You are here
LONDON: Let us vet new bishops, says Synod member
By Bill Bowder
CHURCH TIMES
LONDON (2/9/2005)--ROOT-AND-BRANCH revision of the appointment of suffragan bishops, archdeacons, deans, and canons will be debated by the General Synod later this month.
The proposal comes in a private member's motion tabled by Anthony Archer, an Evangelical from St Albans diocese, in the wake of the Jeffrey John affair at Reading. Dr John was later appointed Dean of St Albans. Mr Archer's motion calls for a working party to look into the methods of making senior appointments.
The Synod debates the private member's motion that attracts the most signatures from other Synod members. Mr Archer's motion raced to the top of the list, with the support of nearly a quarter of Synod members.
At present, diocesan bishops nominate the suffragan of their choice. The appointment of some deans and archdeacons is made by the Prime Minister, with no formal right of consultation from other senior clergy or laity.
In a supporting document, Mr Archer suggests that the Bishop of Oxford was not provided with "sufficient support" when he nominated Dr John to Reading. Dr John subsequently withdrew because of pressure from Lambeth Palace.
Mr Archer said on Tuesday: "The clergy in general would like to see much greater clarity in appointments."
A diocesan bishop, he said, should have a short list of "perhaps two to five names from which he is free to make his decision". All the names would have the support of the diocesan appointments group.
The same procedure could be used for the deans of the newer cathedrals "where the bishop is in the driving seat". He said that he was also "calling for what is in effect a job description" for senior clergy.
One signatory was Canon Robert Baker, Prolocutor of the Canterbury Convocation. He said on Wednesday: "We want a thorough-going review, along the lines of what Baroness Perry did for diocesan bishops."
The issue of the nomination and appointment of Dr John was "an example of the suspicion of the way these appointments are made".
The Bishop of Lincoln, Dr John Saxbee, said that he had signed the motion, but did not support it. "I think it is worth airing the issue. There is a case for looking at senior posts generally, but this proposal is too elaborate and costly," he said on Wednesday.
"I suggest a light touch, and not the root-and-branch review that Anthony Archer is proposing."
A review of the processes for these senior appointments, chaired by the late Sir William van Straubenzee, reported to the Synod in 1992.
Should all candidates for senior positions be approved by the diocese before appointment? Vote here.
END
