Delay in appointing a successor to the Most Rev. Rowan Williams as Archbishop of Canterbury is prompting questions about the viability of the role. Williams joined the debate last weekend, saying it was inevitable that changes would be made to lighten the archbishop’s workload.
He told the Compass Rose Society meeting in Canterbury there was clearly too much on his plate. He said there were always efforts to relieve him of a committee or two “so I get a five-minute break between meetings” but sooner or later significant changes need to be put in place.
The archbishop’s workload, effectively four jobs, will be an issue weighing on the chosen person….
Just a few comments to add to John Martin’s excellent [as ever] report:
1. “Delay in appointing a successor to the Most Rev. Rowan Williams as Archbishop of Canterbury is prompting questions about the viability of the role.”
I think the questions being raised are about the viability of the current selection process rather than the role for which selection is being made.
As John rightly points out there are serious questions about the selection of Barry Morgan, rabidly liberal leader of one of the smallest provinces in the provinces who has made it his job before retiring shortly to shrink the Welsh church even more.
There is also another query about the choice by Williams of Trevor Willmott as his suffagan as Bishop of Dover and the negative effect he and the Dean have had on the CNC [Synod very wisely rejected Williams’ attempts to make him chair of the Synod business committee and the wisdom of Synod is now apparent; and of course the number of representatives there are of the diocese of Canterbury relative to representatives of the wider Church of England and the Anglican Communion on the CNC.
2. “Williams joined the debate last weekend, saying it was inevitable that changes would be made to lighten the archbishop’s workload.
He told the Compass Rose Society meeting in Canterbury there was clearly too much on his plate”
Goodness how Williams whines and whinges. Since his incumbency he has had:
a] the suffragan Bishop of Dover to take the burden of the diocese of Canterbury supposedly because it was such a big job and to free him for Metropolitan and Communion work.
b] the Archbishop of York to represent England on the Primates Committee supposedly because it is such a big job and to free him to concentrate on Communion work.
c] a whole raft of functionaries appointed to help him with Communion affairs [funded it appears by the Americans through the ACO] because it is supposedly such a big job.
No the truth of it is that Williams has spent an enormous amount of Church time doing his own thing – speaking on topics which are outside his remit, writing his own books and articles and indulging his pet interests. He has not spent the time on church matters which he should have, although on his prodigious output I cannot fault him – he produces a major piece of work or a sermon every day or so, although one would have wished that he concentrated on quality and proofreading more and on quantity less. There is no reason why a successor cannot deal with all three roles well if they are not giving priority to running their own interests and sidelines in company time in priority to church business.
3. “The Archbishop of Canterbury is the second citizen of the United Kingdom after the monarch”
We are all under God. There is only one monarch under God, and the rest of us are citizens. Consider the Queen – she manages to be head of state of a dozen or so countries, head of the Commonwealth, head of the Church of England and numerous other roles – do you hear her whining and whinging about what a big job she has?
The truth is that we haven’t heard much from Williams in his supposed fourth role as ‘second citizen’ which isn’t really a recognised role. If he had performed his other three roles well this other function would have taken care of itself as part of that service.
4. “The Rt. Rev. Justin Welby, Bishop of Durham, is widely reported as the commission’s first choice.”
It is worth remembering that whether or not +Welby has gained the supermajority to be considered as one candidate, the selection of the preferred candidate [on a simple majority] whose name is to be sent to the Prime Minister is only made after a second candidate has been selected by a supermajority. Andrew Goddard has an excellent analysis here which makes this clear.
Welby may [or may not, depending on the accuracy of these convenient ‘leaks’] be a chosen candidate, but it is by no means certain that he is the preferred candidate of the CNC, which decision will have to await the selection of a second candidate.
Overall it is a mess, and it would be interesting to know the voting figures, but I suspect the intervention of Williams in pushing for a system which allowed Morgan to be selected to ‘represent’ the Primates, and Williams’ own decision to select Trevor Willmott as Bishop of Dover in Canterbury may be at the bottom of the problems the CNC are having. Fancy that!
It seems to me that the Church of England has a credibility problem, and there is no sign that anything is being done to rectify that. We need an experienced set of hands as steersman now who will have the respect of the orthodox majority of the Communion. That is someone who is not up to his neck in the dishonesty of the current incumbent over things like the Dublin Primates meeting, but I am not sure that any of the current candidates has clean hands on that.
It would be good to show some repentence, and to pray for the right man to be brought forward by God [1 Samuel 16] in His mercy.
“3. “The Archbishop of Canterbury is the second citizen of the United Kingdom after the monarchâ€
We are all under God. There is only one monarch under God, and the rest of us are citizens”
The Britsh Queen is not a citizen (shades of the Fench Revolution!) and the British population are actually subjects, not citizens.
Some astringent and perceptive analysis of what is happening (or not happening) in England, Pageantmaster, thank you.
I imagine the Archbishop of the Rapidly Disappearing ‘I must have a Gay Bishop’ Church of Wales (TM) has put his oar in as well to the current mess.
#2 Thank you for your helpful teasing out of the citizen/subject point, Citizen Clarin.
Vive la différence.
Citizen Pageantmaster
Citoyens Sieur de Pageant and Clarin, my wife would like to interog… talk to both of you. Sincerely, Ernest Defarge.
A searching and well-thought article.
[blockquote] “One reduction in the archbishop’s duties has been achieved in recent years by placing the Bishop of Dover in virtual charge of Canterbury diocese. The archbishop is based in Canterbury on weekends and only when he is not otherwise engaged. That invites the question why the Canterbury diocese warrants six votes on the CNC when the Anglican Communion has just one.” [/blockquote]
It does indeed. ABC has great relevance to Anglicans all over the world, whether for good or ill, and he also influences foreign policy and relations. Some complain that it is not good that he be chosen by the Church of England or the British PM. But in fact its worse than that: Almost half the votes (completely unaccountable) are exercised by representatives from just one diocese.
[blockquote] “Questions too surround the choice of the Most Rev. Barry Morgan, Archbishop of Wales and an acknowledged liberal, to represent his fellow Primates of the Communion.” [/blockquote]
Another excellent question. The choice of Archbishop of Canterbury will likely have an effect on relations between Britain and other countries in the Commonwealth, yet the CofE has somehow permitted all possible input by Anglicans in those countries to be snuffed out. Why was this permitted to happen?
“The archbishop is based in Canterbury on weekends and only when he is not otherwise engaged. That invites the question why the Canterbury diocese warrants six votes on the CNC when the Anglican Communion has just one.”
People in England would say it’s even odder than that. Canterbury diocese is largely rural, with some medium-sized university towns. It isn’t much like the majority of urbanized England. I believe (from what I’ve heard from people over there) that the diocesan ethos is largely liberal catholic, and much more liberal than catholic. It revels in old-style ‘Tory squirearchy’. Forward in Faith believe they are being driven out (by institutional pressure and denial of licenses) over their opposition to women’s ordination and women bishops. Some have joined the Ordinariate. The Cathedral has a disproprtionately large representation on the CNC (including an archdeacon – choosing her own boss! – and the organist – and the cathedral is solidly liberal catholic (if that phrase isn’t oxymoronic). The largest parishes in the diocese are almost all evangelical (some number 300+ in ASA) but they are not represented at all.
“Questions too surround the choice of the Most Rev. Barry Morgan, Archbishop of Wales and an acknowledged liberal, to represent his fellow Primates of the Communion.”
He was “elected” in a way that would give credit to Chicago politics. I think the truth is, since Gafcon and the preceding years of fiasco, the Global South has largely lost interest in the C of E. It wasn’t like this under George Carey.