If you know what you are doing is right …
Tuesday, March 27, 2007 at 09:41AM 
Political Unionism may not die until 8th May but Paisleyism died yesterday.
What is more, I have photographic evidence to prove this – something which, as a UTV journalist pointed out, was lacking in relation to the IRA’s alleged decommissioning.
Everything that Dr Paisley ever stood for, religiously and politically, went up in a puff of very unholy smoke yesterday and I believe that when a man sacrifices his principles for power the only word to use is tragic.
Sadly I cannot say, like David, that I never voted DUP but I am thankful that he allows me to use this platform to air my views.
I don’t think the English language contains the words necessary to convey my disgust but I will say that I utterly repudiate and reject what happened yesterday and I denounce all involved. It literally made me feel sick.
That, however, was not Mrs Paisley’s reaction.
Her ladyship was interviewed on Radio Ulster this morning and she claimed that although the decision her husband took was difficult, “If you know what you are doing is right, you have to do it no matter who is shouting at you”.
Are you not aware that Dr Paisley spent his whole life throwing snowballs and shouting at Unionist leaders for meeting Irish Prime Ministers and sharing power with the likes of Gerry “the Brit” Fitt?
If your husband is right now, he has been wrong for thirty years.
Do you not remember things like this?
If you don’t, everybody else does.
Love, it seems, is not just blind. It also has a very adverse affect on the memory.
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (41)
Important fact to remember Samuel is that, OK political/traditional Unionism/Paisleyism may well be dead, but the Union is still with us and will remain so until the majority in NI (not on the mainland, not in the ROI) vote otherwise.
The reasons Dr Paisley and the DUP have given over the years for the retention of the Union are no longer applicable in Northern Ireland 2007. Perhaps a third of the electorate are prepared to vote for Unionist parties at each election, that's still a few tens of thousands of votes more than the nationalist ones, but not enough to rely on to win a Border Referendum.
The future argument for the Union needs to be made on solid objective (economic and social grounds) instead of relying on communal loyalty which Paisley and Co have always done and despite the bluster from Nationalists, the economic case for us staying within the UK is as strong, if not stronger, than for that of joining the ROI. If the economic case for a UI was so strong, then Nationalists would be delivering up independent analysis of the economic effects of a UI- at this present moment they are frightened of doing this because of the effect of such figures would have on their case.
But we need a post-Paisley, secular, clear-headed unionism that can deliver those arguments.Having Paisley and the rest of the fundamentalists shuffling out of the argument up to Stormont, may give the rest5of us a chance for a bit more long-term thinking and planning without him and his minions bellowing "Lundy" down our lugholes every 5 minutes.
Not the end of the battle by any means....
Changed times require change in attitudes. It's called "moving on". As I said before, let's wait and see how this goes.
Maybe Dr Paisley will mess up, maybe Dr Adams will. They can be voted out you know.
"Changed times require change in attitudes. It's called "moving on". As I said before, let's wait and see how this goes."
We should never forget that SF/IRA are a gang of murdering thugs who should be in jail, not government.
Nothing Adams said suggested to me that he was sorry for all the deaths.
"Nothing Adams said suggested to me that he was sorry for all the deaths."
That's because he considered he was fighting a war, albeit a guerrilla one where other rules applied. He considered the IRA victims as regrettable war victims. I'm not saying he's right, but by his lights he need not say he's sorry.
And let's not forget that Paisley never said he's sorry for inciting men to violence.
Then he is still an unrepentant terrorist.
Sean,
If he is right now he has an awful lot of things to say sorry for.
as an outsider looking at ireland i would say that one part looks economically. politically (and to a lesser extent socially) successful, and the other part does not. Guess which part is the indepentent part and which is the British part. Also, as a Scot i disagree that the UK is beneficial for anyone other than the South of England. The recent budget being a case in point. The cut in higher rate corporation tax will benefit the large multinationals in the south east (mainly London), which will be paid for by an increase in the lower rate corporation tax on smaller businesses that are more common in places like Scotland. Ultimately you need control of economic policy to really benefit you own community.
"Then he is still an unrepentant terrorist."
On that we agree!
<Q>A top heavy government</Q>
It’s a rotten deal, my friends. Sorry to be the man in the Bateman cartoons, but Northern Ireland deserved better than this.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/danielhannan/mar2007/government.htm
<Q>Not that the people of the Province are alone in having lost interest in the details. In Great Britain, too, and in the Republic or Ireland, bromides about “peace” and “power-sharing” smothered any serious debate about the mechanics of the deal.</Q>
I quite agree with your post. When someone preaches one thing for fifty-odd years, and founds a church based on the principle of separation from evil, and then goes and does exactly the opposite of what he has always preached - you have to wonder what it was all for.
I'm a Free Presbyterian. If this is the way things are to be from now on, I cannot envisage staying within the denomination for much longer. In one fell swoop, Dr Paisley has made a laughing stock of the entire stand and basis of our church.
And, in political terms, he has transformed Ulster into the political equivalent of Zimbabwe - a banana republic, run by communist terrorists and their quislings.
The one whose economy which looks successful would find it more difficult that the Uk's exchequer to keep NI in the manner to which it has become accustomed-the 5 billion required annually to keep us up and running is a lot less divided between a population of 55 million taxpayers than a population of 5(?)million taxpayers. If a UI happened tomorrow, we'd be looking at higher income taxes and widespread public-sector redundancies.
Put simply, the structural problems of the NI economy will not solved by a simple switch to a UI and until we can find such a solution then for the population of NI, remaining with the UK (which can afford us) rather than the ROI(which can't) remains the best solution.
I wonder though paul, if NI is ever to become at all self sufficient, if any of the above can be avoided.
A lower capital gains tax alone will not be enough to bring NI back in to good economic health. There's no point getting loads of revenue from capital gains tax if your public expenditure bill is too high.
The ROI didnt just drop capital gains tax and wait for the cash to roll in. It cut expenditure dramatically on hospitals, schools and other such infrastructure.
It could be that NI has this in front of it. A modern Union will have to be economically sound, surely means that the days of south east england subsidising the rest of the UK must surely be on the way out. With the rise of English nationalism, this will become more and more of an issue.
I do agree with the trust of your argument, in that just because the ROI is doing well now, doesnt necessarily provide an argument in favour of a UI. The economic argument in favour of a UI, is based on a UI being more economically beneficial in the long run
Only now that he is no longer exclusively playing the secretarian card is he unacceptable? Hardly. And even at his age, he has time to interject more venom into the process. He is living proof that only the good die young.
I am a member of Sinn Féin, should I be in jail?
"He has interrrupted a lifetime of hate and self-interest with brief moments of humanity, and said moments have been far too infrequent for a man who proclaims himself a man of God."
So how does this square with what John wrote about Paisley founding "a church based on the principle of separation from evil"?
A matter of do as I say not as I do?
I am a member of Sinn Féin, should I be in jail?
Chris,
If you have done the sort of things the future DFM has done then yes:)
My fault, I put that badly. I agree entirely with YOU. I had problems with John's assertion that Paisley founded a Church based on Christian values, when he's on record as having tossed them aside on numerous occasions.
I too was a Free P but have chosen to leave the Church based on the immorality of its Moderator and the silence from the local pulpits. (Ivan Foster being a decent man and an exception. I await others to clarify)
What a great witness to sinners who attended those Gospel meetings!! A 'preacher' using a Gospel service to preach politics and denounce Ian Paisley. The same Ian Paisley who is undoubtably more in touch with God than Foster!
Exactly and precisely correct.
Funny, one of those brief moments may have been a number of years back, at Belfast Airport. My Donegal-resident aunt was struggling with a large suitcase. A large, gruff man came alongside her, picked up the bag, brought it down the hall, gave it back, and marched on ahead. She's pretty sure that it was Paisley.
What about those who hold services of thanksgiving for election victories or say “We will not sit down today or tomorrow or any other time with IRA/Sinn Fein full stop” from their pulpit as a certain person did after the 2005 election?
“What a great witness to sinners who attended those Gospel meetings!!”
What were the DUPs options, in your opinion once they became the biggest party ?
What were your expectations from them. Were you prepared for them to go into government at some stage with SF, once some set of conditions were imposed ?
What would these conditions have been ?
Or were you expecting the DUP to pull the whole thing down ?
In retrospect I think I was foolish but I expected them to, as they said in their 2005 manifesto, go for a more accountable form of direct rule.
They ruled out mandatory coalition with SF/IRA and I didn't expect them to ever form a voluntary one.
I will never accept them in government.
That may not be politically realistic but it is how I feel none the less.
"A 'preacher' using a Gospel service to preach politics AND DENOUNCE IAN PAISLEY."
and also...
"For the past month, Foster has used his pulpit and Gospel services to openly criticse Paisley!"
I do not like politics being brought into the House of God at all - and you are correct, Paisley has been guilty of this also! (And for the record, I do not view Paisley as some sort of infallible man - just a preacher who is in touch with God!) However, I cannot remember Paisley ever completely denouncing another Minister of the same Church like Foster has done. For Ivan Foster to condemn a preacher who has seen thousands won for Christ is nothing short of pathetic.
Too much political weight was against the DUP though Samuel. Once they became the largest political party, things had to change surely. Its a lot easier to make throw away comments and to pick away at the process from the sidelines when your a marginal party in much the same way that opposition parties do in the chambers of government.
SF are at the centre of the process and there was no way that the governments were ever going to go back to square one to form a process which didnt involve SF.
The DUP were on a direct path to going into government with them from the very time that voters started to leave the UUP and transfer to the DUP, the only difference was that they probably expected more return for this eventuality
Just picked up your comment from earlier, directed at me. Listen, Ian Paisley has indeed helped people find God and that is a great and noble thing. So has Ivan Foster. But MY point is that Paisley has now embraced evil, sups with it and it is the duty of every Christian to point this out and CASTIGATE him for it. After all, it WAS Paisley who preached that come ye out from amongst them...now he sits in their midst. Without meaning to be harsh, I choose to use the terms Paisley himself has for decades. He has departed from the path of truth, he has chosen the earthly rewards of being First Minister, in short he is little more than a political whore. If you want to dole it out, learn to take it.
Two verses. Read them, think about them and pray over them. Then ask yourself, is it right to follow a man without question? Also, read the front page of this morning's News Letter.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=55&chapter=2&verse=11&version=9&context=verse
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=24&chapter=27&verse=6&version=9&context=verse
I have nothing further to say to you.
"The same Ian Paisley who is undoubtably more in touch with God than Foster!"
Eh? No doubt at all? How could you possibly know? Did you overhear them? How did God sound? Is it true that he speaks like Charleton Heston? :0)
Isn't this what they used to call "holier than thou"?
The Bible speaks to us on this:
"It is better to trust in the Lord Than to put confidence in man. It is better to trust in the Lord Than to put confidence in princes" (Psalm 118:8,9).
"Do not put your trust in princes, Nor in a son of man, in whom there is no help" (Psalm 146:3).
"No one calls for justice Nor does any plead for truth. They trust in empty words and speak lies; They conceive evil and bring forth iniquity" (Isaiah 59:4).
"He has departed from the path of truth, he has chosen the earthly rewards of being First Minister, in short he is little more than a political whore."
Departed from the path of truth? Really? Despite him emphasising that he has been led by God in the matter? To say he choose the 'rewards' of becoming First Minister is nothing short of anti-Paisley, fanatical speculation! Ian Paisley has already enough reputation in this world to be firmly engraved into history books - so, to claim he wants the position to boost his own ego is strange! I really doubt that Paisley wants to be remembered as the man who stood against Sinn Fein for most of his life, only to sit down with them at the 11th hour! From what I gather, Paisley hasn't done this lightly, and it's only come with much prayer and communion with God.
Samuel,
If you wish, I will pray over those verses and will humbly admit and apologise to you if I am led to feel that Paisley is wrong. I can do no more.
However, I ask that you also, would take Numbers Chapter 12 into prayer and consideration. As I said in my own blog post, there are many Christians taking the attitude of Aaron and Miriam - 'God speaks through us too, and Paisley is wrong'.
Dawkins,
Not the infamous atheist Richard Dawkins, are you? I don't know if you're saved or not. But if you listen to these two men preach - it's pretty evident for itself! Why don't you try one of Paisley's sermons, see what you think? Try the link below!
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?currSection=sermonsspeaker&sermonID=6860
1. To claim he is led by God to embrace evil is risible. I would suggest that he is indeed being led -but by another darker force.
2. Paisley's reputation, which you claim to be secured, has being of a nay-sayer. Now he has swapped being Dr No for Dr Yes. I wonder why it is right to say yes when he campaigned alongside me under the "It's right to say NO" banner. MMM...LET ME THINK, he wasn't in a position to be First Minister then.
3. The Free Presbyterian Church is in a moral crisis. It either accepts a Moderator who compromises with evil so invalidating itself as a Church of God or it condemns its Moderator. I wonder will the Church put its faith in God, or in Paisley? Perhaps the doctrine of separation is outdated?
4. Whether Paisley has done this lightly or not is utterly irrelevant. The fact is he has done it, and he has sold out his principles for a mess of pottage.
"But if you listen to these two men preach - it's pretty evident for itself!"
You might want to look at the meaning of the word "evident". Just because a man gives a good speech it's no indication that he's "in touch with God".
I knew a man just like that: swore God spoke to him, almost convinced those around him. He's doing fine now in the institution, takes his largactyl without complaint, and smiles a lot.
So I take it you didn't hear God speak to Paisley?
These are great verses for all to consider! But, I must point out to you that the New King James Version of the Bible is highly errant and dangerous!! Have a look at - http://www.av1611.org/nkjv.html
Since I am not a politician and have no influence in the outcome of events on this island, I must trust that God will use His servant to carry out His will. The Word of God has told us to pray for those in power...and I have no doubt that a multitude of people have prayed for Paisley! God has also promised to answer prayers according to His will.
I contest your first point! To claim that a man who has been used mightily by God for many decades, is now being led by the devil...is risible!
Paisley's reputation, whatever way YOU want to interpret it... will go down as a man who said NO for most of his life, and then said YES. Now, the older you get, the more stubborn you get - For Paisley to make such a dramatic U-turn just to gain the title of 'Firt Minister' is nonsense. It takes a humble man to have his mind changed after so long and I've never heard of a humble man being in cahoots with the devil!
Your third point, I agree with in part. The Free Presbyterian Church is in moral crisis - but I believe that's for other reasons, which it seems are beyond Paisley's control! To me, the question is - Will the DUP supporters in Free Presbyterianism, consider themselves to be much wiser and dump Paisley?
This is something that is difficult to explain, especially as you seem to be unsaved...or at least, make no effort to say you are saved.
However, to put it simply - The true, born-again Christian is able to discern the Holy Spirit working through a man.
Have you tried listening to that Paisley sermon yet?
Do you believe that Paisley is beyond temptation? Is he man, or god?
It takes a humble man to admit he was wrong, and I hope all those men who put their trust in Paisley will now in all humility see their folly.
The Free Presbyterian Church, and the Church in Corinth back at the time of Paul, have much in common.
I have already made it clear in another reply in this post that I DO NOT in any way, shape or form, believe Paisley to be some sort of infallible man or pope! Paisley is not beyond temptation, but a man walking with God will be able to endure temptation more than a man who is without him. Having heard and seen Paisley recently (and I'm not talking about TV pictures) - I do believe that he is walking with God!
If Paisley be wrong, I will come back to this website and write an entire post apologising if you wish. Does that sound fair? I must go, but I will reply later if you wish to leave another response!
I'd have got back to you sooner but I was away. Let me try to answer your questions.
"This is something that is difficult to explain, especially as you seem to be unsaved...or at least, make no effort to say you are saved."
Yes, I'm saved, thanks to my parents. Themselves full-blown atheists, they saved their offspring from Christianity and other superstitions. I'll always be grateful to them for this. Other atheists of my acquaintance had to first travel the hard road of religious inculcation before seeing the light of reason.
"However, to put it simply - The true, born-again Christian is able to discern the Holy Spirit working through a man."
I'm glad for him or her. There's no chance of it being, er, self-delusion, no?
"Have you tried listening to that Paisley sermon yet?"
It was rather vintage, so I downloaded his latest, recorded on 25 March, entitled "The Impossible Curse". I thought at first it was somebody like John McBlain doing his wonderful Paisley impersonation. But no, it was the Rev himself, sounding like a parody of himself. You couldn't invent this stuff :0)
Last year I attended a revivalist meeting in Mississippi, where the preacher was awesome. He was twice as good as Paisley but here's the thing: he was entertaining as well. Great fun.
And the Gospel choir. Man! You had to be there. Paisley and the Free Prezzies should swing by Mississippi and hear how it should be done.