Friday, 27 May 2011

The Rotten Stink at the Very Top

What we know from this controversy of secrecy and politicking is that nothing gets any better. The Fritchie Enquiry into who made the leak is itself a secret! The Archbishop Rowan Williams in November 2010 said it was concluded and would not be circulated. This would have been a joke of course, to make the enquiry a secret, if it wasn't so real.

Was the enquiry some sort of palliative at the time? When a government does not know what to do, and is under pressure, it has an enquiry - the usual thing being that when the findings come out politics has moved on. But if Williams leaked it, then of course the enquiry too becomes a secret. Lies lead on to lies. This would never 'move on'.

According to the Slee recollection, this is Sentamu being just nasty to Jeffrey John and implying his friends were lobbying for him, when all the time the crooks were Williams and Sentamu:

12. The same day ++Sentamu was at St Albans for the ordinations (his daughter was being ordained). He made an extremely telling remark to Jeffrey John in the hearing of several witnesses: "I don't know why your friends have leaked the fact that your name is on the list for Southwark. It won't do you any good".


Personally I regard the remark (especially in St Albans), as meaning that + Sentamu assumed from the outset, that I was involved.

It is a world of lies and deception at the very top of the Church of England. This was an incredible encounter:

The Archbishop himself was telling us that he was the leaker. No wonder the Press described the source to me as 'impeccable'. There is only one source; everything else is a consequence of that breach of trust.


18. I met the Archbishop on the staircase during the break before evensong. There were two witnesses: one downstairs and one (unknown) upstairs. I said: "When I reported that I knew of the leak ten days before it was published and had warned your staff, you looked as though you didn't know that, am I right?"
"Yes, I did not know; in fairness to them, I was on retreat with the ordination candidates and could not be reached."
"Would you like me to tell you how I think it happened?"
"No!" (he was shouting).
"Then who am I to tell?"
"If you think you know, go and confront him yourself!" - and he went off down the stairs. The witness in the corridor, who had stopped, dissolved away. I never found out who it was.

19. I am bound to ask if the Archbishop realised at that point he was the leak. I felt like Nathan confronting King David, but in Hebrew scripture, King David listens and realises.

20. The Archbishop was not incommunicado. He was not on retreat and he was not on retreat for ten days. He may have wished to identify with the candidates, but he was not being ordained. It is entirely a matter of poor communication within the staff that the Archbishop could not be disturbed.

The blogs have exploded with this story; there is a report in the Church Times open to non-subscribers. If Williams and Sentamu had any decency they would resign, and if they haven't they should be pushed.


June Butler said...

If Williams and Sentamu had any decency they would resign, and if they haven't they should be pushed.

Indeed! It's s sordid story, isn't it?

mikeb said...

i read this with a really heavy heart. it stinks, its a disgrace, and i ask myself how can I belong in a church run like this.

GinnyRED57 said...

Disgraceful stuff. I don't know which comes off worst, Williams or Sentamu.