THE £100-million Fund for Healing, Repair and Justice, arrange by the Church Commissioners to profit communities affected by the historic transatlantic slave trade, has been defended by the Archbishop of Canterbury-elect as a response to a “Gospel imperative”.
Last month, 24 Conservative MPs and 4 members of the House of Lords wrote to Bishop Mullally setting out their concerns about Project Spire. The Conservative MP for Weald of Kent, Katie Lam, who coordinated the letter, wrote that the project rested “on highly contested interpretations of history” and would set a “worrying precedent” for other institutions.
By law, the Church Commissioners’ endowment “should be used to support parish ministry, maintain church buildings, and look after the Church’s historic records”, she wrote. “At a moment when churches across the country are struggling to maintain their doors open — many even falling into disrepair — it’s flawed to attempt to justify diverting £100 million to a project entirely separate from those core obligations.”
Last September, the Church Commissioners agreed at a board meeting to make an application to the Charity Commission to authorise an ex-gratia payment under section 106 of the Charities Act 2011 on the premise of an ethical obligation. Such payments were “never intended for this scale or purpose” and none had “ever approached anything remotely comparable to £100 million”, Ms Lam wrote.
“If a charity can simply establish a latest entity with wholly different objectives and transfer vast sums to it, then the principle that charitable funds should be used for the aim for which donors gave them begins to erode. That principle protects not only donors however the integrity of the charitable sector itself.”
In her response, published on Monday, Bishop Mullally said that Project Spire “doesn’t diminish the Church’s support of or investment in parish ministry or clergy”. She cited the £1.6 million set to be distributed by the Church Commissioners in the present triennium (News, 13 June 2025).
“Our calling to confront historic injustice and our commitment to sustaining parish life due to this fact each flow from the identical Gospel imperative: to like our neighbour as ourselves and to enable all to flourish.”
In a separate reply, the three Church Estates Commissioners and the chief executive of the Commissioners defended the work of historians and auditors, which underpins. “The Church Commissioners’ historic links to Transatlantic Chattel Enslavement have been demonstrated,” they wrote.
The work of Project Spire was “aligned with best practice for top tier responsible investors with long horizons, akin to Lloyds of London and a number of other banks and universities, a few of which have already taken motion”.
It “reflects our long-standing commitment to risk management (by interrogating historical data to grasp present and future risks) and responsible investment. . . Moreover, as responsible asset owners, the Church Commissioners hold ourselves to the identical high standards of professionalism and ethics that we expect from the businesses wherein we invest.”
In a listing of Frequently Asked Questions, published online, the Commissioners argue: “We imagine that by addressing our past transparently, particularly this a part of our past, the Church and its teachings shall be more relevant to more people. We see our response as a very important missional activity that may support the work and ministry of the Church of England in England.”
The research underpinning Project Spire has been the topic of intense debate amongst historians (News, 11 July 2025; 6 June 2025).
Among the signatories of the letter is Lord Biggar of Castle Douglas, Emeritus Regius Professor of Moral Theology on the University of Oxford, who argues in his book Reparations that the Project “runs out way ahead of evidence and reason and implies a shocking lack of due diligence” (Books, 3 October 2025).
