In an interview in March, Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, said his role wasn’t one of moral leadership. He wasn’t actually very clear on what it was, but it wasn’t leadership. Maybe steering the Church of England. Maybe managing it. Maybe “transmitting”:

Leadership is - is, to me, a very, very murky and complicated concept. Often, as I - I think I’ve said before, what people mean when they say leadership is making - making the right noises, affirming a particular set of views, convictions or even prejudices. It doesn’t always have very much to do with how you make a difference. And I think the question I always find myself asking of myself is: will a pronouncement here or a statement there actually move things on, or is it something that makes me feel better and other people feel better, but doesn’t necessary contribute very much?

[On dealing with religious hatred legislation:] We had quite a lot of lobbyings you can imagine from people who wanted a firm lead [...] I thought it wasn’t particularly useful to make loud noises about this, that it was probably more useful to listen to what different groups had to say, transmit what could be transmitted to government [...] So that - that was an area where I deliberately decided to take a fairly low key. I think where we’ve ended up actually, is - is a reasonable enough placement.

Today the archbishop looks to be presiding over a historic split in the church, due to various parties being unable to deal with gay bishops and same-sex partnerships (or “just life”, depending on your point of view). This news was conveyed by him in a characteristically carefully-worded statement.

Whether Dr Williams thought he was managing, or steering, or something else, even if not leading, it looks like he’s not made much of a difference as his organisation pulls itself apart. He appears to have been totally impotent. Still, at least he’s successfully “transmitted” the news to us.

Tags: rowanwilliams, churchofengland