Some reax's to Pompous Pete coming in:

RT @danbarnesdavies @pete173 Is it wise for a bish to be so uncomplimentary about his brothers?
about 1 hour ago via Power Twitter
Reply Retweet
RT @JonWJ @pete173 wise up Pete.Your pious pontificating about process does you no favours.
about 1 hour ago via Power Twitter

check out:
https://twitter.com/RuthieGledhill

Ruth responds,

"RuthieGledhill @pete173 U accuse ME and @jonwj of 'fatuous oversimplification?' Hahahahahahahahahaha. Oh hahaha!"

If God had wanted us to tweet and twitter, God would have created us with feathers. I can never tell who is saying what. What's the matter with just using email and weblogs, as God intended?

A slightly more serious thought, though not thoughtful enough to comply with the Anglican Minimalist's contest guidelines. So I'll offer it here instead:

Scenario 1 results in some bishops who are brilliant, saintly, and effective, and other bishops who are bozos.

Scenario 2 results in some bishops who are brilliant, saintly, and effective, and other bishops who are bozos.

The difference is that in Scenario 1, if we get a bozo it's our own damn fault. In Scenario 2, somebody else can be blamed, but it's not clear exactly who "somebody else" is.

Scenario 2 is a less healthy situation.

Wonderful minimalist essay, Bill! And your thoughts on interdependence and subsidiarity?

Scenario 3

An election synod is held at which any candidate can be nominated. No vetting committee before the election. The election alone determines who is appointed. No national group or committee gets involved after the election.
(This is how Sydney elects its Archbishop).

John Sandeman

John, esteemed colleague:

We used to do it that way in the Episcopal Church, with much the same results Bill identified for Scenarios 1 and 2. For good and ill, changes have been driven by insurance responding to a few but spectacular clergy indiscretions. As a result, whenever clergy change positions (and, for that matter, almost any other profession in litigious America) there must be background checks. Nobody wants the embarrassment of an election after which a difficulty is then discovered. So, no nominations from the floor anymore, and most names presented by a committee, the system used for most congregations writ large. There is a petition process to respond to the committee's short list that somewhat takes the place of nomination from the floor; but even that has to be completed far enough before the electing convention to get the background checks done.

Marshall Scott

Some have asked what the winner of the Essay Contest gets. The winner may have a choice between the first volume of my new edition of the Works of Richard Hooker + the corresponding sections of Hooker's Blueprint; or a copy of Hooker's Blueprint, the distillation od the entirety of the Laws into its key ideas.

Shall we begin comparing ECUSA bishops to CoE bishops? Chane vs the spineless? Andrus vs the ignorant? Robinson vs the pompous? Give me almost any ECUSA bishop.

Bishop Pete is playing a silly little English children's game called 'Top Trumps' but doesn't realize he is losing - and destroying the Church of England at the same time.