The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
David Christie-Murray was educated at the universities of London and Oxford and at Wyclif Hall, Oxford. He was ordained, but after 27 years he resigned orders, having moved, theologically, from the Anglican position towards that of the Society of Friends.
Oh gosh. Yet another reliable, 'unbiased' source about Catholicism. Two down. Can you come up with a book that wasn't written by an Anglican reverend?
Then I fail to see the point in supplying lists when I can simply deny that anyone was ever executed under Mary's reign for their faith. Checkmate.
Erm, no. You won't supply the 'facts' you allege, because you can't. You haven't read enough and don't know enough.
Plain unvarnished simple truth.
I don't feel the need to provide you any because you refuse to acknowledge that any persecution occurred under Elizabeth.
Why should I acknowledge something you allege and have repeatedly failed to show occurred ? No seminary priest was executed BEFORE the Papal Bull of 'Regnans In Excelsis'- which effectively turned English Catholics into presumed traitors if they did not want to be excommunicated. That idiotic gesture (decried by Catholic monarchs) was a gift to Protestant hardliners in England.
So your claim is that exactly zero Catholics were executed during the reign of Queen Elizabeth?
My claim is that you don't provide any evidence for your wild exaggerations and assertions- because you can't. You're on present evidence virtually historically illiterate.
You've got one right in front of you. And yet you call me intellectually dishonest.
Because you are. And you continue to be. If the Catholic Encyclopaedia supports yoru argument, show us how and where it does so. Perhaps it refers to William III Orange as 'King of the Dutch' or gifts him twenty children. We'll never know, because you don't use it to support your bizarre claims or correct your many errors.
It grinds your gears that I was a perfect Englishman who rejected your faith to find another.
My faith ? Oh dear me. I'm a lapsed Roman Catholic.
And the only perfect thing you are is a tw@t.
I know your ideas
Woo-hoo. Carny sideshow Sister Bendy and the crystal balls again.
I know your ideas
I'd prefer you to drop 'Godo Queen Bess' and try getting some decent facts into your posts. But then I'd also prefer an end to world poverty, and I think I can tell which will come first.
I'd be shocked if grammar school in England were taught something contrary to the public view of Elizabeth as the Virgin Queene who saved them from popery and the Spanish Inquisition.
My grammar school was non-denominational. Again, you're just advertising what little you do know about my education at grammar school or elsewhere, comes from me.
How I love keeping an idiot in suspense.
Are you really this retarded Molly?
As you ? Clearly not.
And how sour do those grapes taste?
Are you saying I'm supposed to be envious of your degree ?
Good grief, seek therapy, now, and before it's too late.
I'm sorry Molly. They were all revolutionaries. They should have obeyed their Lord and rightful Queen Mary and then they wouldn't be executed. After all, that's what Christ commands.
Only 31 that we know the names of (not counting Foxe's book) were executed under Mary. That's it. .
Still crap at history ? Still taking notes ? Super. On y va.
Effective reconversion involved both the eradication of Protestantism and the forging of a new, more dynamic, Catholicism. The first, it wa shoped, would be accomplished by terror. Some eight hundred Protestants fled abroad, to Frankfurt, to Strasbourg, to Geneva....
A large underground church flourished in London, meeting at various inns annd houses with congregations up to two hundred. Smaller groups met elsewhere, always subject to the danger of government spies or being given away by loose talk.
Altogether some 280 heretics were burnt in Mary's reign, the majority of them humble men like Thomas Hale, a Bristol shoemaker, or Cicely Ormes the wife of a Norwich weaver. Only 21 clergy were executed.
The great majority of the burnings were in the south-east.
London provided 67 victims,
Kent 58,
Essex 39.
Only 2 heretics were burnt north of the Trent, and except for Gloucester (where the bishop, James Brooks, was a zealot and there were 10 victims) very few in the west of England or in Wales.
The burnings impinged... disproportionately on those who could best make their hostility felt, and whose adhesion was likely to be decisive in a crisis.
As far as his sources and the historical conventions of his day allowed, Foxe wrote good history...
From 'Edward VI & Mary' in C.S.L. Davies's 'Peace, Print & Protestantism'.
Probably not stocked in the Vatican souvenir shop.
Only 31 that we know the names of (not counting Foxe's book) were executed under Mary. That's it. .
Get your piece of slate and dabble your fingers in your own faeces, you're going to have to take notes.
In December 1554 three old statutes against heresy were re-established. On 4 February 1555, the first of the Protestants, John Rogers, was burnt at Smithfield.
In the course of the next three years and a half, nearly three hundred people, high and low, rich and poor, were burnt as Protestant heretics. They included 5 former bishops: Ferrar of St. David's, Hooper, Ridley, Latimer, and Cranmer.
England received back the Pope at Mary's behest, not because the English wanted him.
At the end of August 1554 Suffolk villagers tried to burn a church with an entire congregation at mass inside. In the same month indignant peasants cut off the nose of a Kentish priest. In February (the Imperial ambassador) Renard reported his fear of a rebellion if the burnings were not stopped.
On 29 August 1556, 1 000 people cheered through the streets a roped chain of 22 men and women from Colchester on their way towards burning.
'The Burnings' from 'The Reformation In England to 1559' in Owen Chadwick's 'The Reformation' .
They resorted to kidnapping Sir John Cheke, who had been tutor to Edward VI, and threatening him with burning if he did not recant. Inevitably, the burnings became associated indelibly with ecclesiastical despotism and the Pope.
Which explains the Act of Supremacy outlawing the Olde Mass - his execution of priests, the dissolution of the monasteries and the fact that England went without a Catholic bishop for nearly 300 years?
I'm not aware that Edward III is felt to be a loser in this country.
Are you suggesting you were taught just as much about Edward as Henry?
Admittedly, Rodin's scultpture group of the Burghers of Calais stands outside the Houses of Parliament, but it reflects more on Edward's mercy and magnanimity than anything else. The king responsible for the victories at Sluys and Crecy and Halidon Hill is not disregarded in this country because he was a Roman Catholic.
You've boasted about your tolerant open-mindedness. Have you taken your turn in a parish of Our Lady of Walsingham? Have you dropped something in the collection bin? I noticed a conspicuous absence in your most enlightened universality.
Only a blithering idiot and bigot thinks the way you do.
It has become the collective fantasy of this age that one can hate Catholicism, but not any other religion and call themselves 'diverse'.
Then I fail to see the point in supplying lists when I can simply deny that anyone was ever executed under Mary's reign for their faith. Checkmate.
I'm still waiting for you to provide proof of any of the absurd figures you plucked out of the air.
And I'm still waiting for you to acknowledge that Elizabeth executed Catholics for their faith. You've got a name - Thomas Percy.
You don't provide any, because you can't.
I don't feel the need to provide you any because you refuse to acknowledge that any persecution occurred under Elizabeth. It's completely pointless. Concede that and we can move on to the names.
I'm sure some of these figures you airily reference, IF THEY WERE TRUE, would be at least supported by a website
You've got one right in front of you. And yet you call me intellectually dishonest.
And a review of a book with inaccurate figures inserted doesn't count, by the way.
So your claim is that exactly zero Catholics were executed during the reign of Queen Elizabeth?
No, you're a bigot because you're a particular type of convert- one lacking a sound intellectual base.
It grinds your gears that I was a perfect Englishman who rejected your faith to find another. Yes, of course, I converted because of 'lack of intellect'. Because to acknowledge that there are significant rationales would crumble the entire ediface you've built around me and my ideas.
Or put it another way - what exactly about your ideas would be foreign to me, Molly? I was a liberal agnostic who actually liked Woodrow Wilson. I know your ideas, the problem is that you don't care to understand mine. You've got absolutely nothing in your entire armory that could surprise me.
this is isn't Hollywood or some naff theme park.
Would you prefer "Bessie?"
My 'grammar school' education alone has been quite up to the task of correcting your copious errors.
I'd be shocked if grammar school in England were taught something contrary to the public view of Elizabeth as the Virgin Queene who saved them from popery and the Spanish Inquisition. It's as much a part of your national 'identity', as guns are to America.
The fact that you know nothing about it, other than the scant information I deign to give to you
Are you really this retarded Molly? Apparently so.
Still you have your 'history' degree, and I have a supply of lavatory roll.
Perhaps if Henry hadn't tried to execute all the Catholics -
He didn't. You're a liar and a fantasist.
But then, history for children is written by the winners which is why you know about Henry VIII and not Edward III.
I'm not aware that Edward III is felt to be a loser in this country.
Admittedly, Rodin's scultpture group of the Burghers of Calais stands outside the Houses of Parliament, but it reflects more on Edward's mercy and magnanimity than anything else. The king responsible for the victories at Sluys and Crecy and Halidon Hill is not disregarded in this country because he was a Roman Catholic.
After all, what other religious options were open to him ? Catharism ? Greek Orthodoxy ? Islam ? Judaism ? Only a blithering idiot and bigot thinks the way you do.
Which came first? Mary or Henry? Perhaps if Henry hadn't tried to execute all the Catholics - religious tension would have been lower. Blaming the Catholics for 'exacerbating religious tensions', when it was Henry who sparked them strikes me as blaming the victim. But then, history for children is written by the winners which is why you know about Henry VIII and not Edward III.
Ah so you are just stupid. Good to have confirmation.
we're talking about the numbers. you have constantly tried to inflate the numbers killed by protestant monarchs and minimise those by catholic ones. you have been corrected several times, by molly and myself, yet you continue to post them.
I don't think including the numbers killed in the Pilgrimage of Grace is an exaggeration. Most lists for Elizabeth exclude them, which is not true, although they do usually include the most prominent like Thomas Percy who had the misfortune of being Catholic and plantagenet.
I'm still waiting for you to acknowledge that yes, in fact, that Elizabeth executed Catholics for their faith. Are you conceding this point?
No. You haven't shown she did so. I'm still waiting for you to provide proof of any of the absurd figures you plucked out of the air. You don't provide any, because you can't. I'm sure some of these figures you airily reference, IF THEY WERE TRUE, would be at least supported by a website, or a book, a thesis, a scholar- yet amazingly, you never refer to any of these sources.
And a review of a book with inaccurate figures inserted doesn't count, by the way.
Right, a bigot because I'm asserting that 'Good Queen Bess' isn't as good as her press clippings?
No, you're a bigot because you're a particular type of convert- one lacking a sound intellectual base. And do stop referring to 'Godd Queen Bess'- this is isn't Hollywood or some naff theme park.
And that, perhaps, someone with a grammar school education in England perhaps isn't the most objective person to assess this?
Hahahahahahahaha.
My 'grammar school' education alone has been quite up to the task of correcting your copious errors. The fact that you know nothing about it, other than the scant information I deign to give to you, makes your attempts to mock it all the more laughable.
Still you have your 'history' degree, and I have a supply of lavatory roll.
It seems to me you paid rather more for your arsewipe than I did for mine.
Last edited by molly bloom; November 2, 2013, 09:52.
You think the 300 odd people burned by Mary had all burned other people? Are you stupid?
Which came first? Mary or Henry? Perhaps if Henry hadn't tried to execute all the Catholics - religious tension would have been lower. Blaming the Catholics for 'exacerbating religious tensions', when it was Henry who sparked them strikes me as blaming the victim. But then, history for children is written by the winners which is why you know about Henry VIII and not Edward III.
Leave a comment: