What is going on here?
Changing the system from where we are
This blog explores the possibility that we can all help to change the Church of England for the better by asking deeper questions and altering our behaviour.
My last blog was rather gloomy (though I think realistic) as I reflected on how difficult it is to solve the fundamental problems faced by the Church of England. This is not only because the issues are themselves difficult but because, as a bureaucracy, and one lacking a clear centre of authority, responsibility and accountability, the national church simply lacks the means to take on the challenges.
I’ve given quite a lot of thought since as to what can be done given all the constraints upon the church’s capacity to act in a deliberate and comprehensive fashion. As I have said repeatedly I believe the Church of England will continue to struggle to solve its particular problems (e.g. declining numbers, disagreements about sexuality, safeguarding) until it is able to place them within a renewed, systemic understanding of its identity, purpose and vocation. This should be accompanied by a deep reflection upon the current context. The two can then come together to suggest a positive narrative about the Church of England’s future. This is not simply an organisational or management challenge. It is an act of discernment in which the key question is ‘what is God saying to us’? It would be better if it were one in which we were all involved – a kind of national conversation. I am quite sure it could be done and in this I disagree with those who regard it as too difficult or too time-consuming.
It cannot be done, however, if there is no realistic way to decide to do it. The new Archbishop of Canterbury, if so inclined, could probably convene the necessary people and bodies and champion such an approach successfully but it would take a great deal of courage and determination and it is highly likely that the appointee will be drawn immediately into all the specifics and the moment will be lost.
So what can we do? The other day I was at a symposium held to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Susanna Wesley Foundation and amongst many other things heard Megan Seneque talking about the application of the principles and practices of Theory U in an SWF project.[1] Theory U is based on the idea that the future emerges from a deeper understanding of the present and that positive change occurs when we are engaged in a process of discovery together. I have also been reminded of the ‘missional practices’ associated with the Missional Church movement championed in this country by Nigel Rooms.[2] These practices invite us into a kind of mindful rediscovery of what really matters most to us as we try to look beyond the cultural baggage we all carry with us. I am not advocating either of these approaches in particular but they reminded me there is something we can all do.
This is to keep asking the question ‘what is going on here?’. Whether our arena is the local church or national debates and controversies we could stop, pray, think, discern and seek a deeper understanding of what is going on and encourage others to do the same. I suspect this would be particularly valuable in situations of disagreement and conflict. What is driving the tension? What assumptions are we making – about the matter in hand and about each other?
I do think that assumptions can be particularly damaging to creative progress. I notice that at the local level church people are inclined to want ‘one of those’ rather than to think more deeply about what would be right for them. Some model of working (e.g. messy church, Alpha, family services - the list is long) is assumed to be the answer. In my own parish setting we discovered that engaging children in quite traditional church activities was more effective than producing a typical contemporary family service. This was partly because we could do the former authentically but not the latter. We also found that children are more motivated by being given responsibility than by being entertained.
At the national level there is a good deal of assumption about the correct response to problems that are barely understood. My research on Renewal and Reform showed that the Church of England had gone without much thought at all from ‘we are losing people’ to ‘we must focus on getting people’. But why are we losing people and what is it telling us that we need to hear?
At whatever place we find ourselves in the church we can ask deeper questions and give time to discerning the answer. If Theory U is right such an act of inquiry and discernment might contain the seeds of and the clues to a better future. If a lot of us did this we might achieve a positive impact on the wider system.
In association with this I want to suggest that one of the things we could and should be noting and examining more closely is the way we behave towards each other. I think we could learn a great deal from such reflection and that it might lead to some desirable changes. I have three particular reasons for advocating changes in our behaviour.
Firstly, I advocate it because I think behaviour is often particularly poor in the church at every level. A few weeks ago a very senior and experienced business academic commented at a meeting I attended that behaviour observed in the national church (Synod, chiefly I think) would lead to disciplinary action ‘in the most venal of secular businesses’. There are grave dangers in being part of an organisation which serves a cause to which we are all passionately committed. We assume much too easily that our ‘rightness’ justifies behaviour that would be otherwise unacceptable. We see this happening in the local church, in national debates and on X. Yet we are supposed to be commending ourselves by our love. We forget that ‘how we are’ will be incomparably more influential in how people see the faith than any of our programmes.
Secondly, changes in behaviour require no structural change and yet are much more effective in transforming an organisation. A group of people that wants to work positively together can make any structure work. The intentions behind a change in structure are easily frustrated by those who do not want to change (the NHS is the prime and classic example). Positive changes in behaviour can infect the a system in a good way and produce greater changes than you would imagine. This is one of the insights of the range of theories that compare organisations to complex adaptive systems in nature.[3]
Thirdly, improvements in our behaviour towards each other should lead to a rise in the level of trust across the church. At the moment the levels of trust are low as a report on that subject to General Synod in 2024 argued persuasively.[4] I suggest that an improvement in relationships and in trust is a prerequisite of any positive revival of the church’s fortunes and effectiveness in mission.
I am suggesting that we can all begin to create systemic change where we are. My summary of it is to suggest that we can all seek God’s will at a deeper level and behave in a way that reflects our Saviour. We would see fruit where we are, but also, perhaps, see ripples spreading out into the wider church. I am not arguing that this ‘bottom up’ approach is a substitute for the kind of review I would like to see on a macro scale, but it has its own merits and may achieve more than we expect.
[1] See e.g. Otto Scharmer, Theory U: Leading from the Futures as it Emerges, 2nd ed. (Berrett-Koehler, 2016).
[2] See Patrick R. Keifer and Nigel Rooms, Forming the Missional Church: Creating Deep Cultural Change in Congregations, (Cambridge: Grove Books, 2014).
[3] See e.g. Jean G. Boulton, Peter M. Allen, and Cliff Bowman, Embracing Complexity: Strategic Perspectives for an Age of Turbulence, (Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press, 2015).
[4] Martin Seeley, David Ford, Veronica Hope Hailey, Gordon Jump, Trust and Trustworthiness within the Church of England – a preliminary report, (London: General Synod of the Church of England GS 2354, 2024).