• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Archbishop of Canterbury resigns

Chanakya said:
But not so Anglican, right? That, as I understand it, happened for a way more mundane and practical reason than those more esoteric and abstract considerations that might apply to Protestantism more generally.
Click to expand...
Pretty much. Henry VIII wanted to annul his marriage to his wife Catherine of Aragon* because she wasn't producing the son he wanted. The then pope refused, largely because he was at the mercy of the Spaniards, a member of whose royal family Henry's wife was. There was also the issue that the royal finances weren't great, Henry being a spendthrift and the country was still recovering from the War of the Roses, and there were lots of juicy ecclesiastical estates lying around that would give him money if he controlled the church. Henry himself was a, mostly, devout catholic and his vision for an English church was a mostly catholic one, only with him as its head and English being the church language. Angpicanism eventually went protestant but it is still very catholic in many ways.

*Henry and his father had heavily pressured the previous pope to allow Henry marry Catherine because she was his brother's, Arthur's, widow, and at that time the rcc considered such a marriage brother-sister incest and disallowed it.
 
We had the new Archbishop of Canterbury in my neck of the woods last week - along with 72 other Bishops, to look at the results of a £1,000,000 renovation of a local church. Don't worry it was during school hours.
 
Orphia Nay said:
Strange, I can't find anything on the BBC or Reuters news apps about this schism.
Click to expand...
It's not really strange at all.

Most reporters are not religious, and have little to no clue about religion. They don't cover religious issues because they don't understand them and it doesn't really interest them either. Absent some scandal or some hook to tie into issues that they do care about, reporters generally just ignore religion. They aren't covering the story because they are blind to the significance of such events.

Now here's where we test for Gell-Mann amnesia: do you think that religion is the only issue that the press is blind to?
 
Ziggurat said:
It's not really strange at all.

Most reporters are not religious, and have little to no clue about religion. They don't cover religious issues because they don't understand them and it doesn't really interest them either. Absent some scandal or some hook to tie into issues that they do care about, reporters generally just ignore religion. They aren't covering the story because they are blind to the significance of such events.

Now here's where we test for Gell-Mann amnesia: do you think that religion is the only issue that the press is blind to?
Click to expand...
Spare us your theorising, the outlets I checked had plenty of articles on religion.

Here's a new one about the Anglican Church from 6 hours ago on Reuters, the first place I checked today.

Vatican visit by King Charles to show closening Anglican-Catholic ties - https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/va...-closening-anglican-catholic-ties-2025-10-17/

Meanwhile, I'd say they haven't reported on the GAFCON split because the Anglican Church probably haven't officially acknowledged the split.
 
It's less newsworthy than the appointment itself in the UK because most people wouldn't care. The Archbishop is news because of the reasons for the vacancy, and because the post has a significance wider than the church (e.g. position in House of Lords and in royal ceremonies), but over half the UK population are not at all religious, and only about 12% are Anglican. A split of other Anglican churches in other countries is barely going to register.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom