A REVIEW, published on Thursday, of the appointment of the Rt Revd Philip North as Bishop of Blackburn has concluded that his nomination followed the right processes, but makes several recommendations how these processes may very well be improved.
Campaigners had raised concerns about Bishop North’s views on the ordination of ladies, which he has said is an area on which the Church of England shouldn’t be at variance with the broader Church (News, 15 September 2017).
A submission by the campaign group Women and the Church (WATCH) centred on concerns about how having a bishop who doesn’t ordain women could undermine clergy within the diocese and the diocesan bishop’s function as a figure of unity.
The submission, together with other testimony, was considered by the Independent Reviewer for the House of Bishops Declaration, Maggie Swinson — who can be the present chair of the Anglican Consultative Council (News, 17 February).
At the time of his appointment, Bishop North told the Church Times that the diocese, by which he previously served because the Suffragan Bishop of Burnley, had “worked out tips on how to make it work” (News, 13 January).
This involved working with the “outstanding female clergy of this diocese” he said, including sponsoring them for ordination. “That’s the work of relationship-building, which is critical if mutual flourishing goes to be something that’s real.”
Bishop North has previously said that he believes the ordination of ladies to be an area on which the Church of England shouldn’t be at variance with the broader Church (News, 15 September 2017).
As well as articulating concerns about Bishop North’s suitability as a diocesan bishop resulting from his stance on the ordination of ladies, WATCH’s submission argued that the consultation process resulting in his nomination had not been properly followed.
Ms Swinson declined WATCH’s invitation to call for a moratorium on the appointment of bishops who don’t agree with the Church of England’s decision to ordain women, emphasising that the House of Bishops Declaration “still envisages that each one orders of ministry are equally open to all, whether or not they’re able to receive the ministry of ladies as bishops or priests”.
She did. nevertheless, recommend that changes be implemented to assist improve confidence within the appointment process.
Introducing her report, Ms Swinson said that “perceptions of events and meetings vary, in some cases significantly”, though added that she had “no reason to think that any of the parties is just not telling the reality as they experienced it”.
The WATCH submission argues that the election of the Bishop of Lancaster, Dr Jill Duff, because the chair of the vacancy-in-see committee amounted to a conflict of interest, owing to her long association with Bishop North: each served as suffragan bishops in the identical diocese.
“My conversations leave me in little doubt that the presence of a one that is, in effect, line manager of ordained and a few lay attendees, and who has an interest within the appointment process since the recent bishop can have authority over them, will probably stifle open contribution from those individuals, and doesn’t make for a ‘protected’ space,” Ms Swinson writes.
While finding no deviation from the regulations, she concludes that “the principle of who chairs a vacancy-in-see committee would profit from review in light of the potential conflicts of interest which have been identified here.”
Sir Philip Mawer’s review of the method by which Bishop North was nominated to the see of Sheffield in 2017 — a position he eventually declined — really useful that the 2014 settlement giving reassurance to traditionalists that accompanied the Women Bishops Measure ought to be reconsidered (News, 22 September).
WATCH’s submission to Ms Swinson contended that this work had not been fully accomplished — something which she acknowledges in her report, recommending that “resource is identified to take the needed theological work forward”.
WATCH also argued that the consultation process had been insufficient, and had not adequately sought opinions on whether the brand new bishop ought to be someone who would ordain women.
Ms Swinson concludes that “a way of haste was evident in respect of the consultation”, and that one person to whom she had spoken said that the method had been more rushed than those that they had experienced in other dioceses.
However, she concludes that there was no breach of the regulations in respect of the timeframe of the consultation, and that the method was not unduly short in comparison with examples from other dioceses.
Nonetheless, she acknowledges that the method did feel rushed to some people, and suggests that more clarity “might go some technique to averting perceptions of pressure”.
Ms Swinson’s report reveals that, throughout the consultation process within the diocese, “Bishop Philip’s name was the one mostly mentioned”, and notes that those involved were well aware of his position on the ordination of ladies.
The vacancy-in-see committee voted “by a big majority” to not specify whether the subsequent bishop ought to be someone who ordains women, and Ms Swinson notes that a member who had voted the opposite way was later elected to be considered one of the diocesan representatives on the Crown Nominations Commission that nominated Bishop North.
In her final suggestion, Ms Swinson suggests that the scope of the Independent Reviewer’s jurisdiction be reconsidered. “It wouldn’t be unreasonable to expect that some review mechanism ought to be available to those whose ministry the bishop doesn’t accept.
“Such a mechanism shouldn’t isolate female clergy from the lifetime of the diocese but should provide for them in a reciprocal manner to the review arrangements already articulated within the Declaration,” she writes.
After Ms Swinson’s report was published on Thursday, the group Forward in Faith — which represents traditionalist clergy and parishes within the C of E — queried this last suggestion, the review of the work of the Independent Reviewer.
“It is just not clear to Forward in Faith from the contents of the report exactly what deficiency in the present arrangements could be met by such a change,” the statement says.
It suggests that WATCH’s submission demonstrates that the Independent Reviewer is in a position to contemplate complaints from those on each side of the controversy, and cautions against reviews being undertake due to parties “simply not agreeing with, or feeling uncomfortable with, the contents of the Declaration”.
The declaration, it says, “quite rightly seeks to advertise the flourishing of all parts of the Church and to uphold and protect the minority position within the Church of England”.
On Friday, the chair of WATCH, the Revd Martine Oborne, writing on the Via Media blog, characterised the report as “gently excoriating” of the method in Blackburn, highlighting the recommendations made by Ms Swinson.
“The matters raised aren’t abstract theological arguments but impact on the lives of ladies in each ordained and lay ministry. The continued unfairness within the Church of England creates an unjust and unsafe environment for the various women who proceed to work so hard and graciously in all our dioceses,” she wrote.
A spokesperson for the diocese of Blackburn said: “We welcome this clear affirmation of the processes followed by the vacancy-in-see committee throughout the emptiness.
“The diocese of Blackburn stays firmly committed to seeing all of our clergy and lay leaders, female and male, flourish in the decision that God has given them.”
