Christopher Howse avoids Lambeth entirely and writes about gravestones. See Finding a fitting stone reminder in the Telegraph.
In the Guardian Chris Chivers writes that the Anglican communion needs to take a more global perspective on its problems, see Face to Faith.
In The Times Cathy Ross writes that the average Anglican is a black, female teenager.
Giles Fraser writing in the Church Times asks Can there be compromise on women bishops?
And at Comment is free Judith Maltby notices that Suddenly, it’s time for tolerance.
Graham Kings at Fulcrum and the Church of England Newspaper asks how can bishops disagree Christianly?
“The average Anglican in our world today is black, female and in her late teens or early twenties.”
Will somebody please, please make the press and pundits repeat their STAT 100 class? You cannot average characteristics such as race and gender. You can find an average age, but it is a single number. There is no “average” person – and what a terrible thing that would be in any case.
Thanks for letting me rant. I have seen too many versions of this sentence to stay quiet any longer. Can we see this information in a meaningful format?
Graham Kings’ article should be compulsory reading for every Bishop at Lambeth, and for everyone else too, for that matter.
In reading Giles Fraser—as in so many other CofE commenters, since the Synod vote on ordaining women to be bishops—I keep hearing this notion, that there is a *virtue* to be found in believing “No Girls Allowed!”
Now, I can understand that there may be found various virtues among persons who happen to believe “No Girls”—but a virtue IN the belief? Or some direct CAUSATION, between the belief, and other virtues (like the works of mercy, for example)?
I don’t get it. :-/