A while back a little rumour swept that Anglican news world to the effect that the ABC would step down at the end of 2012 (after the next ACC meeting which, as it happens, takes place here in NZ) and take up a Cambridge college master's role. Then all went quiet. Even last week, talking to an English cleric-who-knows-++Rowan-well staying with us, the thought was that he would not go until after the Covenant was sorted. But, in fact, the rumour was correct and Magdalene College, Cambridge has announced who its next master will be.
Inevitably speculation has already mounted about who the next ABC will be. I suggest it will be one of two people. Candidate number one is a well-known English bishop with good credentials in the Communion who could readily move into the Canterbury role without having to go through a lot of "who's he?" getting to know you stuff. That is, ++John Sentamu. Candidate number two is someone we have hardly heard anything about. That is, +Dark Horse.
and is the Rt Rev Skoteinos Hippos a horse with no name (la, la, la, li, la) or do you have a name in mind, Peter?
ReplyDelete+Martin
I have a name in mind but don't think it fair to begin speculation. I might make comment if I see this particular name mentioned in dispatches. But my point about a Dark Horse candidate is that there are a fair number of low profile English bishops and thus a fair chance that one of them might be chosen ahead of the bookies preferences which always seem to be for the most in your face public profiling bishops.
ReplyDeleteI’m sorry that I cannot share the effusion of “best wishes,” and “well done” etc. that are flowing to RW. As far as I’m concerned, it’s well past time that he resigned. He, like George Carey before him, has done great damage to the Anglican Communion. If his replacement follows in their steps of the past 20 years, then perhaps it will be time, at last, for The Episcopal Church to bid the AC a not-so-fond farewell. I would much rather be working productively with the Church of Sweden, the Old Catholics, ELCA, etc. than constantly fighting with Canterbury and its most socially and theologically backward minions. Fortunately, Peter, though we disagree sometimes, you do not fit the "minion" role very well, and I admire that!
ReplyDeleteKurt Hill
Brooklyn, NY
Kurt Hill
Brooklyn, NY
Hi Kurt
ReplyDeleteI think we are going to disagree once again!
As far as I can see it is very difficult to sustain an argument that another person being the ABC these last ten years would have made an extraordinarily difficult situation better.
As for TEC working more closely with other churches: isn't that up to TEC to do something about, not the ABC?!
I think Chris Cocksworth of Coventry looks the likeliest of the bunch, having been an academic theologian and seminary principal. The C of E likes to play catholic-evangelical pingpong as well.
ReplyDeleteBut who knows?
Williams' departure now gets him out of the further divisions that will follow women bishops (with no respect for conscience) in the C of E, the brouhaha over same-sex marriage in the UK being rammed through by a "Conservative" government led by faux Anglican David Cameron - with the C of E deafeningly silent - and the impending failure of the Covenant.
Williams is genuinely liked and his faith and humility are respected. But, sadly, as a leader he has been an abject failure.
I don't know who, if anyone, can prevent the train crash.
#Martin
Although I'm with Kurt on most things he talks about on this site, I am not in agreement with is dismissive thoughts on ++Rowan.
ReplyDeleteOne has to take into consideration the context - which is that of 'Primus Inter Pares' of the world-wide Anglican Communion - requiring a diplomacy that has had to take into account the unfortunate ethic of 'Unity - at any cost' - an ethic that, as P.I.P., Rowan has felt duty-bound to embrace.
Sadly, his predecessor did not think in the same way - which has been the cause of subsequent problems within the Communion.
Unlike ++Rowan, ++George pushed his own preference for the exclusion of LGBT people from the life and ministry of the Church, giving way to the formation of GAFCON and ACNA - in other words: schism & strife.
At least, Rowan's motivation was, essentially, pure, and not putting his own preference to the fore.
Time alone will tell whether, or not, Rowan's leadership was more divisive than that of his recent predecessor. What we have to be more concerned about now, is who will be called to replace him.
I pray for Rowan, for the Church of England, and for the future of the Anglican Communion - and, I hope it goes without saying, for Bishop Katharine & TEC, and the Anglican Church of Canada, in their quest for justice for ALL.
Agape.
I thought Rupert Shortt's piece on the Guardian comment site was good: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/16/rowan-williams-balance-leadership
ReplyDeleteI would go further, Simon: it is excellent!
ReplyDeleteIn response to dismissive comments like Kurt's, I would also add Fr. Tony Clavier's posting entitled Rowan Williams. A foretaste:
ReplyDelete"We want our own way and we want a Communion and a church which conforms to our own day dreams of what the church should be like. For while we have been pressing our own pattern on +Rowan, we’ve been doing the same on the Communion and the Province in which we live. We may say that we believe in 'Holy' Church, but we much prefer scrappy political church or tidy narrow church."
I'm quite sure that the Scribes and Pharisees saw Jesus as a 'political animal' - so much so that they were plotting to kill him for his 'subversive' activity - planning to substitute LOVE for LAW - having taken care of the latter in Himself.
ReplyDeleteIf folks on this site think that I have “dismissive thoughts” on the ABC, they should check out Williams’ fellow Brit, Adrian Worsfold, who makes my thoughts seem tame by comparison:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.episcopalcafe.com/daily/archbishop_of_canterbury/williams_critique.php
Kurt Hill
Enjoying the First Day of Spring in
Brooklyn, NY
However, Kurt, Adrian Worsfold, witty as he is (and I do sometimes enjoy his posts) he is not an Anglican, and does have his own little axe to grind.
ReplyDeleteI understand your suspicion of ++Rowan, but you must grant that his job is a difficult one. If you found yourself in that position, you might either 'row your own boat' like his predecessor, George Carey, (and see what devastation that caused), or you would seek the 'Middle Way', which is typically Anglican - much as you and I get impatient with that, in matters of justice. Agape, Fr.Ron
Right at the start of Adrian Worsfold's article he says:
ReplyDelete" I moved over to the Unitarians and when I moved I gave my sole attendance to them."
That pretty much says it all. Someone willing to go to a Unitarian church, a church which rejects orthodox Christianity in total, which rejects the truth that Christ was/is God in the flesh, is not someone who's critique we should take seriously.
He claims he left the Church during Rowan's term, bit it seems clear to me that he left the Church, and real Christianity, long before that.