18 January 2019

Two cultures?

We have been having some diverting debates in the Lower House of our Legislature; a couple of days ago, the Opposition moved the grand old motion That This House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government. A rather bumptious young government backbencher, mindful that the best mode of defence is attack, was in the course of an onslaught upon the Right Honourable Gentleman the Member for Islington. He was interrupted on a Point of Order by an Opposition Member, who asked Mr Speaker for a ruling on whether the abusive term "Pillock" was Parliamentary.

Mr Speaker explained that what the bumptious youth had, in the heat of his intemperate rhetoric, actually accused the Leader of Her Majesty's Opposition of being was not "a pillock" but "a palaeoMarxist".

Erskine May, apparently, expresses no views on the propriety of this latter term.

[Is it true that 'Pilosi' is a North American variant of 'Pillock'?]


LLC77 said...

I wanted to send you a comment on the validity of the rites of Vatican II.

There is a way to refute the claims of invalidity of the rites of Vatican II: obtain a copy of the rite of the Copts approved by Leo XIII in the 1890s. This rite is very similar, almost identical, to the 1968 rite. And it was approved by Leo XIII, a Pope considered true by the sedevacantists.

If a copy of the rite were obtained, the statements against the validity of the 1968 rite would be refuted. There must be some official document of Leo XIII or of the Church where the approval is recorded.

The Copts, unlike the Maronites, did not use their rite for the enthronement of patriarchs, I believe.

I have tried to find a copy on the Internet, but I have not succeeded.

God bless you.

John F. Kennedy said...

"Is it true that 'Pilosi' is a North American variant of 'Pillock'?"


At first my answer was going to be the rhetorical "Is the Pope Catholic?" but I'm afraid that phrase doesn't work anymore.

LLC77 said...

In the document "A VINDICATION OF THE BULL ’APOSTOLICÆ CURÆ’, A LETTER ON ANGLICAN ORDERS BY THE CARDINAL ARCHBISHOP AND BISHOPS OF THE PROVINCE OF WESTMINSTER, IN REPLY TO THE LETTER ADDRESSED TO THEM BY THE ANGLICAN ARCHBISHOPS OF CANTERBURY AND YORK", the English bishops analyze in detail the rite of the Copts, and say that it is valid and that it was approved by the Church. They reproduce the rite verbatim, and affirm that the words "ruling spirit (or spirit of rule)" adequately express the grace of the Holy Spirit. This rite is almost identical to the rite of Vatican II.

I believe that this document is a total refutation of the claims against the 1968 rite. You can download it here (see pages 47 and 50):


I believe that you can respond with this to recent allegations against your articles.

If you intend to answer the sedevacantists with this document, please there is no need for you to post this comment.

God bless