The Church of England and disestablishment: I will consider a couple of days, and then decide what to say.


David Davis

The Asse-Hat is going to go along with his socialist masters in government on this one, we can all now see.

I will decide what to think in a day or so. This is all blowing up correctly while everyone is out shopping in Woolworth’s, so that nobody will notice.

Perhaps the English cathedrals will be razed after that, and the land used for “affordable housing”. Just think what fun it would be for the builder-chaps in their jolly little plastic hats, to go at the windows with a wrecking-ball.

It’s all about “change”, you see.

About these ads

5 responses to “The Church of England and disestablishment: I will consider a couple of days, and then decide what to say.

  1. The English bill of rights 1689 surely has built in protection for the COE?

    This is why, when the Dhimmi Arch-Bishop of Canterbury spoke out regarding Sharia laws in this country,
    That too is against the bill of rights.

    No amount of skulldugary in Westminster can change a bill which states “For all time”

    Christianity and it’s place in England was safeguarded by this bill..

  2. A brilliant example of how conservatism is NOT liberal and is NOT libertarian.

    Conservatives leap to the defense of the church and state, liberals and libertarians oppose it.

    There is no argument from libertarian grounds for the existence of a state church.
    There are aethetic reasons to argue for the preservation of the many wonderful church buildings (through entirely voluntary means of course), but they are not libertarian in the narrow sense, and as far as I can see have no basis in thick libertarianism.

    Personally I think that we should go further than simple disesstablishment – the church has benfited for centuries from theft perpetuated on its behalf by the state, perhaps it should release some of that?
    Lets say all church owned land should be opened up for homesteading (a la Rothbard). If there is a congregation which wishes to use the church then fine, they may use it and claim it, if not then first come first served, let those who can use it take ownership.
    That seems equitable to me.

  3. England is currently being de-Christianised on purpose, and there is nothing that can be reasonably done about that.

    I do not dispute that there is no more anything about the Church – whether of England or anywhere else – that ought to do with the way people decide to run their political affairs.

    But the Great Churches of Christendom, and also the littler ones, which embody so much history and art that tells us who we are and have been and will be, ought to be saved. Ideally as you sya by private money. but I can’t see enough forthcoming, since the “lottery” has nationalised the process of giving, passing the decisions to uneletced Stalinists.

  4. Dave:

    Here’s an interesting report on election fraud and suspicious plane crashes and people being “disappeared”, implicating “Christianists” in the U.S. Gripping stuff!

    http://www.alternet.org/rights/114674/?page=1

    Best,

    Tony

  5. Steven Northwood

    England can’t be really. When I was young, I found a New Testament my Mother for one reason or another found need to keep.

    I was never Christened, and never put into any religion. I read that book, and I think, from what his documenters say, that he was a good man, a good leader and a good example, and he taught well to his followers, which according to Luther are called Christians.

    For me it seems a good religion, given the God of Spinoza I think?