Ongoing wait for new Church of England leader ‘staggering' says MP
Conservative MP Martin Vickers said there is a desperate need for a replacement for Justin Welby, who announced he would quit in November and formally stepped down in January.
Technically, the King is head of the Church of England, but the person holding the role of archbishop of Canterbury is the most senior bishop and is the spiritual leader of the Church and the worldwide Anglican Communion.
Speaking during a Westminster Hall debate on Tuesday, Mr Vickers referred to the election of the new Pope Leo XIV – who was announced on Thursday after a secret conclave meeting which lasted just over 24 hours, meaning the Catholic Church had a leader in place less than three weeks after the death of Pope Francis.
Mr Vickers said: 'Perhaps the Catholic Church have got something to teach the Church of England in the speed that they appoint their head.
'We desperately need a head of the Church of England at this time, and that it takes a year to come up with a candidate is staggering.'
His comments came as the Church of England announced the central members and Anglican Communion representatives of the Canterbury Crown Nominations Commission (CNC).
The CNC is the body charged with nominating the new archbishop.
Its membership had been expected to be known in March, but there appear to have been delays in the selection of representatives from the diocese of Canterbury.
On Tuesday, the Church confirmed the Archbishop of York, Stephen Cottrell – currently the most senior bishop in the Church – will be among the voting members, alongside Bishop of Norwich, Graham Usher.
It had already been confirmed that the commission would be chaired by Lord Evans of Weardale – a former director-general of the MI5 security service.
Candidates for the new archbishop must be at least 30 years old, and generally younger than 70 and a nomination can only be made if it has received the support of at least two-thirds of the total number of CNC voting members in a secret ballot.
The commission is expected to have its first meeting later this month, followed by at least two further meetings in July and September.
It is expected there could be an announcement on a nomination for the 106th archbishop of Canterbury by autumn – a year after Mr Welby announced his resignation.
He said on November 12 2024 that he was to stand down following failures in handling a Church abuse scandal involving barrister and Christian camp leader John Smyth – thought to be the most prolific abuser associated with the Church.
More than 11,000 people took part in February and March in a public consultation for the next archbishop of Canterbury – aimed at giving people the chance to influence the future of leadership within the Church, by submitting both names and the qualities they think are required.
Lord Evans said: 'Helping to choose the next Archbishop of Canterbury is both a great responsibility and a privilege.
'The Crown Nominations Commission understands the weight of this important decision and we pray for God's hand on the process.
'I thank those who have taken part in the public consultation across the country and the Anglican Communion, helping us to establish the gifts, skills and qualities required in the next Archbishop.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
5 hours ago
- Spectator
Why conservatives should embrace their Christian heritage
The heydays of Christian influence over European politics may seem long gone. In the UK, after the most recent general election, four-tenths of all MPs took secular affirmations – up from less than a quarter in 2019 – while in Europe, parties with explicitly Christian foundations often seem embarrassed about their religious heritage as they tumble down the polls. Yet Christians have not stopped turning up for those parties. To play to its strengths and resolve its identity crisis, the centre-right should embrace its Christian inheritance. By returning to this Christian inheritance, the centre-right can offer a vision that is compelling to all and re-establish its dominance Even as the centre-right shies away from invoking its Christian credentials, it continues to rally Christian voters around its banner. In the UK, according to the most recent wave of the British Election Study, Christian voters were 33 per cent more likely to vote Conservative, compared to only 15 per cent of non-Christians. In Germany, too, churchgoing Christians are more than twice as likely to vote for the CDU/CSU Union than the non-religious. Even in the notoriously secular France, Catholics disproportionately turn up for the centre-right, with 19 per cent of Catholics – and 29 per cent of regular churchgoers – voting for the centre-right UDC at the 2022 legislative election, where the UDC received only 14 per cent of the overall vote. This reflects a long-standing trend. A recent report by Bright Blue and the Konrad Adenauer Foundation argued that religiosity has been a core component of European centre-right's history as they dominated European politics over the course of the twentieth century. Since 1949, the CDU held the chancellorship for 49 years – 26 more than its main rival, the SPD – during which time its policy platform was largely dictated by Catholic social thought, emphasising the value of family and the importance of social cohesion. In Ireland, up until recent years, both Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael upheld a staunchly Catholic outlook on social policy as they maintained a stranglehold over Irish politics; their Catholicism waned only as their combined vote share began to tumble, but this abandonment of their roots has proven a poor recipe for electoral success. Even in the UK, where Christianity was not as explicit a part of Conservative Party philosophy, the Church of England is not described as 'the Conservative Party at prayer' without reason. This is not merely because Christians vote right-wing. A 2023 paper titled From the Death of God to the Rise of Hitler found that a key predictor for whether you joined the Nazi Party or not was whether you had a Christian first name. If your name was common on churches – think St George or St Martin in England – you were far less likely to do so. The values of the centre-right deeply reflect their Christian heritage, while far-right politics instead often offers a secularised version of religion; one where politics, rather than God, is the source of meaning, and the party takes on the role of the church. For the centre-right to succeed in the future, it should play to its strengths and embrace its Christian inheritance. First, by doing so, it would be playing into a renewed uptick in church attendance and religiosity. Between 2018 and 2024, church attendance in the UK has increased by 50 per cent, including by 300 per cent among the 18-to-24s. In France, as of 2025, the annual number of baptisms is the highest since records began 20 years ago. But second, and more importantly, the values that have allowed the centre-right to be successful are the values it inherits from Christianity: love of country, caring for your family and rewarding contribution. The late Pope Saint John Paul II, in Memory and Identity – the very last book he published before his death – wrote that 'patriotism … is covered by the fourth commandment, which obliges us to honour our father and mother…the patria truly resembles a mother…Patriotism, in other words, leads to a properly ordered social love.' The centre-right alone can provide a vision of country that represents a love of your closest neighbour rather than shutting off from the world, as some right-wing populists would prefer. On rewarding contribution, too, it is largely thanks to its Christian heritage that the centre-right believes that people should take responsibility for their actions – that we have free will and are accountable for our actions and should be rewarded or punished accordingly. Here, it has clashed with those on the left who see hard work or good character as the mere consequences of socio-economic factors and nothing that anybody deserves praise or blame for. Those beliefs – in country, family and contribution – are persuasive to all Europeans, not just Christians. By returning to this Christian inheritance, the centre-right can offer a vision that is compelling to all and re-establish its former dominance.
The Independent
5 hours ago
- The Independent
Do we actually need a new Archbishop of Canterbury?
Here's a tale of two versions of the Church of England. This past week, I've been talking to some of the churchwardens, parochial church council secretaries and treasurers, curates and vicars, who not only put on services and keep food banks and lunch clubs going, but are responsible for repairing the roofs and rebuilding the buttresses. And then there's the other Church of England – the one that is represented by its high-ups, that I usually come into contact with at this time of year when the Archbishop of Canterbury hosts his summer party at his Lambeth Palace home. But this year, there is no clinking of glasses and the Archbishop's apartment lies empty. Justin Welby, who dramatically resigned in November, days after a report into a prolific child abuser associated with the Church of England, finally moved out earlier this summer. If that departure took a long time, then finding his replacement is taking even longer, and is now predicted to last until the end of the year – 12 months on from his resignation. As my conversations with the people who attend and run Anglican churches highlighted, for them it is business as usual – regardless of Welby quitting just before Christmas. Meanwhile, Stephen Cottrell, who has the CofE's number two job as Archbishop of York, can sign off any urgent institutional business, while he offers spiritual leadership by way of his current tour of the north, talking about the Lord's Prayer. So, if the Church of England has carried on regardless, might it not just give up on the protracted process of finding a replacement for Welby? Well, it might not affect Matins in Maidstone or Evensong in Evesham, but it's a certainly a problem for the established Anglican Church. The Archbishop of Canterbury is always one of the 26 Anglican bishops in the House of Lords, and Welby's speeches were frequently reported on (including his final one, viewed as tone-deaf). Now there's a void. Then there's the order of precedence; the Archbishop of Canterbury is always first after the Royal Family in this country, so when Donald Trump makes his state visit to Britain in the autumn, there will be an ecclesiastical-shaped hole at the state banquet (unless Cottrell returns from his tour of the north to play stand-in). Welby's most prominent moment, of course, as part of Establishment Britain, came with his crowning of the King at the Coronation. But there's more to the relationship than that. Meetings may not be as frequent as the weekly audience of the prime minister, but the private talks between the archbishop and the regal Supreme Governor of the Church of England do happen. It is this aspect of the Church of England – being the established church – that is causing the problem with finding a successor to Welby. A 20-strong Crown Nominations Commission (CNC) headed by former MI5 boss Lord Jonathan Evans with representatives of the Church of England and the Crown is wading through paperwork, studying comments sent in by the public and assessing candidates. A quarter of the CNC represents the global Anglican Communion. One can imagine the hours of discussion about hot-button topics such as same-sex blessings and whether the Archbishop might be a woman this time. And after that, the chosen name must be submitted to the prime minister and approved by the King. There is, of course, a simpler way of choosing a church leader. I know, as a Roman Catholic, that I will seem parti-pris, and this will send Henry VIII spinning his grave (no bad thing), but the Vatican knows how to make people focus on the task in hand. So, Church of England: stick all the members of the CNC in a locked room and only let them out when they've made a decision. It worked for Rome. The conclave took just two days to elect Pope Leo XIV. Why not have an Anglican conclave, put everyone out of their misery and send up some white smoke?
The National
6 hours ago
- The National
Ruth Wishart: Anti-abortion movement is well-funded and gunning for us
Her doctors and a midwife said such a course of action would be illegal under the then Irish law whilst a foetal heartbeat was detectable. Savita was just 31 when she died of sepsis in 2018. In the furore which followed, Ireland voted overwhelmingly to ditch the legal clause which prevented abortion. But it took six long years to pass the new amendment which did so. It became part of the Irish Republic's journey to unlock the stranglehold the church had previously held over the law, and subsequently, in 2015, another amendment endorsed same-sex marriage. READ MORE: Scottish Government announces £3 million in funding for 14 festivals More recently, when the US Democratic legislator Melissa Hortman and her husband were murdered by a self-styled evangelical 'Christian' earlier this month, police found a list of some 70 other potential victims in his vehicle. The link they shared is that they had all been vocally pro-choice. You might imagine it was enough for these ultras that they had killed off Roe v Wade in 2022, the landmark ruling which gave federal rights to termination in every US state. Evidently not. Since that ended, we have had tragic instances of rape, child and incest victims being forced to carry to full term, women bleeding to death in hospitals, and the better-heeled having to take flights to that handful of states which didn't take advantage of the new legal landscape and kept women's rights safe. It's almost as if all the male legislators who hollered loud and long for women to stay pregnant no matter the circumstances, collectively believed that all these pregnancies were somehow the result of immaculate conceptions. Unsurprisingly, there is not a four-deep queue of rogue fathers volunteering their financial or indeed any support. Men rule OK? Last week in the Commons, the weaker of two possible amendments was passed which 'allowed' women who self-terminated pregnancies, perhaps via online medication, to avoid prosecution. It did not exempt any medical staff who may have been involved. The author of the second, stronger amendment wrote in The Guardian that the House had chickened out of proper reform and had been altogether too timid. Yet again, some of the loudest voices raised in defence of the legal status quo belonged to men. Blokes like Tory Edward Leigh, whose features have always looked as if he were on the verge of apoplexy or worse. These men also have one thing in common. They will never, ever be pregnant. Which doesn't prevent them from telling women what they should think, or whether or not they should control their own fertility. So there is absolutely no reason to suppose that Scotland or the UK is safe from American lobbying. Just look at what happened when a modest law from Gillian Mackay MSP was passed stopping the Texan-based 40 Days For Life group assembling nearer than 200 metres from any facility offering terminations. Some commentators have suggested all they were doing was praying. Puleeze. Some of the professional posters displayed had come straight from the source of the protesting. Including pictures of aborted foetuses. And there was much shouting, not just at women but at the medical staff who worked there. READ MORE: Kate Forbes: Numbers prove that the world is ignoring those who talk Scotland down When a woman in her 70s was arrested, but never brought to court, she was immediately given heroine status by some US 'freedom of speech' groups. She had been picketing near Glasgow's Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, though not, to be fair shouting, and was demanding her 'right' to go to court despite the Procurator Fiscal recommending no further action. This is all of a piece with the well-funded, Europe-wide anti-abortion protesters who all demand their day in court to rubbish any laws to which they've taken exception. Rose Docherty's arrest, following police warnings about trespassing in buffer zones, came just days after the US vice-president, JD Vance, made a series of totally false accusations about the Scottish laws, including the assertion that people could be in trouble for privately praying in their own home. And referencing 'thought police'. All garbage of course, but not atypical of the current US administration's legendary inability to check their facts before their mouth is engaged. People who think getting rid of Donald Trump would herald a new relationship with the truth might consider that Vance is the constitutional heir apparent. Which is not to say that legitimate protest should ever be outlawed, including protests with which we fundamentally disagree. The Scottish legislation on buffer zones mentions the where of protest, but not the why. Its principal proposer received both death threats and abuse despite being pregnant herself. Nevertheless, it was the Irish nation rising up and voting for change which brought about two civilising laws in that country where the church had long held too much sway. Even in America, there are signs that decent folks are awakening from the slumber which brought us a second Trump term with all the many and increasingly obvious dangers that represents. Non-Elon-Musk-related social media is awash with images of a poorly attended military parade which 'happened' to coincide with the president's 79th birthday and contrasting these images with the millions across the USA who turned out for No Kings Day. The latter was a public riposte to Trump supposing that his presidential status gave him monarchical powers to do as he pleased. An assertion which followed a Time magazine cover this month featuring a back view of 'Trump' looking into a mirror where he wore a crown and lots of ermine. By long-standing Time artist Tim O'Brien, it was entitled King Me. The idea that the man who treats executive orders like bulk-bought confetti should be left to his own fantasies managed to unite and enrage millions of people, some of whom had sat on their hands on the day of the election. Hell mend them. It's become difficult enough to vote in America as it is without ignoring the hard-fought right to vote for which people once died. These barriers to polling rights have also crossed the pond, with new demands to present ID at polling stations despite there being minimalist evidence of voter fraud. No prizes for guessing which group is least likely to have a passport or driving licence. So we must stay alert at all times to prevent our own rules, regulations and values from being altered by foreign voices. Apart from Vance, Musk has also weighed in with his views on the UK Prime Minister and much else. The irony is that Musk himself is a migrant from South Africa, but the breath is not being held for those cuddly chaps from the US Immigration and Enforcement agency to deport him as they now have so many long-standing Americans who 'look foreign' (which is ICE speak for being brown.) If you think they're licensed thugs, you're not wrong. Meanwhile round about us, the world appears to be hellwards bound in any available handcart. There are many theories about why Trump is planning to take a fortnight before deciding whether or not to give more support to Israel by providing the necessary aircraft and their so-called 'bunker-busting' bombs to reach buried Iranian nuclear sites. I know the US president isn't much of a reader, but could I recommend several tomes which detail the effect of unleashing radio active materials from such sites? Not that he cares. It's a reasonably safe bet that the prevailing winds won't carry the nasties to the eastern seaboard in America. The bit that houses hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. Like Gaza, really.
