Archbishop of Canterbury to quit
Discussion
UnderTheRadar said:
I'm not religious at all but I'm sorry to see him go. He is a very intelligent and informed guy who said what he felt needed to be said regardless of his own popularity, which is more than we can expect from our politicians. He's taken some very commendable and unpopular stances over the years and he's one of the people I'd pat on the back and say "job well done".
I'd say advocating Sharia law in the UK is a somewhat unpopular stance, I'll give you that.carmonk said:
UnderTheRadar said:
I'm not religious at all but I'm sorry to see him go. He is a very intelligent and informed guy who said what he felt needed to be said regardless of his own popularity, which is more than we can expect from our politicians. He's taken some very commendable and unpopular stances over the years and he's one of the people I'd pat on the back and say "job well done".
I'd say advocating Sharia law in the UK is a somewhat unpopular stance, I'll give you that.I'd actually prefer he stayed, his comments showed the church for what it really is; out of touch and irrelevant.
carmonk said:
UnderTheRadar said:
I'm not religious at all but I'm sorry to see him go. He is a very intelligent and informed guy who said what he felt needed to be said regardless of his own popularity, which is more than we can expect from our politicians. He's taken some very commendable and unpopular stances over the years and he's one of the people I'd pat on the back and say "job well done".
I'd say advocating Sharia law in the UK is a somewhat unpopular stance, I'll give you that.Laplace said:
I also seem to recall him saying that America should realise that terrorists "have serious moral goals". His more recent comments on the poor London rioters were also an absolute joke.
I'd actually prefer he stayed, his comments showed the church for what it really is; out of touch and irrelevant.
And more than a little sinister.I'd actually prefer he stayed, his comments showed the church for what it really is; out of touch and irrelevant.
UnderTheRadar said:
I'm not saying he is always right, but like the Lords and royalty he is free to express his informed opionion without pandering to a popular vote and has had the balls to do so.
He believes in someone in the sky that made and controls everything (well, the good bits; can't blame Him for everything now can we, naturally) and formally revealed this to a bunch of goat herds thousands of years ago but has kept stum - except for those in the 'inner circle' - since! Informed?Oh, and did someone in a post above actually use "anachronistic" - about the Church! - as if it might change under new leadership?
t.Ozzie Osmond said:
If your accusation was true I wouldn't mind. But in my view the bloke has been a damp rag with no views on anything - just trying to please all of the people all of the time.
Unless CofE stands for something, it stands for nothing.
Are we thinking about teh same bloke? although i can't rmemeber why I do remember being annoyed at his musings on a regular basis.Unless CofE stands for something, it stands for nothing.
The one strange thing about the bloke was that he took an interest in politics, just like Jesus did according to the bible. Yet he wasn't political as such. He was closer to the blueprint in many ways than any pope.
So whilst he might have been a bit of a pain, he was an honest pain. Harman anyone?
So whilst he might have been a bit of a pain, he was an honest pain. Harman anyone?
Pesty said:
Are we thinking about teh same bloke? although i can't rmemeber why I do remember being annoyed at his musings on a regular basis.
To my mind that's the oddity of the fellow. If I try to make a list of what he did that annoyed me, I end up with .... nothing.And if I try to make a list of what he did that was really sensible, I end up with .... nothing.
As a f'rinstance; what was his position on the "anti-capitalist" demo outside St Paul's? Nope, I can't remember either!
Ozzie Osmond said:
To my mind that's the oddity of the fellow. If I try to make a list of what he did that annoyed me, I end up with .... nothing.
And if I try to make a list of what he did that was really sensible, I end up with .... nothing.
As a f'rinstance; what was his position on the "anti-capitalist" demo outside St Paul's? Nope, I can't remember either!
Well here are a few things that annoy me to start with:And if I try to make a list of what he did that was really sensible, I end up with .... nothing.
As a f'rinstance; what was his position on the "anti-capitalist" demo outside St Paul's? Nope, I can't remember either!
His sympathy for Islamic fundamentalism, which is odd for a Christian leader. Saying things like the terrorists behind the 9/11 attacks could have "serious moral goals." He also said that adopting elements of Sharia law in the UK was unavoidable, and spoke out against the French banning of hijabs.
He described the free market as inadequate and immoral, and then came out with this absurdity "Every transaction in the developed economies of the West can be interpreted as an act of aggression against the economic losers in the worldwide game."
He blamed the riots on a lack of "youth services" amongst other things that amounted to basically Britain not being left wing enough after 13 years of a Labour government.
He is either a complete cretin or left wing extremist nut case, who has used an obscure and archaic office to spout damaging and offensive views that have no real place in a civilised society. And he has a stupid beard.
turbobloke said:
Very glad to see Williams on the way out. It's been downhill since Michael Ramsey and the current whiskery communist in a frock saw himself more as a politician than a cleric.
This The head of the C of E should speak out rarely on political issues, and with greater moral authority as a result, and on matters that are the provence of the church.
He demeaned his office.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff