Talk Elections

General Discussion => Religion & Philosophy => Topic started by: Filuwaúrdjan on September 21, 2012, 06:33:09 AM



Title: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on September 21, 2012, 06:33:09 AM
This is an elections forum, so why not do this like an elections thread?

Anyways, this is all happening rather soon. Large numbers of names have been floated around as possible candidates for the least rewarding job in Christendom, and a decent overview of them (and of the process) can be found here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/20/archbishop-of-canterbury-succession-rowan-williams).


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: minionofmidas on September 21, 2012, 07:06:18 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appointment_of_Church_of_England_bishops just to fill in the missing bits on who gets to vote here, exactly.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: afleitch on September 21, 2012, 07:09:18 AM
My favourite part of the article:

'there is even Dr Barry Morgan, a Welshman, to represent the rest of the world for the first time in this process.'

 


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: Tetro Kornbluth on September 21, 2012, 09:01:29 AM
This is an elections forum, so why not do this like an elections thread?

Anyways, this is all happening rather soon. Large numbers of names have been floated around as possible candidates for the least rewarding job in Christendom, and a decent overview of them (and of the process) can be found here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/20/archbishop-of-canterbury-succession-rowan-williams).

His grace, the archbishop of Dublin disagrees with your assertion.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on September 21, 2012, 02:26:11 PM
I had the perception a few months ago that ++York's star was a bit on the wane for these purposes. Was that true, and if so, is it still true now?


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: afleitch on September 21, 2012, 04:53:36 PM
I had the perception a few months ago that ++York's star was a bit on the wane for these purposes. Was that true, and if so, is it still true now?

Sentamu is perceived as too eager for the job. Not signing the Cambridge Accord has also haunted him.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on September 22, 2012, 02:05:41 AM
This is an elections forum, so why not do this like an elections thread?

Anyways, this is all happening rather soon. Large numbers of names have been floated around as possible candidates for the least rewarding job in Christendom, and a decent overview of them (and of the process) can be found here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/20/archbishop-of-canterbury-succession-rowan-williams).

His grace, the archbishop of Dublin disagrees with your assertion.

Maybe he'll be the next Archbishop of Canterbury?  Or do you think they won't go outside the Church of England as they did last time?


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: 後援会 on September 22, 2012, 09:18:30 AM
Does the Archbishop of Canterbury actually matter anymore? For that matter, are there even still any Anglicans who still believe in God outside of former British West Africa? Episcopalianism is basically culturally irrelevant in the United States now.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: TJ in Oregon on September 22, 2012, 11:05:57 AM
Does the Archbishop of Canterbury actually matter anymore? For that matter, are there even still any Anglicans who still believe in God outside of former British West Africa? Episcopalianism is basically culturally irrelevant in the United States now.

It still is culturally relevent in a lot of social circles that are disproportionately influential to their size. I guess the real question I would ask is does the Archbishop of Canterbury matter within Episcopalianism?


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on September 22, 2012, 12:36:20 PM
The post matters a great deal, but has basically no power. Which is precisely why it is the least rewarding job in Christendom.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: Tetro Kornbluth on September 22, 2012, 01:32:16 PM
This is an elections forum, so why not do this like an elections thread?

Anyways, this is all happening rather soon. Large numbers of names have been floated around as possible candidates for the least rewarding job in Christendom, and a decent overview of them (and of the process) can be found here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/20/archbishop-of-canterbury-succession-rowan-williams).

His grace, the archbishop of Dublin disagrees with your assertion.

Maybe he'll be the next Archbishop of Canterbury?  Or do you think they won't go outside the Church of England as they did last time?

Well the CoE certainly needs a radical change but I don't think it is quite ready to return to Rome just yet.

@Al: Yeah, I know what you were saying. I just wanted to interject a little something there.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on September 23, 2012, 02:33:18 AM
What is Justin Welby like? I've been hearing more about him lately.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: J. J. on September 23, 2012, 12:39:59 PM
I spoke to Charters once, I think.  The guy is a moron. 


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on September 23, 2012, 01:21:08 PM
He speaks very highly of you, however.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: minionofmidas on September 23, 2012, 01:33:52 PM
Congratulations Al, you just proved JJ's point.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on September 23, 2012, 01:35:07 PM
:D


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: J. J. on September 23, 2012, 06:43:43 PM

He couldn't answer the official role of the Queen in the Church of England (It was pre-Internet).


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on September 23, 2012, 08:04:59 PM

He couldn't answer the official role of the Queen in the Church of England (It was pre-Internet).

It's not going to be Chartres.

Is there any senior cleric in the Church of England who is not on some level outright disqualified or a just plain bad choice?


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: minionofmidas on September 24, 2012, 04:04:51 AM
Is there any senior cleric in the Church of England who is not on some level outright disqualified or a just plain bad choice?
Their career choice would suggest otherwise.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on September 24, 2012, 05:11:15 AM
Is there any senior cleric in the Church of England who is not on some level outright disqualified or a just plain bad choice?
Their career choice would suggest otherwise.

Har har. Be serious.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: minionofmidas on September 24, 2012, 05:38:07 AM
Is there any senior cleric in the Church of England who is not on some level outright disqualified or a just plain bad choice?
Their career choice would suggest otherwise.

Har har. Be serious.
I am.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on September 24, 2012, 11:31:06 AM
Is there any senior cleric in the Church of England who is not on some level outright disqualified or a just plain bad choice?
Their career choice would suggest otherwise.

Har har. Be serious.
I am.

Classy.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: minionofmidas on September 25, 2012, 12:10:03 PM
Is there any senior cleric in the Church of England who is not on some level outright disqualified or a just plain bad choice?
Their career choice would suggest otherwise.

Har har. Be serious.
I am.

Classy.
Note that I am referring specifically to the clergy of the Conservative Party at Prayer in their modern post-gentlemanly days, and am by no means making any sort of statement on the other member churches of the Anglican Communion.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on September 25, 2012, 01:46:21 PM
Is there any senior cleric in the Church of England who is not on some level outright disqualified or a just plain bad choice?
Their career choice would suggest otherwise.

Har har. Be serious.
I am.

Classy.
Note that I am referring specifically to the clergy of the Conservative Party at Prayer in their modern post-gentlemanly days, and am by no means making any sort of statement on the other member churches of the Anglican Communion.

Duly noted. In that case I more or less agree. I'm given to understand that Church of England vicars and more junior bishops are often (not always but often) more or less respectable. But you're right that it is hard to be respectable and a senior Church of England cleric.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on September 28, 2012, 01:54:01 PM
So the Crown Nominations Commission has met, and one assumes made a decision. Now we play the waiting game.

...ah, the waiting game sucks; let's play Hungry Hungry Hippos.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: useful idiot on September 28, 2012, 02:06:57 PM
Saw the words "Bishop of Durham" in a Guardian article and my heart soared, until I read more closely and found out it's the new guy that's being rumored to be the frontrunner.....such a shame...


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on September 28, 2012, 02:09:42 PM
Saw the words "Bishop of Durham" in a Guardian article and my heart soared, until I read more closely and found out it's the new guy that's being rumored to be the frontrunner.....such a shame...

You might like Justin Welby, actually. I don't like him much, but I'm also not yet entirely familiar with him.

Obviously he's not nearly as much a heavyweight as his predecessor, though.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: useful idiot on September 28, 2012, 02:13:34 PM
Saw the words "Bishop of Durham" in a Guardian article and my heart soared, until I read more closely and found out it's the new guy that's being rumored to be the frontrunner.....such a shame...

You might like Justin Welby, actually. I don't like him much, but I'm also not yet entirely familiar with him.

Obviously he's not nearly as much a heavyweight as his predecessor, though.

Regardless of theological views, I think Wright would have been a fine choice for the job had he not retired. As someone that strongly backed Williams but has a pretty firm foot in the evangelical world, and just as a thoughtful and winsome communicator, I think he could have done a lot of good for the image of the position.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on September 28, 2012, 02:38:58 PM
Saw the words "Bishop of Durham" in a Guardian article and my heart soared, until I read more closely and found out it's the new guy that's being rumored to be the frontrunner.....such a shame...

You might like Justin Welby, actually. I don't like him much, but I'm also not yet entirely familiar with him.

Obviously he's not nearly as much a heavyweight as his predecessor, though.

Regardless of theological views, I think Wright would have been a fine choice for the job had he not retired. As someone that strongly backed Williams but has a pretty firm foot in the evangelical world, and just as a thoughtful and winsome communicator, I think he could have done a lot of good for the image of the position.

Also regardless of theological views, I agree with you, although he wouldn't have been my absolute first choice. Then again, very few of these people would.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on September 28, 2012, 07:05:00 PM
So the Crown Nominations Commission has met, and one assumes made a decision. Now we play the waiting game.

...ah, the waiting game sucks; let's play Hungry Hungry Hippos.
Can't.  Michelle Obama banned it from the schools.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: J. J. on September 28, 2012, 09:19:27 PM
Saw the words "Bishop of Durham" in a Guardian article and my heart soared, until I read more closely and found out it's the new guy that's being rumored to be the frontrunner.....such a shame...

You might like Justin Welby, actually. I don't like him much, but I'm also not yet entirely familiar with him.

Obviously he's not nearly as much a heavyweight as his predecessor, though.

Williams was too much a heavy weight.  I was very disappointed in his attempts at a "mechanism."


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: Simfan34 on September 29, 2012, 02:08:03 AM
Fingers crossed for Sentamu!


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on September 29, 2012, 04:50:25 AM

Nobody in the Church of England likes Sentamu except some of the laity. He's admittedly less bad than some of the other options.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: J. J. on September 29, 2012, 07:56:32 AM

I think he'd be my first choice.  I don't expect it.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on September 30, 2012, 12:25:51 PM
Seems that no candidate has emerged yet. This one is set to last for quite a while.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on September 30, 2012, 01:20:11 PM
Seems that no candidate has emerged yet. This one is set to last for quite a while.

I was given to understand that the CNC had deadlocked between two, which if true is definitely worrying, especially if one of them is ++York (in which case, good on whoever's blocking him!).


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on September 30, 2012, 01:41:11 PM
How about a rule that we refer to the candidates by whatever they traditional sign themselves as?


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on September 30, 2012, 02:45:50 PM
I'm in support of that.

Quote
I was given to understand that the CNC had deadlocked between two, which if true is definitely worrying, especially if one of them is +Ebor (in which case, good on whoever's blocking him!).

Sunday Times has it they're down to +Ebor, +Dunelm, and +Norvic. I'd obviously vastly prefer the latter even if only as a caretaker.

The Mail, similarly but with an important difference, seems to have heard that they've realized none of them can stand +Ebor and are deadlocked between +Dunelm and +Norvic...

Mail commenters, meanwhile, are crying out for the not-quite-schismatic former +Roffen of all people, and somebody going by the handle 'Downtrodden Taxpayer' is claiming that +Rowan Cantuar is secretly agnostic. Stay classy. Of the actual real candidates, their favorite is of course the one who writes in the magazine that introduced the world to the Page Three Stunna.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on October 02, 2012, 12:19:49 AM
According to the Times (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/faith/article3554265.ece), +Dunelm seems to have secured the spot for one choice. The deadlock is between +Norvic and +Ebor for the other slot.

Despite the poor optics of his having been an Etonian and an oilman, +Dunelm is probably the best of the conservative options and one of the less bad of all the options, so I'm tentatively optimistic for now.

ETA: More sources are claiming that Welby is the first choice. (http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=534616&version=1&template_id=38&parent_id=20)

This is inane. It's becoming obvious or at least entirely overwhelmingly CW that +Dunelm is going to be +Cantuar (the fact that they seemed able to agree on him speaks volumes even though there does technically have to be a vote as to which of the two eventual names goes first). Apparently some shady bookies have him at 1/10 odds. The rest of this is I think just going to be an ordeal unless something falls through somewhere.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on October 02, 2012, 06:57:06 AM
And he's been endorsed by Giles Fraser, of course, which means he's got the Marxist vicar vote sown up.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: afleitch on October 02, 2012, 07:15:10 AM
And he's been endorsed by Giles Fraser, of course, which means he's got the Marxist vicar vote sown up.

I like Giles. I have a feeling though if he wasn't a vicar and just a layman he'd have left long ago.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on October 07, 2012, 05:41:12 AM
Increasingly firm 'not +Ebor' consensus, I'm hearing from some of my Episcopalian brethren that they've heard that +Norvic and +Liverpool are back in the offing, maybe +Coventry as well? Huh.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: Simfan34 on October 11, 2012, 12:36:29 AM
This race still seems Sentamu's to lose.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on October 11, 2012, 01:51:50 AM
On what basis do you say that? The people doing this selection are by and large exactly the sort of constituencies in the Church of England that don't like him very much. The specific and in some circles admitted desire to avoid him means that if he somehow ends up at +Cantuar it will be out of perceived lack of any better options and desire to cut losses by doing something vaguely populist.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on October 11, 2012, 12:39:56 PM
Thomas Beckett will always be the Archbishop of Canterbury to me.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on October 11, 2012, 04:21:32 PM
Thomas Beckett will always be the Archbishop of Canterbury to me.

Sigged.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: HagridOfTheDeep on October 12, 2012, 11:23:29 AM
:P

Slightly embarrassed that I spelled his name wrong though.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on October 13, 2012, 12:13:45 PM
:P

Slightly embarrassed that I spelled his name wrong though.

'Beckett' I believe was for some time an acceptable spelling.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on November 02, 2012, 12:21:04 AM
Rumors afoot there may be movement within the next few days. I'll believe it when I see it.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on November 08, 2012, 06:36:53 AM
BBC has been briefed that it's +Dunelm. It will be formally announced tomorrow, apparently.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on November 08, 2012, 11:54:56 AM
The Torygraph is already calling him 'just another Left-wing establishment bureaucrat'. That was fast.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: J. J. on November 11, 2012, 12:57:11 PM
The Torygraph is already calling him 'just another Left-wing establishment bureaucrat'. That was fast.

I would take out "Left-wing" and insert "increasingly irrelevant."


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: DC Al Fine on November 11, 2012, 01:38:53 PM
He seems like one of those compromise candidates the C of E loves so much. Sort of traditionalist, except when he's not. Sort of liberal, except where he's not. An improvement over Rowan, but that's not saying much.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on November 11, 2012, 02:03:03 PM
He seems like one of those compromise candidates the C of E loves so much. Sort of traditionalist, except when he's not. Sort of liberal, except where he's not. An improvement over Rowan, but that's not saying much.

I think it's actually saying quite a lot (and also untrue), but he's definitely somebody on whom it's very easy to be more or less neutral or unmoved and I do think that was partially the point.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: J. J. on November 11, 2012, 03:00:07 PM
He seems like one of those compromise candidates the C of E loves so much. Sort of traditionalist, except when he's not. Sort of liberal, except where he's not. An improvement over Rowan, but that's not saying much.

I think it's actually saying quite a lot (and also untrue), but he's definitely somebody on whom it's very easy to be more or less neutral or unmoved and I do think that was partially the point.

Rowan, and his "mechanism," really turned me off.  I'm at least somewhat sympathetic to the view that gay bishops is something that is unacceptable to parts of the Communion, but I do not want Canterbury to even hint at the idea that it has some sort shadowy, but formal, authority over the ECUSA.

I know that there are parts of the Communion that object, but they don't have a veto over us (or we of them).


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on November 11, 2012, 03:16:00 PM
He seems like one of those compromise candidates the C of E loves so much. Sort of traditionalist, except when he's not. Sort of liberal, except where he's not. An improvement over Rowan, but that's not saying much.

I think it's actually saying quite a lot (and also untrue), but he's definitely somebody on whom it's very easy to be more or less neutral or unmoved and I do think that was partially the point.

Rowan, and his "mechanism," really turned me off.  I'm at least somewhat sympathetic to the view that gay bishops is something that is unacceptable to parts of the Communion, but I do not want Canterbury to even hint at the idea that it has some sort shadowy, but formal, authority over the ECUSA.

I know that there are parts of the Communion that object, but they don't have a veto over us (or we of them).

That's entirely fair, and was one of my (otherwise relatively few) problems with Rowan as well. I certainly think and hope Justin might be somewhat better on that front; it's on matters of theology and dogmatics where he's not much to my taste and Rowan was very much so--which I suppose isn't really what I realistically should be judging ABCs on, so...


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: 7,052,770 on November 24, 2012, 06:20:31 PM
All Christian churches should excommunicate any member who doesn't believe in full equality for gays.


Title: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury election 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on November 24, 2012, 06:24:41 PM
Not that I wouldn't love to see an internal putsch of some kind in the Church of England right now, but I doubt it's going to happen.