My Lords, it is often said and it is a cliché to say it–but hey, I am the Archbishop still–that if you want to make God laugh, make plans. On that basis, next year, I will be causing God more hilarity than anyone else for many years, because the plans for next year were very detailed and extensive. If you pity anyone, pity my poor diary secretary, who has seen weeks and months of work disappear in a puff of a resignation announcement.
The reality, which I wish to start with–then pay some thanks, and then talk about housing–is that there comes a time, if you are technically leading a particular institution or area of responsibility when the shame of what has gone wrong, whether one is personally responsible or not, must require a head to roll. There is only, in this case, one head that rolls well enough. I hope not literally: one of my predecessors in 1381, Simon of Sudbury, had his head cut off and the revolting peasants at the time then played football with it at the Tower of London. I do not know who won, but it certainly was not Simon of Sudbury.
The reality is that the safeguarding and care of children and vulnerable adults in the Church of England today is, thanks to tens of thousands of people across the Church, particularly in parishes, by parish safeguarding officers, a completely different picture from the past. However, when I look back at the last 50 or 60 years, not only through the eyes of the Makin report, however one takes one’s view of personal responsibility, it is clear that I had to stand down, and it is for that reason that I do so.
Next, I want to say thank you to so many people in the House. In these 12 years, I cannot think of a single moment when I have come in here and the hair on the back of my neck has not stood up at the privilege of being allowed to sit on these Benches. It has been an extraordinary period, and I have listened to so many debates of great wisdom, so many amendments to Bills that have improved them, so much hard work.
I have also found that, despite the fact that I still cannot find my way round this building, the staff here are endlessly patient as I look panic-struck when I suddenly find I am standing on a green carpet, not a red one, and have guided me to the right place. I am hugely grateful, and I am very grateful to noble Lords who have been kind enough to send supportive and encouraging notes over the last few weeks. It has been a great privilege and strength to have that.
There has been much reference to the two reports that the Church of England has issued, and I am in the same place, as much of what I was going to say has been said. So, I will not say it again and will say something slightly different–but very briefly. The Coming Home report that the noble Lord, Lord Young, referred to so kindly, sets out five words beginning with “s” which it decided to recommend as the moral centre of good housing. They are: that housing should be safe, and we have heard and know about the need for that through Grenfell, mould, and the need to improve the safety of housing; that housing should be secure, so that people know they can bring up families; that housing should be stable, as people should not constantly be forced to move without choice–it is utterly disruptive; and that housing should be sustainable and zero carbon. We cannot afford to build tens of thousands of houses which increase the problems of climate change.
But I want to add two things. First of all, housing must be affordable, particularly social housing. Social housing is one of the areas which is very inelastic in terms of supply and demand. We need clear criteria for what “affordable” means. One of them should not be in proportion to the average cost in the area, which is the present test: 80% of average cost. I can assure noble Lords that, as we come to the end of our time where we are living at the moment and start looking for a house to buy, 80% of average market cost puts us a very long way away from where we would like to be–and that serves us right, in some ways. Affordable housing needs to be related to income, not to average cost. It needs to be measured against real living wage in a particular area if it is going to be genuinely affordable.
Secondly, it is no use building houses unless you build communities. Housing without community sets us up perfectly for the social problems of the future, so, when we build houses, we have to create the open spaces. And I forgot one “s”, which is satisfying. It has to be a place where children can play, where families get to know each other and where–obviously, I would say this–there is a church, or at least a community centre that acts as a church, where people are brought together. Community facilities in most of our new developments are nugatory, nil, useless; we have to do better.
My last comment: the Church Commissioners for England hold about 5,000 to 6,000 acres of strategic land, out of the 100,000 acres of the Church Commissioners’ total landholdings and another 100,000 acres in the hands of dioceses, parishes, trusts and so on. I know that they are now working on plans for working with government and local authorities, using the mapping tool developed in the Coming Home report, to see the best places to get together with others and have economically helpful areas with good returns. Look at what the Duchy of Cornwall has done with that: you can look down a street and you cannot distinguish which is social housing and which is non-subsidised housing. That also is part of the way in which we treat people with respect.
I look forward to hearing from the Minister. I hope that the Government will undertake to work right across the sector of landholders, so there will be good mixed development that brings people together and sets us up for a better future–and that, as part of that, it is done in the deliberate building of communities before we talk about individual houses.
My Lords, I am hugely grateful to have been here. You remain in my prayers and in my deep affection and profound respect for the huge contribution made by this House to our nation, which it usually does not recognise. I am hugely grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Taylor, for allowing this debate to happen.
As far as this ordinary rural parishioner is concerned he has been a total disaster.
And this just puts the lid on it…
Yet again – more of the same. Insensitive, thanking people for their support – for him. Going on about the privilege of being in HoL but no words for the people who have been abused and degraded and humiliated. Self-congratulatory and no doubt demoralising for many people – but like so much of his work, no one can challenge it. Same as the closure of churches in Covid, reasonable decision on one level, but bound to be sensitive and distressing – and did he care? The latest bishops’ letter, well what can you say? The proof of the pudding is… Read more »
Does he have the same PR advisers as Gregg Wallace?
Sometimes, the scribes of Hansard smooth out speeches, and by removing the rough edges make them better. It is claimed, according to Ruth Davidson (or perhaps Harriet Harman: it was on Beth Rigby’s ED podcast last week) that Hansard used to use the speeches of John Prescott to test people’s ability to catch the tone and tenor of a speech while rendering it easier to read and less revealing of the speaker’s grammatical inexactitudes. Meanwhile, Justin Welby’s speech is just as vile in cleaned-up prose as it was in speech. The worst sentence, which I thought perhaps I had misheard… Read more »
Though I am rising to the bait, it is difficult to compare individuals across long periods of time and with differing forms of evidence. Actually, the calibre of archbishops has generally been pretty high, even prior to the reforms of Dunstan, the Gregorian reforms or the Reformation. Some archbishops might have been politicians more, or as much, as they were prelates, but they generally tended to treat their ecclesiastical functions with a high level of seriousness, whether directly or through intermediaries. However, there have been reckless archbishops (Sigeric, Becket or Laud), feckless archbishops (Byrhthelm) corrupt archbishops (Stigand and Reynolds [?]),… Read more »
Tone deaf. Still doing the self deprecating Etonian schtick. Wrong message. I am pretty worried for his mental state. But to bow out in this way without a sense of apology and penitence (which we all need in the light of our individual and corporate safeguarding failures) was a massive error of judgement. God grant us an Advent repentance and a new start. This was excruciating and sad.
My only disagreement with Pete’s comments is all this about Welby’s educational background. Pete himself went to a public day school (quite possibly on a bursary, I don’t know) and got a very good degree at Cambridge. In a sense, his political and cultural position could itself be regarded as another form of “public school/Oxbridge shtick”. That is all completely irrelevant to the question in hand. This is about Justin Welby personally, and rightly so. To attribute it to his education and background is an explanation, perhaps, but not an excuse. Even the published apology says “I understand that my… Read more »
Some might even raise the question whether he should retain his knighthood in the light of recent events, if he was not given a Peerage, there would be nothing in Anglican Canon Law or even in Civil Secular Law to stop him in retirement from using his Knightly title and calling himself “Sir Justin Welby” Jonathan
In most circumstances, I would agree with you, but I’m going to sound a slightly different note on this one. If I’m not mistaken ++Welby’s knighthood is in the Royal Victorian Order, which is an Order specifically awarded by the King for service to him or the wider royal family. So it would be for the King to decide if his actions would negate whatever service he is supposed to have been that justified the award in the first place. Had the knighthood been within an Order that is more about supposed public service, I would be right there with… Read more »
And the convention arises because clergy are not dubbed with the sword. Their knighthoods are therefore essentially honorary and they are not entitled to use the style “Sir”. None of this applies to female clergy who are made dames, because different rules apply to dames, none of whom is dubbed with the sword either. All very quaint and out of touch of course, but that’s Britain for you.
I recall this being discussed in great detail on TA, and one exception to the ‘rule’ is a male priest who is also a baronet. We formerly had one at the church where I was a rota organist.
All church musicians are familiar with the name Sir Frederick Arthur Gore Ouseley, priest, composer and organist – and baronet of course!
https://youtu.be/aMR4hxa54-g?si=ZKZlEH6B4gyIPqRm
And the Revd Sir Patrick Fergusson Davie Bt of Exeter diocese!….but what about Bishops with DBEs?
Simon Kershaw explained the treatment of DBEs above.
Only if he were a baronet which, of course, is not the case.
I remember there was Canon Sir C W Wigram who was incumbent of a country parish in Northamptonshire, who I believe was a baronet.
There have been many clerical baronets. Sir Patrick Ferguson Davie died in 1988 and Sir Clifford Wigram (also DSC; whose family produced a bishop of Rochester, 1860-67 as well as other 19th century luminaries) died in 2000. Wigram was at Marston St Lawrence, Warkworth (summer services only), plus Thenford (essentially Michael Heseltine’s arboretum), near Banbury. Presently there are four clerical baronets, which must be a record low: (i) Sir John Alleyne (b. 1928; 5th baronet, of 1769, of Four Hills, Barbados), formerly of Weeke, Hampshire (and still resident in Winchester); (ii) Br. John Halsey (b. 1933; 4th baronet of 1900,… Read more »
The Revd Sir John Alleyne, Bt.: Indeed! Formerly Rector of St Matthew and St Paul, Weeke, Winchester. It was he I mentioned in my original post above. I played for him once at St Paul’s and he officiated at my aunt’s funeral at St Matthew’s where I was a ‘rota’ organist for three decades, coincidentally playing successively its three different organs!
When I saw this I was ashamed. Ashamed to be an Anglican, ashamed to be a cleric in the Church of England, ashamed of the institution, ashaed at the arrogance of this man for whom the speech was about him, rather than about others (survivors). It displayed a total lack of empathy and understanding, a failure to listen to the problems that caused his resignation, a failure to listen to those who should be advising him. He is a self-centred narcissistic fool who deserves to have a CDM complaint made against him for conduct unbecoming. He also thinks that his… Read more »
As I said in an earlier thread – the man is so tin eared. An embarrassment really.
I feel this man “just doesn’t get it”. He has no contrition or empathy with those affected.
I felt it was very evident that more people knew of Smyth’s abuse than have admitted thus, and that they should associate themselves with the Church’s inadequate response, and should go too.
It is wrong for any church office holder to expect to shelter behind the single resignation of the Archbishop, whose conduct was no worse in the circumstances, than a host of others.
As I posted on my Facebook page yesterday: ++Welby offers a supercilious and frivolous valedictory speech in the House of Lords [today] with no hint of contrition for the re-abuse of victims of abuse and the abject failure of the National Institutions of the Church of England, especially the Archbishops’ Council, to grip the issues. Many noted the body language of the Bishop of London seated beside him, hanging her head in shame for the Church. Knowing full well the background to Smyth, he utterly failed to act. And this is the Archbishop I worked with on the Crown Nominations… Read more »
I agree, Anthony, he has been a great disappointment. I met him at a conference just after his appointment had been announced. He gave me hope then, but sadly that has evaporated like the dew in the morning sun. So sad. Praying for a successor who will face and deal with the problems that prevent the C of E fulfilling its mission to the nation.Sadly I find it hard to identify such a person on the current bench of bishops – you may know better!
He has been found out. A number of observers are surprised that he remained in office for so long. Has he been very poorly advised, or has he simply not accepted the (otherwise good) advice? The valedictory speech in the House of Lords could have been so different. As to a peerage (elsewhere on these TA threads) I have never quite understood why that has traditionally been automatic for an archbishop. The Prime Minister has enough problems without provoking opprobrium by recommending him. It should in any event be on merit. Why was James Jones, latterly Bishop of Liverpool, not… Read more »
I’m glad that Justin Welby has apologised for this dreadful speech, and that +Helen-Ann and the three safeguarding bishops have also spoken out. But for survivors, and particularly the Smyth survivors, the damage was already done. Couldn’t Welby’s chaplain have drafted something more appropriate for him? Welby has been criticised often enough for ignoring survivors, it’s not as if he and his office were unaware of the issue.
The timings are important here. Bishop HA is the only one who spoke out on the day of the speech. The other bishops only after the negative press and survivor comment.
Do we still feel that she called it wrong with criticising JW publicly a couple of weeks back?
Bishop Helen-Ann’s thoughts on this topic. Please do watch the full recording rather than just read the text.
https://www.channel4.com/news/absolutely-not-the-time-for-humour-bishop-on-welby-speech
I’ve never thought she was wrong to speak out. I think she was right to do so then, and to continue doing so. I’m glad a few bishops are now belatedly following her lead.
You and me both.
Whilst the word “prophetic” applied to bishop Helen-Ann has received a bit of push-back, I would hope everyone could coalesce around words like “courageous” and “leadership”.
Somehow, Janet, I’m afraid that I doubt it! (I’m trying to be circumspect.)
Thankfully I missed seeing or hearing it live, and only knew he’d put his foot in it again from a very small paragraph on the Guardian’s front page this morning. (Collecting for a local hospice, I didn’t have time to look for a fuller explanation inside the paper)
Oh, dear…..
I can’t think of another Archbishop of Canterbury in my lifetime who has made me cringe as much as this one has.
Just more of the same, but revealing in that the focus is on HoL and privilege, and absolutely no focus on survivors.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/dec/06/justin-welby-archbishop-of-canterbury-victims-of-abuse
The bill for removing the remaining hereditaries from the Lords is reaching its second reading in the Lords itself. Like the 1999 Act, it is a very simple bill – a mere five clauses. It would not take much to add an additional clause evicting the lords spiritual. Gavin Williamson tabled an amendment to do just that, which was rejected. However, he did so in mid-October. Were he or someone else (i.e., someone far less unpopular and distrusted than he is) to add such an amendment now, given what has happened since the publication of Makin, would it still be… Read more »
*Advisory: touches on abuse* Marina Hyde: “I assume Smyth never even actually believed there was a hell, or he wouldn’t have spent a lifetime booking his spot in it.” John Smyth definitely did believe in Hell, because he told me my father (a kind and decent, gentle agnostic who had recently died at the age of 55) had gone to Hell, and that I needed to “toughen up and accept the facts”. It shattered my evangelical faith and I lost a year of my life in a state of breakdown and desperate loss. My father had once gone to Crusaders… Read more »
THANK YOU, Susannah! I am much moved by your testimony. I cannot presume to know what has happened to Smyth’s soul, but apart from his being a malignant abuser, he was quite evidently a first class turd.
Susannah, thank you for sharing your story. It isn’t about me, but I cried as I read it – not tears of pity, but of anger at what that man did to you. To everyone else – I’m nothing special, folks, very far from it. To the best of my knowledge I’ve never met Susannah, and her story is very different from mine. But here I’m sitting in tears of anger. So can anybody…anybody at all…explain to me how these so-called Bishops can remain unmoved, or in the case of ++Welby, +Manchester and some others, enjoy ‘jolly japes’ in the… Read more »
It’s so hard for people who are not ‘of the mould’ to understand that those of Smyth’s theological persuasion just do not care, and moreover can justify their cruelty with an ill informed assortment of theological texts. I’m sorry to hear, but not surprised, that you were faced with a hard wall of judgement and criticism but that’s all part of the package. It can take years of self awareness and pain for this to be resolved. One hopes for a kinder, more compassionate, and inclusive succession where the repair work can begin but it strikes me that a clear… Read more »
Goodness, Susannah, sounds grim – but what a blessing to have had your father in your life and to have made the journey you did to a more mature, compassion-filled faith! I believe that those who dwell in love, dealing lovingly with those they come in contact with, dwell in God, whether or not they are Christians (a view reflected in parts of the Bible glossed over by the more hardline conservative evangelicals).
Susannah you have been very brave again sharing some more of the story of your abuse by Smythe . Savi has said much better than I could that you were saved from even worse by the selfless love your father had shown you. It also demonstrates what an ace abuser Smyth was, knowing just where to attack his victims . It was presumably by instilling the fear of going to hell which enabled him persuade his victims to let him beat them so sadistically . Your story Susannah should be a wake up call to those who prefer to look… Read more »
Indeed. Jesus told us to judge a tree by its fruit. Arguably if someone lives a life filled with love for others they have more “faith” in Our Saviour than someone who claims an intellectual belief in Jesus but, on the basis of their behaviour, doesn’t truly know Him.
Like other commentators, I feel a sense of anger at the treatment of someone I regard as a friend, Susannah, and for similar reasons, an increased sense of empathy. According to that kind of cold certainty, very, very few of my family may be in heaven – none of them espoused the kind of intellectual rationalism, with all its rules, regulations and public proof which it requires. And I simply, despite nervous fears and worries to the contrary, cannot bring myself to accept that God’s grace is such a clinically closed shop as they make out. I’ve spent fifty years… Read more »
Susannah, thank you. I acknowledge that you don’t want pity, and others have expressed their sentiments far more eloquently than I can express mine. I simply want to offer my thanks for writing what you have done, as I found it incredibly moving.
What a column. I’ve seldom seen such a burn, yet every line is deserved. “During the years he knew about many British victims of Smyth, Welby found time to address a vast range of topics. The legitimacy of fear in the Brexit debate, Bake Off, the gig economy, usury, reality TV, credit unions, the iniquities of the global trade system, airstrikes against Islamic State, the broken economic model … All of these things – and so many more – over which Welby had no operational control were given a hose-down of his reflections, while Smyth moved on to abusing at… Read more »
An institution can either be honest about itself – and work really hard to make that honesty part of everything it does every day – or it can take the stance that the institution is more important than the truth, and operate on an assumption that the first step in any situation is to defend the institution and then, and only then, to start letting little glimmers of honesty into the conversation. A little at a time and as little as possible. Be sure your lies will find you out. And your obfuscation, half-truths, gaslighting, dismissal and derision. And it’s… Read more »
Utterly disgraceful and very telling. He clearly thinks he is the sacrificial lamb, not just one of many who have failed and needs to face the consequences. Welby should not speak again in public he is no longer fit to speak on behalf of our church.
We also have the Bishop of Blackburn circling the wagons. Let’s hope that he isn’t put anywhere near Lambeth Palace. Another person who seems to think the scrutiny the bishops are under is unjust.
Absolutely. I both raise a despairing wry smile and find it disgustingly cynical how +Blackburn’s expressed ‘concern’ for those feeling worried about safeguarding scrutiny has morphed from a firm focus on his episcopal colleagues in the first place he published it a couple of weeks ago, to people on the front line in parishes in today’s Church Times version. I wonder if he’s been keeping up with critiques of v.1 and crudely shifted to v.2.0, hoping nobody would notice…
In recent years we have had Liz Truss as PM & bullying entitled TV ‘stars’ throwing their weight around at best/behaving like Jimmy Savile & Greg Wallace at worst. We’ve had Cabinet Ministers of all parties with their noses in the trough while simultaneously ignoring ‘common people’ like 1000s of subpostmasters. We’ve had Parliamentary Expenses scandals, bullying & worse at Westminster. Within the Church we’ve had shocking safeguarding failings from ABC, the current ABY, the former ABY, the Archbishops Council, NST, Lambeth, Bishopthorpe, NST, every lead Safeguarding Bishop except Peter Hancock (who to be fair to him would prefer to… Read more »
Perhaps we do get the leaders we deserve but then again I don’t recall anyone asking me to vote for the Archbishop of Canterbury. But we are a church riven with strife so no wonder we get compromise(d) candidates.
You are of course right, servant leadership has been lost. Bravery and accepting the true responsibility of the mantle of leadership places upon them is sorely lacking.
I plot the decline here to the injection of individualist libertarian thought into our society from the 80’s onwards. It is poison and deeply unchristian.
The problem with the CNC process is that its make up, inevitably (with the odd exception) favours the grey and managerial clerics.Trying to get a consensus from 14 very disparate individuals in personality, experience and above all (entrenched?) churchmanship leads generally to the Lowest Common Denominator. So plus ca change plus c’est la meme chose.
Which is why +Helen-Ann didn’t get through the CNC….
Oh wait….
The CNC process for a diocesan and the ABC are quite different. I would be delighted to be proved wrong but I strongly doubt +Newcastle will be our next ABC for precisely the reasons listed by Dr Wallace. One can talk yourself round to supporting the appointment of a diocesan of a strong allegiance to a particular wing of the church in the interests of balance in the HoB (although it seems that that line of thinking may not apply anymore), that is more difficult to do with the ABC.
Is this based on your conversations with past CNC members, or speculation? From what conversations I’ve had, I have only heard a couple who wanted to think about ‘what does someone bring to the HoB’ – but it never became a dominant question. I also don’t think Rowan, or Justin (or George Carey) fit that ‘boring lowest common denominator’ view. They each have their failings – and I would imagine that Rowan is currently the favourite in people’s minds [although once he was attacked for being too far liberal on sexuality, which is ironic that Justin has been the one… Read more »
Preach it, brother!
I can say this now he is going. I visited Lambeth the first week of his tenure to discuss matters, with him and Josiah Idowu-Fearon. He struck me as someone out of a stereotyped film, “The Man from Eton Becomes a Prelate.” I lived in the UK on a “leave to remain indefinitely status” as Prof at St Andrews and had close friends in the Charterhouse/Godalming milieu, so it was hardly “the yank comes to meet an Englishman.” I taught at Yale when Rowan Williams did a replacement stint for the late Hans Frei. And worked closely with him for… Read more »
I think all of these comments about ++Welby are entirely justified, but I also think we shouldn’t dismiss the giggling of the ‘good ole boys on tour’ male Bishops crammed into the row behind him, particularly +Manchester, the trauma-trained Vice Chair of the National Redress Scheme. A couple of people have responded to my posts on an earlier thread about this suggesting I read their responses in as poor a way as ++Welby read the room yesterday. So I have rewatched the speech to make sure, and I stand by my comments. In my view, only +London seemed uncomfortable with… Read more »
Did he really hijack a debate on housing and homelessness to make it all about himself?
No. He used the last chance to speak to say goodbye to the hol before saying more about housing.
But others, who might have had something to say about housing and homelessness, presumably couldn’t speak because Welby chose to use up the clock by saying goodbye.
oh come on – If he had said nothing on goodbye, that would have been noteworthy too.
“Justin cowardly leave the HoL without saying why he is leaving – without any mention of the Church having failed”…
It was definitely expected that he would make a goodbye comment.
He need only have said that it was his last speech to the Lords and goodbye, before moving on to the topic of the debate. There was no need to spend 3 paragraphs pitying his diary secretary and telling jokes. If he did want to say more than ‘goodbye’, he ought to have expressed contrition, and talked of Smyth (and other) survivors.
Well couldn’t he request to make a personal statement about his resignation? Indeed oughtn’t he to have done so? I know nothing about HoL protocol but I think in most bodies people contributing to a debate are required to stick to the subject at hand. If the HoL is otherwise, then he can’t be blamed for that.
Bishop Helen-Ann says it straight on C4 news – https://www.channel4.com/news/absolutely-not-the-time-for-humour-bishop-on-welby-speech
Thank God for Bishop Helen-Ann Hartley. She has taken a strong line of truth and compassion and come down without equivocation on the side of the victims of abuse. This is not merely lip-service; to speak like this is costly.
She has been joined by two other (female) bishops. Imagine a Church where no bishop would publicly confront the evil of abuse and the parallel evil of equivocating about it.
It’s quite upsetting , and in order to maintain ( or restore) integrity at a local level we need ‘new ‘ voices without the baggage. Replacing both AB’s with at least one female might be the way forward. Sooner the better.
Have we ever had a worse archbishop? I doubt it..the man has been a disgrace.
The “concern” that Philip North, Bishop of Blackburn expresses is impossible for me to believe and merely seems to present as a shallow exercise in self-promotion. His diocese has one of the very worst track records in the Church of England for safeguarding compliance – and that is not only with respect to his cathedral. Shameless.
Amen to that.
Thank you. I appreciate you highlighting this point regarding Blackburn Diocese. As a parish officer who made a safeguarding disclosure in Blackburn Diocese, it quickly turned into the worst experience of my life. Indeed, one of the frustrations of the last few weeks (as exemplified by Welby’s statement in the Lords) has been the desperate pointing by the Church’s hierarchy to the alleged improvements in recent years in the training of parish officers as being somehow a guarantee that abuses like John Smyth’s could never happen again. My problem is that when those parish officers are then hung out to… Read more »
He will not be a candidate shortlisted for Canterbury.
Can you give the reasons why he won’t be?
Mainly to do with his position on women in ministry of course. For the Primate of All England to be at odds with the settled mind of the Church on this would be unconscionable. The statement of needs (all elements of the role) will not be silent on the issue. I would need to see his papers to comment further, but one lacuna might be his lack of ministerial experience in the wider Anglican Communion. That’s not to say, of course, that the Canterbury CNC won’t surprise us. But having taken a big risk in 2012, which hasn’t paid off,… Read more »
“[O]ne lacuna might be his lack of ministerial experience in the wider Anglican Communion.” The addition of Communion voices to the Canterbury CNC is going to come back to haunt this process, which will be fraught enough as it is. I’m sure that that 2022 change was designed to increase the Archbishop’s legitimacy as head of the Communion. But I doubt the Communion is worth that change. The more power that Communion instruments try to arrogate to themselves, the more they will be ignored. I would have kept Canterbury focused on the needs of the Church of England–which are great… Read more »
I think that view goes both ways now. Does the Communion have need of a Canterbury ‘focus of unity’? That has become a live question, outside the CofE and inside it now.
I can only pray that you are right. Some of us thought it unconscionable that he was elevated to the position of a Diocesan bishop
Thank you, Anthony, that is good news.
One never quite knows with him who he’s schmoozing this week or what story he’s spinning to them of him being on the side of righteousness. But I hope your opinion, out of so much experience of the CNC proves right.
I also hope we don’t see a translation from York to Canterbury, and then a placeholder appointment of +Manchester to York, after the House of Lords ‘jolly japes’ this week.
If only he’d left out the first 3 paragraphs. If only.
I found this speech wrong on so many levels. Firstly, and most importantly because it expresses no remorse or care for the survivors of safeguarding abuses mishandled by the church, of which the Smyth case is just the most recent example. But I was also disturbed by his mention of ‘revolting peasants’. It is true that Simon of Sudbury was beheaded during the peasant’s revolt, and of course, if it happened, playing football with someone’s head was revolting; but the way the example was used struck me as classist (but then I am a ‘chippy’ working class priest). To use… Read more »
It comes across to me that all of us in the front line parishes are considered no more than ‘revolting peasants’ in the way we are regarded, thought of and treated by many Diocesan hierarchs, no matter our class.
rAs to Simon of Sudbury, now you have told us about the axe marks, I find ++Welby’s choice of example to have some unintentional relevance – incompetents botching something important that could do life-changing harm to people.
“Technically.”
Sounds like he spent too much time with engineers at Enterprise Oil.
…or with either Billy Nye the Whitewash Guy or ‘good’ old Luther Pendragon, perhaps.
“Billy Nye the Whitewash Guy” would make a good character for Viz Comic. And do a lot less harm were he a fictional character whose amusing scrapes with a bucket, a brush and a ladder always end up with a slap-up tea.
If only! Though I got the idea from the science guy character on the Big Bang Theory. Sadly this one is all too real, as is the harm he does to people.
Apologising for apologising is the real growth in the Church.
What JW ought to mean is that he takes part of the responsibility, not the sole amount, and they haven’t addressed that.
In 1923, Walter Frere became Bishop of Truro. He is more widely known as a liturgical expert and ecumenical, but as Bishop of Truro was an innovative figure. Frere had been Prior of the Community of the Resurrection at Mirfield and only agreed to serve as Bishop if he could live in community under traditional vows as he had done for some years. Bishop’s House (Lis Escop) became a sub house of Mirfield where three brothers including Frere lived under Rule. Frere shared fully in the Community life, taking his turn in the most menial domestic chores.(The Cornish folk, somewhat… Read more »
Fantastic. We desperately need a new wave of diocesan bishops willing to create and model a new style of leadership, drawing on the wisdom of the past to serve the present. They need to show the national institutions that there are better ways to pastor, grow and sustain. This includes safeguarding. Bishops and diocesan synods are beginning to wake up. Be brave bishops and lead your people. Don’t wait for the next AofC.
That is fascinating, thank you. With clear parallels to how Pope Francis has chosen to live in community.
The Holy Father is getting on in years and is in poor health, so quite understandably he has chosen to live in the comfort of the modern Casa Santa Marta with its reliable heating and plumbing rather than in the draughty old Papal appartments in the Vatican.
I don’t know David whether you have been inside to House of the Resurrection at Mirfield. If so you’ll have seen the portrait if Frere in the parlour there.
He is the Frere of the Briggs & Frere psalter.
David that is a truly prophetic suggestion and might be applied with some variation to parish life
It’s interesting that in typical Anglican fashion Frere’s successor was Joseph Hunkin. Hunting was Low Church rather than Evangelical. He was a Cornishman whose father was a Methodist local preacher so I suppose it was thought that he started with a double kudos. To his credit Hunkin was popular and dealt with some thorny issues in a sensitive way. Frere’s influence had permeated deep into the psyche of Cornish folk. I served in the Diocese of Lincoln for some years and was struck by the way that Edward King had a similar long lasting impact.
Hunkin was a nominee for Archbishop of Sydney in 1933. In the event H.W.K. Mowll was elected, and he remained in the post until his death in 1958.
Thankyou for the reminder of the great and holy Bp Frere; it is good to remember that there have been some truly great bishops in our history as we see the lack of true spirituality of so much of the current bench
Strange how trivia arise and remain in one’s mind. On reading once that Frere had died on 2nd April 1938 I recalled that my parents had married on Saturday 9th April 1938, so he must have died on a Saturday. That was 16 months after the famous abdication speech. CR did not have a wireless for general use but Frere had one for personal use. Most of the brethren crowded into his room at Mirfield to listen to it. During Frere’s time in CR another Walter, Walter Cotton from Canada, joined CR and had to take another name. He became… Read more »
We some times think (at least i do) of roman catholics as being very formal and traditional in their theology. yet in the service yesterday at notre dame, we saw the archbshop welcome everybody, even those who like me have not trodden the narrow way. I don;t think Jesus liked the company of those who had trodden the narrow way. he was friends with prostitues ands tax collectors. I knew a trainee catholic nun who rejoiced in the expression of sexuality, and of course there is that art critic nun wendy beckett who loved the painting of naked bodies. Can… Read more »
There is a lot I could say – but something that keeps nagging at me is. I am still not clear exactly what he should have done in 2013; or more importantly – forget the past (there are other reasons to wag fingers at +Justin) – but what ‘I’ should do. If I find myself in a position of senior employee of the church and am told about an incident “one of our congregation, they had been a licensed lay minister / reader/etc – had been abusing boys (either while part of another organisation or part of e.g. a church… Read more »
I am a member of the exec of an athletics club. Safeguarding is obviously an issue, particularly when coaches have to train athletes, which of course may involve some physical contact. We have appointed safeguarding officers. They are responsible for reporting through the necessary channels any concerns.We try to have teachers/doctors etc. act as safeguarding officers, as they are experienced and trained. But at monthly exec committee meetings, there is always a safeguarding agenda item, and they will always be asked about any current issues – of course, they will not want to go into details, but they may say… Read more »
Nigel, Safeguarding is a standing agenda item (or should be) at every PCC meeting, with members DBS checked, trained etc. That is the expectation of all C of E churches, although of course with 15.000 churches you’ll always be able to find exceptions where people drag their heels etc. The C of E’s training is pretty good and accessible, so I’d say it’s not difficult to make a congregation more safeguarding aware – at that level it’s pretty good The main challenge as I see it is that when you go beyond that, and you have situations where different agencies… Read more »
Thanks. Any link to a clear explanation of the processes? TimP was requesting a decision-tree guidance, and from his question I had (maybe wrongly) assumed it did not exist. Yes, of course my athletics club is far from perfect, it took years to get all coaches to be properly licensed and pass DBS, and there have been incidents. Nowadays you can’t be a UK athletics official without (basic) DBS checks and training. I seem to remember 20 years ago when I was a PCC member I never underwent DBS checks, and there was of course some resistance (‘why do I… Read more »
Hi Nigel, I’m a regular vicar not a complete expert but 2 links that may help are:
Home | Safeguarding: Training Portal
And the Parish Safeguarding handbook that’s used as the basis of a lot of policies and processes.
Layout 1
Thanks. The second link shows a document which has much in common with the UK athletics guidance, and no doubt other bodies. The first link needs a registration – I do hate that, when there seems to be absolutely no need – you shouldn;t need to register just to read some documents. I think it answers the question TimP was asking. Maybe the question is – if this was in place in 2013 (or earlier), what would the process have been, and would it have avoided all the subsequent abuse and problems? I can’t see why there is the slightest… Read more »
For ‘+Helen’, do you perhaps mean ‘+Helen-Ann’?
This is why when he first resigned, I wrote that there was much about his handling of safeguarding for which he should resign, but I wasn’t convinced this should be the particular case. His actions since then have made me rethink that, but let’s stay with it, and I’ll try to explain then answer your question about what you (or indeed I, as I’m ordained) should do in the situation you posed. At the time I felt that ++Welby had done what was required of him. As a busy Archbishop, he wouldn’t handle everything that came into his office personally,… Read more »
Realist, I came back to the thread thinking I should try to reply to TimP from a safeguarding perspective but found your latest post. It’s a brilliant summary and you have set out the actions of a manager taking proper ownership of a difficult issue and sticking with it. Nobody within the C of E hierarchy took ownership so Smyth was not stopped and many other young men and boys were harmed. In my book the head of the organisation is accountable for a serious safeguarding failing like this, but the resignations should not just be confined to him. Also… Read more »
Excellent. Is this guidance documented anywhere, and have all CoE officers, clergy and higher signed it, in their blood? if not, why not?
Exactly right, Tim – if as clergy we reported, say, a historic incident involving other parties to the police and they said ‘this is too low-level/ vague to investigate or issue a crime reference’ what could we as clergy actually do? It seems that the Makin report was making unfair expectations at this point.
Thank you; I think some people have made some good answers – – but it does seem to only amount to better record keeping and covering-your-<back> . The fact no one got on the phone to the Bishop in another Province is bad. They did try, and this was something an Archbishop should have helped with. But in terms of what they could do in England – I don’t think anything that’s been suggested wasn’t done. The remark about independence – well I do want to see what that would mean in concrete terms. Probably a newer story for that… Read more »
Church must face up to Justin Welby’s damaging legacy | Justin Welby | The Guardian
Justin Welby’s comments were crass. But I am cautious in what I write because I do not know how unwell he is at present and the impact on his judgement. Collectively in the Church of England, I believe, we need to address a culture in which leaders may feel they should push on when too burnt out to do so safely and not supported to step aside; and move forward to an adequately-resourced, genuinely independent safeguarding system staffed by people with the specialist skills and focus to address past wrongs as well as current risks.
There is an interesting lack of curiosity as to why somebody who has often spoken so well – some might say with distinction- in The Lords, should have made such an enormous mess on this occasion