ForumGarden

spot;1514818 wrote: After much thought, I have ordered a Santakini in good time for the festive season. There's a pub in town where it will definitely earn me a free pint at the bar. I need a volunteer to take photos for the thread.


Nice to see you have come to terms with it after all those years. Well done.

What I've found over the last year or so is that my disco style is hampered by my increasingly conservative dress sense. Something has to change.

Well done OnePlus!

Android 8 was released four days ago by Google, and it updated onto my phone this morning. That's very pleasing. They'd said "by the end of the year".

spot;1514818 wrote: After much thought, I have ordered a Santakini in good time for the festive season. There's a pub in town where it will definitely earn me a free pint at the bar. I need a volunteer to take photos for the thread.Will it contain all of you?

I had to google that, and I am regretting doing so.

The images will haunt me for weeks.

Ahso!;1515053 wrote: Will it contain all of you?


I got the XXL but even so it's a worry that it won't.

Never click on a link like that.

*Yawn*

Already bored of the Royal engagement.

Betty Boop;1515102 wrote: *Yawn*

Already bored of the Royal engagement.


Another one?

You have to admit that both of them are hot looking. I mean, I'm guessing he is.

Betty Boop;1515102 wrote: *Yawn*

Already bored of the Royal engagement.


Doesn't the poor prince know better than to marry an actress?!! By definition, they are full of drama! It only worked out well one time that I know of, and that's Princess Grace. (Actually, even that one didn't work out well...)

Another odd statement.

Saint_;1515111 wrote: Doesn't the poor prince know better than to marry an actress?!! By definition, they are full of drama! It only worked out well one time that I know of, and that's Princess Grace. (Actually, even that one didn't work out well...)


I see nothing odd about this statement.

Betty Boop;1515102 wrote: *Yawn*

Already bored of the Royal engagement.


I know what you mean.

If you don't mention it again I wont....................................too late you already have.



Bugger they are on the telly again.

I almost hesitate to ask but - are they intending a church wedding? In the Church of England?

I thought there were rules. What's the point of having an Established Church if it makes exceptions.

spot;1515145 wrote: I almost hesitate to ask but - are they intending a church wedding? In the Church of England?

I thought there were rules. What's the point of having an Established Church if it makes exceptions.


I hesitate to ask also.........but, are you implying by marrying in church, rules would be broken.................what rules ?

Divorced people whose ex-spouse is still living. Clergy will ask couples questions such as whether they contributed to the break-up of their first marriages, whether there was enough "distance" from the first marriage and whether the union would cause a scandal.

Clergy must judge whether couples want a church wedding for the right reasons.

Divorcees can now have full church wedding - Telegraph

Who'd be Archbishop of Canterbury, eh?

There are, though I'm not familiar with them, explicit additional rules for members of the Royal Family. One can only assume they're tougher.

Well...............you have just educated me....at least.

Never knew the cutie, butter wouldn't melt , American actress..................had been married before......I imagined would be Princesses are all virgins.

You'd think they'd still be checked by at least five Anglican Bishops before setting out for Westminster Abbey, I'm sure they used to be.

Of course she's been married before, she's American. Americans go in for serial marriages, it's part of a larger contest about who can spend most and die richest. That's why there's lawyers.

SO a money/status grabber gets engaged to a playboy..........I'm with betty......boring. I give it six years. Americans don't like rules and regulations. queen won't like this one. Remember they still say "that woman" the last time an American joined the family.

It only takes one carelessly-dropped cigar end after the Christmas Dinner at Balmoral and she could be Queen of Australia this time next year, you be careful what you say about her.

The Palace has recognized the potential for tribulation within the Church of England and announced they will celebrate a private at-home wedding with maybe a drive-by through the local town to show off their dresses. Very sensible too.

I have a private church in the grounds too, if anyone finds a whimsical need to use it.

I'll clarify the present position, just for fun but with statements of absolutely inerrant facts.

Before the wedding, Ms Markle will first be turned into a Christian. This is achieved by the administration of baptism. This is actually going to happen, I'm not making it up.

After that[1] she must be catechized, and I think Anglican practice demands that she should then be tested on her understanding of the faith by someone with at least the rank of Bishop. I've made none of that up but I concede it might not actually take place, though given it's the Royal Family we're talking about it might.

Thirdly, in her now-informed state, cleansed of her past and original sins and having explicitly renounced Satan[2], she will be welcomed into the Church by a process called Confirmation which takes the form of a church service amid an established congregation. This, also, is really going to happen.

After that she can marry the Prince.

Gretna Green would have been simpler.







[1]: The catechizing of adults may, in the Church of England, be performed (but still as described below) in advance of the baptism itself, in which case the Confirmation can take place the same day. I very much doubt Ms Markle's baptism will be anything other than private but I'm of the opinion that all Confirmations must be public.

[2]: for anyone who may have forgotten the section:

Do you renounce Satan and all the spiritual forces of wickedness that rebel against God?

I renounce them.



Do you renounce the evil powers of this world which corrupt and destroy the creatures of God?

I renounce them.



Do you renounce all sinful desires that draw you from the love of God?

I renounce them.



Do you turn to Jesus Christ and accept him as your Saviour?

I do.



Do you put your whole trust in his grace and love?

I do.

Do you promise to follow and obey him as your Lord?

I do.

Is it after all that when she begins talking with a British accent?

YZGI;1515238 wrote: Is it after all that when she begins talking with a British accent?


There is literally hundreds of British accents, I think you mean received English ?

Bruv;1515240 wrote: There is literally hundreds of British accents, I think you mean received English ?
I think they pronynce a bit up-market from that.

spot;1515234 wrote: I'll clarify the present position, just for fun but with statements of absolutely inerrant facts.

Before the wedding, Ms Markle will first be turned into a Christian. This is achieved by the administration of baptism. This is actually going to happen, I'm not making it up.

After that[1] she must be catechized, and I think Anglican practice demands that she should then be tested on her understanding of the faith by someone with at least the rank of Bishop. I've made none of that up but I concede it might not actually take place, though given it's the Royal Family we're talking about it might.

Thirdly, in her now-informed state, cleansed of her past and original sins and having explicitly renounced Satan[2], she will be welcomed into the Church by a process called Confirmation which takes the form of a church service amid an established congregation. This, also, is really going to happen.

After that she can marry the Prince.

Gretna Green would have been simpler.







[1]: The catechizing of adults may, in the Church of England, be performed (but still as described below) in advance of the baptism itself, in which case the Confirmation can take place the same day. I very much doubt Ms Markle's baptism will be anything other than private but I'm of the opinion that all Confirmations must be public.

[2]: for anyone who may have forgotten the section:

Do you renounce Satan and all the spiritual forces of wickedness that rebel against God?

I renounce them.



Do you renounce the evil powers of this world which corrupt and destroy the creatures of God?

I renounce them.



Do you renounce all sinful desires that draw you from the love of God?

I renounce them.



Do you turn to Jesus Christ and accept him as your Saviour?

I do.



Do you put your whole trust in his grace and love?

I do.

Do you promise to follow and obey him as your Lord?

I do.


I didn't know she'd have to be confirmed. that's weird. I have to admit though, I'm waiting for her first supposed speaking job. See how much posh she suddenly has in her. She is an actress after all. I'm also waiting ( kind of the way you wait with apprehension at a dog fight )for the establishment to rip her to shreds as soon as she wants to do something 'her' way.

Becoming a part of the Church Militant involves being accepted by one's fellow parishioners - Anglican Christianity is a group experience. Confirmation is like standing on a bench to be seen so everyone will know who you are. The congregation doesn't actually have a veto on letting you join, but they're meant to offer a greeting part-way through.

Sounds like my very Catholic experience to me.

Hang on...Anglican? I thought it would be High church of England?

magentaflame;1515286 wrote: Hang on...Anglican? I thought it would be High church of England?


Anglican is another word for a member of the Church of England, here. The church an Anglican attends can be high or low church depending on how much traveling they want to do on Sundays.

spot;1515234 wrote:

: for anyone who may have forgotten the section:

Do you renounce Satan and all the spiritual forces of wickedness that rebel against God?

I renounce them.


Me too.



Do you renounce the evil powers of this world which corrupt and destroy the creatures of God?

I renounce them.


Me too.



Do you renounce all sinful desires that draw you from the love of God?

I renounce them.


Sure...but I'm gonna miss them.



Do you turn to Jesus Christ and accept him as your Saviour?

I do.



Do you put your whole trust in his grace and love?

I do.

Do you promise to follow and obey him as your Lord?

I do.


I do, I do, I do.

It's very like a wedding ceremony, I always thought.

So Britain doesnt want Trump visiting anymore because hes tweeted far right videos?

magentaflame;1515319 wrote: So Britain doesnt want Trump visiting anymore because hes tweeted far right videos?


We never wanted him to visit before that.

Bruv;1515322 wrote: We never wanted him to visit before that.


He could make Great Britain, "Great Great Britain.

YZGI;1515323 wrote: He could make Great Britain, "Great Great Britain.


And he could sell a lot of Chinese made MGBGGBA hats. It just rolls off the tongue...

YZGI;1515323 wrote: He could make Great Britain, "Great Great Britain.


I think they did that already.

But believe me...okay?..they need more great, and only Trump can make it great okay?. Really great! Only Donald can make anything great.

When someone is that conceited its going to be a great load of something lol



But meanwhile on the other side of the world..... we're sandbagging. We have an unprecedented monster storm.....its going to be GREAT!

And i just teared up a bit. (Its moments like these that i wish i had a computer) an artist has been painting murals on huge grain siloes. They are beatiful.

magentaflame;1515319 wrote: So Britain doesnt want Trump visiting anymore because hes tweeted far right videos?


The invitation remains open, but after his tweeting I expect the official itinerary will include a lot of exposure to street crowds.

May did make the point that no date has been set. I reckon that "date" will never arrive.

I also learnt this morning that almost half the diplomatic posts in the white house havent been filled.

Him tweeting far right british nazi videos ....needs diplomats.

I wonder how Americans would feel if he began tweeting KKK videos? Its almost like he knows he cant do that so he'll post other countries crap instead.....but making the same point.

Im hearing a lot of "Trump loyalists" in the media.

As an aside, I just listened to the weather forecast on Radio 4 - the Home Service as was. They're formal, they're precise, they never ever make jokes. The forecast was cold getting colder across the whole country and her final sentence was "Winter is Coming". She deserves a medal.

We're already hot hot hot....with smatterings of cold. ...but thats normal in low summer. But this weekend is going to be interesting. Farmers are ****ting themselves because we havent had enough rain but now a downfall. They are racing against the clock for harvest.

I remember a weatherman shrugging his shoulders and telling everyone to look out their windows. Victorian weather patterns are funny like that. The old saying for Melbourne...."if you dont like the weather ...wait ten minutes. Its so true.

I was writing something today and stopped, looking at the word that I had just used. I had used it thousands of times before, but today it caused me to think and wonder. So I looked up the word "denigrate" in the etymological dictionary. I doubt that I will ever use the word again.

Wandrin;1515486 wrote: I was writing something today and stopped, looking at the word that I had just used. I had used it thousands of times before, but today it caused me to think and wonder. So I looked up the word "denigrate" in the etymological dictionary. I doubt that I will ever use the word again.


You wouldn't sully somone's reputation by blackening it?

It long predates racism, this notion that the angelic host - and God - glows white while the forces of darkness - note the darkness bit - stand opposed to heaven.

You cannot totally repress the knowledge that the word black, in Latin, is niger. The several hundred million people who polluted the word over several centuries and five continents were racist but they weren't Roman.

spot;1515490 wrote: You wouldn't sully somone's reputation by blackening it?

It long predates racism, this notion that the angelic host - and God - glows white while the forces of darkness - note the darkness bit - stand opposed to heaven.

You cannot totally repress the knowledge that the word black, in Latin, is niger. The several hundred million people who polluted the word over several centuries and five continents were racist but they weren't Roman.


Okay, I am positive that I will not be using that particular word.

So you wont use a perfectly good word lile denigrate?.... well i dont speak etymologically so ill call this as i see it.

You would have to cut out most of the words from your vocabulary if youre going to go down that track.

Political correctness going bonkers again.

You know? When a couple of people here call me a. 'Shiela' they may not knowthat it is actually an insult in this day and age. Do i care? No.because its not their intention to insult me.

There are plenty of synonyms I could use without the baggage of that particular word. I would prefer to do that.

Just dont see the point. Like i said youd have to stop using half your words. Its the intent . Remember the definition of etymology also includes 'historical development" of words. If you want the historical development of the word to stop here then go about your business. But not until today did i know anything about its historical content.....and why should i when its not my intent to offend.

Take the word f.u.c.k for example..... never uttered around granny for fear of her having a fainting spell.....these days shes the one to put it into use.

Instead of getting all hyped up over a bunch of letters'markings' put into some kind of grouping to form an audable array of sound ......think about the groupings of children in africa starving presently. Go help them.

Presumably you wont be visiting Nigeria or Niger........Wandrin ?

Okay, I might have over-reacted a bit. My original concern was that my use of the word may cause the reader to misinterpret my intent. It was that simple. I can see that I have complicated the situation by the way I described my thoughts here on FG.

And I would enjoy visiting Niger or Nigeria.