The recent meeting of the Church of England’s General Synod has put the bishops in a precarious position, highlighting a notable dip in their influence and authority.
Safeguarding Issues and Leadership Vacuum
The Church has faced a series of safeguarding issues in recent months, which have severely undermined the bishops’ moral standing.
Archbishop Justin Welby’s resignation last November—prompted by the fallout from the Makin Review, which scrutinized the abuses committed by John Smyth—has left a leadership vacuum.
Stephen Cottrell, the Archbishop of York, is currently serving as the interim leader but is not without controversy.
Critics are calling for his resignation, accusing him of inaction over the years regarding the protection of victims abused by former priest David Tudor during Cottrell’s tenure as Bishop of Chelmsford.
He has also been criticized for his handling of harassment claims against former Bishop of Liverpool, John Perumbalath, who, despite denying the allegations, has chosen to retire.
At the February 2025 session of the General Synod, which took place at Church House in Westminster, feelings of frustration were palpable.
On the very first day, 73 members voted to forgo Cottrell’s presidential address, while an additional 43 abstained.
Although he eventually spoke to the assembly, Cottrell appeared surprised and taken aback by the public response.
Changes in Clergy Conduct Measure
Despite the outcry against specific bishops, the overall authority of archbishops and bishops over their licensed clergy remains largely unchallenged.
However, the balance of power has shifted significantly with the introduction of the new Clergy Conduct Measure (CCM), which was ratified by the General Synod on February 12.
This modern measure replaces the earlier Clergy Discipline Measure (CDM) from 2003, which critics have long deemed inadequate.
Historically, the CDM concentrated power with bishops, making it relatively easy for parishioners and interested parties to lodge complaints against clergymen.
Bishops often found themselves as the main adjudicators, dismissing cases they deemed frivolous or formally addressing more serious allegations.
As a result, clergy facing accusations often had to seek legal representation, which could lead to considerable financial burdens, even with Ecclesiastical Legal Aid available.
Dissatisfaction with the workings of the CDM grew over time, notably after an article in the Church Times raised questions about its fairness.
The article discussed how the measure allowed bishops to exert considerable influence, often at the expense of clergy, leading to stress and reputational damages for those targeted by minor complaints.
With the CCM now in place, complaints can be resolved more informally at the local level, preventing trivial matters from spiraling into serious issues.
Under this new framework, case assessors will take on the task of investigating allegations of misconduct, while bishops will oversee the imposition of penalties.
Serious cases will be directed to an independent Investigation and Tribunals Team.
The Future of Clergy Support
As for whether this change will improve the support clergy receive from their bishops, the answer remains unclear.
The effectiveness of the CCM will largely depend on the attitudes of the individual bishops.
Those who have previously pursued personal ambition may feel constrained, while those with a focus on service might continue to provide necessary backing for clergy without needing new guidelines.
The redistribution of power under the CCM may well boost clergy morale by shielding them from unfounded complaints.
Nevertheless, the Church still confronts more profound spiritual issues, intensified by ongoing debates over same-sex blessings and financial pressures affecting numerous dioceses as congregational numbers dwindle.
Julian Mann, a former Church of England vicar, has transitioned to a role as an evangelical journalist based in Lancashire.
Source: Christian Today
