Friday, 23 May 2008

Real Politics And Not

By the time that you read this, you will probably know whether or not the Tories have achieved the earth-shattering feat of winning from an allegedly rival, but in fact absolutely identical, party a marginal seat in Cheshire two years before a General Election.

Meanwhile, I have had a day which was not only crowned by a superb dinner under the aegis of one of my SCRs (at which I was seated next to a delightful peeress who regaled me with, among much else, how she used to go round to Prince Charles's room when they were Cambridge undergraduates to try and sell him Marxist periodicals, but he always claimed to have no money with which to buy them), but also included a traditional Latin Mass for those of us determined to keep Corpus Christi on its proper day, attended by more than one former member of the Labour Party. Such former members are very much a feature of traditional Catholic circles, and of several other circles besides...

The strengthening of such ties is real politics. The fake battle between the Tory oligarchy and the politically identical Labour oligarchy is not.


  1. Stop impersonating me!

  2. All a bit quiet around here isn't it? Just had a quick look - not one comment on any of your last 47 posts! And this at a time when you are engaged vigorously in one of the hot issues for a pro war pro family socially conservative party!

    Doesn't really suggest the coming of a new political movement to me.

    Still, I fully expect you to reply that you are having plenty of conversations off the blog, and exchanging emails and correspondence with many senior and influential figures. Surely?

  3. Too right, Jon! If I told you who rang me out of the blue this afternoon (heaven knows where they got the number - I didn't dare ask), then you wouldn't believe me. I can't quite believe it myself. Let's just say that I am feeling a lot more confident than I was this morning.

  4. Martin, that one again, is it?

    I know that you are going to have difficulty grasping this, but our appeal is to people who either couldn't care less what your kind thinks, or else (in very many cases) will actively support anything that you oppose, rightly recognising that anything uttered by the people who lied this country into war must by definition be a lie.

  5. With you on a lot of things, David, but on this Latin Mass thing I do not. The Papacy of JPII was characterised by his efforts to keep the church as ONE, holy, catholic and apostolic. He was criticised for his top down approach, but he did keep the church together at the same time as the Anglican Communion teared, and continues to tear, itself to pieces.

    In his Motu Proprio BXVI has intorduced the potential for a horrific division in the church, by saying that a minority of Latin Mass nuts can go off and worship by themselves, and their priest must support it. There was nothing broken to fix- the church already allowed for latin and the vernacular to be used. He's creating a mess.

    I fear his distaste (which I share) for bad modern music and bad modern liturgy has informed a dislike for the whole post 1962 Liturgy. But he and I know that liturgy is not about us, it's about glorifying God, which we will do best by celebrating a dignified Mass in a tongue we understand in the ONE Universal Church

  6. Indeed, no comments on this post showing on the front page of this blog, even though there are now four, and I've just submitted two for approval.

    You might need to fix your page, David

  7. Patrick, I only go because the daft bishops in this country have moved the Holy Days to the following Sundays.

    And anyway, don't insult our core voters. Not our only ones, but all the same.

  8. Ok, Ok, so the daft bishops moved the Holy Days (and I lose 4 days off work because of it- diocesan workers used to get Holy Days off!)
    and the pope allowed them to do it. I too agree that they should be celebrated at the proper time, not only, but significantly so Catholic Schoolchildren get to celebrate a Mass in school if their parents don't take them of a weekend.

    And I'm sorry, I didn't mean "Latin Mass Nuts" as an insult, though it reads pretty badly. I want them in our Church, that's all, not their own.

  9. Mr Numismatist23 May 2008 at 21:19

    (heaven knows where they got the number - I didn't dare ask)

    Well, it's the work of a few seconds to get hold of your home address, whose initials are FCLCD...

    ...and would I be right in thinking that your number has four zeroes, three twos, two ones, a five and a seven?

    No skulduggery whatsoever - all this information is freely available online in the public domain.

  10. Yes, but this was my mobile phone.

    I'm not suggesting any skulduggery. I always knew that I was only one mutual acquaintance away from this person (several times over, in fact). But I'm in the same position in relation to the Pope, the Queen or George Bush, as are a lot of people. That doesn't mean that I expect them on the blower any time soon.

    This wasn't in that league, obviously. But it was still quite a surprise, to say the least.

  11. I know you and I also know the Pope. I am not the only person in that position, as you know. Perhaps it is time that he knew of you? Several people around him do, as you probably don't know, although I suppose that you might.

    The Prince Charles anecdote is true. He took a keen interest in such matters, but of course he never carried cash.

    I haven't seen him for years, but I am in touch with people who do see him. Your views and his are very close on many matters, and hung Parliaments are going to become more common, bringing into play in the coming decades the monarch's role in choosing a Prime Minister. So, perhaps it is time that he knew of you, too?