A Woman Archbishop: Reflections

A Historic Moment

Watching the enthronement of the new Archbishop of Canterbury left me with both a sense of awe and the resignation of acceptance. When the last Archbishop resigned in November 2024, it did occur to me that there was a likelihood the next person appointed to the office might radically shift from the norm, a woman perhaps.

I stated then that I was not particularly ready for that kind of change when the Church of England had only begun appointing female bishops barely a decade ago. Yet, with my Pentecostal exposure, I was already familiar with women teaching from the pulpit and leading Christian ministries.

Tradition and Change

The traditions of the Church of England have a history, constancy, and stability that I felt should not be defined by speed, but by the gentle persuasion of clergy and laity alike towards necessary aims. Obviously, there have been insurmountable issues in certain provinces of the global Anglican Communion: the ordination of women priests, the issue of sexual orientation, and the blessing of same-sex unions. The conversation must continue, even if agreement remains distant.

Generally, I have accepted the ministry of women in the Church of England, as canons, priests, archdeacons, and bishops. I also recognise that at ordinations, a separate service attends to those who do not accept the ministry of women, with a flying bishop of that persuasion presiding in that setting. I must confess, I have only seen female bishops in the media; I have never met one or been in a service with them in attendance.

The Ceremony Itself

The enthronement service brought the spectacle of religion, politics, and ceremony, along with the pomp and pageantry that the English excel at exhibiting. Representatives of all the different religious communities attended, including the Bishop of Ebbsfleet, one of those flying bishops of a different persuasion mentioned earlier.

For all the acclamation and pronouncements, I was surprised that the ceremony included no laying on of hands. It was more the dainty holding of a hand.

Moving Forward

This process was one in which I had no influence, apart from individually deciding whether appointing a woman as Archbishop sat well with my belief system. There was enough precedent in other provinces to suggest this would settle down into a kind of détente that demands both dexterity and political nous from the office holder.

I know I won't be rushing out to a service presided over by The Most Reverend and Right Honourable Dame Sarah Mullally DBE, yet I wish her term is blessed with success and the reconciliation of the church in whatever way possible. May we, in our misgivings or concerns, see the grace and beauty in what we as mere mortals fail to appreciate in the growth of the church.

Blog - England: We have a new Archbishop of Canterbury, she's a woman

Blog - Losing my religion in this reformation split

A Google NotebookLM AI Podcast on this blog

Nigeria: Islam strongly discourages polygamy

On the trail to Imam-ship

It is a shame that a religious organisation failed to take the opportunity [1] to deal with a situation with objectivity, fairness and a sense of proportion.

Now, I find myself flipping through the pages of their own religious tome and ready to debunk accepted assertions which have been interpreted to suit the whims of men rather than the seeming divine purpose for which the verses were offered as inspiration.

On the matter of the Senator who took for a wife a 13-year old girl, I first argued that despite the moral outrage it garnered there were enough loopholes in the Nigerian constitution, the Marriage Act and the non-adoption of the Child Rights Act to allow for the marriage to be legal and not be subject to the Criminal Code.

A man’s lust over religious law

However, when the Senator decided to hide under the cloak of religion and the protection of Sharia Law, it brought on the fact that Sharia Law or any religious law was incompatible with civil society and took away from the state the ability to think for itself whilst it impacted unduly on the expressed freedom of the people.

In what that Senator said, there was scope for him to be sanctioned by any of the religious authorities of his faith for creating a situation that could bring the religion into disrepute (Something football associations would do without flinching to participants of the game) and for comparing himself to the Prophet Mohammed in trying to justify his now in modern times reprehensible action.

Unfortunately, the Supreme Council of Sharia in Nigeria (SCSN) Kaduna State chapter has advised the Senator not to honour invitations by the authorities to defend his marriage to a juvenile and put up the defence of a verse in the Qur’an that had me digging for truth.

Not what the Qur’an says

Apparently, as they say, “Islam encourages men to marry women of their choice as mentioned in Qur’an 4 verse 2 without any emphasis on age limit.”

Forgive me if I am petulant as to ask if a woman is a direct substitute for female, such that I can call a female baby a woman or a girl a woman – I sure would not call a female of 13 a woman, just as I would not call a male of 13 a man. Generally, that would be a girl or a boy, but we have been asked to stretch the limits of credulity.

The Qur’an 4 verse 2 [2] finds me bereft of the connection between the interpretation and what the verse says.

Here, I have Arabic and 4 different English translations of the verse and all pertain to the care of orphans

2	وَآتُواْ الْيَتَامَى أَمْوَالَهُمْ وَلاَ تَتَبَدَّلُواْ الْخَبِيثَ بِالطَّيِّبِ وَلاَ تَأْكُلُواْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ إِلَى أَمْوَالِكُمْ إِنَّهُ كَانَ حُوباً كَبِيراً

Shakir 4:2

And give to the orphans their property, and do not substitute worthless (things) for (their) good (ones), and do not devour their property (as an addition) to your own property; this is surely a great crime.

yusufali 4:2

To orphans restore their property (When they reach their age), nor substitute (your) worthless things for (their) good ones; and devour not their substance (by mixing it up) with your own. For this is indeed a great sin.

Pickthal 4:2

Give unto orphans their wealth. Exchange not the good for the bad (in your management thereof) nor absorb their wealth into your own wealth. Lo! that would be a great sin.

Al-Hilali 4:2

And give unto orphans their property and do not exchange (your) bad things for (their) good ones; and devour not their substance (by adding it) to your substance. Surely, this is a great sin.

But if the learned members of the Supreme Council of Sharia in Nigeria (SCSN) Kaduna State chapter are now saying by reason of the use of acquisitive words as property and substance a woman is of such material value – that would be unfortunate.

Polygamy is marrying the widowed mothers

The oft touted justification for polygamy comes in the next verse and it bears no similarity to the activities of those with many wives.

Still continuing on the subject of orphans it says [3]

[4:3] If you deem it best for the orphans, you may marry their mothers - you may marry two, three, or four. If you fear lest you become unfair, then you shall be content with only one, or with what you already have. Additionally, you are thus more likely to avoid financial hardship.

A detailed commentary on that verse [4] asserts historical sources to say that the Prophet Mohammed only married the aged widows of friends who had many children to help offer a fatherly setting for the upbringing of the children, the other marriages were to establish specific ties or political alliances.

And now, the same verses [5] in Arabic and 4 English translations

3	وَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلاَّ تُقْسِطُواْ فِي الْيَتَامَى فَانكِحُواْ مَا طَابَ لَكُم مِّنَ النِّسَاء مَثْنَى وَثُلاَثَ وَرُبَاعَ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلاَّ تَعْدِلُواْ فَوَاحِدَةً أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَلاَّ تَعُولُواْ

Shakir 4:3

And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the right course.

yusufali 4:3

If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.

Pickthal 4:3

And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans, marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice (to so many) then one (only) or (the captives) that your right hands possess. Thus it is more likely that ye will not do injustice.

Al-Hilali 4:3

And if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan-girls, then marry (other) women of your choice, two or three, or four but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one or (the captives and the slaves) that your right hands possess. That is nearer to prevent you from doing injustice.

Still, one wife is best

The greater admonition is to avoid having more than one wife than to revel in polygamous abandon and at least this is for the care of orphans which by inference appears to mean those who have just lost their fathers as opposed to those who have lost all parents.

Marrying more than one wife is a costly venture but the subject of orphans continues on to verse 6 and it is clear that the orphans are children, they are immature, they cannot inherit their substance until a particular age and are definitely not to be taken as wives.

It would appear the juxtaposition of orphans, women and marriage really only pertains to polygamy in the marriage to widowed mothers and nothing else. Even I never expected the Qu’ran to be that prescriptive and then to find that it has been misused to satisfy the proclivities of sexually perverse men – unbelievable.

You can never be a successful polygamist

The whole of Sura (Chapter) 4 Al-Nesaa, appears to deal with the subject of women, orphans, marriage and matters of the family and down at verse 129, it says without equivocation, you can never be a successful polygamist no matter how much you try and it is better you do not create the situation where you fall foul of God’s law. But no, satisfying the lust first before the law has always been the way of man.

129	وَلَن تَسْتَطِيعُواْ أَن تَعْدِلُواْ بَيْنَ النِّسَاء وَلَوْ حَرَصْتُمْ فَلاَ تَمِيلُواْ كُلَّ الْمَيْلِ فَتَذَرُوهَا كَالْمُعَلَّقَةِ وَإِن تُصْلِحُواْ وَتَتَّقُواْ فَإِنَّ اللّهَ كَانَ غَفُوراً رَّحِيماً

Shakir 4:129

And you have it not in your power to do justice between wives, even though you may wish (it), but be not disinclined (from one) with total disinclination, so that you leave her as it were in suspense; and if you effect a reconciliation and guard (against evil), then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

yusufali 4:129

Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women, even if it is your ardent desire: But turn not away (from a woman) altogether, so as to leave her (as it were) hanging (in the air). If ye come to a friendly understanding, and practise self-restraint, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

Pickthal 4:129

Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so). But turn not altogether away (from one), leaving her as in suspense. If ye do good and keep from evil, lo! Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.

Al-Hilali 4:129

You will never be able to do perfect justice between wives even if it is your ardent desire, so do not incline too much to one of them (by giving her more of your time and provision) so as to leave the other hanging (i.e. neither divorced nor married). And if you do justice, and do all that is right and fear Allâh by keeping away from all that is wrong, then Allâh is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Sadly, it is the men, the leaders and representatives of the religion that are bringing their holy faiths into disrepute by their actions and where they should speak up for the truth they have succumbed to sentiment and deplorable conduct that finds no backing from the holy tomes they take their teaching from.

Surely, for such hypocrisy that can be no better reward than eternal damnation.

Sources

[1] Leadership Nigeria - For God and Country: Don’t Honour Invitations, Muslim Group Tells Yarima

[2] TheQuran.com - Read, إقرأ: 4:2

[3] The Authorized English Translation of the Quran,Qur'an, Koran- Sura - 4 , Women (Al-Nesaa'), translated from the original by Dr. Rashad Khalifa, Ph.D.  A most enlightening translation of the chapter.

[4] The Islamic Calendars and Others- Understanding, calculating Ramadan, Hajj and other Islamic events-Hilal-Crescent-new-Calendar-dates-Prophet Muhammed, Mohammed-Islam (Submission)-Hadith and Sunna in Islam (Submission)- Ahadith-Sunnah-Quran, Qur'an, Koran

[5] TheQuran.com - Read, إقرأ: 4:3

[6] TheQuran.com - Read, إقرأ: 4:129

Thought Picnic: A sportsman cast as a sinning saint

No saints around

It is hard enough that because of golf certain established television programmes on the BBC have been rescheduled.

Apparently, Tiger Woods, the young but very successful golf “legend” is returning to play a major at Augusta and it seems everyone is agog about it.

Surely, in some places Tiger Woods has sinned, in others he had a sex-addiction and the matter of marrying supposed American values with personal lasciviousness and his untypical religious adherence has become a powder keg of the utmost irritation.

The wrong role models

I have retweeted with comments a few things about this issue mostly from a pragmatic perspective rather than from some moralistic mountain-top, the man is a sportsman not a clergyman – I doubt any in the clergy with similar lapses has seen such a media feeding frenzy.

Why we would choose a mere mortal whose ability is less philosophical as is physical as a role model is definitely interesting but rather sad – celebrity is now of more essence than intellectual rigour and character amongst those who are supposedly leaders.

Frogs leap over the tiger

I was amused when Accenture withdrew their sponsorship of Tiger Woods in the wake of the scandals, a firm that was part of the once global Arthur Andersen accounting empire before it became Andersen Consulting and now Accenture – as Wikipedia put it, they luckily avoided the taint that engulfed the original firm in the wake of the Enron debacle.

When I opened my Economist last weekend, I was presented with an Accenture advertisement and with mirth I tweeted about how they had gone from a tiger to frogs – as for the significance, well, I would rather not comment.

A woman NOT a girl

Now, on the eve of seeing Tiger Woods get back to the physical and manual job of playing golf which without doubt pays so well because he plays so well some other woman appears. Another of those infuriating tweets.

Huffingtonpost SHOCK: Tiger Woods reportedly slept with neighbor's 21-year-old daughter! http://huff.to/cDXOXH (via @HuffPostSports)

Now, it is obviously beneath contempt that a married man would for whatever reason sleep with his neighbour’s daughter, I read that with a bit of disgust, then I realised this “daughter” is a 21-year-old woman – the daughter is NOT a girl.

Digging deeper into the tale it appears she told her story because she felt she was one of his conquests – wake up and smell the coffee, “girl” – even you as a neighbour would have known he was married and regardless of his celebrity and influence; taking a moral stance is not the exclusive preserve of the powerful or the rich – it speaks much of Mr. Woods’ lapse in judgement as it does of the lady’s corruptible mien - surely, they were all conquests.

Blinded by celebrity

It would be easy to apportion blame to Mr. Woods who seems to have brought all this disgrace and calumny upon himself but everyone else who succumbed to his whims has not been proven incapable of knowing right from wrong along with the very glaring fact that they all really did know who Tiger Woods was.

I am in no way justifying any of the activities of Tiger Woods but his considerable celebrity is making great careers for all those who have decided to kiss-and-tell – a good long list of those have given or taken pleasure appears below that story – all feeling so much more hurt because in the heat of the pillow-talk and consequent activity they had been promised something that faded after the orgasm.

If anyone would dare spare a thought for the wife, the children, the mother, the relations and maybe the friends beyond sating the hunger for more celebrity exposés.

Hardly an aggrieved party

None of all the people can be exculpated from this morass of undignified conduct which at one time would have been conducted with discretion, maybe some dignity if ever and never aired in public because we all just knew how to behave – or something like that.

It goes without saying that if there was no market for gossip and tittle-tattle all this philandering would not find a column in the village rag – it is the way of the world today and really I am just interested in golf, I have never looked at Tiger Woods as a moral compass or expected much of him apart from choosing the right club, hitting the golf ball and in the process winning the tournament.

As for the issues, before long someone might even appear with a love child and so? What is really so new under the sun from time immemorial?

The wonder of a man and his maid(en)

Too wonderful for me

I can only reflect on these sayings of the man of Proverbs.

From the King James Version – Proverbs 30:18-19

There be three things which are too wonderful for me, yea, four which I know not:

The way of an eagle in the air; the way of a serpent upon a rock; the way of a ship in the midst of the sea; and the way of a man with a maid.

The first two are elements of nature and still a matter of wonder, the soaring of the eagle and the time it took for man to master the science and art of flight which still fills me with a bit of wonder, as for the serpent on a rock, we do not have a vehicle that glides over terrain the way the serpent does.

The way of a ship in the midst of the sea is now a no-brainer except when you lose power for satellite navigation and you have not learnt to use the sextant – but for people of those times – getting from one place to another mostly using sails still remains a wonder of seamanship.

The warmth of companionship

The last however is a dynamic that still defies explanation, what is between the man and his woman is just not something you can get instruments out to measure.

I learnt years ago that one should never interfere in that dynamic, it is a force that can be both overpowering and endearing, I have had opportunity to observe the Prince and his Princess, the husband and the wife, the boyfriend and the girlfriend, the boy and the girl and always been overcome with wonder.

Yesterday, I was out to Puerto Rico, one of the coastal towns of Gran Canaria where the ode to the built-environment reads like a thousand stanzas of concrete verse. All the hills built into with white beautiful and ugly hotels just because Europeans of temperate and arctic climes seek warmth in the sun on a European island as far South of Europe as possible.

Big brother

As I walked back with the bus stop with ice-cream cone in hand, he said, “Would you like an ice-cream”, she said, “Oh! Yes, please”. They were probably in their sixties and full of fun – the Prince was playing big-brother, it looked and sounded so nice, though I did not expect to see them skipping hand-in-hand to the beach.

Playmates

Then, you wonder why the older generations go to dance classes, I could answer that question – they were dancing the night away – waltzing, fox-trotting, tangoing and whatever makes ballroom dancing exciting.

The decorum of this kind of dancing sweeps away from sight the grotesque antics of embarrassing middle-aged dancers. The Prince and Princess were playmates – I could not dance with myself, I need to consider dancing lessons too.

Protector

Walking through the nature reserve of Maspalomas, one can walk the dunes bare-footed but on the firmer ground of dried plants with footpaths to negotiate, there are dangers. Double-sided prickly disc-like seeds which adhere firmly to your shoes or sandals – the preferred footwear in those places – so, this couple were on an adventure to encounter pain when I warned them of the dangers.

The Prince answered back gruffly, obviously slighted by the fact that I may have pointed out that his was leading his Princess into danger. The Protector was not really being smart. Maybe afterwards, after picking out the barbs from her soles, kissing it better might salve the pain – I interfered.

Patriarch

The restaurant serves a buffet, which means people have to walk around the food tables to get what they like. In most cases, they walk around, have brief chats about the food and then make their choices before returning together to their tables.

However, there were some Princes who were too princely to walk around, their Princesses did all the running around and served their masters who almost expressed impatience for the lateness of the plate and dismissively waited for the plates to be cleared. The man does have a maid here, reminds me of a cheeky comment someone made when he asked if I had laid the maid, (talking about my cleaner) some people can never attain comportment. Oh! There were quite a few Patriarchs in the house and these are Europeans.

Partners

They were looking for the beach promenade and had walked around in circles till someone decided to ask questions – they even had a 5-month old boy in the pram shielded from the sun because you could not really apply sun-tan lotion on the skin of a toddler.

In fact, it was he, who asked the question about directions and I found out that unlike the commonly accepted view that the men never ask for directions, in this dynamic, it was the lady who would never ask for directions.

They shared the joy of helping each other; he pushed the pram through the difficult terrain of pavements without ramps for wheelchairs or trolleys as we walked to the promenade and all the way down to the Playa del Ingles beach where we parted ways. The Prince and Princess were partners.

A-Partners

The last night, he literally wailed as she began to put a distance between herself and him by running. He said, “You find their jokes funnier than mine”. Any Princess would be to rid of such a pathetic Prince. Somehow, there is still a dynamic at work, there is still an attraction that manages to tolerate the insecurity, but would this go on for much longer? The Prince and Princess were beginning to look like A-Partners.

A-partners, coined by the Sun newspaper to describe couples who get on well after separation.

The veil amongst Christians

The head scarf debate

As we settle into what would be a debate for a long time in the West about head scarves, veils, the hijab, coverings and exposures, I remember quite poignantly that this debate has been around for quite a while.

Some 20-something years ago, this debate was going around in evangelical circles, this was not just contentious but frustrating that what was so explicitly discussed in the Bible still left some selecting what they wanted to believe to support their prejudices.

Not, only so, people of other religions also select portions of biblical scripture to support their views completely out of context of the truth that was being portrayed.

Selecting Bible choice cuts

In the Bible, 1 Corinthians 11:3-16 (King James Version), gives the complete low-down on this issue, but it would take an open mind and fresh eyes to appreciate the context and direction of this passage.

The keys to this discourse are in verses 3 and 16, but the 3^rd verse usually gets misunderstood and the 16^th verse conveniently left out of the discourse for reasons I can never understand.

I would take particular verses and break them down for the purposes of furthering this debate, there are other meanings with regards to relationships in here, which I would not cover, but I would clearly contextualise because it is used to foster abuse.

Separating every man from the husband

3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

What we need to note here is the article and possession, it says the head of every man is Christ, however, NOT that the head of every woman is man.

The woman using the definite article pertains to a single woman in relationship to a man, her husband. Every man anywhere cannot just lord it over any woman, he can only do that, in a relationship that is a marriage.

In another blog, on the more emotive issue of wife-battering, I covered how the husband has to be as selfless as Christ to be able to exercise any kind of authority where they believe themselves to masters of their homes and be able to throw their weight around the place.

What is clear is a woman outside the relationship of marriage automatically has Christ as her head, when she has her man, the dynamic of headship changes to her husband.

It is a difficult one, but man in general consists first of male and female; in this case, there is no conferment of the complete servitude of the female sex to any to every man born on earth – it would be illogical.

Traditions and customs might support this dynamic of making all women in society less of the male, but it is not supported in Christianity to give man husband-status to every woman except his truly wedded wife.

Who covers whom?

4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.

Here, it is clear that this refers to man as male.

5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

This uses every woman, but the possibility of two heads, if unmarried, her head is Christ and if married her head is her husband – NOT every man.

6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

If a woman would not cover her head, she should shave, but if shaving is considered a shame, she should then cover her head.

7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

Once again, the definite article is here, the woman (wife) is the glory of the man (husband). We do not go around presenting every woman as our wife, rather, there is one woman who takes that pride of place, and we adorn her and present her with pride and honour her with love and devotion.

8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.

9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

This takes us back to the Adam and Eve story, where Eve was crafted from the rib of Adam as his helper and companion. The definite article also features here – the man (husband) and the woman (wife).

The woman’s prerogative

10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

Now, this fouls up every authority man tries to exercise over the woman because it says it is the prerogative of the woman to decide on whether to cover her head or not. There is no duty of man to impose this on the woman.

This is usually read as the man ought to have power of the head of every woman and force them to appear in a wifely role or subservient role.

For many, the Scripture ENDS here, reading any further is too inconvenient.

Co-dependence of the sexes and equality

11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.

12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.

Equality in the church and equality before God, so where did all this male domination come from?

So, no one would like to read beyond verse 10 because to serious home truths break down the male domination fortress.

13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?

Well, this is question of traditions and customs; there are places where women can be covered and others where woman do not get covered – debate.

The long hair day

14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

Touché – men with long hair have no say in this matter, they need to deal with their issues.

15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

Oh! Apostle Paul does begin to complicate issues by clarifying them. There is a separation between the head and the hair introduced from verse 14 and the reference is now to long hair.

It appears, if a woman has long hair, she already has a covering for her head – it is a no-brainer that hair does grow out of the head - she does not need an artificial covering like a scarf.

Well, why do we have all this fuss about scarves when the hair already covers the head?

16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

If this becomes a contentious topic, drop it, we have not taken on any traditions or customs of head covering, hair covering or even male domination – it is not the way of the church.

And all the men say … Amen!