Who was Oliver Cromwell?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dosdog
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dosdog

Guest
Oliver Cromwell had gone from commoner to Lord Protector, the most powerful man in England. On the way he had massacred many people, had annihilated the monarchy (which was later re-established) and had championed the Puritan cause.

When Rebellion broke out in Scotland (over a Prayer Book that Archbishop Laud had deemed compulsory), Charles resumed Parliament (later referred to as the Long Parliament), but Civil War broke out in 1642, lasting for four years. In 1642, Cromwell was 43 years old, and it was during this time that his talents and military abilities came to the fore. The Puritan Revolution had begun.

The Civil War was not a class war, but rather the culmination of disenchantment of Parliament with the monarchy. Charles had persecuted Puritans and had long-since clashed with Parliament. The War saw fighting between the two sides - Parliament (nicknamed the ‘Roundheads’ due to their severe haircuts) and the Cavaliers (the king and his followers).

Cromwell was now titled ‘Lord General and Commander in Chief of the Commonwealth and Lord Lieutenant of Ireland’. In Ireland, Cromwell ordered the massacres in Drogheda and Wexford, and the English colonization of Ireland. He then traveled to Scotland to crush dissenters there. Oliver Cromwell’s armies were widely acknowledged as unstoppable.

Returning to England he found the Parliament (named the ‘Rump’) in disarray. He dissolved them in 1653, effectively destroying both the monarchy and parliament. He also closed theatres, treated drunks and blasphemers harshly, decreed that recreation was forbidden and Sunday was declared a day of worship. Cromwell had thus become a military dictator.

The Roundheads quarreled - they could not agree on what the next step should be. Some wanted to keep the monarchy, the army wanted a republic and others still wanted religious tolerance for everyone (apart from Catholics and Anglicans!). Also, Parliament was very slow to pay the soldiers.

The King tried to play the game of putting each side against the other, which backfired on him. Many by this stage had lost faith in the King. Charles fled to Scotland but the Scots turned him over to Cromwell in 1646. Cromwell debated about what to do with the King, but he was finally instrumental in signing the paper which declared Charles a traitor and led to his execution outside the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall on January 30th, 1649. England now had no monarchy.

He died on 3rd September 1658 from malaria, leaving his son Richard as his successor. The son was no match for the father however, and England returned to the monarchy in 1660, crowning Charles I’s son (also Charles) as king.

Oliver Cromwell was deemed a moderate because he massacred only Catholics and Anglicans
njnj.essortment.com/whowasoliver_rjdq.htm
 
I hate Cromwell… :mad:
Culture wars :

The Jewish/Puritan Alliance
The Jewish/Puritan alliance was born in a mutual rejection of the cross and all it stood for, and the substitution of King David or Simon bar Kokhba or Sabbetai Sevi or Oliver Cromwell or Napoleon Bonaparte as an alternative to the suffering Christ. The Jews were so enamored of Cromwell as a potential Messiah that they sent a delegation to examine his baptismal records in Huntington, to see if he were descended from the lineage of King David. Cromwell, as Graetz points out, was driven to consummate this revolutionary alliance between Jews and Puritans on both the theoretical and the practical level:

The consummation of this revolutionary alliance against the Catholic Church and Catholic countries like Spain involved, in other words, not only rummaging through the Bible for images that would justify regicide, it also entailed bringing Jews, so recently expelled from the Iberian peninsula, out of their temporary home in the low countries into the land now governed by the Puritan saints. According to Graetz:

Cromwell’s followers felt that by readmitting the Jews to England they could bring about the second coming of Christ, the millennium, and the fifth monarchy mentioned in the book of Daniel. In short, the middle of the 17th century was suffused with an apocalyptic vision of Christ’s kingdom being actually established in the here and now. Jewish refugees from Spain and English Ranters and Fifth Monarchy men were of one mind on this issue. The Kingdom of God was at hand. Something like this had been held by Christians for over a millennium and a half, probably because its advent had been pronounced by Christ himself. What had changed, though, was the kind of kingdom Christ’s followers were supposed to expect.
culturewars.com/2003/RevolutionaryJew.html
 
Question: What was the point of this? Why do people insist on dredging up the errors of both sides ad nauseum? It serves no purpose other than to offend and anger…both sides of the equation.

Can we stop now?
 
Question: What was the point of this? Why do people insist on dredging up the errors of both sides ad nauseum? It serves no purpose other than to offend and anger…both sides of the equation.

Can we stop now?
“History is indeed the witness of the times, the light of truth.”
–Cicero

“Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.”
–George Santayana
In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day.
Jacques Yves Cousteau
brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/jacquesyve204407.html
 
“History is indeed the witness of the times, the light of truth.”
–Cicero

“Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.”
–George Santayana
In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day.
Jacques Yves Cousteau
brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/jacquesyve204407.html
If you are trying to make a point…you are being very obtuse and deceptive about it. While it is true that “they who forget the past are doomed to repeat it”… constantly dredging up examples of internecine atrocities and hatred serve no useful purpose.

Essentially you are doing little more than stirring a pot of air.
 
If you are trying to make a point…you are being very obtuse and deceptive about it. While it is true that “they who forget the past are doomed to repeat it”… constantly dredging up examples of internecine atrocities and hatred serve no useful purpose.

Essentially you are doing little more than stirring a pot of air.
If It offends you stay out of this thread - Period
 
Why, because I object to your attempts at “baiting”?
This book presents the history of two religious sects successfully established in seventeenth-century Massachusetts, where it was illegal to participate in any faith other than the legally established congregationalism of the Puritan founders of the colony.
amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0521525047

In 1656, the Friends of Society, also called Quakers, arrived in Boston and were greeted by quite a welcome wagon. The Puritans, the founders of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, had them whipped, jailed and hanged for breaking their strict religious codes that they enforced as laws. Yes, these were the folks who a quarter of a century before fled Europe in order to have religious freedom. Once here, however, they only wanted freedom for their own religion. The Quakers were banished from Boston and hung if they returned. Eventually an area called Pennsylvania
helium.com/tm/364298/firs…-quakers-early

Quakers: Persecution in colonial Massachusetts
A law was passed at the same time, subjecting every shipmaster importing Quakers or Quaker writings to a heavy fine; adjudging all Quakers who should intrude into the colony to stripes and labor in the house of correction, and all defenders of their tenets to fine, imprisonment, or exile…
 
This book presents the history of two religious sects successfully established in seventeenth-century Massachusetts, where it was illegal to participate in any faith other than the legally established congregationalism of the Puritan founders of the colony…
Are you by chance trying to establish the point that the very people who fled from England and the Anglican Church…did immediately commence to doing precisely those very actions that they considered to be “religious persecution”, and they themselves imposed more stringent restrictions than they themselves endured upon others?

Moot point. Well known. Got anything new?
 
Are you by chance trying to establish the point that the very people who fled from England and the Anglican Church…did immediately commence to doing precisely those very actions that they considered to be “religious persecution”, and they themselves imposed more stringent restrictions than they themselves endured upon others?

Moot point. Well known. Got anything new?
The New Anti-Catholicism: The Last Acceptable Prejudice (Hardcover)
Both right and left have been anti-Catholic at different times. The Know Nothing Party and the Ku Klux Klan attacked Catholicism in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, but liberals prosecuting Prohibition, family planning, sex education, legalized abortion, feminism, gay rights, and other progressive causes embraced anti-Catholicism later. Jenkins examines liberal anti-Catholicism in chapters on whether “The Church Hates Women” and “The Church Kills Gays”; the treatment of Catholics and the church by the news media, in the movies
amazon.com/New-Anti-Catholicism-Last-Acceptable-Prejudice/dp/0195154800

Prime Minister Tony Blair has been criticised for stating he has “no plans” to repeal a law banning British monarchs from marrying Roman Catholics.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/493717.stm

San Francisco’s Hateful Anti-Catholic Resolution Prompts Lawsuit
Tue, Apr 4, 2006
According to Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, “The demagoguery and virulent words of this resolution are reminiscent of the anti- Catholic bigotry of the Ku Klux Klan and the Know Nothings, which marred our Nation’s earlier history. San Francisco may as well have put up signs at the City limits: ‘Faithful Catholics Not Welcomed.”
thomasmore.org/news.html?NewsID=410
 
There is an old saying that go’s "The only thing that we learn form history is that we never learn anything from history
 
The New Anti-Catholicism: The Last Acceptable Prejudice (Hardcover)
Both right and left have been anti-Catholic at different times. The Know Nothing Party and the Ku Klux Klan attacked Catholicism in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, but liberals prosecuting Prohibition, family planning, sex education, legalized abortion, feminism, gay rights, and other progressive causes embraced anti-Catholicism later. Jenkins examines liberal anti-Catholicism in chapters on whether “The Church Hates Women” and “The Church Kills Gays”; the treatment of Catholics and the church by the news media, in the movies
amazon.com/New-Anti-Catholicism-Last-Acceptable-Prejudice/dp/0195154800
This one above kind of makes liars out of the non-Catholic “christians” who complain about persecution, doesn’t it?? It think is says much. I used the reader to read some of it. May have to buy that book…seems quite informative. Gives direct credence to why Catholics should find out who the owners of businesses and corporations are and “boycott” them and refuse to purchase their products.
Prime Minister Tony Blair has been criticised for stating he has “no plans” to repeal a law banning British monarchs from marrying Roman Catholics.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/493717.stm
Wow! I learned something today… I honestly didn’t know that England had such a law. Seems maybe they haven’t come very far since Henry the VIIIth.
San Francisco’s Hateful Anti-Catholic Resolution Prompts Lawsuit
Tue, Apr 4, 2006
According to Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, “The demagoguery and virulent words of this resolution are reminiscent of the anti- Catholic bigotry of the Ku Klux Klan and the Know Nothings, which marred our Nation’s earlier history. San Francisco may as well have put up signs at the City limits: ‘Faithful Catholics Not Welcomed.”
thomasmore.org/news.html?NewsID=410
Now, this doesn’t surprise me in the least. That part of the country … and specifically that area of the “left coast” is well known for its outrageous left wing leanings, and is even home to I think its the 9th Court of Appeals…the most overturned Court of Appeals in the nation. I’m surprised they don’t offer their own children as sacrifices to pagan gods out there.:eek:
 
This one above kind of makes liars out of the non-Catholic “christians” who complain about persecution, doesn’t it?? It think is says much. I used the reader to read some of it. May have to buy that book…seems quite informative. Gives direct credence to why Catholics should find out who the owners of businesses and corporations are and “boycott” them and refuse to purchase their products.

Wow! I learned something today… I honestly didn’t know that England had such a law. Seems maybe they haven’t come very far since Henry the VIIIth.

Now, this doesn’t surprise me in the least. That part of the country … and specifically that area of the “left coast” is well known for its outrageous left wing leanings, and is even home to I think its the 9th Court of Appeals…the most overturned Court of Appeals in the nation. I’m surprised they don’t offer their own children as sacrifices to pagan gods out there.:eek:
In India, Catholic churches are regularly burned by Hindu Fundamentalists, and both Hindus and local animist groups have harassed and killed Catholic converts. In Pakistan, which disagrees with India about everything else, an Islamic Fundamentalist government does the same. Even great charity is no protection. Mother Teresa’s Sisters of Charity have been threatened in India and three of them were murdered in Yemen in the 1990s.
Following is the first in a series of articles by Robert Royal, author of the soon-to-be released book Catholic Martyrs of the 20th Century.
catholicherald.com/royal/royal1.htm

Our Sunday Visitor: Persecution of Catholics still alive, oppression’s face fanatic, traditional
catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=19509
 
The only good thing about Oliver Cromwell is that he made Britain into a Republic, which unfortunately didn’t stick. Otherwise, the man was a tyrant and religious fanatic.
 
Are you by chance trying to establish the point that the very people who fled from England and the Anglican Church…did immediately commence to doing precisely those very actions that they considered to be “religious persecution”, and they themselves imposed more stringent restrictions than they themselves endured upon others?

Moot point. Well known. Got anything new?
I think his point is that everybody hates everybody…or something like that. If his point is different I’ve somehow managed to miss the subtlety.
 
Oliver Cromwell was a horrible man who wanted to steal peoples land and make them pay stupid taxes.But he actually had a daughter who was a saint.
 
I think his point is that everybody hates everybody…or something like that. If his point is different I’ve somehow managed to miss the subtlety.
A Boston University professor argues that Americans, though ‘spiritual,’ are woefully ignorant about religion.
msnbc.msn.com/id/17439043/site/newsweek

Most US adults in the dark about world politics
Two-thirds of US adults admit to being in the dark about political issues outside the United States, and only a third are well-versed in US politics, the results of a poll published Tuesday showed.
breitbart.com/article.php?id=070822064927.3gb131i5&show_article=1

Low History IQ’s
FINDING 1: America’s colleges and universities fail to increase knowledge about America’s history and institutions, [according to a new study by the conservative Intercollegiate Studies Institute]

If the survey were administered as an exam in a college course, seniors would fail with an overall average score of 53.2 percent, or F on a traditional grading scale.
hnn.us/roundup/entries/30280.html
 
…or considering that he doesn’t say anything but merely post links, maybe he’s one of those bot programs…😃
 
A little side-story.

Many years ago I was in the National Portrait Gallery in London with my (late) step-sister. I was dressed in very Australian gear, DryazaBone jacket, moleskin pants, Blundstone boots… and an attendent at the gallery was looking me over as if I was some kind of yokel.

I was telling my stister about Oliver Cromwell - who’s portrait we were looking at. The attendent came up and started to tell me about Oliver as if I needed his assistance (1600’s Britain is my favourite period of history).* SO I turned to him and said “Do you have any portraits of Richard Cromwell?”
“Who?” he asked
Richard Cromwell”, I replied, “Son of Oliver and head of state”

He backed away sheepishly. In the battle of knowledge Australia 1 England 0

*-one of my double majors at university was history and I still collect books on the period
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top