It is worth noting Welby was going to retire next year anyway. I suspect all that will happen is the date will be brought forward from December to April.
There is an article (in the Catholic journal The Tablet) here on the runners and riders -
I would certainly agree that Usher (Norwich) Snow (Leicester) and Tanner (Chester) are the likely candidates. That said, anyone who thinks Rachel Treweek has been a success at Gloucester is an idiot.
Snow is an evangelical so can't be him as you can't have an evangelical succeed an evangelical as Archbishop
That would be an ecumenical matter.
It would also lead to Anglo Catholics and liberal Catholics in open revolt, both would veto another evangelical appointment
Ah, but would they? I suspect they are more like Thatcher's wets- huff and puff but eventually back down in the name of unity. Whereas conservative/sound-on-gays evangelicals not only have a blocking minority but aren't afraid to use it.
If I had to guess... the structure will be like last time- possibly the last few times. The obvious big names will be tossed around to be tossed out. Then someone surprising will be suggested, and nobody will come up with objections quickly, so they will be nominated fairly rapidly before anyone does.
That's certainly how we ended up with Welby, and (to a lesser extent) with Williams.
But from a profile of the runners to succeed George Carey; ...it has been a safe general rule since the war that the prime minister always chooses the archbishop whom his predecessor would least have wanted.
No they would, as would others in the Save the Parish movement led by Reverends Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser who have also led the calls for Welby to resign.
I am a weekly churchgoer and on the Catholic wing and certainly not a wet and I also ain't accepting another evangelical focused on putting money into church planting and new schemes rather than traditional Parish ministry.
Evangelicals didn't have the majority they needed to block PLF, just the 2/3 majority required for no change in doctrine on marriage. They certainly don't have the majority they need on Synod to have 2 back to back evangelical Archbishops which has never happened in the C of E before for the simple reason it would lead to civil war in the C of E
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Sad to hear about the behaviour of the great and the good back in the day. There needs to be a balance between calling out unacceptable conduct and avoiding witch hunts.
This behavioural dynamic of groups who think they’re untouchable is just as relevant today. There are situations in which the entire safeguarding apparatus is just put aside. The untouchable groups know who they are and attract like minded people. The next big scandals will be the entire wholesale abandonment of safeguarding for anything under the rainbow/alphabet people umbrella.
Stephen Miller, an immigration hard-liner and adviser to President-elect Donald J. Trump, is taking over policy planning for the transition and is expected to be named deputy chief of staff in the incoming administration, according to people briefed on the matter.
NY Times
Fully paid up to Trump-won-in-2020 lies. Has promoted conspiracy theories from white nationalism and promoted a Great Replacement Theory novel beloved by neo-Nazis. Led on the policy of separating children from parents when they came over the border.
Any fools who thought that once Trump was elected he'd tack back towards the centre ground are going to be disappointed. It looks like Trump is planning of going full MAGA/Project 2025.
There are going to be a lot of leopards with full bellies.
The centre ground in Washington is not the same as the centre ground of the American people. You'll probably find that Trump moves the Washington consensus in his direction in a more significant way than 2016-2020.
What direction would that be: towards legalised pussy-grabbing, or tax breaks for one’s own industry, or the acceptability of attempted armed insurrection? Or perhaps the freedom to pay hush money to prostitutes. Or blackmail the head of state of a foreign country with withdrawing military aid unless they open an investigation into your political opponent?
According to Rear Admiral Timofhy Gallaudet, who is going to testify at the UAPs hearing on Wednesday, the United States government has evidence of "a new nature of reality."
My parents tell me that Welby used to be the vicar in Southam. The gravedigger there remembers him well. A story surely tailor made for the @SouthamObserver .
Stephen Miller, an immigration hard-liner and adviser to President-elect Donald J. Trump, is taking over policy planning for the transition and is expected to be named deputy chief of staff in the incoming administration, according to people briefed on the matter.
NY Times
Fully paid up to Trump-won-in-2020 lies. Has promoted conspiracy theories from white nationalism and promoted a Great Replacement Theory novel beloved by neo-Nazis. Led on the policy of separating children from parents when they came over the border.
Any fools who thought that once Trump was elected he'd tack back towards the centre ground are going to be disappointed. It looks like Trump is planning of going full MAGA/Project 2025.
There are going to be a lot of leopards with full bellies.
The centre ground in Washington is not the same as the centre ground of the American people. You'll probably find that Trump moves the Washington consensus in his direction in a more significant way than 2016-2020.
What direction would that be: towards legalised pussy-grabbing, or tax breaks for one’s own industry, or the acceptability of attempted armed insurrection? Or perhaps the freedom to pay hush money to prostitutes. Or blackmail the head of state of a foreign country with withdrawing military aid unless they open an investigation into your political opponent?
Towards refocusing the federal government on security issues like enforcing immigration laws and destroying drug cartels, while getting rid of superfluous agencies and open-ended commitments that drain resources.
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Welcome back Cyclefree. Delighted to see you writing for PB again.
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Welcome back Cyclefree. Delighted to see you writing for PB again.
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
The King can reduce headcount in the CoE, in theory.
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Welcome back Cyclefree. Delighted to see you writing for PB again.
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
The King can reduce headcount in the CoE, in theory.
If a majority of diocesan Bishops or a majority of Synod vote for him to go he is also done for
Stephen Miller, an immigration hard-liner and adviser to President-elect Donald J. Trump, is taking over policy planning for the transition and is expected to be named deputy chief of staff in the incoming administration, according to people briefed on the matter.
NY Times
Fully paid up to Trump-won-in-2020 lies. Has promoted conspiracy theories from white nationalism and promoted a Great Replacement Theory novel beloved by neo-Nazis. Led on the policy of separating children from parents when they came over the border.
Any fools who thought that once Trump was elected he'd tack back towards the centre ground are going to be disappointed. It looks like Trump is planning of going full MAGA/Project 2025.
There are going to be a lot of leopards with full bellies.
The centre ground in Washington is not the same as the centre ground of the American people. You'll probably find that Trump moves the Washington consensus in his direction in a more significant way than 2016-2020.
If his huge tariffs and mass immigration deportations and dictator admiration leave the US a more prosperous, safer and secure place when he leaves office in 2029 maybe. Though that is a big if
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Welcome back Cyclefree. Delighted to see you writing for PB again.
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
The King can reduce headcount in the CoE, in theory.
There's always the tunderbolt on Canterbury Cathedral option, if He sees it meet and right so to do.
According to Rear Admiral Timofhy Gallaudet, who is going to testify at the UAPs hearing on Wednesday, the United States government has evidence of "a new nature of reality."
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Welcome back Cyclefree. Delighted to see you writing for PB again.
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
The King can reduce headcount in the CoE, in theory.
Henry VIII set up the CoE to reduce the headcount of his wives...
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Welcome back Cyclefree. Delighted to see you writing for PB again.
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
The King can reduce headcount in the CoE, in theory.
Strange - I really don't know why he generates such, well, dislike from a certain section of the public. He was a very good footballer who played well for his country.
He does well on tv - I can only imagine it must be his politics and the fact he isn't a Conservative which seems to irritate, well, Conservatives.
Stephen Miller, an immigration hard-liner and adviser to President-elect Donald J. Trump, is taking over policy planning for the transition and is expected to be named deputy chief of staff in the incoming administration, according to people briefed on the matter.
NY Times
Fully paid up to Trump-won-in-2020 lies. Has promoted conspiracy theories from white nationalism and promoted a Great Replacement Theory novel beloved by neo-Nazis. Led on the policy of separating children from parents when they came over the border.
Any fools who thought that once Trump was elected he'd tack back towards the centre ground are going to be disappointed. It looks like Trump is planning of going full MAGA/Project 2025.
There are going to be a lot of leopards with full bellies.
The centre ground in Washington is not the same as the centre ground of the American people. You'll probably find that Trump moves the Washington consensus in his direction in a more significant way than 2016-2020.
Unless of course he fails and his policies make the lot of the average American worse in terms of inflation and job security. The electorate are notoriously intolerant of failure.
Elon Musk "has been seen at Mar-a-Lago nearly every single day since Donald Trump won, dining with him on the patio at times" and "weighing in on staffing decisions, making clear his preference for certain roles," @kaitlancollins reports
I don't like Musk, but there are undoubtedly worse people who could be weighing in on who would be a good staffing pick for Trump to make.
Worse than Musk who retweets antisemitic conspiracy theories? Well, I suppose, yes, Donald Jnr. would be even worse.
Pharmaceutically ket v coke. I’ll leave an in depth analysis to the PB expert.
Business travel is grim, unless it's a few weeks/months in a cool city doing a special project. The constant pissing about between Westminster, constituency, foreign trips does not appeal at all.
No no no! I’m not having that.
Business travel is great, and a real privilege. Before Covid I was a very regular business traveller, not right at the extreme end but alternating between BA gold and silver and enjoying every minute of it.
You’re travelling the world and somebody else is paying. Every trip to some dull suburban business park outside Warsaw or Antwerp is also a free teleportation to a region you can explore over the weekend. And long haul trips even more so.
Since the pandemic I’m travelling sadly much less but even last week’s trip to Manchester, Leeds and Birmingham had its compensations.
That's not my experience of business travel. My experience was a hellish early Monday morning and a hellish late Friday evening, having to work extra late Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday to make up the time lost to travelling, being exhausted at home over the weekend, before having to do it all over again the next week.
And mind-numbing hassle to claim expenses, and to convince whoever is in charge of the travel budget that it's reasonable to book a hotel not on the preferred supplier list of whichever annoying travel expense app your employer is using, because all the hotels that are on the app are flea-ridden hellpits miles away from where you need to be.
Which business is paying people to stay somewhere over the weekend unless they're working over the weekend?
It is worth noting Welby was going to retire next year anyway. I suspect all that will happen is the date will be brought forward from December to April.
There is an article (in the Catholic journal The Tablet) here on the runners and riders -
I would certainly agree that Usher (Norwich) Snow (Leicester) and Tanner (Chester) are the likely candidates. That said, anyone who thinks Rachel Treweek has been a success at Gloucester is an idiot.
Snow is an evangelical so can't be him as you can't have an evangelical succeed an evangelical as Archbishop
That would be an ecumenical matter.
It would also lead to Anglo Catholics and liberal Catholics in open revolt, both would veto another evangelical appointment
Ah, but would they? I suspect they are more like Thatcher's wets- huff and puff but eventually back down in the name of unity. Whereas conservative/sound-on-gays evangelicals not only have a blocking minority but aren't afraid to use it.
If I had to guess... the structure will be like last time- possibly the last few times. The obvious big names will be tossed around to be tossed out. Then someone surprising will be suggested, and nobody will come up with objections quickly, so they will be nominated fairly rapidly before anyone does.
That's certainly how we ended up with Welby, and (to a lesser extent) with Williams.
But from a profile of the runners to succeed George Carey; ...it has been a safe general rule since the war that the prime minister always chooses the archbishop whom his predecessor would least have wanted.
No they would, as would others in the Save the Parish movement led by Reverends Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser who have also led the calls for Welby to resign.
I am a weekly churchgoer and on the Catholic wing and certainly not a wet and I also ain't accepting another evangelical focused on putting money into church planting and new schemes rather than traditional Parish ministry.
Evangelicals didn't have the majority they needed to block PLF, just the 2/3 majority required for no change in doctrine on marriage. They certainly don't have the majority they need on Synod to have 2 back to back evangelical Archbishops which has never happened in the C of E before for the simple reason it would lead to civil war in the C of E
But unless you are a member of the Canterbury Nominations Commission when the time comes, what you think doesn't really enter into it. Same for me, Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser.
The CNC will have three members from Canterbury diocese, six from the national panel (who are leaning conservative in their appointments), the Archbishop of York and AN Otherbishop, five members from the wider Anglican communion and a chair nominated the the PM. At the moment, the winning post is twelve votes out of those seventeen, so six noes is enough to stop a candidate.
Or he could point to the very many men in recent months found guilty of having photos of child abuse – many thousands of them, many of the worst kind – who got suspended sentences and walked free from court, in some cases because imprisonment might have put their jobs at risk. And they were also Very Sorry. Of course they were.
This is a side issue to Cyclefree’s well made point but the reason these men were not given prison sentences is abundantly clear: the prisons are full to bursting with people who the state views as a greater threat to public safety, or otherwise in greater need of imprisonment.
Possession of child abuse imagery is a heinous crime but, while the prisons are full, almost no one is going to go to prison for possession alone.
It is worth noting Welby was going to retire next year anyway. I suspect all that will happen is the date will be brought forward from December to April.
There is an article (in the Catholic journal The Tablet) here on the runners and riders -
I would certainly agree that Usher (Norwich) Snow (Leicester) and Tanner (Chester) are the likely candidates. That said, anyone who thinks Rachel Treweek has been a success at Gloucester is an idiot.
Snow is an evangelical so can't be him as you can't have an evangelical succeed an evangelical as Archbishop
That would be an ecumenical matter.
It would also lead to Anglo Catholics and liberal Catholics in open revolt, both would veto another evangelical appointment
Ah, but would they? I suspect they are more like Thatcher's wets- huff and puff but eventually back down in the name of unity. Whereas conservative/sound-on-gays evangelicals not only have a blocking minority but aren't afraid to use it.
If I had to guess... the structure will be like last time- possibly the last few times. The obvious big names will be tossed around to be tossed out. Then someone surprising will be suggested, and nobody will come up with objections quickly, so they will be nominated fairly rapidly before anyone does.
That's certainly how we ended up with Welby, and (to a lesser extent) with Williams.
But from a profile of the runners to succeed George Carey; ...it has been a safe general rule since the war that the prime minister always chooses the archbishop whom his predecessor would least have wanted.
No they would, as would others in the Save the Parish movement led by Reverends Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser who have also led the calls for Welby to resign.
I am a weekly churchgoer and on the Catholic wing and certainly not a wet and I also ain't accepting another evangelical focused on putting money into church planting and new schemes rather than traditional Parish ministry.
Evangelicals didn't have the majority they needed to block PLF, just the 2/3 majority required for no change in doctrine on marriage. They certainly don't have the majority they need on Synod to have 2 back to back evangelical Archbishops which has never happened in the C of E before for the simple reason it would lead to civil war in the C of E
What happens when you don't accept it? Orthodox? Rome? Or a HYUFD schism?
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Welcome back Cyclefree. Delighted to see you writing for PB again.
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
The King can reduce headcount in the CoE, in theory.
There's always the tunderbolt on Canterbury Cathedral option, if He sees it meet and right so to do.
Strange - I really don't know why he generates such, well, dislike from a certain section of the public. He was a very good footballer who played well for his country.
He does well on tv - I can only imagine it must be his politics and the fact he isn't a Conservative which seems to irritate, well, Conservatives.
It's the fact that he was spouting politics when he' was meant to be unbiased. He can now spout his metrosexual political shite on his podcasts or wherever he likes. He won't be missed by many.
Sunil said: "Ah, but is he a Protestant Calvinist, or a Catholic Calvinist?"
Hadn't heard that version before -- but I like it. (In James Blish's "A Case of Conscience", the pope is described as "a Catholic with an almost Lutheran passion for the grimmer reaches of moral theology". I am no expert in such things, but that sounds more Calvinist than Lutheran to me.)
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Welcome back Cyclefree. Delighted to see you writing for PB again.
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
The King can reduce headcount in the CoE, in theory.
Someone's been watching Wolf Hall.
“Thomas Cromwell, you are found built of Treason, Anabaptism and trying to get the King to marry a 3/10”
“Your sentence is to be taken from this place, to another place with bigger piles of gold. You are deprived of your job. You will suffer a Golden Goodbye. You will get a better job, with more money. And a Golden Hello. And share options.”
It is worth noting Welby was going to retire next year anyway. I suspect all that will happen is the date will be brought forward from December to April.
There is an article (in the Catholic journal The Tablet) here on the runners and riders -
I would certainly agree that Usher (Norwich) Snow (Leicester) and Tanner (Chester) are the likely candidates. That said, anyone who thinks Rachel Treweek has been a success at Gloucester is an idiot.
Snow is an evangelical so can't be him as you can't have an evangelical succeed an evangelical as Archbishop
That would be an ecumenical matter.
It would also lead to Anglo Catholics and liberal Catholics in open revolt, both would veto another evangelical appointment
Ah, but would they? I suspect they are more like Thatcher's wets- huff and puff but eventually back down in the name of unity. Whereas conservative/sound-on-gays evangelicals not only have a blocking minority but aren't afraid to use it.
If I had to guess... the structure will be like last time- possibly the last few times. The obvious big names will be tossed around to be tossed out. Then someone surprising will be suggested, and nobody will come up with objections quickly, so they will be nominated fairly rapidly before anyone does.
That's certainly how we ended up with Welby, and (to a lesser extent) with Williams.
But from a profile of the runners to succeed George Carey; ...it has been a safe general rule since the war that the prime minister always chooses the archbishop whom his predecessor would least have wanted.
No they would, as would others in the Save the Parish movement led by Reverends Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser who have also led the calls for Welby to resign.
I am a weekly churchgoer and on the Catholic wing and certainly not a wet and I also ain't accepting another evangelical focused on putting money into church planting and new schemes rather than traditional Parish ministry.
Evangelicals didn't have the majority they needed to block PLF, just the 2/3 majority required for no change in doctrine on marriage. They certainly don't have the majority they need on Synod to have 2 back to back evangelical Archbishops which has never happened in the C of E before for the simple reason it would lead to civil war in the C of E
What happens when you don't accept it? Orthodox? Rome? Or a HYUFD schism?
In theory half the C of E could become Roman Catholic again (certainly if they accepted women priests, Anglo Catholics opposed to women priests and bishops mostly crossed the Tiber or became Orthodox long ago) and the other evangelical half could become Baptist or Pentecostal. It is only being established church which really all keeps them together under the C of E umbrella
“BBC execs, meanwhile, will be giving Match of the Day a reboot to keep it fresh in the wake of such a huge departure.”
Oh gawwwddddd.......we know what happens to BBC shows when they this and based on recent experience they will try and capture da yufffff market. It will be bloody Paddy McGuinness....
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Welcome back Cyclefree. Delighted to see you writing for PB again.
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
The dismissal of an archbishop (unless by consent) would have to be by a legal process involving an ecclesiastical court or tribunal under the Clergy Discipline Measure or the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Measure. Put briefly that is the case generally for any ordained office holder within the diocesan system from vicar upwards.
Sunil said: "Ah, but is he a Protestant Calvinist, or a Catholic Calvinist?"
Hadn't heard that version before -- but I like it. (In James Blish's "A Case of Conscience", the pope is described as "a Catholic with an almost Lutheran passion for the grimmer reaches of moral theology". I am no expert in such things, but that sounds more Calvinist than Lutheran to me.)
Hi Jim, reminds me of this exchange between Frank Abagnale Jr, and Brenda Strong in the movie "Catch Me If You Can":
Frank: Brenda, I don't want to lie to you anymore. All right? I'm not a doctor. I never went to medical school. I'm not a lawyer, or a Harvard graduate, or a Lutheran. Brenda, I ran away from home a year and a half ago when I was 16.
It is worth noting Welby was going to retire next year anyway. I suspect all that will happen is the date will be brought forward from December to April.
There is an article (in the Catholic journal The Tablet) here on the runners and riders -
I would certainly agree that Usher (Norwich) Snow (Leicester) and Tanner (Chester) are the likely candidates. That said, anyone who thinks Rachel Treweek has been a success at Gloucester is an idiot.
Snow is an evangelical so can't be him as you can't have an evangelical succeed an evangelical as Archbishop
That would be an ecumenical matter.
It would also lead to Anglo Catholics and liberal Catholics in open revolt, both would veto another evangelical appointment
Ah, but would they? I suspect they are more like Thatcher's wets- huff and puff but eventually back down in the name of unity. Whereas conservative/sound-on-gays evangelicals not only have a blocking minority but aren't afraid to use it.
If I had to guess... the structure will be like last time- possibly the last few times. The obvious big names will be tossed around to be tossed out. Then someone surprising will be suggested, and nobody will come up with objections quickly, so they will be nominated fairly rapidly before anyone does.
That's certainly how we ended up with Welby, and (to a lesser extent) with Williams.
But from a profile of the runners to succeed George Carey; ...it has been a safe general rule since the war that the prime minister always chooses the archbishop whom his predecessor would least have wanted.
No they would, as would others in the Save the Parish movement led by Reverends Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser who have also led the calls for Welby to resign.
I am a weekly churchgoer and on the Catholic wing and certainly not a wet and I also ain't accepting another evangelical focused on putting money into church planting and new schemes rather than traditional Parish ministry.
Evangelicals didn't have the majority they needed to block PLF, just the 2/3 majority required for no change in doctrine on marriage. They certainly don't have the majority they need on Synod to have 2 back to back evangelical Archbishops which has never happened in the C of E before for the simple reason it would lead to civil war in the C of E
What happens when you don't accept it? Orthodox? Rome? Or a HYUFD schism?
In theory half the C of E could become Roman Catholic again (certainly if they accepted women priests, Anglo Catholics opposed to women priests and bishops mostly crossed the Tiber or became Orthodox long ago) and the other evangelical half could become Baptist or Pentecostal. It is only being established church which really all keeps them together under the C of E umbrella
Back when I was vaguely believing, I was a sort of high-church liberal. Like all the incense and Latin and ritual, just can’t be doing with the moral strictures or guilt trips. Sadly too much of the Anglican Church has adopted the guitars and drum kit in the last couple of decades.
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Welcome back Cyclefree. Delighted to see you writing for PB again.
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
The King can reduce headcount in the CoE, in theory.
There's always the tunderbolt on Canterbury Cathedral option, if He sees it meet and right so to do.
Strange - I really don't know why he generates such, well, dislike from a certain section of the public. He was a very good footballer who played well for his country.
He does well on tv - I can only imagine it must be his politics and the fact he isn't a Conservative which seems to irritate, well, Conservatives.
It's the fact that he was spouting politics when he' was meant to be unbiased. He can now spout his metrosexual political shite on his podcasts or wherever he likes. He won't be missed by many.
He's missed by Everton up front. And sadly that is despite him being 63.
It is worth noting Welby was going to retire next year anyway. I suspect all that will happen is the date will be brought forward from December to April.
There is an article (in the Catholic journal The Tablet) here on the runners and riders -
I would certainly agree that Usher (Norwich) Snow (Leicester) and Tanner (Chester) are the likely candidates. That said, anyone who thinks Rachel Treweek has been a success at Gloucester is an idiot.
Snow is an evangelical so can't be him as you can't have an evangelical succeed an evangelical as Archbishop
That would be an ecumenical matter.
It would also lead to Anglo Catholics and liberal Catholics in open revolt, both would veto another evangelical appointment
Ah, but would they? I suspect they are more like Thatcher's wets- huff and puff but eventually back down in the name of unity. Whereas conservative/sound-on-gays evangelicals not only have a blocking minority but aren't afraid to use it.
If I had to guess... the structure will be like last time- possibly the last few times. The obvious big names will be tossed around to be tossed out. Then someone surprising will be suggested, and nobody will come up with objections quickly, so they will be nominated fairly rapidly before anyone does.
That's certainly how we ended up with Welby, and (to a lesser extent) with Williams.
But from a profile of the runners to succeed George Carey; ...it has been a safe general rule since the war that the prime minister always chooses the archbishop whom his predecessor would least have wanted.
No they would, as would others in the Save the Parish movement led by Reverends Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser who have also led the calls for Welby to resign.
I am a weekly churchgoer and on the Catholic wing and certainly not a wet and I also ain't accepting another evangelical focused on putting money into church planting and new schemes rather than traditional Parish ministry.
Evangelicals didn't have the majority they needed to block PLF, just the 2/3 majority required for no change in doctrine on marriage. They certainly don't have the majority they need on Synod to have 2 back to back evangelical Archbishops which has never happened in the C of E before for the simple reason it would lead to civil war in the C of E
But unless you are a member of the Canterbury Nominations Commission when the time comes, what you think doesn't really enter into it. Same for me, Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser.
The CNC will have three members from Canterbury diocese, six from the national panel (who are leaning conservative in their appointments), the Archbishop of York and AN Otherbishop, five members from the wider Anglican communion and a chair nominated the the PM. At the moment, the winning post is twelve votes out of those seventeen, so six noes is enough to stop a candidate.
Or he could point to the very many men in recent months found guilty of having photos of child abuse – many thousands of them, many of the worst kind – who got suspended sentences and walked free from court, in some cases because imprisonment might have put their jobs at risk. And they were also Very Sorry. Of course they were.
This is a side issue to Cyclefree’s well made point but the reason these men were not given prison sentences is abundantly clear: the prisons are full to bursting with people who the state views as a greater threat to public safety, or otherwise in greater need of imprisonment.
Possession of child abuse imagery is a heinous crime but, while the prisons are full, almost no one is going to go to prison for possession alone.
I know that. Were it down to me, possession of such pictures would merit a prison sentence. Each such picture is evidence of a crime, to my mind one of the very worst.
Or he could point to the very many men in recent months found guilty of having photos of child abuse – many thousands of them, many of the worst kind – who got suspended sentences and walked free from court, in some cases because imprisonment might have put their jobs at risk. And they were also Very Sorry. Of course they were.
This is a side issue to Cyclefree’s well made point but the reason these men were not given prison sentences is abundantly clear: the prisons are full to bursting with people who the state views as a greater threat to public safety, or otherwise in greater need of imprisonment.
Possession of child abuse imagery is a heinous crime but, while the prisons are full, almost no one is going to go to prison for possession alone.
Huw Edwards lost his job but also got a suspended sentence due to his guilty plea and being a first time offender
Or he could point to the very many men in recent months found guilty of having photos of child abuse – many thousands of them, many of the worst kind – who got suspended sentences and walked free from court, in some cases because imprisonment might have put their jobs at risk. And they were also Very Sorry. Of course they were.
This is a side issue to Cyclefree’s well made point but the reason these men were not given prison sentences is abundantly clear: the prisons are full to bursting with people who the state views as a greater threat to public safety, or otherwise in greater need of imprisonment.
Possession of child abuse imagery is a heinous crime but, while the prisons are full, almost no one is going to go to prison for possession alone.
I know that. Were it down to me, possession of such pictures would merit a prison sentence. Each such picture is evidence of a crime, to my mind one of the very worst.
It may be a crime but given we have a shortage of prison places, it is clearly inevitable murderers, rapists, arsonists, terrorists, burglars, dangerous drivers and those who commit GBH and under Starmer those who make unacceptable social media tweets will be jailed ahead of them
One reason why Welby may survive is that any replacements will also have to be asked the same questions: what did they know? When did they know it? What did they do or fail to do?
And there will be possible replacements who do not have good answers. So they will want Welby to hang on until the furore has died down. The unsullied candidates are likely to be more junior and likely unacceptable for that very reason.
Or he could point to the very many men in recent months found guilty of having photos of child abuse – many thousands of them, many of the worst kind – who got suspended sentences and walked free from court, in some cases because imprisonment might have put their jobs at risk. And they were also Very Sorry. Of course they were.
This is a side issue to Cyclefree’s well made point but the reason these men were not given prison sentences is abundantly clear: the prisons are full to bursting with people who the state views as a greater threat to public safety, or otherwise in greater need of imprisonment.
Possession of child abuse imagery is a heinous crime but, while the prisons are full, almost no one is going to go to prison for possession alone.
Huw Edwards lost his job but also got a suspended sentence due to his guilty plea and being a first time offender
I think that as somebody so high profile he should have been punished harder
Why miss such a golden opportunity to set an example?
It is worth noting Welby was going to retire next year anyway. I suspect all that will happen is the date will be brought forward from December to April.
There is an article (in the Catholic journal The Tablet) here on the runners and riders -
I would certainly agree that Usher (Norwich) Snow (Leicester) and Tanner (Chester) are the likely candidates. That said, anyone who thinks Rachel Treweek has been a success at Gloucester is an idiot.
Snow is an evangelical so can't be him as you can't have an evangelical succeed an evangelical as Archbishop
That would be an ecumenical matter.
It would also lead to Anglo Catholics and liberal Catholics in open revolt, both would veto another evangelical appointment
Ah, but would they? I suspect they are more like Thatcher's wets- huff and puff but eventually back down in the name of unity. Whereas conservative/sound-on-gays evangelicals not only have a blocking minority but aren't afraid to use it.
If I had to guess... the structure will be like last time- possibly the last few times. The obvious big names will be tossed around to be tossed out. Then someone surprising will be suggested, and nobody will come up with objections quickly, so they will be nominated fairly rapidly before anyone does.
That's certainly how we ended up with Welby, and (to a lesser extent) with Williams.
But from a profile of the runners to succeed George Carey; ...it has been a safe general rule since the war that the prime minister always chooses the archbishop whom his predecessor would least have wanted.
No they would, as would others in the Save the Parish movement led by Reverends Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser who have also led the calls for Welby to resign.
I am a weekly churchgoer and on the Catholic wing and certainly not a wet and I also ain't accepting another evangelical focused on putting money into church planting and new schemes rather than traditional Parish ministry.
Evangelicals didn't have the majority they needed to block PLF, just the 2/3 majority required for no change in doctrine on marriage. They certainly don't have the majority they need on Synod to have 2 back to back evangelical Archbishops which has never happened in the C of E before for the simple reason it would lead to civil war in the C of E
What happens when you don't accept it? Orthodox? Rome? Or a HYUFD schism?
In theory half the C of E could become Roman Catholic again (certainly if they accepted women priests, Anglo Catholics opposed to women priests and bishops mostly crossed the Tiber or became Orthodox long ago) and the other evangelical half could become Baptist or Pentecostal. It is only being established church which really all keeps them together under the C of E umbrella
Back when I was vaguely believing, I was a sort of high-church liberal. Like all the incense and Latin and ritual, just can’t be doing with the moral strictures or guilt trips. Sadly too much of the Anglican Church has adopted the guitars and drum kit in the last couple of decades.
Indeed but the C of E contains both wings still and has always been a balance between the 2, from the Elizabethan settlement after its swing to evangelical Protestantism under Edward VI and effective return to Rome under Mary Tudor
According to Rear Admiral Timofhy Gallaudet, who is going to testify at the UAPs hearing on Wednesday, the United States government has evidence of "a new nature of reality."
Rather interesting.
He’s a crank who has filmed dust motes in his daughters bedroom and thinks they are tiny ufos.
It is worth noting Welby was going to retire next year anyway. I suspect all that will happen is the date will be brought forward from December to April.
There is an article (in the Catholic journal The Tablet) here on the runners and riders -
I would certainly agree that Usher (Norwich) Snow (Leicester) and Tanner (Chester) are the likely candidates. That said, anyone who thinks Rachel Treweek has been a success at Gloucester is an idiot.
Snow is an evangelical so can't be him as you can't have an evangelical succeed an evangelical as Archbishop
That would be an ecumenical matter.
It would also lead to Anglo Catholics and liberal Catholics in open revolt, both would veto another evangelical appointment
Ah, but would they? I suspect they are more like Thatcher's wets- huff and puff but eventually back down in the name of unity. Whereas conservative/sound-on-gays evangelicals not only have a blocking minority but aren't afraid to use it.
If I had to guess... the structure will be like last time- possibly the last few times. The obvious big names will be tossed around to be tossed out. Then someone surprising will be suggested, and nobody will come up with objections quickly, so they will be nominated fairly rapidly before anyone does.
That's certainly how we ended up with Welby, and (to a lesser extent) with Williams.
But from a profile of the runners to succeed George Carey; ...it has been a safe general rule since the war that the prime minister always chooses the archbishop whom his predecessor would least have wanted.
No they would, as would others in the Save the Parish movement led by Reverends Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser who have also led the calls for Welby to resign.
I am a weekly churchgoer and on the Catholic wing and certainly not a wet and I also ain't accepting another evangelical focused on putting money into church planting and new schemes rather than traditional Parish ministry.
Evangelicals didn't have the majority they needed to block PLF, just the 2/3 majority required for no change in doctrine on marriage. They certainly don't have the majority they need on Synod to have 2 back to back evangelical Archbishops which has never happened in the C of E before for the simple reason it would lead to civil war in the C of E
But unless you are a member of the Canterbury Nominations Commission when the time comes, what you think doesn't really enter into it. Same for me, Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser.
The CNC will have three members from Canterbury diocese, six from the national panel (who are leaning conservative in their appointments), the Archbishop of York and AN Otherbishop, five members from the wider Anglican communion and a chair nominated the the PM. At the moment, the winning post is twelve votes out of those seventeen, so six noes is enough to stop a candidate.
And although the central pool of CNC members ought to reflect the wider church, there's a sense that the current one doesn't. It's certainly not 50:50. Some commentary from when they were elected here:
It is worth noting Welby was going to retire next year anyway. I suspect all that will happen is the date will be brought forward from December to April.
There is an article (in the Catholic journal The Tablet) here on the runners and riders -
I would certainly agree that Usher (Norwich) Snow (Leicester) and Tanner (Chester) are the likely candidates. That said, anyone who thinks Rachel Treweek has been a success at Gloucester is an idiot.
Snow is an evangelical so can't be him as you can't have an evangelical succeed an evangelical as Archbishop
That would be an ecumenical matter.
It would also lead to Anglo Catholics and liberal Catholics in open revolt, both would veto another evangelical appointment
Ah, but would they? I suspect they are more like Thatcher's wets- huff and puff but eventually back down in the name of unity. Whereas conservative/sound-on-gays evangelicals not only have a blocking minority but aren't afraid to use it.
If I had to guess... the structure will be like last time- possibly the last few times. The obvious big names will be tossed around to be tossed out. Then someone surprising will be suggested, and nobody will come up with objections quickly, so they will be nominated fairly rapidly before anyone does.
That's certainly how we ended up with Welby, and (to a lesser extent) with Williams.
But from a profile of the runners to succeed George Carey; ...it has been a safe general rule since the war that the prime minister always chooses the archbishop whom his predecessor would least have wanted.
No they would, as would others in the Save the Parish movement led by Reverends Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser who have also led the calls for Welby to resign.
I am a weekly churchgoer and on the Catholic wing and certainly not a wet and I also ain't accepting another evangelical focused on putting money into church planting and new schemes rather than traditional Parish ministry.
Evangelicals didn't have the majority they needed to block PLF, just the 2/3 majority required for no change in doctrine on marriage. They certainly don't have the majority they need on Synod to have 2 back to back evangelical Archbishops which has never happened in the C of E before for the simple reason it would lead to civil war in the C of E
But unless you are a member of the Canterbury Nominations Commission when the time comes, what you think doesn't really enter into it. Same for me, Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser.
The CNC will have three members from Canterbury diocese, six from the national panel (who are leaning conservative in their appointments), the Archbishop of York and AN Otherbishop, five members from the wider Anglican communion and a chair nominated the the PM. At the moment, the winning post is twelve votes out of those seventeen, so six noes is enough to stop a candidate.
And although the central pool of CNC members ought to reflect the wider church, there's a sense that the current one doesn't. It's certainly not 50:50. Some commentary from when they were elected here:
As an electoral systems go, it makes both the Electoral College and AV look good.
Even then, of that list American Anglicans lean Catholic as do those from Oceania and Europe and the Middle East.
Only the wider Asian and African wings lean evangelical.
You can also of course get conservative Anglo Catholics who would veto an evangelical. Prudence Daily for example is a conservative Anglo Catholic lay member of the Commission who I know would vote against another evangelical
Kind of. In the same way that Trump is also gone…(In 2028). And he will still be raking in vast multiples of peoples licence fees for not that much work.
I am minor helper in a charity that does a lot of work with young people.
We carefully follow all the rules of safeguarding. And, more importantly, the intent of the rules. We have yearly audits and ask for advice on how to improve. We have anonymous reporting for incidents - I helped set up a thing with QR codes so that anyone with a smart phone can go, in one click, to an anonymised form to report *anything*. That's in addition to paper message boxes, email, text number etc etc. All posted up and pointed out to the kids.
All the employees and helpers receive training on this.
And we strive to do more.
Hey, but what's 40 years of gun decking reports, when it's about being a Safe Pair of Hands, a Team Player......
Or he could point to the very many men in recent months found guilty of having photos of child abuse – many thousands of them, many of the worst kind – who got suspended sentences and walked free from court, in some cases because imprisonment might have put their jobs at risk. And they were also Very Sorry. Of course they were.
This is a side issue to Cyclefree’s well made point but the reason these men were not given prison sentences is abundantly clear: the prisons are full to bursting with people who the state views as a greater threat to public safety, or otherwise in greater need of imprisonment.
Possession of child abuse imagery is a heinous crime but, while the prisons are full, almost no one is going to go to prison for possession alone.
I know that. Were it down to me, possession of such pictures would merit a prison sentence. Each such picture is evidence of a crime, to my mind one of the very worst.
It may be a crime but given we have a shortage of prison places, it is clearly inevitable murderers, rapists, arsonists, terrorists, burglars, dangerous drivers and those who commit GBH and under Starmer those who make unacceptable social media tweets will be jailed ahead of them
I've got an idea.
Punishment Battalions for Ukraine.
They can march, arms locked together, through the mine fields.
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Welcome back Cyclefree. Delighted to see you writing for PB again.
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
The King can reduce headcount in the CoE, in theory.
Someone's been watching Wolf Hall.
“Thomas Cromwell, you are found built of Treason, Anabaptism and trying to get the King to marry a 3/10”
“Your sentence is to be taken from this place, to another place with bigger piles of gold. You are deprived of your job. You will suffer a Golden Goodbye. You will get a better job, with more money. And a Golden Hello. And share options.”
Ah, you’ve seen Mantells preferred ending. I think she hated him losing at the end.
It is worth noting Welby was going to retire next year anyway. I suspect all that will happen is the date will be brought forward from December to April.
There is an article (in the Catholic journal The Tablet) here on the runners and riders -
I would certainly agree that Usher (Norwich) Snow (Leicester) and Tanner (Chester) are the likely candidates. That said, anyone who thinks Rachel Treweek has been a success at Gloucester is an idiot.
Snow is an evangelical so can't be him as you can't have an evangelical succeed an evangelical as Archbishop
That would be an ecumenical matter.
It would also lead to Anglo Catholics and liberal Catholics in open revolt, both would veto another evangelical appointment
Ah, but would they? I suspect they are more like Thatcher's wets- huff and puff but eventually back down in the name of unity. Whereas conservative/sound-on-gays evangelicals not only have a blocking minority but aren't afraid to use it.
If I had to guess... the structure will be like last time- possibly the last few times. The obvious big names will be tossed around to be tossed out. Then someone surprising will be suggested, and nobody will come up with objections quickly, so they will be nominated fairly rapidly before anyone does.
That's certainly how we ended up with Welby, and (to a lesser extent) with Williams.
But from a profile of the runners to succeed George Carey; ...it has been a safe general rule since the war that the prime minister always chooses the archbishop whom his predecessor would least have wanted.
No they would, as would others in the Save the Parish movement led by Reverends Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser who have also led the calls for Welby to resign.
I am a weekly churchgoer and on the Catholic wing and certainly not a wet and I also ain't accepting another evangelical focused on putting money into church planting and new schemes rather than traditional Parish ministry.
Evangelicals didn't have the majority they needed to block PLF, just the 2/3 majority required for no change in doctrine on marriage. They certainly don't have the majority they need on Synod to have 2 back to back evangelical Archbishops which has never happened in the C of E before for the simple reason it would lead to civil war in the C of E
What happens when you don't accept it? Orthodox? Rome? Or a HYUFD schism?
In theory half the C of E could become Roman Catholic again (certainly if they accepted women priests, Anglo Catholics opposed to women priests and bishops mostly crossed the Tiber or became Orthodox long ago) and the other evangelical half could become Baptist or Pentecostal. It is only being established church which really all keeps them together under the C of E umbrella
Back when I was vaguely believing, I was a sort of high-church liberal. Like all the incense and Latin and ritual, just can’t be doing with the moral strictures or guilt trips. Sadly too much of the Anglican Church has adopted the guitars and drum kit in the last couple of decades.
Our nearby local church does that and its not for me.. They don't have hymns any more.. they call them songs which are just awful afaiac.
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Welcome back Cyclefree. Delighted to see you writing for PB again.
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
The King can reduce headcount in the CoE, in theory.
There's always the tunderbolt on Canterbury Cathedral option, if He sees it meet and right so to do.
Strange - I really don't know why he generates such, well, dislike from a certain section of the public. He was a very good footballer who played well for his country.
He does well on tv - I can only imagine it must be his politics and the fact he isn't a Conservative which seems to irritate, well, Conservatives.
It's the fact that he was spouting politics when he' was meant to be unbiased. He can now spout his metrosexual political shite on his podcasts or wherever he likes. He won't be missed by many.
He's missed by Everton up front. And sadly that is despite him being 63.
I think the last thread is the the TRUSS of PB thread - The shortest surviving in PB history? 😂
Yeah, I wanted to publish this before Welby resigned.
Waiting until tomorrow morning wasn't an option.
I'm going to read Miss Cycles header in a bit with a cup of Yorkshire and a mince pie
Mince pie?
In early November?
The world's gone mad!
November is for testing the different options so that in December you can make sure you have only the best.
Any time after Halloween its acceptable to have Christmas things.
Which somewhat by definition includes all of November.
After bonfire night it’s vaguely acceptable, not Halloween.
I prefer Christmas to start from the 16th, after my birthday.
It’s a battle that’s already lost but I kinda like Dec 1st as the start of Christmas. That said we are moving to a world where the winter events merge seamlessly. Halloween into bonfire night, through poppy mass and into the big one. People like dressing up houses and nice lights. Do it if it makes you happy.
I only came back on to annoy those who drove me off.
And also because this picks up on some of the stuff I've been writing about in my book.
Many years ago as a pupil barrister I sat in court between John Smyth and Mary Whitehouse. She was bringing a case about some pornographic programme or other. She was very polite and charming.
Smyth, on the other hand, totally ignored me, not even deigning to say good morning or acknowledge my presence in any way. In those days, he was not the only senior male barrister to behave with such astounding rudeness. Fortunately for me, being a woman meant that I was spared his advances. It was only the women-loving perverts I had to fend off. The judge in the case was Mr Justice Taylor who wrote the first report on the Hillsborough tragedy.
Mary Whitehouse lost the case. Christopher Hitchens' remark about the ostentatiously pious comes to mind when you meet people like Smyth. Also if you put any group on a pedestal you create the conditions for some in that group to abuse their position and for abusers to join that group. A lesson which ought to be - but is never ever - learned.
Welcome back Cyclefree. Delighted to see you writing for PB again.
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
The King can reduce headcount in the CoE, in theory.
Someone's been watching Wolf Hall.
“Thomas Cromwell, you are found built of Treason, Anabaptism and trying to get the King to marry a 3/10”
“Your sentence is to be taken from this place, to another place with bigger piles of gold. You are deprived of your job. You will suffer a Golden Goodbye. You will get a better job, with more money. And a Golden Hello. And share options.”
Ah, you’ve seen Mantells preferred ending. I think she hated him losing at the end.
It does make you warm to Henry's operational management style, doesn't it?
Someone published a paper recently - apparently after Admiral Byng, for a couple of generations, his friends, relations and their descendants in the Royal Navy kicked the French noticeably harder than everyone else. And everyone did a bit better.
Business travel is grim, unless it's a few weeks/months in a cool city doing a special project. The constant pissing about between Westminster, constituency, foreign trips does not appeal at all.
No no no! I’m not having that.
Business travel is great, and a real privilege. Before Covid I was a very regular business traveller, not right at the extreme end but alternating between BA gold and silver and enjoying every minute of it.
You’re travelling the world and somebody else is paying. Every trip to some dull suburban business park outside Warsaw or Antwerp is also a free teleportation to a region you can explore over the weekend. And long haul trips even more so.
Since the pandemic I’m travelling sadly much less but even last week’s trip to Manchester, Leeds and Birmingham had its compensations.
I am at the extreme end of business travel (well on the road to GGL for life) and it really isn’t much fun - too many day trips with 5 hours in planes plus 3 hours in airports plus a full day of meetings…
I am minor helper in a charity that does a lot of work with young people.
We carefully follow all the rules of safeguarding. And, more importantly, the intent of the rules. We have yearly audits and ask for advice on how to improve. We have anonymous reporting for incidents - I helped set up a thing with QR codes so that anyone with a smart phone can go, in one click, to an anonymised form to report *anything*. That's in addition to paper message boxes, email, text number etc etc. All posted up and pointed out to the kids.
All the employees and helpers receive training on this.
And we strive to do more.
Hey, but what's 40 years of gun decking reports, when it's about being a Safe Pair of Hands, a Team Player......
Do you know what's really depressing?
That's not only a much more advanced system than in the CofE, but much more advanced and better run than the system used by OFSTED, who are supposed to be the arbiters of good practice in child protection.
We talk a lot about safeguarding in this country but we're really, really bad at it.
It is worth noting Welby was going to retire next year anyway. I suspect all that will happen is the date will be brought forward from December to April.
There is an article (in the Catholic journal The Tablet) here on the runners and riders -
I would certainly agree that Usher (Norwich) Snow (Leicester) and Tanner (Chester) are the likely candidates. That said, anyone who thinks Rachel Treweek has been a success at Gloucester is an idiot.
Snow is an evangelical so can't be him as you can't have an evangelical succeed an evangelical as Archbishop
That would be an ecumenical matter.
It would also lead to Anglo Catholics and liberal Catholics in open revolt, both would veto another evangelical appointment
Ah, but would they? I suspect they are more like Thatcher's wets- huff and puff but eventually back down in the name of unity. Whereas conservative/sound-on-gays evangelicals not only have a blocking minority but aren't afraid to use it.
If I had to guess... the structure will be like last time- possibly the last few times. The obvious big names will be tossed around to be tossed out. Then someone surprising will be suggested, and nobody will come up with objections quickly, so they will be nominated fairly rapidly before anyone does.
That's certainly how we ended up with Welby, and (to a lesser extent) with Williams.
But from a profile of the runners to succeed George Carey; ...it has been a safe general rule since the war that the prime minister always chooses the archbishop whom his predecessor would least have wanted.
No they would, as would others in the Save the Parish movement led by Reverends Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser who have also led the calls for Welby to resign.
I am a weekly churchgoer and on the Catholic wing and certainly not a wet and I also ain't accepting another evangelical focused on putting money into church planting and new schemes rather than traditional Parish ministry.
Evangelicals didn't have the majority they needed to block PLF, just the 2/3 majority required for no change in doctrine on marriage. They certainly don't have the majority they need on Synod to have 2 back to back evangelical Archbishops which has never happened in the C of E before for the simple reason it would lead to civil war in the C of E
But unless you are a member of the Canterbury Nominations Commission when the time comes, what you think doesn't really enter into it. Same for me, Marcus Walker and Giles Fraser.
The CNC will have three members from Canterbury diocese, six from the national panel (who are leaning conservative in their appointments), the Archbishop of York and AN Otherbishop, five members from the wider Anglican communion and a chair nominated the the PM. At the moment, the winning post is twelve votes out of those seventeen, so six noes is enough to stop a candidate.
And although the central pool of CNC members ought to reflect the wider church, there's a sense that the current one doesn't. It's certainly not 50:50. Some commentary from when they were elected here:
As an electoral systems go, it makes both the Electoral College and AV look good.
Even then, of that list American Anglicans lean Catholic as do those from Oceania and Europe and the Middle East.
Only the wider Asian and African wings lean evangelical.
You can also of course get conservative Anglo Catholics who would veto an evangelical. Prudence Daily for example is a conservative Anglo Catholic lay member of the Commission who I know would vote against another evangelical
I'm putting my hat in the ring
1) Drinks tea 2) Loves steam trains 3) Worships the Holy Trinity - the AB, BC, CA of all crankshafts. 4) I worship myself and there the list ends. 5) Will re-introduce excommunications, heresy trials and crusades. Also a Church Militant wing. And boy, will they be militant.
Stephen Miller, an immigration hard-liner and adviser to President-elect Donald J. Trump, is taking over policy planning for the transition and is expected to be named deputy chief of staff in the incoming administration, according to people briefed on the matter.
NY Times
Fully paid up to Trump-won-in-2020 lies. Has promoted conspiracy theories from white nationalism and promoted a Great Replacement Theory novel beloved by neo-Nazis. Led on the policy of separating children from parents when they came over the border.
Any fools who thought that once Trump was elected he'd tack back towards the centre ground are going to be disappointed. It looks like Trump is planning of going full MAGA/Project 2025.
There are going to be a lot of leopards with full bellies.
The centre ground in Washington is not the same as the centre ground of the American people. You'll probably find that Trump moves the Washington consensus in his direction in a more significant way than 2016-2020.
What direction would that be: towards legalised pussy-grabbing, or tax breaks for one’s own industry, or the acceptability of attempted armed insurrection? Or perhaps the freedom to pay hush money to prostitutes. Or blackmail the head of state of a foreign country with withdrawing military aid unless they open an investigation into your political opponent?
Towards refocusing the federal government on security issues like enforcing immigration laws and destroying drug cartels, while getting rid of superfluous agencies and open-ended commitments that drain resources.
The War on Drugs isn't an open-ended commitment? You do make me laugh, williamglenn.
Or he could point to the very many men in recent months found guilty of having photos of child abuse – many thousands of them, many of the worst kind – who got suspended sentences and walked free from court, in some cases because imprisonment might have put their jobs at risk. And they were also Very Sorry. Of course they were.
This is a side issue to Cyclefree’s well made point but the reason these men were not given prison sentences is abundantly clear: the prisons are full to bursting with people who the state views as a greater threat to public safety, or otherwise in greater need of imprisonment.
Possession of child abuse imagery is a heinous crime but, while the prisons are full, almost no one is going to go to prison for possession alone.
Huw Edwards lost his job but also got a suspended sentence due to his guilty plea and being a first time offender
I think that as somebody so high profile he should have been punished harder
Why miss such a golden opportunity to set an example?
We gave lots of Nazis suspended sentences, of course.
Or he could point to the very many men in recent months found guilty of having photos of child abuse – many thousands of them, many of the worst kind – who got suspended sentences and walked free from court, in some cases because imprisonment might have put their jobs at risk. And they were also Very Sorry. Of course they were.
This is a side issue to Cyclefree’s well made point but the reason these men were not given prison sentences is abundantly clear: the prisons are full to bursting with people who the state views as a greater threat to public safety, or otherwise in greater need of imprisonment.
Possession of child abuse imagery is a heinous crime but, while the prisons are full, almost no one is going to go to prison for possession alone.
Huw Edwards lost his job but also got a suspended sentence due to his guilty plea and being a first time offender
I think that as somebody so high profile he should have been punished harder
Why miss such a golden opportunity to set an example?
As the law is supposed to apply the same sentence to everyone, no less for higher status individuals but no more either
Good to see @Cyclefree back. I hope that I wasn't one that caused her to leave, that was certainly not my intention.
I am not Anglican, so have no real say in what Welby does but it's hard to see how he can stay on without further damage to the CoE.
Sex abuse seems particularly prevalent in hierarchical organisations based on patronage and charisma*, but all organisations are at risk and need to take it seriously.
I think that custodial sentences for all child porn possession are not viable without many more prisons. There simply are too many perpetrators, and in any case I am not sure that is the best way to prevent re-offending.
The ongoing French case does show that far too many men are willing to sexually offend given the chance and encouragement.
*there have been a number of cases in my own profession, and many more that never reach the light of day..
I think the last thread is the the TRUSS of PB thread - The shortest surviving in PB history? 😂
Yeah, I wanted to publish this before Welby resigned.
Waiting until tomorrow morning wasn't an option.
I'm going to read Miss Cycles header in a bit with a cup of Yorkshire and a mince pie
Mince pie?
In early November?
The world's gone mad!
November is for testing the different options so that in December you can make sure you have only the best.
Any time after Halloween its acceptable to have Christmas things.
Which somewhat by definition includes all of November.
After bonfire night it’s vaguely acceptable, not Halloween.
I prefer Christmas to start from the 16th, after my birthday.
It’s a battle that’s already lost but I kinda like Dec 1st as the start of Christmas. That said we are moving to a world where the winter events merge seamlessly. Halloween into bonfire night, through poppy mass and into the big one. People like dressing up houses and nice lights. Do it if it makes you happy.
In the USA they need to mark Thanksgiving first, so Christmas starts a little later.
The safe option to replace Saint Gary is Mark Chapman as he is already MOTD2 host and all round professional that everybody goes to for sport presenter gigs.
But the quote about wanting to refresh the programme suggests otherwise, checks what happened to viewership of Football Focus....
Or he could point to the very many men in recent months found guilty of having photos of child abuse – many thousands of them, many of the worst kind – who got suspended sentences and walked free from court, in some cases because imprisonment might have put their jobs at risk. And they were also Very Sorry. Of course they were.
This is a side issue to Cyclefree’s well made point but the reason these men were not given prison sentences is abundantly clear: the prisons are full to bursting with people who the state views as a greater threat to public safety, or otherwise in greater need of imprisonment.
Possession of child abuse imagery is a heinous crime but, while the prisons are full, almost no one is going to go to prison for possession alone.
Huw Edwards lost his job but also got a suspended sentence due to his guilty plea and being a first time offender
I think that as somebody so high profile he should have been punished harder
Why miss such a golden opportunity to set an example?
We gave lots of Nazis suspended sentences, of course.
If hanging them counts as a suspended sentence.
Very few. Many more quietly established themselves as good West German citizens.
Or he could point to the very many men in recent months found guilty of having photos of child abuse – many thousands of them, many of the worst kind – who got suspended sentences and walked free from court, in some cases because imprisonment might have put their jobs at risk. And they were also Very Sorry. Of course they were.
This is a side issue to Cyclefree’s well made point but the reason these men were not given prison sentences is abundantly clear: the prisons are full to bursting with people who the state views as a greater threat to public safety, or otherwise in greater need of imprisonment.
Possession of child abuse imagery is a heinous crime but, while the prisons are full, almost no one is going to go to prison for possession alone.
Huw Edwards lost his job but also got a suspended sentence due to his guilty plea and being a first time offender
I think that as somebody so high profile he should have been punished harder
Why miss such a golden opportunity to set an example?
As the law is supposed to apply the same sentence to everyone, no less for higher status individuals but no more either
I think the last thread is the the TRUSS of PB thread - The shortest surviving in PB history? 😂
Yeah, I wanted to publish this before Welby resigned.
Waiting until tomorrow morning wasn't an option.
I'm going to read Miss Cycles header in a bit with a cup of Yorkshire and a mince pie
Mince pie?
In early November?
The world's gone mad!
November is for testing the different options so that in December you can make sure you have only the best.
Any time after Halloween its acceptable to have Christmas things.
Which somewhat by definition includes all of November.
After bonfire night it’s vaguely acceptable, not Halloween.
I prefer Christmas to start from the 16th, after my birthday.
It’s a battle that’s already lost but I kinda like Dec 1st as the start of Christmas. That said we are moving to a world where the winter events merge seamlessly. Halloween into bonfire night, through poppy mass and into the big one. People like dressing up houses and nice lights. Do it if it makes you happy.
In the USA they need to mark Thanksgiving first, so Christmas starts a little later.
And to be fair we’ve imported Black Friday without the actual reason for having it, so maybe we should import Thanksgiving too? Would nicely fill the gap…
Or he could point to the very many men in recent months found guilty of having photos of child abuse – many thousands of them, many of the worst kind – who got suspended sentences and walked free from court, in some cases because imprisonment might have put their jobs at risk. And they were also Very Sorry. Of course they were.
This is a side issue to Cyclefree’s well made point but the reason these men were not given prison sentences is abundantly clear: the prisons are full to bursting with people who the state views as a greater threat to public safety, or otherwise in greater need of imprisonment.
Possession of child abuse imagery is a heinous crime but, while the prisons are full, almost no one is going to go to prison for possession alone.
Huw Edwards lost his job but also got a suspended sentence due to his guilty plea and being a first time offender
I think that as somebody so high profile he should have been punished harder
Why miss such a golden opportunity to set an example?
We gave lots of Nazis suspended sentences, of course.
If hanging them counts as a suspended sentence.
Very few. Many more quietly established themselves as good West German citizens.
Trouble was there were rather a lot of Nazis. You could hardly hang all of them and expect a functioning country. After all, many of them had useful skills, such as being policemen, or fighting in the army.
Or he could point to the very many men in recent months found guilty of having photos of child abuse – many thousands of them, many of the worst kind – who got suspended sentences and walked free from court, in some cases because imprisonment might have put their jobs at risk. And they were also Very Sorry. Of course they were.
This is a side issue to Cyclefree’s well made point but the reason these men were not given prison sentences is abundantly clear: the prisons are full to bursting with people who the state views as a greater threat to public safety, or otherwise in greater need of imprisonment.
Possession of child abuse imagery is a heinous crime but, while the prisons are full, almost no one is going to go to prison for possession alone.
Huw Edwards lost his job but also got a suspended sentence due to his guilty plea and being a first time offender
I think that as somebody so high profile he should have been punished harder
Why miss such a golden opportunity to set an example?
As the law is supposed to apply the same sentence to everyone, no less for higher status individuals but no more either
Abuse of a public office.
It was not directly related to his job and it is also highly debateable whether a BBC newsreader is a public office
Comments
I am a weekly churchgoer and on the Catholic wing and certainly not a wet and I also ain't accepting another evangelical focused on putting money into church planting and new schemes rather than traditional Parish ministry.
Evangelicals didn't have the majority they needed to block PLF, just the 2/3 majority required for no change in doctrine on marriage. They certainly don't have the majority they need on Synod to have 2 back to back evangelical Archbishops which has never happened in the C of E before for the simple reason it would lead to civil war in the C of E
The next big scandals will be the entire wholesale abandonment of safeguarding for anything under the rainbow/alphabet people umbrella.
Rather interesting.
His beliefs on steam trains and tea are unknown
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pézenas
They have a local delicacy, Petit Pâté de Pézenas, that was brought there by Clive of India, when he lived in Pézenas after finally leaving India
It's a sweet lamb pastry, apparently a refined version of Keema Naan
The town was recommended to me by an antique dealer on my mail route. I was taking him packets of euros; he's heading there for its antiques shops
I always ask when I take people foreign money. I'm so surprised I found someone going somewhere on my next walk
I had a slight raising of the hackles and was ready for a fight when I saw the headline. But then I saw your byline and knew I had no reason to be concerned.
It would be nice to see Welby be the one who breaks the mould and does the right thing but I am not holding my breath.
Just out of interest, who can sack an Archbishop if he won't resign?
He does well on tv - I can only imagine it must be his politics and the fact he isn't a Conservative which seems to irritate, well, Conservatives.
I’ll leave an in depth analysis to the PB expert.
They are Little People - if they can be thrown overboard in a cost cutting/restructuring exercise, this leaves more money for Proper People.
You don’t #NU10K, do you?
He's the best football journalist on the Beeb
And I so love his voice
And mind-numbing hassle to claim expenses, and to convince whoever is in charge of the travel budget that it's reasonable to book a hotel not on the preferred supplier list of whichever annoying travel expense app your employer is using, because all the hotels that are on the app are flea-ridden hellpits miles away from where you need to be.
Which business is paying people to stay somewhere over the weekend unless they're working over the weekend?
The CNC will have three members from Canterbury diocese, six from the national panel (who are leaning conservative in their appointments), the Archbishop of York and AN Otherbishop, five members from the wider Anglican communion and a chair nominated the the PM. At the moment, the winning post is twelve votes out of those seventeen, so six noes is enough to stop a candidate.
Possession of child abuse imagery is a heinous crime but, while the prisons are full, almost no one is going to go to prison for possession alone.
Hadn't heard that version before -- but I like it. (In James Blish's "A Case of Conscience", the pope is described as "a Catholic with an almost Lutheran passion for the grimmer reaches of moral theology". I am no expert in such things, but that sounds more Calvinist than Lutheran to me.)
“Your sentence is to be taken from this place, to another place with bigger piles of gold. You are deprived of your job. You will suffer a Golden Goodbye. You will get a better job, with more money. And a Golden Hello. And share options.”
Frank: Brenda, I don't want to lie to you anymore. All right? I'm not a doctor. I never went to medical school. I'm not a lawyer, or a Harvard graduate, or a Lutheran. Brenda, I ran away from home a year and a half ago when I was 16.
Brenda: Frank? Frank? You're not a Lutheran?
But as I say, that's another story.
And sadly that is despite him being 63.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/11/what-happens-if-justin-welby-archbishop-canterbury-resigns/
In fact, you might say the top of the Church of England is a series of interlocking scandals, united by their dislike for each other.
Which somewhat by definition includes all of November.
And there will be possible replacements who do not have good answers. So they will want Welby to hang on until the furore has died down. The unsullied candidates are likely to be more junior and likely unacceptable for that very reason.
Why miss such a golden opportunity to set an example?
https://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/news/news-and-statements/global-anglican-communion-given-voice-choice-future-archbishops-canterbury
And although the central pool of CNC members ought to reflect the wider church, there's a sense that the current one doesn't. It's certainly not 50:50. Some commentary from when they were elected here:
https://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/crown-nominations-commission-central-members-2022-2027/
As an electoral systems go, it makes both the Electoral College and AV look good.
Only the wider Asian and African wings lean evangelical.
You can also of course get conservative Anglo Catholics who would veto an evangelical. Prudence Daily for example is a conservative Anglo Catholic lay member of the Commission who I know would vote against another evangelical
Sources say that the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby has cleared his diary for tomorrow, as pressure grows on him to resign.
I am minor helper in a charity that does a lot of work with young people.
We carefully follow all the rules of safeguarding. And, more importantly, the intent of the rules. We have yearly audits and ask for advice on how to improve. We have anonymous reporting for incidents - I helped set up a thing with QR codes so that anyone with a smart phone can go, in one click, to an anonymised form to report *anything*. That's in addition to paper message boxes, email, text number etc etc. All posted up and pointed out to the kids.
All the employees and helpers receive training on this.
And we strive to do more.
Hey, but what's 40 years of gun decking reports, when it's about being a Safe Pair of Hands, a Team Player......
You’ve been missed
I prefer Christmas to start from the 16th, after my birthday.
Punishment Battalions for Ukraine.
They can march, arms locked together, through the mine fields.
God will know his own.
Someone published a paper recently - apparently after Admiral Byng, for a couple of generations, his friends, relations and their descendants in the Royal Navy kicked the French noticeably harder than everyone else. And everyone did a bit better.
That's not only a much more advanced system than in the CofE, but much more advanced and better run than the system used by OFSTED, who are supposed to be the arbiters of good practice in child protection.
We talk a lot about safeguarding in this country but we're really, really bad at it.
1) Drinks tea
2) Loves steam trains
3) Worships the Holy Trinity - the AB, BC, CA of all crankshafts.
4) I worship myself and there the list ends.
5) Will re-introduce excommunications, heresy trials and crusades. Also a Church Militant wing. And boy, will they be militant.
More importantly, I'll make religion fun again.
Karim Khan said he would engage in the process and continue in his role while the investigation was ongoing. He denies the allegations.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0j8dq235e2o
By the Hand of God
Never knew it
But of course I was"
If hanging them counts as a suspended sentence.
I am not Anglican, so have no real say in what Welby does but it's hard to see how he can stay on without further damage to the CoE.
Sex abuse seems particularly prevalent in hierarchical organisations based on patronage and charisma*, but all organisations are at risk and need to take it seriously.
I think that custodial sentences for all child porn possession are not viable without many more prisons. There simply are too many perpetrators, and in any case I am not sure that is the best way to prevent re-offending.
The ongoing French case does show that far too many men are willing to sexually offend given the chance and encouragement.
*there have been a number of cases in my own profession, and many more that never reach the light of day..
But the quote about wanting to refresh the programme suggests otherwise, checks what happened to viewership of Football Focus....