The news item below was published on the website of the Diocese of Salisbury yesterday (10 April).
Rt Revd Karen Gorham announced as acting Bishop of Salisbury
The Rt Revd Karen Gorham, Bishop of Sherborne, is to be acting Bishop of Salisbury for a temporary period, it has been announced.
This follows the news that the Rt Revd Stephen Lake has voluntarily and temporarily stepped back as diocesan bishop while a financial audit of two funds is underway. He has also resigned from his role as Church Commissioner. A spokesperson from national Church, which is leading the process, confirmed that the financial audit is being undertaken following allegations of potential financial irregularities in relation to two separate funds, both of which relate to the office of the Bishop of Salisbury. These funds are separate from parish share and other funds controlled by the Diocesan Board of Finance.
Under Bishop’s Karen’s guidance and leadership, support to parishes and clergy will continue as normal. Contacts for DBF staff can be found here Diocesan Board of Finance (DBF) staff – The Diocese of Salisbury and for the bishop’s office here link Bishop’s Offices – The Diocese of Salisbury.
The previous day the Church Times published Bishop of Salisbury steps back during audit and resigns as Commissioners’ trustee; this has more information than the diocesan statement.
What a massive sadness.
We wait in confidence to hear that Stephen has been totally cleared of any wrongdoing.
We hope and pray that this is not an act of spiteful malignancy on the part of anyone.
We also hope that this painful business is resolved with alacrity.
Today’s Times covers this story. It adds that John Worth, chief executive of the Church Commissioners, ‘stepped down with immediate effect on March 30,’ that no reason is given, and that ‘no suggestion has been made of any impropriety nor any link with the case of the Bishop of Salisbury’.
With the Bishop of Ramsbury about to wind up his Diocesan engagements, say Farewell to the Diocese of Salisbury and go on Sabbatical prior to his Translation to St Albans, that will put more pressure on the Bishop of Sherborne, the Diocese being down to one Bishop. I do hope there are enough Hon Assistant Bishops in the Diocese of Salisbury who can provide some cover for Confirmations in Parishes, and take some of the pressure off the Bishop of Sherborne. Jonathan
There’s Bishop Tim Thornton who lives in the diocese – in the next village to us as it happens – and has already ‘stood in’ on one occasion – the early morning cathedral Easter service in which quite a number of people (of many ages) were confirmed. I expect he will play a role.
I have positive things to say about Bishop Tim Thornton. He was reasonable and willing to listen when he was at Lambeth. Quite unusual qualities for a bishop in my experience.
Bishop Karen has been, and will be, quite busy, having spent the past few months as acting bishop of Stepney in addition to her duties in Wessex.
https://www.salisbury.anglican.org/bishop-karen-to-support-the-diocese-of-london-in-acting-bishop-role.php
And we have just recently gone from four archdeacons to two, and Jonathan Triffit, the very capable director of Mission and Ministry, has just been appointed Dean of Bradford.
The Times reports that Hon Asst Bishop Tim Thornton took a confirmation service at the weekend, in Bp Stephen’s place.
I knew Stephen when he was sub-dean at St Albans – a great priest.Praying that this mess gets sorted quickly and does not get stuck in C of E red tape and bureaucracy.
Is there an “acting bishop” measure like the Acting Dean one. I know there are perfectly capable suffragan bishops who act up, but who does the Suffragan role when the Suffragan cant. It proves the need for a suffragan role.
Whatever a suffragan role is.
I think it can mean different things depending on what the diocesan structure is and how the diocesan wants to use a suffragan. But there are a lot of them and it has become rather a growth industry in the last 50 years.
I know it may be too radical a thought but the proliferation of Suffragan Bishoprics (a phenomenon not exclusive to the C of E but much more developed here than in most other provinces and denominations) has over recent decades weakened the sense of the unity of the Diocese around its Diocesan Bishop. I know that has all sorts of issues with it too, but our present arrangements typically mean that we end up with an entire layer of middle managers (eg Archdeacons and Suffragan bishops who end withall sorts of portfolios but little of what we might call senior… Read more »
Too old, Pery and Nicholas, and doubtless many of similar mind:
EVERY Suffragan role, IIUC, has to be aproved by the Dioceses Commission:
https://www.churchofengland.org/about/governance/general-synod/committees-and-commissions/dioceses-commission#na
It reports regularly and routinely to General Synod. I am not aware of any role being rejected for some time and look forward to being corrected. I believe C. Northcote Parkinson had observations on such matters. The Royal Navy has many more admirals than ships.
Nicholas, you sadly omitted to credit Assistant Archdeacons 😉
Though I suspect the Navy’s problem is more that it hasn’t got enough ships, rather than that it has got too many Admirals. AIUI the number of senior officers compares rather favourably with the senior leadership of other multi-billion pound organisations of about 30-40000 personnel. Cut the number of admirals, whose remuneration is in any case not really comparable (ie, it’s lower) with equivalent responsibility in the civilian world, and you just pass on the same responsibilities to lower paid people with less experience. ‘More admirals than ships’ is an easy poke, but it’s not the navy’s (or the admirals’)… Read more »
Thank you Rural Liberal for responding to my ‘easy poke’, which I associate with Parkinson. If I ‘interpret’ correctly, your use of the term ‘hull numbers’ suggests to me a possible naval connection. I tend to agree with you that the pauicity of ships is not the navy’s fault, as recent events have highlighted. In the sense that ‘the church’ is here to defend the people from ‘the enemy’ (however it may be expressed) we need a church that is fit for purpose. Whether that is best achieved by more bishops, or more ‘lower ranked’ clergy or by fewer church… Read more »
Part of the issue, as I have observed differently before, is that the Church of England does not have a structural middle management. However recent developments have loaded the structure with middle management responsibilities on the apparent assumption that middle management exists. There has been little theological or strategic reflection on this development, and roles have evolved to cope with the load.
The church is prone to replicating secular patterns of organisation and status.
If the world thinks that being aristocratic, rich and powerful is important, you end up with prince bishops.
If the world thinks that the premier structure enabling human achievement is the business company, bishops will style themselves as CEOs, and create a sub-structure (theologicaly justified or not) to bolster this confected role.
Having done the Acting Bishop role on four different occasions, I can give you chapter and verse! It’s the Dioceses, Pastoral and Mission Measure 2007 Section 14.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukcm/2007/1/section/14
I think this was invoked by the Bishop of Guildford before he died and transferring Jurisdiction to the Bishop of Dorking as Acting Diocesan Bishop. In Guildford I think they have 2 retired Bishops serving as Hon Assistant Bishops who can help the Bishop of Dorking with Parish Confirmations until a New Bishop of Guildford is appointed and can take office. Yet given the Sad circumstances this Vacancy arose in Guildford, the Church of England and the Crown may not want to move with indecent haste in filling this Vacancy. Jonathan
Given the current length of wait for CNC slots, indecent haste is not an issue.
https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2026/17-april/news/uk/wiltshire-police-confirm-investigation-into-fraud-allegations-brought-by-church-of-england
My comment: The Church Commissioners will need to be 100% transparent about any possible fraud.
If not, any cover-up will seriously compromise…both Archbishops; Marsha de Cordova and Alan Smith; bishops of Blackburn, Norwich, Sheffield; and a large contingent of Church House personnel who run the Church of England.
The tendency of CofE hierarchy is to hide awkward things for the sake of reputation. The strategy is hardwired into the corridors of Lambeth Palace and Church House. But if they follow this course of action, the consequences may be seismic.
I’m not sure this is properly a subject for public comment while investigations are ongoing. There is an enormous difference between ‘fraud’ and ‘financial irregularities’. Both terms have been used in the announcements so far.
If the police have been called in it would tend to indicate that a cover up is unlikely. I think that the new archbishop is starting as she means to go on.