2/06/2009

30 Primates all in two rows (revised)





Well they did take a picture of the Primates with the Presiding Bishop present. Here they are. 30 Primates all in two rows. But wait, there are 38 Provinces, yes? And 4 could not make it. So where are the others?

The earlier picture, taken before the PB was there also had fewer than the number supposedly present.


Well, it doesn't make much difference, except that one might think that with a crowd not all that big it might be possible to get everyone in the picture at once. Perhaps there are 4 all up front holding lots of small cameras from all the bishops and taking snapshots for everyone, so that no picture taken ever is of everyone in the family. Then again there is always the put-out-of-joint sister or brother who just had to be somewhere else at the time. David Virtue says of other absences that day, "Eucharist was conducted in the morning, but at least 20% - 25% of the primates including mostly the GAFCON primates did not participate." Perhaps having stayed away from the one they stayed away from the other.

Nice picture, why in the shade?


Some one has asked who is who... any takers on naming them all? 


11 comments:

  1. Why in the shade? Many from the Global South can not stand the light of day.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So they don't have to squint?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mark,can you or another brilliant reader tell us the names of the primates as they are lined up? or, is there a URL to a spot that does?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I cannot tell who anyone is except for the Archbishop of Canterbury. Marilyn

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well, I am pleased that I was wrong and another picture has been taken and most Primates are in.... now, let's see what KJS does with the unanimous communique...... extend BO33 to stay in Rowan's club?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Wow,

    You would think with all the moola that they spent to go to Egypt that they could find someone with a decent camera (and flash), if needed.

    I would have loved to have the "Lambeth" youtube videographer there as well...

    Fred, good point!

    Peter+
    http://santospopsicles.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  7. On the far right in the first row (third from the right) in the dark purple cassock is the Most Rev'd Martin Barahona, Primate of the Anglican Church of the Region of Central America. I believe that Bishop Andrade of Brazil is to the right of PB KJS. Gregory Venables is to the right of the ABC and to his right (that is, Venables) is Bishop Letouch Porter of Mexico.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The collective noun is a "Pride" of Primates, is it not?

    ReplyDelete
  9. OK, I think the primates pictured are the following (those marked * are representing primates):

    Front Row L-R -

    * Albert Chama (Central Africa)
    John Sentamu (England)
    * David Moxton (New Zealand)
    James Ayong (Papua New Guinea)
    Stephen Than Myint Oo (Burma)
    Rowan Williams (England)
    Gregory Venables (Southern Cone)
    Carlos Touche-Porter (Mexico)
    Dirokpa Balufuga Fidèle (Congo)
    Francis Kyung Jo Park (Korea)
    Mouneer Anis (Middle-East)
    Martin de Jesus Barahona (Central America)
    Justice Akrofi (West Africa)
    Paul Sishir Sarkar (Bangladesh)

    Back Row L-R -

    John Chew (SE Asia)
    Phillip Aspinall (Australia)
    Fred Hiltz (Canada)
    Katharine Jefferts Schori (TEC)
    Maurício José Araújo de Andrade (Brazil)
    Idris Jones (Scotland)
    Paul Kwong (Hong Kong)
    * Leroy Errol Brooks (West Indies)
    Daniel Deng Bul Yak (Sudan)
    Bernard Ntahoturi (Burundi)
    Ian Ernest (Indian Ocean)
    Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda)
    Nathaniel Makoto Uematsu (Japan)
    * Charles Koete (Melanesia)
    Alan Harper (Ireland)
    Barry Morgan (Wales)

    1 primate pictured is an extra from England (Sentamu), and only 3 primates were absent / not represented (Philippines, S. India, & Pakistan), so that leaves 6 not in the photo:

    Benjamin Nzimbi (Kenya)
    Purely Lyngdoh (N India)
    Henry Orombi (Uganda)
    Peter Akinola (Nigeria)
    Thabo Cecil Makgoba (S. Africa)
    Valentino Mokiwa (Tanzania)

    MJ

    ReplyDelete
  10. Richard in Chicago6/2/09 11:38 PM

    If they can't agree on a definition of purple how are they supposed to agree on much else?

    Why does Rowan Williams wear black when all the others are in various shades of purple? He does wear purple on occasion. Does he have a different interpretation of appropriate dress?

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Why does Rowan Williams wear black when all the others are in various shades of purple? He does wear purple on occasion. Does he have a different interpretation of appropriate dress?"

    Actually, ++Rowan is correct. A bishop should wear black normally. The purple cassock as 'everyday wear' only stems from ++Michael Ramsey. Even Roman bishops wear black - the purple cassock is only worn 'in choir'. Similarly, ++Rowan correctly wears a black shirt normally - the Anglican purple shirt is again a recent invention. Unfortunately, most prelates like their purple too much. And indeed, the black chimere should be the norm, not scarlet.

    ReplyDelete

OK... Comments, gripes, etc welcomed, but with comment moderation but with some cautions and one rule:
Cautions: Calling people fools, idiots, etc, will be reason to bounce your comment. Keeping in mind that in the struggles it is difficult enough to try to respect opponents, we should at least try.
Rule: PLEASE DO NOT SIGN OFF AS ANONYMOUS: BEGIN OR END THE MESSAGE WITH A NAME - ANY NAME. ANONYMOUS commentary will be cut.