Thank you Anthony Archer for your long and detailed analysis of the current situation, it is extremely helpful, and I suspect very accurate. I think, very sadly, confusion and secrecy around discernment processes suits certain factions of the church with their ‘underlying issues’(!) rather too well at this moment, and they’ve been rumbled. Let’s see how this plays out…
David Runcorn
3 days ago
I add my thanks to Anthony for his analysis. He is right. ‘Tribalism has become acute … certain CNC members are voting purely on tribal lines.’ No prayerful, collaborative discernment process can work when some in the room are there with the aim of blocking the appointment of any candidates based on the single issue of human sexuality. It is that power grab that is making the urgent attempts to reform the system so complex.
Or is it that none of the offered candidates are of the quality the CNC expects? For instance, might they be overly compliant with the centre’s wishes to gain trust in the current environment.
Yes it can. But in the present context there is a very public, well resourced, conservative lobby, deeply opposed to any movement towards more inclusive approaches to sexuality. Do you see any comparable groups working in the same way from the other side? Co-ordinating groups like ‘Together’ support the place of conscience and choice and do not seek to block conservative concerns in the same way.
Other powerful groups pushing for acceptance of same-sex marriage: the Labour Party, the Conservative Party, the Liberal Democrats, The Church Times, The Guardian, The Telegraph, The Times, both Archbishops, nearly all Bishops, most Archdeacons, the Secretariat of the Church of England…
Indeed there are – though that is a rather strange collection. But this is about how the CofE, and particular groups within it, conduct the business of Godly discernment in decision making.
David from my observations at Synod there is a high level of coordination on both sides of this debate. Inclusive Church has been very successful in populating Synod while The Evangelicals have been somewhat slower in their response. So while there is a “well resourced, conservative lobby”, there is also a well coordinated revisionist lobby. My main concern throughout the last 3 years is the deepening division that is occurring in the church as a result with every likelihood of a major split at February’s synod. Perhaps it is time for a truce.
We disagree on this. I find nothing resembling the same levels of planning and co-ordination among those of more open views when compared with the conservative CEEC. That is what ‘Together’ was only recently set up to address. I stress that in seeking to put forward their own candidates they are going nothing wrong. But more concerning, it is a matter of public record that conservative candidates, nationally and locally, are briefed about how to present themselves in their election profiles and have been specifically advised not to reveal their views on ordination of women and human sexuality and PLF… Read more »
Thank you David. I very much understand you view. I suppose when saying perhaps we need a truce as it stands we are as a church currently splitting ourselves apart. Perhaps what I hope for is for a brake to be put on what is happening through LLF to reflect on the results that are being produced. The effects not just on the LGBQTI+ community but to us all as a whole church. One thing that really has been sadly lacking in the Synod debates of the last 3 years is an honest open discussion about the theological differences that… Read more »
Thanks Simon. I do recognise and respect the concerns of those not in the con evo world on this. But the brakes are already on with this process and I think to stop at this point would be a missional disaster and appallingly painful for those who need it most to hear, at last, their welcome and inclusion. No one is forcing those who disagree to use the prayers. There is room for conscience. You ask where there has been open discussion – well the LLF process offered the most comprehensive theological resource and discussion forum throughout the church that… Read more »
The Bishop of Blackburn was appointed in 2023 without such problems, despite being a very public conservative voice and the CNC being less conservative than it is now. This is pure whataboutery. The issue is categorically NOT liberals blocking conservative appointments.
According to Anthony Archer, liberals are blocking conservative appointments.
He writes: “Frustratingly for them, and a mercy for the Church of England, they do not have the numbers to nominate ‘their own person,’ although they have tried successively.”
No he does not. In a comment to his own article he clearly states “Well there is no evidence of the liberals acting as a tribe.” As people were trying to insinuate there too.
Not having the numbers to force through a candidate of your choosing
regardless of the discernment process is not the same as the “other side” blocking what you are doing.
People will really say anything to try and muddy the waters about the fact that conservatives are acting tribally and are blocking the appointment of bishops when it is so clear that they are.
The liberals can’t get their candidates appointed and neither can the conservatives. What’s the difference? Anthony believes that one lot are acting from evil, tribal motives; while the other lot are acting from a sincere desire to discern the best candidate. Only the one unto whom all hearts are open, all desires known, and from whom no secrets are hid can be sure of that. Neither side has the numbers to reach the level of consensus which the church has historically regarded as necessary. There are two ways forward: Try and find a way forward as a whole church Try… Read more »
The difference might be in the number of votes! One candidate might be just one vote short of being nominated. Another candidate might be four or even five votes short. That would represent a 9-5 split on a final vote. So who is blocking whom? Are the 5 blocking the 9? Or the 9 blocking the 5?
Kate Keates
3 days ago
I have huge respect for Anthony Archer and 99% of his article is of a high quality but I take issue with his assertion that the Church of England has an extensive talent pool. I disagree. As the size of the church shrinks, pretty obviously the number of people eligible for selection as bishops shrinks too. Maybe in the past there was a large talent pool, but that’s no longer the case. In the past there were often a number of nationally famous diocesan bishops. Today I doubt most people could name a single one. In all honesty I doubt… Read more »
Oh indeed. Somebody recently referred to the Bishop of N in conversation the other day. I looked blank and said that I didn’t know there was a Bishop of N. Clearly, he’s made a great impression!
I have had similar conversations. I very much agree the assumption we have an abundance of able talent is faulty. I think the job has become harder – ignoring all the added paperwork type parts – but because the rate of decline is now faster the role requires both skills to make a larger change in momentum but also to deal with the growing number of linked problems (e.g. financial collapse of a parish here and there) – both pastoral, administrative, and then missional “how do we now proclaim the gospel here?” Without revealing what happened during a CNC, before… Read more »
An hypothesis. Could it be that the church (largely led here by bishops themselves) has decided that organisational and bureaucratic solutions to our discontents are the obvious way forward. Thus creating a burgeoning and burdensome administrative and governance culture, which makes the episcopal task (almost?) impossible, and certainly unattractive to priests of a more contemplative and charismatic temperament? Perhaps one could even go so far as to say that many clergy intelligent enough to perceive this are simply not attracted to episcopal ministry. And some who appear imperceptive enough to see that the culture just isn’t working, are the keenest… Read more »
Thanks Tim, and for other contributions on this thread. True that folk don’t apply for the job. But clergy who want to do apply to do the jobs which are often now precursors for episcopacy, while others avoid them. There are two large parishes in my diocese whose vicars frequently used to be made suffragan bishops. That hasn’t now happened for thirty years. If you’re a prayerful, pastoral generalist who would shrivel away as an archdeacon or technocratic diocesan officer, you probably won’t gain ‘preferment’, or perhaps want to?
It’s another reason why I agree with Tim Pollard. The biggest priority is to diary more time for CNCs to allow more candidates to be evaluated.
Another alternative would be to say that if someone reaches the final stages of multiple CNCs (leaving both vague so those who know more than I can fill in the blanks) but is unsuccessful that they aren’t considered in another CNC for say 3 years.
I would assume that the more frequently you hold CNC meetings, the more difficult you make it for lay people with full time jobs to be members of the CNC. But that’s an assumption, and I may be wrong.
I don’t think it is so much a question of a poor quality talent pool as what happens to them once they become bishops. Norman Pittenger used to have a very potent maxim about what happened to bishops when they come to consecration, but it is not fit for publication here; and anyway he lived in an age before women became priests let alone bishops, joining the college, the house, or club, whatever it is called somehow silences them; with a few honorable exceptions, I should add.
Peter, the remembrance of Norman Pittenger reminds me of the days when the pool of potential sadly neglected the best minds and thinkers from selection; David Paton eg
I agree with Anthony that currently there is no shortage of talent in the C of E to make good senior appointments. But I think most of it never makes its way even as far as the list held centrally at the Wash House/talent pool. I know it is possible to suggest other names at a CNC meeting, but that is reliant on the people who haven’t made the central list being known by those whose ‘faces fit’ in their own Diocese, and so have got themselves elected to the Vacancy in See Committee, or indeed the central CNC members.… Read more »
It is certainly true that the present system favours the networkers but I suspect that even if the net was cast wider those networkers who have proved themselves “reliable” will still be favoured over candidates who have shown themselves to be more independent and self-reliant. The whole system is deeply flawed.
Kate Keates
3 days ago
Interestingly Wikipedia highlight that 4 of the 6 acting diocesans are female. Sort of adds insult to injury when less than 50% of sees formally appoint women but women are predominantly doing the job pro tem without the pay and status.
I think the opposite, Suppose most acting bishops had been male – surely rather than being seen as fair it would be worse because it means women are less likely to have certain experiences on their CVs. Also it does play into the narrative that all women support each other, are of one mind, and are doing it for each other (and being wrong when it isn’t one of their team who gets appointed). Or the opposite that all men are on the same team trying to get other men in the job… Obviously we are all of one mind… Read more »
I think this shows the higher ups are trying to make female appointments more likely. It’s the decision of the outgoing bishop with advice from archbishop who to pick, and picking more women must have been deliberate to try making selection more likely. It may not have worked yet, but its hardly a policy you’d want the reverse on. (Also 4 out of 6 is very close to 3 out of 6. So could also just be genuine attempt at equal and we happen to be looking at it on a day it’s flipped one way, but another year may… Read more »
Tim and Kate can I offer two clarifications to your discussion? 1. Acting Diocesans are paid the full diocesan bishop stipend (though this only changed less than a year ago). 2. When a diocesan bishop leaves the suffragan/assistant bishop in the diocese becomes the acting diocesan. Formally this is the appointment of the outgoing diocesan. Gender is not a relevant factor at all. Only when there is no suffragan (or other exceptional circumstances) is someone brought in from outside as an ‘Interim Bishop’.
How does that apply to the Bishop of Taunton who is also Acting Bishop of Coventry. Is she paid twice over? As her main home is in Wells, the travel expenses must be eyewatering.
The Coventry diocesan website states that “Bishop Ruth Worsley, Bishop of Taunton, is currently the Acting Bishop of Coventry, as of Monday 6th November for the duration of the Vacancy-in-See. Bishop Ruth will be based in the Diocese of Coventry for 4 days a week.” One assumes therefore that she is in the Bath & Wells diocese 2 days a week serving as Bishop of Taunton. Ruth was the acting Bishop of Bath & Wells during the vacancy in See in that diocese. Once a diocesan bishop was appointed, she then took on responsibilities in the diocese of Coventry. It does raise… Read more »
Good question: we currently have a bishop with the energy of 10 Duracell bunnies so you could look at the Diocese at the moment and wonder where our suffragan fits. Bishop Ruth isn’t doing anything in B&W as far as I’m aware, pretty sure she’s full time in Coventry. Prior to bishop Michael we had a diocesan bishop submerged by the safeguarding brief (Peter Hancock) before being hit with cancer, and before him one who spent increasing time in the Lords and on national issues, so the Bishop of Taunton had a significant role. It now feels like the first… Read more »
I heard an interesting comment recently along the lines that the diocesan CNC reps might be cautious about appointing a women to the diocese because she very quickly, if not immediately, becomes a member of the House of Lords. The diocese therefore immediately loses a proportion of the new diocesan’s time. Maybe a baseless fear, but it may have relevance if the diocese has felt short changed by their last bishop.
It may well be the case that some diocesan CNC members have this idea. But all members know that bishops have a national role as well as a diocesan one. I doubt that it’s a significant factor.
Perhaps more significant is the view held by some that women shouldn’t really be diocesan bishops (not “here” anyway) or that there are enough already. That position, taken by just five of the central and diocesan members would be a block to the appointment of a woman, whatever the views of the other members — and whatever the calibre of the candidate.
…and you can’t solve the divisions over LLF and sexuality until you solve the divisions over how to interpret Scripture. Where are the leaders who will give clear teaching that doesn’t ignore the last century of Biblical scholarship? Step back from worrying about diocesan finance and see the bigger picture. We need bishops who will explain fearlessly that it is superstition to think that the Bible is magically reliable and that substitutionary atonement is a deficient way of interpreting the cross. Leaders who have the courage to lose the fundamentalists and their money, if they insist on leaving. Get the… Read more »
Depends what’s meant by ‘reliable’, Nigel. I hesitate to enter this sub-thread because huge issues of hermeneutics might get reduced to crude soundbites. But, the last century of Biblical Scholarship has hardly been univocal, and the idea that critical studies of Scripture might lead to ‘clear teaching’ is perhaps questionable. It’s possible to be conservative without being ‘fundamentalist’, whatever quite that is intended to mean here. I suspect figures like Tom Wright and Ian Paul have a vastly deeper grasp on the last century of B.S. than I or perhaps you – they advance detailed exegesis which emphasises the traditional… Read more »
Just to check that I’m understanding you correctly:
Do you believe that Tom Wright’s body of work is an exercise of banging the square pegs of New Testament thought until they are squished into the round holes of his own pre-established theories?
Actually, when I first read Tom Wright’s ‘The New Testament and the People of God’ and ‘Jesus and the Victory of God’ in the 1990s, I found them enormously helpful in freeing me from finding what I wanted in scripture and looking at it in terms of the culture and worldview of the day. And this set me free from more than one standard evangelical interpretation that turned out to be rather anachronistic. All of which is to say that I don’t think the word ‘conservative’ does Tom Wright justice. His theology is a lot more nuanced than that.
I’m taking it that you mean that ‘conservatives’ force their exegesis into the pre-existing round holes of traditional Christian doctrine and ethics? A traditionalist might wonder if ‘Queer readings’ of Scripture and the like aren’t, conversely, a progressive eisegesis, crowbarring texts to make the Bible fit contemporary norms. It seems to me that whatever our presuppositions (and we all have them), the Church’s task is to humbly read, mark, learn and inwardly digest the Word, so its authority can exercise itself upon us. And by grace lead us to perceive God, the world and ourselves in ways that could only… Read more »
You are investing the so-called “Word” with an authority it may not have. (Jesus, not a book, is the Word). How can a particular interpretation exercise an authority? Is your interpretation more authoritative than mine? Only “humans alone” decide what they think is “divinely revealed”. And sometimes wrongly. Your circular argument proves nothing. Humans alone decide what is deduced, revealed or discovered.. Dogs and cats don’t have that ability.
Interesting. I’d be genuinely interested to know what you think Anglicans mean when they refer to ‘the faith uniquely revealed in the Holy Scriptures’, and what we mean when we follow a Bible reading with ‘This is the word of the Lord.’ Yes, humans interpret, but God reveals – or doesn’t he? And while interpretations are ever imperfect, if they can’t be at least apprehensions of revelation, how can God be encountered at all? I guess some would say Jesus the Logos is encountered in prayer, sacrament and lived experience of the Spirit. But without Scriptural canon to test all… Read more »
Human knowledge has developed since the formularies were written. A liturgical response to a scripture reading is not a literal assertion. Saying that “God reveals” is entirely subjective. “Revelation” differs between cultures and religions. Although I believe Joseph Smith’s Book of Mormon is gibberish, millions believe it to be revelation. Perhaps God “reveals” only when His opinion coincides with mine.
A surprising discussion in the context of voting patterns on the CNC! But it’s at the heart of all our tribalisms and, as I said, I think leaders and bishops should be teaching grown-up Christian thinking. Scripture does guide us. It’s the only place we learn about some things, in particular the teaching and example of Jesus (hence ‘uniquely revealed’). But that doesn’t mean it must be any more reliable than any other historical text. Isn’t the reality that we think and read with certain preconceptions and over time evidence mounts that our preconceptions need to be reviewed, and we… Read more »
It’s not even 16th century superstition. That phrase has only been used at the end of readings since the liturgical ‘revisions’ of the late 20th century.
This phrasing began when the RC church translated ‘Verbum Domini’ as ‘This is the Word of the Lord’ instead of the more accurate ‘The Word of the Lord’. The C of E then followed this usage in 1971; a loss of nuance which may have dismayed some while delighting others. Either way, it seemed an infelicitous choice for an established church which could still claim to set our feet in a large room.
All classical icons of Jesus have him holding, what? A Bible with a Cross on it. Mary holds the baby Jesus. Jesus hold Sacred Scripture. Reading TA one gets the distinct impression the CofE is simply a holding tank for irreconcilable views on a broad range of topics. “Good disagreement” as a tag line is the station that train heads, and then the adjective “good” ceases to make much sense, if ever it did.
I don’t buy that there are “ways that could only be divinely revealed, not constructed, deduced, or even discovered, by humans alone.” Can you give an example?
(BTW I’m not advocating ‘queer readings’ of scripture either. I’m with you there!)
Deceased wife’s sister? That ceased to be contentious aeons ago, I’ve recently been researching a well known draper. In the 1890s he had a shotgun marriage aged 18, the bride died soon after childbirth, he shacked up with her sister and a second shotgun wedding followed.
Indeed, because the Biblical witness is complex. WRT remarriage after divorce, some interpretative schools emphasise the prohibition (Mark) while others appeal to the exceptions (Matthew, Paul). Some assert the indissoluble sacramentality of marriage (Ephesians 5) while others dispute this exegesis of that passage. WRT Women Priests, some emphasise the culture-defying roles of Christian women in evangelism and Ministry (Prisca, Phoebe, Junia, Mary Magdalene etc.), while others appeal to the distinction between male and female roles within the purposes of God (I Corinthians, I Timothy etc.). But just because these exegetical debates are difficult and contested, doesn’t mean they can be… Read more »
We have of course drifted somewhat from the CNC crisis, which is not about belief (although the usual suspects think it is) but attitude and behaviour.
Thank you, a timely call ad fontes. Interested that you seem to have compartmentalised ‘belief’, ‘attitude’ and ‘ behaviour’ here. I simply don’t know what’s happening in the CNC, as I’ve noted in earlier threads, but I wonder if these 3 drivers can in fact be isolated, or whether they mutually interact, especially in febrile times. To come back to the questions of ‘what’s happening in the CNC’ and ‘what might be done about it’, they are really hard to grapple with for a ‘pleb from the pews’ like me. Which might be why the conversation takes tangents and diverts… Read more »
I think you are promoting an incorrect and dangerous way of reading Scripture. If we pick verses and passages and from our own prejudices assign weight and scope to them, then ultimately we are just using the Bible to advocate for our own prejudices. Jesus taught a better way: read the entirety of Scripture to understand God’s weights and scope and then try to validate the findings by seeking a passage of confirmation.
So the correct approach is to try to ascertain priorities first. So, for example, does a marriage enable the parties to better serve the Lord?
Not sure I was promoting, Kate, more describing. I agree that the whole of scripture needs to be in our purview.
Not sure about your hermeneutic of ‘priorities’. Might it be possible for these to be identified in line with our presuppositions and prejudices too? Would love to know what you think.
When I wrote it I struggled with the right noun. Priorities was the best I came up with and I know it isn’t right.
Whatever approach we adopt, our prejudices will indeed warp our interpretation. We need to recognise that, but by focusing on the emphases in Scripture I think we could minimise that.
Kate for me this is where the Church comes into play – interpretation of Scripture needs to be done wherever possible in community as well as individually. For it’s in the community that we find accountability and have our prejudices challenged. This is one of the reasons why we need diversity in our churches so we don’t just reinforce what we want to hear from Scripture through groupthink.
Why would you not do this? Isn’t that a choice not to, at least, risk learning something valuable?
Otherwise… John 5:39f
“You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life”.
Jesus seems to think it “worthwhile”, even though the reader needs to be seeking for him as the basic constituent.
This seems to me like square pegs and round holes again. If the words you have quoted are really those of Jesus, then it would appear that he was less than enthusiastic about study of the scriptures and did not think it “”worthwhile””.
A statement was made earlier that Jesus taught us to read the entirety of scripture. He is not recorded as having done so in any of the gospels.
Robin Ward
2 days ago
Anthony Archer argues that when he was on the CNC it worked like a well-oiled talent-spotting machine, and when he was off it like a mosh pit of factional backbiting. So be it. But why the language of ‘tribes’ and ‘tribalism’? Sacred Scripture uses the word ‘tribe’ as a designation of particular election by God. Anthony seems to use it rather more like Corporal Jones in ‘Dad’s Army’, indicating the tiresome and uppity natives who need a firm hand administered by the officer class. Given our renewed responsibility for inculcating racial justice in our behaviour and language, is this entirely… Read more »
I think it’s one of those irregular verbs:
I engage in simple, honest, transparent discernment.
You have come with your own agenda.
He is part of a tribal faction.
Goodness – ‘tribalism’ is a well-established usage to describe a mindset in which loyalty to our favourite group is a more powerful determinant of our belief than rational or theological argument. I’m surprised you’ve never heard it before.
Influence is distributed throughout the Church of England in a variety of ways. It’s good that it’s not all concentrated in one place. The central members of the CNC happen to have a certain amount of influence and are using it, according to their sense of discernment. When Justin Welby, Stephen Cottrell, Sarah Mullaly, and Steven Croft get jumpy about issues of influence and control it’s a very good reason to be cautious about giving away yet another locus of influence to the bishops.
T Pott
7 hours ago
Might it help to abolish the House of Bishops from General Synod?
Bishops could then be appointed based on the needs of the diocese rather than on which way they would vote at Synod.
Most everyone believes a good constituency MP is desirable; but most people choose a candidate based on which party they support. Why should we expect it to be any different in the Church?
Thank you Anthony Archer for your long and detailed analysis of the current situation, it is extremely helpful, and I suspect very accurate. I think, very sadly, confusion and secrecy around discernment processes suits certain factions of the church with their ‘underlying issues’(!) rather too well at this moment, and they’ve been rumbled. Let’s see how this plays out…
I add my thanks to Anthony for his analysis. He is right. ‘Tribalism has become acute … certain CNC members are voting purely on tribal lines.’ No prayerful, collaborative discernment process can work when some in the room are there with the aim of blocking the appointment of any candidates based on the single issue of human sexuality. It is that power grab that is making the urgent attempts to reform the system so complex.
Of course this works both ways! Is it the conservatives blocking a liberal appointment? Or the liberals blocking a conservative appointment?
Or is it that none of the offered candidates are of the quality the CNC expects? For instance, might they be overly compliant with the centre’s wishes to gain trust in the current environment.
Yes it can. But in the present context there is a very public, well resourced, conservative lobby, deeply opposed to any movement towards more inclusive approaches to sexuality. Do you see any comparable groups working in the same way from the other side? Co-ordinating groups like ‘Together’ support the place of conscience and choice and do not seek to block conservative concerns in the same way.
Other powerful groups pushing for acceptance of same-sex marriage: the Labour Party, the Conservative Party, the Liberal Democrats, The Church Times, The Guardian, The Telegraph, The Times, both Archbishops, nearly all Bishops, most Archdeacons, the Secretariat of the Church of England…
Indeed there are – though that is a rather strange collection. But this is about how the CofE, and particular groups within it, conduct the business of Godly discernment in decision making.
David from my observations at Synod there is a high level of coordination on both sides of this debate. Inclusive Church has been very successful in populating Synod while The Evangelicals have been somewhat slower in their response. So while there is a “well resourced, conservative lobby”, there is also a well coordinated revisionist lobby. My main concern throughout the last 3 years is the deepening division that is occurring in the church as a result with every likelihood of a major split at February’s synod. Perhaps it is time for a truce.
Peace, peace when there is no peace.
We disagree on this. I find nothing resembling the same levels of planning and co-ordination among those of more open views when compared with the conservative CEEC. That is what ‘Together’ was only recently set up to address. I stress that in seeking to put forward their own candidates they are going nothing wrong. But more concerning, it is a matter of public record that conservative candidates, nationally and locally, are briefed about how to present themselves in their election profiles and have been specifically advised not to reveal their views on ordination of women and human sexuality and PLF… Read more »
Thank you David. I very much understand you view. I suppose when saying perhaps we need a truce as it stands we are as a church currently splitting ourselves apart. Perhaps what I hope for is for a brake to be put on what is happening through LLF to reflect on the results that are being produced. The effects not just on the LGBQTI+ community but to us all as a whole church. One thing that really has been sadly lacking in the Synod debates of the last 3 years is an honest open discussion about the theological differences that… Read more »
Thanks Simon. I do recognise and respect the concerns of those not in the con evo world on this. But the brakes are already on with this process and I think to stop at this point would be a missional disaster and appallingly painful for those who need it most to hear, at last, their welcome and inclusion. No one is forcing those who disagree to use the prayers. There is room for conscience. You ask where there has been open discussion – well the LLF process offered the most comprehensive theological resource and discussion forum throughout the church that… Read more »
The Bishop of Blackburn was appointed in 2023 without such problems, despite being a very public conservative voice and the CNC being less conservative than it is now. This is pure whataboutery. The issue is categorically NOT liberals blocking conservative appointments.
According to Anthony Archer, liberals are blocking conservative appointments.
He writes: “Frustratingly for them, and a mercy for the Church of England, they do not have the numbers to nominate ‘their own person,’ although they have tried successively.”
I do not think he is writing about liberals in that paragraph.
No he does not. In a comment to his own article he clearly states “Well there is no evidence of the liberals acting as a tribe.” As people were trying to insinuate there too.
Not having the numbers to force through a candidate of your choosing
regardless of the discernment process is not the same as the “other side” blocking what you are doing.
People will really say anything to try and muddy the waters about the fact that conservatives are acting tribally and are blocking the appointment of bishops when it is so clear that they are.
The liberals can’t get their candidates appointed and neither can the conservatives. What’s the difference? Anthony believes that one lot are acting from evil, tribal motives; while the other lot are acting from a sincere desire to discern the best candidate. Only the one unto whom all hearts are open, all desires known, and from whom no secrets are hid can be sure of that. Neither side has the numbers to reach the level of consensus which the church has historically regarded as necessary. There are two ways forward: Try and find a way forward as a whole church Try… Read more »
The difference might be in the number of votes! One candidate might be just one vote short of being nominated. Another candidate might be four or even five votes short. That would represent a 9-5 split on a final vote. So who is blocking whom? Are the 5 blocking the 9? Or the 9 blocking the 5?
I have huge respect for Anthony Archer and 99% of his article is of a high quality but I take issue with his assertion that the Church of England has an extensive talent pool. I disagree. As the size of the church shrinks, pretty obviously the number of people eligible for selection as bishops shrinks too. Maybe in the past there was a large talent pool, but that’s no longer the case. In the past there were often a number of nationally famous diocesan bishops. Today I doubt most people could name a single one. In all honesty I doubt… Read more »
Oh indeed. Somebody recently referred to the Bishop of N in conversation the other day. I looked blank and said that I didn’t know there was a Bishop of N. Clearly, he’s made a great impression!
perhaps you did not notice the Bishop of Newcastle because you were expecting to know about a bishop who is male….
Norwich begins with N too.
I think N was being used in the sense of ‘any Name’ though.
Fr Harry Williams’ autobiography has been referred to more than once in TA. He uses ‘Bishop of X’.
I have had similar conversations. I very much agree the assumption we have an abundance of able talent is faulty. I think the job has become harder – ignoring all the added paperwork type parts – but because the rate of decline is now faster the role requires both skills to make a larger change in momentum but also to deal with the growing number of linked problems (e.g. financial collapse of a parish here and there) – both pastoral, administrative, and then missional “how do we now proclaim the gospel here?” Without revealing what happened during a CNC, before… Read more »
I am surprised that Gloucester and Chelmsford are omitted from your list.
And where are the realistic job expectations for bishops?
The Church of England promotes workaholics. It always has.
An hypothesis. Could it be that the church (largely led here by bishops themselves) has decided that organisational and bureaucratic solutions to our discontents are the obvious way forward. Thus creating a burgeoning and burdensome administrative and governance culture, which makes the episcopal task (almost?) impossible, and certainly unattractive to priests of a more contemplative and charismatic temperament? Perhaps one could even go so far as to say that many clergy intelligent enough to perceive this are simply not attracted to episcopal ministry. And some who appear imperceptive enough to see that the culture just isn’t working, are the keenest… Read more »
As you don’t apply for the job, you’re more asked if you would consider it, that’s not likely to be as large a factor I think
Thanks Tim, and for other contributions on this thread. True that folk don’t apply for the job. But clergy who want to do apply to do the jobs which are often now precursors for episcopacy, while others avoid them. There are two large parishes in my diocese whose vicars frequently used to be made suffragan bishops. That hasn’t now happened for thirty years. If you’re a prayerful, pastoral generalist who would shrivel away as an archdeacon or technocratic diocesan officer, you probably won’t gain ‘preferment’, or perhaps want to?
That’s certainly possible.
It’s another reason why I agree with Tim Pollard. The biggest priority is to diary more time for CNCs to allow more candidates to be evaluated.
Another alternative would be to say that if someone reaches the final stages of multiple CNCs (leaving both vague so those who know more than I can fill in the blanks) but is unsuccessful that they aren’t considered in another CNC for say 3 years.
I would assume that the more frequently you hold CNC meetings, the more difficult you make it for lay people with full time jobs to be members of the CNC. But that’s an assumption, and I may be wrong.
I am biting my tongue and not using the ‘e’ word…
You can of course mitigate that problem by having a larger pool of CNC members – which might be desirable anyway.
I don’t think it is so much a question of a poor quality talent pool as what happens to them once they become bishops. Norman Pittenger used to have a very potent maxim about what happened to bishops when they come to consecration, but it is not fit for publication here; and anyway he lived in an age before women became priests let alone bishops, joining the college, the house, or club, whatever it is called somehow silences them; with a few honorable exceptions, I should add.
Peter, the remembrance of Norman Pittenger reminds me of the days when the pool of potential sadly neglected the best minds and thinkers from selection; David Paton eg
I agree with Anthony that currently there is no shortage of talent in the C of E to make good senior appointments. But I think most of it never makes its way even as far as the list held centrally at the Wash House/talent pool. I know it is possible to suggest other names at a CNC meeting, but that is reliant on the people who haven’t made the central list being known by those whose ‘faces fit’ in their own Diocese, and so have got themselves elected to the Vacancy in See Committee, or indeed the central CNC members.… Read more »
It is certainly true that the present system favours the networkers but I suspect that even if the net was cast wider those networkers who have proved themselves “reliable” will still be favoured over candidates who have shown themselves to be more independent and self-reliant. The whole system is deeply flawed.
Interestingly Wikipedia highlight that 4 of the 6 acting diocesans are female. Sort of adds insult to injury when less than 50% of sees formally appoint women but women are predominantly doing the job pro tem without the pay and status.
I think the opposite, Suppose most acting bishops had been male – surely rather than being seen as fair it would be worse because it means women are less likely to have certain experiences on their CVs. Also it does play into the narrative that all women support each other, are of one mind, and are doing it for each other (and being wrong when it isn’t one of their team who gets appointed). Or the opposite that all men are on the same team trying to get other men in the job… Obviously we are all of one mind… Read more »
I think this shows the higher ups are trying to make female appointments more likely. It’s the decision of the outgoing bishop with advice from archbishop who to pick, and picking more women must have been deliberate to try making selection more likely. It may not have worked yet, but its hardly a policy you’d want the reverse on. (Also 4 out of 6 is very close to 3 out of 6. So could also just be genuine attempt at equal and we happen to be looking at it on a day it’s flipped one way, but another year may… Read more »
Tim and Kate can I offer two clarifications to your discussion? 1. Acting Diocesans are paid the full diocesan bishop stipend (though this only changed less than a year ago). 2. When a diocesan bishop leaves the suffragan/assistant bishop in the diocese becomes the acting diocesan. Formally this is the appointment of the outgoing diocesan. Gender is not a relevant factor at all. Only when there is no suffragan (or other exceptional circumstances) is someone brought in from outside as an ‘Interim Bishop’.
Thanks for the clarifications. Very helpful.
How does that apply to the Bishop of Taunton who is also Acting Bishop of Coventry. Is she paid twice over? As her main home is in Wells, the travel expenses must be eyewatering.
She is presently Interim Bishop of Coventry not Bishop of Taunton. She is not paid twice and is not commuting from Taunton.
Why is there not a suffragan bishop of Nuneaton? That would be another N
Don’t put ideas into the Dioceses Commission’s head!
The Coventry diocesan website states that “Bishop Ruth Worsley, Bishop of Taunton, is currently the Acting Bishop of Coventry, as of Monday 6th November for the duration of the Vacancy-in-See. Bishop Ruth will be based in the Diocese of Coventry for 4 days a week.” One assumes therefore that she is in the Bath & Wells diocese 2 days a week serving as Bishop of Taunton. Ruth was the acting Bishop of Bath & Wells during the vacancy in See in that diocese. Once a diocesan bishop was appointed, she then took on responsibilities in the diocese of Coventry. It does raise… Read more »
Good question: we currently have a bishop with the energy of 10 Duracell bunnies so you could look at the Diocese at the moment and wonder where our suffragan fits. Bishop Ruth isn’t doing anything in B&W as far as I’m aware, pretty sure she’s full time in Coventry. Prior to bishop Michael we had a diocesan bishop submerged by the safeguarding brief (Peter Hancock) before being hit with cancer, and before him one who spent increasing time in the Lords and on national issues, so the Bishop of Taunton had a significant role. It now feels like the first… Read more »
I heard an interesting comment recently along the lines that the diocesan CNC reps might be cautious about appointing a women to the diocese because she very quickly, if not immediately, becomes a member of the House of Lords. The diocese therefore immediately loses a proportion of the new diocesan’s time. Maybe a baseless fear, but it may have relevance if the diocese has felt short changed by their last bishop.
It may well be the case that some diocesan CNC members have this idea. But all members know that bishops have a national role as well as a diocesan one. I doubt that it’s a significant factor.
Perhaps more significant is the view held by some that women shouldn’t really be diocesan bishops (not “here” anyway) or that there are enough already. That position, taken by just five of the central and diocesan members would be a block to the appointment of a woman, whatever the views of the other members — and whatever the calibre of the candidate.
Or how does a diocese cope without 2
Bath & Wells appear to cope quite well as they don’t seem to have had two bishops in the diocese for a long time.
I guess they manage in the same way grouped parishes have to manage with one incumbent.
Parishes are grouped together and diocesan staff continue to grow. Not only do we have Archdeacons, we now also have assistant archdeacons.
You can’t fix the problems with appointing bishops until you solve the divisions over LLF and sexuality. This is just papering over the cracks.
…and you can’t solve the divisions over LLF and sexuality until you solve the divisions over how to interpret Scripture. Where are the leaders who will give clear teaching that doesn’t ignore the last century of Biblical scholarship? Step back from worrying about diocesan finance and see the bigger picture. We need bishops who will explain fearlessly that it is superstition to think that the Bible is magically reliable and that substitutionary atonement is a deficient way of interpreting the cross. Leaders who have the courage to lose the fundamentalists and their money, if they insist on leaving. Get the… Read more »
I think your understanding of the last century of biblical scholarship might be out of date.
Why? Does the very latest scholarship reveal the Bible to be reliable after all?
Depends what’s meant by ‘reliable’, Nigel. I hesitate to enter this sub-thread because huge issues of hermeneutics might get reduced to crude soundbites. But, the last century of Biblical Scholarship has hardly been univocal, and the idea that critical studies of Scripture might lead to ‘clear teaching’ is perhaps questionable. It’s possible to be conservative without being ‘fundamentalist’, whatever quite that is intended to mean here. I suspect figures like Tom Wright and Ian Paul have a vastly deeper grasp on the last century of B.S. than I or perhaps you – they advance detailed exegesis which emphasises the traditional… Read more »
It’s still an exercise in banging square pegs into the round holes of already established theory though.
Just to check that I’m understanding you correctly:
Do you believe that Tom Wright’s body of work is an exercise of banging the square pegs of New Testament thought until they are squished into the round holes of his own pre-established theories?
And you think the same of Ian Paul’s work?
As a “conservative” , Tom Wright finds what he wants in Scripture to support his prejudices. We can all do that.
Actually, when I first read Tom Wright’s ‘The New Testament and the People of God’ and ‘Jesus and the Victory of God’ in the 1990s, I found them enormously helpful in freeing me from finding what I wanted in scripture and looking at it in terms of the culture and worldview of the day. And this set me free from more than one standard evangelical interpretation that turned out to be rather anachronistic. All of which is to say that I don’t think the word ‘conservative’ does Tom Wright justice. His theology is a lot more nuanced than that.
Yes.
I’m taking it that you mean that ‘conservatives’ force their exegesis into the pre-existing round holes of traditional Christian doctrine and ethics? A traditionalist might wonder if ‘Queer readings’ of Scripture and the like aren’t, conversely, a progressive eisegesis, crowbarring texts to make the Bible fit contemporary norms. It seems to me that whatever our presuppositions (and we all have them), the Church’s task is to humbly read, mark, learn and inwardly digest the Word, so its authority can exercise itself upon us. And by grace lead us to perceive God, the world and ourselves in ways that could only… Read more »
You are investing the so-called “Word” with an authority it may not have. (Jesus, not a book, is the Word). How can a particular interpretation exercise an authority? Is your interpretation more authoritative than mine? Only “humans alone” decide what they think is “divinely revealed”. And sometimes wrongly. Your circular argument proves nothing. Humans alone decide what is deduced, revealed or discovered.. Dogs and cats don’t have that ability.
Interesting. I’d be genuinely interested to know what you think Anglicans mean when they refer to ‘the faith uniquely revealed in the Holy Scriptures’, and what we mean when we follow a Bible reading with ‘This is the word of the Lord.’ Yes, humans interpret, but God reveals – or doesn’t he? And while interpretations are ever imperfect, if they can’t be at least apprehensions of revelation, how can God be encountered at all? I guess some would say Jesus the Logos is encountered in prayer, sacrament and lived experience of the Spirit. But without Scriptural canon to test all… Read more »
Human knowledge has developed since the formularies were written. A liturgical response to a scripture reading is not a literal assertion. Saying that “God reveals” is entirely subjective. “Revelation” differs between cultures and religions. Although I believe Joseph Smith’s Book of Mormon is gibberish, millions believe it to be revelation. Perhaps God “reveals” only when His opinion coincides with mine.
A surprising discussion in the context of voting patterns on the CNC! But it’s at the heart of all our tribalisms and, as I said, I think leaders and bishops should be teaching grown-up Christian thinking. Scripture does guide us. It’s the only place we learn about some things, in particular the teaching and example of Jesus (hence ‘uniquely revealed’). But that doesn’t mean it must be any more reliable than any other historical text. Isn’t the reality that we think and read with certain preconceptions and over time evidence mounts that our preconceptions need to be reviewed, and we… Read more »
It’s not even 16th century superstition. That phrase has only been used at the end of readings since the liturgical ‘revisions’ of the late 20th century.
This phrasing began when the RC church translated ‘Verbum Domini’ as ‘This is the Word of the Lord’ instead of the more accurate ‘The Word of the Lord’. The C of E then followed this usage in 1971; a loss of nuance which may have dismayed some while delighting others. Either way, it seemed an infelicitous choice for an established church which could still claim to set our feet in a large room.
‘Verbum Domini’ itself was an innovation in Annibale Bugnini’s new mass.
The traditional formula at the end of the epistle was ‘Deo gratias’
All classical icons of Jesus have him holding, what? A Bible with a Cross on it. Mary holds the baby Jesus. Jesus hold Sacred Scripture. Reading TA one gets the distinct impression the CofE is simply a holding tank for irreconcilable views on a broad range of topics. “Good disagreement” as a tag line is the station that train heads, and then the adjective “good” ceases to make much sense, if ever it did.
I don’t buy that there are “ways that could only be divinely revealed, not constructed, deduced, or even discovered, by humans alone.” Can you give an example?
(BTW I’m not advocating ‘queer readings’ of scripture either. I’m with you there!)
But we haven’t solved the divisions over the remarriage of divorced people, and women priests, (and marrying your deceased wife’s sister?) yet…
Deceased wife’s sister? That ceased to be contentious aeons ago, I’ve recently been researching a well known draper. In the 1890s he had a shotgun marriage aged 18, the bride died soon after childbirth, he shacked up with her sister and a second shotgun wedding followed.
Indeed, because the Biblical witness is complex. WRT remarriage after divorce, some interpretative schools emphasise the prohibition (Mark) while others appeal to the exceptions (Matthew, Paul). Some assert the indissoluble sacramentality of marriage (Ephesians 5) while others dispute this exegesis of that passage. WRT Women Priests, some emphasise the culture-defying roles of Christian women in evangelism and Ministry (Prisca, Phoebe, Junia, Mary Magdalene etc.), while others appeal to the distinction between male and female roles within the purposes of God (I Corinthians, I Timothy etc.). But just because these exegetical debates are difficult and contested, doesn’t mean they can be… Read more »
We have of course drifted somewhat from the CNC crisis, which is not about belief (although the usual suspects think it is) but attitude and behaviour.
Thank you, a timely call ad fontes. Interested that you seem to have compartmentalised ‘belief’, ‘attitude’ and ‘ behaviour’ here. I simply don’t know what’s happening in the CNC, as I’ve noted in earlier threads, but I wonder if these 3 drivers can in fact be isolated, or whether they mutually interact, especially in febrile times. To come back to the questions of ‘what’s happening in the CNC’ and ‘what might be done about it’, they are really hard to grapple with for a ‘pleb from the pews’ like me. Which might be why the conversation takes tangents and diverts… Read more »
I think you are promoting an incorrect and dangerous way of reading Scripture. If we pick verses and passages and from our own prejudices assign weight and scope to them, then ultimately we are just using the Bible to advocate for our own prejudices. Jesus taught a better way: read the entirety of Scripture to understand God’s weights and scope and then try to validate the findings by seeking a passage of confirmation.
So the correct approach is to try to ascertain priorities first. So, for example, does a marriage enable the parties to better serve the Lord?
Not sure I was promoting, Kate, more describing. I agree that the whole of scripture needs to be in our purview.
Not sure about your hermeneutic of ‘priorities’. Might it be possible for these to be identified in line with our presuppositions and prejudices too? Would love to know what you think.
When I wrote it I struggled with the right noun. Priorities was the best I came up with and I know it isn’t right.
Whatever approach we adopt, our prejudices will indeed warp our interpretation. We need to recognise that, but by focusing on the emphases in Scripture I think we could minimise that.
Kate for me this is where the Church comes into play – interpretation of Scripture needs to be done wherever possible in community as well as individually. For it’s in the community that we find accountability and have our prejudices challenged. This is one of the reasons why we need diversity in our churches so we don’t just reinforce what we want to hear from Scripture through groupthink.
Where did Jesus teach us to read the entirety of scripture?
Why would you not do this? Isn’t that a choice not to, at least, risk learning something valuable?
Otherwise… John 5:39f
“You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life”.
Jesus seems to think it “worthwhile”, even though the reader needs to be seeking for him as the basic constituent.
This seems to me like square pegs and round holes again. If the words you have quoted are really those of Jesus, then it would appear that he was less than enthusiastic about study of the scriptures and did not think it “”worthwhile””.
A statement was made earlier that Jesus taught us to read the entirety of scripture. He is not recorded as having done so in any of the gospels.
Anthony Archer argues that when he was on the CNC it worked like a well-oiled talent-spotting machine, and when he was off it like a mosh pit of factional backbiting. So be it. But why the language of ‘tribes’ and ‘tribalism’? Sacred Scripture uses the word ‘tribe’ as a designation of particular election by God. Anthony seems to use it rather more like Corporal Jones in ‘Dad’s Army’, indicating the tiresome and uppity natives who need a firm hand administered by the officer class. Given our renewed responsibility for inculcating racial justice in our behaviour and language, is this entirely… Read more »
I think it’s one of those irregular verbs:
I engage in simple, honest, transparent discernment.
You have come with your own agenda.
He is part of a tribal faction.
Rather like:
I have strongly held theological convictions
You have beliefs
She has opinions?
And they are just plain wrong ….?
Goodness – ‘tribalism’ is a well-established usage to describe a mindset in which loyalty to our favourite group is a more powerful determinant of our belief than rational or theological argument. I’m surprised you’ve never heard it before.
But they have been elected by God!
Influence is distributed throughout the Church of England in a variety of ways. It’s good that it’s not all concentrated in one place. The central members of the CNC happen to have a certain amount of influence and are using it, according to their sense of discernment. When Justin Welby, Stephen Cottrell, Sarah Mullaly, and Steven Croft get jumpy about issues of influence and control it’s a very good reason to be cautious about giving away yet another locus of influence to the bishops.
Might it help to abolish the House of Bishops from General Synod?
Bishops could then be appointed based on the needs of the diocese rather than on which way they would vote at Synod.
Most everyone believes a good constituency MP is desirable; but most people choose a candidate based on which party they support. Why should we expect it to be any different in the Church?