41 responses

  1. It is amazing that there are still Catholics who think we should remain in the EU and one of their arguments is that the EU is made up of Catholic countries. They’ve missed the fact that Europe is entirely secular now, and playing a major part in the re-ordering of the world to exclude God completely.

    I will vote for any Brexit Party candidate in the EU elections and if there isn’t one, and there isn’t a comparable LEAVE candidate, I will spoil my ballot paper by scrawling The Brexit Party across it.

      • Dale

        Completely secular, but we would prefer to live in a sovereign secular country rather than an enslaved secular satellite of Brussels. It’s a case of choosing the lesser of two evils.

      • Dale,

        Isn’t that a good reason not to want to pay a foreign state millions of pounds to make us even more secular?

  2. Editor,

    Yes, I will vote for The Brexit Party as a message needs to be sent loud and clear to those who are doing everything they can to frustrate the process.

  3. It is the duty of Catholics to love their country and to take whatever action is necessary to uphold and defend its sovereignty. The patriotic thing to do is vote the Brexit Party because it is the only patriotic party on offer. The two main parties are now very clearly unpatriotic, shackled, as they are, to their sinister foreign masters in Brussels, and so all decent citizens must cut the vote off from them.

    • Athanasius,

      Your post about patriotism and loving one’s country etc makes me think of the newly born son of Prince Harry and his wife. Everyone is rejoicing, as is natural on the arrival of a new life into the world. I couldn’t help wondering, however, if it crossed the mind of Prince Harry, in his enthusiasm at the wonder of the birth of his son, that his son is one of the lucky ones, allowed to make it into the world and be allowed to live on arrival. I often wonder, when people are so delighted about a new arrival, when they look on such a little innocent person, wholly dependent on their parents to care for them, if they ever feel a stab of guilt at supporting the State sanctioned murder of other little babies, just because it’s their mother’s “choice” not to let them live. I wonder what name he will be given. My money’s on Philip – only because it’s the first name that came into my mind and, on reflection, when Philip goes (well, he’s 90+) there will be no Philip left…

      And then I had another thought. WHY is Prince Harry so delighted about the birth of his little boy, given that he, Prince Harry is one of the eco-warriors, convinced that the planet has only about 12 more years and then, WHAM! It’s over. It’s like when I was buying some garden materials the other day and joked (straight-faced) with the young man at the check out that I was maybe having second thoughts, since not sure if it’s worth doing this if we’ve only got 12 years left to enjoy the garden. Young man’s reaction? Laughed heartily. I honestly don’t think any normal people buy this nonsense at all. Climate extinction, I mean, not gardening 😀

      In any case, we must wish the royals all the best for the time that remains. After all, 12 years is better than the no years which is the lot of the countless aborted babies who never see the light of day.

      Welcome, then, new little royal baby! God bless you!

      • Just as well I didn’t bet on the name of the new royal baby. Not Philip, so I’d have lost – but Archie! Truly, you couldn’t make it up 😀

        Somehow, Prince Archie, or Duke Archie or Earl Archie doesn’t sound quite right. Prince/Duke/Earl Patrick now, that would be a different kettle of sound 😀

  4. I,too, will vote for the Brexit Party if a candidate is fielded in my area. If there’s no acceptable one then I’ll spoil my vote.

  5. I will vote for the Brexit Party or another Leave candidate if there is no-one from the Brexit Party standing in my region. I’ll definitely spoil my vote if I get a weak “leaver” that I can’t trust, or only remain options.

    • Allan

      I think a great portion of the population feel exactly the same way, fed up with the corrupt mainstream parties.

      • Athanasius,

        I completely agree. I’ll definitely be voting Brexit Party and spoiling my paper if there is no Brexit Party candidate on offer.

  6. But the EU has already proven itself to be anti-catholic. In the 1990’s a Catholic politician from Italy, I believe his name was Boglione was elected to be one of the presidents, I believe for the so called Parliament. However to got around that he held the catholic position on homosexuality. There was a rebellion against his nomination, led by the Kinnocks. you renember the Labour leader Neil Kinnock. Although Boglione? demonstrated that as an industrialist he showed no discrimination and had gay workers this was not accepted and out he went. The fact that the Labour Party, now dominated by Marxists is so much in favour of joining and now condemns Brexiteers as ‘nationalists, and one of there number a David Lammie i openly calling Brexiteers Fascists is ll we need to know. We are heading towards a large Union of Socialists Republics. Anyone who is not a socialist is far right and Christians such as Catholic Truth supporters, are the worst of all for daring to defend Catholic Truth. Be warned.

  7. If i were a UK resident, I would certainly vote for the Brexit Party. However, this old conspiracy theorist wants to know: if the UK were to succeed in removing itself from the EU, what would be the reaction of the Bank of England and the Royal Institute of International Affairs? The first institution is a creature of the Rothschild dynasty, and as one of the Rothschilds famously said “Give me control of a nation’s currency and I care not who makes its laws.” The latter institution is the sister institution – one might even say the elder sister – of the Council on Foreign Relations across the pond, and, like the CFR, dictates foreign policy.

    In other words, both these controlling institutions are two major behind-the-scenes tentacles in the NWO octopus. No doubt they are prominent among those who are trying to scheme their way out of the popular vote, and no doubt they would somehow move to keep the UK under the globalist thumb should Brexit succeed.

    • RCA Victor,

      That’s a very interesting point. Before the 2016 Referendum the chancellor was trying to scare us into thinking that there would be financial meltdown if we voted to leave the EU and the boss of the Bank of England – Mark Carney – was backing him up. But the minute the result was known, Carney jumped into reassure everyone that there was no problem, there wouldn’t be a huge interest rate hike after all. I Googled to see what he’s saying now, and this came up, but I’m not an accountant so I can’t really interpret it – maybe you will make sense of it
      https://www.ft.com/content/154cdb0e-6f5f-11e9-bbfb-5c68069fbd15

      I’m not worried about the economic side of it – the £ fluctuates all the time and I don’t believe any of their scare stories. The most important thing is to regain Britain’s independence from the corrupt EU machinery. Everything else will sort itself out.

    • RCA Victor,

      If you were a UK resident, I’d emigrate to the USA. I would go via Mexico. Saves the paperwork… I’d head for Florida…

        • RCA Victor,

          Hilarious! I sent the link on to my Great Nephew who is a big Donald Trump fan (he mimics him to perfection); he is mad about all things American, and is on record as saying he’d love to live there… My Great Nephew, I mean, not Donald Trump – although he is as well… mad about all things American… Oh I give up!

  8. Absolutely Catholics should vote for the Brexit party, I certainly will (if, as I hope, they have candidates in my area).

    Any person of principle should vote for the Brexit party, in response to the mockery of democracy we have seen since the EU referendum.

    The established parties serve no-one but themselves and need to be put to the sword, the whole system is rotten to the core.

    There are very few decent, patriotic people of principle in politics, but I do believe Nigel Farage is one of them.

    Annunziata Rees-Mogg, sister of the much vaunted Jacob, left the Conservative Party in order to stand as a Brexit Party Candidate. Its obviously the women who wear the trousers in that family. Good on her.

    She previously stood as a Conservative candidate and apparently told former PM David Cameron to sling his hook, after he tried to get her to stand using the name “Nancy Mogg”, instead of her actual name. He obviously felt the Catholic connotations and double-barred surname didn’t fit with his image of Conservatism.

    • Gabriel Syme,

      Glad you mentioned that attempt to get Annunziata to ditch her lovely name. One of my favourite Sisters of Mercy during my schooldays was called Sr Annunciata.

      I’m also glad to read that we’re all intent on voting for the Brexit Party candidate if, as you say, Gabriel Syme, there’s one standing in our region. I have to confess my ignorance about the EU election process, so will have to wait to see if any glossy leaflets drop on my door mat with the names of candidates.

      I think there will be shockwaves going through Westminster when the results come through. Something else to be glad about 😀

  9. First of all, the following is intended to be a polite and couteous contribution to the debate, and I hope those you who disagree (who I anticipate to be the majority) will respond in like fashion.

    The question posed at the top of this thread is “Should Catholics vote for the Brexit Party?”

    There are many non-religious arguments for and against EU membership, however those are not at issue here. This thread is about the specifically religious dimension to the debate.

    I am happy to concede that the EU is not a Catholic institution which seems perfectly obvious, however as Dale very succinctly pointed out above the UK isn’t either. However Dale is incorrect when he describes the UK as “secular”. In fact, in constitutional terms the UK is an explictly Protestant, and therefore anti-Catholic instution. It is a state which was deliberately formed first in 1603 and latterly in 1707 as an alliance of Protestant kingdoms against a perceived Counter-Reformatory threat from Spain and/or France. it was also a Protestant alliance for the persuance of Empire. Although the Counter-Reformatory threat no longer exists (if it ever did) and the Empire is almost completely gone, it is worth remembering that the UK state still partially occupies what it still despite its many flaws one of the most Catholic countries in Europe (Ireland) and thereby helps facilitate the ongoing persercution of the Church in that particular part of the world. At the time of the Scottish independence referendum I made this same point here, but no one seemed very keen to engage with that idea.

    Athanasius makes the point that Catholics should support “patriotic” parties. I am not necessarilly convinced of this, as patriotism can be both good and bad. My hereo GK Chesterton wrote “My country right or wrong, is as stupid as stupid as my mother drunk or sober.” However, if we concede for the sake of the argumnet that patriotism is a virtue we should aspire to, then I would like to point out that my “patria” is not the UK, an artificially created Protestant state of the eighteenth century, but rather Scotland, a “special daughter of the Catholic Church” which preceded the UK in formation by at least a thousand years. Many of you here may well be patriotic, but I would politely point out to you that you are patriotic to the wrong country.

    I also know that Scottish independence is not a popular political position here, mainly it seems to me because the SNP have made a very poor show of appealing to Catholics in recent times. (Although to my eyes no more than “Conservatives”, Labour and Liberals.) However if you really believe in subsidiarity rather than remote government by foreigners, then I submit to you that you have a responsibility to consider the independence question far more seriously than it would appear many of you do. I would also say that the reason why Conservative ideas and the centre-right are so unpopular in Scotland, is not because there is anything uniquiely peculiar about the Scottish people, but because there is something uniquely peculiar about the so-called “Coservative” party. This party is conservative in neither its economic, nor its social policy. It is an English nationalist party of establishment elites, and that is why it doesn’t travel well outside the shires of England. The only hope for the right in Scotland, is the normalisation of our politics by the rise of an idigenous Scottish centre-right party in a broadly European mould. For those of you interested in ths idea I flesh it out a bit more here: https://glasgowguardian.co.uk/2013/10/15/scottish-conservatism-isnt-for-the-old-boys/

    • Chris,

      Thank you for your thoughtful post.

      If I could jump to your comments about Scottish independence, let me tell you what I told one of the MSPs with whom I found myself in conversation recently – I’ve explained my essential position on this more than once on this blog, but, for the sake of posterity (albeit that posterity has never done anything for me! The old ones are the best…) allow me to restate it here:

      Prior to the introduction of same sex “marriage”, the Scottish Government ran two consultations on the subject. In each case the questions on the form were so convoluted, so clearly designed to make it virtually impossible for us to respond in a timely manner, that the traditional marriage organisation actually created a leaflet giving the questions again, explaining what they meant and suggesting a response. So, if you think X (which is what this question is saying), and you disagree with it, you need to answer NO. Crazy. For the record, the MSP to whom I was speaking, acknowledged all of the above.

      Still, I ploughed through the questions and even ticked the box to give permission for my answers to be made public. You can read them if you search out the responses on the Government website.

      Not alone, as it turned out, a majority (60+ per cent) of my fellow Scots gave the same answers. We did NOT want same-sex “marriage”. Again, the MSP acknowledged this fact, adding that a consultation is not the same as a binding referendum. Still, I said…

      Boldly, with what we now recognise as characteristic arrogance, Nicola Sturgeon told the world that, nevertheless, we were getting same-sex “marriage”.

      Now, you tell me, Chris; if a Government can ignore the majority opinion on such a fundamental socially revolutionary issue as marriage, where the people wished to retain the traditional family structure, why on this earth would I give them more power over me?

      Please don’t reply to say that it’s a constitutional issue not to be restricted to one Party, that the SNP won’t always be in power. They will go down in history as the heroes who won (their strange sort of) independence for Scotland, for having destroyed the traditional family unit and integral social fabric, and I am having no part in that. I would add, too, that it is to fall short of recognising the gravity of what happened as a result of ignoring those consultations, to say that “the SNP have made a very poor show of appealing to Catholics in recent times.” The SNP have overturned God’s law (as has the Westminster Parliament and as they are battling to have the Northern Ireland assembly do) and that is why, speaking for myself, I cannot vote to increase the power of any of the current crop of politicians. The Brexit Party is a single issue party which is why I can vote for that Party. Once out of the EU, I will revert to my custom of spoiling my ballot paper with a message to drive home the Godlessness of the lot of them, which is why I certainly can’t vote for any of them.

      When I say “strange sort of independence”, I refer, of course, to the unfathomable policy of Scotland remaining in the EU. I notice Nicola Sturgeon has even started referring to Scotland, no longer as aspiring to be “an independent nation” but “an independent European nation”. Last time, too, we were told we would be keeping our allegiance to the Queen and the UK currency. A truly odd type of “independence”. I can’t remember, so maybe you would enlighten me, if we would have our own Scottish army or would we be relying on the UK army for defence purposes?

      As for the issue of Catholics voting for the Brexit Party – headlines are, of course, intended to generate interest, thought, discussion and it is certainly true to say that this is not an issue of dogma, so Catholics are, of course, free to vote or not vote Brexit. And you are right to argue that the UK is constituted as a Protestant state although, I think we have to recognise that secularism has taken root to the extent that most people would not consider it to be a Christian state, merely a state using the trappings of Christianity for national occasions when it suits.

      I have typed the above off and on through a number of interruptions, so I hope it makes some sort of sense. Let me know if not…. if you dare 😀

      • Editor – Thank you for your reply. I will try to address all your points.

        You asked me not to mention that all the parties vote for homosexual marriage, but fundamentally that is the central point. Homosexual marriage is a reality not because of the actions of any one party, but because we have lost the cultural battle across the entire political spectrum. That vote was overwhelmingly carried by 105 votes to 18. Of the brave 18 who voted to oppose, you might be surprised to learn that almost half (7) were SNP members. I would also say that whilst the issue of marriage is of course hugely important, the fuss which was made of the same sex marriage debate, was in my view, a farce. Homosexuals are a tiny minority of the population, and homosexuals who wish to marry are only a tiny minority of that small population. The issue is of course extremely important in principle, but in practice, it affects almost no one. It is a few hundred people per year. Compare that, by contrast to the social catastrophe which has been wrought on countless millions across the west by first divorce, then by promiscuity, and then co-habitation, such that one in four children in this country doesn’t live with one of their parents. That is the real undermining of marriage, which has been done as a consequence of the selfishness of heterosexuals. In my view the church should get out of the marriage game altogether (as a legal enterprise) and confine itself solely to the sacramental aspect. The current legal situation makes a mockery of marriage and I don’t think we should have anything to do with it. We shouldn’t continue to dignify the current abomination with our participation.

        You ask (of the SNP or perhaps the Scottish parliament), “…why on this earth would I give them more power over me?”. I would point out that the politicians in Westminster, who you would seek to further empower via Brexit are currently engaged in loosening England’s divorce laws yet further, and imposing abortion on Northern Ireland; in this latter case in the face of genuine social opposition.

        You describe the SNP’s argument as a “strange sort of independence”. In actual fact independence is the normal state of affairs for countries, and is the normal state of affairs for Scotland, which has only been part of the UK for about a third of the time it was independent. I am not a fan of monarchies generally speaking, but I don’t think many people would argue that Canada is not independent because the Queen is head of state. I would also point out that if we were independent it would be up to the Scottish people to decide who their head of state was, rather than having it decided for them by people who live in different country. In an independent state we could democratically choose to remain as a constitutional monarchy, or to become republic. That would be our decision, not someone else’s. The same would also be true of our membership or not of the European Union.

        The argument that Scottish independence within the EU is no different to remaining within the UK bears no scrutiny at all in my view. The EU is a very loose confederation, whereas the UK is a highly centralised state. The EU has no legal competence to decide on criminal law, civil law, education, health, pensions, benefits, defence, taxation, foreign affairs, housing, to name but a few. All of which are controlled either directly or indirectly by Westminster at present.

        It was not my intention to turn this thread into a discussion of the merits or demerits of Scottish independence, which is a vast subject. It was merely to point out that if the critique of the EU is that it is an anti-Catholic institution which unreasonably draws power to the centre, then one should consider that the UK is a yet more egregious example of the same.

        • Chris,

          This will necessarily be a brief “holding” response to your reply to me, because I ought to have been elsewhere ten minutes ago, but typing ten to the dozen, here are a couple of thoughts for now…

          Firstly, you make no mention of my objection to being asked to devote a considerable amount of time to answering two deliberately difficult consultation forms, when, clearly, the SNP had no intention of allowing a result opposed to their plan to legislate for same-sex “marriage”. This reveals a level of dishonesty, above and beyond even what we have come to expect from politicians of all parties. To have spent what must have been a huge amount of tax-payers’ money putting those consultations together in the knowledge that the entire exercise was a sham, is unconscionable.

          Secondly, just because the homosexual “marriage” agenda was being implemented everywhere else, was not a reason to exempt the SNP from moral duty – quite the reverse. Had they been counter-cultural, I believe they’d have won the independence vote – I really do. And for the record, since I think I omitted to say this above, my own default position has always been that every country should be independent. I know the waters are muddied given the enthusiasm of the Scottish King (James VI) to be King of Great Britain [I hope my memory of school history is not letting me down here!] but, generally speaking I am in favour of independence. For a number of reasons, however, my default position is on hold for the foreseeable future.

          I cannot agree with your argument that if the Church were to withdraw from the legal aspect of marriage, that would somehow help. I understand that it would prevent issues arising from, for example, homosexuals demanding a Catholic wedding but in my view, that is to let the clergy and hierarchy off the hook. So far, they have not shown any backbone (let alone evidence of divine and Catholic Faith) in fighting the culture war; as it would have made the SNP shine to have stood out among governments to have refused to introduce same-sex “marriage”, so it would have provided leadership for the Catholic population (and indeed wider population, opposed to same-sex “marriage”) if they were to simply stand firm in upholding the natural moral law. Saying “no!” to those who ask for the sacraments for children they have no intention of raising as Catholics and marriage ceremonies to those wanting to marry a same-sex partners or a dog (yes, there ARE such cases) is what we need now, solid Catholic backbone, setting an example, not running away, hiding behind some legal loophole.

          As for the EU’s competence or lack of it – they seem to have plenty of competence when it comes to over-ruling English courts in the matter of deporting terrorists
          https://www.dw.com/en/eu-court-rules-al-qaeda-suspect-cannot-be-deported-to-jordan/a-15670322

          My final words on the EU for now is to recommend that you read Brussels Laid Bare by the MEP whose name escapes me at the moment. We advertised it on this blog some time ago, but if you Google you will find it advertised on Amazon. The sheer scale of the corruption (and yes, I’m aware that there will be corruption in the UK parliament and, dare I say, even in Holyrood) should be sufficient to convince anyone that it’s bad enough paying our taxes to national government(s) and seeing them squandered there, without funding a European Parliament, army etc as well.

          I’m well aware that the UK is as anti-Catholic as the EU – that’s fair comment. But why not shed at least one anti-Catholic institution when the opportunity arises? Why pay for two?

    • Olaf,

      I don’t think it’s clear which candidates we have locally – unless we just vote for one of the candidates listed for Scotland, and that’s for the whole of Scotland. I don’t think they make it easy to understand at all.

    • Political Tourist,

      What’s the name of the Brexit Party candidate for Scotland? I’ve not had any literature through the door yet, and I’m wondering how we’re supposed to know who is our candidate. I don’t understand how the European elections work, because, to be honest, I’ve never voted in one before.

  10. I have just had a quick look at an article on the UK Daily Telegraph. It was written by a woman ho has just goe\ne onto the Brexit party. She writes that never has she seen such crowds of people joining up to the Brexit idea. She says that the real mood of the People of the UK is that they want change and they want a massive change. The mood is “Lets get out of this EU Mess”. The massive hit against many Conservative Councillors is indicative of the mistrust of Politicians. The people are saying “We don’t want you”.

    • John,

      Your analysis is spot on – the local elections in England confirmed what we already knew, that the majority of the population, who voted to leave the EU, is disgusted with the machinations of the Westminster politicians to stop Brexit. It’s a shame that hard-working local Councillors had to pay the price, but there are not a lot of options for those who wish to register disapproval at what has come to be known as The Brexit Betrayal. The next few weeks – and the results of the EU elections on 23 May – will be very interesting indeed.

  11. Here’s a newspaper report about a fly-on-the-wall documentary about Brexit where the EU negotiators speak openly about their contempt for the UK
    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-theresa-may-eu-bbc-documentary-behind-closed-doors-barnier-verhofstadt-a8904156.html

    I wonder if this will help the remainers to see the truth about this corrupt project called the EU and join the rest of us in wanting to get out.

    This report is a two-part documentary called Brexit: Behind Closed Doors, and it begins tonight on BBC4. There is a clip from it on the Independent report which I have given the link to.

  12. This is Nigel Farage speaking at the EU Parliament recently – it’s interesting that he mentioned the fire at Notre Dame

  13. I heard the Green Party leader and the Lib-Dem MEP saying yesterday that only 30% of people wanted a no deal Brexit. I checked the polls just now and it says that 30% of Britons wanted no deal but 60% of leave voters wanted no deal. That’s quite a difference, isn’t it, unless I’m not understanding the polling, which is possible, as graphs etc are not my strong suit. I hate it when the politicians quote stats for that reason as I’m never sure if they are telling the whole truth about the figures.

    My other bugbear is hearing people say that the leave side lied because of the claim on the bus to give £350 million to the NHS, but this is what we would be saving when we have left the EU and it is then that it will be given to the NHS – and we haven’t left yet.

    Saying that, I heard Jacob Rees-Mogg say on LBC that the Government have actually given this amount to the NHS, knowing how important it is to people.

  14. Here is Nigel Farage interviewed on the Andrew Marr show this morning (BBC1) – from the get-go it is clear he is out to trap Nigel. Terrible interview.

  15. Yes, but he didn’t trap him, did he?! Nigel definitely came out on top in that interview. Well, I’ve put my tick in the Brexit Party box of six and I hope loads of people do. Our politicians, for the most part, are liars, deceivers and career politicians. How do we get stuck with such rogues? I really think that Nigel Farage is an honest man and the media try all the tricks in the book to get at him, digging as deeply as they can to unearth some misdemeanor or other. I hope it’s not a sin to despise them, but I do!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: