Once I was a clever boy learning the arts of Oxford... is a quotation from the verses written by Bishop Richard Fleming (c.1385-1431) for his tomb in Lincoln Cathedral. Fleming, the founder of Lincoln College in Oxford, is the subject of my research for a D. Phil., and, like me, a son of the West Riding. I have remarked in the past that I have a deeply meaningful on-going relationship with a dead fifteenth century bishop... it was Fleming who, in effect, enabled me to come to Oxford and to learn its arts, and for that I am immensely grateful.


Friday, 2 July 2010

St Thomas Oxford and Thomas Chamberlain

This weekend is the patronal feast of St Thomas the Martyr Oxford, the Anglo-Catholic church near the railway station in Oxford, and where from 2002 -5 I had the privilege of being Churchwarden.

St Thomas' keeps the feast of the Translation of the relics of St Thomas on July 7 as its principal patronal, a tradition going back there to the late nineteenth century. Indeed St Thomas was one of the few post-apostolic saints to have two feast days - those of his death and translation - in 1170 and 1220 respectively. Another to have such a double commemoration is St Cuthbert.

I retain enormous affection and regard for St Thomas', for its faithful parishioners, and for its redoubtable p-i-c and blogger, Fr Hunwicke. Living just across the churchyard from it I see it everyday and keep it and all associated with it in my prayers.

In 2003 I published a history of the church and parish as a festschrift to the last Vicar, Robert Sweeney, and in so doing realised what a special place St Thomas has in the history of the Catholic revival in the Church of England.

I still have a place there as Archivist, and by a happy coincidence Forward Plus, the free newspaper produced by Forward in Faith, has in its latest edition an article about Thomas Chamberlain, the great and remarkable vicar who established St Thomas' as one of the very first Anglo-Catholic parishes in the country. Chamberlain's fifty year ministry there from 1842 to 1892 links the era of the Tractarians to that of the Lincoln Judgment. Modesty almost forbids me to name the author of the article, but I think being a blogger is not that modest, so I will own up to having written it. You can find the article online at the website of Forward Plus by scrolling down to the article, or you can, no doubt, pick up a copy in right thinking Anglican churches.

Thomas Chamberlain, by Lewis Carroll (Charles Lutwidge Dodgson), spring 1860 - NPG P7(3) - © National Portrait Gallery, London

© National Portrait Gallery, London


This photograph of Chamberlain which illustrates the article was taken in the early 1860s by one of his colleagues from Christ Church here in Oxford - the Rev. Charles Dodgson - Lewis Carroll.

Please pray for all at St Thomas' and for its future both as a community and as a place of worship.

Anyone interested in obtaining copies of my book on the church should contact me at jrwhitehead2000@yahoo.co.uk

Precious Blood at SS Gregory and Augustine

Yesterday evening I went to the EF Mass for the Feast of the Precious Blood at SS Gregory and Augustine here in Oxford. As a feast it was a casualty of the 1960s changes in the Novus Ordo so it was good to be able once again to observe it.

Whilst at the church I had an opportunity to admire their latest addition as part of their renovation project - the paintings of SS George, Frideswide, Bede and Anne Line, together with Bl.Humphrey Pritchard and the soon to be Bl. John Henry Newman. These have joined the other saints - Peter and Paul, John Fisher and Thomas More flanking the altar, and all participating, one sensed, in the everlasting thanksgiving for and adoration of the Precious Blood.

Wednesday, 30 June 2010

Thought for the Day




Prince Metternich
Portrait by Sir Thomas Lawrence.


"What is true of religious dogma is equally true of principles of government. To discuss them is often dangerous and always useless."

Metternich

I know you will be wondering (go on, admit it), if of course you do not already know, but, in addition to the jewel of the Order of the Golden Fleece, I believe that the riband the Prince is wearing is that of the Order of St Stephen of Hungary.


Tuesday, 29 June 2010

EF Masses in Oxford in July


Regular Masses:

Sunday 8am (Low Mass) Oxford Oratory


Wednesday 6pm (Low Mass) SS Gregory & Augustine, Woodstock Road

Thursday 9am (Low Mass: readings in the vernacular) St Anthony of Padua, Headley Way
(not on July 1st )


Saturday 9.30am (Low Mass) St Birinus, Dorchester on Thames

Other celebrations in July:

Thursday July 1st Precious Blood
6pm Low Mass, SS Gregory & Augustine

Friday July 2nd First Friday
6
pm, Low Mass, SS Gregory & Augustine

Sunday July 11th Solemn Parish Mass
10.30 am,
SS Gregory & Augustine

Petrine claims

The Lion And The Cardinal recently had this picture of one of the less well known Papal tiaras. and I thought I would share it to mark the Feast of SS Peter and Paul.



It was presented to Pope Pius IX in 1871 by the ladies of the royal court of Belgium to commemorate the 25th anniversary of his coronation, and was made by Jean Baptiste Bethume of Ghent.
  • Upper crown inscribed: IESV CHRISTI VICARIO INFALLIBILI - To The Infallible Vicar of Jesus Christ.
  • Middle crown inscribed: ORBIS SVPREMO IN TERRA RECTORI - To the Supreme Governor of the World on Earth
  • Lower crown inscribed: REGUM ATQVE POPVLORVM PATRI - To the Father of Nations and Kings.
In recent year this tiara has been shown in various exhibitions around the world. Personally I think this one of the least attractive of the surviving Papal tiaras, but it is an interesting example of the genre.

And, just in case you feel you need to ask - of course I am in favour of the restoration of the use of the Papal tiara.

Monday, 28 June 2010

Sarajevo remembered


Few events in human history, even allowing for the dangers of post hoc ergo propter hoc reasoning, have had as direct an impact on the lives of everyone ever since as the assassination of Archduke FranzFerdinand and his wife in Sarajevo on this day in 1914.
View Image

The Archduke and Duchess leaving Sarajevo Town Hall

With those two pistol shots the world changed forever, whether we like the fact or not. In those split seconds the modern political world was born. We were and are all affected by what happened that morning. At that moment an older world, founded on traditional perceptions was symbolically as well as literally shot down by the forces of disorder and revolution.Whatever devil's brew of Bosnian history lay behind the actions of the plotters they fell into the dangerous trap of believing that one person can and should be punished for grievances, real or imagined, in the past as much as the present - things for which their victim was hardly responsible. They had the dangerous delusion that the violent overthrow of a traditional order will produce something better. It doesn't. It will almost certainly result in horrors far worse than before.

Whatever the military arguments about Austria's policy in the Balkans and how to respond, the assassination of the heir to the throne of the Dual Monarchy was an assault upon the very principles upon which it was based - Franz Ferdinand may not have been popular with many in Vienna or Budapest, but he was the next in line to the throne which held the whole together. The evidence since 1918 suggests that such a Danubian union was no bad thing.

View Image

The car leaves the Town Hall on its fatal journey

Last year I read David James Smith's One Morning in Sarajevo, which is an eminently readable account of the events. Published in 2008 It is based on established research plus insights he has derived from visits recently to Bosnia, and contact with relatives of some of the conspirators. Written with pace and a feeling for the locations it has something of the sense of a film or television script which engages the reader's attention. In all that it builds upon Vladimir Dedijer's classic and magisterial The Road to Sarajevo of 1967, although Dedijer has far more about the background - I am in the course of reading it at the moment. Smith has, however, been able to use a definitive account of the trial of the conspirators, which was not available in a full edition in the 1960s.

Smith is fair minded and even-handed, though I would be less inclined to the human sympathy he at times shows towards the Young Bosnian terrorists.

What emerges from his interpretation is, amongst others, a group of young radical nationalists engaging in "gesture politics" - the Archduke is coming to Sarajevo - one of us ought to try to kill him - appears to have been part of their reasoning. Princip himself showed no remorse for the death of the Archduke himself and excused his responsibility for the Great War by saying it would have happened anyway. Others were typical of a certain type of political fanatic - family men with settled careers who were driven by political extremism to terror with unimaginable consequences, yet men seemingly rather surprised to be brought to account for what they had done.

What is also terrifying is the way in which a series of misadventures allowed Princip to be where he was and given the opportunity to shoot. The actions leading to the assassination and the events of the day itself, let alone what happened during the next month, open up a whole range of "what ifs" and "if onlys". I am no great believer in 'counter-factual history' per se, but here such thoughts do bring to mind the range of possibilities that might have happened, with very different consequences.

Whether or not a world war would have broken our sooner or later is, in my opinion, open to question - I am not an inevitabilist - and Smith points to indications of a desire on the part of European leaders to defuse international tensions by 1913. Princip's shots were to prove fatal to that hope - they had the effect of bringing the house down, whether or not it was destined to fall. To blame the war on impersonal forces, however much they contributed to the mind-set of the day, is to deny personal responsibilty for individuals' actions, and their consequences - forseen and unforeseen. That applies to the choices made by political and military leaders in the wake of the assassination, but it must also, definitively, apply to the conspirators. Had there been no assassination we cannot be sure there would have been a conflict anyway. There is no escape clause there.

Since Dedijer wrote the union of the South Slavs as Yugoslavia has disintegrated, and Smith highlights this and its consequences. He also informed me of something I did not realise, that the last of the conspirators,Vaso Čubrilović, only died in 1990. Perhaps Smith's most chilling, or shocking, quotation comes from a Muslim Sarajevo taxi driver who when asked by Smith to take him to the conspirator's graves - once a shrine to Slav nationalism, but now largely shunned and neglected - said "Why do you want to go there? If it had n't been for them we'd still have been in Austria and better off." Thus two world wars, the terrible events in Yugoslavia between 1941 and 1945, post war reprisals, years of Tito's rule, the disintegration and fighting of the 1990s and since, the still unresolved questions, the years of human misery of flight and exile, misery and oppression, brutality and murder, not to mention what has happened to Europe and the world - all are somehow put in a context that challenges all of the decisions and choices made since 1914.
View Image
The bodies of the Archduke and Duchess lying in state

As I read these detailed accounts of what happened, so minutely recorded - including a photograph taken only seconds before Princip fired - you can see the car wheels turning to take the car along the original not the revised route, which gave the assassin his chance (and much more interesting than who might or might not have been on the grassy knoll in Dallas in 1963), I felt a mounting, palpable urge to shout out "Don't shoot!" Mentally I did, yet I know, of course, it echoes down a void of almost a century, unheeded.

I would urge anyone interested to read not only Dedijer or Smith but other books on the last years of the Austro-Hungarian Empire - to understand what happened, and indeed what might have happened, is to understand more about the way our civilisation has gone in the last century. To ask questions about what happened, and why, and was it all avoidable is, I have long believed, important. However one interprets those years, whoever you are inclined to support, in the choices being made one sees much more then "mere" political or military history.




The Archduke's funeral procession in Vienna


Pray for the repose of the soul of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and Duchess Sophie, and for all those affected by their deaths, both departed and living - which is, lest we forget, all of us.


Saturday, 26 June 2010

Valle Adurni on Anglican difficulties

Fr Finnegan at Valle Adurni has had several reflective and sympathetic articles on his blog this week about the issues facing Anglo-Catholics and Anglicans less likely to make the transit of the Tiber. He looks at the issue of taking one's church with one - he is not optimistic , at Anglican priestly formation - commented on by Fr Hunwicke, and at the decline in traditional Anglo-Catholic parishes - all of us former Anglicans have witnessed that. These are pieces well worth looking at, and have been picked up by some of the other blogs.

He stresses the need for the prayers and charity of Catholics who want to see those who believe as they do gathered into full communion.

Friday, 25 June 2010

Swedish Royal Wedding

The wedding last weekend of the Crown Princess of Sweden appears, from what I have seen and read to have been a splendid occasion. There is official coverage on the Swedish Monarchy website, and on the Radical Royalist site.

As in this country it gave an opportunity for the mean-spirited and such like minorities to mutter republican ideas and grumble about the cost, all of which seems to have been rather confounded by a successful and joyful wedding. Some of the coverage in the lead up to the wedding touched on this as in a rather predictable Royal wedding triggers Swedish monarchy debate - Washington Times but the general health of the Swedish monarchy as an institution appears good, as in the articles on this site Official Gateway to Sweden, The and in this article analysing the place of the monarchy in Swedish society The monarchy gives Sweden political innocence.

This is interesting in the light of the new Constitution of 1974 which removed all direct exercise of prerogative power from the monarch and the 1980 legislation which gave complet parity in the succession to women - hence the Crown Princess has a younger brother Prince Carl-Philip, who was briefly Crown Prince from his birth in 1979 until the following year. Whatever one might think of these pieces of legislation they do not appear to have weakened the monarchy - indeed giving women equal inheritance rights was seen as strenthening it by the centre-right government in 1980.

I am old enough to recall the idea being circulated around 1973 when King Gustav VI Adolf died that the age disparity between him and his grandson, the present King Carl XVI Gustav was such that the monarchy would wither between the old age of one monarch and the youth of his successor. That does not seem to have happened - the monarchy appears youthful, glamourous and popular. The instant pundits were wrong again it would appear.



From a British standpoint it was, in my opinion, sad that on the official group photograph the Earl and Countess of Wessex were not included, and seem to be excluded along with members of non-regnant houses, such as Romania and Serbia, or the Liechtensteins. Whatever the reasons the presence of the Queen's youngest son and his wife seems rather less high profile than the representation of the other reigning dynasties. This looks rather like the public tendency of the House of Windsor to keep other reigning, never mind non-regmant, dynasties at something like arms-length on occasions other than when they choose their presence - as in the Garter procession with other monarchs to mark the Queen's Jubilee in 2002, or at the wedding of the Prince and Princess of Wales in 1981. This seems to go back to King George V's choices in 1917 about his name and foreign titles, and one that seems very different to those meetings of the "Royal Mob" in the days of Queen Victoria and King Edward VII. Other royal houses seem much more comfortable displaying monarchical solidarity.