Westminstenders: Stuck in the twilightzone

[RedToothBrush]

Just want to remind everyone if what really matters and what the priority if Theresa May is.

May isn't interested in a new referendum. There is barely time to hold one, and anyone remotely interested in one, isn't named Theresa May. Forget it. Its not happening.

Nor are Brexit talks the most important thing. Whilst Jeremy Corbyn seems finally to be playing with some sort if EEA type solution he's not the one named Theresa May. If she doesn't want one, then it won't happen.

May does seem to favour something along these lines but she has to sell it to her party. If she ends up relying on the support of Labour to push it through against what her party want, then that doesn't end well for her or her party. So Corbyn seeming to squeeze her here isn't necessarily a good thing. It could push her to no deal.

Why?

Cos petty party politics.

THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT THING, and don't forget this, is the EU withdrawal Bill. As it stands, May has to concentrate her efforts on this. If it doesn't pass by the art 50 deadline then we have legal chaos. May isn't big on the courts, but I'm not sure she would want that situation either. It would be even more unthinkable than queues at Dover coupled with food shortages.

If it doesn't pass, and the Lords will do all they can to delay and obstruct as long as they can, May's only option is to beg for an art 50 extension. Which the EU might not be inclined to give. Which might leave us in a situation where our only option is to revoke a50.

The only predictable thing, is this will be last minute brinkmanship.

All the talk of a second ref is a distraction. Talk of Labour's position at this point, is all about positioning for the next election and not about Brexit at all.

So try to keep your eyes on what really matters and what battles are May's big ones and which are merely side shows.

I wonder who Side Show Bob will turn out to be.

DD not on that panel, but am referring to the one where he is doing the cunning and guffawing dolt impression. Am being delighted by Hunt on the other panel. Not.

The UK has always had a problem with Catholicism. As someone brought up as one, I was fully aware I wasn't deemed good enough for the Royal Family . Which, whilst minor, did foster a feeling of not feeling completely English, slightly outside etc. The concept of "Englishness" seems a bit other to me.

Re IDS and his "Catholicism" (from wiki)

"On 3 July 2015, a group of over "70 leading Catholics" wrote to Duncan Smith asking him to rewrite his policies to make them more in line with Catholic and Christian values. The writers stated that whilst they believed he wanted to improve lives, they believed his policies were having the opposite effect and they asked him to rethink and abandon further damaging cuts.[56]"

It only takes 10 mins every couple of days if that

If YouGov deem your views fit with their sample. I hardly ever get asked about Brexit.

Yes MissMoon there were some very odd questions including one like do you think it's the role of government to slavishly implement the will of the people or to give advice and guidance - something like that. Weird.

Horse. stable. Door .Bolted.
But still worth participating I think. You allegedly get £50 if you answer questions between now and eternity!

The UK has always had a problem with Catholicism.

Well, only since the reformation was adopted by the Tudors. And the establishment of the Church of England. England was even majority RC during Lizzie I, I believe. But huge fines for non attendance at CoE's services and RC's who adhered committing treason rather than heresy was a good stick to encourage the adoption of protestantism.

England had been Catholic/Christian for nigh on 800 years. Rejected the Celtic interpretation. The power was in Rome.

Did anyone catch R4 this morning, just before 9am ?

They were interviewing the Irish Taosiach (I spelled that from memory).

What a well briefed, intelligent, reasonable and personable man - certainly on EU matters in as much as they pertain to Brexit.

When he was challenged over whether Ireland would "use it's veto" on any final deal, he chamingly pointed out that's not the way we do things in the EU, we work by building a consensus

He also (gently I thought) pointed out that the EU will be 27 countries and 450 million people ... just in case anyone wonders who has teh whip hand.

I was also impressed by his handling the question of the upcoming abortion referendum which made the interviewers (can't recall who) binary yes/no attitude seem crude and provocative. (Leastways, I got the point).

If we are going to mention British religion, it's worth noting that prior to the Synod of Nicaea, there was already a thriving Christian community in Britain - long before Augustus. Which was suppressed - if not eliminated - in order to have "one true" Catholic church.

"And did those feet..." and all that.

That was an English decision to recognise the primacy of the Roman church, wasn't it DG? Mithras, Druidism and Norse goddies and goddesses were contemporaneous with the earlier presence of pockets of Christianity in Britain. NI (as with the rest of Ireland) Christian as a job lot earlier, methinks. GB later as a job lot of Christianity.

Something along the lines of kings being anointed by God must have given quite an appeal to the adoption of Christianity by rulers.

When the Normans arrived they were shocked and horrified by the paganism of Anglo Saxon Christianity and worked to stamp out the cultural practices in favour of the the official roman line.

As DGRossetti says Christianity had been around in Britain before Augustine arrived in the 6th century and it just sort of organically evolved into it's own creature, particular to Britain, over the centuries ... until the Normans came...

That was an English decision to recognise the primacy of the Roman church, wasn't it DG?

... is one view - the sanitised winners view. It was done at sword point, and quickly eradicated.

But then it supported women priests, so had to go.

When the Normans arrived they were shocked and horrified by the paganism of Anglo Saxon Christianity and worked to stamp out the cultural practices in favour of the the official roman line.

Funny, I never saw the Normans as devout, or particularly religious. All those stone cathedrals were a reminder of the iron fist. As subsequent generations of English learned, Norman rulership was intended to include the church ...Henry II

All those stone cathedrals were a reminder of the iron fist.

Along similar lines, Welsh pride in their towering castles, strategically imposed upon them by the English, always makes me smile.

DGRosetti I have also been impressed by the Irish Taoisesch. He spoke in the EU parliament last week and this piece was a response to Nigel Farsgw - worth a watch
www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/varadkar-calls-for-european-unity-but-not-on-tax-rates-1.3358630

Iona was a centre of Celtic Christianity for centuries. Founded by Columcille and assorted monks of the Irish church (Columba the latinised form). Wouldn't it's connection have been first and foremost with Ireland, not with the southern part of Britain. More the Gaels and Picts. Would it's influence have spread down south? I thought this was the clash. The southern crowd were more into the Roman church.

Of course Aidan (from the Irish church as well) was credited with the founding of the Abbey at Lindisfarne, but don't know how far south his influence went.

Soz, red. won't divert.

I find it difficult to believe there really is any legal reason we can't have a Catholic - or for that matter - a Jewish or Muslim PM
particularly in one of the least religious countries in the world
(Disraeli converted to C of E before even becoming an MP iirc, but that was in the 19th century)

afaik, the only issue would be that a Catholic / Muslim / Jewish / Flying Spaghetti Monster advise the Queen on the appointment of Anglican Bishops
So, a non-CofE PM would simply delegate that religious hangover and get on with their political duties in running the country

Also, there seems nothing to stop agnostics or atheists becoming PM and very probably some have.

The monarch still has to be C of E until a brave PM - so not TMay - finally decides on disestablishment.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/27/theresa-may-conservatives-warning-revolt?CMP=share_btn_tw
Theresa May told: raise your game in three months or face revolt
Senior Tories have given the prime minister a deadline amid concerns she is leading party to ‘utter destruction’

I am not sure it was as simple as out with the old, in with the new, and conquest by fire and sword, etc. Gregory the Great (590-604), who sent Augustine to establish the Roman secular church in Britain was anxious that Roman Christianisation be accomplished in steps, and advised that old Pagan feasts be subsumed into Christian holy days, saint's days, etc.

The two Christianising influences in Britain at that time were the Irish monks (bringing with them a version of monasticism that owed much to the Desert Fathers) from the north/west and Augustine from the south/east, with the pagan Britons and Anglo Saxons squeezed in the middle.

The dating of Easter was a contentious point among these parties but there were others too. At the time, relations between the Anglo-Saxons and the native Britons were fraught, which complicated relations between the various church parties. The tides of tenuous Christianity and paganism ebbed and flowed with secular rulers' fortunes in the early pre Norman period. Overall, the church as established by Augustine and his successors followed the secular model that was well established in Italy and was being developed in the west of continental Europe apart from Ireland (whose time would eventually come however) though after the Norman conquest, European monasticism (Cluniacs, Cistercians and Augustinians) would emerge.

The arrival of the Normans gave an impetus to the development of the state apparatus in general, with the church subsumed into this development and in some ways an essential element of it. Norman Christianity emphasised the secular church apparatus (the hierarchical structure and direct ministry to the flock). The development of church governance structures accompanied the Norman reformation of state apparatus and political relationships, with defined dioceses, deaneries, church courts, etc. The monasteries continued to grow alongside the strengthening of the secular apparatus.

But even in Augustine's time, the trend toward centralisation and tightening of administration was under way. Codification of the law under Justinian in Constantinople was an example that inspired many. The position of king thus gained the attribute of lawgiver, a quantum leap from warlord and distributor of booty. Many strands fed each other, with an overall pattern of increasingly ambitious and efficient administration.

There were controversies once Gregory VII became pope and tried to implement some reforms. In particular he struggled with Henry I on the matter of appointment of bishops. (In general the question of papal supremacy over matters ecclesiastical dragged on for several hundred years in England and saw the assassination of Thomas à Becket as a milestone along the way). Anselm of Canterbury was Gregory's point man, and he spent time in exile as a result.

Post Norman continental monastic movements (Cluniacs, Cistercians, and Augustinians) fit well into the landscape. In this there was continuity with the pre Norman Christian world. The monasteries eventually fell to that most interesting revolution, the Henrician Reformation.

Ffs, talk about grasping at bloody straws and writing utter clap trap.

I am inclined to agree with your verdict on the Telegraph comments, Red.

I agree with Lala's comment too:
Their religious faith, seemed to me, a badge of their own reactionary pedigree, rather than a spiritual awakening

Is it me, or does it seem that Theresa May is the opposite of King Midas where everything she touches seems to turn to cow shit.

If this is her idea of red tape, then fucking hell, there is trouble ahead.

amp.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/27/jeremy-corbyn-pressure-change-of-direction-on-brexit
Corbyn convenes ‘away day’ to discuss Brexit policy shift
Labour leader under pressure to back permanent membership of customs union

Let's hope Starmer or someone else can talk sense into him.

so the rather tedious Gavin Williamson story that has been running this week.

Here is a recap with the latest.

First of all we were treated to this confession
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5313977/amp/Gavin-Williamsons-office-fling-nearly-ended-marriage.html
EXCLUSIVE: 'My family means everything to me. I almost threw it away': Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson confesses to affair with more junior married colleague but says his wife has forgiven him

The comments were largely about how everyone saw through the attempt to be the honourable man confessing to past sin in a proactive way, and how this was a cynical attempt to both raise his profile and help his leadership bid

However the next day this appeared in the Guardian
amp.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/26/defence-secretary-questions-relationship-colleague-gavin-williamson?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=true
Defence secretary refuses to answer questions about relationship with past colleague
Gavin Williamson tells Mail of relationship hours after his lawyers refuse to answer Guardian questions

It claimed that rather than being an admirable former sinner, the Daily Mail story was an attempt at spin and the heading off of an expose.

And tomorrow's Telegraph is going further

And the sunday times is also running this story about Williamson, in which he is accused of leaking defence secrets to distract from the story about his 'fling'

He really has pissed off someone hasn't he?!

Front page of tomorrow's times.

The other lead story is about how Tory Mps are making a fortune from consultancy to companies over brexit. One is getting £6000 a day from a Chinese firm.

Wtf are they actually telling these businesses cos the whole party seems clueless over Brexshit. A