tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post1216942080136885759..comments2024-03-24T15:19:06.377-04:00Comments on The Continuum: Kearnon makes our point for usFr. Robert Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-43388610906134092092008-04-03T01:19:00.000-04:002008-04-03T01:19:00.000-04:00And it was too good a point from which to distract...And it was too good a point from which to distract.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-56026142950917877092008-04-02T16:25:00.000-04:002008-04-02T16:25:00.000-04:00In the words of Groucho Marx, from the contract sc...In the words of Groucho Marx, from the contract scene in <I>A night at the Opera</I>, "Well, let's not break up an old friendship over a thing like that." So I have torn out the Queen Lear line. <BR/><BR/>I realize too, it distracts from my point.Fr. Robert Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-62098273671784178662008-04-02T15:21:00.000-04:002008-04-02T15:21:00.000-04:00Fr Hart, perhaps my earlier question wasn't all th...Fr Hart, perhaps my earlier question wasn't all that politely put, which is why it is ignored, but in order to you to maintain your 'Queen Lear' snipe at the reigning Head of State of peoples other than your own, would you kindly give the less historically clued-up amongst us one concrete instance of King George VI using his executive power contrary to the expressed wishes of Parliament or the advice of his ministers. If by the replacement of 'the wrong PM' by Churchill you mean the resignation of Chamberlain and the appointment of Churchill in 1940, my reading is that these were instances of the King acceding reluctantly to the wishes of Parliament. If you really want to see a use of the executive power of the Crown way outside the square within a Westminster system, I suggest that you look at the Australian Constitutional Crisis of 1975. I don't want to get into an argument with a bunch of Americans about the rightness or wrongness of the Westminster system (although I am beginning to suspect that this is taught in American schools in the way English Church history is taught in RC schools), or with Australians for that matter about the rightness or wrongness of our current system--not on this list, anyway, and I don't want to get into anything with you, Fr Hart, that turns nasty, since I am greatly helped by almost everything else that you write, but I'll not tell your President how to do his job if you don't tell my Queen how to do hers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-70141363185671277802008-04-02T05:43:00.000-04:002008-04-02T05:43:00.000-04:00'the father of the current queen, who in his time ...'the father of the current queen, who in his time actually used his authority to remove the wrong Prime Minister and replace with him with Churchil'<BR/><BR/>Er? (I confess that my British constitutional history isn't what it could be, but could you please elucidate?)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-7918011738281881872008-04-02T00:55:00.000-04:002008-04-02T00:55:00.000-04:00OK. I thought it might be something like that, bu...OK. I thought it might be something like that, but i wasn't sure since there wasn't a formal abdication. No doubt Charles would oblige. Would the disestablishment of the church be meaningful at this point?<BR/><BR/>SeanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-11849502918175831472008-04-01T22:18:00.000-04:002008-04-01T22:18:00.000-04:00Sean asked:What's the Queen Lear reference? Just c...Sean asked:<BR/><I>What's the Queen Lear reference? Just curious.</I><BR/><BR/>Perhaps a bit too subtle. As William Shakespeare wrote it, King Lear decided to throw away his authority, and relax. The result was the ruin of his house and kingdom. I think of a very different king, namely the father of the current queen, who in his time actually used his authority to remove the wrong Prime Minister and replace with him with Churchill, and in other ways to come to the help of England. But, the queen has let England fall into ruin, not because she <I>could</I> never step in at all, but rather because she simply has never bothered.Fr. Robert Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-20036501027983887732008-04-01T20:50:00.000-04:002008-04-01T20:50:00.000-04:00From my own point of view, the Lord is an absolute...From my own point of view, the Lord is an absolute monarch and not a constitutional one. When we stray from His word as expressed in Holy Scripture, it is we and anyone else which is in the wrong. And this applies equally to the Church of Rome with its "celibate" clergy as it does to any other part of the Kingdom of God.<BR/><BR/>But I believe that such is precisely what you were intending to say - or have I got it wrong?Canon Tallishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05182884929479435751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-38242946518953664102008-04-01T19:49:00.000-04:002008-04-01T19:49:00.000-04:00What's the Queen Lear reference? Just curious.Sea...What's the Queen Lear reference? Just curious.<BR/><BR/>SeanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-54579900030772412452008-04-01T19:12:00.000-04:002008-04-01T19:12:00.000-04:00My plain and open admiration of Fr. Robert Hart, f...My plain and open admiration of Fr. Robert Hart, for his unwavering faith and intelligent theological delineations of God's holy truths!!! <BR/> +Stephen ClarkAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com