In my head, I always confuse Rowan Williams with Rowan Atkinson. It has quite amusing consequences. Anyway, this blog is about the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Atkinson... I mean Rowan Williams (I definitely mean Rowan Williams now). He is due to step down within the coming months, but the decision of who will follow him into the post is taking a while, as many things do in the Church. So, who can take on the role of the Archbishop of Canterbury? With our often ethnocentric view of the globe, we often don't see Anglican Christianity anywhere beyond our pebbly shores. However, Christianity is practised in many parts of the world, extending far beyond Europe and the Americas. Rowan Williams has been an active Archbishop, straddling the sometimes uneasy line between science and religion, theology and politics. It's not an easy job. Advancements in technology, science and culture have been so rapid during the last half a century that any proactive and passionate religious head is definitely destined to struggle with their public position.
Ye Olde BBC has conducted a poll of 2500 people asking their opinion on Rowan Williams as the Archbishop, most thought that he had been a good leader, however one quarter didn't think he'd done enough to keep the church relevant in Britain. This task is far harder than it sounds. Nigeria has approximately
18 million Anglican Christians, all of whom the Archbishop of Canterbury is in charge of. The decisions and changes made in Britain touch Nigeria exactly the same, which is one of the main conundrums facing the Anglican church. How can an Archbishop keep the church relevant in Britain, and simultaneously keep Nigerian followers, when the two cultures are so completely different? Nigeria is just one example of a vastly different culture sharing the same religious banner as the U.K. If keeping the church relevant in Britain means elevating women's status within religious bodies and allowing gay and lesbian theologists into the church, Nigerian Christians face alienation.
Even having to deal with differing opinions in the British Isles is like walking on egg shells for an Archbishop of Canterbury. When asked about whether creationism should be taught in schools as a scientific theory alongside that of Darwin's theory of evolution, Williams gave a pained and reluctant answer:
 |
| Rowan WILLIAMS, like if Robin Williams and Rowan Atkinson had a baby. |
"I think creationism is, in a sense, a kind of category mistake
as if the Bible were a theory like other theories... so if creationism
is presented as a stark alternative theory alongside other theories, I
think there's – there's just been a jar of categories, it's not what
it's about." When the interviewer said "So it shouldn't be taught?" he
responded "I don't think it should, actually. No, no. And that's
different from saying–different from discussing, teaching about what
creation means. For that matter, it's not even the same as saying that
Darwinism is–is the only thing that ought to be taught. My worry is
creationism can end up reducing the doctrine of creation rather than
enhancing it."
Poor guy. You can virtually hear the beads of sweat forming on his brow.
 |
| Practised all over the world, Anglicanism is one of the most popular religions. |
Therefore, being the Archbishop of Canterbury is an impossible task, dealt with only by sticking to your guns. Religion is not something to hop in and out of, to chop and change from, so if international Anglican Christians find themselves disagreeing with policies born in Canterbury, perhaps more local roles should be created to ensure that each nation and culture's religious needs are met. Religion can evolve (well, let's say grow), but it cannot have many completely different faces under the same sect banner, otherwise what about the British Anglican Church resembles the three Anglican Churches in Russia? Local, specific growth and modernisation is good, polar opposite official church opinions on homosexuals and science are bad.
