Comments: Some more comment on the Green report

this link to the 13 points post works

ED: thanks, have now fixed that above.

Posted by useful in parts at Sunday, 18 January 2015 at 9:46pm GMT

Who is kidding who here? Talk about locking the stable door after the horse has bolted! To say that this report was 'theologically rooted' is the greatest insult to the collective intelligence of the C of E to date. This is proof, if ever we needed it, of the alarming theological paucity from the top-down, and the glaring arrogance-cum-naivite which says theology has no place in the 'business plans' of the Church.

I remember Ken Leech giving a Compline address on the passage from 1 Peter which is usually used in that Office (Be sober, be watchful, for your adversary the devil prowls around...). Ken pointed out that the Greek word for 'devil' was the same words used, in certain contexts, for a businessman.

Business plans without theology are, indeed, something to be deeply wary of. So, too, are bishops and archbishops (and people like John Spence on yesterday's Sunday programme on Radio 4)who try to cover their tracks and compensate for their lack of consultation and perspective by semantic slight-of-hand.

I expect my General Synod reps to take a very robust approach to these reports, the process which has produced them, and the breath-takingly narrow stance of the people chosen to drive the process.

Posted by James A at Monday, 19 January 2015 at 10:43am GMT

Stephen Conway is obviously the Fall Guy for the brazenly inadequate 'Green' report. Steve Croft, Pete Broadbent and John Spence have fronted theirs. Pete Broadbent has been active in responding to posts on the C of E website. Stephen Green is nowhere to be seen. How much time has had to be carved out of the episcopal diary in Ely to put down a fire blanket and play catch up after the eruption of (legitimate) criticism of this report? I'm sure I'm not far from the mark in guessing that an edict came down from on high, instructing an already busy diocesan bishop to do a rushed patch-up job prior to the next GS meeting, to spare the two archbishops a potential embarrassment and a wounding of their authority. If so, this is surely just a hint at the type of so-called 'leadership' we are to expect in the future.

Posted by Michael Chancellor at Monday, 19 January 2015 at 11:40am GMT

Good post by our own (as it were) David Keen. The situation is terrible and there is no point in pretending otherwise.

Posted by John at Monday, 19 January 2015 at 6:54pm GMT

What I find difficult about the Discerning & Nurturing paper is the following ....

- on "consultation" it basically says they will review and refine content of the talent management proposals in light of earlier consultation, suggestions via social media and the hearing at Synod

- Yet the 1st mini-MBA for Deans is in March 2015,
- Partners have been selected to design and deliver the programmes,
- detailed design is underway and arrangements for identifying participants are underway (paras 14, 16 & 19)

which perhaps is why - unlike the other papers - there is not a discussion forum on the CofE website.

Also given that such actions/decisions are already underway/have been made - then if the February 2015 Synod raises fundamental issues that will be awkward

I've also summarised the Discerning & Nurturing paper

Posted by useful in parts at Monday, 19 January 2015 at 7:28pm GMT

James A:
This GS rep will be asking awkward questions and trying to turn this ship around. i don't expect to be alone. Contact your reps now and tell them what you think while we have enough GS days to debate anything.

Posted by Charles Read at Monday, 19 January 2015 at 9:36pm GMT

I am an urban PP in the English midlands with three churches. Nobody has asked my opinion on issues that confront me in an urban, significantly Muslim, community. I feel as if I am increasingly berated by those above me in the food chain for a sitation that is of their, not my, making, and that should I fail to live up to their expectations in dealing with it, they will have no hesitation in getting rid of me. To impose business employent practices on people with telephone number salaries is one thing, but on PPs on 23K + house ....? There is no point in my saying anything, for nobody in authority has ears to hear. I shall do the best I can serving the Lord, the people and the town. And if that is not good enough, then clearly any sense of vocation I had was misguided. Oremus pro invicem.

Posted by Fr William at Tuesday, 20 January 2015 at 10:59am GMT

Fr William, I long ago gave up waiting for people to ask my opinion before I gave it, the CofE isn't pro-active like that. If you think there are things people should know, then let them know. The more voices from the frontline that the policy-makers hear, the better.

Posted by David Keen at Wednesday, 21 January 2015 at 10:27am GMT
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.