Archbishop

[MrGongGong]

I'm in a bit of a quandary here

I'm worried that i'm starting to agree too much with the Archbishop
(apart from all the Virgin Birth malarkey)

I thought he was spot on

[Mary Chambers]

Precisely. I feel the same.

[eighthobstruction]

The man has eyes and ears, it's not hard to see what is happening....for once he led with his senses , rather than his intellect....

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

we will all be anglican atheists soon .....

¡BASTA!

[3rd Viennese School]

You will notice that even if you're the Archbishop you can't criticise the government...

[french frank]

You will notice that even if you're the Archbishop you can't criticise the government...

Yes, you can. He just did.

[Mandryka]

If you only listen to Radio 4 and only read the Guardian (and only have friends who do the same), you could be forgiven for thinking that Rowan Williams is popular.

But I doubt that he is - the vast majority of people I speak to consider him a bit of a woolly-minded lightweight. And I am inclined to agree.

Anyway, why is he making this intervention in secular matters? Ought he not to be concerning himself with matters relating to God's Kingdom, which - as he may once have been aware - is not of this earth?

The current incumbent of York seems to be much more popular with the public - his brand of muscular Christianity has more popular appeal.

[MrGongGong]

I'm not by any stretch of the imagination a member of the church
but
surely the role of someone like the Archbishop is to do precisely that ? Comment on things that they feel are wrong and will affect the least able to speak for themselves in society ?

What "most people" think is beside the point
his point (which is IMV a good one) is that there is no mandate for what the present government are doing
the defence that "we were elected" really doesn't stand up in the current situation

most people voted for something else !
there was no "winner" in the election

[Mandryka]

I'm not by any stretch of the imagination a member of the church
but
surely the role of someone like the Archbishop is to do precisely that ? Comment on things that they feel are wrong and will affect the least able to speak for themselves in society ?

What "most people" think is beside the point
his point (which is IMV a good one) is that there is no mandate for what the present government are doing
the defence that "we were elected" really doesn't stand up in the current situation

most people voted for something else !
there was no "winner" in the election

I actually agree with what the A of C is saying - I don't really see how anyone could disagree with it, whether you like the Coalition or not, the fact remains NOBODY VOTED FOR IT: hence, no mandate.

But I don't think it is for the A of C to be coming out with this sort of statement - it should, by rights, be Mr. Miliband's repeated theme. Sadly, though, the task of even destructive opposition would seem to be beyond him.

And I'm not convined that the Archbishop's role has ever been to comment on society in this way - a part of his role is certainly to offer care and support to the most vulnerable, but not to make interventions in party politics.

Anwyay, isn't Williams far too often identified with left-wing statements/causes? His risible (and politically unwise) suggestion that Sharia law could be imposed in certain areas did neither him nor his Church any good.

[Serial_Apologist]

Anwyay, isn't Williams far too often identified with left-wing statements/causes? His risible (and politically unwise) suggestion that Sharia law could be imposed in certain areas did neither him nor his Church any good.

Given that practically everyone else in the commentariat is identified by default with right-wing statements/causes, some redressing of media balance would be welcome. That said, I know of no one of left wing persuasion who would or does advocate imposition of Sharia law.

S-A

[Chris Newman]

Anyway, why is he making this intervention in secular matters? Ought he not to be concerning himself with matters relating to God's Kingdom, which - as he may once have been aware - is not of this earth?

I am an agnostic but understand that most religions regard the Earth as part of their God's Kingdom. I may be wrong.

[MrGongGong]

Given that practically everyone else in the commentariat is identified by default with right-wing statements/causes, some redressing of media balance would be welcome. That said, I know of no one of left wing persuasion who would or does advocate imposition of Sharia law.

S-A

Actually , the archbishop didn't advocate the "imposition" of Sharia law, i thought he simply said that some people might want to use it for themselves, which is exactly what the CofE and Jewish folk do

[french frank]

I'm not a constitutional expert, but I'd say the Archbishop is surely wrong if he is suggesting that a government may only do what the electorate has specifically given it a mandate to do in a general election.

By voting in a general election, the electorate gives authority to a government to govern. The government, in turn, has responsibility to take such decisions as it considers to be in the interests of the country as a whole.

A manifesto is a shop window: its articles can be withdrawn from sale and there are other articles in the back of the shop that can be produced as and when required.

This is why governments never remain popular for very long - because they do things that people don't like.

[Lateralthinking1]

There has always been in-depth debate about the concept of mandate. Does any Government ever receive one? This question can be considered from a number of perspectives that I won't go into here. Clearly though not everything can be covered in a manifesto. There are a lot of things - the major events - that are difficult to predict. Wars, terrorism, the international economy - and the record of judging such things in advance seems increasingly poor.

Beyond the need for pragmatism, there are issues here. You might go into a shop to buy a hammer and be suitably disgruntled if you received instead a scythe. Don't think it would legally be acceptable. There is also the coalition thing. I don't think that the Joint Agreement ever received the scrutiny it required plus they frequently don't seem to stick to it anyway.

A couple of weeks ago, I discovered on Friends Reunited an invitation to a school reunion. 30 years since we left. Obviously I didn't attend. Many there were effectively Blairs, Camerons and Cleggs in the making at age 12. However, it did trigger correspondence with a friend who I haven't seen for several decades. A vicar who is also involved in social policy work and who apparently briefs the bishops, he had to receive from me two sheets of A4 summarising my life to date and current position.

Full of moans about the coalition of course and its impacts personally. Strangely he still wanted to communicate and was not of a dissimilar view. The next thing I hear the Archbishop has the lead news story and the ground covered sounds very familiar. Sure this is entirely coincidence but actually I did find it very comforting to hear.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

A manifesto is a shop window: its articles can be withdrawn from sale and there are other articles in the back of the shop that can be produced as and when required.

...which is appalling unprincipled

This is why governments never remain popular for very long - because they do things that people don't like.

In the case of this lot, they appear to relish doing things that people don't like. They remind me of Flashman "roasting" Tom Brown's legs. Michael Gove, on the other hand, reminds me of the school dunce with a cartoon mask on his face.