I was unaware of this contretemps, but it really does seem to be that way. It has made itself look ridiculous. It really should split up. The head guy, this Welby character, seems to be trying to bridge the unbridgeable - the institution is the thing, not the flock. That is just not going to fly long term methinks. I do like the costuming though. It's less gaudy than the Catholic sartorial presentation. Very tasteful.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/01/world/australia/anglican-church-homosexuality-new-zealand.htmlSo even if reading about the internecine tensions of this church is just not your cup of tea, and even if you have SSM controversy burnout, the article is worth clicking on just to view the stunning visual image. It's dead bang gorgeous really. Very pleasingly symmetrical to boot. Too bad copyright law precludes me from splashing it directly on to this page.
How is the CEO of this outfit picked I wonder? Yeah I know, by the British monarch, but how is "he" really picked? (Yes, I don't see a female being picked for another century of two myself assuming the outfit lasts that long.)
It seems that something called the "Crown Appointments Commission" has a key role in the process. What's that?
https://www.churchofengland.org/about/leadership-and-governance/crown-nominations-commissionOK, got it. And its members seem to all be very British looking white people. That does not seem very inclusive now does it? But then, that means all those homophobic prelates/laity from the third world just aren't there. So what is their excuse then for having selected this Welby guy?
https://www.churchofengland.org/about/leadership-and-governance/crown-nominations-commissionI think I want to be the UK king for a day, and perhaps cause a Constitutional crisis by summoning the Archbishop of Canterbury and giving him a good dressing down in full regalia (crown included). That would be fun. Would a gay be eligible to be king?