Posted on 06/18/2011 3:00:02 PM PDT by bruinbirdman
When he launched a stinging attack on the Coalition government over policies "for which no one voted", the Archbishop of Canterbury put himself squarely in the centre of a political storm.
Critics accused him of political bias, claiming it was a throwback to the days when his predecessors regularly clashed with past Conservative administrations.
But perhaps they should not be too surprised, as it can be revealed that the Archbishop has a long-standing left-wing political past.
The young Rowan Williams was once labelled 'a subversive' by a senior MI5 officer over his involvement with a group of Marxist, Trotskyite and socialist campaigners.
The secret briefing papers were seen by then Prime Minister Baroness Thatcher and circulated to MPs.
Last week Dr Williams, who describes himself as a "lapsed" Labour party member held private talks with Ed Miliband, the leader of the opposition, in the wake of his New Statemsman article which attacked the coalition.
The future head of the Church of England first came to the attention of the Security Service when he helped found a left-wing Christian group during his student days at Oxford University.
He wrote the original manifesto for the Jubilee Group, claiming capitalism was in its death-throes and 'threatens to inflict even greater violence on manking than it has done before'.
Rubbing shoulders with left-wing politicians such as Tony Benn and the late Eric Heffer, he wrote: 'We must make our stand with the oppressed'.
The Jubilee Group was identified as a "problem" neo-Marxist organisation in confidential intelligence documents drawn up by MI5 officer Charles Elwell.
He warned of "the problem of Christian left wing groups" and named the Jubilee Group as "the best known and probably most influential".
Mr Elwell, who died in 2008, spent much of his career investigating left of
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Williams is Grade-A, 100% Clueless Jerk.
The Anglican See has strayed so far. It is a modern tragedy.
Well he *is*! And worae, He’s given his soul over to the Devil, and welcomed the Devils servants into the doors of his sanctum sanctorums.
The sooner he is subjected to the Auto de Fey, and burned at the stake, the better.
And well they should have. Good. They should have publicly said so at the time.
And that is being charitable.
I always knew there was somthing about RW that made me feel uneasy.
Socialist, Marxist......oh man, explains it all.
No, he’s a Communist, pure and simple. Read the “manifesto” he wrote. Pure unadulterated Marxism. He demonstrated against the U.S. nuclear sub base when the Soviet Union was still basically Stalinist. He’s probably more than just a useful idiot, because at that time the “antiwar” Left was funded heavily by the Soviets.
CHAPTER XLVII
OF THE BENEFIT THAT PROCEEDETH FROM SUCH DARKNESS, AND TO WHOM IT ACCRUETH
After that certain Churches had renounced this universal power of the Pope, one would expect, in reason, that the civil sovereigns in all those Churches should have recovered so much of it as (before they had unadvisedly let it go) was their own right and in their own hands. And in England it was so in effect; saving that they by whom the kings administered the government of religion, by maintaining their employment to be in God’s right, seemed to usurp, if not a supremacy, yet an independency on the civil power: and they but seemed to usurp it, inasmuch as they acknowledged a right in the king to deprive them of the exercise of their functions at his pleasure.
But in those places where the presbytery took that office, though many other doctrines of the Church of Rome were forbidden to be taught; yet this doctrine, that the kingdom of Christ is already come, and that it began at the resurrection of our Saviour, was still retained. But cui bono? What profit did they expect from it? The same which the popes expected: to have a sovereign power over the people. For what is it for men to excommunicate their lawful king, but to keep him from all places of God’s public service in his own kingdom; and with force to resist him when he with force endeavoureth to correct them? Or what is it, without authority from the civil sovereign, to excommunicate any person, but to take from him his lawful liberty, that is, to usurp an unlawful power over their brethren? The authors therefore of this darkness in religion are the Roman and the Presbyterian clergy.
http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-k.html#CHAPTERXLVII
Auto Da Fe, what’s an Auto Da Fe? It’s what I oughtn’t to do, but I do anyway. (c) Mel Brooks
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.