Lambeth

Lambeth (pronounced lam-bith)

(1) A south London suburb, the location of Lambeth Palace, the seat of the Archbishop of Canterbury.

(2) A slang term for the hierarchy of the Church of England.

The name Lambeth embodies hithe, a Middle English word for a landing on the river.  Lambeth Palace has for some eight-hundred years been the official London residence of the Archbishop of Canterbury.  It sits on the south bank of the Thames, a quarter mile (400m) south-east of the Palace of Westminster, which contains the houses of parliament, on the opposite bank.

Rowan Williams (b 1950; Archbishop of Canterbury 2002-2012) and Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022) chat at Lambeth Palace.

The Lambeth Conference

The Lambeth Conference is a (nominally) decennial assembly of bishops of the Anglican Communion convened by the Archbishop of Canterbury.  There have been fourteen Lambeth Conferences, the first in 1867.  The Anglican Communion is an international association of autonomous national and regional churches, not a governing body and the office of Archbishop of Canterbury is in no way analogous with the Roman Catholic Pope.  The conferences serve a collaborative and consultative function and are said to express “…the mind of the communion" on issues of the day. Resolutions passed at a Lambeth Conference are without legal effect, but can be influential.

Conferences were never the pure and high-minded discussions of ethics, morality and theology some now appear to believe characterized the pre-modern (in this context those held prior to 1968) events.  Agenda and communiqués from all conferences have always included the procedural, administrative and jurisdictional although in recent years, they’ve certainly reflected an increasingly factionalized communion rent with cross-cutting cleavages, first over the ordination of women and of late, homosexual clergy.  During the 1998 conference, Bishop Chukwuma (b 1954) of Nigeria attempted to exorcise "homosexual demons" from the soul of Nigerian-born Richard Kirker (b 1951), a British priest and general secretary of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement.  Recalling probably Ephesians 4:32 or perhaps the more cautionary Matthew 6:15, Kirker forgave him.

The spirit of Kirker notwithstanding, at this point, the disagreements seem insoluble.  The poisonous atmosphere at, and in the aftermath of, the last conference in 2008 did not enhance the image of the church and a typically Anglican solution to avoid a repetition in 2018 seemed to have emerged.  In 2014, in answer to the suggestion he had cancelled the 2018 conference, Archbishop Justin Welby (b 1956; 105th Archbishop of Canterbury 2013-), in a statement worthy of any of his predecessors, responded by stating, "As it hasn’t been called, it can’t have been cancelled."

A communiqué issued after the primates' meeting in January 2016, noted the bishops had accepted the archbishop’s proposal the fifteenth conference should be held in 2020.  However, because of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was in March 2020 decided to postpone the conference to the summer of 2021 but the virus proved elusive and by July, the delay had been extended to 2022.  The first epistle of Peter has been chosen as the biblical focus for the conference, the theme of which is said to be what it means to be “God’s Church for God’s World”.  The apostle Peter wrote this epistle to give comfort to Christians suffering persecution from non-believers, hoping to encourage them to live pure lives despite their vicissitudes.

#lambeth got tagged in Lindsay Lohan's political commentaries on the dramatic night of the Brexit referendum in 2016.  She was a part of Team %remain.  

Peter didn’t sugar-coat the message (1 Peter 4:12-19), making it clear that for Christians, suffering is actually a participation in the sufferings of Christ and is an occasion for rejoicing, helpfully adding that in the midst of the suffering, the Holy Spirit rests upon those who are suffering, this being a great consolation.  He further explains that God uses suffering to purify the Christian community, God's household.  God uses the abuse that pagans unjustly heap on Christians to prepare his people for the return of Christ and warns people not to be surprised at the fiery ordeal that will come upon them as followers of Jesus.  Actually, they should be both grateful and happy and thus glorify God, for if they share in Christ’s sufferings it means they will also share in his glory.

In a world beset by fire, flood, pestilence and plague, 1 Peter seems a good theme to loom over a Lambeth Conference.  Whether or not Christians beyond the Kent conference rooms will long note the message, it probably will resonate with Archbishop Welby’s predecessor, Rowan Williams (Baron Williams of Oystermouth, b 1950; 104th Archbishop of Canterbury, 2002-2012).  During his tenure at Lambeth, Dr Williams probably felt more ignored than persecuted by non-believers, finding the internecine squabbles of the believers in the Anglican factions rather more tiresome.  Declaring the problems in the church “insoluble” he seemed not unhappy to be leaving Lambeth to return to his study and write about Dostoevsky.  A generous spirit, he will have wished his successor well.

Breakaway

Breakaway (pronounced breyk-uh-wey)

(1) An act or instance of breaking away; secession; separation.

(2) A departure or break from routine or tradition.

(3) A person, thing or institution which breaks away.

(4) An object, used in theatrical productions as a prop, constructed easily to break or fall apart (also used to describe costumes designed quickly to be change and thus easily removed), especially upon impact; by extension, anything deliberately constructed of lightweight material or in such a way as to shatter or come apart easily, sometimes as a safety feature.

(5) In ice hockey, a sudden rush down the ice by a player or players in an attempt to score a goal, after breaking clear of defending opponents.

(6) In various codes of football, a run by an offensive player breaking through the defense for a long gain.

(7) In basketball, a term for the fast break.

(8) In rugby union, two forwards positioned at the side of the scrum (also called flankers).

(9) In Australian rural slang, an animal that breaks away from the herd or flock or a synonym for a stampede of a number of beasts.

(10) In Australian geographical slang, an eroding steep slope on the edge of a plateau; an escarpment; a channel of floodwater that has burst from its usual course; or the track or channel eroded by the water (archaic).

(11) Of, relating to, or being that which separates or secedes.

(12) In horse racing, a premature start.

(13) In bicycle racing, a individual or group of riders which has gone ahead of the peloton (the main group).

(14) In the entertainment industry, enjoying sudden & rapid popular success as a result of one role, release etc (archaic, now called “break-out”).

(15) In geopolitics, a sometimes used alternative descriptor for the renegade province of Taiwan. 

1885–1895: A noun & adjectival form based on the (verb) phrase “break away”.  Break was from the Middle English breken, from the Old English brecan (to break), from the Proto-West Germanic brekan, from the Proto-Germanic brekaną (to break), from the primitive Indo-European breg- (to break).  Away was from the Middle English away, awey, awei, oway, o wey & on way, from the Old English āweġ & onweġ (away), the original form being on weġ (on one's way; onward; on), the construct being a- (on) +‎ way (a road; direction).  It was cognate with the Scots awa & away (away), the Old Frisian aweg & awei (away), the Saterland Frisian wäch & wääge (away), the Dutch weg (away), the German weg (away), the Danish væk (away) and the Swedish i väg (away; off; along).

The phrase “break away”, in the sense "disengage oneself abruptly, escape" dates from the 1530s.  The late nineteenth century breakaway was used to describe physical objects, especially specifically engineered theatre props.  The use in sport was noted first in 1906 while the hyphenated break-away seems initially to have been used to describe those individuals associated with breakaway movements but a convention of use never emerged.  The use to describe splinter groups or anything schismatic began in the adjectival sense in the 1930s and was so joined by the noun and in that context the synonyms include breakup, separation, defection, dissension, disunion, division, parting, rift, rupture, schism, split, disaffiliation, & splinter group.

All Blacks vs the Barbarians, Cardiff Arms Park, 1973.

Rugby Union is noted, inter alia, for some inconsistencies in the names applied to positions.  The reasons for this are historical as the game’s origins lie in the early nineteenth century at a time when communication was slow and irregular between the parts of the British Empire (and the US) where it was played.  Nomenclature thus evolved in bubbles (as did some rules) and it seems that in Australia and New Zealand, the terminology could differ even between provinces.  Despite professionalism, some of the differences persist to this day which is why mysterious terms like “second five-eight” and “wing three quarter” still sometimes baffle neophyte audiences.  The breakaway is now more commonly called the “flanker” and there are blindside flankers (No 6) and openside flankers (No 7), the distinction being that the No 7 attaches (loosely) to the scrum on whichever side is further from the nearer touchline.  Breakaways are there to tackle the opposition and hopefully steal the ball and, although not tightly bound to the scrum, do contribute to its rigidity by applying lateral force.  The breakaways are the most obvious variation from the formation used in the breakaway (the split from rugby union dating from 1895) code of rugby league which otherwise uses the same positions and field placements, although, reflecting the later, more codified origin, the terminology tends to be more consistent between nations.

Breakaways: GAFCON and the Diocese of Southern Cross.

Belonging to a long tradition of splits, squabbles, schisms and general fissiparousness in Christianity and other faiths, congregations of Australia’s breakaway faction of the Anglican Church this week began meeting in suburban clubs and halls.  Modest though the surrounds might have been, the turbulent priests are not all that lonely in their walk, joining the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON), an umbrella breakaway group dividing the Anglican Church in many countries.

GAFCON’s core objections are to the “revisionist interpretations” of the Bible by Anglican bishops, a slippery slide of “heresies” which have permitted the ordination of women, the blessing of same-sex marriages and a permissive attitude towards divorce.  Accordingly, the Diocese of Southern Cross was recently launched at a GAFCON conference in Canberra, the announcement made by its new bishop, Glenn Davies (b 1950; Archbishop of Sydney 2013-2021), the Anglican church’s former archbishop of Sydney.  In a statement which was a lament rather that a celebration, the bishop noted it was “…a sad day, in many ways”, adding that “…if the leadership would repent and turn back to the teachings of the bible, we wouldn’t need the Diocese of Southern Cross. I’d shut it down and come back.”  He denied procuring worshipers from other congregations, saying “I’m not luring people in, I’m not recruiting; I’m providing a safe haven and they can come to me.”

The way things used to be done.  St George's Anglican Church, Beenleigh, Queensland, Australia.

The Australian event is the latest expansion of a movement that is dividing the communion in many countries with rebel dioceses having already been formed in North America, South America, Africa and Europe and there are many who concede the schism has already evolved to the point where it must be acknowledged there are now two Anglican Churches in the US.  The nature of religiosity among Christians in Australia is however different from the US experience, both qualitatively and quantitatively.  Anglicanism was between white settlement in 1788 and the twenty-first century, at least nominally, most numerous denomination in Australia but the most recent census data revealed Anglican affiliation dropped more than any other religion in the past five years, from 3.1 to 2.5 million people, almost one in five and fewer than 10% of the population now self-identify as Anglican.  Of this declining sect of Christianity, many predict the breakaway Diocese of Southern Cross will grow but it’s unlikely to assume the critical mass such movements can attain in Africa and the Americas, simply because there simply aren’t enough folk who take religion that seriously.

The new way.  The first service of the Diocese of Southern Cross was held in a meeting room of the Beenleigh RSL (Returned Services League) & Golf Club.

 The breakaway GAFCON is not a new formation.  The culmination of the internal stresses visible in the Anglican communion since the 1968 Lambeth Conference, GAFCOM coalesced over three conferences held between 2008-2018, convened by conservative Anglican bishops and leaders concerned about the establishment’s positions on issues such as the ordination of women, secularism, HIV/AIDS , the matter of gay clergy and marriage equality.  Provocatively held one month prior to the 2008 Lambeth Conference, GAFCON made clear it existed because of heresy, the revisionist "false gospel" which since the 1960s had become part of Anglican orthodoxy, claiming it denied the uniqueness of Jesus Christ and promoted a corrosive cultural relativism which accepted a "variety of sexual preferences and immoral behavior as a universal human right".  These matters had been debated by the factions for years but it was the consecration of the confessed (and non-celibate) homosexual Vicky Gene Robinson (b 1947; Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire 2004-2013) as a bishop by the Episcopal Church in the US which induced the conservative faction be explore an institutional formation, either to “march through the institution” or form a separate church, depending on how the numbers fell.

As things turned out in 2008, it seemed clear a takeover wasn’t (yet) a practical proposition but that GAFCON would continue as a concept.  What was decided was to create in North America, where the threat seemed greatest, a kind of parallel church, an ecclesiastical structure which would cater for conservative Anglicans, a mechanism possible the communiqué asserted because the Archbishop of Canterbury is not a pope and his recognition of an institution is not required to secure a presence within the Anglican Communion.  In a nice touch, the 1662 Book of Common Prayer was called "a true and authoritative standard of worship and prayer”.  Lambeth Palace, predictably, while noting the breakaway’s position was fraught with theological and structural difficulties, otherwise did nothing.  Schisms sometimes flourish, sometimes fade away, sometimes are re-absorbed by the establishment and sometimes cause wars.  With the Lambeth Conference having just concluded, attention will now turn to at least three of those options.

The word “breakaway” can be used of used of Hollywood starlets who wish to break away from the innocent persona of their youth (left), chocolate bars with a wafer centre (a la the Kit Kat) (centre) and devices designed to break away from their connection at a certain stress point (right).

Insoluble

Insoluble (pronounced in-sol-yuh-buhl)

(1) A substance which cannot be dissolved, broken down or dispersed.

(2) That which cannot be solved; unsolvable; insolvable.

(3) That which cannot be explained; mysterious or inexplicable.

(4) In chemistry, a substance incapable of dissolving in a solvent.

1350-1400: From the Middle English insoluble (indestructible, unable to be loosened), from the Old French insoluble or the Latin insolūbilis (that which cannot be loosened), the construct being in (not) + solubilis (soluble) which replaced the Middle English insolible; Middle French borrowed the word from the Latin as insoluble.  In the sciences, the noun insolubility in the sense of “incapability of dissolving in a liquid” dates from 1754 (insoluble having conveyed that since 1713), the Late Latin insolubilitas having previously been used and from 1791 it replaced the Latin insolubilis (that cannot be loosened) although in the early seventeenth century it’d been used of the marriage vow to mean "that cannot be dissolved".  The curious (and in many way annoying as such thing in English are) parallel meaning "that which cannot be solved" dates from 1722 and etymologists think it likely a separate formation from the earlier senses.  The related adjective irresolvable was from the 1650s and was from an assimilated form of in- (not, opposite of), the meaning "that which cannot be resolved into parts" emerging after 1785.  Insoluble is a noun & adjective, insolubility is a noun and insolubly is an adverb; the noun plural is insolubles.

In chemistry, insoluble has the precise technical meaning “incapable of dissolving in a solvent” and while it’s actually rare for absolutely no solute to dissolve at all, many substances are poorly soluble although a compound may be insoluble in one solvent yet fully miscible in another.  There’s also the influence of external factors, most notable temperature; increasing temperature frequently improves the solubility of a solute.  The figurative sense (that which cannot be solved; unsolvable; insolvable) is actually used less than other words or phrases which convey the idea, doubtlessly because of the parallel meaning.  Some claim that in Medieval scholarship, it was a tacit conviction among the learned that the insoluble question did not exist and that all that was ever required was to find the right man whose studies were so deep that he would eventually deduce the answer.  It’s a modern-sounding idea and recalls some of the optimistic phases the United States went through in the twentieth century; probably few think like that now.

Dr Rowan Williams (b 1950; Archbishop of Canterbury, 2002-2012) and Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022), discussing insoluble problems during the papal visit to the UK, Lambeth Palace, London, September 2010

One who probably never felt quite like that but may at times have allowed himself the odd, brief moment of optimism was former Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams, a literary critic and one-time Professor of Divinity at Oxford although his decade in Lambeth Palace seems to have cured him of that.  In late 2008, Dr Williams took a two month summer sabbatical to finish a book about his literary hero, the Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky (1821-1881) which was published as Dostoevsky: Language, Faith and Fiction.  Those few weeks may have been among the happiest of his life, later reflecting that “It was a wonderful experience actually, just being able to get up in the morning and write instead go to committees and answer letters and try to solve insoluble problems in the church.”  To the suggestion that prayer might provide answers to at least some of those insoluble problems he replied “I'll do just that.”  Ten years on, there little indication his prayers were answered.

Intelligence

Intelligence (pronounced in-tel-i-juh-ns)

(1) Capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc.

(2) Describing the manifestation of a high mental capacity.

(3) The faculty of understanding.

(4) Knowledge of an event, circumstance, etc., received or imparted; news; information.

(5) The gathering or distribution of information, especially secret information; the evaluated conclusions drawn from such information; an organization or agency engaged in gathering such information.

(6) The interchange of information.

(7) In the sect of Christian Science, a fundamental attribute of God, or infinite Mind; an intelligent being or spirit, especially an incorporeal one, as an angel.

(8) News or information (now obsolete except as applied to the military, government or others who practice espionage).

(9) As used in intelligence quotient (IQ) tests, refers to an individual's relative standing on two quantitative indices, namely measured intelligence, as expressed by an intelligence quotient, and effectiveness of adaptive behavior.

1350-1400: From the Middle English intelligence (the highest faculty of the mind, capacity for comprehending general truths (and later "faculty of understanding, comprehension")), from the Old French intelligence, from Latin intelligentia & intellegentia (understanding, knowledge, power of discerning; art, skill, taste), from intelligentem (nominative intelligens) (discerning, appreciative), present participle of intelligere (to understand, comprehend, come to know),from intellegere (to discern, comprehend (literally “ choose between”)), the construct being inter-, (between, amid), a form of prepositional inter (between)+ legere (to choose), from the primitive Indo-European root leg- (to collect, gather (with derivatives meaning "to speak; to pick out words)) or the Proto-Italic legō (to care).

The meaning “superior understanding, sagacity, quality of being intelligent” is from the early 1400s and the particular application to spies dates from later that century although at much the same time it was applied in general to "information received or imparted; news". The word assumed its modern meaning (being endowed with understanding or knowledge) in late 1300s, influenced by the use in Old French where it had existed since the twelfth century.  The first formerly structured intelligence quotient (IQ) tests were conducted in 1921.  Intelligential is the adjective and intel the usual abbreviation.

Military Intelligence

The record of military intelligence during World War I (WWI, 1914-1918) was mixed and the troops would joke there were three types of intelligence: human, animal & military.  It was during WWI that some British military intelligence units began to pick up their familiar identification codes (M(ilitary) I(ntelligence)1, MI4, MI5 etc).  MI5 and MI6 remain well-known, thanks to Ian Fleming (1908–1964; the former naval intelligence officer who wrote the James Bond novels) and other writers but there were many other MIs, researchers uncovering amidst the alpha-numeric soup references to entities up to MI25 but not all existed at the same time and most have long since been either disestablished or folded into MI5, MI6 or GCHQ (Government Communications Headquarters; the UK government's clearing house for signals intelligence (SIGINT)) in the post-war years.

Artificial Intelligence: A random eight AI generated images of Lindsay Lohan.  

The records are occasionally contradictory but researchers have synthesized what are thought to be the most reliable sources and the list has been little amended since first it was published in the late 1990s.  The list should not however be misinterpreted; some of the MIx entries identified better thought of as project codes for operations which were, either at once or shortly after their creation, appended to other departments rather than becoming or remaining distinct entities with a personnel establishment and physical accoutrements of infrastructure.  Other were ad-hoc creations of wartime exigency that were dissolved as circumstances rendered their purpose redundant.  There’s also another reason why the list may be incomplete: given all this operates at least notionally under the auspices of the notoriously secretive military and it could be there are any number of still secret departments.

MI1: During WWI, the army’s MI1 (there were a number of sub-sections labelled MI1a, MI1b etc) and the Admiralty’s NID25 had operated separately as collectors and interpreters of SIGINT, including code-breaking.  After the war, they were combined into the inter-service Directorate of Military Intelligence and Cryptography which ultimately evolved into GCHQ.  However, the Army, Royal Navy and newly created Royal Air Force (RAF) all maintained, sometimes in great secrecy, their own intelligence operations, the Admiralty especially jealous of its independence in as many fields as possible.

MI2: A divisional title, the “desk” or section devoted to intelligence relating to Russia & Scandinavia.

MI3: A divisional title, the “desk” or section devoted to intelligence relating to Eastern Europe.  This originally included Germany but so important did the German threat become that MI14 and MI15 were created exclusively to handle Britain’s fears of things Teutonic.

MI4: Matters related to aerial reconnaissance.  MI4’s original remit included not only the analysis of photographs but also the technical aspects of the process (cameras, lens, film stock, mounting techniques etc) and as civil aviation expanded, spying on foreign territory was accomplished sometimes with the use of civil airliners.  MI4 was transferred to Military Combined Operations in April 1940 when the MI15 was hived-off as an operation concerned purely with engineering aspects of photography and attached to the Air Ministry.

MI5: The well-known domestic intelligence service, the focus of which varies according to changes in the threat environment (Germans, feminists, communists, fascists, homosexuals, Freemasons, terrorists etc).  It’s known also as the Security Service but the authorities never make much of this, presumably because they don’t like the idea of people calling it "the SS".  MI5 is responsible to the home secretary (the UK's minister for internal affairs).

MI6: The foreign intelligence service, almost always called MI6 because of its historic origins but actually correctly styled the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) and as the Secret Service Bureau, it actually pre-dated WWI, the MI6 tag not used until World War II (WWII, 1939-1945).  The SIS is responsible to the Foreign Secretary and is well-known because of the connection with spies real and fictional: James Bond, Graham Greene, John le Carré, Ian Fleming, Somerset Maugham, Kim Philby etc. 

MI7: Military Communication Interception, later known as the Propaganda Section and transferred to the Ministry of Information during the Battle of France (the Western Campaign (Westfeldzug to the Germans) May-June 1940)).

MI8: Better known as the WWII Special Operations Executive (SOE), the covert ops department set up “to set Europe ablaze”, concentrating on sabotage and political subversion in Nazi-occupied Europe.  Said at the time to be of great psychological value, post-war analysis of its operations suggested success was patchy.  In the inter-war years, MI8 was concerned with the interception and interpretation of communications.

MI9: A WWII creation concerned with undercover operations, especially assisting escape and evasion by both civilians and prisoners of war.

MI10: Weapons analysis, a WWII military-civil partnership which conducted tests and provided analytical services.

MI11: Military security.  Although concerned with internal matters such as leaks and the theft of intelligence, most of its staff were in field security and the Military Police dealt overwhelmingly with normal police matters or military discipline.

MI12: Military censorship, always a growth industry in the armed forces.  One WWII US general held the view the civilian population needed to be told about the war only when it was over and then only that “we won”.

MI13: There is no evidence MI13 ever existed.  Whether this was because of the superstition the British attach to the number 13 isn’t known.  Conspiracy theorists wonder if it’s something so secret that it’s never been spoken of.

MI14 & MI15: Divisional title, the “desk” or section devoted to intelligence relating to Germany.

MI15: In April 1940, the MI15 title was recycled, German matters having long been exclusively the domain of MI14.  MI15 became the aerial photography branch which was purely technical (how best to photograph stuff) and attached to the Air Ministry while MI4 (aerial reconnaissance) decided what should be photographed.

MI16: Scientific analysis.  As WWII progresses, the importance of advances in science and technology became increasingly obvious.  MI16 wasn’t a collection of scientists but an administrative centre to coordinate research and ensure efforts weren’t being duplicated.  It interacted with existing instruments such as the Ministry of Supply in matters of resource allocation.

MI17: Secretariat for Director of Military Intelligence.  This was an attempt to coordinate the back-office and administrative overhead of all the MIx departments but it also added to the bureaucracy.

MI18: There is no evidence MI18 ever existed but because of the existence of MI19 such an institution may at least have been contemplated with the designation reserved for that purpose (or it could, like the mysterious MI13, be in secret functioning even today).

MI19: A WWII prisoner of war debriefing unit, best known for the transcripts they provided by secretly bugging German generals in captivity in England.  The transcripts are especially interesting when read in conjunction with some of the generals’ memoirs published after their release.

Conspiracy theorists find it intriguing that there’s no documentary evidence for the existence of MI13, MI18 & MI20 and MI21-MI25 remain classified as secret.  Over the years, the most popular conspiracy theory has been there’s a MI unit somewhere concerned with a covering up what the government really knows about UFOs.

The SIS Building, 85 Albert Embankment, Vauxhall, Lambeth, London.  Opened in 1994, nicknames include Legoland, The London Lubyanka, Ceaușescu Towers & The Ziggurat.

The British government did not until 1994 officially acknowledge the existence of the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS, aka MI6), and the identities of its staff and location of their offices were classified secret and subject to a D-Notice (now called a DSMA-Notice (Defence and Security Media Advisory Notice)) which was an official request by government to publishers and broadcasters not to publish or broadcast items about certain matters, a system which worked rather effectively in the pre-internet age.  However, the location of the SIS’s headquarters in the London suburb of Lambeth was apparently the UK’s “worst kept secret” appearing in training materials for taxi drivers although the story it was once in Lonely Planet’s London guide seems to have been apocryphal.  When the new SIS building was commissioned, it was decided to solve the problem of the secret leaking by publishing the details and ensuring the new structure was about the most obvious thing on the Thames.  An eclectic mix of styles, shapes & structures, when opened in 1994 it attracted criticism from those architects who decry anything other than 1950s New York modernism but it has aged rather well, the colors, lines and proportions not without charm.

Enthrone

Enthrone (pronounced en-throhn)

(1) To put on the throne in a formal installation ceremony (sometimes called an enthronement) which variously could be synonymous with (or simultaneously performed with) a coronation or other ceremonies of investiture.

(2) Figuratively in this context, to help a candidate to the succession of a monarchy or by extension in any other major organisation (ie the role of “kingmakers”, literal and otherwise).

(3) To invest with sovereign or episcopal authority (ie a legal instrument separate from any ceremony).

(4) To honour or exalt (now rare except in literary or poetic use).

(5) Figuratively, to assign authority to or vest authority in.

Circa 1600: The construct was en- + throne and the original meaning was “to place on a throne, exalt to the seat of royalty”.  For this purpose it replaced the late fourteenth century enthronize, from the thirteenth century Old French introniser, from the Late Latin inthronizare, from Greek the enthronizein.  In the late fourteenth century the verb throne (directly from the noun) was used in the same sense.  Throne (the chair or seat occupied by a sovereign, bishop or other exalted personage on ceremonial occasions) dates from the late twelfth century and was from the Middle English trone, from the Old French trone, from the Latin thronus, from the Ancient Greek θρόνος (thrónos) (chair, high-set seat, throne).  It replaced the earlier Middle English seld (seat, throne).  In facetious use, as early as the 1920s, throne could mean “a toilet” (used usually in the phrase “on the throne”) and in theology had the special use (in the plural and capitalized) describing the third (a member of an order of angels ranked above dominions and below cherubim) of the nine orders into which the angels traditionally were divided in medieval angelology.  The en- prefix was from the Middle English en- (en-, in-), from the Old French en- (also an-), from the Latin in- (in, into).  It was also an alteration of in-, from the Middle English in-, from the Old English in- (in, into), from the Proto-Germanic in (in).  Both the Latin & Germanic forms were from the primitive Indo-European en (in, into).  The intensive use of the Old French en- & an- was due to confluence with Frankish intensive prefix an- which was related to the Old English intensive prefix -on.  It formed a transitive verb whose meaning is to make the attached adjective (1) in, into, (2) on, onto or (3) covered.  It was used also to denote “caused” or as an intensifier.  The prefix em- was (and still is) used before certain consonants, notably the labials b and p.  Enthrone, dethrone, enthronest & enthronize are verbs, enthronementm, enthronization & enthroner are nouns, enthroning is a noun & verb, enthroned is a verb & adjective; the noun plural is enthronements.  The noun enthronable is non-standard.  The derived forms include the verb unenthrone, reenthrone & disenthrone and although there have been many enthroners, the form enthronee has never existed.

Alhaji Ibrahim Wogorie (b 1967) being enskinned as North Sisala community chief, Ghana, July 2023.

In colonial-era West Africa the coined forms were “enskin” (thus enskinment, enskinning, enskinned) and “enstool” (thus enstoolment, enstooling, enstooled).  These words were used to refer to the ceremonies in which a tribal chief was installed in his role; the meanings thus essentially the same as enjoyed in the West by “enthrone”.  The constructs reflected a mix of indigenous political culture and English morphological adaptation during the colonial period, the elements explained by (1) the animal skins (the distinctive cheetah often mentioned in the reports of contemporary anthropologists although in some Islamic and Sahelian-influenced chieftaincies (including the Dagomba, Mamprusi, Hausa emirates), a cow or lion skin often was the symbol of authority) which often surrounded the new chief and (2) the tradition in Africa of a chief sitting on a stool.  Sometimes, the unfortunate animal’s skin would be laid over the stool (and almost always, one seems to have been laid at the chief’s feet) but in some traditions (notably in northern Ghana and parts of Nigeria) it was a mark of honor for the chief to sit on a skin spread on the ground.

Dr Mahamudu Bawumia (b 1963), enstooled as Nana Ntentankesehene (Chief of the Internet/Web), Ghana, August 2024.  Note the cheetah skin used to trim the chair.

The stool was the central symbol of chieftaincy and kingship among Akan-speaking peoples (still in present-day Ghana where “to enskin” is used generally to mean “to install as a leader of a group” and the constitution (1992) explicitly protects the institution of chieftaincy and judicial decisions routinely use “enstool” or “enskin” (depending on region)).  In Akan political culture, the most famous use was the Sika Dwa Kofi (the Golden Stool) of the Asante and it represented the embodiment of the polity and ancestors, not merely a seat (used rather like the synecdoches “the Pentagon” (for the US Department of Defense (which appears now to be headed by a cabinet office who simultaneously is both Secretary of Defense & Secretary of War)) or “Downing Street” (for the UK prime-minister or the government generally).  Thus, to be “enstooled” is ritually to be placed into office as chief, inheriting the authority vested in the stool.  Enskin & enstool (both of which seem first to have appeared in the records of the Colonial Office in the 1880s and thus were products of the consolidation of British indirect rule in West Africa, rather than being survivals from earlier missionary English which also coined its own terms) were examples of semantic calquing (the English vocabulary reshaped to encode indigenous concepts) and, as it was under the Raj in India, it was practical administrative pragmatism, colonial officials needing precise (and standardized) terms that distinguished between different systems of authority.  In truth, they were also often part of classic colonial “fixes” in which the British would take existing ceremonies and add layers of ritual to afforce the idea of a chief as “their ruler” and within a couple of generations, sometimes the local population would talk of the newly elaborate ceremony as something dating back centuries; the “fix” was a form of constructed double-legitimization.

A classic colonial fix was the Bose Levu Vakaturaga (Great Council of Chiefs) in Fiji which the British administrators created in 1878.  While it's true that prior to European contact, there had been meetings between turaga (tribal chiefs) to settle disputes and for other purposes, all the evidence suggests they were ad-hoc appointments with little of the formality, pomp and circumstance the British introduced.  Still, it was a successful institution which the chiefs embraced, apparently with some enthusiasm because the cloaks and other accoutrements they adopted for the occasion became increasingly elaborate and it was a generally harmonious form of indigenous governance which enabled the British to conduct matters of administration and policy-making almost exclusively through the chiefs.  The council survived even after Fiji gained independence from Britain in 1970 until it was in 2012 abolished by the military government of Commodore Frank Bainimarama (b 1954; prime minister of Fiji 2007-2022), as part of reform programme said to be an attempt to reduce ethnic divisions and promote a unified national identity.  The commodore's political future would be more assured had he learned lessons from the Raj.

There was of course an element of racial hierarchy in all this and “enskin” & “enstool” denoted a “tribal chief” under British rule whereas “enthrone” might have been thought to imply some form of sovereignty because that was the linkage in Europe and that would never do.  What the colonial authorities wanted was to maintain the idea of “the stool” as a corporate symbol, the office the repository of the authority, not the individual.  The danger with using a term like “enthronement” was the population might be infected by the European notion of monarchy as a hereditary kingship with personal sovereignty; what the Europeans wanted was “a stool” and they would decide who would be enstooled, destooled or restooled. 

Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi, Moses Mabhida Stadium, Durban, South Africa, October 2022.

English words and their connotations did continue to matter in the post-colonial world because although the colonizers might have departed, often the legacy of language remained, sometimes as an “official” language of government and administration.  In the 1990s, the office of South Africa’s Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi (1928–2023) sent a series of letters to the world’s media outlets advising he should be styled as “Prince” and not “Chief”, on the basis of being the grandson of one Zulu king and the nephew of another.  The Zulus were once described as a “tribe” and while that reflected the use in ethnography, the appeal in the West was really that it represented a rung on the racist hierarchy of civilization, the preferred model being: white people have nations or states, Africans cluster in tribes or clans.  The colonial administrators recognized these groups had leaders and typically they used the style “chief” (from the Middle English cheef & chef, from the Old French chef & chief (leader), from the Vulgar Latin capus, from the Classical Latin caput (head), from the Proto-Italic kaput, from the primitive Indo-European káput).  As the colonial records make clear, there were “good” chiefs and “troublesome” chiefs, thus the need sometimes to arrange a replacement enstooling.

Unlike in the West where styles of address and orders of precedence were codified (indeed, somewhat fetishized), the traditions in Africa seem to have been more fluid and Mangosuthu Buthelezi didn’t rely on statute or even documented convention when requesting the change.  Instead, he explained “prince” reflected his Zulu royal lineage not only was appropriate (he may have cast an envious eye at the many Nigerian princes) but was also commonly used as his style by South African media, some organs or government and certainly his own Zulu-based political party (IQembu leNkatha yeNkululeko (the IPF; Inkatha Freedom Party).  He had in 1953 assumed the Inkosi (chieftainship) of the Buthelezi clan, something officially recognized four year laters by Pretoria although not until the early 1980s (when it was thought he might be useful as a wedge to drive into the ANC (African National Congress) does the Apartheid-era government seem to have started referring to him as “prince”).  Despite that cynical semi-concession, there was never a formal re-designation.

Enthroned & installed: Lindsay Lohan in acrylic & rhinestone tiara during “prom queen scene” in Mean Girls (2004).

In the matter of prom queens and such, it’s correct to say there has been “an enthronement” because even in the absence of a physical throne (in the sense of “a chair”), the accession is marked by the announcement and the placing of the crown or tiara.  This differs from something like the “enthroning” of a king or queen in the UK because, constitutionally, there is no interregnum, the new assuming the title as the old took their last breath and “enthronement” is a term reserved casually to apply to the coronation.  Since the early twentieth century, the palace and government have contrived to make an elaborate “made for television” ceremony although it has constitutional significance beyond the rituals related to the sovereign’s role as Supreme Governor of the Church of England.

Dame Sarah Mullally in the regalia of Bishop of London; in January 2026, she will take office as Archbishop of Canterbury, the formal installation in March.  No longer one of the world's more desirable jobs (essentially because it can't be done), all wish her the best of British luck.

In October 2025, the matter of enthronement (or, more correctly, non-enthronement) in the Church of England made a brief splash in some of the less explored corners of social media after it was announced the ceremony marking the accession of the next Archbishop of Canterbury would be conducted in Canterbury Cathedral in March 2026.  The announcement was unexceptional in that it was expected and for centuries Archbishops of Canterbury have come and gone (although the last one was declared gone rather sooner than expected) but what attracted some comment was the new appointee was to be “installed” rather than the once traditional “enthroned”.  The conclusion some drew was this apparent relegation was related to the next archbishop being Dame Sarah Mullally (née Bowser; b 1962) the first woman to hold the once desirable job, the previous 105 prelates having been men, the first, Saint Augustine of Canterbury (circa 630s-circa 604) in 597 (not to be confused with the still influential Saint Augustine of Hippo (354–430)).

Despite the suspicions the event was being in some way "devalued" because a woman got the job, there is in the church no substantive legal or theological significance in the use of “installed” rather than “enthroned” and the choice reflects modern ecclesiastical practice rather than having any doctrinal or canonical effect.  A person become Archbishop of Canterbury through a sequence of juridical acts and these constitute the decisive legal instruments; ceremonial rites have a symbolic value but nothing more, the power of the office vested from the point at which the legal mechanisms have correctly been executed (in that, things align with the procedures used for the nation’s monarchs).  So the difference is one of tone rather than substance and the “modern” church has for decades sought to distance itself from perceptions it may harbor quasi-regal aspirations or the perpetuation of clerical grandeur and separateness; at least from Lambeth Palace, the preferred model long has been pastoral; most Church of England bishops have for some times been “installed” in their cathedrals (despite “enthronement” surviving in some press reports, a product likely either of nostalgia or “cut & paste journalism”).  That said, some Anglican provinces outside England still “enthrone” (apparently on the basis “it’s always been done that way” rather than the making of a theological or secular point”).

Lambeth Palace, the Archbishop of Canterbury's official London residence.

Interestingly, Archbishops of York (“the church in the north”) continued to enjoy ceremonies of enthronement even after those those at Canterbury underwent installations.  Under canon law, the wording literally makes no difference and historians have concluded the retention of the older form is clung to for no reason other than “product differentiation”, York Minster often emphasizing their continuity with medieval ceremonial forms; it’s thus a mere cultural artefact, the two ceremonies performing the same liturgical action: seating the archbishop in the cathedra (the chair (throne) of the archbishop.  Because it’s the Archbishop of Canterbury and not York who sits as the “spiritual head of the worldwide Anglican community”, in York there’s probably no lingering sensitivity to criticism of continuing with “Romish ways”.  It's not that northern noses are less troubled by the “whiff of popery”, it just that few now care.

In an indication of how little the wording matters, it’s not clear who was the last Archbishop of Canterbury who could be said to have been “enthroned” because there was never any differentiation of form in the ceremonies and the documents suggest the terms were used casually and even interchangeably.  What can be said is that Geoffrey Fisher (1887–1972; AoC-99: 1945-1961) was installed at a ceremony widely described (in the official programme, ecclesiastical commentaries and other church & secular publications) as an “enthronement” and that was the term used in the government Gazette; that’s as official an endorsement of the term as seems possible because, being an established church, bishops are appointed by the Crown on the advice of the prime minister although the procedure has at least since 2007 been a “legal fiction” because the church’s CNC (Crown Nominations Commission) sends the names to the prime minister who acts as a “postbox”, forwarding them to the palace for the issuing of letters patent confirming the appointment.  When Michael Ramsey (1904–1988; AoC-100: 1961-1974), was appointed, although the term “enthrone” did appear in press reports, the church’s documents almost wholly seem to have used “install” and since then, in Canterbury, it’s been installations all the way.

Pope Pius XII in triple tiara at his coronation, The Vatican, March, 1939.

So, by the early 1960s the church was responding, if cautiously, to the growing anti-monarchical sentiment in post-war ecclesiology although this does seem to have been a sentiment of greater moment to intellectuals and theologians than parishioners.  About these matters there was however a kind of ecumenical sensitivity emerging and the conciliar theology later was crystallised (if not exactly codified) in the papers of Second Vatican Council (Vatican II, 1962-1965, published 1970).  The comparison with the practice in Rome is interesting because there are more similarities than differences although that is obscured by words like “enthronement” and “coronation” being seemingly embedded in the popular (and journalistic) imagination. That’s perhaps understandable because for two millennia as many as 275 popes (officially the count is 267 but it’s not certain how many there have been because there have been “anti-popes” and allegedly even one woman (although that’s now largely discounted)) have sat “on the throne of Saint Peter” (retrospectively the first pope) so the tradition is long.  In Roman Catholic canon law, “enthronement” is not a juridical term; the universal term is capio sedem (taking possession of the cathedral (ie “installation”)) and, as in England, an appointment is formalized once the legal instruments are complete, the subsequent ceremony, while an important part of the institution’s mystique, exists for the same reason as it does for the Church of England or the House of Windsor: it’s the circuses part of panem et circenses (bread and circuses).  Unlike popes who once had coronations, archbishops of Canterbury never did because they made no claim to temporal sovereignty.

Pope Paul VI in triple tiara at his coronation, The Vatican, June. 1963.  It was the last papal coronation.

So, technically, modern popes are “installed as Bishop of Rome” and in recent decades the Holy See has adjusted the use of accoutrements to dispel any implication of an “enthronement”, the last papal coronation at which a pope was crowned with the triple tiara was that of Paul VI (1897-1978; pope 1963-1978) but in “an act of humility” he removed it, placing it on the on the alter where (figuratively), it has since sat.  Actually, Paul VI setting aside the triple tiara as a symbolic renunciation of temporal and monarchical authority was a bit overdue because the Papal States had been lost to the Holy See with the unification of Italy in 1870 though the Church refused to acknowledge that reality; in protest, no pope for decades set foot outside the Vatican.  However, in the form of the Lateran Treaty (1929), the Holy See entered into a concordat with the Italian state whereby the (1) the Vatican was recognized as a sovereign state and (2) the church was recognized as Italy’s state religion in exchange for which the territorial and political reality was recognized.  Despite that, until 1963 the triple tiara (one tier of which was said to symbolize the pope’s temporal authority over the papal states) appeared in the coronations of Pius XII (1876-1958; pope 1939-1958), John XXIII (1881-1963; pope 1958-1963) and Paul VI (who didn’t formally abolish the rite of papal coronation from the Ordo Rituum pro Ministerii Petrini Initio Romae Episcopi (Order of Rites for the Beginning of the Petrine Ministry of the Bishop of Rome (the liturgical book detailing the ceremonies for a pope's installation)) until 1975.

The Chair of St Augustine.  In church circles, archbishops of Canterbury are sometimes said to "occupy the Chair of St Augustine".

The Chair of St Augustine sits in Canterbury Cathedral but technically, an AoC is “twice installed”: once on the Diocesan throne as the Bishop of the see of Canterbury and also on the Chair of St Augustine as Primate of All England (the nation's first bishop) and spiritual leader of the worldwide Anglican Communion. So, there’s nothing unusual in Sarah Mullally being “installed” rather than “enthroned” as would have been the universal terminology between the reformation and the early twentieth century.  Linguistically, legally and theologically, the choice of words is a non-event and anyone who wishes to describe Dame Sarah as “enthroned” may do so without fear of condemnation, excommunication or a burning at the stake.  What is most likely is that of those few who notice, fewer still are likely to care.