Church of England must open files for others to scrutinise.
Monday December 30 2024, 12.01am GMT, The Times
This time of year usually sees the Church of England enjoying its best headlines. The Archbishop of Canterbury’s Christmas message is a staple of seasonal news bulletins. Not this year. There was no festive message from Justin Welby, who is in his final days as lame duck archbishop after resigning over the John Smyth abuse report.
The Archbishop of York, Stephen Cottrell, who will step temporarily into the lead role, is also under pressure to quit over his handling of the case of a predatory priest who was promoted and kept in ministry despite his abusive conduct being well known to church leaders.
Three previous archbishops of Canterbury or York— Carey, Sentamu and Hope — have also had their legacies tainted by their handling of safeguarding cases. One reason for the Church’s problems is that it is swaddled in secrecy.
In 2020, after another bungled safeguarding case, Cottrell said that he wanted “a new spirit of openness and transparency”. But the outside experts who were brought in to improve the Church in this area speak of broken promises, difficulties finding information and ignored recommendations.
If it is to survive, the Church needs the disinfectant of sunlight. It could start by submitting itself to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act, opening its files to scrutiny.
Although congregations have been shrinking for decades, the Church still plays a major role in Britain’s national life. A quarter of all primary schools and 228 secondary schools are Church of England; about one million children receive a Church education. There are 26 bishops in the House of Lords, able to vote on legislation that has an impact on every citizen.
Yet the workings of the Church, including its stewardship of great wealth and property (you should see some of these bishops’ palaces), are off limits, even for ordinary churchgoers. A recent appeal to the government to bring this institution within the ambit of the freedom of information legislation was rejected.
Whitehall’s reply was that the act was “one of the key mechanisms for accountability” that had “helped to set a benchmark on transparency and openness”. However there were “no plans” to bring the national church institutions (the cathedrals and the offices of the bishops) within its scope.
That decision should be reconsidered. The Church seems to prioritise its own reputation over doing the right thing. It is incapable of reforming itself. Its files should be opened for others to inspect, expose and point the way forward. The Times.
.jpeg)