> On Apr 6, 6:31 pm, nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...
> > In article <4d992343$0$21500$607ed...@cv.net>,
> > John W Kennedy <jwke...@attglobal.net> wrote:
> > > On 2011-04-03 17:59:58 -0400, neonprose said:
> > > > On Mar 29, 9:35 am, John W Kennedy <jwke...@attglobal.net> wrote:
> > > >> On 2011-03-29 03:17:12 -0400, neonprose said:
> > > >>> Divine Providence is a Calvinist notion
> > > >> No, it is a Jewish/Christian/Moslem commonplace. It is a Calvinist
> > > >> obsession.
> > > > Logically, it can be both a Calvinist notion and
> > > > a Jewish/Christian/Moslem commonplace. A
> > > > notion and a commonplace can co-exit in the
> > > > same space-time.
> > > My point is that one cannot reason:
> > > Calvinists believe in Providence.
> > > Hamlet believes in Providence.
> > > Therefore, Hamlet is a Calvinist.
> > > One might as well reason:
> > > Stalinists tell lies.
> > > Rush Limbaugh tells lies.
> > > Therefore, Rush Limbaugh is a Stalinist.
> > > Or:
> > > Eugene O’Neill’s father is an alcoholic.
> > > George W. Bush is an alcoholic.
> > > Therefore, George W. Bush is Eugene O’Neill’s father.
> > Careful, John -- this may not be the best way to explain your point
> > to Elizabeth. After all, Elizabeth believes that the princess
> > Elizabeth Tudor was the mother of the Earl of Oxford, so she might
> > well believe that George Bush is Eugene O'Neill's father!
> > > >> If any specific point of Jacobean religious controversy is present in
> > > >> “Hamlet”, it is the question of Purgatory, and the play comes down
> > > >> squarely on the RC side of it. On the other hand, it is hard to believe
> > > >> that a Roman Catholic would have presented Thomas Cranmer as the
> > > >> saintly prophet he is in “Henry VIII”.
> > > > After you mentioned Cranmer I devoted three hours to
> > > > reading about Cranmer on Wikipedia. I swear to God
> > > > that the article is a 67 screens long. I just clicked them
> > > > off.
> > > > I think Cranmer's problem (in terms of his legacy, if that's
> > > > the right word) were his recantations at the end of his life.
> > > > They make him look like an equivocator. He certainly was
> > > > an equivocator on his way to the stake. I think Cranmer's
> > > > problem was that the English Protestants and Catholics were
> > > > far from finding a via media.
> > > I do not think you know what “equivocator” means.
> > I'm pretty sure that she doesn't.
> > > In any case, none of this has anything to do with the fact that, from
> > > Rome’s viewpoint, Cranmer was a schismatic and heresiarch, whereas the
> > > play “Henry VIII” presents him as a divinely inspired prophet and a
> > > saintly man.
> > > > Of course that didn't satisfy the consummate scholars who
> > > > produced the famous 1908 Catholic Encyclopedia. They
> > > > thought the author was Protestant but if Shacksper wrote
> > > > the works he would have to be ready, like Littré, to give
> > > > confession and receive absolution on his death bed.
> > > Committing a sin while thinking, ”It’s OK, I’ll repent later,” makes
> > > the original sin worse and, in most cases, makes the repentance
> > > worthless.
> And you've read Sir John McLane's biography
> of Sir Thomas Seymour, Baron of Sudeley, and
> I have not.
Amazing! By Elizabeth's standards this is *almost* a reference. "Sir
Victorian biographer of Seymour.