Archbishop of Canterbury question

[bx...@yahoo.com]

I noticed that on the House of Lords' website, the new Archibishop of Canterbury, the first female to hold that position,  is referred to as "The LORD Archbishop of Canterbury."

Is this the same thinking whereby the late Queen was referred to as "The DUKE of Lancaster?"

Thanks.

Brooke

[BREMENMURRAY]

Yes

[bx...@yahoo.com]

Thanks, BREMENMURRAY.

Brooke

[David Beamish]

There are other examples of apparently male titles which have been held by females, such as Lord President of the Council, Lord Privy Seal, Lord Speaker (of the House of Lords), Lord High Admiral (held by the late Queen), First Lord of the Treasury. It may also be noted that, when there was first a female Member of the House of Commons, the formula used by the Sovereign in the Gracious Speech changed from "My Lords, Gentlemen" to "My Lords and Members of the House of Commons". But after women were admitted to the House of Lords in 1958 the formula did not change, and indeed speakers in House of Lords debates use the formula "My Lords".

[Jonathan]

On the other hand, on the appointment of the first female head of the judiciary, the title was changed to Lady Chief Justice.

To me, there has always been a distinction to "Lord" used as a prefix to another title, where if means "important", or "senior" or "high ranking"; and "Lord" used as someone's personal title. Examples of the former also include "Lord Mayor" and "Lord Lieutenant" and don't change with gender. I did not agree with changing the Chief Justice title, although having said that, female appeal court judges are "Lady Justice".

[sven_me...@web.de]

You did not agree? You want to have everything as it was, some archaic thoughts about titles. Don't stay in the past!

[Jonathan]

In my previous comment, I meant  to say, "there has always been a distinction **between** "Lord" used as a prefix..." It was mangled during editing.

On the contrary, I think a woman should still be Lord Chief Justice because it sounds better, and I don't see why a female holder should have an inferior sounding title.

Which of the other titles would you change? "Lady Speaker", "Lady High Admiral", "Lady Mayor", or any of the other examples David gave above? Or if we are not going to have "archaic" (or as some would call them, traditional) titles, why use the prefix "Lord/Lady" at all? It could be simply "Chief Justice", etc.

[LoopyCrown3]

The current Lady Mayor of London  ask for it to be changed for her appointment. Having the first Lady Mayor Show even though she is the third woman to hold the position.  

[S. S.]

I would disagree for "Lord" being used as a prefix meaning "important". It is quite plainly a mark of the past where men dominated the field. We may as well start calling Queens as Kings if we opt for posterity since that is "traditional". In any case, there isn't much point in being a stickler for "Lord" in office's title. The exact same message is conveyed with "Lady" in the office's title. We may soon enough see more females opting for the female equivalent as with the Lady Chief Justice example. Furthermore, being a "lady" is not "inferior". We don't have queens regnant be "inferior" to kings now do we? A rather patriarchal idea to suppose lady is inferior to a lord. As to the argument for eschewing traditional titles and just making it "Chief Justice", I am afraid most people would find an office rather empty sounding without Lord/Lady! It does give it an air of grandeur. This is one of those balancing acts for the modern and the ancient. Some things catch up, some become stagnant. 

S.S.

[Jonathan]

It's a funny old world where we have to call actresses "actors", yet historic offices have to be renamed because the holder is female. It also makes the office rather uninclusive for people who are non-binary.

"House of Lords and Ladies", anyone?

[https:/www.LeighRayment.com.au]

Next will be partners for same-sex of Knighthoods and Nobility having a style or equal to their partner.  Only fair in this woke world to meet standards for one and all.

[sven_me...@web.de]

Woke is a term used by disgusting rightwing people who have no respect for others.

[https:/www.LeighRayment.com.au]

Left wing, right wing, centre all use the term. Don't assume it is only an extreme side that only does. Please don't be foolish.

[cb]

This morning, I woke to find political correctness assailing these pages again.  My plea to those who would besmirch others for their choice of words is - cease and desist.  If you don't know what a word means, or what your correspondent means by it, ask.  Words in English mean different things in different geographical areas and in different cultural groups within those areas.

The origin of 'woke' in the sense of awareness of a cultural or political matter comes from the 1930s in the music scene in America where it was used by folk and blues musician Lead Belly as a warning for his fellow African Americans to remain vigilant against racial violence.

These days, it is used so loosely it's hard to know what anyone means by it.  It can be a compliment, a perjorative and anything in between and that depends on two essentially subjective and eminently changeable parameters:  the individual opinion of the person using the word and the individual opinion of the person hearing it.  If you think about it, it makes the word a waste of space.  Not worth the trouble it took me to write this.  But I am interested in words so it was worth it to me!!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Peerage News" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to peerage-news...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/peerage-news/19344a87-21f7-4e46-a26b-4a294e339c03n%40googlegroups.com.

[Jonathan]

I hope I haven't opened a can of worms here! I don't really have that strong opinion either way whether it should be Lord or Lady Chief Justice etc. I didn't see a need to change the title for a woman simply because I never saw any reason why a woman shouldn't be just as suitable for the post as a man. I hadn't considered the idea that some people might think the title harks back to when the post (any many others) would exclusively have been male, so I thank S. S. for a different perspective.

My interest is more in the correct form of address from a pedantry point of view, rather than to consider whether something is "woke." I still feel there is a distinction between the use of "Lord" in the name of some positions, and as a personal title. In the UK, we don't use job titles as part of someone's name; for example we don't say "Prime Minister Starmer" or "Secretary Cooper" as they might in the US. When I lived in Leicester, our Lord Lieutenant was Lady Gretton, and I didn't see anything wrong with that. However, I wouldn't want women, or anyone, to feel excluded from a certain post by the post's title. I wonder whether any future female holders of the mayoralty of the City of London might choose to revert to being Lord Mayor.