« | Home | »

The Gospel According to Tony


And the Lord spake unto his good and faithful servant, saying, Thou art my son, in whom I am well pleased. And though there be some that pretend to adore Mammon through God; yet others cherish God, by the offices of Mammon.

Thou knowest well, my son, many there are that give by taking; and their name is Legion.

But twice blessed are they that take, by giving.

The whoremongers have scourged the righteous with kisses; but thou hast loved the children of the whore of Babylon, with fire from the heavens and the temper of thy sword.

Thou hast plucked out the heart of Mesopotamia, even from the Tigris to the Euphrates. Thou hast kindled fear with the banners of the Lord of Hosts and stricken thine enemies with the fear of the wrath of thy love.

Blessed therefore be the warmakers, for they shall be received into the bosom of the Church; their speech will be recompensed with gold; they shall be called the brokers of peace.

Blessed too are they who hide their bushel under the light of their tax-deductible charitable gift. For they shall see in their flesh, that they dwell among the elect, and their legacy shall grow tenfold. Verily, it shall grow an hundredfold.

And His servant answered Him, saying, I am ready to meet Thee, and to answer for all that I have done. And the Lord was with Tony, and he was a lucky fellow, all the days of his life.

Comments on “The Gospel According to Tony”

  1. A.J.P. Crown says:

    This is a translation, the Lord and Tony converse in Latin.

  2. bluecat says:

    Sale of indulgences is no longer practised, surely?

  3. pinhut says:

    There is no ethical means of spending blood money.

  4. Joe Morison says:

    I often wonder what it’s like being Tony Blair. Of course, on the surface it’s all perma tan and smiles, and a life of jet setting self-congratulation; but i think if one could dig deeper it would be pretty bleak. He always seems to have had the ability to believe the lies it was politically expedient for him to espouse. Neil Kinnock recently called him a method actor; but with actors, the role comes to an end – Blair is trapped for life, the knowledge of the wrong he’s done having to be constantly hidden from, and that must do terrible things to the psyche. It’s nothing compared to immeasurable suffering his policies have caused, but i feel sorry for him.

  5. ski says:

    No sorrow for Blair here. I used to believe he was a complete and utter fraud – the method actor as mentioned. Now I have moderated my opinion somewhat. I actually think he now, perhaps has always, believed that Iraq was right. And that for a long time he had been believing his own divine inspired judgements: he was, in short, a megalomaniac with funamentalist touch.

    • Joe Morison says:

      I’m sure he believed that what he was doing was right. Monstrous things are so very often done by people who do.

    • Geoff Roberts says:

      Your last sentence could be applied to Hitler, Stalin and a few other twentieth century characters. A bit over the top? How would you describe GW Bush?

      • Joe Morison says:

        I guess that both Bush and Saddam thought that what they were doing was in the best interests of Iraq: Bush believing that he would transform the country into a mini-West, all apple-pie order and dentally fixed smiles; of course, another ‘good’ outcome would be a safe oil supply for the morally best country in the world (which he clearly believes the US to be). Saddam would have thought something like, the only way Iraq can enter the modern world is for a strong man at the top: to keep the fundamentalists down, give women some sort of equality, stave off civil war it is necessary for me to impose my will – the executions and torture and personality cult are necessary, the alternative is worse (and from our perspective, hideously, one can see his point – one of Bush’s most bizarre achievements was to create a measure of understandable sympathy for one of the world’s least sympathetic people (after all, he did die well, didn’t he?)).
        Thinking one is doing the right thing is almost irrelevant when it comes to censure. If someone believes that ‘Jesus hates fags’ (as their placards have it) and that God desires their lynching, that lynching condemns them as much as if they’d done it for fun. A person should be judged from how loving their actions are, not from whether they thought they were ‘doing good’.

  6. Geoff Roberts says:

    My take on Blair is a different one. He certainly uses his faith as a justification for his actions and decisions but the consequences are never predictable and may even have short-term positive effects. It’s very difficult to assess objectively what a leader has done until the documents are on the table.

    • A.J.P. Crown says:

      Both Blair and Bush have strong Christian “personal” beliefs and they started wars in two Muslim countries. I don’t tar all Christians with the “warmonger” brush, nevertheless it’s not a coincidence. Next time Christians run for office, maybe pacifists should think twice before voting for them.

      • Joe Morison says:

        I don’t think religious faith is the problem, i think it’s moral certainty. A Christian like Rowan Williams sees his faith as a means to doubt and questioning; it’s fundamentalists, whether atheist of religious, who can do awful things in the unquestioned belief that they are doing good.

        • Geoff Roberts says:

          I’d say that it’s a potent mixture of faith and moral certainty, similar to the brew which motivates Muslims to carry out suicide bombings in order to punish the sinful Christians. John Updike’s novel ‘The Terrorist’ was a not very convincing attempt to get inside the mind of a young Muslim and show his transition into a campaigner for moral justice.
          We simply don’t understand the processes that motivate a young Muslim to attack a western icon or a western leader to attack a foreign land. The United States has been a major attacker of small countries for a hundred years or more. Didn’t Nixon order the attack on Cambodia to show the Vietnamese that he was capable of anything?

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.

  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • Harry Stopes on Trump, #takeaknee and American History: The response to James McClean, a West Brom player from Derry who refuses to wear the poppy on his shirt during October/ November (like the parading of...
    • Thomas Jones on Glen Newey 1961-2017: A message from Glen Newey's family: We are asking for contributions from Glen’s friends, colleagues and students around the world in the hope of ...
    • shosha shuldeiner on The Conventional Mr Hefner: I think the answer to your query as to why has the adjective 'conventional' been attached to Mr. Hefner's description, lies in the the observation of ...
    • Jeremy Bernstein on The Conventional Mr Hefner: I had one encounter with Playboy. I had written a profile of Stanley Kubrick for the New Yorker that centered on chess. I was visiting Oxford and was ...
    • RobotBoy on ‘This Bankrupt Island’: Around five million Puerto Ricans (and those of PR descent) live on the U.S. mainland - more than on the island. There are over 700,000 Puerto Ricans ...

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

Advertisement Advertisement