destroy our Republic, wreck our economic system and redistribute wealth, dismantel our military, abandon Israel, eventually pull out of NATO, and abandon our allies in Asia to face Chinese naval power in alone. Those of us who realize all of this are your friends and loyal allies as we always have been This man's aim is to turn the USA into a one party system so be forewarned. One party systems are usually called dictatorships. What is stunning is the left in the USA is bragging about the end of the opposition party. We never dreamed this could happen here. It has.
Obama hates his own country so much he wants to weaken and destroy it. This is real the meaning of his Marxist slogans during is 2008 and 2009 Presidential campaigns "change" and "forward". Those are the exact same slogans that used to be on banners on Red Square in Moscow after the Russian Revolution after 1917.

The scary thing is the USA, the UK, and Europe are all on a free fall down the same Alice in Wonderland rabbit hole...

His first act as President in January 2009 was a show of disrespect toward Britain when he ordered the White House staff to wrap up the bust of Sir Winston Churchill in a blanket. This bust was given to Bush by PM Blair after 911 and was kept in the Oval Office as an inspiration for Presient Bush in the fight against militant Muslims like al Quaeda. When Obama saw the bust of Churchill he ordered it wrapped in a blanket and returned to your Washington Embassy in a van like a piece of used furniture.

The UK, the USA, Europe, and the European diaspora suffer from a new mental condition called Historical Alzheimers disease. This form of brain and memory degeneration is common among the majority of our young today who's skulls are full of mush as well as the surviving burned out druggies liberals from the late 60's. They have absolutely no idea how we got where we are at this time in history based on the ideals and sacrifices of our ancestors. Nor do they have and idea what direction we are all headed other that what their left wing pop culture and politically correct hero's tell them which is party, party, party the money will not stop flowing. Their world is the next rave or rock concert or living in a "occupy camp" for months off of their parents credit cards.

Some of them managed to surive the drug era and get fine educations. Today they are our leaders who look quite respectable in their exspensive coats and ties. To look at them they look like wise politicians from the past. They aren't. You know their names. We all do. They are traitors.

You are correct. Without a doubt Obama will refuse or slow down military intelligence and aid to the UK in any future conflict over the Falklands.

Obama just sent four F-16 jets to Egypt. Egypt is now controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood.What does that tell you?

I hope you weren't one of those hysterical Europeans who thought the messiah had stepped foot on earth complete with a halo wearing that Cheshire Cat smile on his face when Obama was elected in 2008.

24 January 2013 at 16:44  
Blogger len said...

The Roman Catholic Church has a long history of intimate involvement in Europe's political and religious affairs.The Catholic Church has an agenda for Europe, and would it not be strange if it didn`t?.If Catholics believe that their 'interpretation' of the Gospel is correct(many Christians don`t because much of Catholic doctrine is not scriptural and relies heavily on its own 'traditions') would they not want to promote the Catholic version of the Gospel to all Europe?.

24 January 2013 at 19:20  
Blogger John Magee said...

len

Seems to me the EU isn't exactly "Roman Catholic Friendly" (or Christian friendly for that matter). So what is this great "plan" Rome and the EU have cooked up together to enslave Europeans under the rule of the Pope?

I respect your views len. But you need to forget the conspiracy theories and realize how much Catholic and Protestants have in common as christians and the war we face together all over the majority Christian world against secularists, Marxists, and radical Islam in our midst.

24 January 2013 at 19:50  
Blogger len said...

Mr Magee,
I agree that unity would be a good thing for the Christian denominations.
But for this to happen there would have to be a certain amount of 'give and take'.Now Catholics claim that their concept of Christianity is the only one and that protestants must become Catholics?.

The Reformation was a decisive move away from the corruptions(sorry there is no other word for it) of Rome.

So on what basis can we unite?.

24 January 2013 at 20:56  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

len

As you know, Roman Catholics would never compromise on what they consider to be the Truth; neither would Protestants.

A start would be accepting what we share in common as followers of Jesus Christ and showing one another s degree of ecumenical respect.

The scandal of inter and intra denominational disagreement only serves the purposes of Satan.

24 January 2013 at 23:39  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

John Magee

To answer your question, no, I was not one of those Europeans who was taken in by Obama's 'messianic' image and personally I think Obama is a bit of a disaster.

I'm actually a conservative,climate change 'denier',euro sceptic of the Disraelian/Whiggish school, but with my feet firmly on rational ground.

25 January 2013 at 08:33  
Blogger John Magee said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

25 January 2013 at 15:46  
Blogger John Magee said...

david

We have lots in common :O).

25 January 2013 at 17:24  
Blogger len said...

I agree with your comments Dodo(24 January 2013 23:39)

Perhaps we should focus on what share rather on what divides us?.
Christ should be the central point of focus for Christians... perhaps we should start there?

25 January 2013 at 18:45  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Indeed; what else could possibly be our shared focus len?

25 January 2013 at 19:24  
Blogger Lord Lavendon said...

John Magee,

My sympathies, as your controversial journalist Glenn Beck noted :

"All hail the messiah
Obama, Obama
The path to the new socialist motherland!
Our savior, our savior
Obama, Obama
The leader more famous than Lindsay Lohan

Bow down and praise the one
Give him your money and your guns
Give us a country
That makes your wife proud
Lord Barry heal the bitter ones:
Religious and Clinging to faith and to guns,
Hope for the change of the hope of the change!"

25 January 2013 at 23:40  
Blogger John Magee said...

Lord Lavendon

Yes, Glenn Beck, his web site: The Blaze... is one of the best sources for news of what's really going on in the USA from a traditional/conservative point of view... I hope everyone here takes a look at it for curiosity sake and hoepfully look at it often to get a new perspective and see how organized the conservative movement is in the USA in the these dark times.

Of course they liberals crucify him, distort what he says, and just plain tell lies about him.

He's the best!

PS He also can be very funny at times. Liberals hate a conservative with a sense of humor.

26 January 2013 at 15:43  
Blogger John Magee said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

26 January 2013 at 15:49  
Blogger John Magee said...

Dodo

Interesting you've come around to my way of thinking. I may disagree with Protestanst about history (theology id not my forte) but I've always posted on HG's blog I love Protestants as my brothers and sisters in Christ and they deserve our respect as individuals and their churches for the enormous good they do in Christ's name.

As a former Episcopalian/Anglican it's difficult, I should say impossible, not to have interest and sympathy for the my former church other Protestants yet I have to reject their versions of Church history and am very confused by their confusion having so many interpretations of the Bible as the "truth" that guides their thousands of denominations. Maybe this is how divorced people feel about their former spouses?

Rejection and anger yet a trace of fondness still exists but then you wake up from the momentary daydream and remind yourself the fondness is in the past never to be renewed.

Had the Episcopalians/Anglicans not gone over the cliff embracing every liberal cause and crusade that came down the pike over the past 50 years I might still be one.

One door closes and another one opens so I am now very happy at home in Rome and I'm not alone. :O)

27 January 2013 at 01:12  
Blogger len said...

I expect people said that on the Titanic Mr Magee?.

27 January 2013 at 09:51  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

len
What a silly comment and so soon after saying: "Perhaps we should focus on what share rather on what divides us?"

John Magee
Well, welcome aboard the Ark and be sure the vessel is sound, despite the antics of certain past crew members.

4 February 2013 at 01:04  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older