Evil possessed of power writes many a bloody page in the annals of Man, but Christ, and those who stand with Him, win in the end, if not always in this vale of tears, always and forever in eternity.
Crowned Monster
- Donald R. McClarey
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 43 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
That X post is one of the more historically illiterate ones I have yet seen, outside the world of TDS, at least. Probably has a couple of degrees, too. 🤦🏼♂️
While Churchill was spot on with a lot of things, he certainly was no saint. #naughtydocument. One cannot criticize him for being leader of the British empire, but much of what he did was to attempt to preserve the relevance of Britain long after they became irrelevant. One can argue whether or not the non colonial powers are better off today than they were under the British empire, but let’s face it, he did everything for Britain. There are some people today that say that the whole globalism “we need to act collectively” BS is merely an attempt by the Brits to maintain relevance 50 years past their expiration date. And many of the neocons in the republican party signed on to this. If Britain wants a war in Afghanistan let them fight their own. Oh. Wait. They already did that. And lost. A lot of the problems in the middle east that persist to this day are the result of Britain and their nation building.
“he did everything for Britain.”
In the long run, yes. Making peace with Germany after the fall of France in 1940 might have been in the short term interest for Britain, but Churchill realized that Hitler was no normal actor on the European stage, but an existential threat to freedom in the world. If Churchill was not a statesman the term has no meaning.
As for Afghanistan, the Brits never succeeded in having other than fleeting control over that zone of tribal warfare masquerading as a nation. We went into Afghanistan in 2001 because of 9-11 and not due to the Brits. The hubris to engage in nation building in what was never a nation was all-American and can not be blamed on the Brits or the Neo-Con phantoms conjured up by the isolationist right.
“Taking hold”??
Egads, it had been there for a millennium (if not longer) already. Frank is right – although historically illiterate may be too charitable here.
Henry VIII was indeed a monster. The worst ruler of Britain. He had an estimated 70,000 people executed during his reign.
“Anglochog” is ignorant. England was known as Mary’s Dowry long before the Tudors. The Dissolution destroyed so much. What amazes me is that there are so many anti-Catholics in modern UK. Although young people are converting to Roman Catholicism. The Church of England like the US Episcopalian church is losing members because of liberalism such as changes to their dogma, same sex marriages, gay clergy, and ordaining as I call them priestesses.
In my neck of the woods the pro-life, traditional Anglicans congregations are growing. A monastery of South African Benedictines have moved into the county.
One cannot criticize him for being leader of the British empire, but much of what he did was to attempt to preserve the relevance of Britain long after they became irrelevant
==
What does this mean? Britain in 1951 was a populous country with a large productive base and a seasoned military. They were a consequential power. What they did not have was the productive base to supervise India and much of tropical Africa contra an antagonistic local political class. Guess what? No one else had the capacity to do that either.
==
Churchill’s first term was consumed with prosecuting the war. His second occurred after India and points adjacent had been unloaded. His activity toward ‘preserving the Empire’ consisted of working to suppress insurgencies in the Malay states, Kenya, and Cyprus (tasks finally accomplished under his two immediate successors).
==
I have no idea how you arrive at the conclusion that Davos rubbish can be blamed on late Imperial British politicians.
==
There is no such thing as ‘nation-building’. There is such a thing as midwifing institutions. It’s not impossible for a political class in a multi-ethnic state to cut deals among themselves which sustain a political order with which people can live. India’s politicians have managed to do this for 78 years and a considerable menu of African countries seem to bump and grind along (not prosperous, but not killing each other). The question in re Afghanistan is how it came to be that the U.S. Armed Services spent twenty years building an Afghan force that fell apart when it was challenged. Please recall that the Iraqi military and police after horrid initial setbacks in 2013-14 found its footing and prevailed.
==
As for post-war Britain, they had an overvalued currency in a dysfunctional system of fixed exchange rates, they had terrible industrial relations, and they allocated to state agencies and government corporations functions which could be adequately performed by private enterprise. They damaged a functional system of primary and secondary schooling and built a hypertrophied system of tertiary schooling. And, like a number of other countries, adopted immigration policies injurious to their health as a polity. The Tory ministries in charge during the period running from 1951-64 and 1970-74 were no more capable that the Cameron-Sunak era clowns in reversing bad Labour policy.
If Henry was granted a vision of what the mainstream Anglicans are currently capable of, he probably would have slaughtered his advisors and done sackcloth and ashes.
Well, it was Henry, so maybe cloth of gold and ashes!
Dickens said it best: Henry “was a most intolerable ruffian, a disgrace to human nature, and a blot of blood and grease upon the history of England.”
Henry will always be remembered (even by those who know little of history) by the fact he killed a couple of wives because they could not produce a male heir. And then science showed us down the century’s that in fact it is the man who determines the sex of a child. He will also have a legacy of being a divorcee and serial adulterer who treated the women in his life like disposable and worthless entities. Henry divorced another few wives because of his adultery.
Henry inherited an England that was thriving with Catholicism and he destroyed all of it during his reign.
Henry’s reign of terror against the Church produced some of our most important
Saints and allies in Heaven – St Thomas More, St John Fisher, St Augustine of Canterbury, and a multitude of English martyrs. Catholicism also claimed Shakespeare and Chesterton.
Henry’s political, religious and personal motives and actions against the Catholic Church were pre-cursors for other anti-Catholic assaults against the Church down the road. And his poison lives on.
“The suppression of the Church in England was the dress rehearsal for the French Revolution, the Italian Risorgimento, the Mexican Revolution, and the Spanish Civil War. Henry VIII’s divorce is the reason America is a Protestant country”
https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7653
Henry Tudor is Exhibit #1 in the case against monarchy.
[…] Z’s Blog8. Peruvian Bishops Call on the Pope Leo XIV to Return – Silere Non Possum9. Crowned Monster: King Henry VIII – Donald R. McClarey, J.D., at The American Catholic10. Ketanji Fatigue – S.A. McCarthy […]
“Henry Tudor is Exhibit #1 in the case against monarchy.”
The Monarchy serve little purpose in the west beyond symbolising tradition, cutting ribbons, pomp and ceremony and being good for tourism.
However, I think there is a case for a Royal Head of State in the Middle East. The royal families in UAE and Jordan are two examples of how having a monarchy has stopped these countries from falling into the hands of Islamic extremist governments and becoming regional and international threats. Although, admittedly there have not been rogues extremists that have come out of both, they don’t tolerate Islamic extremism as good for business. Infact, the King of Saudi Arabia has poured a lot of money into supporting Christians because they fear Shiite extremism growing. They aren’t stupid.