Support the Café
Search our site

Archbishops of Canterbury and politics

Archbishops of Canterbury and politics

The Church Time reports on a study which shows that the three most recent Archbishops of Canterbury have been “con­sist­ently controversial political figures.”

Turbulent Priests? The Archbishop of Canterbury in contemporary English politics, by Daniel Gover, a researcher at Theos, was released the same day as Dr Williams’s leader appeared in the New Statesman (News, 10 June).

The report examines the archi­episcopal interventions of Robert Runcie (1980-91), George Carey (1991-2002), and Rowan Williams (2002-present). It looks at policy areas including urban poverty, asylum and immigration, criminal justice, and armed conflict.

The report says: “The Arch­bishop’s political role encompasses both participation in political debate and giving meaning to the more ‘sacred’ moments of national life, such as mourning and death.”

In the area of urban poverty, the report Faith in the City, published in December 1985, was “particularly significant . . . because the com­mis­sion that authored it was established by and acted in the name of” the then Archbishop, later Lord Runcie.

“It was interpreted by some — not entirely without justification — as having been a direct attack on [Margaret] Thatcher’s economic policies.” The report’s “strong sup­port for Government intervention put it at odds with the economic liberalism that underpinned many of Thatcher’s reforms.”

An analysis of the British Social Attitudes Survey at the time suggests that “the Archbishop was broadly in line with the popular mood,” Mr Gover suggests. It also suggests that “the case for Dr Runcie’s moral approach to urban poverty being outdated appears weak. . . It is reasonable to judge that the Archbishop suc­ceeded, in this area of debate, in sounding a moral voice in support of the common good.”

The main areas studied were poverty and social policy, war and peace, and criminal justice.

Dislike (0)
Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

Facebooktwitterrss
Support the Café
Past Posts
2020_001

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café