MovieChat Forums > The Wind That Shakes the Barley (2007) Discussion > Protestantism under threat

Protestantism under threat

posted 15 years ago by Jazzist-H-Crisp
33 replies | jump to latest

The origins of the conflict in Ireland lie in the Wars of Religion in Europe which lasted well over 200 years and caused the deaths of millions of people. The Wars of Religion were between Catholics and Protestants. They involved wars between countries (eg Spain attacked Britain in 1588) and also civil wars in France, Germany, the Netherlands and Britain.

Henry VIII changed Britain from a Catholic state into a Protestant state in 1534. He did so primarily in order to marry Anne Boleyn. It was a dangerous move because Protestantism was a small "heretical" sect which the Catholic states of Europe were determined to eradicate, just as they had eradicated the Cathars in France in the 12th century.

Once Britain turned Protestant, enmity and suspicion set in between England and its Catholic neighbours, Scotland and Ireland. England built up its navy to defend itself against attack by France or Spain. Spain attacked in 1588, but a great storm wrecked its fleet. Spanish ships tried to land in Ireland, but the English were waiting for them and the rebellion that the Spanish hoped to raise never happened.

The English Civil War of the 1640s was essentially Catholic monarchists versus Protestant republicans. The Glorious Revolution of 1690 deposed Catholic James to install Protestant William and Mary. The failed rebellion of 1745 was a last attempt to restore Catholicism.

England tried to neutralise the Catholic threat from Ireland by planting Protestant settlers there. The two largest settlements were round Dublin (the Pale) and in the North. But the grip of Catholicism on the people of Ireland could not be loosened. And the antagonism between Protestant and Catholic never faded away.

In 1922, as soon as the South got its independence, it immediately began passing Catholic legislation and it gave the Catholic hierarchy special access to Government. Ireland became the most Catholic state in Europe, banning divorce, contraception, homosexuality, etc, handing its education system over to the church, and enforcing censorship under the control of the hierarchy. De Valera declared it "A Catholic state for a Catholic people".

Clearly, the Northern Protestants would not wish to be subjugated to Catholic domination, so they have always declared themselves to be British and have tried to maintain the link with Britain.

The IRA campaign to drive the Northern Protestants into a Catholic Ireland has been unrelenting since the separation of the two states in 1922. The IRA do not recognise any right of the Northern Protestants to choose not to belong to the Catholic Irish state. So they have been killing the Protestants in gun attacks and bombings, and describing their murder campaigns as 'a war of liberation'. In retaliation, Protestant gangs have formed and have killed Catholics in blind sectarian attacks. The Good Friday Agreement has brought an end to the violence, apart from dissident IRA attacks. Whether it is a settled peace or merely a lull in hostilities remains to be seen.

Loach's film is foolish and simplistic. It has no conception of the plight of the Northern Protestants and it ignores them completely. It presents the conflict as Ireland fighting imperial Britain and presents partition as an act of vengeance. Loach has no more regard for the democratic wishes of the Northern Protestants than have the killers in the IRA. His film is therefore an incitement to more murderous attacks by the IRA. It is a setback to all hopes of a lasting peace.

[–] Nathars 15 years ago

I'd say that was a diatribe of biased misinformation.....

e.g. Ireland is a Catholic state for a Catholic People..... I do not believe that DeValera ever said that...... He consulted the Protestant churches on the draft of the 1937 Constitution. I don't think the Catholic church was consulted on the 1920 Government of Ireland Act by the British government.

I do know that Lord Brookborough did say that Northern Ireland was a protestant state for a protestant people...... and to be sure to employ "good protestant men and women".

Ireland voted to leave the Union in 1919 ..... northern Protestants refused to recognise that democratic desire freely expressed in a British General election...

Loach's film is about a small town in Cork and if you knew what you were talking about you would know that there was no religious aspect to that conflict in Cork
and Loach's take on the events is quiet realistic in fact.... He never brings religion into it like you do. In fact the event of 1919-22 are almost devoid of religious aspects to the conflict. It's the stuff that wnet on later that brought in that dirty word and in my humble opinion it should be left out of this thread also.

The Pooka

[–] Jazzist-H-Crisp 15 years ago

I am accused of "a diatribe of biased misinformation".

Do you mean that the Wars of Religion never happened or that they were not a conflict between Protestants and Catholics?

Or do you mean that the facts of the history of sectarian conflict in Europe cannot be reconciled with the pro-IRA propaganda that you have swallowed?

Perhaps you should read some history and find out what the wider context of the struggle in Ireland was. Then you might see how religion has been the central issue for hundreds of years. And you should check out what happened to the Cathars - then you will understand why the Protestants in Europe believed that they were facing an implacable and ruthless foe. See also an account of what happened in 1572 in the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre.

The Northern Protestants objected to Home Rule on the grounds that it would be Rome Rule. They were right. It was. Independent Ireland became a Catholic state straight away. Among the first laws passed was legislation which banned divorce, following Catholic dogma, despite the strenuous efforts of WB Yeats and many Protestants to have their rights as a Protestant minority respected. Their calls for non-sectarian legislation were ignored.

By contrast, in the newly-formed Northern Ireland, the Government tried to set up a fully integrated system of education, to bring together Protestants and Catholics. That plan was thwarted by the Catholic church. It refused to participate. The Protestant churches handed over their schools to State control. The State then refused to give Catholic schools any public funding, but the Catholic church would not comply. In time the State relented and by 1960 Catholic schools were still privately run, but receiving 100% funding from the State. So the Catholic church won in the end, but at the expense of generations of ordinary Catholics who suffered a second-rate education from 1922 until 1960. Of course, the Catholics who suffered that second-class treatment were taught to blame the State rather than the church.

[–] Nathars 15 years ago

European wars were very simply irrelevant to Ireland until approximately 1608.

They became relevant with the "plantation" of Ulster..... The Irish were NOT responsible for that. That was a result of the First Act of Union (a British thing). Had that sad event not occurred we might have had a better history on both ends of this island. For those who might need a translation Plantation in 2010 language equals ethnic cleansing.

In the South there was divorce between 1922 and 1937.... or did you not know that.
The people voted overwhelmingly(>90%) for the removal of divorce.... that is democracy in action.

Did you know that all Protestants and everybody else could vote right from the start in the Republic..... I am pretty sure that was NOT the case in Northern Ireland until the early 1970's for catholics.
Did you know that Protestants and Jews were freely elected to the Parliament in the Republic in far greater proportion to their number in the population.
Did you know that the first and fourth President of the Republic were Protestants (and elected). Did you know that the GAA has a popular living ex-president from Wicklow who is a Protestant.

Did you know that Protestant schools in the South were given extra capitation grants over and above that for catholic school children to preserve the Protestant ethos of those schools. Did you know that DeValera did that back in the 1930's. It is causing no amount of grief now as the EU does not permit this practice anymore.

Did you know that in the Republic Protestant churches were the First to disavow state run schools and pleaded religious freedom as their motive and did you know that this is still the case.

Did you know that religion is a refuge for the insecure and is mostly blind nonsense peddled to the weak to control minds (and thereby wallets).

You might have gone to some special school metthinks...

What threat are you spouting about...
The Pooka

[–] Jazzist-H-Crisp 15 years ago

The strength of your convictions seems to be in inverse proportion to what you actually know of Irish and European history.

Wars of Religion "irrelevant"!!!!!

Have you never heard of James Fitzmaurice Fitzgerald and the Desmond rebellions of 1569 and 1579? Those were Catholic rebellions against British Protestant rule. Prior to the second rebellion, Fitzgerald had several interviews with Catherine de' Medici in Paris, even offering to help make Henry III of France king of Ireland, and was granted a pension of 5000 crowns in 1576. Early in the following year he left for the Spanish court, where he offered the crown to the brother of King Philip II, Don Juan; after that he travelled to Italy to meet Pope Gregory XIII. He visited the leading CATHOLIC powers in Europe (in case you missed the point).

The Plantations were an attempt by Britain to deal with Catholic intrigue and rebellion by seeding the country with Protestants.

The Catholic terrorist plot to murder King James I (the Gunpowder Plot of 1605) which was foiled at the last minute, made British policy towards the Irish all the more determined to repress treachery and rebellion.

The lands of the defeated rebels were deemed British property after the Desmond rebellions, after the Nine Years War and after the Flight of the Earls. Most of the land in Ulster became Protestant, not through plantation, but through normal commerce. Protestant Scots bought land there in the wake of the defeated rebellions and resettlements, when Protestantism at last seemed secure in Ireland.

Your comments on divorce are simply wrong. Civil divorce was introduced in Britain in 1857. The newly independent Ireland of 1922 ruled against it, despite the objections of WB Yeats and other prominent Protestants. The constitution of 1937 enshrined Catholic dogma on divorce. Catholic dogma remained the law of the land until 1995.

The IRA continued to attack the Northern Protestants after partition, with the secret assistance of Michael Collins, now supposedly a Minister in a 'friendly' neighbouring state. They did so because they wanted to drive the Protestants into their Catholic republic.

[–] Nathars 15 years ago

Totally missed your point.... The Fitzs of Desmond had no concept of Ireland as a nation state. They had a great idea of their own self importance. Did they not eventually rise to be the highest ranking Dukes in the British realm (Dukes of Leinster) until they lost it all at the roulette tables of Monte Carlo. Carton House was the country seat and Leinster House their town house (after whom it is named) and is now the Dail, not to mention the prototype for the White House in Washington. Not too much in common with the rest of their Catholic brethern there.

The Plantations were friendly happy events where people bought land off of each other.... now that is very novel.

The Catholic terrorist plot to murder the CATHOLIC King James I of England and VI of Scotland... was a BRITISH plot not an Irish one and all the plotters executed were English not Irish. That is NOT an Irish matter and of no relevance to the Irish other than the murderous repression applied in its wake to place Catholicism under severe threat and pressure..... (ref. your title post).

There are numerous divorce settlements on the record in the corts of the republic between 1922 and 1937... ask any good lawyer.

WB Yeats was reputed to be a fascist sympathiser who wrote real good poetry and liked a bit of inspirational hashhish it is reported.... who died in France in 1939.
Some of Yeat's political dogmas would be a bit de-classe in post war Britain.
Much unlike DeValera whose record in silencing fascism in Ireland (Blueshirt movement)in the mid 30's is often conveniently ignored.

Frank Aiken who formed Fianna Fail with DeValera was the principal attacker of Protestant communities in the North after 1920. He changed his ways in 1924. He was the main force behind the first SALT treaty on nuclear proliferation in the 1970's. Michael Collins did not support attacks on Northern Protestants.
But he was dead by August 1922.

Try to walk a mile in the other man's mocassins (old American proverb)
The Pooka

[–] Jazzist-H-Crisp 15 years ago

I can see it is a waste of time discussing this topic with you. You do not bother to check anything and so I have to put right elementary mistakes that a moment's search on Wikipedia would have prevented.

Thus .. "The Fitzs of Desmond had no concept of Ireland as a nation state." But they tried to launch a rebellion against British rule with the help of the Catholic powers of Europe. At the papal court Fitzmaurice touted a plan for the invasion of Ireland, with the intention of offering the crown to the nephew of Pope Gregory XIII. Nothing Catholic about that!!!

As for the Gunpowder Plot of 1605, go away and read something about Guy Fawkes and the CATHOLIC plot to kill James I. The Catholics had expected James to be another Mary Tudor, launching a crusade against the Protestants and backing the Counter-Reformation. When he failed to do so, the plotters decided to kill him.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Fawkes

Finally, to see a historian's perspective on the events that Loach mangles in his film, I suggest that you read an essay by Roy Foster, Professor of History at Trinity College, Dublin, titles 'The Red and the Green.'

http://www.thedublinreview.com/archive/twentyfour/foster.html

[–] Nathars 15 years ago

Wikipedia..... (hardly a quotable or reliable research source)
Guy Fawkes..... (English not Irish)
Trinity College....

My god such sources.... They still played God Save the King at Trinity Regatta 10 years after Irish Independence.... I think I know where their loyalties lie. I might know them better than you think.

Wrong Hymn Sheet I'm Afraid.... easily discredited.

The Pooka

[–] jasongrimshaw 15 years ago

"The Plantations were an attempt by Britain to deal with Catholic intrigue and rebellion by seeding the country with Protestants."

As if that were an entirely reasonable thing to do in a foreign country where they were not wanted. Im not going to get into this argument except to say that in my opinion conflict leads to acts of questionable integrity on all sides, however to suggest that the British and Protestants in the North were somehow innocent victims of Irish Catholic treachery in the 19th and 20th century is to ignore the facts, of which the policy of ethnic cleansing during the Great Potato Famine of the 1840s is the most devastating and despicable event, caused by British policy which stipulated that vast quantites of food had to be exported and that leasees had to pay tithes of 10% on their tiny allotments... you see they were not legally allowed to own land. That was a British policy designed to break the nation by disposessing them...

I agree with your opinions regarding the terrorist organisation that was the IRA, but let us not forget the Loyalist terrorist organisations who were aided and abbetted by the police force and British army. One cannot argue any justification for that collusion, even though there was conflict. If one does it gives validation to the IRA campaign, something which should never be given validation or any sense of it being representative.

Finally the findings of the Saville Report show that attrocities were carried out by both sides and given the Conservative governments apology for the events of Bloody Sunday, I think it's fair to say that finally Britain is realising their significant responsibility (along with their civil rights policies) for how event developed in northern Ireland from 1969.

Perhaps soon they will recognise the crimes against humanity perpetrated in their name during the 19th century and finally apologise for the deaths of 1,000,000+ people, caused in lareg part by their policies. As the United Nations is recognising those events as genocide can surely mean that the time is approaching when they will again have to broch those events

[–] No 6 15 years ago

Jazzist

I think you are conveying a very "selective" historical argument. You mentioned that the Northern protestants objected to Home Rule because they saw it as 'Rome Rule'. This objection is more a refelction of their religious bias than what was presented in the actual Republican mandate. The republican movement supported by Michael Collins during this period was more interested in created a socialist, technocratic and progressive state rather than the "Catholic superstate" that came about when DeValera got into power. If the Republican movement of 1919-1921 was so determined to bring about a 'Rome Rule' state they wouldn't have had enjoyed the support of many Protestants which they had during the War of Independence

"Be seeing you!"

No6

[–] prakashsant7 15 years ago

Excuse me? I'm neither Catholic nor Protestant so I have no personal dog in this fight, but you have little credibility in anything you say when you fill paragraphs full of obvious historical misinformation-- did you even bother to check your facts before posting?

"Once Britain turned Protestant, enmity and suspicion set in between England and its Catholic neighbours, Scotland and Ireland. "

WTF?? Not even 50% accurate. First of all, Scotland also had a Protestant Reformation in the 1500's (look up John Knox), and was as Protestant as England was (i.e. mixed Protestant/Catholic population but with power increasingly concentrated in Protestant hands). As for Ireland, there had been centuries of enmity between them and England because England was a colonizing power since the 13th century (when they were both Catholic)-- nothing whatsoever to do with a religious split. In fact, by the time of Henry VIII's switch to Protestantism, the enmity between England and Ireland had if anything subsided, since both Henry VIII and his father didn't bother Ireland too much (Elizabeth I and of course Cromwell made the mistake of changing that policy to a more heavy-handed occupation). It was English (and also Scottish) colonization that got Ireland's enmity up, NOT a simple Protestant-Catholic religious conflict.

"Spain attacked in 1588, but a great storm wrecked its fleet. Spanish ships tried to land in Ireland, but the English were waiting for them and the rebellion that the Spanish hoped to raise never happened."

Damnit, Jazzist, do you spend 2 minutes even Googling your facts? Yes, in fact, there was a massive Irish rebellion against England when the English and Spanish were at war. Go look up Red Hugh O'Donnell and Hugh O'Neill, and the 9 Years' Rebellion (bloody guerrilla war) between Ireland and England from around the mid-1500's to after James I took the throne in 1603. It was a vicious rebellion, supported by Spain, and it nearly bankrupted England-- Queen Elizabeth I herself was never able to suppress it, and James I just struck a peace deal so that O'Neill himself was never punished. As for why the Irish rebelled against England, well, when you have a colonizing power brutalizing your civilians and stealing away your crops, would you really do otherwise? As for Spain, they had their own rebellion in the Netherlands to deal with and in fact, England wasn't even their main target-- although the Spanish in fact did pound England in a bunch of later sea battles, and sent a smaller Armada that in fact landed in west England and burned much of it down, 1597 or so (Carlos Amezola, or something like that, was the name of the commander). So in fact, Spain very much did continue with naval control and was therefore able to supply the Irish in their rebellion until the peace deal in 1603, at England's severe expense.

"The English Civil War of the 1640s was essentially Catholic monarchists versus Protestant republicans. "

Way, WAY too simplified. The King Charles I was Catholic, yes, but a large proportion (if not most) of the nobles and aristocrats were still very much Protestant. It wasn't a religious war-- it was a class war, between the upper class rich gentry and the middle-class artisans and Puritans. That's in fact the same sort of lineup that happened with the American Civil War in 1861-- landed aristocrats (with slaves) against middle-class artisans with a very different culture.

"The Glorious Revolution of 1690 "

1688

"England tried to neutralise the Catholic threat from Ireland by planting Protestant settlers there. "

When the hell was Ireland ever a threat to England before the 20th century? It was England constantly invading Ireland, not Ireland invading England-- so England was the threat to Ireland, not the other way around. If the English hadn't been such heavy-handed, brutalistic, atrocious colonizers in Ireland, then maybe the Irish might have adopted Protestantism themselves, but they held onto their Catholic identity in part as a way of fighting back, as they had every right to. As for Catholics using Ireland as a base to invade England-- both Charles I and James II were Catholic kings already in England, so they hardly needed an Irish base, and Charles Stuart in 1645 never gave it much thought. (His support was Scottish Jacobites, Protestant and Catholic-- the Irish couldn't have cared less, they were being screwed either way.)

"In 1922, as soon as the South got its independence, it immediately began passing Catholic legislation and it gave the Catholic hierarchy special access to Government. Ireland became the most Catholic state in Europe, banning divorce, contraception, homosexuality, etc"

Dude, it was 1922-- do you know of ANY EUROPEAN NATION, Catholic or Protestant, that had tolerance of homosexuality? Outside of the Dutch, almost nobody-- certainly not England. As for contraception, the pill hadn't been invented yet, so whether Catholic or Protestant, people just used the rhythm or analogous methods-- the great debates over contraception came decades later. You completely trash your own credibility when you get something so obvious so completely wrong-- you're transferring bitter debates of a much later period to a decade well before they came about.

"Loach's film is foolish and simplistic. It has no conception of the plight of the Northern Protestants and it ignores them completely. "

It's a historical film that deals with the British brutality in putting down the Easter Rebellion in Ireland after 1916-- that's its topic, not the Northern Irish one. And Loach is on solid ground, since the British really were brutal, arrogant and murderous in Ireland for centuries of colonization, from any historical standpoint. (Made even worse by British hypocrisy then-- claiming to fight for freedom in WWI but brutally repressing the freedom of Irish and many other nations.) When the Irish defeated the British in their war of independence in 1921, they had a new nation with an uncertain identity, and the Catholic faith of their ancestors was naturally going to be a part of that new identity {though not the only one). Ireland is one of very few island nations to have once been whole, but to remain divided today, and while I can't condone the IRA campaign of violence-- by far the most brutal in Europe's recent history (much more so than the Basques and Baader-Meinhof), it's obvious where it comes from.

I've met a number of northern Irish people, and they tend to be very kind, decent people whether Catholic or Protestant. And even the Protestants, in my experience, consider themselves to be very distinct from the British-- part of the UK, yes, but northern Irish, not British in their identity.

[–] Jazzist-H-Crisp 15 years ago

I have presented the conflict between Britain and Ireland as a by-product of the Wars of Religion in Europe. The Wars of Religion were based on the confrontation between the established church of Rome and the newly-formed Protestant churches. The Protestants were a small dissident minority at first, a heretical movement which the loyal Catholic countries of Europe, France and Spain, sought to exterminate, just as the Cathars had been exterminated in the 12th century.

That is why I titled this thread "Protestantism under threat", in order to focus attention on the precarious state of the Protestant Reformation and the ferocity of the attacks upon it.

The conflict has several dimensions because Protestantism, by virtue of its emphasis on the individual standing before God with no intervening hierarchy, has a natural affinity with democracy, as opposed to monarchy and the ancien regime. Catholicism, by contrast, was authoritarian, monarchist and hostile to democracy.

Britain turned Protestant by pure chance. Henry VIII was no Reformer. He was merely selfish and ruthless. He threw off the corrupt and hypocritical authority of Rome, not out of principle, but because it suited his selfish purposes. It was pure chance, but it was very fortunate for Britain and for Europe. Turning Protestant set Britain on a path which led eventually to a powerless figurehead monarch and a democratic parliament in power. Secular ideals of a legal system free from clerical control, state education, votes for women, etc, were achieved on that foundation.

Ireland was a problem because it remained Catholic. It was forever plotting with the Catholic countries of Europe. There were rebellions, aided and abetted by Catholic Europe, but they failed. Reprisals and plantations followed. And both sides, Britain and Ireland, regarded the other with suspicion and distrust.

That is the historical context for the conflict which has continued right up until the present day. It is a religious confrontation which has accumulated political and ideological accretions.

Of course, many people prefer a simpler story which portrays the British as nasty wicked people who hated the Irish for no reason at all. It makes a childish melodrama of the historical narrative, but it is hardly surprising that it is believed by so many, given that the Catholic church specialises in religiously segregated schools to promote Catholic beliefs. No doubt the history that is taught in them has little regard for Protestantism and British democracy. As Loyola said, "Give me a child until it is seven, and I shall ensure that it never thinks straight again."

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Hotrodder 14 years ago

Evanmang- yes, historically there were quite a few Protestant ebels. But I would argue that the more recent Troubles were sectarian in almost every regard. Nationalist areas hardly welcomed the Orange Parades through their streets did they? When the Prov IRA or the UVF, etc killed someone an automatic response by the opposing group was to murder a Catholic or Protestant, clearly demonstrating the religious link to their causes. Extremists like Paisley damning the Pope doesn't to me show that many Protestants had much truck with Republicanism nin the 1970s and '80s.
I also think it very likely that Jazzist here is a Protestant from Northern Ireland, not an Englishman.

"I was left in no doubt as to the severity of the hangover when the cat stamped into the room."

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] indigo_heart2004 14 years ago

what a load of unionist bollocks!

the fact of it all is that the unionists feared that when their system of apartheid ended there would be hell to pay from the catholics. especially considering how their 'country' was gerrymandered into existance! (hmm...donegal is mostly republican, you say? well, we don't want them now, do we).

while it may have begun over religion, it has been a war of occupation for the last century, at least, and has ALWAYS been about power! and the fear of relinquishing same.

another fact is that as long as it is irish killing irish most brits could care less. they would cut the north 6 counties loose if they could find a way and save face doing so.

clothe it in all the sunshine you want, lad, but to portray the prods as downtrodden is revisionist history at its worst.

'God is a kid with an ant farm' Constantine

[–] Proview1 14 years ago

So thats a thumbs up or down for the film then guys?

[–] Professicchio 14 years ago

The conflict has several dimensions because Protestantism, by virtue of its emphasis on the individual standing before God with no intervening hierarchy, has a natural affinity with democracy, as opposed to monarchy and the ancien regime. Catholicism, by contrast, was authoritarian, monarchist and hostile to democracy.

Ho, really????
Well, here is an irony for you to consider:
1)Ireland: an overwelming Catholic country with a democratically-elected president as head of the state.
2) Great Britain: an an overwelming Protestant country with a non-democratically-elected monarch as head of the state.

I am afraid over-simplification does not seem to be Loach's problem here, but rather yours, despite your writing efforts. Maybe next time you probably better express yourself through the medium of art as well, possibly dance or music....

I am a non-religious believer myself but if you want to get further into this diatribe I can give approximately 3.000.000.0000.0000 points that can prove you Catholicism as being more liberal and forward-thinking than "Protestantism"; you just need to let me know.....

[–] Hotrodder 14 years ago

I can give approximately 3.000.000.0000.0000 points that can prove you Catholicism as being more liberal and forward-thinking than "Protestantism"

You've got to be f!cking kidding! Remind me again- What are the Catholic Church's "liberal" views on homosexuality, abortion, the use of condoms in the prevention of Aids, women priests...? I could go on and on.
That and it's malignant past covering up of paedophiliac priests and also non-sexual child abuse in Catholic schools makes it 100% conservative. Ireland became a virtual theocracy after the Anglo-Irish war, to the point that one commentator stated that the Irish ended up with far less freedom than they had had under British rule.

"I was left in no doubt as to the severity of the hangover when the cat stamped into the room."

[–] Professicchio 14 years ago

OK pal, you have asked for it, so, to be polite, let's take just a few random facts:

- Democracy vs. Monarchy: with the notable exeptions of Spain, Belgium and other small countries that (sorry) are just not worth mentioning here, the "relevant" Western/Christian countries who, in the 21st century, still have a monarch as head of the state are overwelmingly "protestant" countries.
Aside of the UK there is Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway and (people just often fail to notice this) all countries from Commonwealth still have queen Elizabeth II as formal head of the state, that includes Australia, Canada and New Zealand.

- Racial attitudes: say what you like about ex-colonies, like Brazil or Mozambique, conquered by Catholic Imperialist countries, but, to a certain extent, they have seen a better racial integration from the start than South Africa or even the States. The Apartheid is a protestant-made phenomenon.

- Moral boundaries: the films that push the boundaries in terms of sex and violence have overwhermingly been made in Catholic countries for at least the past 50 years, especially Italy and France (but recently also Spain and Latin America): from Les Yeux Sans Visage to Last Tango in Paris, from the "Spaghetti Westerns" to "Giallo" films, from the work of Fellini, Pasolini, Antonioni, Chabrol to Fulci, Breillat, Noe`, Jodorowski....you name it.
Although Scandinavian countries have been more open in this respect, the USA have suffered a setback since the 80s and in the UK film censorship has been harshest than anywere in the democratic world, although it has relaxed in the past years.

- Omophobia: although it has been an intolerance issue for any major Christian cult (and not), among "democratic" states, it was the very protestant Victorians who opposed it more virulently (exeption made for lesbians: queen Victoria apparently refused to believe that such practices existed, God bless her 'enlightenment'!). In Great Britain it was still treated as a crime until the late 1960s.

- The Westbro Baptist Church: do I really need to say more? See for yourself:
http://www.godhatesfags.com/ (hint: it's not a joke)

- The Amish community: have you seen the film "Witness"?

At this point I could name all the hundreds of "churches" that have or have been trying to bring Christanity back into the Dark Ages and probably would be unfair but, regardless, they still account as "protestant" churches, so do the maths yourself.
I'll move to something else for the sake of simplicity........

- Abortion: despite catholic church being still virulently anti-abortion I have not yet heard about a catholic supporter who has commited acts of violence against an abortion-practicing doctor, nevermind shooting one. Catch my drift, hope you know the rest of the story.

- Bogus science: Creationism is a 100% purely protestant-made phenomenon. Altough I am sure there are followers and are growing in numbers among them, I have still yet to come across a single practising catholic, even among clergy members, who actually believes that the events and time-tables reported in the Bible are strictly true and to be taken literally. I think that's quite an achievement considered I have lived for over 20 years in a country allegedly made by at least 90% of them.
Likewise you'll be surprised to know that the Darwin theory, as a teaching subject, has met far less resistance in catholic countries than USA for example, were people were still trying to have it banned from classrooms just over half a century ago, and actually, many will try to do again, sooner or later.

- Slavery: protestant-based countries like Great Britain, Holland and USA were benefitting from the slave trade more and for longer than anyone else. Slavery was only abolished in the States in 1865 (it actually went on quite a bit longer, but let's leave it for now).

- Witchcraft trials: while the protestant movement, starting from the century, certainly brought some new fresh ideas into the Western world and helped the path for the age of Enlightenment, it also certainly did not get rid of some unfortunate superstitions. In truth, criminal prosecutions for witchcraft and various association with the devil worsened, particularly under puritanism, one example above all: the Salem witchcraft trials of 1692/93. These were the largest witch trials ever of its kind and brought the prosecutions of dozens and the execution of 21 people.
The whole trend among protestant ended only in the 19th century, long time after it was disallowed by the Church.

- Death penalty: the only country in the "civilized" western world to support it is USA, and its supporters are overwhelmingly WASPs.

- Gun laws: this is a delicate subject but to keep it simple I find odd that people that support free firearms also call themselves Christians (protestant), I guess that is a new, very liberal, interpretation of the "turn the other cheek" principle. Better not take simple positions about that one and leave it as it is.

- Individual freedoms: I tend to laugh my assets off whenever I hear someone calling places like the USA: "the Land of the Free" knowing that in many states you can't buy alcohol below the age of 21(!) and you can get imprisoned for months for something like "jaywalking" (so THAT is a crime, yeah!).
That brings me back tender memories of my youth when, aged 12 or less, I could go into any shop around town and purchase 4 bottles of vodka and 20 packets of cigarettes, no question asked, walk out and roam the streets freely without even worring were the traffic light was.
Don't need to tell were it was but....... you guessed it! It was a Catholic country (no need to name one, just pick and choose).

- Women's rights: there is this myth going around that the reason why the Feminist movement was created first in Northern European protestant countries it's because in these countries they were more free to express thamselves. Unfortunately that is exactly what it is: a MYTH.
There is a much simpler reason why the Feminist movement originated from were it did: women in these countries were treated far worse.
When you want to judge women's condition in a certain society you first need to look at that society AS A WHOLE before judging: between the 18th and 19th century northern European countries progressed rapidly, men were getting richer, freer and more independent then ever thanks to the privileges brought by the industrial revolution and the "free market" but, despite this, women in this new bourgeoisie were still expected to live exactly like they had always done: raise kids, stay at home, cook and clean.
Things weren't better in the lower classes were the growing industries were now employing women (who were working out of necessity, not empowerment) but paying them an absolute misery compared to men and for far worse working condition. Women were dying and getting seriously ill by the dozens every dayin th is new "free" society.
Believe it or not, until the early 1900s, such things as "public wife sale" existed in evolved protestant society, something that even the Taliban would consider seriously backwards.
Despite Catholicism being very strict in female-male roles, women in Catholic countries have always had a higher role than in northern-protestant countries, although that role was mostly confined in the boundaries of the family: they tend to be matriarchal society rather than patriarchal as in norther europe.
If protestant countries are ahead of catholics countries nowadays in equal rights law it's mostly because women suffered longer and harder under the neo-slavery conditions of the industrialized era whithin those countries.

- Women and science: the greatest female scientist of the 20th century (and two-times nobel prize winner) was Marie Curie, a woman born and educated in Poland, one the most catholic countries in the world.

-Women and arts: the first renowned female painter of the modern era was Artemisia Gentileschi. The only woman EVER to be nominated for an Oscar as best director before last year, was Lina Wertmuller (35 years ahead of Kathrine Bigelow), both Italian, both raised Catholics.

- attitudes towards sexuality: the porn industry in the very "free" and protestant USA is a multi-billionaire business, rental and purchasing of porn DVD generates more money than any other genre, some pornstars are more famous than some Hollywood celebrities.
Yet, I doubt we will see Ron Jeremy or Jenna Jameson taking Arnold Schwartznegger's place as governor any time time soon.
The only country that has had a pornstar in a high political position is Italy, the home of Catholicism, who has voted Ilona Staller (aka Cicciolina) into national parliament back in 1987!

Of course you right about the truly ghastly handling of the paedophile priests by the "bosses" in the church, but the fact is, cases of sexual abuses are also widespread and JUST AS BAD for any type of church were adult priests/pastors are put in position to handle children and/or vulnerable people, and just as disgracefully there have been attempted and ongoing cover-ups.
Take a look at this just to see a tiny tip of the iceberg:
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/police-girl-raped-then-relocated ?p
And I rather not even start about the multitude of incest cases in the "Children of God" church. Just do the search yourself, pal. There is plenty of stuff out there: take your pick and mix.

Now, since I am not even a religious believer, I couldn't care less of making a Catholic/Protestant comparison on who is better; matter of fact is all I'm trying to say is that it's pratically idiocy of the most idiotic kind to make a full judgement on people or even more so, countries, just on the base of faith believes: the world is a far more complicated place than that.
At the end of the day you are free to take side with whoever you want and close your eyes/ears/nose to all that is not convenient for you to see/hear/smell.

"I was left in no doubt as to the severity of the hangover when the cat stamped into the room."

It looks like you have actually accidentaly stomped yourself on that cat, pal, and it was not just the product of an hangover: better be more careful next time.

[–] Hotrodder 14 years ago

Quite sure that this is a set up, but what the Hell, I'll play ball!

Democracy vs. Monarchy

There is no "versus" Are you seriously claiming that Spain, Norway, Holland, Sweden, and all the other Monarchies aren't democratic countries? Really? It's not as if there aren't good reasons why some countries do and don't now have a King or Queen or whatever. One of the most Protestant country's -Germany -has no Monarch so your point is idiotic.

Racial attitudes

Yes, people like Hernán Cortés showed the truly compassionate side of Catholic Spain didn't they? Made friends with the natives they did, didn't they?
And of course there was this too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5McSEU48Y8

Moral boundaries: the films that push the boundaries in terms of sex and violence have overwhermingly been made in Catholic countries for at least the past 50 years

Precisely because they're sexually repressive states! The people making porn and violent movies in these countries are rebelling against the religious attitudes there, not going along with them. Are you saying the Catholic Church in Italy, say, APPROVES of ultra violent and porn films? Does Cannibal Holocaust have the Papal Seal of Approval?

Omophobia

I assume you mean Homophobia? Again the Catholic Church seems to tolerate it's priests being homosexual predators but outwardly it condemns homosexuality and all it's aspects.

Westbro Baptist Church

Yes, they're loonies. A very small bunch of extremists hated, nay detested, by almost every other Protestant in the US. They're hardly representative of the average Protestant now are they? Don't be so silly.

The Amish community

Now I know you're joking! The Amish are gentle pacifists, living life the way they choose to, causing no problems for anyone else. Are you equating them to the nutcases of the Westboro Baptist Church somehow? Don't be daft, man!

Abortion

I'm anti-abortion myself so I have little to say here. But again equating the actions of a few extremist loonies with an entire religion numbering millions is a lunatic argument.

Creationism

And Darwin was a Protestant or have you conveniently forgotten that? And it was a Protestant country - Britain-that his highly controversial theories were first published. I doubt that they would have been published in Italy or Spain at the time.

Slavery

Clutching at straws now aren't we? Are you forgetting it was Spain and Portugal who was one of the biggest slave exporters? Where do you think all those black people in Central and South America and the former Spanish etc possessions in the Caribbean come from, ya dope? Slavery was not a solely Protestant practice.

Witchcraft

Here we go again! Let's sing along!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5McSEU48Y8 Yep, the Catholic Church has always been so gentle to everyone it, um, disagreed with hasn't it?

Death penalty

Every single country in Western Europe- regardless of religion has banned it, your point is? And for that matter the last countries to ban it in W. Europe were- gasp!- Catholic countries, the Protestant ones banning it way ahead of them.

Gun laws

Absolute nonsense. Americans regardless of religion either support or oppose gun ownership in the US and I've seen no evidence that their religion make one jot of difference on what view that they take on the subject. A friend of mine is an Irish-American Catholic who owns three guns- should he be changing his religion?

Individual freedoms

Different countries, different freedoms. You sem to think I'm American, I'm not. What the USA wants to do with it's laws is entirely up to it and it's people, but are you seriously suggesting that minors below the age of 12 should have easy access to alcohol and cigarettes? Are you some sort of nutcase with no sense of social responsibility? Again most Western countries regardless of religion have rules regarding the sale of alcohol and cigarettes toi minors so again your point is stupid.

Women's rights

Ho, ho, ho! Women in Catholic counties were second class citizens for years and in many still are. It was perfectly legal, even encouraged, to beat your wife if she disobeyed and in Italy you could get away with murdering your wife if she'd been having an affair FFS. I could go on and on but frankly I can't be bothered. Women in Catholic countries were and still are baby machines who were expected to keep popping them out even if it was dangerous for them. In any case Woman's Suffrage generally came MUCH later in Catholic countries than Protestant countries.

Women and science/Women and arts

Again your point is ridiculous. I could list women in either endeavour who were Protestant. Their religion is irrelevant to their abilities.

attitudes towards sexuality

Now you're just being ludicrous! You were claiming that Catholic countries were more liberal towards porn earlier and now you're freely admitting that the US- a bastion of WASPism- is a major producer! Make your sodding mind up!

And the really funny thing about all this is I'm an atheist and have no real urge or need to defend Protestantism. Still, it's been fun and I had a little while to waste. TTFN!

"I was left in no doubt as to the severity of the hangover when the cat stamped into the room."

[–] Professicchio 14 years ago

Thanks for your extreme nit-picking and quite idiotic points, mate: I guess I have no way than use the same approach again.

Are you seriously claiming that Spain, Norway, Holland, Sweden, and all the other Monarchies aren't democratic countries? Really? [] It's not as if there aren't good reasons why some countries do and don't now have a King or Queen or whatever. One of the most Protestant country's -Germany -has no Monarch so your point is idiotic.

Tell me: were the hell did I say these are not democratic countries? I you weren't much of a dumb tw@t ( sorry I don't normally insult, but you are seriously wasting my time on this) you would have read the previous post to mine that said: Protestantism, by virtue of its emphasis on the individual standing before God with no intervening hierarchy, has a natural affinity with democracy, as opposed to monarchy and the ancien regime. Catholicism, by contrast, was authoritarian, monarchist and hostile to democracy.
I was just saying that the equation protestantism=anti-monarchy is an oversimplification of the facts.

Yes, people like Hernán Cortés showed the truly compassionate side of Catholic Spain didn't they? Made friends with the natives they did, didn't they?

Again, was I talking about that particular time and era? Tough to compare to Cortés' "catholicism" with protestantism isn't it, since protestantism was barely about to start when Cortes had already done his deeds? Just don't know the difference between 16th and 19th Century, do we?
Thanks for the illuminating Youtube link, i really needed that to know who Cortés was.

Precisely because they're sexually repressive states! The people making porn and violent movies in these countries are rebelling against the religious attitudes there, not going along with them. Are you saying the Catholic Church in Italy, say, APPROVES of ultra violent and porn films? Does Cannibal Holocaust have the Papal Seal of Approval?

No, the Pope sticks his nose in anything usually, but you are skipping the fact that while he does not approve, Italy and France, Spain etc. STILL got to see those films that, instead, were heavily banned and censored in UK, USA and even some Scandinavian countries. One one hand some do not approve on the other hand some are just too "sensitive" for some stuff, that's how it goes, win one way, lose the other.

Now I know you're joking! The Amish are gentle pacifists, living life the way they choose to, causing no problems for anyone else. Are you equating them to the nutcases of the Westboro Baptist Church somehow? Don't be daft, man!

Did I say anything qualifying? Was I portraying them as violent or say any other negative thing about them? Again, you are the one making assumptions: a community that sees any modern thing as "bad" can be right or wrong but not "liberal", in the great scheme of things. That was the original theme on my points.

I'm anti-abortion myself so I have little to say here. But again equating the actions of a few extremist loonies with an entire religion numbering millions is a lunatic argument.

You know, I start to wish your mother had a different opinion on that.............
You just love wasting your time, don't you (as I am, stupidly, doing now)?
WHERE THE F#@K DID I SAY YOU SHOULD JUDGE ONE OR THE OTHER RELIGION ACCORDING SOLELY TO THESE FACTS? Wasn't I taking specific examples just to make a point of the contrary? Communication breakdown........

And Darwin was a Protestant or have you conveniently forgotten that? And it was a Protestant country - Britain-that his highly controversial theories were first published. I doubt that they would have been published in Italy or Spain at the time.

REALLY??????? And would a "who gives a *beep* go right with that sentence?
They actually were published shortly after (well, they had to be published in English first, naturally). Still, I am talking about RIGHT NOW.
Thanks for underlining these ironies that were originally implied in my writings, unfortunately some need to have anything explained and re-explained to exaustion, I guess you did your job.

Clutching at straws now aren't we? Are you forgetting it was Spain and Portugal who was one of the biggest slave exporters? Where do you think all those black people in Central and South America and the former Spanish etc possessions in the Caribbean come from, ya dope? Slavery was not a solely Protestant practice.

Again: super'dupa idiot was back there with a vengance: WHERE THE F#@K DID I SAY about slavery being a "solely Protestant practice"?
I think you might have a serious memory lapse problem, does not seem to be dyslexia, at least.
..................................................
YES, talk about that..... I did say Catholic Church being "gentle" did I? I definitely did, sure.
.........................................
Thanks for showing me your favourite history book again.
Well, nobody expects the Spanish inquisition, but morons are never far off the map unfortunately.
......................................................
AND of course I do believe you ARE American! That must be so obvious to anyone!!!!..........................................

OK, I have read the rest now and all I can do it's try to make my original point more clear (honestly I wasn't thinkin' anyone capable of writing here would be so dumb to take it for its contrary), maybe if I write more times it could be a bit clearer:

I couldn't care less of making a Catholic/Protestant comparison on who is better; matter of fact is all I'm trying to say is that it's pratically idiocy of the most idiotic kind to make a full judgement on people or even more so, countries, just on the base of faith believes: the world is a far more complicated place than that.

I couldn't care less of making a Catholic/Protestant comparison on who is better; matter of fact is all I'm trying to say is that it's pratically idiocy of the most idiotic kind to make a full judgement on people or even more so, countries, just on the base of faith believes: the world is a far more complicated place than that.

I couldn't care less of making a Catholic/Protestant comparison on who is better; matter of fact is all I'm trying to say is that it's pratically idiocy of the most idiotic kind to make a full judgement on people or even more so, countries, just on the base of faith believes: the world is a far more complicated place than that.

I couldn't care less of making a Catholic/Protestant comparison on who is better; matter of fact is all I'm trying to say is that it's pratically idiocy of the most idiotic kind to make a full judgement on people or even more so, countries, just on the base of faith believes: the world is a far more complicated place than that.

I couldn't care less of making a Catholic/Protestant comparison on who is better; matter of fact is all I'm trying to say is that it's pratically idiocy of the most idiotic kind to make a full judgement on people or even more so, countries, just on the base of faith believes: the world is a far more complicated place than that.

I couldn't care less of making a Catholic/Protestant comparison on who is better; matter of fact is all I'm trying to say is that it's pratically idiocy of the most idiotic kind to make a full judgement on people or even more so, countries, just on the base of faith believes: the world is a far more complicated place than that.

I couldn't care less of making a Catholic/Protestant comparison on who is better; matter of fact is all I'm trying to say is that it's pratically idiocy of the most idiotic kind to make a full judgement on people or even more so, countries, just on the base of faith believes: the world is a far more complicated place than that.

I couldn't care less of making a Catholic/Protestant comparison on who is better; matter of fact is all I'm trying to say is that it's pratically idiocy of the most idiotic kind to make a full judgement on people or even more so, countries, just on the base of faith believes: the world is a far more complicated place than that.

.....................................

[–] Hotrodder 14 years ago

Aww! Did I upset diddums? Shame!

"I was left in no doubt as to the severity of the hangover when the cat stamped into the room."

[–] Professicchio 14 years ago

aehmmm, yes, I'm sorry.
Next time I shall be much more considerate towards 11-years old who want to prove the world they have gone through primary school therefore they have heard about the Spanish Inquisition and Cortes or even that Darwin was born in England; after all we can all use Wikipedia and YouTube nowadays.

I should have communicated as you do, I would have saved time and energy:

[–] Hotrodder 14 years ago

You were snotty with me from the outset, matey, so I got snotty with you, simple as that. You're obviously got an ego the size of Nebraska, and I usually treat such arrogant fools with withering contempt. Pompous twit.

"I was left in no doubt as to the severity of the hangover when the cat stamped into the room."

[–] Professicchio 14 years ago

I sincerely doubt I was "snotty with you from the outset" pal, since YOU were the one who intruded the conversation I was having with someone else, if there is someone who has the right to judge if I was snotty or not, that one IS the poster I was talking to.
First you introduce yourself with:

[] You've got to be f!cking kidding!

(see above)
and than you pass judgement on me: WHO THE F@CK ARE YOU?
I guess it's OK if you want to treat "arrogant fools with withering contempt" but, unfortunately, if bringing ludicrous cliches that even a 3rd grader can express better it's all you can do, along with a range of smileys, you are just shooting yourself in the foot.
Then again sorry, I really shouldn't be so harsh with little kids..

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CarolinianDude 14 years ago

"Oh and Catholic schools are far more liberal and open then their Christian counter parts. "

Thankyou for admitting Catholicism isn't Christianity

[–] CarolinianDude 14 years ago

There's literally NO basis for that. Also lets run through some names here.
Bill O'Reilly
Sean hannity
Brian Kilmeade
Rosie O'Donnell
Christine O'Donnell (no relation)
Carrot top
Bono
Joe McCarthy
Bull Connor
Peggy Noonan

All irish-catholic, all flamingly republican. Jersey's fat Italian governor whose trying to break the teacher's unions as we speak, Italian Catholic. I could name more but it would be pointless. The above list is their contribution minus the Kennedy's.

Americans of English descent, just to name a few:
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
Ben Franklin
John Adams
Abraham Lincoln
Robert E Lee
Edgar Allen Poe
HP Lovecraft
Steven King
Tom Selleck
Charlton Heston
Bruce Willis (on his dad's side)
Clint Eastwood
Brad Pitt
Hank Williams
Alan Jackson
Randy Travis
Robert Redford (also part Ulster Scots)
Kid Rock (also part Ulster Scots) & Eminem (also part Scots)

Americans of Ulster Scots Protestant Ancestry:
ELVIS PRESLEY
Andrew Jackson
Stonewall Jackson
John Wayne

again, I could go on, but what's the point. By the way Glenn Beck was raised Catholic. So was Adolf Hitler and his lover Eamon De Valera. Peace

[–] michael-hughes-3 14 years ago

Carolinian dude........

A couple of slave holders in there I dare say.

BTW in 1859 Abe Lincoln favoured the invasion Cuba to make it a homeland for the negro population of the US.

Eamonn De Valera was no lover of Fascism or Hitler but a great lover of etiquette and process as a neutral. He never loved the nation that sentenced him to death and I doubt you would either.

De Valera snuffed out the nascent fascist movement in Ireland in 1936 a full 3 years before WW2, whilst it was still in Fashion in the US until 1940. Because he followed a neutral protocol to the letter he has been dubbed by the likes of your little knowledge.... history can be unjust also.

Facts not hearsay please.

[–] CarolinianDude 14 years ago

de Valera signed the book of condolences for Hitler. Dev would have known from diplomatic reports that the Allies had been freeing concentration and death camps since February 1945, and he would certainly have had an inkling of the conditions in them. Signing the book of condolances with that knowledge = pro-Nazi
The fact the only Irishman who died fighting Nazies did so in the British army should tell you a lot too, for instance, where was the Irish army? The answer is not fighting Hitler. Because they're government was very sympathetic to him, or as you put it "neutral". And they harbored a population (you people) which re-elected that same not-gonna-fight-Hitler government several times after the war.

And yes, there were plenty of slave owners on that list, nobody's perfect, contrary to what Lebronicus thinks of you. Furthermore the fascist movement in America (which was largely an Irish-Catholic movement thankyou), which mainly consisted of Irish Catholic Blueshirts and the German American Bund, were "snuffed out" during the war as well. The difference being, our army would also become involved in said war. Yours was not.

[–] michael-hughes-3 14 years ago

Dude...

I know the incident that you refer to..... What Dev knew or did not know is pure speculation on your part. It appears you would prefer it that way but there was never any evidence.

3 Four Star US Generals crash landed within 10 miles of my home in a B17 after they got lost.

They were arrested and brought to a hotel for breakfast. After an hour or two they were driven 100 miles to within 100 yards of the border and allowed to "go for a walk".
One of them later accepted the German surrender in Austria.
This was the fate of all allied belligerents. Not one German spy or airman (and there were many)was ever released until the war was over. Dev's policy was quietly pro Allies but publicly very very neutral, thence the empty diplomatic neutral gesture that YOU CHOOSE in order "override" all the other good work done by Dev. These are the facts.

The policy of the Irish Government was set out in 1939 - Neutrality was that policy. In fact it is also recorded that if Germany had invaded in 1940 (a plan was in place) we would have fought with the British (the US was not in the war until Christmas 1941. If the British had invaded we would have opposed them too, but that's nothing new. We were too small and our democracy too fragile to do otherwise. The vast majority of Irish people respected and admired this policy ans still do.

I have given you facts but you choose revisionism for reasons that we will never know.

I hope I have helped you to look closer than simple generalizations.
America still has it's own problems (Pte. Manning's treatment). Hypocrisy springs to mind.