xhosa2000
Posts : 1186
Join date : 2015-11-24
 | Subject: What did the Church do with Colenso ?.  Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:02 am | |
| PostSubject: Re: What the Church did with Colenso. Sat Nov 14, 2015 8:24 am Reply with quote littlehand wrote: 1880 Edition [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Many thanks, Littlehand, for this link. (Although not intended for myself, but being on an open forum, I did have a look at it. Not judging or anything and I do hope you won't mind if I may offer something of an opinion on this.
I done a wee bit of reading up on the good lady who wrote the article and taking into account that children are often well affected by the tutorings and guidance of their parents amongst others, particularly in relation to the specific time period and area concerned, and would like to offer the following view and perhaps caution? Please do forgive me if I offend or seem impertinent as that is not my wish. Not to say that you do not apply caution, but rather to discover if I am on the right path myself.
It would seem that Lady Colenso was the daugter of Bishop Colenso of the Church of England. The Bishop was more than a bit at odds, it would seem, with the Church he represented. In fact, so much so that there was quite a stir and official publications were even presented to challenge and discount his views, which same views he was most likely teaching. One of the better known differences was his teaching on the "Two Adams". Whilst I am not intending to wade into all of that as it will detract from my current focus of Isandlwana, I do find that his behaviour was to my mind a little worth considering as it is such that we voften instill in our children.
Personally, I wonder why the Bishop, if he so disagreed with those who appointed him, did not step down from his appointment if he so disagreed? In conclusion, I find that I might be wiser to consider the writings etc of his daughter keeping this in mind? Adding to this, perhaps there is more reason to be cautious as the book, if I am not mistaken, has one primary objective which is to claim and support that Durnford, whom I believe she was in love with, was innocent?
Please, again, accept my apologies if I am "out of line" with this. I would like to hear your views and response and no need to use kid gloves if you are so inclined.
With due respect
ArthurI find the above slightly interesting Mr Arthur Wright, and i hope you are still around?. i can spare the time to engage with you on the above, could you please respond, in first person..with any direct observations/ questions you might have. i found the above a little vague.. The fruit does not roll far away from the tree, i'm guessing was the main conclusion one is supposed to draw from your post.. and a rather clumsy attempt to infer that ' the father was dodgy..then the daughter must be too'. have i got that right?. hope to hear from you soon.. warmest. xhosa2000 |
|
Home 
Search 
Register 
Log in 
