Dr Martyn Percy
THINKING ANGLICANS
Martyn Percy: Is the Church of England Orwellian?
on Wednesday, 25 May 2022 by Simon Sarmiento
Martyn Percy has written three articles which Modern Church has published.
“In three short articles, Martyn Percy looks at three words currently being given the full 1984 treatment: independent, ethical and trustworthy. Is the Church of England using these words as defined by most dictionaries in 2022? Or, are we now enmeshed in an Orwellian church in which little that is said corresponds to our normal frames of reference?”
- The Ministry of Truth and Safeguarding in the Church of England (A ‘Lessons Learned Review’ from 1984)
- Ethical? (or, Tea and Sympathy Are Not Enough)
- The Church of England…. Trustworthy?
2 COMMENTS
Froghole
Dr Percy mentions the flood (or ‘flood’) at Bishopthorpe, and the fire at Chichester. This reminds me that the British state, like the Church of England has ‘form’ in misappropriating documents, as at Hanslope Park, Bucks (the FCDO migrated archives):
The Harvard historian Caroline Elkins was able to make much hay from this with respect to her campaigns for justice in Kenya; see here for a recent discussion:
https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/108/1084814/legacy-of-violence/9781847921062.html, at 408, 649-55 and 675;
note that one of the villains of her story, Evelyn Baring, chaired the committee which produced the Howick report on crown appointments in the Church (1964, as Lord Howick of Glendale). The desire for secrecy and concealment seems to be a profoundly unappealing aspect of the national character. As is the do-as-I-say-and-not-as-I-do approach to government in Church and State. The unpleasant Savoyard philosopher, de Maistre, noted that a nation often gets the government it deserves; perhaps the same might be said of its prelates. *If* this is true, what does it say about modern Britain?
In his essay “Politics and the English Language” (1946) George Orwell wrote: “Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind”. We have been witness to the ‘murder’ and character assassination of not only Martyn Percy but also Bishop Bell – and others. In 1935, poet TS Eliot wrote ‘Murder in the Cathedral’ – a play commissioned by the Bishop of Chichester George Bell on the martyrdom of the Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Becket. The play can be seen as a prophetic warning to the Church of England.
In 1965, Stephen Spender wrote: “Orwell perhaps lacked poetry, but…he echoes the message of Wilfred Owen, the greatest poet of the First World War: ‘All a poet can do today is to warn’. 1984 remains…a necessary warning”.
The Church of England are clearly not listening to the warnings – by poets or anyone else.
This is beyond a tragedy as we celebrate the Platinum Jubilee of Her Majesty – its Supreme Governor.
There will be no expressions of sorrow, regret or acknowledgement of the need for repentance on the part of anyone at Christ Church, let alone its clergy, simply because they will have been told by Winkworth Sherwood and Luther Pendragon that such admissions of failure could be constructed as an admission of guilt and further diminish the already abysmal reputation of the institution.
Why does the Oxford scandal matter?
Similar could happen to any priest in the CofE. Dodgy lawyers and disreputable laundries have shown how easy it is to work alongside the structures of a dysfunctional diocese and malevolent college to assist in the design and production of the giant carcrash that has happened in Oxford diocese. And the CofE must now add ‘weaponized safeguarding’ to its list of forms of abuse.
A judicial inquiry is required. Nothing less will disinfect Oxford malfeasance (diocese, cathedral, college, lawyers, laundries) with the sunlight of scrutiny.
Whatever this is … it does not look like safeguarding. It is misappropriation of process for malign purpose and looks to have involved many layers of dishonesty and even fraud.
All needs full investigation. And the Archbishops should be putting Oxford Diocese into Visitation and its bishop and cathedral under suspension pending investigation.
‘
Excerpts from ‘Archbishop Cranmer’ article [above]
The Church of England’s Independent Safeguarding Board is not independent. They are funded by the Archbishops’ Council, accountable to it, and have no remit or powers that render it independent. It operates out of Church House in Westminster. Ergo, it is another internal laundry machine, merely branded ‘independent’ in order to satisfy the PR imperative for reputational damage control.
Alex Carlile’s review into the Church of England’s treatment of George Bell was independent, and given his searing judgment against the Church of England’s woeful and chronic maladministration of justice, you might understand why they don’t want to commission another one of those.
But an “independent inquiry” has to mean what it says, and do what it says on the tin. To achieve that, the Church of England cannot protect itself by setting the Terms of Reference, and then picking the coppers, counsel, judge and jury; and then controlling the PR on the verdict.
The Bell Society 