Ivan Foster on Ian Paisley
Amid the general eulogies and accolades being given to Dr. Paisley now he is standing down there have been dissenting voices; Jim Allister has decried Paisley’s legacy. In the Impartial Reporter (you need to register but it is free) Ivan Foster gives an interview about Dr. Paisley. Whilst personally, despite my religious views, I come at anti agreement unionism from a secular position and would not share all of Rev. Foster’s other views either; I find his analysis of how Paisley’s religious views led him into politics interesting:“In the early days of political activity, others were putting spiritual activities into the political realm. We were being forced by Terence O’Neill and others who were putting ecumenism into practice by promoting better relations with Republicanism. They wanted to forget the past in the spiritual realm; forgetting the past teaching of reformers. We rejected this new unity based on old falsehood,”
Foster notes: “It was Ian Paisley who constantly quoted Luke chapter six: ‘Woe unto you when all men speak well of you.’ For those of us who lived through the O’Neill must go days all this is like a déjà vu in reverse.”
And the final comment seems spoken more in sorrow than anger: “the days of conversions, of God’s people separating from the apostasy of the ecumenical churches.”
Although I would not agree with all of what Ivan Foster says and I suspect many of you will be much less supportive; I think it is worth a read if people want a further understanding of some of the views present amongst some fundamentalists in Northern Ireland. It also illustrates that there are significantly divergent views amongst such people and within their organisations. Alternatively you may wish to denounce me as a bigoted idiot; it will be neither the first nor I deem the last time.
‘Incidentally, many Fundmentalists including myself would go further and separate from the Orange Order and “Band Parades” that purport to share religious beliefs in common but clearly do not do so by their lifestyles. Rev Ivan Foster, to my knowledge, is also of this belief – the downfall for Ian Paisley was that he was not and this became an increasingly big problem for him.’
So are we to believe from the above that as long as Paisley was preaching ‘hate’ against Catholics he was’nt a problem as this particular ‘lifestyle’ choice did not upset ‘fundamentalists’ ? But as soon as he Paisley started to adopt what some would call a more Christian and open approach to his Catholic fellow countrymen and their political representatives then he Paisley had erred from the ‘true ‘ faith and had to be cast out ?
As for Paisley’s lifestyle ? Surely the Rev Foster must have had a doubt or two during the past 40 years ? Or was it just since Paisley had a chuckle with the Great Satan McGuinness ?
You may perchance have come across the term GUBU.
It stands for
Grotesque, Unbelievable , Bizarre, Unprecedented .
and it surely applies to those who at this late hour now only find Paisley in ‘error’
I would have thought Paisley was in error from about the time he went into politics ! Still he’s made a pile of money from both !
‘If you want to broaden it, then show me statistical evidence for any of the countries you have stated that has shown a decrease in crime, murder, rape over the last 2 centuries as their societies have “evolved.” ‘
As it’s off topic I don’t want to broaden it but would like to make just a few points in this area.
Firstly statistical evidence is not available for most of the past two centuries . It is assumed by some commentators that modern secularism is in some way reponsible for increasing crime rates in western countries and the breakdown of family life, much higher divorse rates , abortion etc etc in recent decades . I’m not denying there may be some truth in that assumption.
Certainly when we contrast Irish society in 2008 say with that of 1950 we see higher murder and crime rates . But go back to Victorian times and murder rates were much higher and so too were crime rates . So full were the prisons of the UK and Ireland that penal colonies were established in Georgia (USA) and later in Australia / Van Diemens land to draw off the surplus ‘criminal ‘ population . Any social history of Britain during the Industrial Revolution will show a country of vast differences in wealth between the few aristocrats and an emerging middle class and the vast majority of industrial workers and driven from the land ex cottiers . The prison population was of course drawn mostly from the poorest sections of society . No different from now.
What I’m saying here is that there is a relationship between poverty / relative poverty and crime rates and this applies all over the western world . Recent anthropological evidence indicates that the formerly so called ‘peaceful’ societies of stone age hunter gatherers were in fact a lot less peaceful and had much higher murder rates than the worst inner city areas in major American cities .
There may be a perception that ‘secularism ‘ and the growing absence of the
‘fear of God’ among the younger generation is behind the recent rise in crime rates . I’m suggesting it’s a lot more complex than that .
BTW – I consider myself a social conservative and am not a proponent of abortion on demand. I also happen to believe in marriage complete with marriage license for both parties and any future children’s protection . While we differ very much as regards both our attitudes to religion I’d say we are not very far apart in our attitude to social and economic issues .
As Mr Paisley has only an honorary PhD, he is not entitled to be titled. Call it Mr Paisley, not Dr Paisley.
I don’t think it’s an honorary one.