Another dean has announced his retirement, in this case the Rt Revd David Conner of St George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle. This is not yet on the Chapel’s website, but I have been sent a copy of the current Chapel newsletter which starts with this.
The Dean of Windsor
Bishop David Conner has announced his intention to retire at the end of July 2023, twenty-five years after his appointment as Dean of Windsor.
As Dean he holds the role of Register of the Order of the Garter and was also, from 2001 to 2009, Bishop to the Forces.
David and Jayne Conner will be much missed but, given that July is several months away, there will be plenty of time to give them our heartfelt thanks and wish them a happy retirement.
With all these retirements I have to ask whether the Church of a England has sufficient people with the right mix of experience, skills and personality to fill all the posts becoming vacant.
I’m not sure how the Dean of Windsor is appointed, but it will not be anything like the process for a cathedral dean. Will it be the King’s own decision?
I think it’s just a Crown appointment. When David Hoyle was appointed to Westminster, the announcement included: “the Abbey is a Royal Peculiar, and the Dean is responsible to the Sovereign as Visitor of the Abbey. This is therefore a Crown appointment and has been approved by Her Majesty The Queen following an open application process.” What support the Crown gets to make it might depend on the circumstances. I doubt Downing Street has any direct involvement. Maybe the Appointments Secretaries are asked for advice. Certainly Lambeth would be involved. The King will certainly want to know who is on… Read more »
Yes, I’m sure the King will receive advice, but I suspect that the final decision is his and his alone.
‘But don’t bet on a woman’ – I think that was said when Richard Chartres retired ….
Yes, and I played my part to ensure that that was a good bet! Not that I am a betting person, and certainly not when an insider!
I think that’s a very reasonable question but one few (if any) here can answer.
I think the necessary qualification for being Dean of Windsor is an existing connection with the Royal Family Of the last three, David Conner was previously Bishop of Lynn (Sandringham is in that neck of the woods.) Michael Mann, for a short time Bishop of Dudley, I remember being described as a shooting mate of the Duke of Edinburgh. Not sure what Patrick Mitchell’s connection might have been.
And ‘nota bene’ the new Vicar of Sandringham was previously Incumbent of Tetbury, where Highgrove is in the parish!
With respect, you’ve made a factual error there. The current incumbent at Sandringham was previously Vicar of Tewkesbury Abbey, not Tetbury. Yes, it is is in the same country as Highgrove, but has no particular connection.
I think you will find that Paul Williams, the current Rector of Sandringham was vicar of Tewksbury and not Tetbury.
Sorry about that! But perhaps I can add to my initial comment that Michael Mann became Bishop of Dudley, suffragan of Worcester, while the Diocesan was Robin Woods – previously Dean of Windsor!
Good question!!! Glad somebody else has noticed!!
I think this is not unexpected. The Dean is already past the retirement age for other clergy, and Windsor (a Royal Peculiar) is specifically excluded from the retirement age legislation (as is also the Dean of Christ Church, Oxford). The Dean will still be in office at the time of the Coronation in May and, presumably, will officiate at his final Garter Service in June, with King Charles as both Monarch and Sovereign of the Order by then.
Is King Charles not “both Monarch and Sovereign of the Order” now?
Yes. Well observed. That thought occurred to me after it was too late to edit. I should have said “with King Charles now as both Monarch and Sovereign of the Order”. It was an allusion to the Dean’s very long association with the late Queen and the ‘new’ Sovereign’s first Garter Service which will be the Dean’s final one.
Nothing personal intended to this case, but how can anyone defend the difference in retirement age rules?
St George’s Chapel Windsor is a ‘Royal Peculiar’ which on my understanding places it outside any control or jurisdiction of the institutional C of E although, of course, all of its clergy are ordained C of E priests. It is, in fact, a college of priests with the Dean at its head. Westminster Abbey is similar. Observant viewers may have noticed that the Dean of Windsor takes precedence over the Archbishop of Canterbury when he is there. Christ Church, Oxford is a royal foundation (of Henry VIII) but a non-Royal Peculiar according to William Nye (Secretary General of the Archbishops’… Read more »
The CE is breaking the law of the land anyway. Noone can now be forced to retire at 70, as I understand it. Please correct me if I am wrong.
For insomniacs, I recommend the Ecclesiastical Offices (Terms of Service) (Amendment) Regulations 2017 on this subject. The CofE has many issues, but breaking the law on retirement is not one of them!
I think it’s complicated.
Generally no, but the de-regulation can be overridden by a specific law which I suspect is true in the church with a measure. (I’ve never studied church law in detail. ). So I suspect it is lawful.
Whether a specific measure was lawful under European anti-descrimination law is debatable but post-Brexit any opportunity to challenge it on such grounds may have been lost anyway.
It’s further complicated by the fact that ministers aren’t employees in the normal sense.
In short, its complicated but someone would need fairly deep pockets to challenge it.
Kate: A joint reply to you and Anthony Archer, to whom thanks for quoting the Regulation above. But as you surmise, the subject we are discussing is provided for in the Measure under which the Regulation was made: The Ecclesiastical Offices (Terms of Service) Measure 2009 (No. 1). Section 9 (4) states: This Measure shall not apply to a holder of an office in a Royal Peculiar or to the dean and residentiary canons of the Cathedral Church of Christ in Oxford. My memory failed me on one point. The exemption extends to the Oxford residentiary canons as well as… Read more »
I appreciate your explanation, which I knew. My point really was that this difference in retirement age rules is hard to defend. Should there be different retirement age rules because of royal peculiar status, do we think? I think not. I am not anti monarchy, by the way.
It’s only the two Deans, not all of clergy at those two establishments who are ‘age exempt’ and, as already mentioned, there is a possibility that things might change at Christ Church. I see nothing incongruous in the Dean and King’s private chaplain holding office at the King’s pleasure, which is what I think it amounts to.
My question is rather in the opposite direction. Compulsory retirement on the grounds of age is now illegal, as a form of age discrimination, unless there are, exceptionally, legally valid reasons. What would those reasons be in the Church of England, I wonder?
You are right that it is still possible for employers to have an “Employer Justified Retirement Age” but very few do; there are complicated processes to go through. Both Oxford and Cambridge Universities, for example, have live or recent disputes about this; all other universities have, I believe, abolished compulsory retirement ages altogether. The judiciary still have a compulsory retirement age, recently raised to 75.
However, this discussion isn’t relevant to clergy, because they aren’t counted as employees and so wouldn’t be covered by this (or any other) aspect of employment equality law.
Some of us are employed, and so have no compulsory retirement age.
Apologies for my sloppiness. My comments relate to parish and diocesan clergy. Clergy employed by organisations such as theological colleges, schools, colleges, hospitals, prisons, and so on are presumably all employed and their posts are covered by normal employment law and practices. Indeed I note that in the case of Fr Robin’s employer, the organisation’s excellently clear accounts state that the principal is remunerated only for his academic role. (Item 16, 2021 accounts). In response to Anthony Archer, the Church of England of course is not breaking the law, but it has managed a carve-out from the law applying to… Read more »
There’s no “of course” about it. The Equality Act 2010 at 13(1) states “A person (A) discriminates against a person (B) if, because of a protected characteristic, A treats B less favourably than A treats or would treat others.” Since age is a protected characteristic (same act, 4), the definition is far wider than employment and certainly covers church office-holders. The next provision 13(2) reads “If the protected characteristic is age, A does not discriminate against B is A can show A’s treatment of B to be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate am.” So, what is the “legitimate… Read more »
https://www.churchofengland.org/sites/default/files/2017-10/ac-age-limit-measure-guidance-for-website-october-2017_0.pdf According to the regulations, and subject to the appropriate ‘direction’: Any bishop, dean, archdeacon or residentiary canon can have their term of office extended to 75 (but cannot take up a position after the age of 70. Parochial appointments are possible after the age of 70. In the case of parochial offices there is no upper age limit. The Dean of Windsor is currently 75, and turns 76 later this year – so is being treated on a par with what would be possible for the dean of a cathedral (should they wish to stay to the age of… Read more »
From the Winchester Review into abuse by John Smyth, page 29, where David Conner “had not remembered things accurately”. Like so, so many people, “Of this I have no memory”. “David Conner told the reviewers that the Christian Forum was a significant component at the school, but that he was not involved and the other Chaplains who may have known Smyth at the time were now deceased. He said that he himself had never met Smyth.(note 67). The reviewers have seen documentary evidence that he was listed as a speaker at the Christian Forum on a number of occasions, including… Read more »
Several retirement announcements.
Are there advantages (tax, pension, etc.) to retiring after the first of the year? Or is there a mandatory age that several people just reached?
I wish David Conner well. But the Dean of Windsor is a pretty inconsequential appointment except possibly to the Royal Family in general and the Monarch in particular. Whoever replaces him will need to be comfortable with privilege and protocol, know how to hold his or her knife and fork, and know how to behave at significant religious events like the royal garden party: http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2dNCw0hPLs&t=20s
Who indeed?
I guess it depends. Randall Davidson, for example, would never have been fast-tracked to Lambeth but for his being a friend of Tait’s son, becoming Tait’s son-in-law and chaplain (through which he got to know the queen), becoming dean and acting as the leading court cleric and adviser to the queen on all aspects of ecclesiastical patronage (incidentally, Davidson’s predecessor as dean was another Connor).
In the case of the Dean of Windsor I wonder if it’s rather more likely that he buried the Queen, stared down the barrel of a coronation, and thought that might be a good time to call an end to his career so notice in first week back after Christmas. I can’t recall if a rush for the exits in January is a common thing in the CofE, but it is in very many other walks of life I’ve experience of – from the armed forces, through teaching, management etc. You come back after ringing in the New Year and… Read more »
The second half of your final sentence agreed. Without knowing, I think it’s a fair bet that HM the King was consulted, or knew, before this announcement. I think several people on this thread have missed the point that Windsor is totally distinct from cathedral deaneries.
It is ‘customary’ upon the death of the Sovereign for senior members of his/her household to offer their resignation so that the incoming king/queen can assemble their own team. In this case ‘customary’ has a meaning approaching obligatory.
Of course, that may not have happened here, but equally if it has we wouldn’t be party to that information.
The late Queen famously was a devout Christian and had a fairly close relationship with the ordained members of the Royal Household. I personally would find it unsurprising if some of them feel it is the right time to retire.
Hope I’m not committing any terrible crime in copying this here: authoritative information from Crockford’s about Royal Appointments in the Church of England:
https://www.crockford.org.uk/royal-appointments
It may be entirely coincidental, but are the current departures of Deans anything to do with the fact that cathedrals are now registering as charities with the Charity Commission, instead of hitherto not having been requied to do so?
I very much doubt it. More likely it’s due to a backlog of retirements and moves because of Covid.
I don’t know why my personal opinion is being asked in several questions here about the different ‘rule’ for retirement ages of just two members of the clergy out of the entire Church of England! I did my best to explain at some length in the reply to ‘Shamus’. It’s a simple matter of law. Why are people so excited over something so unimportant in the wider context of things? The Dean of Windsor is Private Chaplain to the King and in a special relationship to the Royal Family, officiating at marriages and their funerals and having custody of their… Read more »
It could be a financial thing. he might have stayed in post to pay a mortgage off.
I’m not sure that this really merits a reply, but the Dean gets (or got) a house with the job, the Deanery in Windsor Castle, next door to St George’s Chapel. See also the link I posted on ‘Royal Appointments’. Most of the comments on this thread would have been redundant if people had troubled to read it.
I have read it and as the son of a minister i know how it works. yes a house comes with the job. But where do they go after they retire/lose the house. i know many ministers who work past retirement age for a vareity of reasons, but this is one of them. Although its becoming less of an issue as life long vocations are fewer so many who join the ministry have a house to go to. Rather than the previous generation who sort these things out in later life
I obviously don’t know about the particular case of David Conner, but if he had retired at other times I would have expected a house on one of the private estates to be found for him. With so many retirements from the Royal Household following the death of Queen Elizabeth there will be a lot of pressure on grace and favour housing, so he may be unlucky.
I was told by someone who I think was in the know that he was specifically asked by the Queen to stay in post until after she (and Prince Philip) had died – presumably she wanted him to be involved in their funerals. So it makes sense that he is now leaving.
Bingo!
I instinctively had that impression. He will be 76 before his retirement date. His has been the longest continuous service as Dean since the end of WW II.
NO
David Conner is an excellent man, much appreciated by HM The Queen, numerous service chaplains and others who appreciated his wise and learned mind as well as his generous pastoral care.
What a shame his impending retirement has precipitated such a slew of ecclesiastical nit- picking and churchy train-spotting comments.
He is worthy of generous appreciation.
Totally agree. It has been absolutely baffling.
I am not nit picking. nor am I doubting Rev Conner’s ability to do a good job I wonder if they will get an Acting Dean from outside Windsor – i know its a royal peculiar but- it seems to be a thing to get a retired dean like jane hedges or graeme knowles to oversee things while a new dean is appointed
Those arrangements are provided for in section 13 of the Cathedrals Measure 2021 which does not apply to Windsor (nor, yet again, Christ Church Oxford). Any such arrangement would be ad hoc, and, so far as I am aware, has never happened at Windsor. There does not appear to have been any break in the appointments of successive Deans.
I did not say you per se were nit picking.
However this collection of responses seem well filled with ecclesiastical trivia.
Forgive me adding to the compost heap of Anglican trivia.
The Dean of Windsor is in fact Bishop David Conner.
The title Reverend in any case does not go with the surname…ever!
It prefixes the Christian name.
It is comparable to calling Sir Winston Churchill, Sir Churchill.
In this case the Dean would be The Right Reverend David Conner.
The Dean is The Right Reverend David Conner. He is also a Knight Commander of the Royal Victorian Order, but by convention does not use his knighthood title with his episcopal one.
That is just what I said, with a KCVO addition
Thank you. Agreed, on reflection my comment was redundant and if said at all ought to have been addressed to mark, not to you. I have the impression that of all C of E clergy the Dean probably has had the closest, certainly longest, relationship with and the confidence of the Royal Family, especially our late Queen.
I think it is legitimate to wonder who might be the next Dean, but I’m not going to speculate my own thought in public!
I am open to offers!!
This might be a prudent retirement in advance of the Makin report into John Smyth. Conner was School Chaplain at the time a number of boys were abused by Smyth who was a regular invited attender though with no obvious or suspected close connection to him. The idea that such a Chaplain would have been kept in the dark as the scandal emerged and was handled is a “challenging” proposition.
This is a very ungracious comment. A large school like Winchester will have various sorts and conditions of Christian observance and in my experience of large institutions the chaplain can be regarded by some as unsound and therefore suspect by Christians of a more fundamentalist stance. It is more than feasible that such as they would have operated well outside the control or knowledge of the chaplain. David’s being unaware is entirely credible and it is sheer unkindness to cast the vileness of Mr Smyth’s behaviour in the dean’s teeth. His retirement has absolutely nothing to do with this unworthy… Read more »
The “challenging proposition” has already been fully investigated and found to be without foundation. That emerges from the report commissioned by the College written by people with impeccable credentials. From memory the report has something like 194 pages. The Winchester reviewers have cooperated with Keith Makin. We await his report and findings. There were four chaplains at the College. David Conner joined as Senior Chaplain after Smyth had infiltrated both the School and the Christian Forum and has, indeed, said that by them he was considered ‘unsound’ – shorthand for outsider, not one of the club sharing their biblical ethos,… Read more »
I don’t know the flavour of churchmanship of the chaplaincy at Winchester, but in many of the colleges of the two historic universities (and at least some other university chaplaincies) then the more evangelical ‘societies’ or groups consciously operate absolutely and utterly separately from the chaplaincy. From my own experience participation in the chapel choir of one such college was automatic grounds for participation in the CU to be vetoed. If such as division operated at Winchester between the official chaplaincy and some of the individual societies operating within the college, then it is entirely possible that the chaplains would… Read more »
Accepting, as I have pointed out, that the report was commissioned by Winchester College, all of these questions have been fully answered. The report itself seems to have been overlooked somewhat, although it was published on TA on 22nd January 2022.