 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
History Forum / General / British History / March 2004Mel Gibson Film On The Reformation Forthcoming?
Mel Gibson is a traditional Roman Catholic. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him make a film critical of Martin Luther, John Calvin, Henry VIII, et al., and the Reformation. It probably would be well-worth seeing -- but not necessarily Accurate History. Artistic License will be employed for dramatic impact and contemporary resonance. Smart People will understand that, be entertained and intellectually and emotionally stimulated. ---- Dumb People will rant and rave, look silly and make Mel millions of dollars. So, what's new? That's precisely what is happening with respect to his current film, _The Passion Of The Christ_. Mel can do it again if he so chooses -- and with Other People's Money [OPM] this time -- if he desires. DSH > Mel Gibson is a traditional Roman Catholic. > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > DSH mel is an ultra right wing catholic and any movie he makes of the reformation will not be flattering to the likes of luther and calvin . prots and born agains are the ones turning out in droves to see passion . they won't take too kindly to a movie calling luther and other protestant reformers s as satan's tools and prots as all doomed to hell . > Mel Gibson is a traditional Roman Catholic. Traditional!!!!! He believes the current Pope is an imposter for a start and that all of his decrees are null and void.. How many more of his traditional beliefs do you want to investigate? Island-bound twit. (No, I'm not an RC). Surreyman > > Mel Gibson is a traditional Roman Catholic. > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Island-bound twit. > (No, I'm not an RC). Time we went back to having two Popes I say. Any nominations for the other one? Desmond Tutu I think. Vlad > Time we went back to having two Popes I say. Any nominations for the other > one? > Desmond Tutu I think. Only if Mrs. Tutu doesn't mind. -- Andrew Chaplin SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO (If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.) Sorry, guy, Tutu already is exployed by a competing Firm which is headquarted at Canterbury instead of Rome.... > Sorry, guy, Tutu already is exployed by a competing Firm which is > headquarted at Canterbury instead of Rome.... And Mr Gibson won't be that keen, and I imagine he'll be paying... What is it about movie stars and bonkers religions? It must be that proper ones don't show their money the respect it deserves...  SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > > Sorry, guy, Tutu already is exployed by a competing Firm which is > > headquarted at Canterbury instead of Rome.... [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > It must be that proper ones don't show their money the respect it > deserves... No idea? Ask John Travolta. >Time we went back to having two Popes I say. Some would say we have one too many already! Liz Perhaps pogues and poguettes should let Mel Gibson actually MAKE his alleged, projected film on the Reformation -- before they tell everyone exactly what's in it ---- and hand-wring, kvetch, whimper and whine. DSH > > Mel Gibson is a traditional Roman Catholic. > > > Traditional!!!!! > He believes the current Pope is an imposter for a start and that all of his > decrees are null and void.. Really? I don't think so. He doesn't drift much further off the reservation than Mother Angelica on EWTN (sat channel). > > > Mel Gibson is a traditional Roman Catholic. > > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I don't think so. He doesn't drift much further off the reservation than > Mother Angelica on EWTN (sat channel). Uh, you've missed quite a lot. He specifically rejects Vatican II & therefore everything after. Oh, and, BTW, Vatican II is where the Church officially said that "the Jews" are not guilty for Jesus' death. Susan > > > > Mel Gibson is a traditional Roman Catholic. > > > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Oh, and, BTW, Vatican II is where the Church officially said that "the Jews" > are not guilty for Jesus' death. So? 1) Was the pope speaking "from the chair" or was he just setting policy? There is a difference. The are many catholics who remain in the church who reject some of the changes. 2) Mel Gibson isn't reponsible for the actions of his father. BUT, in any case, the movie merely goes along with what the Bible says. That's not to say the present day Jews killed Jesus (and, since He came back to life, AND he forgave them at the him of his execution it doesn't matter in the first place.) The execution of Jesus was part of God's plan. His "agents" were the Jews and the Romans. > > > > > Mel Gibson is a traditional Roman Catholic. > > > > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > 1) Was the pope speaking "from the chair" or was he just setting policy? You're kidding, right? It was considered a revolutionary doctrinal shift. > There is a difference. The are many catholics who remain in the church who > reject some of the changes. Yes, I undestand they are called "lapsed" > 2) Mel Gibson isn't reponsible for the actions of his father. Who said anything about his farther???? [snip your personal beliefs] Susan > > 1) Was the pope speaking "from the chair" or was he just setting policy? > > You're kidding, right? > It was considered a revolutionary doctrinal shift. Doesn't matter how revolutionary the shift in doctrin was. A Roman Catholic isn't a heretic just because he doesn't follow the latest zig or zag of the church. (IOW, the RCC isn't the Communist Party). > > There is a difference. The are many catholics who remain in the church > who > > reject some of the changes. > > Yes, I undestand they are called "lapsed" You are completely WRONG. There is a cable TV network (EWTN) which is run (in part) by nuns and priests who are in good standing with the church. There are a handful of priest who have "gone too far" but differing on Vatican II doesn't make you a "lapsed catholic." > > > 1) Was the pope speaking "from the chair" or was he just setting > policy? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Catholic isn't a heretic just because he doesn't follow the latest zig or > zag of the church. So you admit that Vatican II was ex cathedra. > (IOW, the RCC isn't the Communist Party). But the definition of a Roman Catholic is that they follow the Pope. It doesn't make sense otherwise. > > > There is a difference. The are many catholics who remain in the church > > who [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > You are completely WRONG. Then so are my Catholic friends & relatives who have assured me that this is exactly the case. > There is a cable TV network (EWTN) which is run > (in part) by nuns and priests who are in good standing with the church. Yeah, and?? What on earth does this prove or disprove? > There are a handful of priest who have "gone too far" but differing on > Vatican II doesn't make you a "lapsed catholic." > So you admit that Vatican II was ex cathedra. What? I do no such thing! > > (IOW, the RCC isn't the Communist Party). > > But the definition of a Roman Catholic is that they follow the Pope. > It doesn't make sense otherwise. The Pope is the head of the RCC. But he isn't a Hitler or a Stalin with robes and a funny hat. > > You are completely WRONG. > > Then so are my Catholic friends & relatives who have assured me that this is > exactly the case. What can I say. If your "friends and relatives" believe at attending a Latin Mass with the altar at the far end of the choir makes one a heretic then your "friends and relatives" are a bit on the silly side. > > There is a cable TV network (EWTN) which is run > > (in part) by nuns and priests who are in good standing with the church. > > Yeah, and?? > What on earth does this prove or disprove? That some of the most influencial RCs in American have problems with "Vatican II" and that they state their positions in public and remain in good standing with the Church. EWTN is the de-facto voice of the RCC to Amercans in general. Your "friends and relatives" most likely get what they know of the Church from their parish priests. Most parish priests are, at best, "limited." (AND, as has come out, many of them are homosexuals and child abusers.) There are a LOT of very smart "religious" in the RCC. Many of them work at EWTN and many of them have no problem with the movie made by Mr. Gibson. The RCC is a very diverse institution (duh!) and is quite tolerate within limits. For example, their are RC priests who are "married with children" and the Church knows this and lets then continue as priests in good standing. The movie is just one of the Gospels. Repeating the letter of the Gospels would not make anyone a heretic. > > So you admit that Vatican II was ex cathedra. > > What? > > I do no such thing! Well, since you snipped what you said, even you must have realized what you did. > > > (IOW, the RCC isn't the Communist Party). > > > > But the definition of a Roman Catholic is that they follow the Pope. > > It doesn't make sense otherwise. > > The Pope is the head of the RCC. right. And if you belong, you have to acknowledge that. > But he isn't a Hitler or a Stalin with > robes and a funny hat. He is in charge. > > > You are completely WRONG. > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > altar at the far end of the choir makes one a heretic then your "friends and > relatives" are a bit on the silly side. If you are going to equate furniture & language with serious dotrinal matters, then you are the one on the silly side. > > > There is a cable TV network (EWTN) which is run > > > (in part) by nuns and priests who are in good standing with the church. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Your "friends and relatives" most likely get what they know of the Church > from their parish priests. You have said nothing that makes me blieve that *you* know more than they, & in fact, you seem to know less. Most parish priests are, at best, "limited." & your proof of this is....? > (AND, as has come out, many of them are homosexuals and child abusers.) Irrelevent. > There are a LOT of very smart "religious" in the RCC. Irrelevent. Many of them work at > EWTN and many of them have no problem with the movie made by Mr. Gibson. Irrelevent. > The RCC is a very diverse institution (duh!) and is quite tolerate within > limits. For example, their are RC priests who are "married with children" > and the Church knows this and lets then continue as priests in good > standing. > > The movie is just one of the Gospels. It is bits & pieces of more than one, aswell as extra-biblical writings. Repeating the letter of the Gospels > would not make anyone a heretic. Which was never the point under discussion. Susan > BUT, in any case, the movie merely goes along with what the Bible says. That's *not* what I heard. It follows just *one* of the gospels. The art (and the bias) is in choosing which gospel. 'The Bible' says whatever you want it to say if you chose carefully enough. SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 Qercus magazine & FD Games www.finnybank.com www.acornuser.com Qercus - a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines > > BUT, in any case, the movie merely goes along with what the Bible says. > > That's *not* what I heard. It follows just *one* of the gospels. The art > (and the bias) is in choosing which gospel. 'The Bible' says whatever you > want it to say if you chose carefully enough. Well, sport, I understand that the movie follows one Gospel as much "to the letter" as it can within the limits of the art. Gaps are filled from the other gospels and other sources. There have been low budget movies (produced by various churches) that have shown the same things. The differences are the Gibson made it a first class production and Gibson had a high profile among the non-believers. The non-believers attempted to destroy Gibson but they have made him rich enough to pay for another few moneys without any outside money. > > > BUT, in any case, the movie merely goes along with what the Bible says. > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Well, sport, I understand that the movie follows one Gospel as much "to the > letter" as it can within the limits of the art. And from where do you get this impression? Gaps are filled from the > other gospels and other sources. There have been low budget movies > (produced by various churches) that have shown the same things. The > differences are the Gibson made it a first class production and Gibson had a > high profile among the non-believers. And he was determined to have one, too. The non-believers attempted to > destroy Gibson but they have made him rich enough to pay for another few > moneys without any outside money. Yes, Gibson was clever to get one of his technical advisors to give the cript to a panel of scholars just as shooting was completed. Susan > > BUT, in any case, the movie merely goes along with what the Bible says. > > That's *not* what I heard. It follows just *one* of the gospels. Actually, it picks & chooses. For instance, the bit where the Jews ahistorically blame themselves comes from *only* Matthew. This is why some Xians think Gibson is an antisemite, because he picked THAT bit out to portray on the screen. Susan The art > (and the bias) is in choosing which gospel. 'The Bible' says whatever you > want it to say if you chose carefully enough. In alt.history.british John Gilmer <gilmer@crosslink.net> wrote: >> > > > Mel Gibson is a traditional Roman Catholic. >> > > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >Jews" >> are not guilty for Jesus' death. >So? >1) Was the pope speaking "from the chair" or was he just setting policy? >There is a difference. The are many catholics who remain in the church who >reject some of the changes. >2) Mel Gibson isn't reponsible for the actions of his father. BUT, in >any case, the movie merely goes along with what the Bible says. That's not >to say the present day Jews killed Jesus (and, since He came back to life, >AND he forgave them at the him of his execution it doesn't matter in the >first place.) >The execution of Jesus was part of God's plan. His "agents" were the Jews >and the Romans. You can only hold those ideas if you think that the Bible is inerrant. While a number of evangelical groups in the US and elsewhere *do* take that view, I don't believe that Catholics do. If the Bible is not inerrant, then the details of the story of how Jesus was killed may not be completely accurate. And God has never stated His plans. What you wrote in your last paragraph is close to determinism, i.e. it was fore-ordained that the Romans and Jews would act the way they did. This contradicts free will. ---- Paul J. Gans ---- Paul J. Gans >Uh, you've missed quite a lot. He specifically rejects Vatican II & >therefore everything after. >Oh, and, BTW, Vatican II is where the Church officially said that "the Jews" >are not guilty for Jesus' death. Vatican II was a big big change. It is also not up for discussion, it is doctrine. If indeed he rejects it then he is out of step with the Church. He's telling the Pope how to be Catholic. I'm hoping that the next Pope will go for a Vatican III. -- Julian Richards julian-richards "at" ntlworld.com Usenet is how from the comfort of your own living room, you can converse with people that you would never want in your house. > >Uh, you've missed quite a lot. He specifically rejects Vatican II & > >therefore everything after. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Church. He's telling the Pope how to be Catholic. I'm hoping that the > next Pope will go for a Vatican III. One can remain in the RCC and say and believe that Vaticam II (or whatever) is silly. The RCC isn't the communist party. >> >Uh, you've missed quite a lot. He specifically rejects Vatican II & >> >therefore everything after. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >The RCC isn't the communist party. Dissing the Pontiff? If Gibson is so keen on the old time Catholicism then JP2 should reform the Inquisition to get medievally Catholic on his a.s. The RCC is also not Pizza Hut where you can choose which toppings you like. -- Julian Richards julian-richards "at" ntlworld.com Usenet is how from the comfort of your own living room, you can converse with people that you would never want in your house. > > >Uh, you've missed quite a lot. He specifically rejects Vatican II & > > >therefore everything after. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > is doctrine. If indeed he rejects it then he is out of step with the > > Church. Yes, this is my understanding from other Catholics. It also makes sense, logic-wise. Xianity is faith-based: you have to believe in order to be one. He's telling the Pope how to be Catholic. I'm hoping that the > > next Pope will go for a Vatican III. > > One can remain in the RCC and say and believe that Vaticam II (or whatever) > is silly. Which is like saying that one can be Lutheran and Catholic at the same time. It doesn't make any sense. > The RCC isn't the communist party. Normally I would never argue with someone about another religion, but I've been told by too many people who follow that religion something the opposite of what you are saying. Susan > > > >Uh, you've missed quite a lot. He specifically rejects Vatican II & > > > >therefore everything after. [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Susan What a load of crap. > > >Uh, you've missed quite a lot. He specifically rejects Vatican II & > > >therefore everything after. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > The RCC isn't the communist party. The RCC is spent. It represents unbridled corruption. The pope is an old fool and the quicker he dies the better. Then the RCC may have a more enlightened pope who will change the laws on contraception and save the lives of possibly millions of poor people. >> > >Uh, you've missed quite a lot. He specifically rejects Vatican II & >> > >therefore everything after. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >enlightened pope who will change the laws on contraception and save the >lives of possibly millions of poor people. Your semitic side is shining through again. May we expect a "man on a stick" comment next? > >> > >Uh, you've missed quite a lot. He specifically rejects Vatican II & > >> > >therefore everything after. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Your semitic side is shining through again. May we expect a "man on a > stick" comment next? I like it. dead man on a stick is rather humorous. >> >> > >Uh, you've missed quite a lot. He specifically rejects Vatican II & >> >> > >therefore everything after. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > >I like it. dead man on a stick is rather humorous. Then people like you really shouldn't kvetch about 'anti-semitism'®. >> Your semitic side is shining through again. May we expect a "man on >> a stick" comment next? > > I like it. dead man on a stick is rather humorous. The Rev is no Protestant or Reverend in the Church of Ireland.He is a RC who uses an Anglican clergymans nick (a snotty made up one)to tarnish the Anglican Church. I understand that he may be, or was an active member of the IRA or Provos and may have gone to Palestine to arrange arms shipments.The IRA want to get rid of some arms .......nothing new here. Tilly Bright1_3@hotmail.com > >> Your semitic side is shining through again. May we expect a "man on > >> a stick" comment next? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Tilly I've tested him on that, he is anti-Catholic and anti IRA. You appear to be pathologically anti Catholic. > I've tested him on that, he is anti-Catholic and anti IRA. You appear > to be pathologically anti Catholic. Wrong , I have several RC friends whom i have a lot of time for.. I was quite surprised to hear this BTW .The Rev is no Church of Ireland clergyman, quite the opposite.You saw the posts from from Rev. Graham of the Anglican Church of Ireland regarding him .didn't you? It makes sense when one thinks about it. Tilly. Tilly -- Bright1_3@hotmail.com > > I've tested him on that, he is anti-Catholic and anti IRA. You appear > > to be pathologically anti Catholic. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Tilly. I was never stupid enough to presume he was an Anglican clergyman. >> I've tested him on that, he is anti-Catholic and anti IRA. You appear >> to be pathologically anti Catholic. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >clergyman, quite the opposite.You saw the posts from from Rev. Graham of the >Anglican Church of Ireland regarding him .didn't you? If you were dumb enough to fall for those forged posts... >It makes sense when one thinks about it. You don't think, twatty. That's your problem. > If you were dumb enough to fall for those forged posts... The denial of you on the Church of Ireland website is pretty damning as well. Looks like you're a phoney all the way through... SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > > If you were dumb enough to fall for those forged posts... > > The denial of you on the Church of Ireland website is pretty damning as > well. > > Looks like you're a phoney all the way through... Don't tell me people actually thought he was genuine. ... > The denial of you on the Church of Ireland website is pretty damning > as well. > > Looks like you're a phoney all the way through... He is a complete phony and part of his agenda is to discredit Protestants as well as Jews etc........Several people have spoken to the Rev. Graham. It has been brought to the attention of the Church of Ireland that someone posting in these newsgroups (and perhaps others) under the name "The Revd Terence Fformby-Smythe" has claimed to be a clerical member of the Church of Ireland, specifically within the Diocese of Armagh. It has also been brought to our attention that this individual has implied the The Archbishop of Armagh, The Most Revd. Dr. Robert Eames, can "vouch" for him/her. The Archbishop and the Church of Ireland state categorically that there is no "Revd Terence Fformby-Smythe" serving in the church - in Armagh or anywhere else. The Revd Michael Graham Hon Secretary, Internet Committee Central Communications Board The Church of Ireland Church House Church Avenue Rathmines Dublin 6 Tel: +353 (0)1 4978422 I am the Rector of Drogheda in the Diocese of Armagh (interesting that you don't know me since you claim to serve in the same Diocese). A check of http://ireland.anglican.org/dioceses/armagh/armaghparishes.html will verify this. ___________________________________________________________________ Take out your Church of Ireland directory (or telephone the Diocesan Office or Church House) and find my home contact telephone and/or fax number and/or parish email address (as opposed to the central Church House number given on my original posting). Then simply contact me directly and verify that I am indeed the poster of these message from the Church of Ireland in response to the complainant who contacted the Archbishop about your haverings. I cannot make it any simpler than that and I offer you the chance to put your money where your mouth is. For all other members of these newsgroups, I will repeat: "The Revd Terence Fformby-Smythe" (sic) is not a serving member of the Church of Ireland in the Diocese of Armagh or any other Diocese under that name. Michael Tilly -- Bright1_3@hotmail.com >... >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >He is a complete phony and part of his agenda is to discredit Protestants as >well as Jews etc........Several people have spoken to the Rev. Graham. And you know this because they've told you they have? What a dumb twat! (forged post deleted) > And you know this because they've told you they have? What a dumb > twat! > > (forged post deleted) I might have spoken to him myself. :-) Tilly -- Bright1_3@hotmail.com >> And you know this because they've told you they have? What a dumb >> twat! >> >> (forged post deleted) > >I might have spoken to him myself. :-) You don't even know? Even if you knew, you'd probably be lying. >Tilly > >-- >Ditsy1_3@hotmail.com > > And you know this because they've told you they have? What a dumb > > twat! Hey - he's signing his posts more honestly! Susan > > (forged post deleted) > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.594 / Virus Database: 377 - Release Date: 24/02/04 >> If you were dumb enough to fall for those forged posts... > >The denial of you on the Church of Ireland website is pretty damning as >well. > >Looks like you're a phoney all the way through... That website is a spoof. Looks like you're an a.shole all the way through... > >> If you were dumb enough to fall for those forged posts... > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > That website is a spoof. Looks like you're an a.shole all the way > through... Except the main Church of England website points to it as authentic... Looks like you're a phoney, not that I ever believed you were ever anything else. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government >> >"The Revd Terence Fformby-Smythe" <renegedd@anglickan.org> wrote in >message [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Except the main Church of England website points to it as authentic... The main Church of England website points to a Church of Ireland site? >Looks like you're a phoney, not that I ever believed you were ever anything >else. Looks like you're an a.shole, not that I ever suspected otherwise. > >Except the main Church of England website points to it as authentic... > > The main Church of England website points to a Church of Ireland site? Yep, looks like you're still a liar... > >Looks like you're a phoney, not that I ever believed you were ever anything > >else. > > Looks like you're an a.shole, not that I ever suspected otherwise. Nice to see you agree with Susan Cohen on something... If I've managed to upset both of you I'm obviously doing something right... SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > "Tilly" <Bright1_3@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > I've tested him on that, he is anti-Catholic and anti IRA. You appear > to be pathologically anti Catholic. Well don't you think that might be sensible under the circumstances BTW being knowledgable on Irish history and the English/Protestant treatment of the Catholics there, I actually had some sympathy for them during 'the troubles' but not for their terrorist attacks on innocents. BTW the Trev. is quite knowledgable about the inside of the 'The Maze', the famous prison in Belfast. Tilly Bright1_3@hotmail.com >> "Tilly" <Bright1_3@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >of the Catholics there, I actually had some sympathy for them during 'the >troubles' but not for their terrorist attacks on innocents. You? Knowledgeable? Don't make me laugh, twatty. You know jack sh.t. >BTW the Trev. is quite knowledgable about the inside of the 'The Maze', the >famous prison in Belfast. Actually, I was the prison chaplain for a while. >Tilly > >Ditsyt1_3@hotmail.com > You? Knowledgeable? Don't make me laugh, twatty. You know jack > sh.t. I did a loton European history including English history in great depth at university Rev. >> BTW the Trev. is quite knowledgable about the inside of the 'The >> Maze', the famous prison in Belfast. > > Actually, I was the prison chaplain for a while. ROTFLMAO.......... You seemed to know the place intimately Rev, it was obvious you spent a lot of time there. An Anglican Minister for IRA prisoners?.........LOL Pull the other one, the management knew damn well a Protestant Minister would have been a sheep among wolves there.You would have been torn limb from limb, particularly because of your mouth...... You knew the place so intimately, you discussed the faeces smeared on the walls there and only IRA prisoners did that during hunger strikes. Tilly Bright1_3@hotmail.com >> You? Knowledgeable? Don't make me laugh, twatty. You know jack >> sh.t. > >I did a loton European history including English history in great depth at >university Rev. Translation: I read one illustrated book on the subject, which I couldn't finish. >>> BTW the Trev. is quite knowledgable about the inside of the 'The >>> Maze', the famous prison in Belfast. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >You knew the place so intimately, you discussed the faeces smeared on the >walls there and only IRA prisoners did that during hunger strikes. You dumb, ignorant twat. The Maze included both Republican and Loyalist prisoners. The various factions were segregated into their own H-blocks. I was chaplain to the Loyalists. > > "Tilly" <Bright1_3@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > > > I've tested him on that, he is anti-Catholic and anti IRA. You appear > > to be pathologically anti Catholic. > > Well don't you think that might be sensible under the circumstances Sensible? you who speaks to Alex and the Rev and Matt. Incidentally the provisional IRA is Marxist not Catholic. And you appear to know little about the troubles. Its about a united Ireland not religion. Except that the bastards sons of Scots and English in Ulster are generally Protestant and the true Irish are generally of Catholic parentage. > Sensible? you who speaks to Alex and the Rev and Matt. Like you? > Incidentally the provisional IRA is Marxist not Catholic. The Provisionals are all RC. > And you appear to know little about the troubles. Bullshit. Its about a united > Ireland not religion. Except that the bastards sons of Scots and > English in Ulster are generally Protestant and the true Irish are > generally of Catholic parentage. LOL......you're kidding right? For goodness sake Belfast is even segregated along Protestant/Cathlic lines.It isn't just political, it also has a strong religious element. The RC's have always been resentful of the treatment they received at the hands of the English, especially the land owners who treated them like dirt.They forced them into poverty and starvation and even tried to dictate their form of worship. I suggest you do some reading on the subject. I actually had sympathy for the Catholics given the treatment they received, being labelled 'Papists' and being mistreated by Protestants who consider/ed themselves superior. They got a very raw deal at the time. Tilly Tilly -- Bright1_3@hotmail.com > > Sensible? you who speaks to Alex and the Rev and Matt. > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Tilly I have done extensive reading on the subject. Many leaders of Irish nationalism were nominally Protestants. And some of the biggest bastards of the RUC have been Catholic. And I have Irish ancestry as well as Jewish. >> Sensible? you who speaks to Alex and the Rev and Matt. > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >themselves superior. >They got a very raw deal at the time. Hmm, so Steffi is an IRA sympathiser...interesting. >Tilly > >Tilly >-- >Ditsy1_3@hotmail.com >> > "Tilly" <Bright1_3@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >are generally Protestant and the true Irish are generally of Catholic >parentage. Not forgetting that most of the dumb Yanks who donate money to Noraid are themselves descended from Ulster Protestants. You can't make this sh.t up. >>> Your semitic side is shining through again. May we expect a "man on >>> a stick" comment next? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >uses an Anglican clergymans nick (a snotty made up one)to tarnish the >Anglican Church. I am not a Catholic and my name (it's not a "nick") is neither made up nor "snotty". >I understand that he may be, or was an active member of the IRA or Provos Yeah, right. Or even the RUC. >and may have gone to Palestine to arrange arms shipments.The IRA want to >get rid of some arms .......nothing new here. A so-called orthodox jew talking about "Palestine", Steffi? Those nice people at Mossad may like to have a quiet word with you when you finally go home. >Tilly > >Ditsy1_3@hotmail.com > A so-called orthodox jew talking about "Palestine", Steffi? Those > nice people at Mossad may like to have a quiet word with you when you > finally go home. Why would they? I might be one of them!!!!! :-)) Tilly -- Bright1_3@hotmail.com >> A so-called orthodox jew talking about "Palestine", Steffi? Those >> nice people at Mossad may like to have a quiet word with you when you >> finally go home. > >Why would they? I might be one of them!!!!! :-)) A ditsy little reform jew broad? I don't think so, Steffi. >Tilly >-- [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.594 / Virus Database: 377 - Release Date: 24/02/04 > >> A so-called orthodox jew talking about "Palestine", Steffi? Those > >> nice people at Mossad may like to have a quiet word with you when you [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > >Tilly Tilly was probably the one who seduced poor old Vannau. > Tilly was probably the one who seduced poor old Vannau. Who? I presume you mean Vanunu. It takes quite a woman to be able to do it and be convincing I would think! :-) Tilly -- Bright1_3@hotmail.com >> Tilly was probably the one who seduced poor old Vannau. > >Who? I presume you mean Vanunu. >It takes quite a woman to be able to do it and be convincing I would think! >:-) Why? Most men would allow themselves to be seduced by anyone half-way attractive. >Tilly > >-- >Ditsy1_3@hotmail.com > A ditsy little reform jew broad? I don't think so, Steffi. Whenever you call me this I just laugh,it means I am frustrating you. Tilly -- Bright1_3@hotmail.com >> A ditsy little reform jew broad? I don't think so, Steffi. > >Whenever you call me this I just laugh,it means I am frustrating you. You're as deluded as Suzy Cohen. Perhaps you need another dose of reality. >Tilly >-- >Ditsy1_3@hotmail.com In alt.history.british Julian Richards <see@sig.co.uk> wrote: >>Uh, you've missed quite a lot. He specifically rejects Vatican II & >>therefore everything after. >>Oh, and, BTW, Vatican II is where the Church officially said that "the Jews" >>are not guilty for Jesus' death. >Vatican II was a big big change. It is also not up for discussion, it >is doctrine. If indeed he rejects it then he is out of step with the >Church. He's telling the Pope how to be Catholic. I'm hoping that the >next Pope will go for a Vatican III. He does not recognize this pope as legitimate. He rejects Vatican II and everything that has both come from it and happened after it. As far as he is concerned there is an anti-pope in Rome. ---- Paul J. Gans In alt.history.british a.spencer3 <a.spencer3@ntlworld.com> wrote: >> Mel Gibson is a traditional Roman Catholic. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Island-bound twit. >(No, I'm not an RC). >Surreyman Gibson's particular group of religious folks are essentially heretical -- though I don't think anyone has bothered to say that. It isn't just that he favors the Latin mass -- many others do to. All one has to do is Google around for the religious views of his father. Just be sure to be prepared when reading them. ---- Paul J. Gans > Gibson's particular group of religious folks are essentially > heretical -- though I don't think anyone has bothered to say > that. It isn't just that he favors the Latin mass -- many > others do to. If Gibson (and those who go along with him on the subject) are "heretical" he has a LOT of company include the most famous nun in the United States. The church obviously doesn't believe Gimbson to be a heretic. > All one has to do is Google around for the religious views of > his father. Just be sure to be prepared when reading them. What? You can't say it here? "Dad" doesn't deny that the Germans killed many Jews. No question that "dad" doesn't like Jews, but neither do most of the French or the ARABS. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.