The new Bishop of Dover, who is responsible for the Channel Islands, has been appointed by the Queen. Rev. Dr Rose Hudson-Wilkin is the first ever female black Bishop appointed by the Church of England and was introduced to the diocese by the Archbishop of Canterbury today (28 June).
Reverend Hudson-Wilkin was born in Jamaica and is a former long-serving speaker at the House of Commons. She also worked as a chaplain for the Queen and led prayers at the wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in May 2018. The Church of England has not yet announced whether she will be visiting the Channel Islands in the near future.
-- Channel Television News:
ITV News made a mistake recently in the reporting of the next Bishop of Dover as having jurisdiction over the Channel Islands. This is not in fact the case. And thereby lies a sorry tale of delay, prejudice, fundamentalism, misogyny, and a personal conflict between a Bishop and a Dean, with sides taken, which does no credit at all to any institution which is supposed to be devoted to love and reconciliation.
The main problem goes back to when Tim Dakin was appointed Bishop of Winchester and inherited a particular legacy issue from his predecessor. This was about a complaint by a churchgoer about a church warden which had been badly handled by the Dean of Jersey, Robert Key.
The ins and outs of that sorry saga have been well documented elsewhere and I will not repeat them now. The one thing I know is that dwelling on them cause grief to the lady concerned. However I will say this much. Having commissioned a report to investigate what had gone wrong, the Bishop of Winchester then ended up with the report landing on his desk. What should he do? If he suppressed the report and it did not see publication, and it later emerged that such a report had been commissioned and existed, how would safeguarding in Winchester appear? On the other hand if the report were to be published, it was clear that action would need to be taken.
Reverend Hudson-Wilkin was born in Jamaica and is a former long-serving speaker at the House of Commons. She also worked as a chaplain for the Queen and led prayers at the wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in May 2018. The Church of England has not yet announced whether she will be visiting the Channel Islands in the near future.
-- Channel Television News:
ITV News made a mistake recently in the reporting of the next Bishop of Dover as having jurisdiction over the Channel Islands. This is not in fact the case. And thereby lies a sorry tale of delay, prejudice, fundamentalism, misogyny, and a personal conflict between a Bishop and a Dean, with sides taken, which does no credit at all to any institution which is supposed to be devoted to love and reconciliation.
The main problem goes back to when Tim Dakin was appointed Bishop of Winchester and inherited a particular legacy issue from his predecessor. This was about a complaint by a churchgoer about a church warden which had been badly handled by the Dean of Jersey, Robert Key.
The ins and outs of that sorry saga have been well documented elsewhere and I will not repeat them now. The one thing I know is that dwelling on them cause grief to the lady concerned. However I will say this much. Having commissioned a report to investigate what had gone wrong, the Bishop of Winchester then ended up with the report landing on his desk. What should he do? If he suppressed the report and it did not see publication, and it later emerged that such a report had been commissioned and existed, how would safeguarding in Winchester appear? On the other hand if the report were to be published, it was clear that action would need to be taken.
Probably the wisest course of action would have been to refer the matter upstairs to the Archbishop of Canterbury. But instead he decided to take action himself by suspending the commission of the Dean of Jersey to practice. Maybe he saw it as cowardly to "pass the buck". As he is now heavily protected by a team of PR consultants, we will probably never know.
This suspension awoke the anger of the clergy of Jersey and some of the lay people who saw this as an unwarranted interference in the local affairs of the church - a hasty reaction which did not consider the merits of the case [and which overlooked a churchwarden being "chaperoned" for being too tactile, which should have rung warning bells].
This suspension awoke the anger of the clergy of Jersey and some of the lay people who saw this as an unwarranted interference in the local affairs of the church - a hasty reaction which did not consider the merits of the case [and which overlooked a churchwarden being "chaperoned" for being too tactile, which should have rung warning bells].
The end result was a very visible falling out between Winchester and Jersey, under which Guernsey, still also under the diocese of Winchester, got dragged in.
With accusations and tempers flying high, the end result was satisfactory to no one.The Dean apologised for making mistakes and the suspension was lifted. Further reports were commissioned which found that no disciplinary action should be taken against the Dean. By a clever piece of spin by some Jersey laity, this was taken as meaning that the Dean had been exonerated. It did not. All that meant was the than mistakes he made were not so severe as to warrant disciplinary action.
Meanwhile something had to be done regarding the toxic relation between the Bishop of Winchester and the clergy and Dean of Jersey. The solution of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, was to bring the Channel Islands under the oversight of the Bishop of Dover, Trevor Willmott (popularly known in clergy circles as “Tricky Trevor”).
The legal document for this arrangement is complex and also involves Bishop Trevor being appointed as an assistant Bishop within the diocese of Winchester. Clearly the lawyers were taking no chances as to the legitimacy of this oversight. It's a tricky piece of legalese which can argue that Bishop Trevor had oversight both as Bishop of Dover, and by his links to the Bishop of Winchester.
During this period of oversight, women bishops were approved in the Church of England – in 2014. UK Canon law changed. This was rapidly followed by changes in Canon law in the Isle of Man in 2015. But nothing happened in the Channel Islands.
The Canon law of Jersey says that the bishop has to be a man. When the newly revised law was brought in by Bob Key, there was no reason to specified the gender of the Bishop, except as a rearguard holding action against the introduction of female Bishops into the Channel Islands, and particularly into Jersey.
With accusations and tempers flying high, the end result was satisfactory to no one.The Dean apologised for making mistakes and the suspension was lifted. Further reports were commissioned which found that no disciplinary action should be taken against the Dean. By a clever piece of spin by some Jersey laity, this was taken as meaning that the Dean had been exonerated. It did not. All that meant was the than mistakes he made were not so severe as to warrant disciplinary action.
Meanwhile something had to be done regarding the toxic relation between the Bishop of Winchester and the clergy and Dean of Jersey. The solution of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, was to bring the Channel Islands under the oversight of the Bishop of Dover, Trevor Willmott (popularly known in clergy circles as “Tricky Trevor”).
The legal document for this arrangement is complex and also involves Bishop Trevor being appointed as an assistant Bishop within the diocese of Winchester. Clearly the lawyers were taking no chances as to the legitimacy of this oversight. It's a tricky piece of legalese which can argue that Bishop Trevor had oversight both as Bishop of Dover, and by his links to the Bishop of Winchester.
During this period of oversight, women bishops were approved in the Church of England – in 2014. UK Canon law changed. This was rapidly followed by changes in Canon law in the Isle of Man in 2015. But nothing happened in the Channel Islands.
The Canon law of Jersey says that the bishop has to be a man. When the newly revised law was brought in by Bob Key, there was no reason to specified the gender of the Bishop, except as a rearguard holding action against the introduction of female Bishops into the Channel Islands, and particularly into Jersey.
As far as I have been able to ascertain, the Dean at the time, Bob Key, was opposed to the changes on pragmatic grounds. His own words that on voting on the law permitting Women Bishops in the church of England was that "My concern is that this particular legislation, not the principle, but this particular legislation does not give enough safeguards for good Christian people who can't accept the ministry of a woman bishop.” . Canon Law in Jersey, by specifying the gender of a Bishop was a neat pre-emptive strike.
When Bishop Trevor retired as Bishop of Dover he retained his appointment as Assistant Bishop of Winchester, with oversight for the Channel Islands. Meanwhile changes in Jersey Canon law were cleverly tied into the complex arrangements between Jersey, Winchester and Canterbury.While the law could have been easily changed, it is clear that by tying them into a resolution of those arrangements, it ensured further delay.
When Bishop Trevor retired as Bishop of Dover he retained his appointment as Assistant Bishop of Winchester, with oversight for the Channel Islands. Meanwhile changes in Jersey Canon law were cleverly tied into the complex arrangements between Jersey, Winchester and Canterbury.While the law could have been easily changed, it is clear that by tying them into a resolution of those arrangements, it ensured further delay.
This means that the new Bishop of Dover could come to the Channel Islands, but would have no legitimacy as a Bishop within Jersey, because of the lack of changes in Jersey Canon law.
There is a activist contingent of lay folk and clergy within Jersey who are both resolutely opposed to women bishops, indeed also question the legitimacy of women priests as well. They will do anything in their power to prevent this, and so far have been singularly successful in delaying any changes in the Channel Islands.
It is unlikely that they will succeed in the long-term but they may yet succeed in delaying the legitimate authority of women bishops in the Channel Islands for at least another decade. Some of those with legal skills have even been involved in the task of drawing up changes to Canon law - which not surprisingly have stalled! This contingent see this as their god given Christian duty to not recognise the role of women in leadership roles, despite that being accepted in the Church of England.
But there is absolutely no need to link changes in diocese with the changes in Jersey Canon law. It has been argued - and I have been told myself - that it will be easier to do everything at once. This is a specious argument which serves only as a means of delay. It is to be hoped that at some point this prevarication will be seen as the duplicitous argument that it is. The case of the Isle of Man shows that changes can be made easily and quickly where there is a will. If anyone says it is better to make all the changes in one go, ask them: why we can't we do as the Isle of Man has done, and make one important change now?
Perhaps it might be instructive to ask the new Bishop of Dover what she thinks about the fact that if she comes to visit the Channel Islands during her stay she is effectively stripped of all rights and legitimacy as a Bishop in the Church of England. She cannot ordain clergy. She cannot confirm young adults. She cannot be introduced in church services as a Bishop - with all the rights of a Bishop in the Church of England - visiting Jersey. She is effectively reduced to the status of Parish priest the moment she sets foot on Jersey soil.
I think that is an appalling situation and one which has gone on for far too long. We are now almost 9 years since the Church of England gave women the right to be Bishops, and 8 years since the Isle of Man followed. And instead we are governed by a legal fudge, and all kinds of horse trading and delay behind the scenes. I am sure that St Paul would have had strong words to say about this sorry state of affairs.
Breaking News
From "The Church Times", June 28: "AN ARCHBISHOP’s Commission examining the relationship between the Channel Islands and the Church of England will issue its final report later this year, after completing a consultation on the islands."
This is a report, not a decision.! More delay!
Mike Keirle (on FB) on the ITV Article: Sorry but that isn't accurate as Bishop Trevor continues to have oversight as Assistant Bishop of Winchester until such times as the Commission determines the future flourishing of the Channel Island Deaneries.
There is a activist contingent of lay folk and clergy within Jersey who are both resolutely opposed to women bishops, indeed also question the legitimacy of women priests as well. They will do anything in their power to prevent this, and so far have been singularly successful in delaying any changes in the Channel Islands.
It is unlikely that they will succeed in the long-term but they may yet succeed in delaying the legitimate authority of women bishops in the Channel Islands for at least another decade. Some of those with legal skills have even been involved in the task of drawing up changes to Canon law - which not surprisingly have stalled! This contingent see this as their god given Christian duty to not recognise the role of women in leadership roles, despite that being accepted in the Church of England.
But there is absolutely no need to link changes in diocese with the changes in Jersey Canon law. It has been argued - and I have been told myself - that it will be easier to do everything at once. This is a specious argument which serves only as a means of delay. It is to be hoped that at some point this prevarication will be seen as the duplicitous argument that it is. The case of the Isle of Man shows that changes can be made easily and quickly where there is a will. If anyone says it is better to make all the changes in one go, ask them: why we can't we do as the Isle of Man has done, and make one important change now?
Perhaps it might be instructive to ask the new Bishop of Dover what she thinks about the fact that if she comes to visit the Channel Islands during her stay she is effectively stripped of all rights and legitimacy as a Bishop in the Church of England. She cannot ordain clergy. She cannot confirm young adults. She cannot be introduced in church services as a Bishop - with all the rights of a Bishop in the Church of England - visiting Jersey. She is effectively reduced to the status of Parish priest the moment she sets foot on Jersey soil.
I think that is an appalling situation and one which has gone on for far too long. We are now almost 9 years since the Church of England gave women the right to be Bishops, and 8 years since the Isle of Man followed. And instead we are governed by a legal fudge, and all kinds of horse trading and delay behind the scenes. I am sure that St Paul would have had strong words to say about this sorry state of affairs.
Breaking News
From "The Church Times", June 28: "AN ARCHBISHOP’s Commission examining the relationship between the Channel Islands and the Church of England will issue its final report later this year, after completing a consultation on the islands."
This is a report, not a decision.! More delay!
Mike Keirle (on FB) on the ITV Article: Sorry but that isn't accurate as Bishop Trevor continues to have oversight as Assistant Bishop of Winchester until such times as the Commission determines the future flourishing of the Channel Island Deaneries.
Yet strictly speaking there is no reason to link the change in Canon Law on Women Bishops to this ongoing event, which would put even Charles Dicken's Jarndyce v Jarndyce to shame.
Posts
1 comment:
Excellent piece, however you start by mentioning ITV's mistake in saying the Bishop of Dover has responsibility for the Channel Islands, later on you write this "When Bishop Trevor retired as Bishop of Dover he retained his appointment as Assistant Bishop of Winchester, with oversight for the Channel Islands." thus making exactly the same mistake!!
Post a Comment