What is in Kelvin's Head?

Review of Predictions for 2018

31/12/2018

On 1 January I made predictions for the coming year. Time to see how I got on.

1 – General Election in the second half of the year.

Well, no we didn’t and the government linger on. Not right

2 – “…and as the polls close, our exit poll predicts that the Conservative Party is unlikely to be able to form a new government…”

Well, the government did linger on of a fashion. N/A

3 – The next but one leader of the Conservative Party becomes Ruth Davidson MP.

Too soon to tell. Not right yet.

4 – The hipsters get bored of vinyl and discover cameras with actual, you know, film.

In September, I happened upon three or four hipster types from Denmark in the cathedral grounds taking photographs for a fashion shoot in Belgium. They had stopped shooting for a moment…. to reload film canasters. Right – but likely to become more common yet.

5 – No date for a new referendum on Scottish Independence.

No date for a new referendum and no great call for one either. Right.

6 – No progress for LGBT affirming Anglicans in England.

Sadly correct. Right

7 – Progress for LGBT affirming Anglicans elsewhere, particularly Brazil.

Stunning progress in Brazil – marriage agreed by huge majority on synod floor. (And who else saw that coming!) Right.

8 – Increasing realisation that sexual abuse is part of church culture. #churchtoo #metoo.

Yes – meetings happening all over the place trying to work out how to respond. Few coherent policies yet. Right.

9 – FTSE lower at the end of 2018 than it is at the beginning. (7687)

As I write this the FTSE is at 6728 – worst year in a decade. Right

10 – The end of the beard.

Those with style, manners and culture have seen the error of their ways and shaved. A few young and misguided types cling on. Completely and utterly right.

Not a bad year, I think.

23 responses to “Nuptials Review”

Hermano David | Brother Dahâ€¢veed

30/04/2011

It is funny, Ryan, that you mention that the couple have been “living together” for some time. I mentioned that at Padre Bosco’s Liturgy blog in a conversation about Kate’s private confirmation service and felt I was poo-pooed for being a traditionalist. I had mentioned that I felt the confirmation seemed like legalisms so that he could still be the future King and playing church for a couple who had been publicly cohabiting for some while already.

Agatha, you jumped to that conclusion by yourself, you naughty girl! I was suggesting just the opposite, that had Adam found a suitable companion there would not likely have been any hanky panky in the story.

BTW, what you hint about is illegal here also.

The primates of Ireland and Wales were invited, as well as, the Archbishop of York, but I have not noticed them in the BBC video.

What I did not realize by watching the Royal Channel feed directly from the BBC, was that folks who watched the feed on the TV networks were subjected to the mindless banter of ill informed news commentators, including the American Broadcasting Company’s insipid, cotton candy-ish Tournament of Roses Parade commentating team, whose repartee is usually constrained to such fascinating topics as the array of exotic barks and the number of celery seeds applied to a particular parade float!

On the Royal Channel there was no prattle, just the events as they unfolded with a crisp HD picture for my 24″ display, great color and excellent audio, the music was wonderful. I have raced through the on demand video and listened to the music and played it for others a few times now.

Reply
1. kelvin
  
  30/04/2011
  
  I certainly saw the Primate of All Ireland on the video. I think he was in the quire rather than by a tree, but I’m not sure now. It is turning into an Ecclesiastical version of Where’s Wally, isn’t it.
  
  Whilst on the topic of the Archbishop of York, it’s worth taking in his comments on cohabiting, milk and cows.
  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/royal-wedding/8481736/Royal-wedding-Archbishop-backs-William-and-Kates-decision-to-live-together-before-marriage.html
  
  Reply
ryan

30/04/2011

any excuse, eh? 😉

Plus, evangelical churches (say) tend to be more MILFalicious than most, so I suppose that the scenario I describe could have happened to *some* clergyperson.

Reply
Hermano David | Brother Dahâ€¢veed

30/04/2011

It appears that Kate also forgot an important family tradition! This was begun by the late Queen Mother at her wedding, and was followed by the Queen, as well as Princess Diana and it had been reported that Kate would also lay her bouquet on the Tomb of the Unknown on her way out of the church. But I recall that she still had it in the state carriage and at one point she had handed it to the Prince as she was climbing into the coach.

Reply
1. kelvin
  
  30/04/2011
  
  I believe that the plan was always to carry the bouquet back to Buckingham Palace and then send it back to the Abbey to be put on the tomb later.
  
  I think it may be something to do with having the flowers for the official photographs.
  
  Reply
Stewart

30/04/2011

@Hermano David | Brother Dahâ€¢veed – Diana would not have done on the way out after the service as her wedding was at St Paul’s – not the Abbey.

Reply
Hermano David | Brother Dahâ€¢veed

30/04/2011

That will teach me to accept what Statesonian commentators say, rather than research it myself. The Wiki says that the brides send their bouquet that day after the wedding to the tomb.

That is right Stewart, Diana’s funeral was help in the Abbey.

Reply
Agatha

01/05/2011

I guess Kelvin, you have never met a bride who was marrying the second in line to the throne. Surely their marriage is all about procreation. Not to say they don’t love each other etc but it is a hereditary monarchy.

Reply