Posted Dec 22, 2001 by pixie
First of all, who was the scarlet whore, and I must apologise for our slander of her. As a Quaker, I hope I am appropriately shame-faced, for now we would eat puddings with delight (which I hear tell we weren't allowed back then either.) He he he! In fact, in order to let bygones be bygones we will make an entire pudding and eat it with relish!
|
 
|  | |
|
|
Posted Dec 23, 2001 by Shazz PRME(emeritus)
With relish?! 
It's much nicer with custard and cream!  
I've no idea who the 'scarlet whore' is/was although I believe that she crops up quite a lot in writings of the time. The Quakers were mild compared to Oliver Cromwell, though. He banned just about anything which could be construed as 'fun'... and an awful lot of things which nowadays constitute worship. 
shazz  
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Dec 25, 2001 by pixie
You're right. Oliver Cromwell was not a party animal. He is in fact one of the reasons (some say the reason) Quakers became pacifist. He was going to go after all of them as "ranters" and a danger to the country. But George Fox convinced him that we would carry no arms and be pacifist, which was the key to not being stamped out. I always wondered why it was such a big deal that William Penn showed up to meeting wearing his sword until I learned that. I love religious history. It is scary and and wonderful at the same time.
I wish you peace and serenity on this blessed night.
pixie
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Dec 25, 2001 by Shazz PRME(emeritus)
Thank you 
shazz
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Dec 2, 2005 by Jabberwock
The Scarlet Whore was probably the Pope.
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Dec 2, 2005 by Jabberwock
...as he wears scarlet robes.
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
Home
Reply
