Tom Wright descends into moral fog

From here:

Consider the following scenario. A group of Irish republican terrorists carries out a bombing raid in London. People are killed and wounded. The group escapes, first to Ireland, then to the US, where they disappear into the sympathetic hinterland of a country where IRA leaders have in the past been welcomed at the White House. Britain cannot extradite them, because of the gross imbalance of the relevant treaty. So far, this seems plausible enough.

But now imagine that the British government, seeing the murderers escape justice, sends an aircraft carrier (always supposing we’ve still got any) to the Nova Scotia coast. From there, unannounced, two helicopters fly in under the radar to the Boston suburb where the terrorists are holed up. They carry out a daring raid, killing the (unarmed) leaders and making their escape. Westminster celebrates; Washington is furious.

What’s the difference between this and the recent events in Pakistan? Answer: American exceptionalism. America is subject to different rules to the rest of the world. By what right? Who says?

Tom Wright seems more interested in the process that leads to justice than the act of justice itself – a bit like a Dilbert cartoon that I had pinned to my office wall for a number of years saying, “We take pride in our processes”. Presumably Wright would have been more content to have bin Laden tried by due process, found innocent and released than be the recipient of a summarily delivered hole in the head.

Judging by his selective quotation of Scripture and inane view that cultural and national values are morally equal, it’s hard to believe that Tom Wright hasn’t allowed anti-Americanism to cloud his judgement.

Temporal justice is never perfect: Tom Wright’s version of it amplifies its imperfections to the point of vacuity.

 

The Church of England selling the family jewels

From here:

The Church of England has been secretly plotting the sale of one of its greatest treasures, a set of paintings worth an estimated £15 million, despite concerns the move will provoke a furore.

Leaked documents show senior officials are acutely aware there could be a backlash if the 12 paintings that have hung in the historic home of the Bishops of Durham for 250 years disappeared into the hands of a ‘billionaire from Russia’.

The confidential documents also reveal the Church Commissioners, the Church’s financial arm, have hired a London public relations firm for up to £37,000 to handle the predicted outcry over the sale.

The Commissioners, who include the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, faced such a storm when they last raised the prospect of selling the paintings ten years ago that they were forced to shelve the idea.

Art lovers, MPs and even the then Bishop of Durham, Tom Wright, expressed outrage that the collection of large canvases by the 17th Century Spanish master Francisco de Zurbaran could be moved from its home and even broken up or sold abroad.

No doubt the Church of England needs the cash to continue to promote its “mission” – whatever that is – or perhaps to continue to house its bishops in style – including, up until recently,  Tom Wright, whose attachment to some very expensive paintings doesn’t prevent him noting that in the world the rich get rich at the expense of the poor. One wonders how future bishops of Durham will be able to bring themselves to continue pontificating on the evils of poverty without the consolation of being surrounded by the aesthetic delights of the Spanish masters.