The Prime Minister’s Office has issued the following Press Notice on the appointment of Chair of the Crown Nominations Commission for Canterbury.
Appointment of Chairman of the Crown Nominations Commission for Canterbury: 16 December 2024
The Prime Minister has appointed The Lord Evans of Weardale KCB DL to be the Chairman of the Crown Nominations Commission for Canterbury.
From: Prime Minister’s Office, 10 Downing Street and The Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer KCB KC MP
Published 16 December 2024
The Prime Minister has appointed The Lord Evans of Weardale KCB DL to be the Chairman of the Crown Nominations Commission for Canterbury. The Crown Nominations Commission is the Church of England committee that nominates the candidate to be the next Archbishop of Canterbury to succeed the Most Reverend and Right Honourable Justin Welby. Archbishop Welby has announced that he will complete his duties on 6th January 2025.
Notes for Editors
Jonathan Evans has been a Crossbench member of the House of Lords since 2014. Until October 2023 he was Chair of the Committee on Standards in Public Life. He is currently Chair of the HALO Trust, the anti-landmine charity, and of the Public Interest Committee at KPMG UK. He is a former Director-General of the Security Service, MI5. He is an active and communicant member of his local parish church.
The Church of England’s standing orders state that the Chair of the Crown Nominations Commission for Canterbury is appointed by the Prime Minister and must be an actual communicant lay [i.e. not ordained] member of the Church of England.
A distinguished public servant, no doubt, but what, pray, qualifies him to head up the appointment process of the Church of England’s chief pastor?
He’s a serious and committed Anglican layman who has also had a distinguished career in public service, understands complex systems, and isn’t a politician.
That seems pretty reasonable.
Is it known what degree of personal choice was exercised in more recent reigns by the Monarch prior to present procedures in the appointment of the hierarchy, particularly perhaps by Victoria being very personally committed theologically or would records tend to be opaque on this subject?
Are there any church historians out there who might know the answer to this?
Search me, guv – I’m a Quaker.