the new archbishop of canterbury

Hear, hear! About time the established order was given a good shake, though doubtless she will have all manner of obstacles put in her way by bishops with medieval ideas about women.

And I suspect some of them will have one or two sinister secrets they're terrified of the new Archbishop shining a light on.

I hope she is not as weak as she sounds!
They all usually are!

Why do you think she sounds weak Jojo? A genuine question, I’m curious. I’ve not seen a lot of her on the tv, but what I have seen, she strikes me as a no nonsense sort, but not especially weak.
As other posters say, though, I suppose it depends how all those around her behave and how many of them try to thwart her, hold back issues, etc.

I think someone who had a very senior position in the NHS is unlikely to be weak! Maybe pragmatic but not weak.

I may be wrong but didn't she say she would not tolerate mysogeny? Good for her if she did.

Jojo1950

I hope she is not as weak as she sounds!
They all usually are!

What do you mean by 'weak', and what is it about a 'strong' A of C that you would prefer?

Apparently ten bishops (or similar) have refused to take communion from a woman. That says it all really.

I am very pleased she has been chosen but I’m afraid she will have as difficult a job as previous ABCs. Even Rowan Williams, who has a brain the size of a planet, could never get anything done. I always thought that those Anglicans who couldn’t approve of women being priests or bishops should have become Roman Catholic. Some did, even married ones, but a lot didn’t.

I used to work in a theological college and saw all sorts.

I was hoping for a female Archbishop but didn't think they would appoint one. I see that some bishops want to form a breakaway group. Diocesan Dinosaurs for a title?

I am conflicted here (and I should add that it doesn't bother me on a personal level what the gender of the ABC is). In any walk of life some people hold unshakeable opinions but in a democracy we should all agree with what the majority (who vote) choose. We are now in a society where, if democracy doesn't give somone what they want, small, shouty groups of people do their utmost to undermine or destroy the view of the majority. I see this as a small, shouty group within the Church of England. They don't like this result so they try to undermine it. They have surely had their say and made their point so shouldn't the majority vote be supported, or at least accepted, by all? That having been said, there are a few things that nothing would change my opinion on! I have had to put this as a comment as I am not sure that I know how to comment on a comment ...

What do you mean?

Etoile2701 Do you mean me? If so, I have seen where some posts reply to an existing comment and I am not sure how. In this instance it would have been to Bazza's comment

I think it depends on your view of the bible. As a bible believing Christian,
I read that w omen are seen in the New Testament as equal to men, but having different roles. Being the ABC is not one of them. Her views on same sex couples is directly opposite to those in the New Testament. She has also departed from the historic Anglican positions that uphold the authority of Scripture for faith and life. She is also proud choice - again departing from the biblical view of the sanctity of life.

Jojo1950

I hope she is not as weak as she sounds!
They all usually are!

Eh? In what way?

Those who know her, (yes!), will tell you she has always been highly ambitious, and her appointment came as no surprise. Weak is not a fitting description.

she's already spoken about safeguarding and misogyny - not really 'weak' subjects

I'm not religious but I think it's great they've allowed a female

Her main problem will be with the Anglican Communion in Africa. I’m amazed she was appointed.

DH met her at some years ago at an inaugural meeting for something or other at the Houses of Parliament. Although she had left the NHS she was involved because she was still interested. He was impressed with her and now always refers to her as "my friend" because they sat at the same tea table!

Agree …

Agree Milliedog

Paula Vennells , of Post Office notoriety , was one of the three most senior women in the Church of England, and had she not been exposed she may well have been a contender for the position of Archbishop of Canterbury.
I am not particularly impressed by the latest incumbent, but we shall see.

Milliedog

I think it depends on your view of the bible. As a bible believing Christian,
I read that w omen are seen in the New Testament as equal to men, but having different roles. Being the ABC is not one of them. Her views on same sex couples is directly opposite to those in the New Testament. She has also departed from the historic Anglican positions that uphold the authority of Scripture for faith and life. She is also proud choice - again departing from the biblical view of the sanctity of life.

I read that w omen are seen in the New Testament as equal to men, but having different roles.

Biologically of course, they do.

But they, women, can never be equal to men if they are excluded from the positions of power / high office.

However all religions are, it would appear, male-dominated, some more so than others - which is why I will never have anything to do with organised religion.

I wonder who wrote the New Testament or the Bible, men or women. How little some people change.

I was unaware that there was an Archbishop of Canterbury at the time the New Testament was being written ….
So, where does it say that a woman can’t be the ABC?

She has already spoken out about assisted dying. How very sad