REVIEW OF NOMINATION TO THE SEE OF SHEFFIELD AND RELATED CONCERNS Report by the Independent Reviewer Contents PART 1: PRELIMINARIES ................................................................................................................ 4 a) Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 4 b) The Nature of the Independent Reviewer’s Role and of this Review ......................................... 4 PART 2: THE 2014 SETTLEMENT AND THE HOUSE OF BISHOPS’ DECLARATION ON THE MINISTRY OF BISHOPS AND PRIESTS .................................................................................................................. 7 a) The 2014 Settlement ................................................................................................................... 7 b) The Five Guiding Principles.......................................................................................................... 8 c) ‘Mutual Flourishing’ .................................................................................................................... 9 PART 3: NARRATIVE OF EVENTS .................................................................................................. 10 a) The Diocese of Sheffield and the Implementation of the 2014 Settlement ............................. 10 b) “New Norms, New Beginning” .................................................................................................. 11 c) Bishop Croft’s Departure and the Vacancy in See Committee .................................................. 13 d) The Crown Nominations Commission (CNC) ............................................................................. 17 e) Bishop North’s Reaction to his Nomination and the Preparations for its Announcement ....... 21 f) The Announcement of Bishop North’s Nomination and Subsequent Events ........................... 22 g) The Doncaster Minster Meeting ............................................................................................... 24 h) Opposition Grows ...................................................................................................................... 25 i) Professor Percy’s Intervention .................................................................................................. 27 j) The Effect of Professor Percy’s Intervention ............................................................................. 32 k) Bishop North’s Withdrawal and its Aftermath .......................................................................... 35 PART 4: ANALYSIS OF THE ISSUES ................................................................................................ 38 Point (a) What has been done in the Church, including in the Diocese of Sheffield, to inform and educate clergy and laity about the Settlement agreed in 2014, and the effect of the Declaration within that Settlement? .................................................................................................................... 38 Point (b) The process leading to the nomination of Bishop Philip North to the See of Sheffield ..... 42 Point (c) The consistency of Bishop North’s nomination with the House of Bishops’ Declaration .. 47 The Critique offered by Professor Percy and Others ........................................................................ 49 Two Preliminary Points: .................................................................................................................... 51 (1) What exactly does Bishop North believe about Women’s Ordination? .................................. 51 (2) Professor Percy and the Views of The Society and Forward in Faith....................................... 52 2 Some Reflections: .............................................................................................................................. 54 (1) The History of the Church of England’s Engagement with this Issue ...................................... 54 (2) The Nature of the House of Bishops’ Declaration and the Five Guiding Principles ................. 56 (3) The Bishop as “A Focus of Unity” ............................................................................................. 57 (4) Mutual Flourishing ................................................................................................................... 59 Point (d) The Reactions to Bishop North’s Nomination in the Church and Beyond it ...................... 62 Point (e) The Response of the Institutional Church to the Nomination of Bishop North and to the Reactions to it .................................................................................................................................... 65 PART 5: SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................... 68 Point (a) What has been done in the Church, including in the Diocese of Sheffield, to inform and educate clergy and laity about the Settlement agreed in 2014, and the effect of the House of Bishops’ Declaration within that Settlement? .................................................................................. 68 Recommendation 1 ....................................................................................................................... 68 Point (b) The process leading to the nomination of Bishop Philip North to the See of Sheffield ..... 69 Recommendation 2 ....................................................................................................................... 69 Point (c) The consistency of Bishop North’s nomination with the House of Bishops’ Declaration .. 69 Recommendation 3 ....................................................................................................................... 70 Point (d) The reactions to Bishop North’s nomination in the Church and beyond it........................ 70 Point (e) The response of the institutional Church to the nomination of Bishop North and to the reactions to it .................................................................................................................................... 70 Recommendation 4 ....................................................................................................................... 71 PART 6: CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 72 LIST OF APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 74 3 PART 1: PRELIMINARIES a) Introduction 1. In their letter of 23 March 2017, the Archbishops of Canterbury and York asked me, in my capacity as Independent Reviewer under the Declaration on the Ministry of Bishops and Priests (Resolution of Disputes Procedure) Regulations 2014 (hereafter, “the Regulations”) to address certain concerns that had arisen in the Church about events surrounding the nomination, and subsequent withdrawal, of Bishop Philip North as diocesan bishop of Sheffield. In their letter (reproduced at Appendix 1) the Archbishops identified five such areas of concern, viz: (a) what has been done in the Church, including in the diocese of Sheffield, to inform and educate clergy and laity about the settlement agreed in 2014, and the effect of the Declaration within that settlement; (b) the process leading to the nomination of Bishop Philip North to the See of Sheffield; (c) the consistency of that nomination with the Declaration; (d) the reactions to that nomination in the Church and beyond; and (e) the response of the institutional Church to the nomination and to the reactions to it. They concluded by asking me to exercise my power under Regulation 27 of the 2014 Regulations to consider and report on the operation of the House of Bishops’ Declaration on the Ministry of Bishops and Priests in relation to each of these five areas. 2. I had separately received a letter dated 13 February 2017 from Women and the Church (WATCH) asking me to examine one aspect of the nomination process in respect of the Sheffield vacancy, i.e. whether the Archbishops’ and the Prime Minister’s Appointments Secretaries had made clear the guidance in paragraph 12 of the House of Bishops’ Declaration to the Vacancy in See Committee and others in Sheffield consulted as part of the process leading up to Bishop North’s nomination. A copy of the letter from WATCH is at Appendix 2. In the light of both of these letters I had no doubt that I should accede to the Archbishops’ request and I so informed them on 24 March. b) The Nature of the Independent Reviewer’s Role and of this Review 3. Before I embark on an account of the events which led to these two approaches and my analysis and conclusions about their implications for the House of Bishops’ Declaration and the Church, it may be helpful if I clarify the nature of my role as Independent Reviewer and the approach I have adopted to the conduct of this review. I do so in order in part to respond to some anxieties about the role which were expressed to me in the course of my review. 4 4. The function of the Independent Reviewer is to consider grievances brought by a PCC under Regulations 8-15 or, under Regulation 27, wider concerns brought by any person relating to any aspect of the operation of the House of Bishops’ Declaration. Regulation 27 is cast in very wide terms. Although the discretion Regulation 28 gives the Independent Reviewer as to whether to enquire into a concern is one to be used sparingly,