DISAGREEMENTS about the future funding of racial-justice work in the Church of England have aired in the General Synod, after the co-lead bishops on the issue expressed their concerns.

In the 2023-25 triennium, central funding for racial-justice work — the first time that it had been allocated for this — was £20 million in designated funds from the Archbishops’ Council.

Last month, however, the Triennium Funding Working Group (TFWG) announced spending plans for the next triennium, to 2028, which allot £12 million for “social and racial justice” — a pot that is also intended to fund housing and disability justice.

The plans were criticised by the co-leads for racial justice, the Bishop of Croydon, Dr Rosemarie Mallett, and the Bishop of Kirkstall, the Rt Revd Arun Arora, who called the decision “bewildering” (News, 13 June).

At the General Synod’s meeting in York, the spending plans were defended on the basis that the £20-million funding had been intended as a one-off and not as an ongoing commitment.

Correspondence between Dr Mallett and Bishop Arora and the Bishop of London, the Rt Revd Sarah Mullally, who chaired the TFWG, shows that the lead bishops were not made aware of the decision before it was announced

In a letter dated 10 July — the day before the Synod began — Bishop Mullally said that restrictions meant that the TFWG could not communicate its decisions in advance, but apologised if this had “further undermined confidence in relation to the Church’s commitment to this important area”.

In the letter, seen by the Church Times, she assured Dr Mallett and Bishop Arora that the TFWG would recommend that the underspend from the 2023-25 budget, which was expected to be about £4 million, should be used to bolster the new budget.

Also on 10 July, the first volume of a new reference document on racial justice was published on the Church of England website. The document includes theological reflections on the issues, and pen-portraits of the bishops, deans, and archdeacons in the Church of England who are from UK minority-ethnic backgrounds.

An appendix lists the various networks and groups active in the Church of England, including those the Teahouse Network for Chinese-heritage priests (News, 20 August 2021), and a group for the increasing number of Persian clerics in the C of E (Features, 6 June)

In the introduction to the report, the Archbishop of York writes of how “progress towards racial justice in the Church of England has been slow — painfully slow. Much has been achieved in the last four years but we are still far from where we want to be, where we need to be, as a Church.”

Questions about the funding decisions, and whether they were indicative of a lack of commitment to racial justice, were asked in the Synod, and unsuccessful attempts were made to amend the spending plans.

The Vicar of St Luke’s, Prestonville, the Revd Martin Poole (Chichester), attempted to amend a motion welcoming the Archbishops’ Council’s spending plans to request that funding for racial justice be increased to £20 million in the next triennium.

In February, the Synod had heard from the chair of the Archbishops’ Commission on Racial Justice, Lord Boateng, about promises on racial justice which had been made and then not fulfilled (News, 14 February). “Don’t perpetuate that scandal by doing the same,” Mr Poole said.

Daniel Matovu (Oxford) suggested that the funding decisions showed that the leadership of the Church “cares little, at least for racial and disability justice”; but Busola Sodeinde (London), a Church Commissioner, said that, while the concerns were “deeply valid”, the funding had been intended as one-off and time-limited, not a sustained source of financial support.

In a vote by Houses, the amendment fell in the Houses of Bishops and Laity: Bishops 13-7, with three recorded abstentions, and Laity 80-75, with 12 recorded abstentions, despite being carried in the House of Clergy by 89 to 52 with 18 recorded abstentions.

Bishop Arora said afterwards that “it was frustrating to note that whilst more than half of Synod voted for the amendment to restore racial justice funding, the deliberate move to oppose this through a vote by Houses meant that the amendment was lost. The vote in the House of Bishops was especially disappointing.”

Earlier in the sessions, Bishop Mullally fielded questions about the funding decision. She said that the 2023-25 funding was a one-off, and that originally only £2.5 million had been allocated for ongoing funding for social and racial justice.

Viewed in this way, the new plans were a sustainable increase, she said, but she acknowledged that it might not look this way.