actually dave she wasnt threatening catholicism on britain. She was bringin england back to the holy Roman catholic chruch.

See, Mary I was cheeredwhen she wrestled the crown from Lady Jayne Grey and she was widelt supported because she was going to take the england back to the holy church. There were obviously english protestants who were unhappy about that.

As from what I have understood by Mary's reign the country was still majorly in favour of catholicism, henrys church was effectively still catholic only it rejected the pope, everything else remained teh same. It was in edwards reign that his puritan uncles, the seymours steered the country to protestantism, his reign weas only for i think4/5 yrs so ppl still wanted the old faith. when mary came she was welcomed, obivoulsy the vociferous protestant zealouts made abig shout as all zeolouts do but that was not really a major sentiment.

In fact the one who really changed england was elizabeth. Despite the misconception that elizabeth supported religious freedoms, its a lie. Elizabeth forbade the raising of the host, she deemed it pagan, the priests who still believed in their hearts in catholic doctrine were forbidden from the mass and only a few were willing to take to the execution stand for their views, majorirt believed in their hearts but acted in accordacne with the law. Eventually elizabthe was succeeded by protestant james vi of scotland, and he also enforced the protestant way. So really it was elizbathes stance which forced the ppl to her faith.

"Dave" wrote:

I'm just not seeing an effort or desire to go back to Puritanic Principles. Perhaps a more conservative social framework on the part of those disillusioned enough to fall for the wedge issue stunt - but not a return Puritanism.

I didn't mean a literal return to puritanism. I used the term more in reference to America's founders.

My point was that there is an expanding "culture war" in america that didn't exist say fifty years ago. Compare this to Western Europe where everyone more or less thinks the same and no one is challenging the errosion of society. In america there are people who challenge it.

Religious freedom wasn't really all that important at the time - I mean 48 years after her reign Europe decided at the Peace of Westphalia that the religion of the nation would be determined by the sovereign - and the sovereign for most countries, including England, was definitely not the people.

I certainly respect men like St Moore, but ultimately the heresy of the Catholic Church needed to be cleansed, and in some cases purged for England for the good of Christianity and the West.

"Dave" wrote:

I certainly respect men like St Moore, but ultimately the heresy of the Catholic Church needed to be cleansed, and in some cases purged for England for the good of Christianity and the West.

So what are your views on those societies in europe which remained with the Catholic Church eg spain, italy, portugal and in the new lands south america. I know they are secular states now but they still are majorly affiliateed with the Vatican. Do you consider them heretics?

Also what about all the socalled saints who came before the split- eg Thomas e Becket and Joan of Arc? If they were before the split then they must have been catholic surely? Does that mean they are heretics aswell?

"salaf" wrote:

I didn't mean a literal return to puritanism. I used the term more in reference to America's founders.

However that is an important distinction. The right isn't offering a legitimate cultural transformation - they are just offering a platitude that serves their political interests. Sort of like how the Saudis or Mubarak dress their political necessities in some sort of mystical "return to principles" they are not actually delivering.

"salaf" wrote:

My point was that there is an expanding "culture war" in america that didn't exist say fifty years ago. Compare this to Western Europe where everyone more or less thinks the same and no one is challenging the errosion of society. In america there are people who challenge it.

I'm not familiar enough with Europe but my observations appear to coincide with yours. I think I do see your point though - I didn't pay close enough attention to your use of the word grassroots earlier.

Would you agree that while there is a general resentment of popular culture shedding traditional religious values - the leaders of the opposition do not really have culture, but rather have their own private interests at heart?

"Medievalist" wrote:

So what are your views on those societies in europe which remained with the Catholic Church eg spain, italy, portugal and in the new lands south america. I know they are secular states now but they still are majorly affiliateed with the Vatican. Do you consider them heretics?

Doctrinally they are heretics.

Among other things they pray to Mary (a clear violation of the council of ephesus) and Saints for intercession - when Jesus Christ is our intercessor.

"Medievalist" wrote:

Also what about all the socalled saints who came before the split- eg Thomas e Becket and Joan of Arc? If they were before the split then they must have been catholic surely? Does that mean they are heretics aswell?

It depends - not all protestants accept the catholic list of saints (much like oriental and orthodox do not accept all the catholic saints) furthermore protestant denominations and orthodox have additional saints the catholics do not. Arius is a classic example.

Basically they go through the same review as if they were just being considered for Sainthood - except this time through a protestant lense eliminating Catholic heresies.

If you were a Pope that conjured up ex cathedra and papal infalibility and therefor were cannonized, I assure you, you are not a Saint in Protestantism. However Joan of Arc, and other such martyrs are almost always in the club.

I personally think Thomas Aquinas is one of the greatest saints even though I don't believe everything he wrote.

There basically was a point somewhere around the 1600s where the Catholic Church became theologically bankrupt - recycling the finer points of their religious imperialism in an attempt to prepare for a journey westward. Meanwhile Protestantism encouraged new directions and new interpretations more firmly grounded in text - rather than derived from canon law

"Dave" wrote:

Would you agree that while there is a general resentment of popular culture shedding traditional religious values - the leaders of the opposition do not really have culture, but rather have their own private interests at heart?

I don't think there's a general resentment in america of popular culture. If there was it wouldn't be a problem and there would be no culture war. It differs regionally I imagine.

I would agree though that this culture war isn't really represented politically or in the media. There seem to be a lot of phoney conservatives in America right now. I don't buy people like Bill O'Reilly or Anne Coulter as real American conservatives.

"salaf" wrote:

I don't think there's a general resentment in america of popular culture. If there was it wouldn't be a problem and there would be no culture war. It differs regionally I imagine.

True... i'm coming from the somewhat diluted perception of a bible belter.

"salaf" wrote:

I would agree though that this culture war isn't really represented politically or in the media. There seem to be a lot of phoney conservatives in America right now. I don't buy people like Bill O'Reilly or Anne Coulter as real American conservatives.

There really aren't any political parties anymore... it's all about getting behind the most electable guy. Thus when Bush is in power you have neocons, with McCain you have centrists etc. On top of that there are opportunists that can get money by poking the fire - ann coulter/bill o reilly. And then there are libertarians which are basically hippies who like guns - bill o reilly/lew rockwell

So really no one group can claim to be the voice of conservatives here - paleocons like myself are literally extinct.

There are some reaganites roaming around chanting deficits don't matter too.

The culture war is basically a tool for all the above - even the paleocons to a certain extent.

I HATE MY CULTURE LIKE I HATE MY RELIGION

"Judda" wrote:

I HATE MY CULTURE LIKE I HATE MY RELIGION

Lil bro i think u shuld b careful in wat u say.

Culture n Religion r two different things n the most important of all is ur Religion.

they is both stupid and wierd and i hate them both....

da only thing i like about culture is polygamy... unfortunatly the koran disencoureges it,

.....but it is not stressed enough :o

"Judda" wrote:

they is both stupid and wierd and i hate them both....

da only thing i like about culture is polygamy... unfortunatly the koran disencoureges it,

.....but it is not stressed enough :o

Bro is ur religion Islam???

R u a Muslim???

Hav u eva read the holy Qur'an fully???

bro if all the above r a 'yes' then i honestly dnt no hw u can h8 ur religion. FEAR Allah!!!

"May Allah subhana wata Allah guide u to the right path.Ameen!"

"Judda" wrote:

I HATE MY CULTURE LIKE I HATE MY RELIGION

Yikes!

So why tell the forum? Are you trying to get them to hate their religion and culture too, trying to get everybody to help you not hate your religion (well drop the culture thing), or are you just trying to provoke a reaction?

As for the culture thing - eh, you can't choose your culture but you can certainly marry out of it.

i tell the 4rum coz i is so frustrated....

i only ever wanted your reaction after i read the disturbing thing u said on the old forum...

"Judda" wrote:

i tell the 4rum coz i is so frustrated....

i only ever wanted your reaction after i read the disturbing thing u said on the old forum...

Which disturbing thing did I say on the old forum?

aisha :roll:

"Judda" wrote:

aisha :roll:

lol like I said - she turned into an impressive woman.

Def not into 9 year olds...

I've never really been given a satisfactory answer to that but i'm willing to leave it alone for the sake of politeness.

Definitely one of my bigger hangups about Muhammad.

"Judda" wrote:

I HATE MY CULTURE LIKE I HATE MY RELIGION

in that case bugger off and leave us alone in peace
there is no point answering your questions
they are answered yet you come back on again with another childish comment , just to get a reaction from us.
so ppl, leaving this kid alone...hes here just for a laugh, no need to take him seriously...
he takes mick out of islam again and again...its time to tell him to DO ONE!

i promise to be good!

ban him then? :?

jus wastin evry1z tym with his obscene stories, stupid rants and posts....disses Islam (Astagfirullah!)...and then he tries have a religious debate about wierd topics?

ur a confused bender lol

"Darth V-Hayder" wrote:

ban him then? :?
ur a confused bender lol

admin told me on PM how much he loved me and he asked me to marry him. I said let me stay on the forum and I will think about it.

at which point are we supposed 2 laugh? :roll:

who said it was a joke?

mate... u r a joke

a very bad one

one of them i have to tickle myself to force me to laugh

ASK HIM THEN!