Death to Anglicanism!
I shall continue with my analysis of my depressing five-year old predictions in a paragraph or two, but I should like to enlighten my reader(s) with an historical review of the office of the Archbishopric of Canterbury.
One of the most famous Archbishops of Canterbury was St. Thomas Beckett, who was the first commoner of any kind to make a mark of English History (according to Simon Schama, at any rate). He managed to royally piss off King Henry II, who in no uncertain words referred to his knights as "miserable drones and traitors" who "allow(ed) their lord to be treated with such shameful contempt by a low-born cleric." Four knights took the King's meaning and departed for Canterbury, where they opened St. Thomas' skull and smeared his brains on the stones of Canterbury cathedral.
After Henry VIII founded the Church of England for the noble purpose of securing a better lay, Englishmen suffered the insufferably authoritarian Archbishop William Laud. Laud decided that the CoE would be the only religious institution of the country, and connived with the loathsome King Charles I to use religion as a political tool to fulfill Charles' dream of a United Britain. Laud's heavy-handedness led to the terrible British civil wars, and the rise of Grand Inquisitor Torquemada's favourite Protestant, Oliver Cromwell. Laud was deservedly decapitated.
Now, we find another obnoxious type in the Arch-Episcopal garments. Dr. Rowan Williams is the current proprietor of the failing Church of England. He is famous for doubting the existence of God during the latest Tsunami disaster, and creating a rift in the world-wide Anglican Communion by pushing through controversial measures about Gay Clergy. Now, it seems Dr. Williams is following in the steps of his forebear Archbishop Laud. He's recently castigated bloggers and the "new media" because he sees the wonderfully tumultuous process of internet dialogue "close to that of unpoliced conversation."
Should conversation be policed, Right Reverend? Why should we be stuck with the, as you say, "cool professionalism" of the old media when it's been demonstrated to not exist at all? The old media are just as full of Âparanoid fantasy, self-indulgent nonsense and dangerous bigotry. While I think the full expression of human beings is a good thing, our political masters disagree. They want to re-create that all-important illusion of a "consensus" moving steadily in a pro-government direction. Rt. Reverend Williams is no exception to this. He's more a politician than a leader, and he's in deep with the NuLabour establishment.
I say that his church deserves to sink. Let those who love ceremony convert to Popery (and thus please many colleagues of mine), and let those who prefer the spirit and simplicity of Protestandenominationsns join a real church, not a screeching circle of activist thugs.
I, as a distant son of Britain, do wholly repudiate the Church of England and deny the preposterous claim any Monarch or Archbishop of Canterbury of spiritual authority. I deny the Queen's title of Head of the Church in England, and I must humbly ask her why half-witted activists such as Rt. Rev. Williams are being put in office as her representative. At least this demonstrates the prudence oseparatingng Church and State.
After that bit of invective, let me change the direction of the venom, but not its flow. To-day I shall focus on computers. This was a major concern of mine some time ago, and checking again, I see that my concerns were justified.
First on my list was the dominance of Microsoft. They haven't been checked, and Apple is even more heavy-handed in its dealings with those who displease His Trendiness Steve Jobs. Windows XP is still the largest operating system out there.
My worst fear in computer realms was an invasion of privacy. First, that companies would install software on your computer to put advertising on your computer. That's already come to pass. My second fear was an identifying number hard-wired into processors that identified each computer. This has also come to pass thanks to Intel. My third fear was a devil's alliance of the RIAA and Microsoft that would make it impossible to play pirated music on one's PC due to invasive copyright-protection software. This is due to happen in the next edition of Windows, Windows Longhorn. Microsoft is integrating Digital Rights Management that will ensure that every file you play is up to RIAA snuff (and, presumably, inform on you if it isn't). It adds another intrusive layer of security to benefit the thugs at the RIAA. To make it worse, Intel is in on it also, as they intend to integrate DRM into their new chips.
Looks like my next PC will be running Linux and will work from a non-Intel CPU. Will these types ever be satisfied, or must all our life be on public display for them?
One of the most famous Archbishops of Canterbury was St. Thomas Beckett, who was the first commoner of any kind to make a mark of English History (according to Simon Schama, at any rate). He managed to royally piss off King Henry II, who in no uncertain words referred to his knights as "miserable drones and traitors" who "allow(ed) their lord to be treated with such shameful contempt by a low-born cleric." Four knights took the King's meaning and departed for Canterbury, where they opened St. Thomas' skull and smeared his brains on the stones of Canterbury cathedral.
After Henry VIII founded the Church of England for the noble purpose of securing a better lay, Englishmen suffered the insufferably authoritarian Archbishop William Laud. Laud decided that the CoE would be the only religious institution of the country, and connived with the loathsome King Charles I to use religion as a political tool to fulfill Charles' dream of a United Britain. Laud's heavy-handedness led to the terrible British civil wars, and the rise of Grand Inquisitor Torquemada's favourite Protestant, Oliver Cromwell. Laud was deservedly decapitated.
Now, we find another obnoxious type in the Arch-Episcopal garments. Dr. Rowan Williams is the current proprietor of the failing Church of England. He is famous for doubting the existence of God during the latest Tsunami disaster, and creating a rift in the world-wide Anglican Communion by pushing through controversial measures about Gay Clergy. Now, it seems Dr. Williams is following in the steps of his forebear Archbishop Laud. He's recently castigated bloggers and the "new media" because he sees the wonderfully tumultuous process of internet dialogue "close to that of unpoliced conversation."
Should conversation be policed, Right Reverend? Why should we be stuck with the, as you say, "cool professionalism" of the old media when it's been demonstrated to not exist at all? The old media are just as full of Âparanoid fantasy, self-indulgent nonsense and dangerous bigotry. While I think the full expression of human beings is a good thing, our political masters disagree. They want to re-create that all-important illusion of a "consensus" moving steadily in a pro-government direction. Rt. Reverend Williams is no exception to this. He's more a politician than a leader, and he's in deep with the NuLabour establishment.
I say that his church deserves to sink. Let those who love ceremony convert to Popery (and thus please many colleagues of mine), and let those who prefer the spirit and simplicity of Protestandenominationsns join a real church, not a screeching circle of activist thugs.
I, as a distant son of Britain, do wholly repudiate the Church of England and deny the preposterous claim any Monarch or Archbishop of Canterbury of spiritual authority. I deny the Queen's title of Head of the Church in England, and I must humbly ask her why half-witted activists such as Rt. Rev. Williams are being put in office as her representative. At least this demonstrates the prudence oseparatingng Church and State.
After that bit of invective, let me change the direction of the venom, but not its flow. To-day I shall focus on computers. This was a major concern of mine some time ago, and checking again, I see that my concerns were justified.
First on my list was the dominance of Microsoft. They haven't been checked, and Apple is even more heavy-handed in its dealings with those who displease His Trendiness Steve Jobs. Windows XP is still the largest operating system out there.
My worst fear in computer realms was an invasion of privacy. First, that companies would install software on your computer to put advertising on your computer. That's already come to pass. My second fear was an identifying number hard-wired into processors that identified each computer. This has also come to pass thanks to Intel. My third fear was a devil's alliance of the RIAA and Microsoft that would make it impossible to play pirated music on one's PC due to invasive copyright-protection software. This is due to happen in the next edition of Windows, Windows Longhorn. Microsoft is integrating Digital Rights Management that will ensure that every file you play is up to RIAA snuff (and, presumably, inform on you if it isn't). It adds another intrusive layer of security to benefit the thugs at the RIAA. To make it worse, Intel is in on it also, as they intend to integrate DRM into their new chips.
Looks like my next PC will be running Linux and will work from a non-Intel CPU. Will these types ever be satisfied, or must all our life be on public display for them?
posted by The Admiral at 11:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home