Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams was quoted in British press yesterday speaking in support of the need for information to be restrained in the case of high-profile people attempting to keep their public personas intact.
“Of course, if people behaved morally there would be no need for super-injunctions. But how many of us actually would be comfortable about the ceaseless scrutiny of every aspect of ourselves?
“This is a culture so obsessed with transparency that it can confuse that, I think, with this universal miasma of gossip and prurience.”
He begins with "if people behaved morally" , well Archbishop Williams, how about YOU! There is an old adage that says "when you point a finger at someone there are four fingers pointing back at you."
But the really outrageous part of this is that here is a person who occupies the highest office in he Anglican Church, appointed by the Queen, serves not only all of England but to some extent the entire world and his press people allow him to say this tripe right after he was exposed by the Colin Slee memorandum? He. the archbishop may be incompetent, I am unsure, but this really tells me his staff is incompetent. What staff would allow a person who has already euphemistically "stepped in it big time" to allow the boss to make such a bold and incredibly stupid statement as that?
Not just this time but his public persona is a shambles and the staff continue to allow the Archbishop to look like he has "lost all sense of political acumen". In effect, it looks as if he wants to be replaced. It looks as if he has decided to do everything in his power, short of the honorable thing, step down, to kill his waning career.
Does anyone disagree there is a bumbling fool at the helm of the Church of England?
H/T The Lead/Torey Lightcap
5 comments:
Oh the arrogance-- I think he´s confused being ¨educated¨ with being smart-- the man is snide and in my opinion quite stupid and has no managerial sense -- even more defensive and insensitive than his buddy the pope (who actually is starting to recongnize better outside information).
After some careful thought the above post did not further any real discussion. In addition, it appeard to have all the earmarks of a troll.
"when you point a finger at someone there are four fingers pointing back at you." Well, that's if you consider the thumb to be a finger, and if you've either got a really weird physiology, or you point with your thumb. Anyone who says this hasn't really tried to do it.
Post a Comment