John Collingridge The Guardian Lobbying, lawyers and a media blitz: the fight to kill the Church of England’s £100m slavery compensation fund
Nick Spencer and Yinxuan Huang Theos Beyond “Christian nationalism”: Measuring attitudes to Christianity and Britishness today
It seems to me beyond doubt that the English economy of the eighteenth century was thoroughly involved in the slave trade and its products and that the Church, England’s main spiritual and moral institution, was thoroughly involved in England’s economy. Many vigorous voices, such as those of Samuel Johnson and William Warburton, were raised within the Church against slavery but not enough as there should and could have been if the trade were to have been abolished earlier. That is enough to justify some repentance and some action, involving money, to indicate a change of institutional mind. I don’t think… Read more »
The English economy of the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was thoroughly enmeshed in the class inequities and exploitation of the time, and the Church of England was thoroughly engaged in England’s economy.
What repentance and financial restitution should we perform to expiate our inherited guilt (if we believe in such a concept) in this regard?
it could be argued that “:Faith in the City” was one, similar response to the economic inequities within the UK. Not to expiate guilt, but to acknowledge that the institution was enmeshed in structures that did and do exploit rather than liberate.
Thank you. Did the Commissioners give funding to the CUF, and was there any pushback if they did.
I think that’s quite a good analogy. Other aspects of the eighteenth century economy, such as Enclosures, did have victims, though there is not a set of heirs to those victims in the same way as there is when it comes to slavery. And we do not generally regard the basic institutions of those days, private property, wage labour and accumulation of capital for investment as basically unjust
The Green party seem to.
Not just the CofE either – here is an interesting article from a Baptist perspective: https://www.baptist.org.uk/Articles/736918/Do_you_take.aspx
The Guardian’s “everyone who opposes Project Spire is part of a right wing conspiracy” is a disappointing journalistic response to a complex issue. It’s no more than the mirror image of GB News complaining that everything is woke.
Leaving aside the issue of slavery reparation, what strikes me is the implications when people with access to power, wealth and influence can, as it were, drown out other voices and leave little room for debate, let alone balanced, nuanced, compassionate theological discussion. As a trans person with disabled family members I have lived experience of where this leads and it should concern all of us.
You are exactly right Nicky. With your trans background you have the lived experience to see this for what it is. Probably many readers of TA struggle to appreciate the issue, through no fault of their own. This article is less about the specifics of Project Spire than about Church governance, and how we make decisions within the Church of England. It is perfectly acceptable to make arguments for or against Project Spire, and there are valid arguments in both directions. But at the end of the day a decision was made in favour by the institution, through groups such… Read more »
How would you change things to prevent this happening?
Good question Surrealist. The main thing is to publicise what is happening, so people are aware of the issue. That is why I asked the TA team to list the Guardian article, which they kindly did. The problem is because the same right wing millionaires own the vast majority of the press they can control and limit what is said about these same issues. Think back to the Theo Hobson piece a couple of weeks back when he said the Spectator refused to take an article by him criticising the Cambridge processor James Orr, when it had been happy to… Read more »
Well, Gibson’s critique of Orr strikes me as far more vague, infinitely less detailed, and thinly substantiated, compared to the comprehensive, evidence based and forensic analyses that Arday’s shortcomings received.
So could non-publication simply have been a judgment based on journalistic merit?
If there’s a story to tell, or a cancellation to foment, the Left are just as capable of this as the right.
There is perhaps scope for an article in the Spectator or elsewhere about the state of theological education (or the lack of it) in the UK. Lord Gove is a former Education Secretary and at one stage professed to have a Christian faith (or did he just want to get his children into a church school?). I would have thought he might be interested Cambridge University’s Office of Student Conduct, Complaints and Appeals awarded £5,000 compensation to a student who had been bullied by James Orr. The student left the university. It appears that Mr Orr may not have been… Read more »
Hobson not autocorrect
Firstly, I would argue that it’s already happening and cannot be prevented. However, I’m drawn back to the account of Jesus turning the tables in the temple courts and I’m wondering what that might look like now?
Thank you Simon for your post. I would have been far harsher to Lord Biggar and his fellow travellers. Being Australian with UK and Irish heritage I think Project Spire is magnificent. Still hoping that the Australian Anglican Church can make a similar project for reconciliation with our Indigenous and Torres Strait First Nations communities. Reparations and reconcilliation are so needed. But we lost a vote for First Nations people to get a Voice to Federal Parliament and the campaign was similar to the Right Wing Farage usual suspects. Within the Anglican Church across the Dioceses there was resistance .… Read more »
Thanks for the post, Richie, and I think you emphasise a useful point. Those of us with lived experience of these issues can see it clearly, but others who may have different lives are unaware of the issues. All we can do is document is going on, and provide the evidence. And just to complete that “public education” service, this is a final post, turning from Nigel Biggar to to his sponsor Paul Marshall. At least Prof Biggar is commendably public about his actual beliefs, whereas, like many right-wing “philanthropists”, Marshall is careful to leave few clues. Careful investigation can… Read more »
(Continued from Previous Post) All of this would not be a problem but for the fact that Paul Marshall is a significant funder within the Church of England – mainly within the HTB ecosystem. Whilst some money goes direct to HTB, he has contributed £10 to the Revitilise Trust, the church planting engine of the HTB network, and also helps to fund St Mellitus College, which now trains about a quarter of all Anglican ordinands. Personally, I find it worrying that a man with such clearly evidenced views, and who supports the GB news TV channel, has such a significant… Read more »
Quite a lot of people in the C of E have broad alignment with the HTB ecosystem.
I am aware of that Sceptic, and have no problem with such wide membership in itself. But Paul Marshall’s close involvement with HTB does raise two questions. 1 How many of these people are aware of the political views and activities of their major sponsor? 2 Many of the more senior people will be entirely aware of the political views and activities of their major sponsor (and friend for some). Yet they seem to accept it quite happily. What do we think of that? Does that reflect in any way on the senior leadership of HTB? Paul Marshall is entirely… Read more »
Excellent article by Andrew Graystone on the new “Marshall Plan”: https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/ideas/media/65415/the-marshall-plan-paul-marshall-gb-news
Thank you, that’s interesting, but perhaps the article gives you the sanitised version of Marshall that he wants you to see, having carefully curated his public image.
Graystone is remarkably gentle on the social media islamophobia – but is still incredibly helpful in emphasising the huge reach and influence his deep pockets have given him.
At least it’s his own money.
Look At Charlotte Gill’s journalism for multiple examples of taxpayer’s money – yours and mine – being doled out by Government at various levels to bankroll left wing causes and ‘research’.
If you disapprove of the way money is spent you can vote for a different government. Accounts of public bodies are publicly available and further information can be obtained by freedom of information requests.
Absolutely. I think the point is that the spreading around of money (public or private) to fight the culture/information wars isn’t just a ‘right-wing’ occupation.
All sorts of people in my congregation have all sorts of political views, from the ultra-woke to the anti-woke. I don’t judge some to be acceptable co-workers and others to be beyond the pale. But maybe that’s too liberal for you?
Just for those unaware of GB News activity and reputation – this happened yesterday, but illustrates what is par for the course.
https://www.itv.com/news/2026-10-16/gb-news-presenter-to-pay-damages-to-deputy-green-leader-over-social-media-posts
Paul Marshall helps to pay Alex Armstrong’s salary.
In 2025 it emerged that Panorama had edited Donald Trump’s speech of January 6th 2021 in a way that, in the BBC’s own words, gave “the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action”. The director-general and the head of BBC News both resigned, and Trump is now suing for up to $10 billion.
I helped to pay the director general and head of news’ salaries – unwillingly.
The protestations over the projected £100M to ‘wash the stain’ of slavery from the Church strike me as being at least partly specious and/or insincere, but they have picked up a lot of camp followers along the way. A one-off disbursement of £100M is a comparative trifle in the context of a £11.6 billion endowment. It equates to the operating costs of the Church Commissioners over a 12 month period, or the recent growth in the fund over a period of a few months. As political whitewashings go, it strikes me as being comparatively cheap: ‘Paris is worth a mass’,… Read more »
Bravo Erehwon
£150 million was assigned to the redress scheme for abuse victims alone. Redress/reparations, what is the difference?
If I have any doubts on the reparations issue, itis simply whether money is being directed in the right places, and whether it is a case of white washing.
The Church Commissioners funds should be applied, and applied only, to the charitable purposes for which the Church Commissioners exist.
Is that agreed?
If the proper scope of those purposes is disputed, it is regrettable, though perhaps inevitable, that the question end up in court.
Litigation and its costs to the Church could easily be avoided, by eschewing any controversial or dubious avenues for expenditure.
PS I struggle to imagine a worldview in which £100M can accurately be called a comparative trifle.
Sceptic, you make a valid point, but again this is about how we make decisions as much as about Project Spire itself.
There might well be a valid question about the purposes to which the commissioners can legally apply their funds, but (bearing in mind the advice in 1 Corinthians chapter 6) is this best resolved by those with deepest pockets resorting to lawfare, or (citing Nicky above) “balanced, nuanced compassionate theological discussion” within the church institutions?
It’s the Grauniad, so I ignore it. Let those who feel strongly about it contribute to a fund. I don’t want to and if it goes ahead I shall leave. (Regretfully.)
“Good God – the eastward position, and all creation groaning!”
Wot?
Falling out over relative trivia when there are far more substantial issues. From Thomas Hardy’s Jude the Obscure.
Quote from Jude the Obscure, Jude’s children have killed themselves and he overhears an argument about church ritual.