Thursday, May 24, 2007

Unaccustomed as His Grace is...

Cranmer is not one to boast, but it would appear that last night he won an award in the inaugural ConservativeHome ‘Best Conservative Blog’ awards. He triumphed in the ‘Best Anonymous Blog’ category.



ConservativeHome said: ‘His Grace writes in the persona of the man who was burned at the stake almost five hundred years ago, even in emails and blog comments. The aim of this blog is to "investigate and expose religio-politics or politico-religiosity, whatever the cost" (or more specifically, conservative-Christianity and Christian-conservatism). He does this with moral seriousness and intellectual rigour, bringing some refreshing common sense to some of the touchiest subjects in British politics.

Cranmer is humbled and honoured. He would like to thank all of his Communicants for making this blog what it is – a manifest beacon of intelligent and erudite comment on a plane well beyond the ‘tabloid’ mentality of most of the medium. Indeed, His Grace is aware of undergraduates who download comment threads and submit them as their own theses...

His Grace was not, however, able to be present at the ceremony, but an acceptance speech made on his behalf read as follows:

His Grace apologises that he is not able to be with you in person, owing to the lack of a corporeal state. He is both honoured and humbled to have been voted ‘Best Anonymous Blog’ by the evidently discerning readers of ConservativeHome.

Both in the pulpit and at the despatch box, it is increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to articulate one’s views on sensitive issues without them being purposely misrepresented. Thus the church embraces ‘multi-faith’, or else it is bigoted; and politics embraces ‘multi-cultural’, or else it is ‘racist’.

And to take a contrary view from the prevailing religio-political zeitgeist is to invite ridicule, isolation, and other forms of persecution. Those who insist that politics and religion should not mix understand neither religion nor politics. And in today’s world, it is naïve to assert that the one has nothing to do with the other.

His Grace is proud to be (in this order) Christian, English and Conservative. He prays that the importance of the philosophy and foundations of all three might be rediscovered by the Conservative Party, and that a period of righteous government might begin in the UK in 2009.

However, the winning of this award presents Cranmer with a dilemma. It would now appear that a bottle of champagne awaits him, but to collect it would be to negate the very category in which His Grace triumphed. To not collect would be to let a perfectly good bottle of champers go down the throats of Mssrs Montgomerie and Coates. So far, one (un)helpful suggestion has been received:

I recommend that His Grace's award be poured onto a roaring fire, as a libation.
It's What He Would Have Wanted.

Cranmer would be most interested to hear from his intelligent and erudite communicants. If a problem may be halved in the sharing, a dilemma may certainly be progressed towards resolution…


Anonymous Voyager said...

The jereboam should be delivered to a church of His Grace's choice and used as Communion wine in a thanksgiving service

24 May 2007 at 09:51  
Blogger Gerv said...

Her Majesty's Royal Mail will happily carry bottles, if correctly packed. Anonymous mail forwarding services such as mailnetwork (disclaimer: I've never tried them, or any other provider of this service) should complete the picture. It may take a little while, but eventually your Grace will be able to quaff anonymously and in peace. :-)

24 May 2007 at 10:04  
Blogger Hanson said...

Your Grace,
First of all, congratulations. Well deserved.

Secondly a question: Did you express any opinion about alcohol before 1556? Just interested.

Third, can you recommend any good biographies about yourself?

24 May 2007 at 10:05  
Anonymous bob said...

Congratulations on your award which is thorougly deserved.

As for you champagne I might suggest that you lobby the Royal Navy to commission a ship bearing the name HMS Cranmer and use the champagne upon its launch.

24 May 2007 at 10:24  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Third, can you recommend any good biographies about yourself?

Mr Hanson,

The superlative one is 'Thomas Cranmer: A Life', by one Diarmaid MacCulloch.

24 May 2007 at 10:30  
Blogger Mr Eugenides said...

Your Grace could always send a sacristan to the pickup on your behalf.

A well deserved award, by the way.

24 May 2007 at 11:13  
Blogger Praguetory said...

How about presenting the prize to the other nominated anonymous bloggers? Might slim down the competition for next year.

24 May 2007 at 11:19  
Blogger botogol said...

Well Done, your Grace.
How about offering a prize for the best comment..

24 May 2007 at 12:40  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How about a prize to the best sermon/talk, regarding your Grace's 450th anniversary of that fateful day, as published in 2006? I only read 2 - one was outstanding (IMO) the other, well er, best not said. GregB

Thomas Cranmer - Faithful Unto Death By Fire

24 May 2007 at 12:58  
Blogger Cranmer said...

His Grace is presently torn between bestowing this champagne upon a communicant, or despatching it to a highly-deserving Member of Parliament...

'Best comment' competitions are a little pointless on a blog with so many intelligent, erudite, and witty communicants. But which MP might be worthy...?

24 May 2007 at 13:20  
Blogger C4' said...

Send it to a mosque!

24 May 2007 at 13:33  
Anonymous Voyager said...

or despatching it to a highly-deserving Member of Parliament...

Norman Baker......

24 May 2007 at 13:55  
Anonymous G Eagle Esq said...

His Grace Archbishop Cranmer

Your Grace

Well done

I have the honour to remain your Grace's obedient servant and

Tot siens

G Eagle

24 May 2007 at 15:55  
Anonymous Peter O said...

Your Grace,

As an ordained representative of the church that you so wonderfully helped to shape and as a fellow conservaitve blogger, I am quite happy to receive and drink the aforementioned bottle on your behalf, given that you seem to suggest that your drinking hand is most unworthy...

24 May 2007 at 16:23  
Blogger Captain Nice said...

Well done, your Archbishopness.

I agwree about morwal serwiousness and intellectual wigour.

His Archbishopness challenges his readers to go one better than cynicism and wrancour - and they do.

Well done again. I have enjoyed weading your blog since it began.

(Dictated by state-of-the-art Zenith Voice Recognition Algorithm Technology)

24 May 2007 at 16:56  
Anonymous kgqwqkzy said...

Don't waste it on a flamboyant gesture.

The word verification happens also to be my name; is this a portent?

24 May 2007 at 17:56  
Anonymous Theo Lomas (BUCF) said...

Your Grace,

Thank you for the kind words, we really do appreciate them. We would also like to give you our thanks, it was an award well deserved.

Kind Regards,

Theo Lomas

Chairman, BUCF

24 May 2007 at 19:16  
Anonymous Theo Lomas (BUCF) said...

(Yours that is!!!)

24 May 2007 at 19:20  
Anonymous Colin said...

Again congratulations, Your Grace!

"His Grace apologises that he is not able to be with you in person, owing to the lack of a corporeal state.."

What about a resurrection in order to enjoy the bottle of champagne? And skoal!

"His Grace is aware of undergraduates who download comment threads and submit them as their own theses".

Congratulations, Mr. Voyager and Miss Jelly Bean, for co-authering the theses in the faculty of theology. Would Your Grace be kind enough to ask his students to also express their gratitude by sending a bottle of champagne to each of these co-authors.

24 May 2007 at 19:43  
Anonymous Terry said...

Nominate Edward Leigh of Cornerstone to receive it for you

24 May 2007 at 19:44  
Blogger Cranmer said...


Via this thread and email, five MPs have emerged:

Norman Baker
Iain Duncan Smith
Ann Widdecombe
Edward Leigh
Frank Field

If there are no others, and no overwhelmingly endorsed candidate, His Grace will have to make a 'Spirit-led' decision.

24 May 2007 at 20:54  
Anonymous Mike H said...

His Grace could, pehaps, flog it on Ebay and donate the proceeds to a deserving charity?

24 May 2007 at 21:15  
Anonymous Snuffy said...

Your acceptance speech had me laughing out loud. Well done. You do indeed deserve it.

As for the bottle, I look forward to hearing what you decide.


24 May 2007 at 21:26  
Anonymous Philipa said...

Many congrats your Grace.
Richly deserved.
Best wishes from Fortean Times.

24 May 2007 at 21:41  
Anonymous Miss Jelly Bean said...

Colin, your thoughts and considerations are much appreciated. Might I remind you though, being the committed Muslim that I believe myself to be (or try to be), I take no indulgence (if there is any) in the consumption of champagne or any of the like.

24 May 2007 at 21:43  
Blogger jailhouselawyer said...

Of course I questioned the anonymous label, because Cranmer is anything but anonymous. I suspect that they are referring to the identity of the person behind Cranmer. Your secret is safe with me your Grace...

24 May 2007 at 22:11  
Anonymous Colin said...

Miss Jelly Bean,

Hhm, sorry. Obviously, you are a good girl. Is there no fun permitted for a good Muslim girl except to debate with voyager about the bible?

The bestselling book Girls of Riyadh of the beautiful hijab wearing Rajaa Alsanea suggests that there isn't much difference between Western and Muslims girls: "Living in a society with strict cultural traditions while Sex and the City, dating and sneaking around behind their parents backs consume their lives, these four young girls face numerous social, romantic, professional and sexual tribulations."

After all, we are all human, aren't we. What is your view about the book if you had time to read it despite your exams? No desire to congratulate His Grace for the award?


Oh, come on, Miss Jelly Bean. He his a great guy. He lets you and me openly criticise his religion on his own blog. How many Muslim blogs would do the same?

24 May 2007 at 22:39  
Anonymous Colin said...

The Jailhouselawyer wrote "Your secret is safe with me your Grace... "


But it is an open secret that his real name is Benedict no. 16.

24 May 2007 at 22:46  
Anonymous Miss Jelly bean said...

I have no doubt in the slightest that Cranmer is indeed a 'great guy' and I really enjoy contributing to his blog. I both respect and admire his intelligence and zealous personality when discussing matters religio-political. His unconcealed and undisguised criticism of Islam (in certain respects) possesses an air of challenge which cannot be easily condoned.

In regards to the book Colin, yes I would read it. Your assumption "after all, we are all human, aren't we" intrigues me. Indeed we are all human and yes we have desires which we would like to fulfill once in a while. But some seek to go beyond that and what you may view as the restricted monotony of living a religious life, will not be perceived as such by the one who is de facto living that life. If we come to analyse the psychological nature of man, there were certain codes of morality which were only based on the notion that man is a rational human being and place little claim on the animal within him. Others gave more entitlement to the animalistic nature of man and ignored the rational being within him. I feel both need to be considered which is what Islam does, so as to not deprive you of one or the other. But of course, in order to achieve a balance, one needs to go by a set of laws which form limitations, and I feel man needs limitations to adhere to.

25 May 2007 at 10:19  
Blogger Quentin Langley said...

The best suggestion above is the eBay auction with proceeds going to a suitable charity.

A variant would be to have it raffled for charity or political group, which was my first thought.

Quentin Langley
Editor of

25 May 2007 at 11:32  
Anonymous Kafka said...

One would think it entirely appropriate to have it forwarded to the Lady Margaret .......

25 May 2007 at 12:03  
Anonymous Colin said...

Miss Jelly Bean,

I appreciate your excellent comment and kind words about Cranmer which demonstrate your noble character.

Moreover, I agree with your views concerning limitations. We only differ with regard to the person who should tell us what to do and what not to do. The libertarian view is that the individual himself is responsible and nobody has the right to tell him or her as long as he or she doesn't harm anybody else. This follows from Kant's reasoning about the universal laws of ethical behaviour. However, I understand that priests have a vested interest in demanding the leadership in these matters. And as long that they don't proclaim to restrict the liberties of humans, religion is beneficial.

26 May 2007 at 13:59  
Blogger shergar said...

I'm an award-winning blogger. Ish what I do! Hic!

26 May 2007 at 22:00  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Oh Colin, how does the Kantian System work with those who are Existentialists and refuse to accept Kant's Universality Postulate ?

What if they simply don't believe in Kant ?

27 May 2007 at 22:17  
Anonymous Colin said...

Oh Voyager,

Good point. But the question was if anybody else should have power over you to dictate what you may do, even if you don't harm anybody else. Kant said no and that's the libertarian view.

BTW, it also follows from your excellent insight that positions of power are not infrequently occupied by psychopaths who will abuse their power to their own advantage and to your disadvantage. The libertarian views derive exactly from these historical experiences and insights. I can't see any major disagreement between your and my view. Your point is that there are always people who refuse to accept the principle of liberty. Correct. And their attempts to enslave others have to be stopped if possible. But this is only possible if people first accept the principle of liberty. If people accept anti-libertarian principles such as fascism, sharia, communism etc., it is impossible to prevent tyranny.

28 May 2007 at 17:10  
Anonymous Voyager said...

There is no difference in our views on that Colin, but my point was simply that in calling up Kant as an arbiter invites the response what if you are dealing with a non-Kantian.

The basis of consensus is that we agree on the same rules. Kant was trying to find a rational moral basis behind religious values in an era of acclerated atheism during The Enlightenment.......the fact that he created a moral framework which Paton called the Moral Law produced The Categorical Imperative which has a few flaws when applied.

The fact is that if you go to play tennis and your adversary brings a baseball bat, you know you cannot beat him to death.....

29 May 2007 at 07:04  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older