Is it possible to be an Archbishop and a practising Christian? A few thoughts prompted by reflecting on this personal statement from JW https://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/news/latest-news/personal-statement-archbishop-canterbury-justin-welby-following-publication-iicsa

Crucial: I'm not at all suggesting that JW is not a Christian! I'm wanting to tease out if there is something in the office of ABC that prevents the occupant of that office from acting in a Christian fashion.

Some years ago, can't remember where, JW said that he wanted to ensure that he mentioned Jesus in every interview. I really liked that. It's a standard I believe in, and fail to achieve, and want to do better in.

Also, after the revelations about his family history, JW said something which I have often brought to mind - I find my identity in Jesus Christ. I thought that was truly wonderful, and it inspired me.

With those two examples in mind, look at the post-IICSA statement. There are two mentions of the word 'Church' and one use of the word 'pray'. No mention of Jesus, let alone reference to the great theo-drama of repentance and grace, of forgiveness and redemption.

It is boilerplate drafted by lawyers. Change the word church to the word institution and it could have been sent out by any organisation. Which is the problem. Salt that has lost its saltiness is no longer good for anything, fit only to be trampled underfoot.

So how have we come to such a pass as this? Someone who is capable of distinctive and inspiring Christian witness is - in the very position when such witness would be most expected - unable to give a Christian response.

JW is not the problem. I often grieved for his predecessor, who seemed to me like Laocoön wrestling with great snakes. The problem is clearly institutional, not personal.

Those with greater insight and information than I can specify which institutional forces are responsible for this eclipsing of the capacity for Christian witness on the part of the ABC. I guess it is insurance companies not wanting admission of liability, but I cd well be wrong.

My worry is that we in the Church of England, specifically the House of Bishops in the Church of England *as an institution* has lost the theological capacity to discern the principalities and powers involved in a situation such as this.

Because we cannot see, we cannot respond. We have gone out from the presence of Jesus.

And it was night.

In order to maintain a capacity for manifesting a Christian witness we need to have an institutional memory of what it means not to be captured by the principalities and powers. We need to remember what it is to go in to the desert.

I think we are frightened of the desert. We cling to inherited status. We strive to protect our image. We use the language of reputational management. We are unwilling to sell everything we own to gain the pearl of great price.

And because we fear, we die. The spirit of the Lord has departed from this place. We cling to the vessel, but have forgotten that the purpose of the vessel was to share the holy wine.

So what is there to be done? We must repent, and turn to the Lord who has torn us and will heal us. We must especially learn once again how to read the signs of the times. We need to start taking God seriously again.

This will be a long task. For anyone who wants to pursue this further, I give more detail about all this in my chapter in this book, which is being published this week. https://spckpublishing.co.uk/the-future-of-brexit-britain We have a lot of work to do. /END