You are currently browsing the monthly archive for May 2019.
Comments will be off this and future posts temporarily for the next several days.
I cannot guarantee I will have time to respond, so, rather than leave readers in limbo with a lack of response, it’s better to turn off the facility for the time being.
Rest assured that posts will continue to appear daily. Feel free to ‘like’ as usual.
I’ll turn comments back on again for future posts as soon as I am able.
In closing, welcome to my new subscribers! I have an extensive back catalogue of posts on various socio-political topics on the Marxism / Communism page. For simple recipes, lots of health articles and a chronicle of the Trump era, check out Recipes / Health / History / Trump. More importantly, the Bible passages I have been writing about over the past several years are on Essential Bible Verses, and a variety of Christian topics are on Christianity / Apologetics, including abortion.
Thank you for your readership!
See you soon!
The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall have issued an invitation to President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump for tea when they visit the UK next week.
This is a first for any US president, according to the Daily Mail:
Mr Trump will be the first serving American president to meet Prince Charles on such intimate terms.
This is partly because the Queen has been handing over a number of her responsibilities to him, the heir to the throne.
The Mail reported (emphases mine):
The unexpected meeting will take place at Clarence House, the heir to the throne’s official residence in London.
It will come on the same day as the Queen’s official state banquet for Mr Trump, which Charles will also attend. The prince did not meet the President on his working visit to Britain last year, which included a meeting with the Queen at Windsor Castle amid massive protests in the capital.
His sons, Princes William and Harry did not meet with the president, either:
Reports at the time suggested Charles and his sons William and Harry had refused to have anything to do with the arrangements, which was seen as a snub by the Americans.
However, this year, The Daily Caller says that the Trumps will meet the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge at the State Banquet, which the Queen will host:
Kate Middleton and Prince William are also expected to be at the banquet.
The Daily Mail points out:
The Donald Trump Prince Charles met on a visit to New York, soon after his wedding to Camilla in 2005, is a very different figure from the outspoken president he will welcome into his home.
Despite their intrinsic disagreement on climate change and chlorinated chicken, Prince Charles and President Trump will no doubt find subjects on which they do agree.
Camilla is highly regarded as someone who puts everyone at ease. She also has a sparkling wit.
The Trumps are sure to have a delightful afternoon.
Those going into London that day will find increased security measures and road closures in the vicinity around Clarence House, no doubt.
President Trump and First Lady Melania visited the UK in July 2018, which I covered at the time:
When Mr May hosted Mrs Trump in London (July 13)
When Trump met with Britain’s two most powerful women (July 13)
July 13: Piers Morgan’s exclusive interview with President Trump
July 13-15 : Trump’s weekend in Scotland — memorable for the wrong reason
I hope the Trumps have a safe, enjoyable and productive visit.
Ascension Day is Thursday, May 30, 2019.
What follows are readings and meditations about Jesus’s ascent into Heaven, returning to His Father:
Acts 1:9-11 on the Ascension (addresses errors of preterism)
A Reformed view of the Ascension (Christ as prophet, priest and king)
Ascension Day 2016 (John MacArthur on Acts 1-11)
Readings for Ascension Day (same regardless of Lectionary year)
I hope these help to enhance the significance of this important feast day.
Pentecost comes in ten days’ time.
Between Thursday, May 23 and Sunday, May 26, European voters let their leaders know what was on their minds.
The 2019 EU elections were quite the eye-opener, as nationalist parties and the Greens did very well indeed:
Like them or not, interesting trends emerged:
Italy
Matteo Salvini was thrilled:
France
Marine Le Pen’s Rassemblement National (RN) — National Rally — edged past Emmanuel Macron’s LREM — Renaissance — list:
Politico reported that Le Pen’s party:
scored about 24 percent of the vote, compared with roughly 22.5 percent for Macron’s centrist-liberal party, according to two initial projections.
United Kingdom
The biggest news came from the United Kingdom. The six-week old Brexit Party won nine out of ten regions.
The Telegraph reported (emphases mine):
The Brexit Party has won nine of the 10 regions to declare their results in the European elections, claiming 28 of 64 seats in the European Parliament.
Nigel Farage’s party came top in the North East, North West, East of England, Wales, West Midlands, East Midlands, Yorkshire & Humber, the South West and South East.
This came largely at the expense of the Conservative Party. Theresa May’s party have lost a huge share of the vote across all regions, so far losing 15 MEP seats to leave a total of three. The party is in fifth place, with its lowest vote share in a national election since they formed in 1834.
Good grief!
However, The Brexit Party is represented in 10 out of 10 regions, as this Scottish result came in early on Monday morning:
It seems that Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party will now hold one more seat than Angela Merkel’s CDU Party: 29 to 28!
Nigel Farage gave his MEP acceptance speech in Southampton, saying:
These are some of the regional results (click on image to enlarge):
Here are the other new Brexit Party MEPs.
Hearty congratulations, ladies and gentlemen!
What an amazing result!
Like the Conservatives, Labour also suffered. The Liberal Democrats received a lot of Remain votes from Labour voters, as did the Greens. In Scotland, the SNP took a substantial share of Labour votes.
You can read more about the EU election results on the BBC’s website and at the Daily Mail.
Regardless of what one thinks about Theresa May’s premiership, giving her a media kicking on the day she stood down as party leader and imminently as Prime Minister is not a good look.
George Osborne was David Cameron’s Chancellor to the Exchequer.
When Theresa May became PM in July 2016, one of the first things she did was to sack him. He then sat on the backbenches as a Conservative MP until he stood down early in 2017.
As Osborne has somewhat of a journalistic background, the owner of the London Evening Standard hired him as the daily paper’s editor in May 2017.
Since then, the freebie paper’s editorial line has been anti-Brexit — and anti-May.
He tweeted this himself. I bet he could hardly wait to be the first paper to publish this photo last Friday afternoon:
The editorial pages stuck the boot in further.
Here are the first two paragraphs of the editorial, accompanied by another photo of her as above:
Her resignation speech this morning pointed to a premiership that might have been: human, understanding of modern Britain, respectful of the achievements of her predecessors, and straight about the compromise needed if we are to move forward as a country.
Sadly, little of this was on display during her premiership. As a result, the central objective she set herself — leaving the European Union in an orderly fashion — looks less certain than it did the day she entered Number 10 less than three years ago.
Then, there was the political cartoon on the opposite page:
It was good to see that Osborne received a lot of negative Twitter comments on both tweets.
I’ve been reading the Evening Standard for decades. That was when they still charged money for it. The news coverage and journalism were top-notch.
These days, I go straight to the puzzle page and skim the rest.
The Standard used to offer objectivity in its editorial line. Unfortunately, the paper’s standards have fallen significantly in the past few years, and it has become not only politically biased, but also too focused on celebrities. I hold George Osborne partly responsible. If he is able to get his staff access to celebrity news, surely he can get them access to substantial news.
The three-year Lectionary that many Catholics and Protestants hear in public worship gives us a great variety of Holy Scripture.
Yet, it doesn’t tell the whole story.
My series Forbidden Bible Verses — ones the Lectionary editors and their clergy omit — examines the passages we do not hear in church. These missing verses are also Essential Bible Verses, ones we should study with care and attention. Often, we find that they carry difficult messages and warnings.
Today’s reading is from the English Standard Version with commentary by Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.
The Storm at Sea
13 Now when the south wind blew gently, supposing that they had obtained their purpose, they weighed anchor and sailed along Crete, close to the shore. 14 But soon a tempestuous wind, called the northeaster, struck down from the land. 15 And when the ship was caught and could not face the wind, we gave way to it and were driven along. 16 Running under the lee of a small island called Cauda,[a] we managed with difficulty to secure the ship’s boat. 17 After hoisting it up, they used supports to undergird the ship. Then, fearing that they would run aground on the Syrtis, they lowered the gear,[b] and thus they were driven along. 18 Since we were violently storm-tossed, they began the next day to jettison the cargo. 19 And on the third day they threw the ship’s tackle overboard with their own hands. 20 When neither sun nor stars appeared for many days, and no small tempest lay on us, all hope of our being saved was at last abandoned.
—————————————————————————————————————————-
Last week’s entry discussed the decision of the Roman crew to set sail for Phoenix — Phenice — in Crete to spend the winter. Paul had warned against it, but Fair Havens was not a place where they could spend the winter, despite its gentle name.
Therefore, centurion, crew, prisoners, cargo, Paul and Luke — with possibly another of their companions — set sail along the sheltered coastline of Crete, helped by a gentle southerly wind (verse 13).
Then, a violent wind from the north east struck (verse 14). The ship was no match for it, so they had no choice but to let the wind control the ship (verse 15).
Matthew Henry posits that they might have been near Phenice at the time but God had other plans for them (emphases mine):
It is probable that they were very near the heaven of Phenice when this tempest arose, and thought they should presently be in a quiet haven, and were pleasing themselves with the thought of it, and wintering there, and lo, of a sudden, they are in this distress. Let us therefore always rejoice with trembling, and never expect a perfect security, nor a perpetual security, till we come to heaven.
His description of the storm is excellent:
The ship was exceedingly tossed (Acts 27:18); it was kicked like a football from wave to wave; its passengers (as it is elegantly described, Psalms 107:26,27) mount up to the heavens, go down again to the depths, reel to and fro, stagger like a drunken man, and are at their wits’ end. The ship could not possibly bear up into the wind, could not make her way in opposition to the wind; and therefore they folded up their sails, which in such a storm would endanger them rather than to them any service, and so let the ship drive, Not whither it would, but whither it was impelled by the impetuous waves …
John MacArthur says that the gentle southerly wind they encountered was often the precursor for a northeaster, the calm before the storm:
“Well the south wind is nice and we’ll at least stay along the edge of Crete and if we don’t get all the way to Rome, at least we can hang in there at Phenice. Then you have one of the biggest words in this whole story. Verse 14, “But,” – got to watch those gentle south winds. – “Not long after there arose against it a tempestuous wind called Euroclydon.” That was the sailors’ term for a nor’easter. It comes from two words, one Greek, one Latin. The Greek word is Euros and it means an east wind. The Latin word is aquilo and it means a north wind.
… It would come down from Asia, just blowing down and it was a severe wind. They gave it the name Euroclydon because it was so fierce and it was one of the greatest feared winds of all winds. It was a wind of hurricane or typhoon proportions. They were in a hurricane. They were in that little thing. It was like a pod floating on the ocean, bobbing up and down and being pummeled and beaten by the northeast wind. This was a typhoon. This was a hurricane with all of the concurrent airflow that comes together and swirls the clouds and swirls the sea. This is what they were in the midst of.
And you all have seen on television hurricane somebody, hurricane Bertha or Edna or Agnes or something and you know what it’s like. That’s exactly what this little wooden thing got trapped in. And the little gentle south wind wafted them on was replaced by a threatening treacherous, deadly nor’easter.
The wind drove them temporarily to a place of shelter, the island of Cauda — present day Gavdos, south of Crete — where they were able to secure the ship’s lifeboat with some difficulty (verse 16).
After hoisting the lifeboat successfully, they then secured the ship’s structure and lowered the ‘gear’ — whether anchor or mainsail — hoping to avoid the Syrtis (verse 17).
MacArthur explains verse 17 in more detail. At this point, they had sailed only 23 miles from Fair Havens:
… there was a great fear among all those who sailed the Mediterranean. And the fear was of Euroclydon because Euroclydon sent ships to the graveyard known as the Greater Surtis.
… The Greater Surtis – archeologists have studied and dug up there many things for many years – was the graveyard of ships. Whenever a great northeastern wind would come of hurricane or typhoon dimensions, it would blast ships into the Greater Surtis. And it would reef them there and shatter them and smash them, and lives would be lost there on the coast of North Africa. And so they were afraid. They had two options: if the hurricane didn’t dump them into the sea and capsize the ship, then the hurricane would drive them into the graveyard of ships known as the Greater Surtis.
Then they did three things.
The first thing they did was to secure the boat. Every sailing vessel had a dingy. And a dingy doesn’t have to be super small, but it was a small enough boat so that when you harbored a boat you could get in it and get to shore. It was a very important thing to have. It was also a rescue boat. In any case – in the case that the larger ship would break up, this was a lifeboat. It was very important to hang on to that thing. In sailing, normally, the dingy was attached to the stern of the boat by a rope and just pulled along. But immediately upon any stormy weather they would have to get that thing inside or it would be swamped with water and it would drag. And, eventually, it would sever the rope and it would be lost. And so with great difficulty they first thing they did was get the swamp dingy into the main ship. They probably swung the yardarm out and used it as a hoist. And they all worked hard, but they got it in.
The second thing they did – and this is something you may never have heard of – they frapped the ship … Verse 17 says, “When they had hoisted it,” – hoisted the dingy in – “they used fraps undergirding,” – or frapping – “the ship.”
… in the days that we’re talking about they built ships without the use of bolts. In other words, when the planks ran along the side, they couldn’t run large girders down and then bolt the planks to the girders because they didn’t have any bolts. And the only way they could really secure it, they used pitch. They would use anything they could. I was reading, recently, a tremendously interesting article in National Geographic about the Phoenician sailing boats and how they used to cover them with certain kinds of things that would seal them. Well, that’s fine until you get into a hurricane.
When you get into a hurricane and you’re in a single-masted vessel, there is no distribution of stress. That is in a multi-sailed vessel, the stress is distributed all over the entire hull. In a single-masted situation, the stress is directed at one area and it begins to split the ship. And it will literally splinter the entire hull unless something is done. So there were cables that were wrapped around these hulls. And when stress came they would winch these cables tight. Just like wrapping the ship up with rope in order to keep it secure. And so they diligently set about to frap the ship or undergird the ship.
The third thing they did, “fearing lest they should fall into the quicksand.” Now you say, “Wait a minute, quicksand in the middle of the Mediterranean?” Right. That’s another one of those terrific translations. The Greek word is Surtis. They were afraid of winding up on the Surtis. … Here’s it’s the form surtin, that ending, but the same word. And it probably means the reef, the shoal, the sandbar. It can have a reference to the sandy beach where it could be dumped and then smashed. And they had a fear of this.
So what were they going to do? It says, “They struck sail,” in the King James. What it literally says in the Greek is they lowered the gear. I think what it means is they dropped the mainsail. Well, whatever they did it worked.
Henry has a simpler explanation for undergirding:
They bound the ship under the bottom of it with strong cables, to keep it from bulging in the extremity of the tempest.
The next day, they jettisoned their cargo (verse 18) to lighten the ship. They kept some food with them, as we will see later in the chapter.
On the third day, they threw the ship’s tackle overboard (verse 19).
This was a desperate situation. Add to this the fact that the violence of the storm was such that, having seen no daylight or starlight for ‘many days’, they abandoned all hope (verse 20).
They were cold. They were wet. They could not bear to eat. Their nerves were frayed. They were afraid. They had no light. They could do nothing but allow this storm drive them to an unknown destination.
They were no longer in control — of anything.
Henry points out that Jesus might have chosen seafaring men as Apostles for a reason:
See what hardships those often undergo who are much at sea, besides the hazards of life they run; and yet to get gain there are still those who make nothing of all this; and it is an instance of divine Providence that it disposes some to this employment, notwithstanding the difficulties that attend it, for the keeping up of commerce among the nations, and the isles of the Gentiles particularly; and Zebulun can as heartily rejoice in his going out as Issachar in his tents. Perhaps Christ therefore chose ministers from among seafaring men, because they had been used to endure hardness.
He also puts forth an interesting question: why did Paul not quell the storm? He then answers it by saying that no apostolic miracle was ever wrought for personal comfort. All of their miracles gave glory to God:
Why did not Paul, by the power of Christ, and in his name, lay this storm? Why did he not say to the winds and waves, Peace, be still, as his Master had done? Surely it was because the apostles wrought miracles for the confirmation of their doctrine, not for the serving of a turn for themselves or their friends.
MacArthur says the desperation that the storm wrought showed that God was controlling everything here. It was probable that Paul, and possibly Luke, knew everything would turn out for the best, according to His will:
Now God says, “That’s exactly what I want. No one has any resource, no one has any hope, no one can turn to anybody or anything. You are hopeless. Now I will announce My presence.” Beautiful! One of the principles that God has used over and over and over again in the word is that God comes in response to man’s absolute hopelessness, right, and announces who He is. And He had just the man. He had his man, Paul, who was probably just going along with it all saying, “Well Lord when is the time? It’s going to be soon, I imagine.”
In fact, through the storm, God was leading them very close to Sicily — to Malta:
Isn’t it interesting that with the sail down, with the storm swirling about them everywhere and the inability to see the stars for the clouds, they couldn’t see anything day or night. Which means they couldn’t what? They couldn’t navigate, they sailed on a direct course to the harbor of Malta. Now, you look at that little dot there and you figure out who was steering that ship. Amazing. This is all in the plan of God.
Here is a map of Gavdos. Here is a map of Malta. If you look to the right — eastwards — on the map of Malta, you can see the southernmost Greek island of Crete, our Apostle’s starting point.
However, no one on-board knew that, and the sense of hopelessness continued.
Next time — Acts 27:21-26
What follows are the readings for the Sixth Sunday of Easter, May 26, 2019.
These are for Year C in the three-year Lectionary used in public worship.
Emphases below are mine.
First reading
Luke, the author of Acts, was from Troas, in the western part of Asia Minor. He met Paul at the time of his journey to Macedonia. Paul had originally wanted to go further eastward into Asia Minor, but the Holy Spirit intervened. Paul ended up travelling westward from Asia Minor to Macedonia. Luke joined him, hence the first person narrative. Once in Macedonia, they never met the man in Paul’s vision. Instead, they met a woman, Lydia, a purple cloth merchant. This is the origin of the church in Philippi.
Acts 16:9-15
16:9 During the night Paul had a vision: there stood a man of Macedonia pleading with him and saying, “Come over to Macedonia and help us.”
16:10 When he had seen the vision, we immediately tried to cross over to Macedonia, being convinced that God had called us to proclaim the good news to them.
16:11 We set sail from Troas and took a straight course to Samothrace, the following day to Neapolis,
16:12 and from there to Philippi, which is a leading city of the district of Macedonia and a Roman colony. We remained in this city for some days.
16:13 On the sabbath day we went outside the gate by the river, where we supposed there was a place of prayer; and we sat down and spoke to the women who had gathered there.
16:14 A certain woman named Lydia, a worshiper of God, was listening to us; she was from the city of Thyatira and a dealer in purple cloth. The Lord opened her heart to listen eagerly to what was said by Paul.
16:15 When she and her household were baptized, she urged us, saying, “If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come and stay at my home.” And she prevailed upon us.
Psalm
This Psalm foretells the creation of the Church and the joining of Jews and Gentiles into one joyful flock. ‘Selah’ means ‘heed these words’, ‘pay attention’.
Psalm 67
67:1 May God be gracious to us and bless us and make his face to shine upon us, Selah
67:2 that your way may be known upon earth, your saving power among all nations.
67:3 Let the peoples praise you, O God; let all the peoples praise you.
67:4 Let the nations be glad and sing for joy, for you judge the peoples with equity and guide the nations upon earth. Selah
67:5 Let the peoples praise you, O God; let all the peoples praise you.
67:6 The earth has yielded its increase; God, our God, has blessed us.
67:7 May God continue to bless us; let all the ends of the earth revere him.
Epistle
Readings from Revelation continue. John prophesies the New Jerusalem, the Water of Life, the Tree of Life and the Lamb of God.
Revelation 21:10, 22-22:5
21:10 And in the spirit he carried me away to a great, high mountain and showed me the holy city Jerusalem coming down out of heaven from God.
21:22 I saw no temple in the city, for its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb.
21:23 And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine on it, for the glory of God is its light, and its lamp is the Lamb.
21:24 The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it.
21:25 Its gates will never be shut by day–and there will be no night there.
21:26 People will bring into it the glory and the honor of the nations.
21:27 But nothing unclean will enter it, nor anyone who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life.
22:1 Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb
22:2 through the middle of the street of the city. On either side of the river is the tree of life with its twelve kinds of fruit, producing its fruit each month; and the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations.
22:3 Nothing accursed will be found there any more. But the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his servants will worship him;
22:4 they will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads.
22:5 And there will be no more night; they need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be their light, and they will reign forever and ever.
Gospel
There is a choice of two readings from John’s Gospel.
The first is from Jesus’s discourse during the Last Supper, wherein He says that He must return to the Father, in order that God may send the Holy Spirit. Ascension Day is this coming Thursday, therefore, the reading is particularly apposite.
The second is the moving miraculous healing of the infirm man at Bethesda. No one helped him into the healing waters of the pool. However, Jesus knew and had mercy on the man.
First choice
John 14:23-29
14:23 Jesus answered him, “Those who love me will keep my word, and my Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them.
14:24 Whoever does not love me does not keep my words; and the word that you hear is not mine, but is from the Father who sent me.
14:25 “I have said these things to you while I am still with you.
14:26 But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and remind you of all that I have said to you.
14:27 Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled, and do not let them be afraid.
14:28 You heard me say to you, ‘I am going away, and I am coming to you.’ If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going to the Father, because the Father is greater than I.
14:29 And now I have told you this before it occurs, so that when it does occur, you may believe.
Second choice
John 5:1-9
5:1 After this there was a festival of the Jews, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
5:2 Now in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate there is a pool, called in Hebrew Beth-zatha, which has five porticoes.
5:3 In these lay many invalids–blind, lame, and paralyzed.
5:5 One man was there who had been ill for thirty-eight years.
5:6 When Jesus saw him lying there and knew that he had been there a long time, he said to him, “Do you want to be made well?”
5:7 The sick man answered him, “Sir, I have no one to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up; and while I am making my way, someone else steps down ahead of me.”
5:8 Jesus said to him, “Stand up, take your mat and walk.”
5:9 At once the man was made well, and he took up his mat and began to walk. Now that day was a sabbath.
Our Lord’s miracles involved not only physical or mental healing but also spiritual healing. We can apply these as lessons in faith: a belief in Jesus as Lord heals our troubled souls.
On Friday, May 24, 2019, Prime Minister Theresa May announced that she would stand down as Conservative leader immediately and as Prime Minister once the Conservatives have elected a new leader.
The tension at No. 10 must have been palpable that morning, as the email with the text of her speech had no attachment. ITV’s Robert Peston tweeted:
Nonetheless:
The Guardian, among other media outlets, has the full text of her speech (emphases mine below):
Ever since I first stepped through the door behind me as Prime Minister, I have striven to make the United Kingdom a country that works not just for a privileged few, but for everyone. And to honour the result of the EU referendum. Back in 2016, we gave the British people a choice. Against all predictions, the British people voted to leave the European Union.
I feel as certain today as I did three years ago that in a democracy, if you give people a choice you have a duty to implement what they decide. I have done my best to do that. I negotiated the terms of our exit and a new relationship with our closest neighbours that protects jobs, our security and our Union. I have done everything I can to convince MPs to back that deal. Sadly, I have not been able to do so.
I tried three times. I believe it was right to persevere, even when the odds against success seemed high. But it is now clear to me that it is in the best interests of the country for a new Prime Minister to lead that effort.
So I am today announcing that I will resign as leader of the Conservative and Unionist Party on Friday 7 June so that a successor can be chosen. I have agreed with the Party Chairman and with the Chairman of the 1922 Committee that the process for electing a new leader should begin in the following week. I have kept Her Majesty the Queen fully informed of my intentions, and I will continue to serve as her Prime Minister until the process has concluded.
It is, and will always remain, a matter of deep regret to me that I have not been able to deliver Brexit. It will be for my successor to seek a way forward that honours the result of the referendum. To succeed, he or she will have to find consensus in Parliament where I have not. Such a consensus can only be reached if those on all sides of the debate are willing to compromise.
For many years the great humanitarian Sir Nicholas Winton – who saved the lives of hundreds of children by arranging their evacuation from Nazi-occupied Czechoslovakia through the Kindertransport – was my constituent in Maidenhead. At another time of political controversy, a few years before his death, he took me to one side at a local event and gave me a piece of advice. He said, ‘Never forget that compromise is not a dirty word. Life depends on compromise.’ He was right.
As we strive to find the compromises we need in our politics – whether to deliver Brexit, or to restore devolved government in Northern Ireland – we must remember what brought us here. Because the referendum was not just a call to leave the EU but for profound change in our country. A call to make the United Kingdom a country that truly works for everyone. I am proud of the progress we have made over the last three years.
We have completed the work that David Cameron and George Osborne started: the deficit is almost eliminated, our national debt is falling and we are bringing an end to austerity. My focus has been on ensuring that the good jobs of the future will be created in communities across the whole country, not just in London and the South East, through our Modern Industrial Strategy.
We have helped more people than ever enjoy the security of a job. We are building more homes and helping first-time buyers onto the housing ladder – so young people can enjoy the opportunities their parents did. And we are protecting the environment, eliminating plastic waste, tackling climate change and improving air quality. This is what a decent, moderate and patriotic Conservative Government, on the common ground of British politics, can achieve – even as we tackle the biggest peacetime challenge any government has faced.
I know that the Conservative Party can renew itself in the years ahead. That we can deliver Brexit and serve the British people with policies inspired by our values. Security; freedom; opportunity. Those values have guided me throughout my career.
But the unique privilege of this office is to use this platform to give a voice to the voiceless, to fight the burning injustices that still scar our society. That is why I put proper funding for mental health at the heart of our NHS long-term plan. It is why I am ending the postcode lottery for survivors of domestic abuse. It is why the Race Disparity Audit and gender pay reporting are shining a light on inequality, so it has nowhere to hide. And that is why I set up the independent public inquiry into the tragedy at Grenfell Tower – to search for the truth, so nothing like it can ever happen again, and so the people who lost their lives that night are never forgotten.
Because this country is a Union. Not just a family of four nations. But a union of people – all of us. Whatever our background, the colour of our skin, or who we love. We stand together. And together we have a great future.
Our politics may be under strain, but there is so much that is good about this country. So much to be proud of. So much to be optimistic about. I will shortly leave the job that it has been the honour of my life to hold – the second female Prime Minister but certainly not the last. I do so with no ill-will, but with enormous and enduring gratitude to have had the opportunity to serve the country I love.
When she got to the last five words of her announcement, she choked up and abruptly turned around before re-entering No. 10:
Here is her statement in full (start at 1:28, sorry for the closeup of Peston):
Brexit defeated Theresa May:
The Sun‘s political editor observed:
Peston called it correctly:
This is important to remember over the next several weeks:
The new Prime Minister should be in place by the time Parliament begins its summer recess. The 1922 Committee is comprised of Conservative MPs and will oversee this process:
Then again … please note:
The Guardian has more (emphases in the original, those in purple mine):
Conservative party chairman Brandon Lewis and the vice-chairs of the 1922 Committee, Cheryl Gillan and Charles Walker, have issued a joint statement setting out the process for selecting a successor to Theresa May.
First they thank her for her service to the party as an activist, councillor, MP, a member of the shadow cabinet, party chairman, home secretary and, finally, prime minister.
“She embodies the finest qualities of public service and, with this decision, has once again demonstrated her strong sense of duty and devotion to the national interest,” they say.
They set out the following –
-
- The timetable to select a new leader has been decided by the executive of the 1922 committee after consultation with the party board, which includes representatives of the voluntary, parliamentary and professional party.
- Nominations will close in the week commencing 10 June, before “successive rounds of voting will take place until a final choice of candidates to put to a vote of all party members is determined”.
- “We expect that process to be concluded by the end of June, allowing for a series of hustings around the UK for members to meet and question the candidates, then cast their votes in time for the result to be announced before Parliament rises for the summer,” they say.
So we should have a new prime minister by mid-July.
They conclude:
We are deeply conscious that the Conservatives are not just selecting the person best placed to become the new leader of our party, but also the next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. That is a solemn responsibility, particularly at such an important time for our nation. We will therefore propose that the leadership election and hustings involve opportunities for non-members and people who may not yet vote Conservative to meet the candidates and put their questions to them too.
Peston points out that Graham Brady did not sign the 1922 Committee’s letter, even though he is its chairman. It is possible that Brady wants to throw his hat into the ring as a contender:
I assume the reason the chairman of 1922 committee of Tory MPs Graham Brady hasn’t signed letter setting out timetable for new leader and PM to be in place by 20 July is that he may well be a candidate to replace @theresa_may.
Soon afterwards:
By mid-afternoon:
Jeremy Hunt was the first to formally declare his own candidacy:
I doubt either of these men has a chance. The Conservatives must choose someone who can defeat Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn, therefore, I predict Boris Johnson will be the next leader and PM.
May’s predecessor tweeted his appreciation of her service. It did not go down well. One person remembered that he stood down as party leader the morning the referendum results were in — around 9:30 a.m. on Friday, June 24, 2016:
He gave an empathetic interview to the BBC later in the afternoon:
Let us spare a moment to recall Cameron’s jaunty ‘doo-doo-doo-doo-Right!’ tune after he resigned:
Brexit is powerful, although, despite this tweet, not insurmountable:
I hope the new Spanish government’s concerns turn out to be accurate (emphases mine):
The Spanish government has described May’s decision to resign as “bad news”, warning that it significantly raised the prospect of a hard Brexit, reports the Guardian’s Madrid correspondent Sam Jones.
“A hard Brexit in these circumstance seems an almost unstoppable reality,” the government’s spokewoman, Isabel Celaá, said at a press conference on Friday afternoon.
Celaá said the announcement would disappoint all those “who want an orderly UK exit from the European Union”. But she said that Spain had contingency measures in place and would do everything possible to “guarantee the best situation” for Spanish citizens and businesses in the UK.
A No Deal Brexit does not mean a disorderly exit from the EU. Plans have been in place for months to implement No Deal processes, as drawn up by civil servants in Whitehall. No Deal was ready for implementation well in advance of Friday, March 29, 2019.
Outside of Brexit, I believe Theresa May was a good prime minister.
As far as Brexit went, however, her downfall started when she presented her deal at Chequers in July 2018. The principal members of her Brexit team at the time resigned. It is rumoured that her ‘deal’ — a treaty — was developed in Berlin by one of her advisers. I have read at least one article about it, but would like to see another source before writing more.
Whoever the next Conservative leader is, I hope he or she is a committed Leaver and will toss the whole of May’s deal into the long grass of history, where it belongs.
On Wednesday, May 15, 2019, the governor of the State of Alabama signed a new, highly restrictive abortion law:
This is the gist of the law:
LifeNews has more (emphases mine):
Lawmakers approved the ban on a 25-6 vote and it now heads to pro-life Governor Kay Ivey, a Republican. The legislation will take effect six months Governor Ivey gives the bill her signature unless court stops it. The Republican-dominated House of Representatives voted 74-3 in favor of the proposal.
Although abortion activists claim the bill targets women, the language of the bill makes it clear that’s not the case: “This bill would provide that a woman who receives an abortion will not be held criminally culpable or civilly liable for receiving the abortion.”
ABC News explains:
Alabama’s state Senate voted and approved one of the most controversial and restrictive abortion laws in the country.
The ban prevents women from seeking abortions by making any abortions a felony for the doctor who performs them, making this different than the so-called “heartbeat” bills that have passed in other states recently, like Georgia. Those bills point to the detection of a fetal heartbeat as the point at which an abortion is banned, but the Alabama ban goes further.
The Alabama measure does not provide any exemptions for cases of rape or incest, meaning that the women or children who are victims in those cases would have to carry a pregnancy to term. The only exception allows for abortions in cases where the woman’s health is at risk.
So, no, the bill does not punish women. It prosecutes physicians performing abortions:
https://twitter.com/ZenisekJaroslav/status/1128787527157067781
The debate was heated in Alabama’s Senate. This is a must-watch video:
https://twitter.com/Cliff_Sims/status/1128658282778963969
It is highly likely that this law will be challenged in the courts.
It will be interesting to see how this law plays out in the years to come, not only in Alabama but also in influencing other American states’ abortion legislation.
Churchmouse Campanologist 