The attacks on 22 July traumatised Norway, one of the most politically stable and tolerant countries in Europe.

It seems that the reasoning goes like this:

• Norway is stable and tolerant
• Killings are unstable and intolerant
• Stability and tolerance can’t cope with instability and intolerance
• therefore, ergo, ipso facto, Norway is traumatised.

I don’t deny that individuals in Norwegian society might have been so badly affected by the killings that “trauma” would be a reasonable description of their mental and physical conditions. But that is a supposition on my part, based, chiefly, on the way in which we are told, over and over again, that trauma is the only possible reaction to unexpected and violent events¹ Nowhere do I see any evidence that Norwegian society as a whole, has been traumatised.

When the Prime Minister, Jens Stoltenberg, remarked that “the Norwegian response to violence is more democracy, more openness and greater political participation” it doesn’t strike me that he is the leader of a country convulsed by PTMS (post-traumatic-melodrama-syndrome), no matter how much lazy, unthinking, journalism, wants him to be.

Shame on you, BBC.

1. The four most depressing words in English journalese? “Counsellors are standing by”.

I know exactly who reads the papers: the Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country;
The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country;
The Times is read by people who actually do run the country;
the Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country;
the Financial Times is read by people who own the country;
The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country;
The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.

The News of the World and The Sun are read by the people who don’t care who runs the country, just so long as they can hear what’s in their voicemail, and read about their sons’ medical reports.

(h/t : Out of Ur)

A new wonder alloy has been invented, it was announced today, by Michael Knoman of Camford University. “I am really pleased to have have worked out the theoretical basis of a new wonder alloy”, Dr Knoman said. “All previous alloys have been lacking a certain something. Through my extensive study of carbon-fibre, porridge oats, and chrome tires I have come up with Unobtanium. This alloy will revolutionise our understanding of manufacturing: it is lighter than aluminium, stronger than steel, sexier than titanium. It is cheaper to manufacture than recycled cardboard, will be the necessary component of renewable and sustainable energy, can cure cancer, and make the ideal material for a new form of musical instrument.”Responding to accusations that he had not yet produced a sample of this material, Dr Knoman, a lecturer in Semitic Languages and Biblical Studies, said, “I think it is very disappointing that the “Guild of Metallurgists” don’t have an open mind to see the way they have been going wrong all these years. After all, if I, a gifted amateur, am able to come up with this new alloy, it just shows that they have been wasting time and effort in their chosen discipline.”

Dr Knoman hopes to have his new alloy on the market “some time”. In the meantime, he would like to point out his new popular book is available now—  Heavy Metal: the Secrets the Metallurgists DON’T want you to know.

And if you think that is ridiculous, then try Jesus Christ’s Last Supper ‘was on a Wednesday’ and look at the qualifications of the person involved.

In the last couple of months I have found myself going out of my way to provide things for people: research, a document, a reference, a copy of a sermon, a strategy for implementing a pastoral initiative in a parish. All of these things have been works of supererogation– by that I mean, none of them have been part of my responsibilities for the cure of souls in this parish, none of them have been part of the pastoral care of the people of God entrusted to me. Rather, they have been (I thought) thoughtful and helpful actions for colleagues and friends (sometimes very loosely defined).

In almost every instance, the piece of research, document, reference, sermon copy or strategy has disappeared into the ether or the mawl of the Postal system with nary a sign that it had either: reached its destination, or: proved to be helpful. In other words, the research, document, reference &c was sent in hope and received in silence.

I had thought to contact everyone of my respondents directly, to ask if they had received the research, document, reference &c, and whether or not it was just because they had been trapped under a large fridge since receiving it that prevented them from acknowledging receipt, or even thanking me for it. Then I thought that was a frightful piece of passive-aggression, and that, really, I could do better than that.

So, in place of individual passive-aggression here is a monumental, generic piece of passive-aggression.

If you have received from me, in the last six months or so, a piece of research, a document, a reference, a copy of a sermon, a strategy for implementing a pastoral initiative in a parish, then:

The CBIT is important to him and his friends, as their good friend, Tom Brenchley, died of brain injuries sustained in a motorbike accident last summer, shortly after completing the summer exams.

Today, Budget Day in the UK, and a week in which there are so many other claims on our time, money and attention, might not be the best day to stir the generosity of my readers. Even so, whatever you are able to do in supporting this worthy cause will help teenagers like Tom, who suffer traumatic injuries.

The easy way to give is via:

http://www.justgiving.com/Jonas-Lewis-Anthony

Thank you!

(BTW we’re hoping, if he raises enough money, he’ll stay in Oslo!)

Will it be Berlin ’89 or Tehran ’79?

Or, as it more likely with Vice-President Suleiman still in control, will it be “meet the new boss; same as the old boss”?

Amazing palm trees in Nigeria: everyone wired for broadband so Mrs Elechi can email me with a plea for a “benign devotion” to “feed my (yawning) kids”.

Go into business selling broadband access, Mrs Elechi.

As part of his preparation in writing the letter, last month the Pope summoned the bishops of Ireland to the Vatican for a meeting to discuss the allegations, the convictions, the cover-ups and the attitudes that led to such a sorry state of affairs.

The meeting did not go well, but not for any reasons you might have thought. There was little sense of shame, or contrition, or repentance, or reconciliation reported in the media, secular or catholic. Instead, The Tablet reported that a number of bishops were angered by the ceremonial formality of the meeting:

The Bishop of Killaloe, Dr Willie Walsh, said people in Ireland had been “rightly angry at the apparent pomp and ceremony and the kissing of the Pope’s ring” by bishops when they greeted Benedict XVI.¹

Really, Dr Walsh? Were the people of Ireland really angry that the Vatican palace is a formal and ritualised place? Were the laity of Killaloe pained on behalf of your hurt amour-propre? Was diplomatic and ecclesiastical protocol the major issue of the meeting? Tell me, Dr Walsh, how is life in the eighteenth century?

This was a meeting at which the chief pastors of a church, having utterly forgotten their responsibilities to pastor and care for the most vulnerable and trusting, were to be called to account. And you didn’t like the seating plan.

It seems that there are bishops, in all churches, who are men of strong and certain principles, chief of which is they are a very senior and important people², and should be treated as such. A friend of mine, who once trained baby cathedral clergy, told them the greatest challenge they faced in their ministry was the confusion between working in a big and important building and thinking themselves to be big and important people. Willie Walsh (obviously distracted by the BA strike) has succumbed.

Today the Pope will issue his pastoral letter. What’s the betting some big and important bishops will complain about the typeface?

1. ‘Vatican formalities anger hostile Ireland’, The Tablet, 13 March 2010, p. 42
2. h/t Clayboy