Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVII: The Snark Enlightenment

[Nea Byzantia]

And I am not do not remember many people advocating Protestants be banned from public office and public life.
Sure there is arguments back and forth.

But legitimate criticism is different than hatred.

The Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines all make fun of each other, rib each other, engage in verbal sparring, but they are still brothers.
Brotherhood is not often polite deference and complete agreement but it is not hate.

I know what ribbing is, and I can tell what it is when I see it.

What are you implying?

[Bear Stearns]

Because they're lazy, smelly, and pretentious.

*** Warned for trolling ***

Really...

[Nea Byzantia]

*** Warned for trolling ***

Really...

Really.

[Salus Maior]

I know what ribbing is, and I can tell what it is when I see it.

What are you implying?

That I can tell the difference between ribbing and intent to offend?

[Nea Byzantia]

What are you implying?

That I can tell the difference between ribbing and intent to offend?

Ah, ok.

[Novus America]

And I am not do not remember many people advocating Protestants be banned from public office and public life.
Sure there is arguments back and forth.

But legitimate criticism is different than hatred.

The Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines all make fun of each other, rib each other, engage in verbal sparring, but they are still brothers.
Brotherhood is not often polite deference and complete agreement but it is not hate.

I know what ribbing is, and I can tell what it is when I see it.

I agree, OT seems to go beyond ribbing into genuine hostility at times.

[Nea Byzantia]

I know what ribbing is, and I can tell what it is when I see it.

I agree, OT seems to go beyond ribbing into genuine hostility at times.

Hostility and insufferable smugness...

[Novus America]

And I am not do not remember many people advocating Protestants be banned from public office and public life.
Sure there is arguments back and forth.

But legitimate criticism is different than hatred.

The Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines all make fun of each other, rib each other, engage in verbal sparring, but they are still brothers.
Brotherhood is not often polite deference and complete agreement but it is not hate.

Very often brotherhood is expressed in friendly sparring or rough-play, or otherwise ribbing each other.

Very much so. Which is why we should not take genuine offense over sparring and rough play.

[Nea Byzantia]

Very often brotherhood is expressed in friendly sparring or rough-play, or otherwise ribbing each other.

Very much so. Which is why we should not take genuine offense over sparring and rough play.

Cause that will only invite more beatings...

[Bear Stearns]

Really...

Really.

That's lame as fuck.

[Nea Byzantia]

Really.

That's lame as fuck.

Agreed.

[Old Tyrannia]

Old Tyrannia what’s up with all of the hatred for the Roman Catholic Church? Even as a Continuing Anglican I have no ill will towards Rome and I can also recognize the English Reformation was a giant clusterfuck of killings and tyranny with the theology being in the background of the politics.

With all due respect, Camelone, I find it difficult to class you as an Anglican at all, given that not only are you not actually in communion with the Church of England but from what I gather you belong to the tractarian-inspired Anglo-Catholic wing of the faith who actively reject many of the fundamental positions of the Anglican Church laid out in the Thirty-Nine Articles. Not that I bear any particular ill will to you over it; I might disagree with you on particular theological matters but unlike Roman Catholics you're not a part of a massive international organisation that has a history of being actively hostile to both my country and my church.

. It's not like Catholics on this forum (and the Orthodox as well to a degree) don't constantly spout hatred for Protestantism.

I certainly criticize Protestantism (well, more the low-church Protestantism I was raised in rather than High Church),

So you actively chose to turn your back on Christ in favour of an antichrist? Interesting.

but I don't recall ever referring to Anglicanism as "the vile (or should I say, perfidious?) English religion"

Which is perfectly just, as the Church of England is not vile or perfidious whilst the Roman Catholic Church certainly is.

nor have I gone out of my way to make snide remarks about the Archbishop and his character.

Please feel free to, Justin Welby is a prat.

At no point did I claim that Henry VIII was a traditionalist in the sense that you're making out. I only stated that he was a traditional Catholic in most theological matters, rather than a convinced Protestant, which he plainly was. You don't seem to understand Christian theology beyond the most superficial level, however, so perhaps you can be forgiven your confusion.

I doubt Henry VIII was much a theologian either.
I am sure he cared about his desires and political power, not ivory tower theological debates.

Any historian worth their salt, Catholics included, will tell you that Henry VIII was highly educated and interested in theological matters; that's a matter of historical record. He was initially awarded the title "Fidei Defensor" by the pope for his treatise against Luther, Assertio Septem Sacramentorum. Whatever you judge his motives to have been- and even as a staunch critic of Henry (who persecuted many Protestant reformers as well as Catholics, let's not forget) I find it entirely plausible that he generally believed himself to be acting in accordance with God's will- there is no denying that he understood the theological implications of his actions fully.

Hello everyone! If I may ask, what's the current point of discussion? It seems to be something about the "Divine Right of Kings" and/or the "Mandate of Heaven", but I could be mistaken.

Also, I seem to notice that my earlier mean-spirited joke about Henry VIII and the English Reformation has spiraled out of control into all of my RWDT friends being hostile and belligerent to each other. It's sad... I'm sad now. I shouldn't have made that remark earlier.

This isn't your fault, Swaglord. It's a storm that's been brewing for some time.

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

If God ordained the pope, why is his kingdom so small? Sounds like a lame god.

The whole “my Kingdom is not of this Earth thing”. I am no theologian and more deistic/agnostic anyways but the existence of a separate political power and religious leader exists in Christianity.
A lot is a misunderstanding of of the roll of the Pope, who has always been separate from the major worldly leader.
The Pope was never supposed to be Emperor.

The Papal States were only formed after Italy collapsed into anarchy, with the end of that anarchy they really lost their reason to exist.

Of course many Popes got greedy for more worldly power, but many I am sure would say they should not have done so into the first place.

Which is why the pope owned the Papal States. Because his kingdom is not of this Earth.

[Nea Byzantia]

The whole “my Kingdom is not of this Earth thing”. I am no theologian and more deistic/agnostic anyways but the existence of a separate political power and religious leader exists in Christianity.
A lot is a misunderstanding of of the roll of the Pope, who has always been separate from the major worldly leader.
The Pope was never supposed to be Emperor.

The Papal States were only formed after Italy collapsed into anarchy, with the end of that anarchy they really lost their reason to exist.

Of course many Popes got greedy for more worldly power, but many I am sure would say they should not have done so into the first place.

Which is why the pope owned the Papal States. Because his kingdom is not of this Earth.

That's around the time the Papacy started going off, from the point of view of us Orthodox...When Pepin the Short created the Papal States in the 8th century.

[Old Tyrannia]

I agree, OT seems to go beyond ribbing into genuine hostility at times.

Hostility and insufferable smugness...

Be honest, you're mostly hostile to me because I keep pointing out that you are factually wrong about things and you don't like being corrected.

[Nea Byzantia]

Hostility and insufferable smugness...

Be honest, you're mostly hostile to me because I keep pointing out that you are factually wrong about things and you don't like being corrected.

See, there's that smugness again.

Sure, I'm antagonistic (admittedly, I can and should be nicer), but I'm not hostile - at least not intentionally. My temper just gets the better of me. If I have been overly hostile, I apologize.

[United Muscovite Nations]

I think it's reasonable to be fairly hostile to the Catholic Church. For most of its history it was a political leviathan that oppressed people of other faiths and tried to quash dissent, and it gave up none of that power willingly.

[Camelone]

Old Tyrannia what’s up with all of the hatred for the Roman Catholic Church? Even as a Continuing Anglican I have no ill will towards Rome and I can also recognize the English Reformation was a giant clusterfuck of killings and tyranny with the theology being in the background of the politics.

With all due respect, Camelone, I find it difficult to class you as an Anglican at all, given that not only are you not actually in communion with the Church of England but from what I gather you belong to the tractarian-inspired Anglo-Catholic wing of the faith who actively reject many of the fundamental positions of the Anglican Church laid out in the Thirty-Nine Articles. Not that I bear any particular ill will to you over it; I might disagree with you on particular theological matters but unlike Roman Catholics you're not a part of a massive international organisation that has a history of being actively hostile to both my country and my church.

I can go into some of the reasons why I do not believe I can ever join the Anglican Communion proper, mostly theological, and that I place higher importance on the Ecumenical Councils over the Articles. I attempt to frame my beliefs through the 1928 Prayer Book and the Articles where they do not conflict with the Ecumenical Councils or the three Creeds. Besides that I must say that perhaps it’s the difference between being a British Anglican and an American Anglican, where in America I feel more solidarity with Catholics and Orthodox than many other Protestants.

[Novus America]

The whole “my Kingdom is not of this Earth thing”. I am no theologian and more deistic/agnostic anyways but the existence of a separate political power and religious leader exists in Christianity.
A lot is a misunderstanding of of the roll of the Pope, who has always been separate from the major worldly leader.
The Pope was never supposed to be Emperor.

The Papal States were only formed after Italy collapsed into anarchy, with the end of that anarchy they really lost their reason to exist.

Of course many Popes got greedy for more worldly power, but many I am sure would say they should not have done so into the first place.

Which is why the pope owned the Papal States. Because his kingdom is not of this Earth.

Oh well nobody claimed the Popes of that era were always the most upstanding of Christians...
Many were power hungry and corrupt.

Although one can make an argument that given the anarchy in Italy at the time, establishing state for defensive purposes was a matter of practical necessity regardless of theological merits.

Although I am not so naive to believe all Popes had purely benign intentions.
Many did want political power and material wealth.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Which is why the pope owned the Papal States. Because his kingdom is not of this Earth.

Oh well nobody claimed the Popes of that era were always the most upstanding of Christians...
Many were power hungry and corrupt.

Although one can make an argument that given the anarchy in Italy at the time, establishing state for defensive purposes was a matter of practical necessity regardless of theological merits.

Although I am not so naive to believe all Popes had purely benign intentions.

By the 1800's, however, the Papal States were a terrible relic that abused human rights and tried to dominate other states through its moral authority. It was a good thing that the Napoleons dispossessed the Popes of their land.

[Salus Maior]

I agree, OT seems to go beyond ribbing into genuine hostility at times.

We've all done that.

[Salus Maior]

I think it's reasonable to be fairly hostile to the Catholic Church. For most of its history it was a political leviathan that oppressed people of other faiths and tried to quash dissent, and it gave up none of that power willingly.

No Church has given up whatever power it had willingly.

[United Muscovite Nations]

I think it's reasonable to be fairly hostile to the Catholic Church. For most of its history it was a political leviathan that oppressed people of other faiths and tried to quash dissent, and it gave up none of that power willingly.

No Church has given up whatever power it had willingly.

The Church of England did, the Lutheran churches did, parts of the Orthodox Church did. The Catholic Church was committing horrible abuses right up until the present. The last 200 years of Catholic Church history have been ridden with scandal and embarrassment that has nearly destroyed the Church, all of it because the Church has desperately tried to cling to medieval power.

[Nea Byzantia]

No Church has given up whatever power it had willingly.

The Church of England did, the Lutheran churches did, parts of the Orthodox Church did. The Catholic Church was committing horrible abuses right up until the present. The last 200 years of Catholic Church history have been ridden with scandal and embarrassment that has nearly destroyed the Church, all of it because the Church has desperately tried to cling to medieval power.

Maybe it'll catch up with 'em someday soon.

[Salus Maior]

Which is why the pope owned the Papal States. Because his kingdom is not of this Earth.

It was more because Charlemagne gave them that land after he booted the Lombards from Italy. And the rest is just medieval politics.