Wednesday, April 22, 2009

A crucifying budget

Cranmer was going to write about zombies. What else did David Cameron mean when he referred to Labour as the ‘government of the living dead’?

He was hoping to find an outstanding zombification graphic from the excellent Mr Beau Bo D’Or. But he found only the Chancellor of the Exchequer crucified.

There is a problem with this. Unlike ordinary mortals, for whom there is the assurance of resurrection, there is no such hope for the un-dead. Cranmer is no expert on zombies, but he believes them to be finally and utterly extinguished by decapitation or breaking of the neck.

The British people are being financially crucified by this budget. The levels of debt are obscene, and, in the absence of cuts in public spending, the only option is to tax and tax again. We shall be paying for New Labour's economic incompetence for generations to come. The Spectator Observes: 'Even taking inflation into account... the amount that will be borrowed from 2008-09 to 2013-14 is more than the debt this country ran up to win World War One, World War Two and the Napoleonic Wars combined. Where Napoleon, the Kaiser and Hitler could not exhaust our national financial resources, there is a real chance that this Government might do so.'

This was a fundamentally dishonest budget with deceptive forecasts from a delusional Chancellor in damaging denial. There can now be no hope or expectation that Alastair Darling may ever be resurrected, at least politically.

Whether New Labour be cremated or buried six feet under is unimportant. Whether they have an open-air pyre floating down the Thames or a clinical incineration in Hounslow is immaterial. They are dead, undeniably and reliably, not only merely but really and most sincerely.

32 Comments:

Blogger Demetrius said...

Perhaps the Government are all huddled together in the Cabinet Room listening to soothing music. Later RTE Lyric FM will be doing Brahms "German Requiem", in memory of the Irish Economy. Failing that there is an excellent DVD of Mahler's 2nd Symphony, known as "The Resurrection". If this is well as bit too well, uppish, they can always put on the CD of the Aussie group Full Fathom Five.

22 April 2009 at 18:06  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your Grace, please take down the illustration. I find it offensive. Am I the only one?

22 April 2009 at 18:27  
Anonymous oiznop said...

I had a sharp intake of breath but I can see the point. I don't particularly like it though. I guess if you find it offensive, like the BBC, you're free to turn it off or log out.

22 April 2009 at 18:36  
Blogger McKenzie said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

22 April 2009 at 18:41  
Anonymous not a machine said...

agree with you mckenzie , we are now faced with somthing that sucessfull economics doesnt have an answer for yet , namely destroying the basic natural productive mechanisms to sustain us all .

its as though we all have a big car and big house , but be short on food and water.

as for the budget , we are no nearer to knowing what went off in these banks that we own or what exactly these toxic debts are , which is a disgrace in its self , i keep asking my self why the need to be so secret , what is there to hide ???

also the borrowing is a huge risk as it is based on predicted growth , which may not materialise in sufficient flow to make the borrowings reduce , we could go like japan with a stagnent economy but with huge debts

22 April 2009 at 21:06  
Anonymous Chocolate Mousse (Light) said...

I also find the picture offensive.

22 April 2009 at 21:14  
Anonymous no nonny said...

I don't like the picture - I respond negatively to crucifixes and affective piety. To me, they are sick, insulting both the One on view and the viewer.

Perhaps that's why, the more I think about this one (don't need a second look) the more I recognize its quality as satire. e.g: It crucifies the killers of Christ; it crucifies the self-styled saviours of the world (nEU liebour and the marxists); it turns the affective spin right back on the spinners.

Yes, I can see justification for it. These are terrible and bitter times.

22 April 2009 at 21:16  
Anonymous Hereward said...

It's almost a perfect picture: an enemy of our nation getting his just deserts beneath the symbol of his crime. It's one thief short, though.

22 April 2009 at 21:24  
Blogger McKenzie said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

22 April 2009 at 22:28  
Anonymous TBF said...

The picture is offensive, but it's supposed to be. I don't know why I'm addicted to your blog, Cranmer, but I come here every day. I don't leave many comments but I read and learn. You're the best blog on the web for the mix of religion and politics and I think you should go full-time and professional because the so-called professionals just aren't that good . I've made a small contribution to your collection plate - I don't want thanks or any glory. Just to show support.

22 April 2009 at 22:32  
Anonymous church mouse said...

As our very brilliant vicar reminded us on Easter Sunday - the crucifix and the cross, in themselves, are not unique. They were, originally, symbols of shame and disgrace: capital punishment for criminals. The Pagan, Secular, Humanist, Romans crucified thousands of people, before and after Christ.

As Father D. said, what makes the symbol unique for Christianity is the Resurrection and Ascension that followed Christ's 'dispatch'; and the Salvation He avails us.

As we see, the Budget -makers/breakers have not such powers. And the Wood, the ship of the soul* ...will do what with them?

I know we should tell the Comrades that they offend us; and this picture boomerangs the offence right off the other cheek. Superb.

But the tough bit is making myself pray for these enemies! As I think it through, I envisage an exercise in 'Imitatio Christi' -"Father, forgive them..." His example included humility: and forbade vengeance.

Ah Cranmer; the Cross of Christ was ever a vehicle for meditation. Thank you.

* St. Augustine; Commentary on the Gospel of St. John 1: 1-5.

22 April 2009 at 22:51  
Anonymous len said...

The Good shepherd died for His sheep.
This government has merely fleeced the sheep.
and yes, the picture is offensive, your impeccable good taste seems to have deserted you your Grace.

22 April 2009 at 23:03  
Anonymous Hank Petram said...

Your Grace,

I can certainly see why some of my fellow-communicants find the illustration offensive, and not just the ultra-Protestants among them. My objection, though, is of a different kind. The current tenant of No. 11 is not even a victim, let alone a saviour. He is the one doing the crucifying. Might I respectfully suggest the eleventh station of the cross, Christ is Nailed to the Cross, with Comrade Alastair’s smirking features photoshopped onto the Roman soldier wielding the hammer.

Your blessings, my Lord.

22 April 2009 at 23:22  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Someone has put weight on in here, I can hear the ice cracking.

22 April 2009 at 23:47  
Anonymous Terry said...

It seems to be that the current economic circumstances are payback for an ungodly nation that elected an ungodly government not once, not twice but three times. These things come back to haunt you in the end; when a people follow God, everything should go well with you, including in the physical and material realm. Clearly the UK is broke and would do well to ponder its moral state. Sin has a payback, including being given over to ungodliness.

23 April 2009 at 00:19  
Anonymous not a machine said...

your grace has missed the soldiers playing dice at a canapes luncheon for the cloak that would have kept the wind and rain of our backs.

or the sponge of bitter vinegar being offered.

i may have to go on retreat iam happy yet all too wordly today

23 April 2009 at 01:43  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr Cranmer, tear down that picture!

23 April 2009 at 07:51  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am the original Anonymous who asked Mr Cranmer to take down the (to me) offensive picture.
I did not wish to write a sermon on the subject (McKenzie), merely to state an opinion. However, if you insist, I find it offensive, because a man on a cross is a vivid (the vivid) Christian symbol and to use it in a jokey, political way, is likely to be offensive to Christians. Yes, I can switch off. But that does not get rid of my disappointment in Mr Cranmer's lapse.
If you read this, Your Grace, a reply would be appreciated, by one of your regular readers.

23 April 2009 at 08:28  
OpenID jobtwenteewun1to3 said...

Your Grace,

I am with Hank Petram on this. The occupant of No. 11 is certainly no victim. I am not sure he is the one doing the crucifying though as he is perhaps little more than the glove puppet of the bloke next door.

I am a little bemused at some communicants commenting that they are uncomfortable with the image of the cross here. I suggest that our Lord and saviour was far more uncomfortable on his cross, yet he mmuttered not a word in protest.

23 April 2009 at 09:16  
Anonymous Michael Albinson said...

I too am disappointed by this image. His Grace has on other occasions spoken about the Cross and the importance - removal from scenes in Coronation Street - and now uses the same image in parody.

23 April 2009 at 09:37  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

I too am shocked ... for it us the nation that is on the cross whilst Darling, Brown, Mandleson and cohorts hammer in the nails and gamble for our clothes. We still await the spear in our side.

23 April 2009 at 10:29  
Anonymous Preacher said...

Your Grace.
I agree with the postings that find the image offensive, When the agonies of crucifixion are used in parody or humour it seems to some extent to trivialise the pain endured by the Lord on behalf of fallen humanity.
Having said that I must agree that this zombie government should be laid to rest, maybe it is more vampire than zombie, vampires in mythology are fast, shape changing blood sucking undead creatures that were once human, they are cunning & infect others with their malady after draining away their life blood. Need I say more?

23 April 2009 at 10:54  
Blogger McKenzie said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

23 April 2009 at 13:41  
Blogger Gnostic said...

This government seems intent on inflicting maximum damage to our country in the full knowledge that it is not they who will have to clean up the mess.

This is nothing less than criminal sabotage delivered by an inept, malevolent, morally reprehensible governemnt with malice aforethought. Why isn't Cameron asking for a vote of no confidence for this treasonous scum instead of just calling them names???

The more I see of Cameron in "action" the less likely I am to vote for him. His leadership is a bitter disappointment to say the least. He simply doesn't have the "Eds" to do what's necessary. I can't bring myself to trust this man to do make the necessary harsh and nasty decisions to curb public spending.

As for the crucified Darling image, this one is more apt I believe. It's what we'll make of him come the next election:

http://www.edu.fi/oppimateriaalit/hygieniaosaaminen/images/jauheliha21.jpg

23 April 2009 at 14:33  
Blogger McKenzie said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

23 April 2009 at 14:58  
Blogger McKenzie said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

23 April 2009 at 15:21  
Blogger King Athelstan said...

I prefer to burn them at the stake, while a miltary band play appropriate tunes such as Flower Of Scotland, Scotland The Brave and of course Hoots Mon.
( No offence intended Your Grace)

23 April 2009 at 17:56  
Anonymous martin sewell said...

I have just remembered that when Australia decided to change its Anthem Spike Milligan offered one that we might adapt.

Australia Australia Australia we love you

We love you in the morning , and in the evening too

We love you when we're shopping and when we're at the Zoo
We sometimes wake at midnight - so we can think of you!

Australia Australia we love you with all our heart,
Our lungs and spleen and kidneys - and every other part!

Unfortunately in these times of compulsorary inclusivity we probably have to let this one go as it excludes those such as Grace who, being corporeally challenged, might take offence.

24 April 2009 at 09:55  
Blogger Young Mr. Brown said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

24 April 2009 at 11:10  
Blogger Young Mr. Brown said...

I wish to state that I too find the illustration offensive, and I was surprised to find it here.

It is your blog, Your Grace, and it is a free country, and I will defend your right to post it. But it will inevitably raise questions for some of us about Your Grace's judgement.

24 April 2009 at 11:13  
Blogger McKenzie said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

24 April 2009 at 21:47  
Blogger eddie said...

Quite simply, you have let the family and your Father down.

27 April 2009 at 10:17  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older