The Crown Nominations Commission (CNC) held its first meeting to discuss the choice of the next Archbishop of Canterbury at the end of last week.
This has prompted two articles in the Telegraph.
Edward Malnick Archbishop selection panel ‘dominated by liberals’
Peter Stanford Archbishop of Canterbury: who’ll get the impossible job?
The Guardian published this leader today: Church of England: archbishop’s move.
There were also two items about this on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme on Friday, at 0655 and 0846.
There has been no official announcement of the dates of later CNC meetings, but Thinking Anglicans understands that there will be two further meetings, in late July and September, with an announcement of the name of the next Archbishop several weeks later.
Me thinks that the Guardian Leading article is being a tad premature in saying that whoever moves into Lambeth Palace is likely to crown our next king. Her Majesty is currently onto her twelfth Prime Minister running from Churchill to Cameron. The next Archbishop of Canterbury will be her seventh in succession to Fisher, Ramsey, Coggan, Runcie, Carey and Williams. If York (62), Chartres (64) or Norwich (62) are appointed and have to go aged 70 – then, God willing, I fully expect Queen Elizabeth, following in the footsteps of her mother’s longevity, to have at least an eighth Archbishop… Read more »
I can think of no greater way to address the injustice done to women in the Church over two thousand years than to consecrate the next ABC a woman. The fact that men in positions of power would do everything possible to make sure a woman is never appointed a bishop yet alone the ABC, makes it all the more important to right a two thousand year old wrong. Talk about protecting the “turf” of the “old boy’s network” ! Again and again, I see so many parallels in the Anglican and Roman Catholic hierarchies in the way they exercise… Read more »
“…..this charismatic, headline-grabbing cleric [Sentamu] is first preference for the liberal/Catholic/High wing.”
??
Does Thinking Anglicans know whether or not they plan to interview?
It is somewhat astonishing (if true) that the CNC needs to meet three times, with the final meeting not being until September. It is difficult to fathom what they will discern over the next three months that they do not already know. As foreshadowed in my letter to The Times of 17 March, this is a recipe for further ridiculous speculation and leaks during the silly season. If they are going to interview candidates, that will add to the pressure on confidentiality. Why not just get on with it rather than give the process an aura and mystique that it… Read more »
It would be far too rude of me to ask Her Majesty, the Queen, how old she is, me being a commoner from across the Pond. But, Google says she was born April 21, 1926. The Queen had her coronation on the day before I surprised my mom by being born six weeks early, but somehow the Queen has managed to overcome that handicap, and carry on. She is 86 years old, according to my calculations. While I most heartily wish that she has many more years to long reign over her subjects, happily and gloriously, actuarial tables are against… Read more »
The Malnick article is laughable. Besides taking the “orthodox” at their own estimation, the assertion that anybody in the future would be the CofE’s “first homosexual bishop” is absurd. That post was long ago taken, anonymous though the exact title holder may be.
Interviews for Cantuar – how very vulgar. Alternatively the CNC could always draw lots. Well if it was good enough for Matthias …..
Peterpi, such lèse majesté may be acceptable in the Rebel Colonies, or in the heathenish pages of the Guardian, but those of us who are what Hillary Mantel calls ‘respectable people’ show a proper deference towards gra reg fid def, and do not engage in treasonous “calculations”. Moreover, anyone speculating about how many more Archbishops Her Maj might yet get through should consider the statistics: Archbishops deprived or murdered by monarchs: at least 5 (by my count) Monarchs deposed or murdered by archbishops: possibly 1 Clearly, the royals have form. I’m not saying the Queen will have the next Archbishop… Read more »
The Guardian “doth compass or imagine the death of our lord the King.” Or dost they get a pass because she is only a woman?
Peter Stanford is under the impression that the Prime Minister no longer has a free choice from the two names put forward by the CNC. I knew there was a green paper in 2007 that _proposed_ a change in the law to that effect, but I didn’t think the change in the law proposed by the green paper ever actually happened. Can anyone shed any light?
If the Queen lives as long as her mother, she may well outlive the next ABC. It’s quite offensive to hear a joke about whether the next King will be Charles or William, assuming that Charles will still be living when his mother dies. Charles and Camilla have just visited Canada (I’m a Canadian) and they were well received. They are not young, beautiful media stars, but those are not requirements to inherit the Throne. Charles has many wonderful qualities and he has been quite prescient and thoughtful.
Good point. The PM could probably insist on having two candidates to choose from – if he wanted to!
rjb on Tuesday, 29 May 2012 at 7:38am BST, that was delightful! It made my day.
I suspect that, at times, modern royals would have loved to have had the ability of the earlier ones, LOL.
Canadian Richard seems to take exception over his American cousin, Peter’s innocent little jest about who will succeed Elizabeth II. Unless the Law is altered prior to the present queen’s demise (long may that day be delayed) then the answer clearly is Charles. The moment Her Majesty takes her final breath then it will be – “The Queen is dead – long live the King” The present queen became monarch the instant George VI died. Of course, if the Prince of Wales were to predecease his mother – then the crown would be William’s. However, twice in the last century… Read more »
The PM has no choice in the order of names offered. The second name is only case there is an unknown problem with the first – don’t want the job, fail medical or CRB check, etc!
Susan, Mrs. Thatcher went for the second name when the two names in order of clear preference were Habgood and Carey. The then Archbishop of York would have been a worthy successor to Saint Augustine – but the Iron Lady, alas, went for the then Bishop of Bath and Wells and we all know to our certain cost what a disaster that proved to be.
Peter Stanford’s article, in his last paragraph, revealed the fact that Andrew Carey has written to the Church of England newspaper with is thoughts about where the blame lies for the present lack of unity in the Anglican Communion. The tragedy is, that the seed was sown with the enactment of Lambeth 1:10, presided over by none other than Archbishop George Carey. If certain African Primates had been more ready to listen to the Western Churches’ call for justice for the LGBT community, then Lambeth 1:10 may have been less contentiously worded – so as to allow for proper discussion… Read more »
@ Feria and @ Susan Cooper: appointments of diocesan bishops remain Crown appointments. While technically the PM retains the power to decide, Gordon Brown announced (in the 2007 document The Governance of Britain – not a Green Paper as such – para. 63) that Downing Street would adopt the convention that has long been in operation re suffragan bishops, namely that henceforth he would only ask for one name. There is normally a second name that has commanded the necessary support of the CNC, but I fail to understand why and have always assumed that the ‘second name’ does not… Read more »
Do we know what HM’s Churchmanship is?
H.M’s preference is for Prayer Book Matins.
In answer to Bill – above:
Is Her Majesty not still, by papal declaration, England’s ‘Fidei Defensor’ (Defender of The Faith)?
Or is that one of Rome’s few withdrawal’s from ‘Papal Infallibility’?
(Perhaps R.I.W. could answer this)
In answer to Ron’s question regarding the title “Fidei Defensor.”
In the midst of the unpleasantness between Roma and England in the latter years of Henry’s reign, the Pope did award the title to James V of Scotland – although it isn’t entirely clear that doing so in anyway deprived Henry VIII of England. Either way, the title continues with the current monarch – who must surely be Franz von Wittelsbach.
Having heard Rowan’s brilliant sermon at the Diamond Jubilee Service of Thanksgiving at St. Paul’s on the theme of “Dedication” – it is becoming more and more apparent as to the great loss the Established Church will experience when he retires from the position of Archbishop of Canterbury at the end of this year. If that mighty word didn’t make the politicians squirm in their seats – then I don’t know what would.