It's my trumpet and I'll blow if I want to...

Quite bizarre to discover that this blog is (very, very allegedly) the 120th most influential blog in the country, according to Wikio blog rankings. Looking at how much upping and downing there is, it'll be back into obscurity next month.

An apology is therefore in order to all the blogs which should be above mine, but for some reason aren't. Dave Walker demonstrates effortless excellence: despite posting only 4 times in October he's up 76 places. However, it is rather gratifying to be more influential than the Newsnight blog, and Anglican Mainstream (which is more of a news site than a blog, and so shouldn't be on the list at all). Matt Wardman explains a bit more about how they work.

It was a relief to discover other religious/Christian blogs above this one, until I discovered that Bishop Hill isn't one, and therefore the top ranking religious blog according to Wikio is Damian Thomsons' Holy Smoke. I can only assume that there are a shedload of religious blogs that Wikio don't know about yet.

Society of St. Stephen the Great bankruptcy: case closed

Phil Groom has just posted a new document from the US courts about the St. Stephen the Great bankruptcy case.

Brewer, you may recall, tried to get the Society of St. Stephen the Great (new owners of SPCK bookshops) declared bankrupt in the USA. The court threw out the claim, partly because the paperwork was in a mess, and also because most of SSG's creditors were in the UK. The lawyer overseeing the bankruptcy, Randy Williams, then took Mark Brewer to court for bringing the system into disrepute, a charge which Brewer denied, and the result is this Motion to Compromise Controversy, signed on 29th October 2008 (don't you love these legal titles?).

What does it mean? As far as I can tell...
- a few small fines
- compulsory legal training for Mark Brewer in bankruptcy law (10 hours) and ethics (2 hours)
- case closed, and the more serious charges against Mr. Brewer not pursued.

One loose end tied up, plenty more to go.....!!!

by the way, still no reply from either the charity commissioners or Mr Brewer himself. I sit by the letterbox each day, waiting and hoping. Not really.

Quantum of Solace

The latest Bond outing has already smashed box office records in its opening weekend. It's clear from the film's plot why it's opening in the UK first, but more of that later. This is very much Casino Royale 2, picking up in plot and feel on its 2006 predecessor, and again reminiscent of the Bourne Trilogy: a movie which stands on its own, but makes more sense if you've seen the one before it.

Critics have given it mixed reviews, and here's my take:

Plot: Bond is out to avenge the killers of Vesper Lynd, his love interest in Casino Royale. He claims he's not motivated by revenge, but he spends the entire film pursuing (and killing) a series of contacts around the world who lead him closer and closer to his quarry. On the way he encounters the main baddie - Dominic Greene - who is in cahoots with both the CIA and various South American dictators-in-waiting. He blocks off water supplies, destabilises governments, the dictators step in and take over, and Greene gets lots of land in return. And that's about it: no world destroying megalomaniacs here, but still a nasty piece of work.

Along the way Bond teams up with the obligatory beauty, who's family were destroyed by a Bolivian general who is in league with Greene, and who also wants revenge. He has to slip out of MI5 (or is it 6?) control in order to pursue his vendetta, and yet again we have a Bourne similarity: a spy working against his own people in order to pursue his own agenda.

Style: The film seemed to be almost 50% chase sequences: road by Italian lake going into a quarry, Siena rooftops (brilliantly staged), boats in a Caribbean harbour, car and bike chase, hotel chase, plane dogfight, and probably several others. The camera jumps around so much in many of these that it's hard to keep track of what's going on, but it certainly gives it a faster pace than Casino. It's also very low tech: scarcely a gadget on show (except some whizzy computer graphics at MI5), and some very physical stuntwork. Roger Moore this is not!

Substance: the plot is twofold - Greene's wheeling and dealing, and Bond's pursuit of revenge. Beneath that is there anything deeper? Casino Royale explored Bond's choices over what kind of person he would be, what kind of image of masculinity ('part monk, part killing machine'). Here he seems to have settled on a Clint Eastwood persona: steely and single minded pursuit of revenge.

If there is a moral heart to this film it is about motivation. Bond is motivated by revenge, Greene by greed, the CIA by power (having people they can influence and control in satellite states), the Foreign Secretary by expediency, Bond's companion Camille by revenge again. The CIA subplot probably won't go down very well in the USA, and many of the main characters talk about 'heroes and villains' (a nod to the title of the latest Heroes series? probably not), but refuse to draw moral lines between them. At times it's hard to know which side of the line Bond falls on, he has so few scruples about killing people. Is there, as one character suggests, no real distinction between heroes and villains? Does it matter which side you're on?

A couple of characters suggest that something deeper: Camille wants to 'free you from your prison', and Matthis (virtually his only other ally) encourages Bond to forgive, and to forgive himself. The suggestion that revenge takes you prisoner, and forgiveness sets you free might have carried the day in Spiderman 3, but it doesn't stand a chance in the hail of bullets, crashes and explosions that is Quantum of Solace.

All in all a good spy thriller, but the character development which took us all by surprise in Casino Royale is put on hold for 1 more chase sequence, and Bond is a less complex, less interesting character as a result. It's a good ride, it has the familiar Bond style (lots of dinner suits and cocktails) but is in danger of disappearing into a Bourne Identikit. This iron man needs a heart.

Oh Gym All Ye Faithful

Culture Secretary Andy Burnham has suggested that poorly attended church buildings be turned into gymns, restaurants etc. in order to protect them as heritage sites. (Ht Dave Walker) Personally I'd love to see gymns and restaurants turned into churches. Just imagine being part of a church which met over a curry, or doing your Pilates with Tallis playing in the background.

What kind of exercises would a church/gym have? We have a fairly good selection of warm up exercises (raising hand, lowering them, standing and sitting on order, genuflecting, sharing the peace, and perhaps a longer and slightly faster procession than usual as a cardio warm-up), a few trips up and down the tower steps would do the job of a stepper, and hardback hymnbooks could take the place of weights. For the really committed you could bench-press a pew.

The really innovative thing would be for churches to do this (I'm being a bit more serious now) as a mission initiative, not simply as a way of saving an old and lovely building. Remember that church is not a building, neither is it an event put on in that building on a Sunday morning (though we often confuse people by saying 'welcome to our church' at that event). The church is the community of disciples in one place with a common love for God, one another, and a common mission to make Christ known. The building is an asset to this, but it doesn't define the church.

The great stones may not be left upon one another (Matthew 24, Sunday's reading), but that doesn't mean God has left town, it may just be the beginnings of birth pangs, something new, something gospel.

An Education

Englands humiliation in the Stanford 20/20 match put me in mind of a story. I think it's from Gordon Macdonald's classic 'Ordering your Private World', but can't quite remember.

The story goes that a junior manager in a large company was involved in a big business deal, which went pear-shaped and he lost the company $20m. He was called to the Chief Executives office, and turned up looking suitably sheepish. "I'm very sorry sir", he said "and fully accept your decision to sack me."

"Sack you?" responded the CEO "why would I want to sack you? I've just spent $20m on your education!"

SPCK Personal Data: Cambridge ok, Chester iffy

The following was posted on the SPCK/SSG blog today. Following the warning a few days ago about how much personal data (staff files, credit card records) might have been left lying around at one shop in the South of England, I thought it was worth reposting here:

I don’t like that picture of Cambridge (a picture posted here, on the rubbish left behind at the closure of the Cambridge SPCK) , makes my stomach sink every time I see it because I had to create it. Unfortunately I didn’t have time to put it all in a skip (because, of course, they hadn’t paid to have the rubbish collected) before i got fired all those months back.

I don’t know if it’s all still there but I did my best to make sure there was no personal data left in the pile, and any that i found is still (if it hasn’t been moved) in the single filing cabinet on the lower floor, due to be shipped to Bradford (or wherever the brewhole decided it should be kept).With regards to the paperwork in Chester, yes it was still there pre-firing, and I doubt he’s moved it at all. Yes, the temps have access to it, and no the filing cabinet isn’t locked. Don’t you just love this concept of ’security’?

The computers from all the closed shops as of end-of-sept have been kept in the basement in Bradford, none were sold on ebay (because that way my job and I didn’t do it, precisely for the reasons stated above) and any that were reused outside of the company were sold back to Booksolve to be wiped clean and sent on to whomever, so there’s nothing to worry about there.

There's info about the Durham shop paperwork in the comments thread here, I don't know whether the fact that Durham staff (apparently) haven't been paid means the business is running out of money, or whether this is a normal occurence. If it's the former, then I can't see how SSG/ENC/Third Space books can survive much longer. Which makes it all the more important to trace the money/accounts of the business, especially where pension contributions, legal fees and payments to obscure 'Orthodox' charities have ended up, and to do so quickly.

Whilst we're on the subject, no reply yet from either the Charity Commissioners or Mark Brewer. In fact, there are a lot of people who it would be nice to hear from.

Local Mission Opportunities: Bath & Wells job, Mission Shaped Ministry

1. New Mission Enabler job in Bath & Wells Diocese, advert on Start the Week, brief job spec. here. Given that we're involved in ecumenical mission here in Yeovil, you may have the blessing (well disguised) of working with me, but don't be put off by that!

2. The MA in Missional Leadership, a highly regarded course will be running a local network soon:

"From December onwards there will be a Dorchester network, based at the Dorford Centre, for an accredited Missional Leadership course. On the 4rd of December, Martin Robinson will be presenting the ethos and structure of the course to let church leaders know about it (at 3.30) and on the 5th there is a free taster day - where Martin will teach on Missional History."

venue details to follow.

Some blurb on the course itself (or for a good overview download the leaflet - gives an overview of the 6 modules, and some commendations).

"The Missional Leadership course was created by Together in Mission and is aimed at leaders at all levels including:
* Local church leadership team including clergy
* Church planters
* Emerging church leaders
* Youth church leaders
* Small group leaders

The course was prepared by people with hands-on experience of mission in the UK. It aims to enable leaders and potential leaders to re-think ministry and church, so that mission is at the centre of all that is done, and is effective in our 21st century context."Leadership is one of the key issues facing the church in the 21st Century, so training leadership has to be a high priority in Parish life. This course is a must!" (The Rt Revd Mike Hill, Bishop of Bristol.)

The course is delivered as distance learning through Birmingham Christian College, and is validated by the University of Wales.

For more information on the course go to Together in Mission at www.togetherinmission.org. For information on the University of Wales and validation arrangements go to www.wales.ac.uk or email validation at wales.ac.uk " or go here.

If you've done the Fresh Expressions 'Mission Shaped Ministry' course, this would look like a natural step on for further study. The MA is also less obviously Anglican, so will have some fresh perspectives where there is common ground with MSM.

Update: have amended the text above (see first comment).

'You Can't Say **** On the Radio'*: Manuel, Manners and the Media.

Far be it from me to moralise about the BBC’s week of turmoil.

Or then again....

The Beeb are probably hoping the suspension of Jonathan Ross and resignation of Russell Brand will draw a line under this whole business. I think the BBC’s actions are right, but I hope it’s the start of something, not the end of it.

Who’s Answering?
There have been nudging 35,000 complaints about those phone calls. Just to put this into context, the broadcast of ‘Jerry Springer, the Opera’ on BBC2 attracted 63,000 complaints, but was okayed by the Governors Programmes Complaints Committee. No Trustees meetings, no resignations. And the now notorious Russell Brand show apparently went on to make some fairly off-colour remarks about Jesus (so I’m told by someone who heard the show - all the podcasts have been removed so there’s no way of checking), but without protest from anyone.

Folk of my age grew up with the Young Ones, at the time a groundbreaking comedy sitcom, which was right at the edge of 1980’s boundaries of taste and decency. Scanning the scripts now, what’s notable is the relative absence of swearing and crude sexual references - though it didn’t seem like it at the time. Set alongside the main post-watershed comedy fare now (Little Britain, Armstrong and Miller, Harry & Paul, Mitchell & Webb), it looks very tame indeed.

‘He’s Cleared the Boundary By a Mile!’
There’s no question that the boundaries have shifted. The public has become more tolerant of swearing, sex and violence, in fact some programmes seem to play up to this (e.g a gratuitious beheading in the recent Bonekickers. This attracted 100+ complaints, but was defended by the BBC. Again, it was a Christian group portrayed in a bad light. Do you see a trend emerging?)
How far is too far? Brandon Ross’s sin seems to have been to get personal - their material has no shortage of gross/sexual/tastless content, but what made it unpalatable was that there was an individual target, without the right of reply, who seems to have been thoughtlessly picked on and made fun of.

This is what comedy does all the time, from Les Dawsons mother-in-law to Steve Coogans desperate DJ’s and former roadies - but they pick on a stereotype, a human characteristic, an abstraction, rather than a real person. Satire like HIGNFY picks on people who are already in the public eye, but often to expose hypocrisy, mixed motives and political spin. That’s very different to what happened on 18th October.

Have I Got **** For You
But even the language markers on Have I Got News for You have shifted. Yesterdays show was unusual in it’s use of the bleeper (does anyone know why f*** is offensive when Tom Baker says it but not when it’s Alexander Armstrong?) - normally there is no censorship of bad language, and it wasn’t always like that. There has been a relentless erosion of the forbidden territory here, and in some ways the answerphone messages are the logical extension of this. If broadcasters can now use whatever words they like, the only way to shock or push the boundaries is in how you use them, or who you use them to.

Instead, the shock has been that there actually was a boundary. From Jools Holland (using the f-word live on Channel 4 in the Tube, a massive scandal in its day) to Chris Evans, Graham Norton, and Russell Brand the BBC has stuffed its schedules with known boundary-pushers. The only suprise is that they’ve not invited Chris Morris to present the news. (For what it’s worth, I like Hollands show, and last year he performed a new Mass setting in a couple of Cathedrals, so he’s virtually an Establishment figure now.)

There are some boundaries of taste which have tightened considerably. Racist, and to a lesser extent sexist humour are now mostly taboo (though Life on Mars got away with both by setting the jokes in 1973). But these are the exception rather than the rule.

Can You Laugh at Jesus?
However religion hasn’t gone the same way. For me as a Christian, to hear Jesus ridiculed and made a figure of fun is deeply offensive. To some degree I’m so used to it that it’s less offensive than it should be. I’m not talking about things like Life of Brian, which (the crucifixion scene apart, which I find quite uncomfortable) was a brilliant religious satire. But the Jerry Springer broadcast demonstrated that there was, effectively, nothing that would be deemed too offensive to show when it came to Christianity, and no level of protest which would cause broadcasters to think again.

There is a difference between how Christianity is treated and how other faiths are dealt with. In part it’s ignorance - there is still some general public awareness of the Christian story and Christian stereotypes, which comedians can make use of. Just imagine this Eddie Izzard routine applied to, say Hinduism. It’s the Christian reference points which make it work. We just don’t know enough about other religions to make them the stuff of comedy.

It’s also partly fear, especially when it comes to Islam, because whilst we’ve established what people will put up with (or at least, what everyone except thousands of dismayed Christians will put up with) when Christianity is ridiculed, those lines are nothing like as clear with Mohammed and the Koran. And we’re so used to Christians protesting politely that the vehemence of Islamic outrage is a shock.

A third reason is the fact that the relationship between Western satire and secularism and Muslim culture is much less developed than it’s relationship with Christianity. For the latter, you can go back to Chaucer, with Islam we just have Omid Djalili. Except that he’s Bahai.

The Brand Bounce?
Last year was the bicentenary of the abolition of slavery, achieved against mountainous opposition by William Wilberforce and other campaigners. Wilberforce’s other main achievement was the ‘reformation of manners’:

Wilberforce’s second life goal was “the reformation of manners.” What he envisioned was a restoration to Britain of the Christian virtues of charity and civility in a culture that had markedly decayed in both

and he succeeded in transforming a society which tolerated slavery, child prostitution, and poverty alongside the dissolute lives of the rich. It is possible for boundaries of taste and decency to shift upwards, as well as downwards. We can be just a bit more restrained than we are now, without invoking the Victorian Values bogeyman (that convenient killer of debate). I’d love to see it in my lifetime. I’d love to see it start this week.

* this song, which seems very relevant now!
This is a cross-post from the Touching Base column hosted by the Wardman Wire

PS if you've not had enough of all this by now, then try this article by Howard Jacobsen in the Independent.