We reported on 10 December that Rochester has no confidence in the Archbishops’ Council.
This provoked the Council to respond on 20 December, see Archbishops’ Council responds to Rochester Diocesan Synod’s motion of no confidence and the full text of the letter signed by the Secretary General, William Nye is available here.
Rochester diocese has now replied to that letter. See:
That’s an excellent letter from Bp Jonathan.
It really is. I particularly appreciate the discussion around repentance and the issue of organisational structure.
Bishop Jonathan says “My hope was that the passing of this motion would draw the attention of the Council to the deep concerns of those in the Diocese of Rochester and elsewhere to the need for a fundamental change of culture not only around safeguarding but around transparency and accountability in leadership and governance.” From the outside, this strikes me as going right to the heart of the matter. To treat the current crisis as being just about “safeguarding” is to miss the point. The safeguarding failings were a symptom, not a cause, of the malaise.
The letter on behalf of the Archbishops’ Council is a neat encapsulation of the problem, I think. It’s a tone-deaf recapitulation of all the things that the Synod members who voted no confidence already knew the Council is doing or intended to do. There’s no acknowledgment that for a diocesan synod to vote in this way is in any way extraordinary, which is… extraordinary.
I agree with hose who have said that +Jonathan’s reply is excellent.
I feel encouraged that we have a bishop who is thinking clearly and making his arguments succinctly and to the point. I hope we hear more from him on our predicament and ways forward for the future.
Is it strictly true to say that ‘the Archbishops’ Council has responded’ to the diocese of Rochester’s concerns?
A letter has been issued by the trustees of the Archbishops’ Council, but the Council itself appears to have remained silent. The trustees, of course, answerable to the Charity Commissioners but not necessarily in that capacity to the General Synod, might well prompt the Archbishops’ Council to do something, but until that happens, I’d argue it’s not the business of the trustees to undertake what would seem to be the Council’s business.
Each of the seventeen Members of the Archbishops’ Council and the seventeen Trustees are one and the same person. I’m not sure how this affects, if at all, their capacity in the response which you question.