Is there an Antidisestablishmentarianist in the house?

I've never seen that word in print, but if there is
such a thing as Antidisestablishmentarianism, there
logically should be an Antidisestablishmentarianist. 

An English teacher from the last millenium said that
Antidisestablishmentarianism was the longest word in
the English language.

At long last, the C of E is shedding more of the
embarassing ties to the state, not due to any nobility
on the part of the Church, but because the new prime
minister sees the relationship as being improper if
not unholy.

Charles+
"--------------------------------

LONDON: Brown to give up power to pick Church leaders

By Patrick Hennessy, Political Editor
Sunday Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/10/nbrown210.xml
6/10/2007

Gordon Brown is preparing to give up the prime
minister's historic right to choose the Archbishop of
Canterbury - and other Church of England bishops.

The move to grant "operational independence" to the
Church will represent one of the biggest changes to
its relationship with the state for centuries. It is
just one of a swathe of "royal prerogative" powers,
held by the prime minister, which Mr Brown is planning
to do away with once he takes over at Number 10 later
this month.

In a move he has already announced, he will also give
up his prerogative power to declare war without the
consent of parliament. Military action, such as the
invasion of Iraq, will in future have to be approved
in advance by MPs.

Mr Brown, whose father was a minister in the Church of
Scotland, is determined that the Church of England
will make up its own mind on who should succeed Rowan
Williams as Archbishop of Canterbury and spiritual
head of 70 million Anglicans worldwide. He was
appointed in 2002.

The Sunday Telegraph can reveal that the prime
minister-in-waiting has asked officials and senior
politicians with close links to the Church to
investigate the best way that he can renounce the
"power of patronage".

At the moment, the Crown Nominations Commission,
considers candidates for vacancies for diocesan
bishops, as well as the archbishops of Canterbury and
York, whenever they arise.

A list of two names, often in order of precedence, is
then put to the prime minister who can select either
name or ask the commission to provide a further name
or names.

However, a leading supporter of the Chancellor said:
"Gordon does not believe that the PM should be
involved with the selection of the head of the Church
- or any other clergy. He is actively seeking ways of
ending this power of patronage."

One possible way forward would be for archbishops and
bishops simply to be selected by the commission,
without any input from Number 10, or by the General
Synod of the Church of England, a body about
500-strong which includes clergy and lay members. The
next meeting of the synod, scheduled for next month,
may discuss the role of the prime minister in Church
appointments.

A papal-style "election" of the Archbishop of
Canterbury by leading church figures is another
possibility, but is not thought particularly likely to
be introduced.

Mr Brown wants his government to be seen as
representing "all faiths and all cultures," and not
tied significantly to the Church of England. His
proposals raise the possibility that he might take
steps to remove the right of bishops to take their
seats in the House of Lords.

Chris Bryant, the Labour MP and a former vicar, said:
"I think it would be far better if the Church was
independent of the power of the prime minister."

Church insiders have confirmed they are aware of Mr
Brown's proposals. A source added: "We would need to
look carefully at any proposal which is put forward to
establish whether any legislative or other changes
were needed."

Other prerogative powers held by the prime minister
include the right to appoint and dismiss ministers,
the decision on when to call a general election, the
declaration of a state of emergency and even decisions
on the creation of new universities.