Go Back   Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums > General Discussions > Christianity

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-04-2012, 07:46 PM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 16,982
Default The New ArchBishop of Canterbury

So Thankfully Rowan Williams who has been Canterbury for quite some time now, and pretty much buggered it up, except for avoiding a full out split in the Anglican Communion, but thats only coz he's actually spent an entire decade doing everything but tackling the issues of Women Priests and openly homosexual Bishops has decided he's going to step down. The philosophical ejit who once said there was provision in England for Islamic Sharia Law to govern those Muslims in this country needs to be replaced.

Therein lies a problem.

They were supposed to announce the Successor last week....The Crown Appointments Committee which is charged with the selection has spent more then three days in debate and apparently the verdict is split, they are failing to come to a decision as to which candidate is best....probably because they either go for a non qualified person, or a conservative whose only method of tackling the issues Rowan wont will be to make a stand and cause the communion, probably, to collapse

By Default The ArchBishop of York must be a contender. John Sentamu however is an evangelic with conservative leanings. There are three issues with his appointment, the first, He's a black man, and thats something that has never happened in the position of ABC before, the issue of race, not an immediate issue until you remember that the split over the issue of gays, tends to be the Black Gospel African Contingent of the Communion against the White Liberal American Episcopalians...the opposing view will no doubt take a racial stance, leaving John in a difficult position. Secondly, he's a bit too noisy with the press. He's abit to supportive of the Greens, the Anarchists, the camping in a tent to make a point about poverty...which might make him seem too undignified for the post. Finally...he's old and close to retirement.

By Default The Bishop of London must also be a contender. The major issue with Bishop Richard is that he has VERY close links with Royalty, particularly Prince Charles, who is unpopular with the public and the government. Need I say that he would be a key supporter of Charles as ABC in the event of the Queens Death and a Royal Accession occuring. Many people would rather that Charles Abdicate, or, with any luck, is outlived by his Mother. Secondly, Whilst London will tollerate Women Priests, and will even receive Communion possibly...he refuses point blank, to Ordain them as Priests, much less consider them for Consecration as Bishops. Need we also say that Richard is Ancient, and therefore also close to retirement.

Another Contender is the Bishop of Norwich, Now he has quite a Synodical background, assistant to archbishops in the past, Government beloved seat in the Lords, Various important councils. The disadvantage of this man is that he might be to connected to the administrations, He's a politician in the Church sence of the word. He may also be highly valued in some of these roles, which he may be forced to give up were he to be appointed, and that might be too much of a loss to the establishment...he is also pushing towards retirement.

The next contender is The Bishop of Coventry and their are serious concerns here. Coventry is an open evangelical, fall on the fall, can I have a Haleuljah type, he also happens to be the youngest Bishop in the Church of England AND He's only been a Bishop since 2008. He's what you might consider a wild card, young, fresh...but unknown and unqualified.

Finally there is The Bishop of Durham. Durham is one of the more important Cathedrals in England, and also of the Northern Province. Now Personally...and beyond a Shadow of a doubt, THIS is who they should choose for the position IMO This Bishop began life as a Business man in the secular world. So he is aware of work place politics, and he's successful at balencing the idea of State (Government) and Church (Religion) He was Dean of Liverpool Cathedral before being consecrated, so as well as understanding life from the point of view of a Bishop, he also understands it from the point of view of the Cathedral Community (Church will be important to him as well as diocise therefore)

He has a background in finance, which will be key since the Church is in a dire state financially, and the economy hasnt helpped. He has practical knowledge in this area invaluable as a transferable skill!

There is but one problem with Durham....He only became a Bishop this time last year



anyone has to be better then what we have right now...after all, we all remember the visit of The Pope to England, and the fact that Rowan Williams allowed him to set foot inside the Royal Pecculiar of Westminster Abbey, something that was LOST to the papacy in 1558....after about 560 years, the Pontif reclaimed the heart of Anglicanism

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pGVSv4h6fA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-y1WwFm28tg
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-04-2012, 08:28 PM
rearnakedchoke rearnakedchoke is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,587
Default

so why can't women be priests or pastors?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-05-2012, 02:54 AM
Bonnie Bonnie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Where the bluebonnets bloom
Posts: 6,668
Default

The Bishop of Durham definitely sounds like the best choice, but would the elder bishops feel slighted if he were picked and would that play a part in his consideration. Why is there such a gap between those near retirement and the "freshmen"? No one in between?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-05-2012, 08:10 PM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 16,982
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonnie View Post
The Bishop of Durham definitely sounds like the best choice, but would the elder bishops feel slighted if he were picked and would that play a part in his consideration. Why is there such a gap between those near retirement and the "freshmen"? No one in between?
Well...when a post like this becomes Vacent, candidates are always few and far between because of the importance of the Role. Out of respect the Senior Bishop is always considered...London is the most Senior Bishop...obviously the Primates are considered, so York in this case, that goes without saying...and usually, it would probably be one of them as the favourite...but at a time when the communion is frigile...the Church is worried about putting in a Hardline Conservative...because they will inevitably split the communion, an thus diminish their own office infact as head, not only of the Church of England...but the entire Anglican Communion...thats a massive chunk of the protestant church world wide.

I dont really know how they draw up this list of candidates. The real problems with the other three is that they havent been Bishops very long...so is it right to make them Archbishop? To do so, would be to technically do what the United States did with Barack Obama...make the most important person someone with no great experience in their field, the top dog...thats one hell (pardon the pun) of a gamble.

With Durham...one has to also say, is it fair on the diocise to rob them of two Bishops within such close succession? The Guy has only been on his throne one year since the last...and every time their is a new bishop, the whole mood and order of the diocise changes...is it fair to do that to Durham as a Diocise?

I dont know...but I imagine this is why they cant decide...They havent got a middle of the range player...the guys are either young and free thinking, or old and dangerously conservative.

We saw how with Rowan Williams, they took a gamble and it flopped...Rowan was selected from the Church in Wales...Not surprisingly one of the things he's talked about is Dis-Establishment of the Church from the Crown....why might that be? because HE ISNT ENGLISH and therefore its not as important to him...But should you really but a Welsh Man as head of the Church of England...when that position relies on the State-Religion unification? Obviously not...because your asking someone who isnt native, to cherish what is not native to him....yet absolutely essential to his post....If the Church is disestablished it is no longer the Church of England, and it will loose its rights and privilages that it gained during the Civil War.

For Example...if you get married in a Church of England Church then the Priest acts not only as a Minister of Religion, but also as a minister of the Crown, in a LEGAL sence refering to the Laws surrounding Marriage....IF you get married in anyt other Denomination...EVEN any other Protestant denomination...then you need a Priest AND a Legal Registrar...because that particular priest is not backed by the Crown, and All Laws must therefore be made in the presence of Someone who does have the legal capacity to say these two are wed in British Law, as well as just Spiritually.

The Government also have to do things like make sure that there is a Church of England Church in every part of the Kingdom...because as well as being Spiritual, they are, in essence, an ancient form of Government Department...and just like you have a local Government Council for each area...so this is the Government providing Spirituality for their population.

Do you follow...The Church of England, is Truely, and Historically, The British Governments Department of Spirituality...which makes the Arch Bishop of Canterbury, The Cabinate Minister for Spirituality...But because this form was taken BEFORE a permanent Government sat...its independant of the Government, and actually classed as a DIRECT Branch of the British Crown...its MORE akin to Castles and the Military...its somewhere between Government, and Civil Service.

This is why the Queen is The Defender Of The Faith...and the Archbishop of Canterbury The First Amoung Equals.

With their very essence so tied...how can you say they should be disestablished?? Yet the present ABC actually said that publically and was in favour...thankfully noone was really listening at the time.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-06-2012, 06:44 AM
Bonnie Bonnie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Where the bluebonnets bloom
Posts: 6,668
Default

Who makes up this Crown Appointments Committee, and does the Queen have any input or influence in this decision?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-06-2012, 04:21 PM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 16,982
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonnie View Post
Who makes up this Crown Appointments Committee, and does the Queen have any input or influence in this decision?
I think the Nomination Committee as its also called can be made up of different people for different things...so when for example they gather to decide who might be Knighted, and when they gather to decide who might be archbishop, they may not infact be the same people.

I know that for this particular Comittee there is a pannel of Sixteen who will interview each person as a collective obviously. The Crucial things which remain unknown are who decides which people sit on the Pannel, and who makes the nominations for the Pannel to consider...I suspect this is a collective thing between Government representatives in the Civil service, one of whom will no doubt be the chair of the comittee, and between something known as the General Synod, which is like the Church Council on a National Level. There is also such a body as The Church Comissioners, they, I believe have a vested interest in the Church Lands, Property, and Finacial situations...having taken over from the old Land Barons during the Reformation when the Church suddenly inherited one third of the entire landmass of England, to Rule under the Crown as property owners. Finally there is such things as the Convocation, which is to do with a gathering of the Bishops. I suspect its between all these institutions that one or two names eventually reach the top.

The selection Pannel will no doubt have representatives on all major parties, so Government Officials, Crown Representatives, Civil Service Personnel, a range of Clergy...and I do know there are several Lay people involved (that is people unordained)

As with all matters, Her Majesty, The Queen has the power, but she will almost certainly not use it. This means that, in theory, She has tasked this pannel to decide for her, and whilst, in theory, if she dissagreed with their findings, she could refuse their suggestion to appoint a specific candidate...but she simply will not do this on a realistic level without an unimaginable cause.

Because as I mentioned before, the Church is in essence a outlet of the Government, bizzarly, The Prime Minister must also give his official signiture to the new candidate. So the Comittee with report to the Prime Minister, and he shall take the suggestion to the Queen that under her charge, Her Government has enforced this selection pannel, and they have suggested she appoint Blah.

She will of course aggree...they are in this circumstance acting as her Counsel, or Chief Advisor. As far as I understand these two signitories must be added to the charter in order for the candidate to be selected. He may very well be summoned to Buckingham Palace...it is likely, that all Candidates have also met the Queen, and probably personally once their names were put forwards. She has a habit of being very well wired into the Church...but that meeting wont be part of the official decision, because she has tasked a committee to do it for the sake of the democratic process of Government which occured during the Glorious Revolution, which after the Dissolution, Reformation, Abolition, Civil War and Restoration, removed her as Absolute Monarch, and instead placed her as a Constitutional Monarchy bound by the laws of the Church and the Government of that period, which include the acts of settlement and such like which actually place great restraints on her power...they dont forbid her to use power...they simply make it clear there will be shyty consequences if she does

Make no mistake...England is a Post-Revolution Nation...contrary to popular opinion, the true Revolution happened nearly a century AFTER the Civil War and Two Centuries after the Reformation...its simply forgotten about because it was settled by Courts and Coronations...NOT by battlefield warfare or Madame Guillotine
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-05-2012, 07:46 PM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 16,982
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rearnakedchoke View Post
so why can't women be priests or pastors?
According to the World Wide Anglican Communion, they pretty much can be Priests now. Infact it was the early 1990s when the Church of England declaired it was theologically sounds for Women to be priests. The issues around this are based on the New Testament theology advocated through pauline scripture...and they are open to interpretation. For example, Paul clearly states that the role of women is to be covered up and silent, and the role of the man is to speak up and lead. However, even in Saint Paul's day there appeared to be house churches run by women. The general view was therefore moved from Women should be silent and therefore shouldnt be ministers, to Women can be ministers where there is a lacking of leadership from men.

Now that covers Ordination of Women into the priesthood...but a Bishop isnt ordained, a Bishop is Consecrated....Consecration doesnt mean that the Established Church recognises a personal calling from GOD for a person to minister...it means the Established Church recognises that GOD has decided he shall make Holy an individual.

Those who dont really aggree with Women in Ministry, obviously are going to dissagree even more with making women Holy in some way. Adam, they say was made Holy by Christ, the Second Adam so to speak theologically...but Eve...well she was never redeemed in that way theologically...so can you really say that GOD would ever make Holy a Woman like he would a Man, not just to minister, but to be a Shepheard of His Sheep...for Bishops then have Flocks, their Diocise.

Some say the theology should be ignored, after all, its theological, Bishops, whilst Consecrated still make mistakes and are therefore not Holy in the sence of being infallible...but Holy in the sence of a Church, or a Graveyard being Holy...Sacred Land, Sacred Person. Others say that if you've ordained women then you recognise GOD has called some, and therefore you have to recognise he could equally call them to be consecrated...and in some areas of the Anglican Church that has already been approved as a logical step...but not yet in England itself

I have to say from having been present at a Consecration of Bishops Service and many Ordinations...there is FAR greater power...almost tennable power, in a Consecration Service....GOD really does seem to reveal the hearts of the men involved...and sometimes, I gotta say he reveals that they are NOT of the Standard...and yet the Church still goes ahead with its Ceremony anyway...I know a Priest who I cant even think of as being a Priest...and he moved on, in the 8 years since we parted company, to become a Sufferegen Bishop in the Diocise of York...and more recently, has actually become a Bishop of Chichester. Thats the ultimate conflict of Church Vs GOD...where the Church consecrates and considers Holy, people GOD has rejected...if that happens, then, in my eyes, even if GOD never considers a woman Holy...it doesnt stop the church from simply deciding she is...so what bloody difference does it actually make...GOD seems to work with whats put infront of him by the Church whether he truely selected them or not.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.