Of Deaths and an Election

Renowned theologian Alistair McIntyre has died at the age of 96. I confess to hearing a lot about him but to never having read him - he should be on my to be read task list, especially his most famous book, After Virtue. An obituary is here. A reflection on his impact as a philosopher-theologian is here.

McIntyre's great thesis (as I understand it) is that the Western world has followed Kant and his ethical emphasis on individualism/individual rights to choose one's own best life to its peril; instead, taking a cue from Aristotle, ethics is both a communal and an historical matter, which does not begin with the Enlightenment, and includes concern for all not just for myself.

As a small anecdote (about a large demographic crisis) which - again, as I best understand things - illustrates where Kant's influence is at a kind of communal self-destructive zenith - with birthrates in many countries (not only in the West, also in Asia ... but not in Africa) well below replacement rates (NZ at 1.6 births per woman is one of a number of countries in similar situation), I was listening to a radio talkback session host trying to drum up listener engagement on this matter, and he cited a US survey of why people didn't want children and 57% said (from memory) Just because I don't.

Someone in my life who often mentioned Alistair McIntyre (along with other notable theologians such as Robert Jenson) was the Reverend Dr Bryden Black. Bryden, until a few years ago, was a regular commenter on Anglican Down Under. He was also a personal friend, a clerical colleague here in the Diocese, and a larger than life character with many luminous thoughts on a wide range of matters, not limited to theology and ecclesiology, because he owned a large sheep station in North Canterbury and thus had many things to say about the state of the economy, the weather and the quality of our political leaders.

Bryden died recently after a brief illness and his funeral will be at 1 pm Friday 6 June, 2025 at St. Christopher's church, Avonhead Road, Avonhead, Christchurch.

I will miss him!

This blog is Anglican Down Under which means a special interest in Anglican matters in the West Island. Having been earlier this year to the farewell for Philip Freier, the immediately past Archbishop of Melbourne, I have paid attention to the election of the next Archbishop. That election was held 22-23 May, this weekend past. On the slate were local candidates and one candidate from England. Since the latter was already a bishop - Ric Thorpe, Bishop of Islington in the Diocese of London, and bishop with responsibilty for supperoting church plants in the CofE - I wondered if he might do well in the election. My theory is that a bishop on an election slate has a head start since they already answer the question, Could this person be a bishop?, before getting to the question, Should this person be our bishop?

The result of the election is that Archbishop-elect Ric Thorpe will be the next Archbishop of Melbourne, with his installation being later this year.

I met Bishop Ric at Lambeth and enjoyed a brief conversation with him. Many  Down Under Anglicans, as well as members of other denominations, will have had much longer conversations with him, since he has been a frequent visitor to these parts, speaking at conferences on church planting and like subjects.

For some media statements/reactions, try here, here, here and here.

A Catholic Kind of Archbishop of Canterbury?

If last week I posted a few thoughts (with tongue in cheek) about Leo XIV being an Anglican kind of Pope, then this week let's have a go at the converse, A Catholic Kind of Archbishop of Canterbury? But no tongue in cheek.

First, I have noticed some Anglican concerns about how long it is taking to choose the next ABC, with unfavourable comparisons to the seped with which the new Pope was chosen. While there is much to learn from the Catholic church, and, yes, we could, arguably, be a bit quicker, let's acknowledge that it is very unlikely that Anglican (whether in the CofE itself or across the Communion) would ever agree to an electoral body for the next ABC which consisted of:

- only males

- only bishops

- about 80% membership picked by the previous ABC

I think not! We are not going to have A Catholic Kind of Process of Choosing the Archbishop of Canterbury Ever :)

Secondly, it may or may not be a bad thing that a bit of time has elapsed in the Anglican process.

Thirdly, since catholic means universal, we can observe that this time around (due to initiative by Archbishop Welby) there is greater representation of the Anglican Communion in the Crown Nomination Commission put together for the occasion (from 1 to 5 members). 

In the past week the process of choosing the five has been completed and it is a delight report that the Reverend Canon Isaac Beech, a New Zealander, a member of Te Pihopatanga o Aotearoa, has been chosen to represent Oceania (which, by the way, is not "the South Pacific" but South Pacific plus some of Asia plus North Pacific). See further here. 

For a complete overview of where the process is at, see what Andrew Goddard has to say here.

Fourthly, perhaps the bigger "catholic" question about the next ABC is whether the next ABC will have universal reach into and around the Communion, as well as into and around the CofE?

Consider the following issues:

- could we have a female ABC (as many in the CofE would like) v would that work well in wider Communion relationships (noting that some Anglican provinces do not ordain women as bishops)?

- if an English bishop is chosen, will that person connect with the CofE if not appropriately "moderate" v will that person connect with most of the Communion if not explicitly conservative, especially in connection with That Topic?

- what if a non-English (non-Welsh/Scottish/Irish) bishop were chosen, for example, an African bishop was chosen, who then would have greater acceptability to the wider Communion (the vast majority of which is African) v would any non-English bishops, from any part of the world, other than Great Britain and Ireland, be acceptable to the CofE as a whole?

Of course, fifthly, ultimately, the greatest "catholic" question re the new ABC is whether she or he will have ability to enhance unity in the CofE and in the Communion?

Incidentally, the title question to this post has a further aspect: customarily the ABC is successively evangelical ... catholic ... evangelical and it is now the catholic turn!

An Anglican Kind of Pope?

Okay, my tongue is somewhat planted in my cheek but let's see if there is a modicum of truth in my title.

Since last week's post, the smoke has burned white and Cardinal Robert Prevost, lately of Chicago, the Augustinians, Peru and recently domiciled in Rome with a red hat, is now Pope Leo XIV.

There seems much to like in Leo XIV, not least from a personal perspective, that he stands with Francis' critique of JD Vance on ordo amoris, which is also my position. Alternatively put, Leo may be an American but he is not a Trumpian American.

He also in statements since his election is affirming of the Francis way of modernising the church. Yet, liked by "traditional" Catholics, he is wearing all the papal vestments including the mozetta, and living in the papal apartments. 

What is in a name? Well, may be not that much if one's parents named one X or Y because "they liked" it. But there is quite a lot in a name chosen by popes because they set out to live up to and to live out that name. John Paul 1 and John Paul 2 wanted to capture the best of Popes John XXIII and Paul VI who straddled the (as it turned out) epochal decades of the 1950s, 60s and 70s, including Vatican II. Francis chose that name because of his "bias to the poor." Now we have Leo XIV, with specific resonance to Leo XIII, who wrote Rerum Novarum on the rights and duties of capital and labour, upholding the dignity of the labourer and challenging capitalists to live out obligations to their fellow humans. Sort of Marx without actual socialism (because not espousing collective ownership of the means of production). I haven't been to Peru but I can imagine that many years sent in Peru would point one to an encyclical such as Rerum Novarum.

There is more to the Leo XIII and (likely) Leo XIV connection than the Christianising of political economics. I leave that to other commentators. The point for now is that for those on the Catholic left, there is a lot to like in Leo XIII and for those on the Catholic right there is nothing to dislike in Leo XIII, and thus all (as I read across X and open up some of the articles tweets point to) have much to hope for in Leo XIV, including the chiefest critics of Francis.

Clearly, to this point in recitation of things said in the past few days, Leo XIV is very Catholic, so Catholic we might even say that it seems very unlikely that any Catholic will come up with the jibe (sometimes made about Francis) that the Pope was not Catholic!

We might also note - with much appreciation - that Leo XIV is a Christ-centred man of God, as Robert Imbelli draws out in this article.

Why bother then with a tongue in cheek remark about Leo being an Anglican kind of Pope?

Well, I have seen a number of commentators these few days past talk about Robert Prevost as a man not given to taking sides, but keen to walk a careful middle line. For instance, here is Dan Hitchens writing about "Leo XIV and the Best-Case Scenario" (meaning the best case for conservative Catholics to take heart even though Leo looks like "Continuity Francis" in certain respects):

"Trawling the Holy Father’s Twitter history, as one does, suggests a churchman who has made it to the age of sixty-nine without feeling any need to choose a side in the Catholic culture wars. Yes, he is outspoken on the rights of migrants; but he’s also seriously alarmed about the trans issue. Yes, he retweets the more progressive Catholic publications; but he also shares writings from the sturdily orthodox Cardinal George and Archbishop Chaput. Yes, he admires Pope Francis and likes the idea of “synodality”; but (unlike some people) he does not seem to regard either as a kind of inspired update on the gospel that calls into question what the Church has been doing for the last two thousand years."

How much more Anglican can you get than that? 

:)

(Update (after first comment below): Anglicans do not need to walk the middle line as individual members of the Anglican Communion. But Anglican bsihops do find themselves walking the middle line ...).

PS For a beautifully written account of aspects of the contemporary Catholic scene with respect to Pope Francis and now Pope Leo, see Colm Tobin's reflections-with-advice-at-the-end.

Smelling the Sheep

Josie Pagani heads up her latest column for the Stuff newspapers with "Restoring politics as a broad church". Her general political point is that some of what we are seeing in politics such as Trump's resurgence in the USA (and, we might add, noting UK election results over the weekend, Farage's Reform party's success) is the result of  a widening gap between those who opt in to running the place and those who opt out. Her overall argument is that "politics" needs to become a "broad church" - more inclusive of, and better recognising the plight of those who have opted out or, perhaps, just feel left out:

"Our politics cater to those who opt in. They see those who have fallen off life’s train, but they don’t know what to do for them. Governments throw them pity, at best, and the gap keeps widening between those who are part of the system and trust it, and the big chunk of people who have opted out and mistrust.

...

The more politics leaves people behind, the more unstable politics will become. Sooner or later, they will come for you.

Social observer Chris Arnade jokes that Donald Trump’s opponents are the kids who sit in the front row of class while Trump’s supporters are the kids at the back of the class.

...

To be a political party only for those who opt in, in a country where too many are opting out, will lose elections."

Pagani notices that, nevertheless, some hope from the centre-left is emerging as both Carney and the Liberals in Canada and Albanese and Labour in Canada and Australia have had solid wins in very reent elections.

But laced through her column are some citations of remarks made by Pope Francis who, of course, tried to make his church as broad as possible, with a special emphasis on inclusion of the poor and the marginalised. Thus Pagani notes:

"Pope Francis spent his life thinking about poverty, and how to reach the excluded.

He had a catchphrase, “reality is more important than ideas”. He wanted believers to move beyond abstract doctrines, and deal with the world and its people as they found them.

“Smell the sheep,” he used to say. Live and eat with the people.

... and ...

There is another politics that can reach people. Pope Francis said the church must be “a field hospital after battle”, a refuge and place of repair. It must “go to the peripheries, which are often filled with solitude, sadness, inner wounds and loss of a zest for life”."

These words resonate with me - a mere Anglican and not too sure whether I am centre-left or centre-right :).

Facing reality. Smelling the sheep - i.e. understanding people in the actuality of their lives - often messy lives. Taking care not to live in the world of ideas (or blogs!!) but among and with people. Church as a hospital more than a schoolroom; church as refuge more than a fighting vehicle; church with people difficult to love rather than filled with lovely "nice" people.

None of this is easy. All of this fleshes out the gospel stories in the 21st century. What does it mean for church to be "the body of Christ" - the living, breathing, perspiring (or smelly!!), sometimes bleeding, sometimes sore-muscled living expression of Jesus on earth.

Jesus is risen. He is risen indeed IN HIS CHURCH - the bodily resurrection of Christ.

All of this as we head to next Sunday, Good Shepherd Sunday!