Marcus Walker The Spectator Why C of E bishops are so bland
Kelvin Holdsworth What in Kelvin’s Head Finding a place to be
Luke Bretherton Comment The Conversion of Public Intellectuals
Al Barrett This estate we’re in When ‘being interrupted’ is not enough
I agree with some of what Marcus Walker says. He concludes: “If the CNC only has one name to put forward, it will always go for the safe option. Is it any wonder the bench of bishops has become desperately monochrome in thought and theology?” I think another more fundamental reason for the extreme caution in the bench of bishops is the need to adhere to a more central message – the message of being successful. The CofE is in decline however we look at it. Confirmations have flat lined. Congregations are ageing. Numbers are shrinking. The Catholic movement has… Read more »
The voting pattern of the current house/council of bishops does not support your analysis. Very few conservative evangelical bishops have been appointed. If anything more and more liberal bishops are being appointed. I note your concern that Conservative Evangelicals will “take” their people, presumably out of the Church of England. However, it must be remembered that people are free agents, they choose to worship where they feel wanted and valued, rather than being despised for their beliefs. They will give sacrificially and willingly where they feel valued and respected, where they choose to worship. If that is not the Church… Read more »
Bob I think your whole post supports my analysis. You are presumably from one of those congregations that both convince and terrify the bench. You are quite correct that the power of the Conservative Evangelicals has not translated into numbers of bishops. Hence my use of (yet!) in my last sentence. I am delighted to read of all that thrives in your congregation, but of course the numbers in the CofE generally don’t reflect that. And I assume the young people do not go on to be Confirmed. Money is another factor. Almost every diocese is now relying on reserves… Read more »
The Jeffrey John affair was the watershed moment, emboldening conservative Evangelicals by showing that, while their constituency was poorly represented on the bench, the bishops could nonetheless be bullied. Jeffrey John was subsequently blackballed over further episcopal appointments, first in England then in Wales. When the news broke of the affair, it was the prominent conservative Evangelical layman, Dr Philip Giddings, who attracted the opprobrium of liberals. But, as +Rowan Williams revealed in a 2016 essay, it was his fellow bishops who were the main driver behind his decision to make Jeffrey John withdraw. The essay was entitled, somewhat harshly,… Read more »
It was much worse for Jeffrey John in his native Wales. The Archbishop of Wales (Barry Morgan) reportedly blocked him from Bangor and then Llandaff, from the latter spuriously on the grounds of his age. June Osborne was appointed (the same age as Jeffrey John!) and she was a disaster.
It’s baffling because Archbishop Morgan was stridently pro LGBT and Jeffrey John would have been warmly welcomed as Bishop of Llandaff. I don’t think he would have had the toxicity against the Dean of Llandaff, which festered between Osborne and the Dean.
Where can that essay be found, please?
It’s from “Speaking of Faith”, ed. John Miller, Canterbury Press, 2016.
Where is this to be found?
I think it may be out of print, although there is a second hand copy on Amazon for £3.19.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Speaking-Faith-John-Miller/dp/1848259204
The essay’s title did not in truth refer to +Rowan’s aside on the Jeffrey John affair, but – mea culpa Perry – I couldn’t resist it!
“the creative tension between Catholic/Liberal/ Protestant has collapsed” Thank you for your fuller comments, some of which I can consider… As for this single point, how ‘creative’ was it in fact? Creative how? Enabled the survival of the CofE in an era when people were more prepared reflexively to attend church in the now no-one-attending CofE? So having ‘parties’ was a creative tension inside a relatively stable-attendance church. But once the predicate disappears, it is really immaterial what one makes of an erstwhile “creative tension.” No one is attending the CofE. “Parties” in such a climate would be, to put… Read more »
Hello Christopher. That’s an interesting question. I think the tension was creative in two ways. Firstly from the very start of the post English Reformation it enabled the rise of something distinctively Anglican. Liturgically. Culturally. And in terms of spirituality. I don’t think we would have had, for example, Lancelot Andrewes or George Herbert without that tension. General Synod could be at its best when there was considered work between those of quite different approaches. One small example is the report The Church and the bomb which emerged in the early 1980s. The fact that Conservatives have now rather taken… Read more »
The two statements “I agree that any notion of “parties” would be nonsensical” and “The fact that Conservatives have now rather taken over means that GS has become a battle ground” don’t really make sense together. If parties are now not functioning as once you believe they did, one consequence is that the “conservative” position remains. Then you say this creates a battleground. Even if this is correct, what would need to be done, since you say parties are gone/nonsensical? Would it be that the conservative position cease being, well, conservative? That is, one obvious problem is the lack of… Read more »
I’m not really sure about any of that Chris. I was simply responding to your interesting question about creative tension,
The rise of Charismatic Evangelicals in the C of E is a fairly recent phenomenon. In the 1970’s towards the end of the Christian era in England this group largely met in small house churches and bible weeks over the summer. However large numbers of people still attended C of E churches. Sunday schools were full, para church organisations such as Boy’s and Girl’s Brigades still flourished. Evangelical Churches were a minority in the C of E but with the end of Christendom attending church institutions out of tradition declined rapidly. Meanwhile Charismatic Evangelical churches found a church planting model… Read more »
Very interesting analysis. Thank you.
I am not sure if the church I grew up in the 50s and early 60s was exactly a creative tension between three discrete “parties”. I felt I was in a Church where catholic/ evangelical and broad were emphases on a common core. In no particular order: the sense of being the National Church, the Prayer Book (albeit the ceremonial varied), the parochial system and the sort of pastoral care that went with it plus the fact clergy were trained at residential colleges (albeit party ones) and so had something of a common “socialisation” and no doubt others of my… Read more »
I don’t disagree with you. I was merely responding to Mr Godsell’s comment about three parties and whither did they go. Is your response better directed to him for reply? I grew up in the 50s and 60s as well and PECUSA also had anglo-catholic (a small entity; and happily so for them) low-church (Virginia Seminary et al) and broad church. In the context of the US, generic ‘evangelicalism’ has been better understood outside PECUSA. Certainly in this period. In PECUSA, these different emphases likewise were able to co-exist, and the 1928 BCP did not hinder this but allowed it.… Read more »
You are correct that numbers are declining, but you vastly overestimate evangelical strength. The C of E has been moving in a liberal direction on sexuality, and evangelicals have not been able to stop this. Bishops know this is an issue which could cause many evangelicals to leave, and have not offered anything to stop this (e.g. a third province). I suspect many bishops would welcome their departure. There were quite a few evangelicals appointed as bishops between c. 2010-2017, but since then it has been predominantly liberal catholics (e.g. York, London, Norwich, Salisbury, Bristol). Evangelicals tend to be concentrated… Read more »
Buggins turn in many cases.
I wanted to cheer when I read Marcus Walker’s article, and then wanted to scream. Here we have one of the most carefully reasoned and presented accounts of what’s gone wrong with the preferment system, with an impressive amount of awareness of diversity and self-reflection on privilege from its author, included in an influential, non-Church, publication. But is disability mentioned? No. Not once. There is possibly the biggest problem with the current situation on diversity, in my view – that until its different expressions affect us personally or gain political traction, they don’t even cross the minds of some of… Read more »
I think that’s an unfair criticism. It’s not an article about particular criteria – it also doesn’t mention class, educational background, whether one came to ministry late in life or was a career cleric, trans history, age etc.
I remember when Anglo Catholic curates tended feel obliged to mention Our Lady, the Blessed Sacrament and Confession in every single sermon, to make it OK Catholic….but very silly….and tiresome. Comments in these pages cannot all mention safeguarding, equal marriage, disabilities or even evangelicals….or it becomes very silly Nor should any of us should be defined by disability, victimhood or sexuality. Marcus Walker, thank you for saying what you did….but how do we extricate ourselves from this rabbit hole. When applying for what could be called a senior post in the CofE there now seems a need to give a… Read more »
Please do not presume to say how others ‘should’ be defined. That is not for you (or for me) to say. I’m not going to say more about how I self-identify, as it may disclose more about who I am than I wish to share on here. But suffice to say I do identify in one of these ways (not necessarily as disabled, despite having chosen to focus on that absence), so your attempt to instruct others on how we should self identify includes and offends me. It may not, of course, offend others – and that is precisely my… Read more »
I presume nothing.
You are simply making the point I was trying to make.
‘Should be defined’ is not the same as ‘define’. It means the person is the accusative of the defining not the subject doing the defining.
I work with people who are severely disabled.
They are free to define themselves as they chose.
Most seem to chose to define themselves by more than their disability.
Incidentally most of them are delivered from the burden of being oversensitive and are blessed with a sense and not by wallowing in victimhood.
Thanks for your comments, Kate, but I disagree on it being unfair. Mr Walker does not mention several of the protected characteristics pursuant to the Equality Act, yet each of them poses significant barriers to preferment under the current system. In my view, and it is only my view, if one is going to list some of them in an article about diversity, and include other things that are not among them, there should at least be a nod of acknowledgment to the others, disability included.
Maybe Fr Walker doesn’t see the ‘protected characteristics pursuant to the Equality Act’ as some kind of unquestionable ideological framework for salami-slicing humanity into silos of precisely defined, unchallengeable identity? Perhaps he might deem the uniting identity conferred on us by God – children of the one Father – more fundamental than the divisive identity-proliferation of critical secular theory? The latter might seem to foster a world-view doomed to perpetuate divisions, complaints and turf-wars among and between subsets of a fractured humanity. Just the exact opposite of what the Gospel promises and effects.
‘The Catholic movement has collapsed.’ No, it hasn’t if you look more closely. Numbers may be smaller than in the 1980s but there are many signs of missional initiatives, a joyful proclamation of the faith, and worship centres of liturgical variety and excellence. And a greater willingness of trad and liberal Catholics who remain in the Church of England to display mutual respect and cooperate where possible.
That’s good to hear Nigel, and I am sure I over stated my case. Apologies.
St John’s Timber Hill in Norwich is a growing church in the Anglo Catholic tradition. Fr Richard Stanton is a diligent parish priest who has grown the congregation and turned around the parish’s finances.
“ imperialist white supremacist capitalist ableist hetero-patriarchy.” I’m slightly surprised that he did not add cis-gendered. Really? Does Rev Barrett hope to get people on board with this? I mean I’m gay, massively neurodivergent and thus disabled, the son of communist refugees, I do my best to live simply, don’t drive, am a very poor meat-eater , and as much of a feminist as a man can be, but heck, stop blaming straight white men for everything, especially if you’re one yourself. Most straight white guys are incredibly nice and good. Just stop this nonsense, it’s alienating everyone.
But this isn’t about the niceness or goodness of individuals, qualities which are probably evenly spread across the human population irrespective of identities and characteristics. It’s about systemic prejudice. Does the way the world operates favour countries which have behaved and behaved in a way that might be termed ‘imperialist’? Does our society and its structures give advantage to white people? Does the world favour those who are able and willing to compete ruthlessly for resources, power and money? Does society disadvantage those living with disabilities? Does society give structural advantage to men and to straight people? And to ask… Read more »
So a society ‘dominated’ by straight, white men whose niceness or goodness as individuals is not in question becomes ‘systematically prejudiced’ when you add on women, people of colour, LGBT folks, disabled people… it does not make sense. You are blaming straight, white, able bodied males, just admit it.
As long as those “nice, good, straight white men” do not recognize the privilege that society has endowed them with and 1) think that their exalted position is all of their own making, and 2) make no effort to afford others with the same privileges, then, yes–blame is appopriate.
(And I speak as a straight white male.)
I think it does make sense. ‘Niceness’ and ‘goodness’ – we’re in danger of putting a lot of weight upon slippery and subjective terms here, I know – operate within the confines of a society’s values, mores and prejudices. Not so long ago men – and women – who would be deemed nice and good accepted that women couldn’t vote, be doctors, judges, politicians, priests. The vast majority of us now see the systemic prejudice in that system. At that time only a few did and, like the suffragettes, campaigned to change things. In order for all people to have… Read more »
Indeed. Afghanistan, Iran and a goodly few other countries come to mind!
Why?
In Iran women are not barred from any career save – surprise surprise – being members of the clergy. Mandatory head covering for women is no more discriminatory than mandatory breast covering for women in the United Kingdom. If it is, do explain how.
I thought that the Spectator article was poor and predictable – and played to a often portrayed caricature of a monochrome episcopacy. I simply don’t think that is the case. Of course, we lack some of the characters of years gone by – but they were the ones who also often turned a blind eye to poor practice, decline, and abuse in the church. I take the point that the LLF agenda is clearly preventing appointments and something needs to change structurally, but the logic doesn’t follow that this leads to a bland bench of bishops.
You have to remember who the new editor of the Spectator is.
But the Rector of S Bartholomew the Great is not Gove (or the dread Johnson). He has a mind and his article is perspicacious and wise.
We desperately need more like him and fewer manager bishops who have done the short course.
I agree Homeless Anglican. The episcopacy does seem bland because they all seem to toe the Welby line publicly. Privately it’s probably different. Fr Walker doesn’t mention the extra incentive for would be women bishops – an automatic seat in the House of Lords. That’s quite a prize.
Delete ‘extra incentive’; substitute ‘disincentive’? Delete ‘prize’; substitute ‘burden’?
Free first class travel to and from London. Free accommodation in London. £300+ daily attendance allowance. Mixing with the most powerful and wealthiest in society. I wouldn’t call that a burden.
I am sorry but this needs calling out. Take a look at the expenses register https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/lords-finance-office/2024-25/members-finance-publication-may-2024.pdf and you will see modest claims – often none for accommodation – and to mix with some of the wisest and well informed minds in society. This is an important burden. You may not like it, but please don’t make unsubstantiated claims such as this.
From Luke Bretherton Comment The Conversion of Public Intellectuals : A turn to Christianity, however, need not entail making it either a defensive civilizational project anchored in a sanitized version of history or a sectarian faction fuelled by an aggrieved sense of entitled victimhood. Following Christ and discerning the ongoing work of the Holy Spirit should be about discovering just and generous forms of life here and now that bear witness to and prefigure the new creation. Approaches that predetermine what Christianity can and should be by overidentifying it with a prior culture or historical moment refuse to discover what Christ and… Read more »