by Anon
The Odyssey (2026) is an epic action-adventure movie written and directed by Christopher Nolan adapted from Homer’s ancient Greek poem. If you haven’t seen the film, I recommend it. If you haven’t read the book, I also recommend it. The Odyssey consists of 24 books and was written down during in the 7th century BC, so committed to parchment in the same kind of era as much of the Old Testament. Both The Odyssey and the Old Testament existed in oral form for many centuries before this. Both share chequered histories of contested versions, with the same stories adapted for different contexts and cultures. (See Bruce Louden, Greek Myth and the Bible, 2019).
Nolan’s film is widely regarded as an enormous feat as much as it is entertaining. True, purists snipe that the film is not faithful to Homer’s original and takes liberties. That may be so, but it rather misses the point. These stories were epic sagas that were vehicles for moral instruction, cautionary tales, and freighted with warnings about the dangers of hubris, irony biting back, the inevitability of betrayals, and the virtues of faithfulness, patience and perseverance.
But suppose for a moment we see The Odyssey as a vehicle for ecclesial parables? This is neither strange nor original. In Gods of Management (1978), Charles Handy examined managerial and organisational cultures through four ancient deities: Zeus (dominance and monarchy), Apollo (communication and order), Athena (cooperation and practicality), and Dionysus (creativity and individualism). Handy highlighted the tension between organisational imperatives (Zeus and Apollo) and individual imperatives (Athena and Dionysus), which cannot be fully resolved. He argued that treating people as individuals instead of mere resources is crucial.
In typical parish settings, cultures may reflect Athena and Dionysus, but many Protestant ecclesial hierarchies tend to be influenced by Zeus and Apollo. This situation will lead to growing dissonance. When self-identified leaders and their compliant followers stop engaging, what happens? Bishops and senior pastors may hold their titles but lack true power, acting like modern versions of Zeus or Apollo while increasingly being ignored.
Simon Western, in Leadership: A Critical Text (2018), argues that “leaders are authentically transformational… they increase awareness of what is right, good, important, and beautiful.” Western identified three primary forms of leadership discourse in the twentieth century: Controller, Therapist, and Messiah, with a fourth suggested. Controller discourse focuses on efficiency and social management, rooted in early twentieth-century scientific rationalism. In contrast, Therapist discourse emphasises personal growth and well-being.
The latter part of the 20th century saw the rise of the fourth type of leadership, namely Heroic-Messiah discourse, which promotes charismatic leadership in uncertain environments. This discourse promised order amid chaos and encouraged transformative change by highlighting heroic actions and visionary outcomes, suggesting that progress is essential to achieving success. Western’s book is a seminal study in leadership and offers a relevant critique for our times.
Similarly, Mateusz Grzesiak’s Leadership and Narcissism in the Organization (2022) reveals the rise of messianic discourse in an age of anxiety as institutions face existential threats. While true messiahs are rare, faux messiahs—who elevate themselves above others—have become increasingly common.
The myths of Narcissus, particularly as told by Ovid, provide insights into institutional behaviour. Both Narcissus and Echo illustrate how organisations can become fixated on appearance, echoing only what they hear, and are ultimately ensnared by self-love and inflated self-regard.
Narcissus is alive and well in the Church of England. Its leaders hear that working in teams, strategy, vision, corporate branding or comms are the way to go. Or that something must be done about climate change, or inequality. The leaders only repeat what they last heard.
That said, we note Richard Sennett’s careful reframing of the myth. He argues that in narcissistic disorder one sinks into oneself. And that without meaningful references and valuing of others, no stable character or self-image is ever formed. Sennett writes that
‘…as a character disorder, narcissism is the very opposite of strong self-love. Self-absorption does not produce gratification [but rather] produces injury [italics mine] to the self; erasing the line between the self and other means that nothing new, nothing “other”, ever enters the self; it is devoured and transformed until one thinks one can see oneself in the other – and then it becomes meaningless… The narcissist is not hungry for experiences, [s/he] is hungry for Experience. Looking always for an expression or reflection of [oneself]…one drowns in the self.’ (The Fall of Public Man, New York: Norton, 1992, pp. 324-25).
Sennett argues that narcissism often hinders goal achievement. In corporate narcissism, as with individuals, there is a tendency to avoid closure on measurable outcomes to escape external judgment that could weaken self-esteem. This avoidance is unintentional; those affected engage in repetitive self-referential patterns that prevent stable character development and lead to self-absorption. While others may remain captivated by what these individuals or organisations might do next, ultimately, nothing changes. (Yes, Fresh Expressions fits the bill).
Translating this into ecclesiology, it seems to be a particularly compelling preliminary diagnosis of the Church of England’s safeguarding debacles. Everything goes round and round and round in circles in a kind of endless death-loop. Nothing changes. Narcissism craves your admiration and devotion, and commands your deference and fealty. But it never wants judgment or accountability. QED the CofE? (QED is from the Latin phrase quod erat demonstrandum, which means “that which was to be demonstrated” or “what was to be shown”).
It doesn’t take a genius to see that the endless cycle of ‘lessons learned reviews’ in Church of England safeguarding belongs to this world. Like Groundhog Day (another version of an ancient Greek myth), the Church of England just repeats the past in the hope that it will eventually get it right. The myth of Tantalus is instructive. So Einstein was right. “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.”
There is a heuristic pragmatism at work here, but it could also apply to many contemporary Protestant denominations. The Church of England, to compete with modernity, will adorn itself with trendy, secular rhetoric and processes because it thinks it “must look good”. It rarely thinks past this. Furthermore, it seems destined and bound to deliver precisely nothing.
As Sennett would concur, the narcissism is found in the journey and process that never achieves closure. Diagnosing corporate narcissistic personality disorder in the Church of England in an organisation becomes possible when we understand the origin of Narcissus.
Other myths also illustrate the dangers of hubris. Icarus, who flew too close to the sun against his father’s warnings, fell to his death when his wax wings melted. Similarly, Narcissus, obsessed with his own beauty, rejected those who loved him and ultimately died alone, transforming into a flower. Both stories emphasise how hubris can lead to isolation and ruin. These are ecclesial parables.
James Hopewell, the Anglican contextual theologian (Congregation: Stories and Structures, 1987) writes of the Zeus-myth at work in a specifically church-based context as a case of “an arbitrary and dictatorial rule…punish[ing]those who dared to oppose him…a one-man show who got his way…[by] the acquiescence of corporation-minded members…[and ridiculed opponents]”.
For Hopewell, the myth of Zeus serves that purpose, as it narrates the emergence of a supreme ruler from the Titans (the Elder Gods). Zeus dethrones Chronus (in Roman religion, Saturn), the most important god. Zeus has unequalled powers thereafter, but is not omnipotent, omniscient or omnipresent. He can be opposed, deceived and evaded. Zeus nonetheless functions as an arbitrary and dictatorial ruler, and a cypher for the leadership of congregations.
In ecclesial terms, the minister is a ‘one-man show’ with exceptional managerial gifts and can often be a Zeus-like figure. But such leaders also thrive on manipulation and can ridicule opponents with ‘thunderbolts’. Nonetheless, the minister may present as a fine and hospitable pastor, and provided members stay on the right side of this Zeus-like figure, the congregation is likely to be convivial. Hopewell accepts that his characterisation of a church or denomination where Zeus reigns, as
“…not a pretty story, but its very aptness and ugliness might awake its actors both to their plight and to their Christian promise…” (Hopewell, p. 188).
The stories of the gods evolve. Humans can be elevated to godlike status after their deaths, as with Heracles. But in many cases, there is an obvious sense in which one can read the persona and actions of many of the charismatic church leaders featured in this blogsite as befitting a Zeus-like figure. Pilavachi, Brain, Smyth, the Fletchers and others all come to mind. One can compare the eldership gathered around them to other Titans or lesser gods.
What is clear is that the epic accounts of such churches can be more Greek myth and ancient saga than many might suppose. Furthermore, such ancient narrative plots are easily detectable in other revivalist ministries, with leaders exercising extraordinary powers and holding unmatched authority and powers over their devotees. Indeed, these stories and plots are alive and well in contemporary culture and appear to resonate with everyday life.
Hopewell’s interpretive analysis, rooted in myths, narratives, ethos, and worldview, explored the collective unconscious. The archetypes in shared memory, often repressed, continue to influence congregational life and macro-denominational polity. For example, we can think of Anglican bishops known for their unpredictable bullying. While some might experience the bishop as pastoral and visionary, others can find them to be a trigger of fear. The bishop can be armed with thunderbolts, and the laity and clergy are unsure of who could be punished next. Some might view the bishop as a storm bringing misery, while others saw the same leader as essential for growth, as though they were like nourishing rain. Regardless, all may live in apprehension of the bishop’s retribution.
Those familiar with Greek myths will recognise Zeus, the god of weather, thunder, and lightning. Zeus could manifest as a ferocious storm to control others. Or he might transform into a swan to seduce Leda, a mortal queen, leading to the birth of influential mythological subordinates. Bishops can wield significant powers but be utterly unpredictable, punishing those who question their authority and rewarding obedience. Colleagues, congregations, and clergy can live in fear of banishment or punishment, unsure of when wrath or favour might come next, or why.
The Odyssey still has a lot to teach the Church of England. But the lessons lie not in heroism or some longed-for homecoming. Rather, we find the lessons in the lack of accountability, hubris and failure of moral leadership, and the absence of transparent governance. Bishops hide behind their clouds in their heavens, dwelling in Olympus. Nobody trusts these gods and demi-gods who lead the Church of England. They are capricious and unaccountable. They seek only obeisance and control. Like the ancient cults that Homer knew, such deities are just feared – or increasingly ignored. The epic saga that is the Church of England will end when this ancient cult is abandoned, and the people turn once again to a true faith rooted in Christ, and grounded in truth, justice, equality and mutual accountability.
This is a magisterial excursus that diagnoses the ills of the CofE from an Olympian standpoint. It is a magnificent achievement. Anon’s conclusion is also spot on: the deep spirituality of the One, Holy Catholic Church seems to have been jettisoned in favour of the fads and concerns of the world. As we see from the many young men who are currently asking to become members of the Orthodox Church or the Roman Catholic Church, people are desperate for Christianity in all its original fullness; desperate for Reality, not a worldly institution.
So the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church are not institutions? The Vatican and the Curia – and the Vatican Bank – are not worldly? That’s an interesting view.
I agree that many people are looking for a true and deep spirituality, and that’s wonderful, but I think they’re as likely to find it in eg Native American spirituality as in any religious denomination – witness the remarkable international popularity of the First Nations Bible translations.
This is an excellent article comparing a classical Greek story and its lessons with Christian religion. Your comment JEH was excellent too thank you.
I was just listening to church music from the 17th century. The political and religious unrest caused by Protestant and Catholic monarchies could be compared with the unrest that we have in the church – although on not such a grand scale. Tallis and Byrd wrote sublime music within the abbeys. The music creates the space to allow the still quiet voice to speak and It has survived all the upheaval of at least three centuries.
What intrigues me about this useful article, is why its author(s?) has to remain anonymous? One of Stephen’s requests was, as I may have remembered, to at least have some kind of identifier. There have been quite a few “Anon”s. Which is this one? One of my fears is that part of the text is generated by AI. Not that this is bad per se, but my hope at having found someone who is familiar with the work of, say, Simon Western AND Greek mythology, might be confounded. If the author could tell us why she has to remain anonymous, I believe I would understand.
Thanks, Steve – a fair point about having some kind of identifier. On the other hand I think it can be right to protect others – good individuals who’ve acted in principled ways (rather than in ‘closed ranks’ or ‘cover-up’), and who might be in trouble if we identified them.
Forty years ago, my young family and I were ‘led up the garden path’ by a vicar in Yorks. When I complained, most of the Church officials involved closed ranks against us – but there were good exceptions, including two other local vicars.
After more than three years, the bishop called a meeting with the Area Dean, the Lay Chairman, me, and one of those supportive vicars – and if anyone dislikes the words quoted in my paragraph above, they aren’t mine but those of that vicar at the meeting.
A decade later, during research, I interviewed lots of Church people. One respected liturgist asked about my journey (or ‘pilgrimage’), so I told the story of our experience in the late 1980s. The liturgist heard me thoughtfully, then (rather to my surprise) picked up just one point – the two vicars who’d helped us – and said that such integrity was ‘rare among the clergy’. That, from an insider!
I won’t identify either that vicar or that liturgist. Both still work in the C of E, and might get what Rev Graham Sawyer (a Peter Ball survivor) has called ‘the secret phone call’ – an abuse of so-called ‘confidentiality’ which more and more of us openly condemn. A day or two before that meeting with the bishop, the helpful vicar got the ‘call’ from another participant, in an attempt to dissuade him from supporting me. It failed, I’m glad to say. Stephen is right strongly to assert the need for ‘independence’ – good people genuinely show it.
Kieran
I wonder if there is any Christian authorised religion in the world that isn’t corrupt. Isn’t guilty of using power and money before the loving care and support of each member in their families.
Some have left their homes and countries to find a safer new world where they can worship more freely. Did they discover a deeper spirituality?
I have worked in different churches all my life in the Anglican tradition keeping my head down, busy with music and bottle stalls but where I found my deeper faith was at home in my meditations and studies of native Americans and Celtic Christianity.
It’s not just Christianity, all organised religions are potentially corruptible – as are all human institutions. Religious organisations are as incapable of purity as are the individuals who make them up. Keeping them more or less on the side of the angels is a constant labour, and God bless all those who engage in it.
In answer to Steve Lewis, ‘Anon’ is that we are CofE victims of abuse and processes, and usually more than one person is writing a piece, but with an individual taking responsibility for the main authorship in an essay.
Sadly, we choose to write like this because of the culture of threats, bullying and intimidation at the very top of the CofE. In our pursuit of justice, truth, accountability, and transparency in CofE safeguarding, we have exhausted all avenues to have our cases heard by proper independent arbitration.
We have found that if we continue to complain, often out of desperation and despair, the NST and/or Archbishops’ Council and bishops retaliate by reporting abuse victims to the police, citing harassment, or engaging their lawyers to issue ‘cease and desist’ letters. These are expensive to respond to, and frankly the threat of legal action forces abuse victims to be silent, cows them into withdrawal, drives them underground, or causes new levels of despair and suicidal ideation.
Some CofE clergy who have complained about safeguarding matters and due process are threatened with suspension for rocking the boat, or told not to question bad safeguarding practices, as that in itself will constitute a safeguarding violation. Some clergy have faced CDMs and suspension for daring to step out of line. The suspensions last for many months, even years.
The Archbishops are well aware that there is no mechanism for complaining about bad, incompetent or corrupt safeguarding practice in the CofE. The NST know this too. Ineqe do absolutely nothing, and indeed have an established pattern of colluding with these abuses. The Charity Commission do nothing.
Rather like the French Resistance, we have been driven underground by the vicious and cruel intimidation perpetrated by the senior leadership of the CofE. We’d be happy to write openly if the CofE’s safeguarding was honest and accountable. But it isn’t, and we live in fear of their reprisals and retribution, for which we bear the scars.
Of course, and thank you. Please write again if you feel able to. Bonne chance
Anon and friends, thank you for such an excellent blog. Comparing C/E hierarchy to Greek gods is very apt.
I was appalled and shocked at the detail of seemingly merciless suffering inflicted by those in power in an effort to preserve their reputations. Indeed, as you say, it is vicious and cruel especially in targetting people who only want to serve God.
I marvel they do not seem to have a glimmer of a conscience and yet dare call themselves, ‘men of God’. How deluded!
I shall pray for you.
The sickest dimension is how biblical principles of justice inform so much of UK culture, and have done for centuries. Paradoxically, is the UK Anglican Church one place where these principles frequently get neglected? The rudiments of a fair legal system are not all that complicated: avoid conflict of interest, and let the evidence of witnesses speak for itself. Yet do we see these ideas get ignored in countless Church scandals?
The conflict of canon law and civil law seems to be at the route of many mismanaged safeguarding processes and so to grave injustices. James speaks of ‘countless church scandals’.
In our case the conflict was blatantly a refusal to accept the civil law of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ because the Diocesan Safeguarding Officer claimed that the complainant (chorister), must be believed and any evidence to the contrary is inadmissible. So then, innocence is impossible to prove because any evidence contrary to the allegation is not accepted.
The DSO said her statement was a House of Bishops ruling but we could not find that anywhere nor did she respond to our request for a reference detail. So we are left apparently (according to the DSO), with the canon law of ‘guilty until proven innocent’ with ‘innocent’ impossible to prove or be accepted.
Perhaps that would be a good place to start reform of safeguarding. Defining the laws of canon versus civil.
Thanks, Anon/s. It’s noticeable that of late years more and more clergy are using pseudonyms or ‘Anon’ when contributing to open forums like Surviving Church or Thinking Anglicans, clergy Facebook groups, and even the password protected members-only Sheldon Hub. It speaks volumes about the terrible insecurity many clergy are living with.
I feel free to use my real name only because I’m retired, don’t depend on the C of E for my income (except pension, which they can’t take away) and wouldn’t be too bothered if they took away my PTO or booted me out of the Church altogether. It really doesn’t say much for church systems or our leaders, if the majority of clergy are living in a state of fear.
Which is in part the reason why numbers going forward to ordination are significantly declining:
https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2024/12-july/news/uk/number-of-ordinands-plummets-synod-hears
As the truth continues to emerge of what it might be like if you “step out of line”, show aptitude they find intimidating, or a host of other reasons for them to pick on people, isolate them or otherwise bully or harass them, is it any surprise?
I conclude the pressure is working. That said, I see no sign of things improving for paid church staff or volunteers anytime soon.
The resignation of Justin Welby, some time after the TV exposure of John Smyth by Channel 4 News and Cathy Newman, affirms what you say above.
Is TV a medium with a unique power to pull the veil from the very worst Anglican Church cover ups?
Yes indeed TV would be a very appropriate medium if it could be done.
An excellent documentary was made in past months based on the Church of England being the Post Office at prayer (made when the PO was headline news).
It was ready for broadcast by Al-Jazeera but pulled at the last minute. No-one seemed too sure as to the reason for this.
I was not involved and can give no other information.
If it’s the documentary I’m thinking of, it was filmed a few years ago and pulled at the last minute when the Israel/Gaza kicked off and Al Jazeera made coverage of that a priority. I was interviewed for that programme.
However, you may be thinking of a different programme.
I doubt it Janet. It sounds about the same. I know quite a few people who are well known in protests about safeguarding were interviewed.
If that was the reason it was pulled could it not be screened now? In view of what Anon has said it is still very relevant and topical.
I was introduced to a filmmaker and I asked if her company could screen it but unfortunately, at the time she was making another film.
I imagine Al Jazeera are still focussing their coverage on the Middle East, especially since Trump has stirred up wider conflicts there. I don’t know if Clover Films would be contractually able to offer it to a different broadcaster or not, but I hope they at least got paid for the work they had done.
Then again, maybe al Jazeera have screened it after all – since they aren’t included in TV listings we probably wouldn’t know.
That would be a shame Janet, if it had been screened without your knowing about it, especially since you took part.
It should be made known that it exists because I thought the aim was to to educate the public about abusive safeguarding practices in the Church of England; there is a great need for that. So many people, even those who go to church, have no idea what is really going on.
It would be a pity if all that hard work was wasted.
Yes, I agree. I may try to find out what has happened.
‘Clever clogs’ (page 49, Private Eye, 21 Aug 2026) is concise and incisive. It is getting very much harder for the Anglican Church hierarchy to keep on covering up maltreatment of members.
Thank you for these comments. It cannot be stressed enough that safeguarding in the CofE is unsafe, as it rests in the hands of senior leaders who take a personal and invested interest in whom to pursue with punitive motives and whom to pardon, no matter what. The CofE’s safeguarding operations are of course clumsy and bureaucratic. But they are also corrupt and incompetent.
We do not use the word ‘corrupt’ lightly. But we do mean it, and we can name bishops, ecclesiastical law firms and senior lay leaders who have conducted their work in a manner that would lead to dismissal in any other organisation. No wonder, then, that the bishops and senior lay leaders, backed by their lawyers, will fight to the death to avoid independent scrutiny and external regulation. We repeat that the bishops and archbishops are in full collusion with the current arrangements.
As Jürgen Moltmann once wrote, “Repentance that does not change the structures has not yet reached the sin. The church that apologises for its failures while maintaining the systems that produced them has not repented… it has managed its reputation in the language of repentance.”
Under these circumstances, trust and confidence can never be restored in the bishops, archbishops, NST, and senior lay leaders.
Working in the corporate world, and since, I’ve been fascinated by corporate dysfunction. Naively in the early days I just assumed that you could help them untangle their anti-productive behaviour, such as the “basic assumptions” Bion elucidated (1948) and others have built upon.
In recent years my preoccupation has swayed toward dysfunction in the institutions of the Churches, which paradoxically is often far worse than in the secular world of mammon.
If you can “diagnose” it then perhaps you could treat it. Whilst I do believe that thoughtful interventions could still be beneficial (in the event of their being permitted) I have reluctantly built an increasing opinion that the root of almost all these “dysfunctions” is sin. Wrongdoing. Evil men. That these characters are lodged at the top of big business is probably no surprise to many readers here. It still shocks me though, despite the years of hearing others’ stories recounted here, some of which are mentioned above, just how bad these bad actors are in the Church.
Sociopathy, psychopathy, malignant narcissism, whatever we call it, in respect of individuals, bad stuff gets done and they still get away with it. There’s no place for them in the Body of Christ.
Corporate narcissism, or Institutional narcissism, as we have often referred to it here in respect of the C of E, whilst vast in scope, has to me at least more hope of “treatment”. To maintain the self-delusion of a radiant Bride requires a vast swathe of human complicity to maintain the facade on the one hand, with the reality of decline, hurt people, scandals etc just behind the mirror. And people are voting with their feet, even if they aren’t minded to participate in calling out the disparity.
All narcissists require a facilitator to maintain the defence. Very often there are significant codependencies ensuring the partnership endures. I don’t think the strength of this bond is anything like as stable for the corporate version. In that there is hope. And those who lead the way, as above, are gaining traction to encourage their less confident sisters and brothers to follow them.
‘The journalists who took down Harvey Weinstein’ is a 30 October 2019 Radio 4 Media show episode. NDA exposure, and gaining a knowledge of the hidden scale of this, plus potentially vast costs, might appear to have had an elemental value in exposing wrong doing. Anglicanism, perhaps silently, uses a lot of member money in some situations, where NDA’s and legal fees are costly. I begin to ask if church and charity groups need far greater regulation by the charity commission, and for members and contributors to see how much of their members’ money is being spent on legal fees and NDA’s.
‘Report hears of ’30-plus years’ of abuse at church’ is on page 5 of the Sept 2026 edition of EN (‘Evangelicals Now’). It is a very honest description of yet another CoE foul up. This time Saint Andrew’s Chorleywood is the subject. It is totally baffling why Saint Albans allegedly say there are no plans to commission an independent safeguarding review. Apparently the diocese favours a ‘listening exercise’. Is this enough if eleven informants have shared experiences, some of which might be described as grooming or sexual abuse? And what if there were possibly gay exorcisms as well? Also, should there be curiosity about the dates of the incidents, and if they overlap with when Mike Pilavachi was at Saint Andrew’s Chorleywood? The case for fully independent safeguarding gets ever more compelling.