It is hard to keep tabs on episcopal vacancies in the Church of England at present. By my calculation there are nine diocesan episcopal posts that are vacant or to become vacant by the summer. Two further diocesan posts are in temporary abeyance (Lincoln and Salisbury) while the current incumbents await the result of disciplinary enquiries that are being undertaken. That would possibly bring the total number of diocesan vacancies to 11. This total means that around 25% of the senior episcopal posts in England are currently in or about to enter a temporary vacancy. Fortunately, for the smooth running of the Church of England, there are enough suffragan and retired bishops around to provide temporary cover so that episcopal leadership for all 42 dioceses is preserved for the foreseeable future.
The appointment of diocesan bishops in England is, by all accounts, a complex and painstaking operation. There has always to be, before names are considered, a statement of needs prepared by the receiving diocese. A group of carefully chosen and highly qualified individuals are brought together to form a Vacancy in See Committee. This group will meet and share their thoughts on those who are thought to be suitably qualified individuals. Confidential lists of suitable candidates are already in existence and those who become diocesan bishops have probably been on such a list of potential nominees for some time. The political sensitivities within the Church of England require the Committee to understand fully the importance of a cultural and theological fit. A diocese such as Chichester (to be vacant in June ‘26) would expect to receive a leader with Anglo-Catholic leanings while the new Bishop of London will need to have skills able to operate sensitively across a wide range of church traditions. This churchmanship match-up might once have been a major part of what was required for a successful diocesan bishop. Now this aspect of a candidate probably takes its place alongside all the other pressing skills and abilities needed to cope with the chronic complexity of the role. Against the background of a severe decline in finance and members in most dioceses, no candidate will be able to offer everything that might be desired from him or her. These expectations have become so numerous that I suspect every nominee will be seen not to achieve the ideal or even required level of excellence in some areas. The candidate that is eventually chosen will probably have to be a compromise choice. There are simply not enough experienced candidates to match all the expectations laid on them. The Vacancy in See Committee do not have the opportunity to choose the ‘Archangel Gabriel candidate’. Were such a person to exist, the whole process might be considerably less stressful.
I will have more to say about why the pool of candidates for diocesan bishops is not strong currently, but I think it is important to consider from the outside what might be the qualities needed for this post if we were able to design from scratch the ideal candidate. The qualities I want to suggest as essential for a diocesan bishop can be summarised in three words. The bishop needs to operate well as pastor, leader and teacher. This first quality that I mention here is the quality of an individual who knows how to care for others, especially the clergy of the diocese. The clergy are entrusted to be pastors and to care for their parishioners on behalf of the bishop. In my own ministry I can only remember two bishops who seemed to care and be genuinely interested in my own ministry and welfare. This is not the time to go into further reminiscing on this point, but I would like to suggest that a bishop should know far more about the individual clergy under his/her charge than just as names in a file. Fortunately, I have normally been able to find other clergy who would provide oversight and encouragement, but it was not something that came routinely from my bishops. With the declining number of front-line clergy to care for, this role for bishops might reasonably be expected to come into greater focus.
The second role of a bishop in a diocesan role is to provide leadership, especially in the form of inspiration and direction for the institution. The bishop pastor is the one who guides the work and morale of individuals who work for the institution while the bishop leader fulfils a management role in equipping and inspiring the whole. I would want my leader to have gifts of exceptional sensitivity and wisdom. I want them to be the people who can guide and motivate committees so that the right decisions are taken. A good chairperson, as I expect my bishop to be, will read the room with unerring accuracy so that the insights of all present will be heard and taken into account. Above all, and true to the theme of this blog, I want my bishop to be supremely sensitised to the dynamics of power, including his/her own.
The final quality that I have chosen to emphasise (there are many others – no doubt) is that the bishop to be a teacher/theologian. Sadly, this last capacity is becoming a rare quality. Clergy who read books seem to be in minority and those who become bishops may not have this important ability to inspire a passion for godly leaning among clergy and laity. My ideal bishop candidate will have this capacity to get people excited about God in terms of spirituality, study and prayer. Needless to say, I have watched, with regret, the short-cuts in theological training that have been brought about for financial reasons. Perhaps a new generation of bishops can inspire their clergy to give more time to study and the nurture of a mind that is constantly seeking new ways to understand more of the mystery of God.
To return to the appointing of nine (possibly more) men and women over the next 18 months to take episcopal roles of a highly complex and demanding nature, the Church of England authorities know they have a very difficult job. Most, if not all, of the next generation of diocesan bishops will be suffragans already and so the pond from which to fish is finite in size. One unsettling question, for which we have no answer, is whether the job of diocesan bishop has become so demanding, if not impossible, that a new generation of younger clergy will refuse to submit themselves to a post that they suspect will grind them down to the point of exhaustion and burn-out. One ominous piece of information was shared with us about the difficulty of making senior appointments in the Church of England. In the course of last year, the then leading candidate for the Bishop of Durham who had already gone through several stages in the appointment process, withdrew his/her name at quite a late stage. The Church cannot easily survive the departure of such highly qualified candidates. If ever the Church were to find itself in the desperate position of having to appoint candidates who are clearly not up to the job, the seeds of institutional collapse are at hand. It is also a serious blow to clerical self-esteem and institutional morale when office holders at the level of diocesan bishop are required to step back and take paid leave. We still have not as an institution recovered from the appalling reputational hit when a diocesan bishop was tried and sent to prison for his sexual crimes.
One major area of concern which applies to bishops and clergy is whether they are up to coping with stress. Every member of the clergy has some insight into severe stresses of managing personnel, finance and safeguarding that come their way. The same stresses, much magnified, are faced by our bishops. The present cohort of suffragans will know about the impossible demands and conflicts handed to those who preside over complete dioceses. To take but one area of stress: how does a diocesan bishop manage when he/she knows that a parish for which he/she has responsibility has a grossly inadequate incumbent in charge? How does the bishop make a decision and decide whether to allow a toxic clergyperson to take charge of a church, when it is possible/probable that that this charge will be badly mismanaged? Knowing where safeguarding bodies are buried must be a constant source of stress, even anguish. While a suffragan remains a suffragan, there is always the diocesan to refer to and, hopefully, sort out the problem. As a diocesan bishop the buck stops at the study door. The damage caused by making the wrong decision really matters. Peoples’ lives and wellbeing are affected. No one with a conscience wants to be responsible to helping to destroy or damage the life of another or undermine an institution as precious as the Church of Christ.
I end this reflection about bishops in the C/E with questions. The first is to ask whether the episcopal task is too onerous and stressful to be accomplished successfully today? The second question is related to the first. Given the new complexities that surround anyone who operates in a public role, demanding a range of skills probably not possessed by a single individual, is it fair to place anyone in this role without re-writing their terms of contract? I don’t know the answer to these questions, but I believe that they need to be faced by clergy and lay people at every level of the Church.
I would add a fourth requirement: to be visible. The archbishops of Southwark and Westminster have spoken up about hot topics such as Trump’s blasphemy. Why are CofE arch/bishops silent? Do they fear ridicule?
I do worry that our bishops are in the main, afraid to speak out on what might be unpopular or contentious socio/political issues. Many of them are followers and not leaders and lack the spirit and courage of Amos. They seem to have lost the unpopular prophetic witness (fear of the Daily Mail and its followers?). There are now sadly few ‘boat rockers’ like Alan Wilson RIP.
‘Dating Scan’ on NHS website shows the unborn in the third month of life. Odd how our bishops never speak about the UK’s modern abortion genocide. The testimony of Moya Brennan RIP, the singer who has just died, will receive zero attention from bishops in all likelihood. Her conversion and commitment, after trauma related to drugs-alcohol-abortion, is inspiring. But do many of our woke Anglican bishops dislike reality? Certain forms of abuse all too readily get swept under diocesan carpets……………
I think pretty much every job in the C of E is too stressful now. A suffragan bishop told a group of clergy that his job is ‘like trying to drink from a hose that’s been turned full on’. But parish ministry is like that too. No wonder clergy don’t have time to read.
I don’t know what the solution is, but I’m sure that all those top-down initiatives coming from dioceses and the central Church are part of the problem. And diocesan offices need to keep in mind that they’re there to resource clergy at the coal face, not to make more admin for clergy to do.
I’m pretty scathing most of the time about the utter mediocrity that characterises the majority of today’s senior clergy. Thankfully there are notable exceptions, and since the change of regime at The Wash House a very welcome cultural change seems to be gradually trickling down into the actual appointments being made, though the majority still perpetuate the ethos ‘yet more of the same’. But I have to be absolutely honest and say should the Church ever be misguided enough to offer me preferment to a senior role, I would run the proverbial mile, and then some. I’ve seen some really good people destroyed by the institutional toxicity inherent in senior Church roles, and become mere shadows of the gifted, vibrant, people they once were. I don’t think a Diocesan Bishop’s role is too stressful in and of itself, but when you add constantly dealing with that level of toxicity to the inevitable busyness that seeps into every role in the Church, it loses any appeal it may ever have had, in my view. Anyone desperate to be one absolutely deserves to be…let the reader understand!
Perhaps a marginal comment but as a priest in the Diocese of Chichester, I would be sorry if there was an assumption that the next Bishop had to be Anglo Catholic. Certainly that is the tradition of most of the senior leadership, and characteristic of many coastal parishes in places such as Brighton. But the vast majority of the Diocese is made up of small rural communities with the odd larger town, most of these sharing the diversity of traditions found across the C of E. Including some large conservative evangelical churches.
Nicholas. You are absolutely right that no assumptions should be made about the churchmanship of the next Bp of Chichester. But in my lifetime all the bishops have been catholic (with a small c). George Bell was a notable Dean of Canterbury before he became Bp in the 30s. I knew him very slightly around the time of his death in Canterbury. His successor was a relation of Michael Ramsey and so on up to this day. We will see. Nothing is certain but anglo-catholic candidates need to have some posts where this dimension of Anglican tradition is represented. A monochrome bench of bishops all wearing identical open evangelical clothes would not be a good thing for the Church of England. We will see.
Having recently retired from the role of Diocesan bishop I am slowly decompressing. The role is complex and the scrutiny (rightly) incessant but I am not sure the stresses were any greater that those faced by deans of cathedrals or (for that matter) many senior leadership roles and, at least in retrospect, I loved being both dean and bishop. But the challenge of ensuring I was personally well resourced theologically and spiritually was considerable. I could not have thrived without excellent and specialist colleagues who formed strong teams. We, I reflect, depended on each other to continue in prayer, deep reflection, loving care, and prophetic action.
I was a social worker for one year. There were colleagues who weren’t up to the job. The seniors talked to them and found courses for them to go on to solve the issues. Then I was a stipendiary priest for 25 years. I don’t recall ever hearing a priest being helped in this way.
That’s also exactly my impression of how the church senior leadership fails to function!
I was an NHS medic, qualifying in that late 1980’s and retiring around a decade ago. The NHS may have intermittent problems with BAH (bullying, abuse or harassment) that do not get immediately addressed each time. But it bears zero resemblance to the woeful Anglican Church situation.
After retirement I was one of five students commissioned as an evangelist by my local Anglican Diocese. Three senior professional witnesses were stunned at the mental state of a fellow student, who claimed to have felt accused of adultery in foul language by a New Wine course tutor.
Within just weeks the same New Wine tutor offended two of those same witnesses. The two witnesses were shocked by what they felt were accusations of sexual misconduct against them, once again delivered in crude language.
How many times does lightning have to strike in an Anglican Diocese before a bishop finally takes notice? The Torah and wider Old Testament, plus our New Testament, spell out plain biblical principles of natural justice.
The witness of two or three victims-witnesses-whistleblowers should suffice. But it seems to take decades and multiple witnesses before some Anglican bishops wake up to poorly concealed BAH (bullying-abuse-harassment).
Mark Twain said: “It ain’t the parts of the Bible that I can’t understand that bother me, it’s the parts that I do understand.” That certainly might apply to a lot of our bishops.
Our secular system of law reflects biblical principles of natural justice. But is the Anglican Church one of the few modern UK spaces where these bits of the Bible get ignored a great deal of the time?
Appointing Mulllally, even after the Malcolm Sargeant scamming of £5.2 million and the Fr Allan Griffin suicide, both in her London Diocese, was plain crazy. Are we are mugs, as Anglicans, to stand for such an absurd appointment?
Does it send out a signal that abuse, bullying, harassment, embezzlement and false accusations of sexual misconduct can quite likely be tolerated, with relatively limited consequences for diocesan teams covering them up?
I love your Mark Twain quote James! Thank you for these comments that stir memories of the church throughout my life and I shudder when I recall them.
One especially when I was fairly close to Bishop Peter Ball listening to his words in talks and sermons. But looking back he preached complete submission to the ‘church’ and sacrifice of anything good we thought of ourselves. We thought he was so inspiring as he carried his worldly goods in a plastic shopping bag from church to church and we all fell under his spell. The humility he taught is evident in church teaching and I have learnt through experience in family and work situations it is not helpful. It leads to being abused and taken advantage of.
I have friends who were confirmed by Peter Ball who don’t know if they are ‘properly’ confirmed or not but have left the church anyway. We were never give any apologies and Peter Ball was never mentioned again all swept under the carpet like all of us. Who cares – the church doesn’t.
Thanks, Margaret, some elements of the Anglican Articles are archaic or even intolerant in our modern context, but there is also some wonderful wisdom in the Articles. Anglican Article 26 possibly infers how liturgy and sacraments are effectual and meaningful, even if performed by an ‘unworthy’ minister. That’s a tough question, though, whether to consider confirmation by Peter ball as completely acceptable. I am just not completely sure what angle to take on that question. But the truth has this habit of coming out, and church bullies or abusers get some well deserved surprises when they least expect them.
I too was confirmed by Peter Ball. I wish it had been someone different, but God sees our hearts and our motivations and does not consider the confirmation invalid because of the unworthiness of the bishop who administered it. Which is just as well – I was baptised as an adult by my father, and Gordon Rideout laid hands on me when I was priested. All of them paedophiles.
You’re right that almost everyone fell under Peter Ball’s spell – he was mesmerising. And thoroughly evil.
It just occurs to me, with getting older, and having much more time for reflection, to ask if there is often an acute-on-chronic issue at work. The form of church we are connecting with impacts how BAH can be concealed. An intimate small fellowship, with every member ministry or involvement to some degree, has built in protections. A larger assembly hall type church meeting, with a focus sometimes on numbers, and on ‘running it like a business’, can be a fertile spot for bully boys to populate. Is there something about great swathes of the charismatic movement which pulls in predators, and gives them space to attack people? With larger churches a person can be a faithful attender and committed financial supporter, but really have zero deeper awareness of hidden bullying or embezzlement problems. It’s probably much harder to hide things in a smaller group setting.
Your brief, but shocking summary here Janet, should be remembered by many of us here who, over the years, have heard with horror the harrowing treatment you have suffered before and during a lifetime of devoted and effective ministry you have yourself given to the church. Many of us too have benefited from your generosity and great wisdom, not just as a priest but as a wonderful person.
And I believe today may be your anniversary, a symbol of what you have overcome. There can be no better “confirmation” than your continuing witness and service as a priest . Strength and blessings to you!
Thank you so much Steve – and how remarkable that you remembered the anniversary of my priesting!
I had ignored that anniversary for some years, because I was ambivalent and somewhat bitter about having been ordained in the C of E. But enough healing has taken place – thanks to the work of the Holy Spirit, a caring bishop, and compassionate people like you – that this year I have again taken out and displayed the icon of St George and the Dragon which a friend gave me on 23 April 1994.
Janet, I would like to echo Steve’s words.
Your responses and advice have been a constant support and sustained me through a difficult time.
Thank you so very much.
Ditto-I found ‘Letters to a Broken Church’ immensely helpful. It had depressing elements, but it really reassured me. Myself, plus three other victims of false allegations of sexual misconduct, were clearly far from alone. KCJ+DARVO, with victims-whistleblowers-witnesses branded “troublemakers” is littered across Anglicanism in the UK and Ireland.
It certainly is. Those who assume that all accusations of abuse must be true are naive – false accusations can be another method of abuse. Abuse lawyers tell me that around 95% of accusations of sexual abuse are true – the remaining 5% create a devil of a problem. And do real survivors no favours.
The four victims (as referred to above) were not accused of ‘abuse’. They felt grossly unfair accusations of sexual activity were made in unseemly language. The Diocese in question has a grim record.
There is the almost 50 year cover up of child abuse by the late ‘Rev Dr Canon William George Neely’. An NDA was fixed up in recent years. The media note how his tombstone ends: PRIEST SHEPHERD FRIEND.
‘Karl Faase interviews Joe Turner for Jesus the Game Changer Season 2’ is an ‘Olive Tree Media’ YouTube film posted 30.1.22. Why would an Anglican Diocese ever want a parish promotional film to open with an image of hooded and armed paramilitaries?
Thank you Susan, that’s kind. I just wish I had been to do more.
I think I’ve reached the point where I would just be grateful to see people of Christian integrity appointed as bishops, whatever else their inabilities or failings. I long for Christian leaders who tell the truth, do not make threats, do not go back on their word, do not assert what they know to be untrue, do not lie by omission, do not breach UK law in their behaviour towards their clergy, do not try to discipline their clergy for not doing the impossible (when the bishop has even admitted it to be impossible)…..
Empty churches-cathedrals, and empty promises about addressing BAH (bullying-abuse-harassment) define modern UK Anglicanism. Picking an Archbishop from London Diocese as new global Primate defies belief. Did the oligarchy fixing the appointment reflect on the £5.2M Sargeant fraud and the Fr Allan Griffin suicide following the ‘brain dump’ incident?
Yes indeed Kate, you put it so well.
In our heart that is the prayer and longing of us all.
We have countless senior leaders in Anglican evangelicalism, some of whom might readily plaster church walls in a bible verse or two.
But it’s easy to write a statement like this one on a wall: ‘He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God’.
What does heaven make of it, if a senior Church leader on earth wantonly ignores these sentiments of Micah, but has them put on a church wall? I am unsure if widespread NDA use, DARVO, and abusers getting shielded, lines up at all well with the Micah verse cited.
Branding witnesses, victims and whistleblowers as “troublemakers” is a supreme act of folly. God is not mocked, and great sections of Anglicanism are collapsing. Ejecting victims-witnesses-whistleblowers does not work.
The absence of frank and honest clarity, on the Sargeant embezzlement; and also on the suicide of Fr Allan Griffin, leaves me wondering how Sarah Mullally ever sleeps at night. £5.2M going missing is no small thing.
The ‘brain dump’ related to the death of Fr Allan Griffin was shameful. Why no frank and honest public statement, in painful depth, about how the brain dump lapse was allowed to happen? Why no great mass of church resignations?
Do you get rewarded within Anglicanism for successfully covering up abuse?
I know of one such appointment within the last couple of years, which gives me some grounds for hope. We need all senior appointments to be of people of faith and integrity, but one is a start. And of course there may be others I don’t know of – apart from Helen-Ann Hartley, of course. She seems to have gone very quiet.
In response to Janet, there will soon be another opportunity to make a senior appointment of faith and integrity if the opportunity is realised and taken. The only difficulty is that it will need the approval of the Bishop. This new Bishop has refused to acknowledge pleas for justice in safeguarding by myself and others.
In my case, it could be quite well because the present holder of the post about to become vacant, instructed the safeguarding group, “Do not respond to Mrs Hunt” (from SAR).
It seems that even the Bishop has obeyed this instruction. We shall see.
This new bishop has been in post for about a year. Is she already on sabbatical? Why has a retired bishop been announced as Acting Diocesan?
No Peejay it is not the Bishop who is to be replaced. Perhaps in my effort to be cautious I did not explain myself clearly.
The Bishop I refer to has indeed been in post for about a year. I am speaking of the Dean who is to retire in about two weeks. It is he who instructed the safeguarding group, “Do not respond to Mrs Hunt” (from SAR).
I gave him saying that as the reason the Bishop has never responded to me.
I hope this clarifies the situation.
Bishop Helen-Ann just completed the London Marathon, and there would have been considerable training for this, even for an experienced runner like she is. Such physical activity would be a good antidote to the stresses of her day job, and is to be recommended, or at least some bearable physical activity. I was useless at running, but can walk a bit.
Many folk have come off twitter, and so it’s difficult to discern what they’re doing or thinking about. Others “post” less for fear of getting the social media sewer backwash. The other sites don’t seem to have the impact or reach twitter once had.
When she started her ministry in Newcastle, the bishop had a profound impact on survivors of abuse, for her strength and support. But she won’t have made any friends in high places. We know well the insidious system of silencing and coercion to group conformity that goes on there. I do hope she hasn’t been damaged herself by this, but I have no way of knowing. The omertà spreads like a virus.
ANGLICAN INK posted-‘Inquiry finds ‘Singing Vicar’ abused girls in UK, no offending proven in Australia’-on April 22 2026. It never ceases to puzzle me how the Anglican Church can be so vague about some matters. The deceased cleric in the report appears to have covered a number of parishes in various places. Protecting victims might appear to be the reason for not saying where the alleged or proven abuse happened.