Press release from the Prime Minister’s Office
Appointment of Chairman of the Crown Nominations Commission for Canterbury: 16 December 2024
The Prime Minister has appointed The Lord Evans of Weardale KCB DL to be the Chairman of the Crown Nominations Commission for Canterbury.
From: Prime Minister’s Office, 10 Downing Street and The Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer KCB KC MP
Published 16 December 2024
The Prime Minister has appointed The Lord Evans of Weardale KCB DL to be the Chairman of the Crown Nominations Commission for Canterbury. The Crown Nominations Commission is the Church of England committee that nominates the candidate to be the next Archbishop of Canterbury to succeed the Most Reverend and Right Honourable Justin Welby. Archbishop Welby has announced that he will complete his duties on 6th January 2025.
Notes for Editors
Jonathan Evans has been a Crossbench member of the House of Lords since 2014. Until October 2023 he was Chair of the Committee on Standards in Public Life. He is currently Chair of the HALO Trust, the anti-landmine charity, and of the Public Interest Committee at KPMG UK. He is a former Director-General of the Security Service, MI5. He is an active and communicant member of his local parish church.
The Church of England’s standing orders state that the Chair of the Crown Nominations Commission for Canterbury is appointed by the Prime Minister and must be an actual communicant lay [i.e. not ordained] member of the Church of England.
So the former Director-General of the Security Service, MI5 will take a leading role in the appointment of the next Archbishop of Canterbury.
How appropriate !
Forget not that my Lord of Leeds also spent time as a Russian expert for MI5,aka GCHQ – and a finer bishop is not to be found!
Bishop Nick Baines joined GCHQ as a linguist after a university language degree in German and French, and then GCHQ trained him in Russian. But only four years later, aged 26, he resigned to become a priest. One presumes he was working towards this path for a few years before that.
Perhaps he is a fine bishop because he chose to walk away from the security services, rather than embrace their values.
My friends in Bradford would not agree that he is ‘the finest bishop’.
really? why?
We never learn, do we. Who cares about being ‘the finest’? What about the ones show their frailty, humanity, and vulnerability?
Minor corrective – GCHQ is a separate entity from MI5/6 (or if you prefer BSS/SIS). And you can see folk pouring into the doughnut morning by morning…..
That, frankly, is not my experience, nor that of a number of other clergy who have had the misfortune to come into contact with him.
On a point of information, “North” (MI5, the domestic security service, Thames House) report to the Home Office, “West” (GCHQ, signals intelligence, Cheltenham and elsewhere) reports to the Foreign Office. Although it has become more complex given GCHQ’s changing remit, they are not legally permitted to operate domestically other than in support of other agencies that can, and they take that distinction very seriously. They are not, in any way, the same organisations.
Nick Baines is 67 so notwithstanding his admirable qualities will not be a candidate for Canterbury.
sadly not – his loyalty to consolidating the united dioceses has kept him north!
Transparency and trust is fast becoming a key question relating to senior appointments in the Church of England. So why do we keep appointing people to these important roles who have a background in the security services? William Nye’s last Civil Service job was as Director in the National Security Secretariat at the Cabinet Office, before he went off to be Principal Private Secretary to Prince Charles. And now we have a former Director General of MI5 as chair of the Canterbury CNC. Is this wise? What values and experiences do these men bring to these roles? Are these the… Read more »
Discretion, a keen sense of responsibility and duty, ability to process and weigh information. Attentive listening. Calmness under pressure. These qualities which one would hope for in a senior MI5 operative might come in handy in other contexts, perhaps?
If you regard the Church of England as a Corporation like the Post Office or an oil company then probably but if you see the Church as the Body of Christ then certainly not.
I find the unofficial security vetting of the next Archbishop, probably organised by William Nye as extremely sinister.
Would Jesus and the twelve apostles have survived “security vetting” ? Of course not !
I want an Archbishop who is prepared to speak truth to power. What I see is an appointment expressly designed to prevent that.
A national church appointment, in the gift of the supreme governor of the church who is also the head of state, and will be acting on the advice of his ministers who are in power … I think there are many reasons in this setup why we may not get someone well-versed in the art of speaking truth to power.
Please hold back such a view. We are not aware of all the members!
‘Discretion, a keen sense of responsibility and duty, ability to process and weigh information. Attentive listening. Calmness under pressure.’
Which of these qualities are unhelpful or incommensurate with contributing to the life of the body of Christ?
Well said. This CORPORATE body of the CE has to change and radically!! Too much arrogance and self serving! Too much money spent on so called projects instead if giving it back to the parishes where the real CE work should be done.
I agree, but these qualities might equally be found in other professions, such as senior management in local government or education.
Such people might bring, in addition to the above, deep immersion in working within the Nolan principles, experience of managing safeguarding at a senior level, and experience of working within a culture of democratic accountability. These experiences might be considered quite relevant bearing in mind the current problems in the church.
Well, he’s a past Chair of the Nolan Committee, so might have some usefl experience……..
Safeguarding’s always gone brilliantly in local government and schools, hasn’t it!
I’d have thought that higher up the list would be: spiritual discernment, theological wisdom, intimate experience of the structures, strengths and turmoils of the CofE, a passion for mission and the ability to recognize a proohet for our times. Not sure that being a terrorism expert quite fits that bill.
Do you know the bloke or his Christian commitments? What breathtakingly arrogant assumptions you make about his skills or limitations on the basis of his past career.
If we had someone like that he could perhaps be made Archbishop of Canterbury!
Wow. Sorry I was unaware he was the appointing Monarch. Just the Chair of the panel
Given that Evans and Nye overlapped in their time in charge of MI5 and the National Security Secretariat, and would presumably know each other, I wonder whether Nye had any influence in Evans’ appointment? The national C of E yet again being an old boys club where connections count more than ever.
Connections, or relationships? Two sides, one coin? An incarnate faith calls for deep mutuality in relationships, which can be inevitably be presented as croneyism by detractors, but could just be profound fellowship in Christ. To the pure all things….
It is perhaps more relevant to ask whether Lord Evans and Justin Welby know each other and whether he was consulted about the choice.
Unworthy comment.
How do? In the normal course of events the outgoing ABC would surely be consulted so I think it’s entirely reasonable to wonder whether it happened on this occasion.
An opportunity missed. The Prime Minister could have signalled that safeguarding was a priority by choosing someone with a background in safeguarding. He could have signalled he supports increasing the number of women in diocesan roles by choosing a woman to head this CNC. He could have signalled a need for greater racial diversity by choosing someone other than a white man. In the end he chose a white male establishment figure. With all due respect to Lord Evans, I am disappointed.
One might wonder how much personal say the PM had in this, especially given that he is not a practising member of the Church of England, and indeed not a practising Christian at all. I imagine he might rely quite strongly on his Appointments Secretary (who is a non-voting member of the CNC). We might also speculate that the central members of the CNC are at least consulted, and so too perhaps the Appointments Committee of the Church of England. But this is all speculation on my part, I absolutely have no inside knowledge. (If I did I wouldn’t be… Read more »
Then maybe my disappointment should be directed at someone other than Keir Starmer but I don’t think it lessens my disappointment.
But if the CofE is for everyone then Sir Keir is entitled to take an interest in this matter if he chooses to do so. As the King’s Prime Minister he perhaps ought to at this torrid time for the CofE.
I am told we live in a democracy. Doesn’t that mean Sir Keir’s legitimacy comes from the people not the King ?
In a word, no. We don’t vote for a Prime Minister, we vote for a party and the Monarch accepts their leader as his or her Prime Minister, whom s/he has the right to dismiss at any point. The legitimacy of the Government comes from the Crown. It’s a continual frustration of mine that ‘Government’ isn’t a required subject in schools here like it is in some other countries. If it were, we would have to dispense with the ruse that Britain is a democracy. That in turn might enable people to engage more effectively with the political process, but… Read more »
If you’re going to be picky 🙂 we don’t vote for a party either: we vote for an individual candidate in the constituency where we are registered. Those elected are usually affiliated to a party and are pledged to give their support to that party’s leader. The Church Assembly was created partly because Parliament cme to be composed of people who were not members of the established Church. It enabled the Church to be legislated for by its own members. There ws an assumption that it still represented the vast majority of people in England, and that even those who… Read more »
Quite right you are. Thanks for the clarification.
1919 was a long time ago and much has changed. So should we. A re-engagement with the Government would be a positive step.
In 1919 one of the arguments advanced by Liberals like H. A. L. (Herbert) Fisher, then president of the board of education, against the Cripps/Wolmer/Cecil scheme to convert the deliberative Representative Church Council (established in 1904) into a legislative body, was that it would give the the Church “all the advantages of disestablishment without any of the disadvantages”. For Hensley Henson and E. A. Knox (both unpopular in their own very different ways), it amounted to disestablishment without disendowment, and made the Church a narrow and introverted sect. For nonconformists (led by P. T. Forsyth, the heir to John Clifford),… Read more »
If he is interested in the CofE he should attend a parish on Sundays and consider getting baptised. Only then should be attempt to guide its direction.
So much pure speculation!
Amen.
The Prime Minister (or his Appointment Secretary who probably made the recommendation which the PM skim read and signed amid a huge pile of other papers) was somewhat constrained in having to find a: a regular C of E attending lay person b. someone with the time to devote to the task over the next few months c. Someone who had held some sort of leadership position which would command sufficient respect. d. Someone with the hide of a pachyderm who can cope with all the flak that comes their way the moment their name is announced. Personally, I am… Read more »
The Jesus I read about in the Gospels is very far from being “a safe pair of hands” so why do we assume it is a good idea to appoint an establishment figure as Archbishop of Canterbury ? A Church of England with a General Secretary who is a former Royal Courtier and Security Expert is going to struggle to reflect authentic Christianity as we can all see recently.
I am sure you are right and I understand the practicalities but that doesn’t change that I am disappointed. (And, I was careful to say that I was disappointed not that the appointment was wrong in any way. I described my reaction. )
Kate so sorry you seem to be side tracked. This is the appointment of the Chair. Unless you think you are privy to undisclosed names yet to be appointed to the panel. Not sure why such announcement has do many people getting briefs/knickers in a twist at this stage!
Yes, it is the appointment of a key person. Not only will Lord Evans as chair be able to steer the debate, we know that recent CNCs have been deadlocked which suggests a vote either way can be decisive. I think we should expect transparency as to how the person casting that vote was selected … And we don’t have it.
I anticipate similar concern over the selection of the five international delegates.
The problematic word in all this is ‘signal’. Choosing people for any role on the basis that it will make a point guarantees nothing; it’s a ‘fur coat and no knickers’ approach to governance which can only end badly.
It is tragic that the level of any kind of trust in the leadership of the Church of England is now such that this announcement receives such an extraordinary level of attack – and, if I have read the negative comments correctly, entirely on the basis of supposition, rather than of clear factual knowledge of either Lord Evans or of the circumstances around the Prime Minister’s choice to appoint him to this role. I know nothing at all about Lord Evans, but I am grateful that anyone is prepared to give of their time to help appoint a new ABC,… Read more »
“Most importantly, and yet unremarked upon by other commentators on this thread, is the fact that he is an active member of his parish, and thus is a stakeholder of the most important kind in the Church of England.”
Unremarked upon because that is a legal requirement to be appointed chair of the CNC.
Thank you for elevating comments here above the gossipy “disgusted of the CofE”. He has an invidious job and deserves and commands our prayers, support and wisdom. Let us all pray for wisdom and guidance for the future for a thankless but prophetic role into the future. Perhaps we can all discover a theology of redemption rather than of judgement in these times.
I would in general agree with you and with Homeless Anglican on this. But I also hope that Lord Evans takes on board the extent to which many Anglicans have been shaken and appalled by the string of serious failings in the CofE’s handling of its safeguarding scandals and the ease with which we are told ‘there was nothing I/we could do’ (as has happened yet again today) so would we please leave it to the grown ups, ie the people who know how these things work in practice, to handle. I think that concern is reasonable and should be… Read more »
So don’t just express this concern here. Write Lord Evans about it.
I could. But I suspect that cooling my porridge is more likely to be an effective use of my time and energy. Traditionally in the civil service, the importance of correspondence from the public was judged by its weight, ie how many sacks. I hope other tallies are now included but old habits…
You don’t think that the negative comments might have a lot to do with the lack of transparency as to how Lord Evans was chosen, whether other candidates were considered, the key qualities he was felt to have, and who were the key figures behind the appointment etc?
I don’t think anyone has commented negatively on Lord Evans himself, but people do seem to have reasonable concerns as to the process and lack of transparency.
Dominic Agreed totally. Look forward to heading south to worship at your abode over Christmas period!
Today’s antiphon to the Magnificat: O Sapientia
O Wisdom,
coming forth from the mouth of the Most High,
reaching from one end to the other mightily,
and sweetly ordering all things:
Come and teach us the way of prudence.
When do we find out who the Canterbury representatives and the Anglican communion representatives on the CNC are?
I’m not sure why this hasn’t appeared, but it is directly relevant to your question. The proposal is to reconceive the role of the See of Canterbury vis-a-vis the Anglican Communion.
https://livingchurch.org/news/news-anglican-communion/proposals-call-for-decentering-canterburys-role-in-anglican-communion/
I saw the report in a recent edition of Church Times and have scanned the Anglican Communion Commission’s proposals – they seem significant, given current ‘crises’, including a change to the description of the Anglican Communion and reducing the AB of C’s involvement and influence through a rotating presidency.
Likewise I’m surprised these proposals have not featured on TA yet. Perhaps being saved for the Christmas/New Year slot!
The best way to reconceive it would be to disband the communion and let us all get on with our national business without foreign interference.
Some provinces are very content to have a bona fide Communion (receiving communion as a Body). Those who do not want that arrangement can of course vote with their feet. You raise an interesting point. It may be that for some, the place of Canterbury was desirable, including those in the CofE, and more widely. If that is taken away, it sounds like your immediate reaction is “the best way to reconceive it would be to disband the communion.” I wonder if that is because you are in the CofE? That the CofE needs “to get on with our national… Read more »
What the provinces wish wasn’t taken into consideration when they were created in the lands the British Empire colonised either. The whole communion is a creaking imperial project that needs to die so ‘we all’ can find ourselves again as equals.
Thank you for this–very revealing, England centric–view.
I wondered as much.
England speaking for the Anglican Communion.
Advent blessings.
I wouldn’t assume too much. I may work in England but I was born and raised overseas in nonconformity. Establishment, I ain’t.
Blessings to you also.
I went to Virginia seminary. The PECUSA at the time had two missionary fields, foreign and domestic. My classmates in a missionary mood went to the Philippines. My Yale colleagues influenced by notable missionaries, went to Burundi and to Rwanda, French speaking countries in Africa, like most of W Africa (with the conflicts that betokened). Also Tanzania and Kenya. NONE of this had to do with ’empire’ but with the spirit of bringing the Gospel. The ’empire’ is an anxiety notable in form in England, and unrelated to Gospel promulgation in the name of Jesus Christ, coming from many different… Read more »
That’s all very helpful. For what it’s worth, I don’t actually believe the anti-empire argument I deployed earlier. I had wrongly assumed a liberal interlocutor and simply presented an argument which I thought might receive a sympathetic hearing. My real objection to the communion is just as I put it at first: interference by foreigners in the affairs of a State Church. The last time the Archbishopric of Canterbury was subject to direct foreign influence was before 1534. I’m not eager to see a reversion to that state of affairs. I’m very happy to admit this is an England-centric view… Read more »
I agree that your position, focused not on the life of the AC but on the National Church, makes sense. I have said as much.
The AC provinces were not clamoring to be involved in decisions about the See of Canterbury. That was something coming from within the CofE.
The issue is that those who have maintained the historical practices of the communion (e.g. male episcopate, marriage between a man and a woman) are the ones struggling to be on full communion with those who have departed from these norms. Why should those who stayed the same be the ones who have to leave?
I don’t know why that question is posed to me.
Women in all three orders of ministry is now the settled mind of the church. Same sex marriage will take longer but the direction of travel is clear. Perhaps the answer to [your] [the] question is that doctrine is not immutable. And no-one is under the slightest obligation to leave.
So we’ve got Billy Nye the Whitewash Guy who held Whitehall security committee posts, now we’ve got a former head of MI5…did anyone say we were looking for people experienced in transparency in their ways of working… You couldn’t make this stuff up, and the HoB didn’t even engineer this one!! Well, not so we know anyway. At least it makes a change from all the alleged former members of MI6 who staffed Lambeth Palace… Joking apart, if he has had an active role in the kind of vetting undertaken by the security services, he may well turn out to… Read more »
Too nigh to Nye, as it were?
Behold, the end is nigh? Or Nye??
I’d much rather ‘behold, the end of Nye’! We can but hope, but meanwhile all roads will no doubt continue to lead to his door…
This must win the prize for the most depressing thread on TA (though I admit that is a hotly contested title).
There are some people here who really, really, really need to find themselves a hobby.
Do you know what Fr Dexter, I absolutely agree with you. My expectation is that Lord Evans hasn’t even heard of TA let alone read any of the stuff in the comments section.
Come, come. For some commenting here clearly is a hobby. And for others I suspect it is a form of therapy. I of course am simply being rational. But I am missing messrs Gillis and Chesterton.
I am not!
Yes. Where did they go?
As a newcomer and outsider, who’s read rather few TA threads, it strikes me that it is, to some degree, a proxy for a discussion about the pros and cons of establishment.
The appointment of The Lord Evans of Weardale KCB DL is a good one. His predecessors have been Lord Hurd (former ++Carey), Baroness Butler-Sloss (++Williams), and Lord Luce (++Welby). I have a sense that the judges/civil servants have/will do a better job than the politicians. Lord Luce presided over a dysfunctional CNC, with opinionated members not working well as one body. The commission couldn’t agree the nomination(s) at the end of the final (two-day) meeting. It needed to meet again, as a press release had to make clear. I am privy to some (leaked) information on it, and was surprised at those who were apparently interviewed,… Read more »
/ The most significant innovation Lord Evans could bring would be for this part of the due diligence to be outsourced, i.e. to be conducted by a process wholly independent of the church. A number of potential candidates mentioned to me seem to have blemished records in this area, which at the very least need forensic examination in advance. I wish Lord Evans well. It will be interesting to see the composition of the whole commission when it is published. If I have any criticism of the Downing Street press release, it doesn’t disclose the parish where he worships. But then he is… Read more »
It is slightly odd in referring to his local parish church, rather than his parish church, or a local church.