Thread: Mafia issue #7 Skrull Invasion [GAME OVER] SKRULLS WIN! Embrace change...

Originally Posted by Woofness

that doesn't make any sense

I should clarify that I had the House of Lords in mind, and the setting is the 16th, 17th, or 18th century.

Originally Posted by sycld

I didn't.

The next one should be an intrigue about Papist or Calvinists assassinating Members of Parliament faithful to the Church of England and the crown.

Originally Posted by sycld

I should clarify that I had the House of Lords in mind, and the setting is the 16th, 17th, or 18th century.

Calvinists? You mean the presbyterian swiss reformation-inspired Scots?
First. 16thC doesn't come into it. The Scots and English are two seperate nations until James in 1603 and prior to that they loved having that bastard whore bess on the english throne (they're not affected by the act of uniformity). If you go back as far as Mary Tudor then Protestantism hasn't taken much hold of Scotland and they still have their own Catholic Queen.
They wouldn't have killed James or harmed his parliament, he was a protestant, and a scottish protestant at that; and once we get onto charles I and his high anglicanism going on crypto-catholicism we find that the scots and parliament are in agreement in wanting him gone.
Once they sold old charlie one up the river to the established church and parliament they were pretty much permanent buddies to puritan (later whiggish, much the same thing) England
If you are looking for real opposition to pre- or post-protectorate england then it's catholics or bust

I think that is what woofness meant
otherwise I like the flavour, but I would

Originally Posted by Think

blah blah

UGH alright so apparently I wasn't precise enough for Think.

16th, 17th, or 18th century for Papist assassins of members of the House of Lords.

17th century for Calvinist assassins of the members of the House of Lords.

If you say, " Well Puritans aren't quite Calvinists blah blah blah," then I'll say, "I'm not sarmt enough 2 no the diffarance "

Originally Posted by Think

I think that is what woofness meant
otherwise I like the flavour, but I would

What woofness meant was probably, "Why would modern Catholics want to kill members of the modern House of Commons?"

And your last sentence really added a lot of heady stuff to the discussion.



I was just being facetious with this whole thing anyway. I don't really care.