Jacob Stuart Harrison Storytelling Thread - FSTDT Forums Ex-Pet Lolcow

[MW 590]

The state religion may still be Anglicanism, but most British people are "Nones".

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...s-no-religion-british-social-attitudes-survey

They're not all Atheists and most do believe in the supernatural and things like the afterlife, but they're not Christians. The Church of England hasn't been the main religion for decades. Catholicism has more adherants here, but most of them are immigrants or the children of them.

For the British people, not counting the Polish and Muslims who are very religious, very few actually practice the faith they claim to follow, only 2% of those who claim membership of the Church of England actually attend Church services.

Americans take far more interest in religion than Europeans do OP.

Well there will be a religious revival after the rightful heir is restored to the throne because the media and education system will promote Catholicism.

 

[Some Manajerk]

Well there will be a religious revival after the rightful heir is restored to the throne because the media and education system will promote Catholicism.

Have you seen Britain these days? if they're going to promote any religion its going to be Islam.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

He intended the world to be perfect but the first evolved modern humans Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil causing humanity to be cursed with original sin. But to save humanity, he sent his son Jesus Christ to die for our sins so that whoever accepts Jesus as their lord and savior, do good works, and do penance for sins can be saved.

1. There was the Bourbon Restoration after the Napoleonic Wars that lasted till the July Revolution of 1830 when they were replaced by the House of Orleans.
2. Most Catholic monarchies have fallen because it was Satan's plan to destroy Catholic monarchies and cause the decline of Catholicism in those countries.

But those religions are from before England became a nation. When England became a nation in 927, most of the Anglo Saxons were Catholic.

The fact that other Catholic powers such as Austria did not recognize Napoleon, means that even other Catholics didn't think that the Pope had the legitimate power to crown a new monarch in place of an older dynasty.

Your view is heretical and against the canon of the Catholic Church, as you are claiming that Satan is more powerful than God and can enact desires that are against God's will, invalidating His omnipotence.

 

[not william stenchever]

1. Never trust a papist

2. Satan is a jobber

 

[Queen Elizabeth II]

We deserve those horrible things because we are sinners, so Christ's sacrifice is a great act of mercy.

According to you, this creature deserves to be tortured for all eternity because of some broad way back when ate an apple and might be unlucky enough to be born in a predominantly irreligious nation like Iceland.

Think about that sensibly for a moment.

Well after the House of Bourbon was overthrown in 1830, there were those called the "Legitimists" that argued that they should be restored to the throne and there are still legitimists today. However I know that the rightful heir to the English throne is the rightful heir to France's throne because of England's claim to the French throne back in the 1300s.

If we're really going down this road, why do you stop in the 1300's? Why not pick an Italian considering Britain and France were both subjects of a Christian Roman Empire?

Satan's work of overthrowing Catholic monarchies was not God's work.

He lets it happen, and being omnibenevolent he can only will that which is "good". Therefore, the fall of the Catholic monarchies is an act of divine providence.

While it is true that it took a long time for Catholicism to be firmly established, it was the Scandinavians that were the last to convert. The Wikipedia article on the Christianisation of Anglo-Saxon England says that England became mostly Christian by the 7th century. So by 927, the majority of the English were Christian.

We're not talking about Scandinavia. Within the cities yes, most of the wealthier inhabitants were Christians. The countryside, however, took far longer to convert. This wasn't the Mediterranean well-trodden and maintained, this was at the time the very ends of the known world for Christianity.

Well that was because Napoleon conquered much of the powers of Europe and established client states in their place until he was defeated and the old order was restored in 1815.

And then it was crashed down again when Napoleon came back, and a Napoleon II and III.

France doesn't have a king today either.

 

[MW 590]

The way most Catholics have explained it to me, the Pope is God's representative on Earth. He's not divine in and of himself, but basically what he says is practically the word of God. So the way most Catholics would tell it, God Himself, via his agent the Pope, appointed Napoleon leader. Therefore he is the rightful ruler because the agents of God's church said so.



And just fucking LOL "this nation I am not a citizen of should do this. Oh, me live there? No, I'll stay here in America."

You are misinterpreting the doctrine of papal infallibility. The pope is only infallible when when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church," which rarely happens.

Your view is heretical and against the canon of the Catholic Church, as you are claiming that Satan is more powerful than God and can enact desires that are against God's will, invalidating His omnipotence.

It is against God's will for wickedness to happen, but he allows it to happen because he doesn't want to interfere with people's free will.

Have you seen Britain these days? if they're going to promote any religion its going to be Islam.

The scary rise of the horrible religion of Islam will cause many English to want to join my cause, because restoring the true monarchy will save England from Islam, because the true monarchy will promote Catholicism as a religious alternative which will hinder the rise of Islam, and they will also stop Muslim immigration.

 

[eldri]

I for one welcome @Jacob Harrison and respect his plight to return power to rightful heir to England's throne.
I believe it is within Kiwi Farms' best interest to help him on the condition that he helps us with our Anglo Menace.

EDIT: Jacob if you want us to help you please give Null your phone number so he can talk to you in private.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

It is against God's will for wickedness to happen, but he allows it to happen because he doesn't want to interfere with people's free will.

You are not saying that these things are happening because of the will of Man, but the will of Satan, which makes the Catholic position on theodicy irrelevant. I suspect you say this because you cannot accept the idea that people may, of their own free will, reject your ideal world.

 

[UW 411]

@Jacob Harrison Apologise for the cardinal sin of triple posting you absolute heathen.

 

[Lydia of Whiterun]

And just fucking LOL "this nation I am not a citizen of should do this. Oh, me live there? No, I'll stay here in America."

"The theory of the exceptionalism of the U.S. has developed over time and can be traced to many sources. French political scientist and historian Alexis de Tocqueville was the first writer to describe the country as "exceptional" in 1831 and 1840." - Wikipedia

 

[MW 590]

View attachment 643295

According to you, this creature deserves to be tortured for all eternity because of some broad way back when ate an apple and might be unlucky enough to be born in a predominantly irreligious nation like Iceland.

Think about that sensibly for a moment.

But according to Catholicism, the souls of unbaptized babies go to Limbo instead of Hell because they died while they were too young to commit mortal sin.

View attachment 643295
If we're really going down this road, why do you stop in the 1300's? Why not pick an Italian considering Britain and France were both subjects of a Christian Roman Empire?

The Roman Empire fell a long time ago, so the barbarians fulfilled the void and established new nations. The Roman Empire's successor was the Byzantine Empire which in a treaty, recognized Charlemagne as Emperor in the West. Charlemagne and later Holy Roman Emperor's recognized the other European monarchies so those monarchies were legitimate.

View attachment 643295
He lets it happen, and being omnibenevolent he can only will that which is "good". Therefore, the fall of the Catholic monarchies is an act of divine providence.

Just because he let it happen, doesn't mean that he willed it to happen. As I said, he allows sin because he does not want to interfere with free will, but he does not like sin.

View attachment 643295
We're not talking about Scandinavia. Within the cities yes, most of the wealthier inhabitants were Christians. The countryside, however, took far longer to convert. This wasn't the Mediterranean well-trodden and maintained, this was at the time the very ends of the known world for Christianity.

Well since the Anglo Saxon Kingdoms established Christianity as the official religion, the government started supporting the building of churches all over the country and the Bishops assigned local priests to local parishes, so by 927, over 200 years after all the Kingdoms established Christianity, most of the subjects would be Christian. And even if the countryside was still pagan in 927, Catholicism was still the official established religion of England.

View attachment 643295
And then it was crashed down again when Napoleon came back, and a Napoleon II and III.

France doesn't have a king today either.

Correct. And there are monarchists today who view the French Republic as illegitimate just like I see the modern UK monarchy as illegitimate. I also view the French Republic as illegitimate but the difference is they want the Bourbons restored while I view the true monarchy of England as the true monarchy of France.

 

[Queen Elizabeth II]

But according to Catholicism, the souls of unbaptized babies go to Limbo instead of Hell because they died while they were too young to commit mortal sin.

That is a theological opinion, and not a teaching of the Catholic Church.

Benedict XVI most recently explained in his Berlin lectures that because God is omnibenevolent, he would make allowances for those who for reasons outside of their control could never know of the existance of the Catholic Church.

This is just an assumption, and nothing more. Only through baptism through the trinitarian formula and through full intellectual submission to the Roman Pontiff is one saved according to the Catholic faith.

The Roman Empire fell a long time ago, so the barbarians fulfilled the void and established new nations. The Roman Empire's successor was the Byzantine Empire which in a treaty, recognized Charlemagne as Emperor in the West. Charlemagne and later Holy Roman Emperor's recognized the other European monarchies so those monarchies were legitimate.

So you will accept pagan tribal warlords overthrowing and destroying a Christian empire as valid, but not Elizabeth's claim?

Your case for your royal candidate is inconsistent. Is or is the right of conquest not valid? Because if it is like you propose here, Elizabeth II is the "true" queen.

Just because he let it happen, doesn't mean that he willed it to happen. As I said, he allows sin because he does not want to interfere with free will, but he does not like sin.

He made the universe this way knowing how things would turn out. He could have made a world in which this couldn't happen, but he chose the configuration where it would.

Well since the Anglo Saxon Kingdoms established Christianity as the official religion, the government started supporting the building of churches all over the country and the Bishops assigned local priests to local parishes, so by 927, over 200 years after all the Kingdoms established Christianity, most of the subjects would be Christian. And even if the countryside was still pagan in 927, Catholicism was still the official established religion of England.

Until it wasn't. Roman Paganism came to overpower the Celtic faiths, which was overtaken by the Germanic faith, which was taken over by the Catholic, Which was taken over by the Reformist, Which was overtaken by Anglo-Catholicism/High Anglicanism...

You can see the problem I assume? There are many other religions with far older claims to being the "traditional religion of England". We've not even explored the fact Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have seperate state-sanctioned religions.

Correct. And there are monarchists today who view the French Republic as illegitimate just like I see the modern UK monarchy as illegitimate. I also view the French Republic as illegitimate but the difference is they want the Bourbons restored while I view the true monarchy of England as the true monarchy of France.

But all the monarchies of Europe are illegitimate, you could just as easily use the Donation of Constantine and claim the rightful king of Western Europe is the Pope. It's a forgery of course, but it's from that the Pope drew the authority to crown himself as Lord of the Papal States.

 

[GS 281]

@Jacob Harrison pls dont double-triple post. learn how to multi-quote. Also, get yourself an av pls.

 

[AnOminous]

@Jacob Harrison pls dont double-triple post. learn how to multi-quote. Also, get yourself an av pls.

Give him one if he doesn't.

 

[GS 281]

Give him one if he doesn't.

Hes a gud Catholic boi tho.

 

[NOT Sword Fighter Super]

Nobody here cares about British royal politics.

 

[MW 590]

That is a theological opinion, and not a teaching of the Catholic Church.

Benedict XVI most recently explained in his Berlin lectures that because God is omnibenevolent, he would make allowances for those who for reasons outside of their control could never know of the existance of the Catholic Church.

This is just an assumption, and nothing more. Only through baptism through the trinitarian formula and through full intellectual submission to the Roman Pontiff is one saved according to the Catholic faith.

The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary and the Assumption of Mary used to be theological opinions that were generally accepted long before they were infallibly proclaimed as dogma, so I and many Catholic believe that Limbo is the destination for the souls of unbaptized infants. But some other Catholics think that they go to heaven. Either way, the sins that cause damnation are mortal sins so infants and young children are too young to be able to commit those kinds of sins.

So you will accept pagan tribal warlords overthrowing and destroying a Christian empire as valid, but not Elizabeth's claim?

Your case for your royal candidate is inconsistent. Is or is the right of conquest not valid? Because if it is like you propose here, Elizabeth II is the "true" queen.

They were originally pagan conquerors but they were made valid when they converted to Christianity and were recognized by the Byzantine Emperors and Popes. The Byzantine Emperors as successors to the Roman Emperors had the authority to recognize them as valid.

He made the universe this way knowing how things would turn out. He could have made a world in which this couldn't happen, but he chose the configuration where it would.

Making it so that it would not happen would be interfering with the free will of his creation. Satan chose to rebel against God, inventing sin and then Adam and Eve chose to eat the forbidden fruit. It was the choices of Satan, Adam, and Eve that made the world the way it is today.

Until it wasn't. Roman Paganism came to overpower the Celtic faiths, which was overtaken by the Germanic faith, which was taken over by the Catholic, Which was taken over by the Reformist, Which was overtaken by Anglo-Catholicism/High Anglicanism...

You can see the problem I assume? There are many other religions with far older claims to being the "traditional religion of England". We've not even explored the fact Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have seperate state-sanctioned religions.

As I said, while those religions were older, they were from BEFORE England was established as a nation in 927 AD. Catholicism is not the traditional religion of the region of England but it is the traditional religion of the nation of England.

Nobody here cares about British royal politics.

But are you American? If so, you should care because of America's Anglo Saxon cultural heritage and you likely have English ancestry.

 

[NOT Sword Fighter Super]

But are you American? If so, you should care because of America's Anglo Saxon cultural heritage and you likely have English ancestry.

But that's the beauty of being American, we don't give a shit about the rest of the world.
Good luck, though.

 

[Animewasamistake]

Eww a catholic.

 

[MarineTrainedTard]

I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that the number of Americans with Irish, African, Hispanic, and Eastern European ancestry, when combined, vastly outnumbers those with British ancestry; especially those with pure Anglo-Saxon ancestry.

And even if we take mixed blood into account, why should someone who's, say, 1/4 Spanish, 1/4 Slavic, 1/4 Irish and 1/4 Anglo-Saxon value the Anglo-Saxon bit beyond the other 3?