Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2002 :: February ::
Re: Proto-Catholilcs? Proto-Prods?
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.0507  Thursday, 21 February 2002

[1]     From:           Bill Arnold <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:           Wednesday, 20 Feb 2002 07:22:48 -0800 (PST)
        Subj:           Re: SHK 13.0496 Proto-Catholilcs? Proto-Prods?

[2]     From:           Sam Small <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:           Wednesday, 20 Feb 2002 18:09:17 -0000
        Subj:           Re: SHK 13.0476 Proto-Catholilcs? Proto-Prods?

[3]     From:           Sophie Masson <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:           Thursday, 21 Feb 2002 23:49:07 +1100
        Subj:           Re: SHK 13.0496 Proto-Catholilcs? Proto-Prods?


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Bill Arnold <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 20 Feb 2002 07:22:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: 13.0496 Re: Proto-Catholilcs? Proto-Prods?
Comment:        Re: SHK 13.0496 Re: Proto-Catholilcs? Proto-Prods?

Carl Fortunato quotes, then writes, "'I had no idea that, in 1066, there
was any other Church but the universal Catholic Church of Rome. Unless
Sam is suggesting that England and Scandinavia were Eastern
Orthodox...'  He is probably suggesting that England had always been a
bit of a maverick church, and under Will the C they had acted less
independently of the papacy.  They were certainly not a separate church,
not even before Augustine of Canterbury.  However, they did have
different ways, and it may be accurate to say that they became more
Roman (not more "catholic") after William."

Which raises a question in my mind, what was the relationship between
Exeter Cathedral, its Bishops, and the Plantagenets?  Was it Catholic,
then Anglican?  I remember a reference to an early Bishop from EC and
one of the Plantagenets, and their indebtedness to each other.  Does
anyone know?  Can a source be cited?

Bill Arnold

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sam Small <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 20 Feb 2002 18:09:17 -0000
Subject: 13.0476 Proto-Catholilcs? Proto-Prods?
Comment:        Re: SHK 13.0476 Proto-Catholilcs? Proto-Prods?

Martin Steward writes of my previous post:

Fretting about Roman Catholic conspiracies might have been politically
acceptable back in 1606 (indeed, evidently well-founded), but nowadays
it seems a little distasteful, don't you think? I am neither Scottish,
Irish, nor Roman Catholic, but I found this posting rather unpleasant -
as unpleasant as Mel Gibson's disgraceful movie, for the same reasons.

I find Mr Steward's opinion of my opinion distasteful because disrespect
underlined it.  I suggest he reads "Hitler's Pope" by John Cornwell and
then tell me there was no Papal enthusiasm for Hitler's regime.  He
might like to look at Opus Dei's website and its many internet
detractors.  I do not dislike individual Catholics, Moslems, Jews,
Hindus etc but it is a self confessed fact that all religions have
expansionist agendas - and Papal loathing of Communists and Jews is
widely known.  Shakespeare was well aware of this global dynamic but,
strangely, Mr Steward is not.

SAM SMALL

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sophie Masson <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 21 Feb 2002 23:49:07 +1100
Subject: 13.0496 Re: Proto-Catholilcs? Proto-Prods?
Comment:        Re: SHK 13.0496 Re: Proto-Catholilcs? Proto-Prods?

There is the old question of Celtic Catholicism  being subverted by
Roman Catholicism, in the person of Saint Augustine and Canterbury
itself, in was it the sixth or seventh century (I'm a bit hazy on
dates). Celtic Catholicism was of much older date in the Isles, and had
a much stronger monastic rather than episcopal tradition. But of course
Ireland kept that much longer than England did--it is really stretching
a long bow to suggest that the Reformers were acting in the spirit of
the Celtic Christians! To them the Irish--with their Celtic Catholic
traditions--were not the model, but benighted savages, surely?

Sophie Masson
Author site: http://www.northnet.com.au/~smasson

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.