Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Adagietto

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 39
31
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 10, 2010, 03:53:40 AM »
I suspect the truth of the matter is that members of the Royal family would tend favour consensus, and dislike any brand of politics that is seen as being unduly divisive; if it is true that the Queen felt uncomfortable about Mrs Thatcher's brand of politics, that would have been the reason, not because she is personally 'left of centre ' in her views. In so far as the 'right' in Britain is defined in terms of Thatcherism, I would agree with contantinople to the extent that they would probably feel little sympathy with that; but that is not the dominant force in Conservative politics at the moment, and I doubt they would prefer a Labour government to the present one. We know much about Prince Charles' personal views than those of the Queen, and they show a peculiar mixture of conservative and quite radical elements. He is certainly no right-winger in the Thatcherite sense, and he receives more mockery from the right than he does from the liberal intelligentsia, who would sympathize with the work that he has done through the Prince's Trust and on environmental issues.

32
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 09, 2010, 08:13:57 AM »
The question of woman bishops in the CofE has not yet been settled, but it is only a matter of time. Is there any reason to think that the Queen dislikes the idea of women priests or bishops? Even if she did, she would take good care not to reveal it.

33
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 09, 2010, 05:23:13 AM »
'The female disciple Junia was renamed Junian (that is a historical fact) to mask female involvement in the early church.'  In fact in the original Greek, the name only appears in the accusative, so Paul could either have been referring to a man named Junia or a man named Junias; there is no way of telling for certain. The female name Junia is better attested for the period, and up until the 19th Century it was generally assumed that Paul was referring to a woman (thus 'Salute Andronicus and Junia' in the King James Bible). So evidently nobody considered that this was a matter of any significance with regard to the priesthood.  From Victorian times onward some translators give the male name, sometimes pointing out the possible alternative sometimes not, evidently on the basis of a casual assumption rather than as a deliberate attempt to downplay female involvement in the early church.

34
The Windsors / Re: Andrew, Duke of York
« on: August 08, 2010, 11:44:57 AM »
What sane banker would have agreed to take on the Duchess in the first place? Though perhaps someone thought she was a better bet than dodgy mortgages.

35
The Windsors / Re: Andrew, Duke of York
« on: August 08, 2010, 10:40:35 AM »
Only six million?

36
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 08, 2010, 07:05:30 AM »
I wasn't meaning to suggest that you were't arguing in good faith, but that your reply to Grace suggested that you weren't willing to concede that to people who oppose the ordination of women.

37
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 08, 2010, 06:26:18 AM »
Oh, I do, but I try to show people the courtesy of accepting that they are arguing in good faith, until it becomes clear that they are not.

38
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 08, 2010, 05:30:19 AM »
No, you were denying Grace the right to make her point, by implying that people who oppose the ordination of women are really doing so because they think women are inferior, and the theological and other arguments that they put forward can therefore be dismissed out of hand.

39
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 08, 2010, 03:01:32 AM »
Although I am in favour of women priests and bishops, I know plenty of people (men and women) who oppose this who in no way think women are inferior to men; Grace has every right to point this out.

40
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 07, 2010, 08:45:54 AM »
'That is still quite a good paycheck for a year. ' Eric, I'm not sure it is right to look at this as being equivalent to what the boss of a company, say might get, since a good deal of this will be spent either in connection with public duties, or on the maintenance of buildings, collections etc. which are effectively inalienable and would otherwise have to be maintained out of public funds.
 
 

41
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 06, 2010, 04:51:40 AM »
Oh, so death duties should be imposed retrospectively on the Duchy of Cornwall just because you don't like the Duchess of Cornwall; isn't this all getting a bit silly?

42
The Windsors / Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« on: August 05, 2010, 10:02:38 AM »
It would be difficult to cut her off the civil list because she is not on it in the first place.

43
Oh I do like that latter portrait; I hope it will turn up again so we will able to see it in colour.

44
The Hohenzollern / Re: Mecklenburg-Schwerin
« on: July 31, 2010, 06:35:16 AM »
This has all the appearance of being a 19th Century fantasy castle, have anything older survived? It does look most impressive, and evidently deserves to be better known; unfortunate perhaps that it was in the DDR, unlike the Bavarian equivalents.

45
Heinrich was the only boy I think, and there was also Editha, Gabrielle, Hilda and another whom I forget. I have acquired quite a few postcards of these children recently, I will post some when I have scanned them.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 39