Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pope sends direct message to Ben

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ben Kenobi
    replied
    The really interesting part is how they came up with Sophia of Hanover, after they had their whole revolution and realized the entire line was gone. Also the Test Act and the Act of Supremacy. Not well covered in American history, but quite important all the same.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ben Kenobi
    replied
    When did that happen? Was there ever a period where the Netherlands actually invaded another European power and won? I don't recall hearing that they were even especially good at beating up on smallpox-ridden Native Americans...

    EDIT: Ah, the Glorious Revolution. I'd forgotten about that particular historical hiccup. Reminds me of that time we conquered Iraq...
    Yes, the strangest thing is that it was only the fourth King Willy who was born in England. Despite it's commonality as an English name.

    Leave a comment:


  • Elok
    replied
    Reading Wiki's article on the GR in more depth now. Not sure it really counts as a "conquest" when quisling elements in the nation's own legislature invite you, there are widespread riots in your favor, and the other guy doesn't even try all that hard to resist you. Sounds like William of Orange just culture-flipped London. Tricky Cre/Fin bastard's awful good at that, isn't he?

    Leave a comment:


  • Ben Kenobi
    replied
    The imperfect is a verb form, found in various languages, which combines past tense (reference to a past time) and imperfective aspect (reference to a continuing or repeated event or state). It can therefore have meanings similar to the English "was walking" or "used to walk." It contrasts with preterite forms, which refer to a single completed event in the past.
    This is the correct tense. The imperfect of 'run' is 'ran'.

    Leave a comment:


  • Elok
    replied
    Also, BK, he was referring to your grammar. "The hierarchy is not run the same way."

    Leave a comment:


  • Elok
    replied
    Conquered by the Dutch? The DUTCH?!?

    When did that happen? Was there ever a period where the Netherlands actually invaded another European power and won? I don't recall hearing that they were even especially good at beating up on smallpox-ridden Native Americans...

    EDIT: Ah, the Glorious Revolution. I'd forgotten about that particular historical hiccup. Reminds me of that time we conquered Iraq...

    EDIT TWO: No, I'm thinking of a different historical cockup, aren't I? Anyway, that happened after they acquired (and lost) control of pretty much all of the East Coast of NA, so yeah, they were kind of a big deal even before Victoria.
    Last edited by Elok; September 25, 2013, 20:29.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ben Kenobi
    replied
    Dear lord, how are you a teacher..
    It's not. There are substantial differences between the organization within the Catholic church and the organization within the Anglican church.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ben Kenobi
    replied
    Ok it's official, you're a dumbass.
    A nation ruled by the Dutch and then random German nobodies from Hanover is more prestigious than France under the Sun King or Spain under the Habsburgs, or Austria under the Habsburgs.

    Some called it 'Glorious'. There wasn't much glorious about it. Other than the emblazoned prejudice of the Test Act that still bars Catholics from the throne. But I guess that's what happens when you become a fief of the Dutch. England in the 17th isn't Victorian England in the 19th.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ben Kenobi
    replied
    You realize that the Episcopalian Church and the Anglican Communion are two separate things, right - the TEC being a member of the Anglican Communion, but not speaking for the whole?
    I'm aware that the 'Church of America' is a subset of the Anglican communion, like the Church of England, and the Church of Ireland, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • Imran Siddiqui
    replied
    Originally posted by Ben Kenobi View Post
    Right now? Anglicans believe in female priests, abortion, contraception, gay marriage, and have the queen as their head. Some of them reject transubstantiation. Some of their bishops reject Christ. We're talking official heirarchy speaking from official positions.
    You realize that the Episcopalian Church and the Anglican Communion are two separate things, right - the TEC being a member of the Anglican Communion, but not speaking for the whole?

    Leave a comment:


  • DinoDoc
    replied
    L2Post, Ken.

    Leave a comment:


  • kentonio
    replied
    Originally posted by Ben Kenobi View Post
    Also, the heirarchy is not ran the same way
    Dear lord, how are you a teacher..

    Leave a comment:


  • kentonio
    replied
    Originally posted by Ben Kenobi View Post
    They weren't. They were conquered by the Dutch.
    Ok it's official, you're a dumbass.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ben Kenobi
    replied
    @Imran. Queen as their head is a huge difference between the two. Also, the heirarchy is not ran the same way, and their 'bishop of Rome' is Canterbury. These are not superficial changes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ben Kenobi
    replied
    Please don't be ridiculous. If you're seriously trying to argue that Britain wasn't a major power until the 18th century, then you're a bigger dumbass than I thought.
    They weren't. They were conquered by the Dutch.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X