|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Associate Archdeacons
|
Incensed
Shipmate
# 2670
|
Posted
Word reaches me that the Bishop of London has appointed a new Archdeacon of London and an Associate Archdeacon of London. Does anyone know whether there is such a thing as an Associate Archdeacon anywhere else?
Posts: 241 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
Using my amazing google skills, I have discovered that the title "Associate Archdeacon" has been known in the Anglican Communion since at least 1926 and that Canon John Day was appointed Associate Archdeacon to the Diocese of Liverpool in 2014.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
The Two Cities Area of London is moving from having two Archdeacons with other, additional responsibilities, both parochial and administrative, to having one full-time Archdeacon with no additional responsibilities and an Associate Archdeacon who is also the Dean of Women's Ministry for the whole of the diocese of London. That's how I read this communication anyway: http://www.london.anglican.org/articles/archdeacons-two-cities-ad-clerum-0615/
[ 17. June 2015, 09:35: Message edited by: Amos ]
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Man with a Stick
Shipmate
# 12664
|
Posted
The position, juridically, does not exist. However, under a number of pieces of legislation, and the Canons the Bishop (in some cases) and the Archdeacon (in others) may delegate certain archidiaconal functions to another priest.
That is what will be going on here. The interesting question would be what would happen if the Archdeacon and the "Associate Archdeacon" fell out and the Archdeacon withdrew his delegation.
Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Metapelagius
Shipmate
# 9453
|
Posted
Or an archsubdeacon, perhaps? ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
Rec a archaw e nim naccer.
y rof a duv. dagnouet.
Am bo forth. y porth riet.
Crist ny buv e trist yth orsset.
Posts: 1032 | From: Hereabouts | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
georgiaboy
Shipmate
# 11294
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Metapelagius:
Or an archsubdeacon, perhaps?
Most of the subdeacons I have encountered (at least liturgically) have tended to be 'arch'. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Sorry, I'll get my biretta.
--------------------
You can't retire from a calling.
Posts: 1675 | From: saint meinrad, IN | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
pete173
Shipmate
# 4622
|
Posted
The Archdeaconry of Charing Cross is being suppressed. The Two Cities Area will be under the Archdeacon of London, with an Associate Archdeacon - who is giving up her role as Dean of Women in order to take on the Safeguarding Portfolio in the Diocese along with her Archidiaconal duties. The legalities are tricky because of the "only one office holder per office" issue and the question of jurisdiction.
But we shall find ways of circumnavigating that. And it will be a good partnership to model for the CofE - a man who does not (yet!) accept the episcopal and priestly ministry of women working with a woman priest who has been an articulate and thoughtful campaigner on the issue.
--------------------
Pete
Posts: 1653 | From: Kilburn, London NW6 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
One feels bound to ask WHY it is thought necessary to have a 'Dean of Women'? And if there is a need for such a person, who is the 'Dean of Men'?
There have been ordained women since 1994 so I'd have thought it was high time this sort of nonsense stopped.
The Church can't afford this sort of thing on purely economic grounds, never mind the 'jobs-for-the-girls' taste of the whole thing.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
TomM
Shipmate
# 4618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
One feels bound to ask WHY it is thought necessary to have a 'Dean of Women'? And if there is a need for such a person, who is the 'Dean of Men'?
There have been ordained women since 1994 so I'd have thought it was high time this sort of nonsense stopped.
The Church can't afford this sort of thing on purely economic grounds, never mind the 'jobs-for-the-girls' taste of the whole thing.
In most diocese, I believe, it is not a (separate) paid post - the person occupying the role often having a 'day job' in some other capacity in the diocese.
In many areas, there is still discrimination against women in ministry (not those objecting on theological grounds, but pure misogyny), and in those cases an advocate can be important. There are also questions to be addressed as to why the pattern of women offering themselves for ordination is so different to that of men, and whether that is tied into other issues, as well as many other areas that such a person might be engaged in dealing with.
Posts: 405 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
pete173
Shipmate
# 4622
|
Posted
Indeed, I abolished the role in Willesden after consulting with the women clergy. Then we brought it back because there were no women in the staff team. It doesn't cost in London beyond a slight stipend uplift (so the "we can't afford it" canard can be laid to rest), and we do still face the glass ceiling problem.
There's still plenty more to do.
So the death of Deans of Women is probably premature. as the reports here indicate.
--------------------
Pete
Posts: 1653 | From: Kilburn, London NW6 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
