The game is on. Journalists have started their game of speculating without reason on the internal workings of the mind of the Archbishop of Canterbury. The whistle has blown, the runners are lined up, and now we’ll get a race to see who can guess the best story. How exciting… er… or maybe not quite.
I thought the silly season had finished with the ending of the summer break. However, I was clearly wrong. But, the race they describe is the wrong one – the only ‘race’ is between the newspapers.
The media are running with the Telegraph’s speculative story about the retirement of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Despite the accurately vague language that is used in these reports, it is sadly inevitable that many people with think them credible. I don’t blame the writers for amusing themselves in this way, but the readers need to ask themselves a few questions.
Let’s start with the headline in the Times: “Bishops line up to don Williams’ robes”. Can someone tell us just how bishops ‘line up’? What’s the process? The facts are: (a) there isn’t one, (b) no bishops are interested in playing this sort of game, (c) bishops cannot put themselves in the frame even if they wanted to, and (d) bishops are usually too busy doing their work to bother with this stuff.
“Bishops are placing themselves under starter’s orders in the race to become next Archbishop of Canterbury”. Er… who and how? I understand the use of the metaphor, but it doesn’t work in this case. There is no race. There is no competition. There is no ‘finishing line’. The horses don’t know that they are running or where the jumps are that they didn’t know they were required to jump.
It simply doesn’t work like this. If any particular bishop was being considered, he probably wouldn’t know. He couldn’t influence the process anyway. Unlike some other Provinces of the Anglican Communion, there is no election to be fought, no lobbying to be done, no one to lobby and no ‘ultimate prize’. One newspaper report speaks of “some apparent jockeying for position among Dr Williams’ potential successors”. How would a potential successor actually do this ‘jockeying’? Just asking.
You’d have to be out of your mind to want to be Archbishop of Canterbury. My guess is that whoever is asked to do it next will have to be dragged to the seat.
Just read this in today’s Telegraph: “The Archbishop is thought to be under pressure from some senior colleagues to move aside…”. Er… ‘is thought’ by whom (other than the media who would like a good story)?
Anyway, all this speculation is based on another misleading use of language. Why would Rowan be ‘retiring early’ by leaving when he thinks it best for the Church to do so? The fact that any of us can go on until we reach 70 doesn’t mean we should – and most bishops don’t. There would be no sinister significance in the timing of a retirement.
I have no idea when Rowan thinks he might retire. I doubt if anyone else does. Journalists certainly don’t. We can all speculate, but that’s all it is.
And most of us have a life to live and work to do and will leave this media game (for, entertaining though it obviously is, that is all it is) to the media.
– Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Location:Oxford
Nick Baines's Blog 
September 12, 2011 at 3:48 pm
It is measure of how you have improved readers of the blog that we shall resist the impulse to tease you unmercifully about repressed ambition!
September 12, 2011 at 4:17 pm
Thank you for some clarity in the silly season.
September 12, 2011 at 5:33 pm
Nick, given your indisputable intelligence, I can only think you’re being disingenuous or surprisingly naive.
There’s isn’t a process, like in America for example, where bishops can openly ‘line up’ to be elected, true.
But do you really believe there are no bishops who are interested in trying to put themselves in the frame. Last time around, I remember one bishop making it quite clear they were interested in succeeding Carey, went on to Radio 4 and virtually issued his manifesto. Another bishop upped his media profile to get York and was dismayed when he didn’t – and that’s according to his former press secretary.
And have you not seen the hagiography of Chartres in the Guardian? http://bit.ly/p9Gee3
So, yes some bishops are interested in trying to put themselves in the frame, but I tend to think that the more open the ambition, the more likely they are not to get it. Those who do want the job, and I agree with you they’d have to be brave/mad would be better advised to push themselves to the back of the line than the front.
A couple of other points. You start the piece with a misleading claim that reports are speculating on what Rowan is thinking. No, we’re reporting what we’ve been told by friends of his.
And arguing he’s not retiring early is clearly sophistry. There’s nothing sinister in the timing, I’m not sure anyone’s suggesting there is, but leaving 8 years early is, well, retiring early, whether you’re a banker, lawyer or an archbishop.
September 12, 2011 at 7:50 pm
Nick
It would be naive to think that there are no bishops who would like the job. I also disagree that there is nothing that someone with such appetites could do under the present circumstances. Standing members of the Committee cannot now help noticing the activities and actions of those potential candidates who they may or may not have to consider. As such, a little profile raising would be a natural response, if someone did want the job and thought it might soon become available.
Of course, this could all turn out to be absolute rubbish, and Rowan could go on for another ten years. Then again, it could well be accurate.
September 12, 2011 at 10:10 pm
Jonathan & church mouse, it’s a media game. Just look at the language. I think you might be confusing ‘Rowan’s private conversations’ with people wanting you to think they are ‘close’. And, no, I can’t think of any credible candidate who wants to be ABC or is playing for it. You are imposing on us motives that I don’t think apply. Things have moved on since the Carey era.
Retiring any time after 60, when you’ve done a long stint, is hardly ‘early’! Anyway, it’s entirely up to the ABC when he goes and many will regret it when he does. You can carry on selling the story – and it’s a good ‘win’ for you – but it’s still an entertaining media game and a misleading one at that. My points remain unaddressed.
Anyway, I’m now moving on to more important stuff.
September 13, 2011 at 12:11 am
“Anyway, I’m now moving on to more important stuff.”
I hope you don’t mind me saying Nick but it’s a bit rich to hear someone putting a comment out there and then move on so quickly to “more important stuff” a touch dismissively when people challenge it or maybe don’t agree with it.
I fully understand your concern about the media hype etc…in fact I hadn’t even heard any of the “rumours” before you so kindly highlighted them. I actually thought that Jonathan and Church Mouse put their case very fairly…your comments did have abit of a feel of “us Bishops, to a man (unfortunately…but hopefully things may soon change…well if you can call 2014 at the earliest “soon” but we are talking the Church of England here!) are well above this sort of thing” when it would only be fair to reflect that Bishops are only human, with many strengths but some weaknesses like the rest of us.
As you say, there are probably many on the Bishops bench, who would not touch the job with a ten foot bargepole, sensibly and understandably so,but I think there might be some who may harbour some form of desire for the top job. You could argue that about the role of Prime Minister…who would want it…but quite a number undoubtedly do.
I am also with Jonathan in that the more open and naked the ambition, the less they are likely to get the post should they want it. Although I do not believe ambition is in any way wrong per se, my own take on things is that any priest who, from their early days has an all consuming driving ambition to become a Bishop, however well they may try to keep it well hidden, should not be let a hundred miles within sight of a Bishop’s mitre as it could well end uip being an unmitigated disaster for the Diocese they end up leading or helping to lead.
I much prefer the Justin Welby “I’m absolutely gobsmacked…but if God leads I’m inclined to follow” type of approach to his recent appointment.But then I would say that wouldn’t I coming from his Diocese! Don’t get me wrong I am all for career/vocational development but I think there are one or two who have to be “watched”
I do disagree with Jonathan regarding Richard Chartres though. By all accounts there has been some real growth in London Diocese under Bishop Richard’s leadership and I do think that whenever Rowan Williams does decide to retire (and I personally don’t think it will be for some time yet) we do need a future Archbisohop with a proven track in significantly growing their Diocese to encourage and enable other Bishops to do the same from a place of personal experience.
However Nick I do agree with you that I think many people will indeed be sorry when Rowan Williams retires. I think he has come in for some very unfair criticism at times, especially from the more traditionalist element, especially amongst the more conservative evangelcial wing. This was the man who came up with the vision of the church needing to instil and grow a “mixed economy” to face the challenges of the future when he was Bishop of Monmouth, way before he got to Canterbury which is pretty visionary I feel.
I suppose I had better move on now and find more important stuff to say and do!!!…sorry..just couldn’t resist it!
September 13, 2011 at 2:52 pm
Hi Nick,
Just wondering what you meant by this remark:
“Things have moved on since the Carey era.”
Yours,
Andrew
September 13, 2011 at 3:20 pm
Andrew, simply this: the people who might have wanted to be ABC last time round (after George Carey) have gone and I don’t think the same attitude pertains now. Just because there was ‘competition’ or game-playing by certain individuals last time round does not mean it is going on again now. That’s all.
September 14, 2011 at 9:48 am
Bishop, thanks for putting a smile on my face this morning. I had a mental picture of several bishops playing dodgeball to see who would fill the post! In all seriousness, this post is so important and it is best if the imaginative candidate were dragged kicking and screaming to Canterbury. That kind of humble reluctance is needed.
September 14, 2011 at 10:02 pm
Jason,
I don’t buy humble reluctance from most people, although I buy a show of humble reluctance. The one example of genuine humble reluctance was Rowan Williams and look what it’s done to him, what we’ve done to him.
Wouldn’t it be much better if someone qualified for the job and with the stomach to do it could say so without hiding behind denials and fake humility? Oh for honesty!
September 15, 2011 at 12:21 am
Erica
I get what you are saying about “humble reluctance” buit I still prefer an authentic Moses/Isaiah/Jonah approach to a huge task than the “bring it on I’ve got what it takes” approach.
I agree that it needs to be someone qualified for the job, which in my view should at least include plenty of parish experience on the ground and a track record in actually growing a diocese under challenging conditions….so at least we could have a bit of been there, done that, got the t-shirt etc.
I remember somewhere that CS Lewis once wrote that he had to be reluctantly dragged kicking and screaming into the Kingdom of God such were his attempts to resist God’s call on his life, and look what happened to him.
Of course, you would hope that one of the qualities of an Archbishop’s appointments panel would be some form of spiritual discernment, but I agree that it’s no guarantee!
Unless of course by “with the stomach to do it” you mean someone who would be willing to take the bull by the horns and continue to try and mould the Cof E into some form of credible shape for the task of relevant, contemporary mission in the 21st century then I might be with you!
Talking of which, we had our Deanery Synod discussion/debate last night on the admission of women to the Episcopate ahead of our Diocesan Synod vote in November, and it was profoundly depressing to realise that we have been discussing this in one form or another for the best part of 40 years…and then we wonder why people outside the church don’t take us seriously or see the church as a virtual irrlevancy to their everyday lives.
And we did take a vote, which was overwhelmingly in favour of the motion…although I still have an equally depressing feeling that despite all but one of the Diocesan Synods so far voting favour by large majorities in all three houses, that one of the Houses at General Synod may well still bring the motion down, and sadly, if I was a betting man, which I am not, my money would be on the House of Clergy to vote it down
From what I am hearing there are supporters of the motion who will not vote in favour if safeguards for opponents aren’t tightened, which underlines an unease I have about a “Code of Practice” being practically workable. I have been a civil servant for a number of years and have seen numerous “Codes of Practice” come and go, many of which you could drive a coach and horses through, so I am not convinced the powers that be have quite got it right yet and there may be some serious fine tuning still to be done.
If this does happen the job of the next ABC may become nigh on impossible because I guess many of us at grass roots level would justifiably ask “what’s the point” and become hugely cynical if an overwhelming yes vote across the country in all three Houses is not reflected at Genral Synod level.
Rowan Willams has made clear his desire for Synodical reform and if the motion is not carried, I imagine there will be overwhelming cries I guess that he gets his wish.
And anyway, could it not also be that someone imaginative and creative is also the best person qualified for the job. Imagination and creativity combined with the right management qualities and courage could well be a really attractive combination.
September 18, 2011 at 2:59 pm
Jason
“And anyway, could it not also be that someone imaginative and creative is also the best person qualified for the job. Imagination and creativity combined with the right management qualities and courage could well be a really attractive combination.”
Absolutely.
What I fail to see is why that person has to be genuinely reluctant to take the job on. If they have all the right qualities, they should relish the opprtunity. And if they really don’t want to do it, then an important part of the right qualities – motivation, and possibly the ability to assess one’s own abilities correctly – is actually missing.
I always thought CS Lewis was talking about coming to faith, not about a continued reluctance to follow God’s call once he’d fully accepted it.
September 18, 2011 at 2:59 pm
Sorry, that last comment should have been addressed to Phil!