A Church Times Poll shows a lack of trust in C of E General Synod

Fewer than one quarter of respondents to the Church Times readership survey have confidence in the General Synod’s leadership. In contrast, nearly three-quarters have confidence in the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Out of 4620 respondents, polled last summer and autumn, 73 per cent agreed with the statement “I have confidence in the leadership given by the Archbishop of Canterbury.” Only seven per cent disagreed.

When it came to the General Synod, however, only 23 per cent agreed. Forty-one per cent were uncertain, and 37 per cent disagreed.Read it all.


Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * Christian Life / Church Life, * Culture-Watch, * International News & Commentary, Anglican Provinces, Church of England (CoE), England / UK, Parish Ministry, Religion & Culture

4 comments on “A Church Times Poll shows a lack of trust in C of E General Synod

  1. Pageantmaster Ù† says:

    [blockquote]respondents to the Church Times readership survey[/blockquote]
    Tells us nothing about what church members think, only what Church Times members think, and so given that the Church Times is a liberal catholic loony left leaning rag, the results just tell us what some of the Church Times reading liberal catholic left-leaning loony readership think.

    A poll of church members [most of whom don’t read the Church Times] would have been more representative and useful.

    More interesting is why the Church Times a few days before Synod is putting up a vote of confidence in Justin Welby and a vote of no confidence in Synod members. Could it have anything to do with the former editor being Justin Welby’s Press Officer?

    Just possibly it is. And just possibly Lambeth Palace press office involvement may be why last week the Church Times were running articles with the new Justin Welby/HTB talking points:
    1. We have lost the Culture Wars in the UK [ignore the overwhelming majority of the Communion];
    2. We have to detoxify the church with the secular world by removing points of difference with it; and
    3. Therefore say after me: “Forget teaching about sex, get on with preaching the Gospel”
    4. Criticise those who think it is important – they are yesterday’s people – bigots and fundies, and holding us back.

    Interestingly we have heard the same line coming firstly from Lambeth Palace with Welby trotting it out for quite a while, then the Church Times ran several articles with some ‘research’ arguing the same thing, and this week it has been picked up by Peter Ould and Brother Ivo who writes for Cranmer. Quess who was schmoozed by Lambeth Palace at a media reception recently? Look what wine and nibbles can achieve – hey ho.

    Different Archbishop, same old scheming manipulative and deeply un–Christian mind games and propaganda. What are the odds of Justin Welby telling us all next week in his Presidential Address to Synod that we have to “forget differences and preach the Gospel”? What do you reckon? Any takers for a bet that that is what Justin Welby will do at Synod and that this is the latest self-serving crap to come out of Wobbly Towers?

    Winner gets a personal invite to wine and nibbles with Justin, David and Phil at Wobbly Towers and a year’s free subscription to Indaba Today.

  2. Katherine says:

    If we are to forget about personal behaviors, what Gospel is left to preach?

  3. William S says:

    I has also noticed Peter Ould’s surprising (to me) piece about losing the culture wars in the UK and advising us to restrict our activities to preaching the gospel.
    That wouldn’t surprise if it came from the Archbishop, because in an attempt to keep everyone together, which I’m sure is the no.1 priority for an Archbishop, it would be a good idea to house-train evangelicals so they do their evangelism, but don’t make a fuss about issues that upset the kind of people who read the italic Church Times italic .
    But distinctly odd coming from Peter. It just doesn’t make sense on so many levels:

    If same-sex activity is fine in wider society then why isn’t fine in the church? And vice versa – if it’s not part of God’s will for redeemed humanity. why is it a good idea for anyone?

    What happens if a sexually-active gay or lesbian is converted? At what point do you reveal to them that, in spite of affirming GLBT activity outside the church, you can’t do that there here? Quite reasonably, they could say ‘Why didn’t you say this before?’

    Does anyone really think that churches will be allowed to survive as islands of hatred and homophobia (I speak as from the opposite standpoint), and not be brought into line by the full force of the law – eventually?

    Those thoughts are just off the top of my head. If Wilberforce had applied this logic to the slave trade, where would we be?

  4. MichaelA says:

    “given that the Church Times is a liberal catholic loony left leaning rag”

    True! 🙂