Read on Twitter
Ok, this is all kinds of weird.
1. Thomas Becket was not an advocate of religious liberty, just of clerical immunity from secular law. More here: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23645138?seq=1
2. Neither Becket nor his Church were anything but hostile to Jews: https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1450257.pdf
1. Thomas Becket was not an advocate of religious liberty, just of clerical immunity from secular law. More here: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23645138?seq=1
2. Neither Becket nor his Church were anything but hostile to Jews: https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1450257.pdf
(Contd) Proclamation: Becket’s “stand, after centuries of state-sponsored religious oppression and religious wars throughout Europe, eventually led to the establishment of religious liberty in the New World.”
Becket died in 1170; the religious wars in Europe were 400 yrs later.
Becket died in 1170; the religious wars in Europe were 400 yrs later.
3. The bizarre suggestion that Becket came after religious wars etc, may just be bad writing—Hopefully the WH has a staffer who knows that the Reformation and the religious wars in Europe came way later than Becket.
4. This thing makes Anouilh look like a serious historian.
4. This thing makes Anouilh look like a serious historian.
Finally, who writes “In my historic address to the United Nations last year...” (or, indeed, to any body) without guffawing?
