Blog RSS Feed
This Gillray cartoon of ‘The Church Militant’ seemed an appropriate illustration for a sorbet between courses of bishops, lest we exhaust our appetite for more before we finish the list. The rankings on 7th August, when I began this exercise, were: Christopher Cocksworth, Graham James, John Sentamu, Justin Welby, Tim Stevens, Richard Chartres, John Packer, Stephen Croft, Nick Baines and John Inge
Today’s rankings from Oddschecker (I apologise for the vulgarity of this method of selection, but it seems the fairest) is as follows:
Christopher Cocksworth 7th August
Graham James 8th August
John Sentamu 10th August
Justin Welby 13th August
James Jones 20th August
Tim Stevens 18th August
Richard Chartres, 24th August
Stephen Croft 28th August
John Packer 30th August
Nick Baines 3rd September
John Inge 7th September
Tom Wright 10th September
Stephen Cottrell 17th September
Timothy Thornton 25th September
David Urquhart 1st October
Dr Graham Kings 9th October
Dr Barry Morgan
Dr Alastair Redfern 13th October
James Langstaff
Stephen Conway
John Pritchard
Michael Perham
Nicholas Holtam
James Newcome
Mike Hill
Paul Butler
Peter Bryan Price
Peter Forster
Stephen Venner
Michael Langrish
Tim Dakin
Gregory Cameron
Stephen Platten
+James Jones, Bishop of Liverpool, who did not make it at all into the original short list, is now in fifth place, immediately behind +Justin Welby.
On a more general note, one or two things have struck me (apart from the difficulty of the task ahead, which we already knew about). I think there is no obvious candidate. Apart from their personal qualities, which we must hope weigh uppermost in the minds of the Crown Nominations Commission, there are perhaps three practical considerations which the comments so far suggest we expect to be taken into account. These are:
- The age of the candidate: he needs to be still under 70 at the next Lambeth Conference due to be held in 2018;
- The seniority of the candidate: though some might think +Nick Holtam or +Tim Dakin a good choice, they are currently in their first posts as bishop.
- The length of service in their present posts: +Justin Welby might be a good candidate for other reasons, but has only recently arrived in Durham.
I do pray very sincerely that these practical considerations are not allowed to come in the way of choosing the best man for the job. As has been pointed out several times, we are at a crucial juncture in the Church of England, and for that matter in the Anglican Communion, with a built-up head of steam demanding change. There can be no question of ‘Buggins’ turn‘. It will require someone with very special abilities to fulfil the role of Archbishop of Canterbury. Cometh the hour, cometh the man?
◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊
A hundred thousand thanks, Laura, for this very clear guided tour of the potential candidates, and also allowing us to recap from the beginning. As regards your plea that it be the right person for the job, not just Buggin’s turn, amen to that!
My pleasure, Matthew, and thank-you very much for the nudge. It was all getting rather muddling and unwieldy. I will continue to add hyperlinks for the assessments as I do them.
Well, I still think that James Jones is the right man for the Job, while if pushed probably Steven Croft as a second runner.
Others possibly Nick Baines or Alan Wilson (unlikely as he is a Suffragan and quite outspoken).
At a push, Mike Hill of Bristol is a good candidate as well.
The other option is of course completely off the wall someone from Wales or Ireland.
Paul Colton of Cork could be a runner.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Colton
I follow him on twitter and he is brilliant and pastoral.
Cometh the hour, oops there’s no one for the hour.
“You might say that, I couldn’t possibly comment”
Of course, it doesn’t have to be a bishop at all. Thomas Cranmer wasn’t one, and some of us have good reason to be grateful to him nearly five centuries later. Just an observation.
Beckett wasn’t even a priest, and God save us from another like him!
…. or Scotland, UKViewer?
I think Bishop Alan would find that it cramps his style too much!
How about leaving the post vacant and appointing a woman as Lay Moderator? Job description: stop people tearing strips off each other.
Goodness, ‘lay’, ‘woman’ and ‘Moderator’ (as in Moderator of the Church of Scotland). By choosing three known incitements to opposition in one title, I suppose it would achieve one amibition – people would be so busy tearing strips off the said poor woman that they would have no time or energy left to tear strips off each other!
Perhaps her role should be to conduct an in-depth review of power structures in the Church of England, with a comprehensive survey of lay people and participation from theologians, church historians, representatives of other churches, psychologists, sociologists… . Meanwhile the Archbishop’s role could rotate around some of these senior bishops on an annual basis until the review is complete. If the House of Bishops wish to continue their secret meetings, I suggest these could be dedicated to a series of retreats where the bishops test their own role against the example of the servant king.
I offer these suggestions in all seriousness, and not in a spirit of criticism. I’m happy to confess my ignorance of the ins and outs of the episcoposphere.
I love ‘episcosphere’! Don’t worry about ignorance – I set up this website so that no one need regard that as a reason not to engage in debate. I think yours is a very good idea, but first we have to overcome the problem of the way the laity are viewed. For centuries, the only literate people in a community were the gentry (up to a point) and the clergy. Very much like the caste system, this meant that the Kshatriya gentry and the Brahmin clergy both looked down at all the other castes. The assumption was also made that if people did not speak Latin, or could not read English, they were stupid. This mindset still lingers on in the episcosphere (though probably not consciously). I think I feel a blog post coming on, unless you would like to have a go? 🙂
I’d love to read your blog post. You’re probably right that the Church of England hasn’t quite caught up with near-universal literacy. I understand Gutenberg and Caxton played their part in the Reformation; in our age the web is a new factor in church renewal: alongside a higher level of basic education, it offers new opportunities to autodidacts, and for debate.
Oddschecker seriously reckon Michael Perham is worth listing? And above Mike Hill? Times are desperate.