Is it any wonder that trust levels are falling in the Church of England?

In 2023, the Rt Hon Sir David Lidington, Chair of the Project Board examining the governance of the Church of England, told General Synod, “Let me be frank, having never previously been involved in Church governance, I have been personally shocked by the depth of resentment and mistrust that pervades relationships between different organisations, traditions and people within the Church family. Governance reform will not on its own deliver the cultural change needed, but it can help. Without governance reform, I believe it will be very hard to overcome mistrust.”

He pointed to the 2022 Governance Review Group’s Report which he said set out “a confusing lack of clarity over who was responsible for decisions … pervading everything, a lack of transparency with a plethora of committees, subcommittees, commissions and boards, a bureaucratic tangle in which it was almost impossible to take even urgent decisions clearly and quickly, or to hold decision-takers to account”.

The day after Keir Starmer took office, the Church of England’s General Synod listened to a presentation from Professor Veronica Hope Hailey, Dean of the University of Bristol Business School. She is a co-author of the recent report, “Trust and Trustworthiness in the Church of England”.

Professor Hope Hailey offered four criteria by which people judge the trustworthiness of leaders: ability, benevolence, integrity and predictability. Of the four, a breach of ability or competence is the easiest to repair, because no one expects anyone to be perfect. However, when there is doubt about whether those asking you to trust them have your best interests at heart or share your values or when they give conflicting messages, trust quickly vanishes.

The 2024 report found, “Pervasive yet patchy distrust is manifest in different ways across the Church,” and that “the major and traumatising breaches of trust that have been of deep concern to the General Synod and many, inside and outside the Church, have brought profound and sustained breakdowns of trust into the life of the Church”. The report lists “racism, sexual abuse and issues relating to Living in Love and Faith as amongst the issues that deeply affect the life of the church”. To which could be added the decision by the Church of England to close churches during the Covid lockdown, rather than campaign to have them designated as an ‘essential service’.

A survey carried out by the Catholic Union found that 62 percent of people said that their physical or mental health had been affected by church closures and that 90 per cent believe church buildings should not have been closed. The clergy felt isolated during Covid. They felt helpless as they sought to care for their dispersed, and increasingly depressed flocks, without any assistance from ‘the centre’. They were left confused by the insinuation that the Church prioritised the physical needs of parishioners over their spiritual health.

When the Church of England carried out a survey about Covid in 2021, people were not given an opportunity to say whether they thought the decision to close the churches had been right or wrong. Instead, the wisdom of those who made the decision was taken for granted and they placed the responsibility on the parishes to solve the problem that had been created. The key takeaway being,”This is now a critical time for churches to engage with the people who have drifted away during lockdown”. This caused many to question the competence and benevolence of those at the ‘centre’.

The local Parochial Church Council (PCC) can see the empty pews and are doing their best. They can also see the roof that needs repairing and the demands from the diocese to increase their parish share, reach Net Zero targets and enter into discussions with the neighbouring churches about sharing a vicar. All too often it seems the problems are created by those with the power and then those on the ground are expected to clear up the mess. Is it any wonder that trust levels are falling and that the Save the Parish campaign is gaining influence amongst the grassroots?

And then there are the ‘big issues’ of safeguarding and the fiasco surrounding the Living in Love and Faith process.

Last July, General Synod watched on as a presentation from the Archbishops’ Council about the sacking of the Independent Safeguarding Board (ISB) descended into chaos. Standing orders, of the procedural type, were traded in an attempt to hear from those who had lost their jobs. When Mr Reeves, a former member of the ISB was finally able to speak, he said that one of the challenges of working with the Church had been language. The Church had a different understanding of the word “independence”: “They mean semi-detached.” When they talk about “trust”, “they mean obedience,” he said, and when they talk about “communication”, “they mean loyalty.”

Similarly, the ‘Questions’ were even more heated than usual, with a number of people enquiring whether the decision of the Archbishops’ Council to sack the ISB had been unanimous or not. While the Archbishop of Canterbury suggested it might not have been, the Archbishop of York, Stephen Cottrell, stated otherwise.

Twelve months later and the Archbishop of York had cause to make what he described as a “a small correction to the record”. It turned out that the vote had not been unanimous at all, with four voting against the decision and four abstaining. “I spoke incorrectly,” he told General Synod, “and since it’s been pointed out to me, I wanted to take this opportunity to apologise.”

It seems extraordinary that a matter of ‘fact’, which could easily have been checked immediately against the minutes, has taken twelve months to be ‘corrected’. In that time General Synod has met twice and the Archbishops’ Council has met on numerous occasions. Whether it was a lack of competence, benevolence or integrity — there is no doubt that an organisation will find it hard to regain trust when the recollection of their senior leaders about important matters is so unpredictable.

In February 2023 the Archbishop of York told the world, “It has been a long road to get us to this point. For the first time, the Church of England will publicly, unreservedly and joyfully welcome same-sex couples in church.”

Eighteen months later and standalone services have yet to be commended. There have been wranglings over doctrine, legal advice and transparency. Frustration has been voiced about the House of Bishops’ continual flip-flopping but in the end it comes down to trust. What the Bishop of Bath and Wells described as “a gloss that I just don’t think will do”, lay member of Synod, Aneal Appadoo, said more plainly, “I for one feel I have been tricked.”

The ‘Trust and Trustworthiness in the Church of England’ report offers some advice about how the Church of England might become trustworthy again, but it also warns: “Occasionally all these efforts to reset the culture, values and behaviours are still inadequate and the institution may fail over time to recover. Roy Lewicki (2017) has called this the Humpty Dumpty syndrome. As the nursery rhyme tells us: All the King’s horses and all the King’s men couldn’t put Humpty together again. In these grave circumstances a public sector organisation is often broken up, merged into other departments or relaunched as a separate structure with a different remit. In the private sector, a business may not recover from the impact upon its reputation.”

There is certainly deep theological division within the Church of England, and the ability, benevolence, integrity and predictability of leaders may be in short supply, but one thing on which everyone can agree is that there is eggshell wherever you step.

Susie Leafe is director of Anglican Futures, which supports orthodox Anglicans in the UK

Is it any wonder that trust levels are falling in the Church of England?

By Susie Leafe
CHRISTIAN TODAY
12 July 2024

“The fight for trust is the battle that defines our age.” So said Sir Keir Starmer to his supporters moments after Rishi Sunak conceded defeat.

This was not news to those who attend or follow General Synod. It used to be that you would hear a few mutterings of dissent in the corridors, but more lately members have articulated their concerns publicly in questions and speeches. That the number of written questions submitted by members has more than doubled over the past five years is a tangible manifestation of these decreasing levels of trust.