Thursday, 24 March 2016
Jo Wells to be next Bishop of Dorking
Press release from Number 10
Suffragan Bishop of Dorking: Jo Wells
From: Prime Minister’s Office, 10 Downing Street
First published: 24 March 2016
The Queen has approved the nomination of the Reverend Canon Jo Bailey Wells for election as Suffragan Bishop of Dorking.
The Queen has approved the nomination of the Reverend Canon Jo Bailey Wells, MA, PhD, Chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury, to the Suffragan See of Dorking in the Diocese of Guildford. She succeeds the Right Reverend Ian James Brackley, MA, on his resignation on 30 September 2015.
Notes for editors
The Reverend Canon Dr Jo Bailey Wells (50) was educated at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge and then at University of Minnesota, USA. She trained for ordained ministry at St John’s College, Durham.
She was Chaplain of Clare College, Cambridge from 1995 to 1998 and Dean from 1998 to 2001. From 2001 to 2005 Jo served as a lecturer in Old Testament and Biblical Theology at Ridley Hall, Cambridge. From there she moved to North Carolina to be Director of the Anglican Episcopal House of Studies and Associate Professor of Bible and Ministry at Duke Divinity School. On her return to the UK in 2013 she took up the role of Chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury, based at Lambeth Palace. Since 2015 she has also served as Canon Theologian at Liverpool Cathedral.
Jo is married to the Reverend Dr Sam Wells, who is Vicar of St Martin-in-the-Fields in London. They have 2 children. Her interests include art, architecture and textiles. Jo has spent a significant portion of her annual leave over many years in East Africa, most recently in supporting Archbishop Daniel Deng Bul in theological education in the Episcopal Church of South Sudan and Sudan.
The Guildford diocesan website has Bishop of Dorking announced.
Posted by Peter Owen on
Thursday, 24 March 2016 at 9:42am GMT
The Archbishop of Canterbury’s website has Archbishop of Canterbury’s Chaplain to be new Bishop of Dorking.
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Church of England
Still no news as to who is to be the 44th Bishop of Oxford? Mind, in the 16th century they had successive episcopal vacancies in the Oxford diocese for 9, 21 and 11 years.
Wonderful indeed, in that she is truly an estimable person. But it means that out of a senior staff of two bishops and two archdeacons, one of them - 25% - has had zero experience of parish ministry. If I understand her biography correctly (as above and in Crockford) I don't think she even served a curacy. In an age where ministry 'at the coal face' gets harder and harder, this would not aid me in relating to her and respecting her if she were my new bishop, wonderful person though she is.
Nice. Mind you it will be a good while before we see any more bloke Bishops appointed ;-)
Oxford ? All you can be sure of is that it won't be Dean John.... Canterbury wouldn't upset his Primatial mates
For corporate appointments this would be a decent press release but it is disappointing for a bishop. On paper it sounds good but, as I have said before, it is irrelevant whether she is married when what we - or at least I - want to know is where she stands on issues of sexuality, on poverty, on evangelism, on evolution vs creation.
So it sounds like a decent appointment but I wish we got the information of interest to Christians rather than a corporate-style press release. It is the sort of issue Prof Martyn Percy has recently written about.
So will people on here now stop complaining that we have no bishops who are theologians (i.e. have held university posts in theology)...?
This is a fantastic appointment - lucky Dorking, lucky Surrey.
Surely the reference to "election" in the No 10 press release is a mistake: this is a suffragan bishopric.
(hat tip Gavin Drake).
I had not realised that the Chaplain to the Archbishop was married to the vicar of St Martin's - traditions that one wouldn't necessarily see as a neat match?
A refreshingly good appointment by +Watson. If every new bishop nominated had spent most of his or her ministerial career in parish ministry, it would make for a very dull College of Bishops. The diocesan bishop is the Chief Pastor and there is no need to replicate this in a suffragan, especially in a relatively small diocese. The clergy of Guildford will get that. And anyway who says that parish experience is the must have attribute? Clergy need to be challenged to think differently.
Indeed, Charles Read, as one who has raised that issue a couple of times in the past, I readily acknowledge that Dr Wells has impressive theological credentials.
On another matter raised here from time to time in relation to episcopal appointments, can anyone tell us what proportion of the serving bishops were trained at St John's Durham?
A number of the first cohort of women bishops have clergy husbands, but Jo's is, I think, the most high profile. I wonder how they will manage their life, other than commuting (in which direction?) on South-West trains? Is this something that should concern us?
The appointment (which is a Crown appointment) is governed by the Suffragan Bishops Act 1534 Simon! Think you will find that bishops 'name and elect' them, but I am no constitutional lawyer!
I can't easily answer your wider question, Edward Prebble, but I can observe that, of the ten women bishops now appointed, four of them were trained at St John's Durham. And still not a single one who was trained at Mirfield, St Stephen's House, Westcott or Cuddesdon.
You may be right, Anthony, but this wording has not been used in other recent announcements about suffragan bishops.
Malcolm Dixon notes that 10 women bishops are now either appointed or in post.As yet though it seems to me that as a group they have ordained very few priests or deacons of either gender.This, I imagine,will change in 2016.Does anyone know how many ordinations they have collectively done?
Can't get the civil servants these days!
As the appointment is based on an act from 1534, I would think they are using the word "elect" in its old sense ie. "Chosen" rather than elected by vote.
In answer to the question about proportions, here are the current stats on bishops' training institutions (diocesan bishops number first, then suffragan):
Wycliffe Hall, Oxford 8+11
Westcott House, Cambridge 6+6
Ridley Hall, Cambridge 5+9
Cranmer Hall, Durham 4+12
Ripon College Cuddesdon 4+4
St John's Nottingham 3+5
St Stephen's House Oxford 3+3
Trinity College, Bristol 2+8
Queens College Birmingham 2+1
Oak Hill College 1+1
Kings College London 1 diocesan
St Augustines College 1 diocesan
Sarum & Wells College 4 suffragans
Lincoln Theological College 3 suffragans
Regional and diocesan courses 1+3
For added interest, there are 10 diocesans and 16 suffragans with doctorates and 19 diocesans and 24 suffragans who were Oxbridge undergraduates.
I note some complaining here that the new bishop hasn't extensive parish experience but is highly regarded as a theologian. Given what passes for theology in the two current archbishops, I'd say this will make for a refreshing change.
That is a very interesting list, NJ, and I am impressed that you were able to produce it so quickly.
Do you think you could provide a similar, but shorter list, of those appointed say over the last five years, or perhaps since the appointment of the current Archbishop of Canterbury? I note the very high number of suffragans who hail from Cranmer Hall, Durham, and wonder how many of them are quite recent appointments.
Interesting though the list of Bishops/ theological colleges is, it doesn't tell us where, ecclesiastically, they are now. One Wycliffe product is now a flying bishop and one Trinity man is the former Chair of Affirming Catholicism. Evangelicals seem to move up the candle....any evidence of moves the other way?
OK Edward Prebble, you did ask!
Since Justin's appointment, as far as I can work out the figures are as follows (diocesan then suffragan as before):
Queens Brum 2 diocesans
Oak Hill 1+1
St Albans MTS 1 diocesan
St Johns Nott, St Stephens, Edinburgh and SEITE 1 suffragan each
I would echo Perry Butler's comment that training institution does not necessarily reflect the individual's churchmanship, even when they were training, let alone 20 years on. It is also worth remembering that different colleges are very different sizes, certainly today, though I don't know what the numbers would have been when this generation of bishops were training. For example, compared to number of ordinands, Oak Hill is significantly under-represented, while St Stephens is possibly over-represented.
A great appointment for Guildford, and interesting stats about colleges.
The late Michael Scott-Joynt I believe moved in a more conservative direction over his career. I was quite surprised recently to learn he'd been at Cuddesdon.
Richard Chartres is another Cuddesdon alumnus, but, although high church I don't believe he's ever been much of a liberal. When he was there, under Runcie, he was happily out of step with the prevailing ethos.
Indeed, Richard Chartres was so "out of step with the prevailing ethos" at Cuddesdon that he left and eventually concluded his training for the ordained ministry at Lincoln Theological College, eventually becoming the greatest Archbishop of Canterbury we never had.
Perry, and NJ, I certainly take your point about drawing inferences about a particular bishop's theological position based on the hue of the college where they did their training. My father attended Ripon Hall, Oxford at the height of its modernist/liberal fame, then developed into a staunch AngloCatholic and later into one of the leading lights of the Charismatic movement in New Zealand.
It is surely legitimate, however to draw some inferences from trends. It is clear (as Malcolm Dixon points out) that Cuddesdon and Westcott, formerly very strongly represented on the episcopal bench, are now relatively minor players, compared with Wycliffe, Ridley, Cranmer and Trinity, especially if you take those "evangelical" colleges together. But a cursory review of the two lists seems to show a pretty similar distribution, which suggests to me that it is unfair to blame (or credit, depending on your perspective) Archbishop Welby for the change.
It is much more likely that, already 30 years ago, the big evangelical parishes had the big youth groups, which led to a high number of vocations, which led to higher attendance at "evangelical" colleges, which has led to a higher number of senior clergy drawn from that stable.
I have no idea whether Dr Jo Wells fits well into this generalisation, but I think the generalisation is valid.
The preponderance of women bishops with clergy spouses is no reflection on any of them individually but is a somewhat disconcerting pattern.
Turbulent Priest, I wonder whether some of that clergy husband trend comes down to the 'boring practicality' of child care and raising a family.
Most clergy roles allow some flexibility with managing their diaries, but the flip side is that one often has to work unsociable hours. To manage the child care it's very helpful if one's other half has some flexibility in their role as well - which makes another priest ideal in that respect.
I think that the last bishop to have trained at Ripon Hall before its amalgamation with Cuddesdon was the retired Bishop of Edmonton, Peter Wheatley.
There are lots of men bishops married to female clergy and this phenomenon is common in most other occupations. It's not disconcerting, it's life in a world where marriages are not based on wives obeying their husbands but are genuine partnerships. We should instead be giving thanks to God that we live in a society and church where couples can live in fruitful partnerships that foster mutually beneficial vocations.
I don't disagree Edward, but I think " movement" after Ordination is interesting and I wonder if it is much studied by Min Div Our residential colleges are " party" colleges and I am sad ( not least as a Lincoln man) that Lincoln, Salisbury and Chichester went in the cull.I do wonder if the right colleges were closed.As a former DDO for 12 years I follow the progress of those who went through the system under me...over 120...with considerable interest, and not a few surprises.
The two Peters...of course many priests are married to other priests. But not that many! Current figures suggest that if your husband is a priest you are more likely to become a bishop.
Having a spouse in a different job gives a different perspective.
As I've already said, this is no criticism of any current bishop or priest. But it does suggest something odd about the selection process.
Edward Prebble "it is unfair to blame (or credit, depending on your perspective) Archbishop Welby for the change."
Indeed the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, seems to have gone to great lengths to ensure that the House of Bishops was not filled with his own "yes men" (They were all men then) but with a broader cross section representing the breadth of tradition within the Church - much to his credit, but also to his cost. One might hope that similar generosity of spirit may be seen again soon.
Paul, Archbishop Ramsey always ensured a fair and just balance between Catholic and Evangelical bishops, With the possible exception of William Temple (whose reign at Canterbury was cut prematurely short) Ramsey was undoubtedly the greatest ABC of the 20th century. Robert Runcie worked hard to ensure an episcopate in his own Liberal-Catholic image and likeness and now Justin Welby, similarly, seems to be filling English cathedras with like minded Evangelicals with managerial skills. I cannot remember a time past when 80% of the top five Sees were filled by Evangelical Clerics, London being the 20% exception. Who is there left to follow in Richard Chartres footsteps? I have heard the Bishop of Chichester's name being mention as a possible successor but his handling of the allegations concerning his predecessor George Bell may well prevent that happening. Will London also fall to the Evangelicals thus making it an100%?
I think ++Justin is being suspected unfairly of bias.. NJ, how do Justin, Rowan, George and Robert compare (wrt any propensity to prefer as Bishops people from their own Theological College)?
I could've sworn I'd seen Jo generally called Bailey-Wells, but in this matter she seems to be consistently Wells. If true, this is a little disappointing.