Tuesday, November 09, 2004

Tom Wright's Castle

Several of the bibliobloggers have commented on this Daily Telegraph article in which Tom Wright defends his right to live in Auckland Castle:

Bishop Defends his Castle Against Invaders
By Jonathan Petre
But Bishop Wright is adamant that neither Auckland Castle, the magnificent home of the Bishops of Durham for 900 years, nor other historical houses should be sold. "It is not nostalgia," he said. "It is actually wrong."

The bishop, a leading theologian and bible scholar, said the Church was under constant assault from sceptics who argued that its days were numbered and it was no longer wanted.

"Every time the Church destroys one if its deep-rooted symbols, it is conniving at that," he said. "That is why it is wrong, not just sad."
In Sansblogue, for example, Tim Bulkeley says:
Frankly Tom, that kind of symbol the Church of the Crucified Carpenter can do without.
But what critics like Tim are missing is that it is quite standard for us English to live in castles. I'm not sure what it's like for Jim Davila up in Scotland, but here in England castles are everywhere. I live in a modest, everyday kind of castle myself. Admittedly, it has nothing like the grandeur of Auckland Castle, but then I don't have quite the same worries that he does about those exceptionally big drafty rooms, the damp, and all that bother of finding and retaining staff. I manage on just a butler and a maid here. And can you imagine the heating bills? No, maintaining an English castle is no walk in the park. Give me a three bed semi any day of the week.


Mark Goodacre said...

Just in case you're in doubt, this is a joke.

TorreyS said...

According to the old saying: "My Home is my Castle", most of us live in castles, don't we....? :)

Whit said...

Let he who is without den, cast-le first stone.