by Jeremy Halcrow

Many Anglicans in Sydney feel their beloved Archbishop is being persecuted by the media. They see claims of ‘nepotism’ as scurrilous untruths designed to undermine the gospel’s credibility.
This view has justification.
Firstly the Archbishop’s son, Michael, was appointed chaplain of St Andrew’s Cathedral School by principal Phillip Heath over a year before Dr Jensen was elected Archbishop. Michael’s junior role at the Cathedral was authorised by the then Dean, Boak Jobbins.
Secondly, brother Phillip was appointed Dean after an exhaustive, year-long search. The Cathedral required a highly-motivated and charismatic leader. Serious discussions about the role were initiated with high-profile ministers outside the Diocese but these did not bear fruit. Phillip Jensen is one of the few leaders in the Diocese that has demonstrated the skills needed to take the Cathedral into a new millennium. It was for this reason that the Archbishop’s nomination was passed so overwhelmingly by a 18-person chapter meeting chaired by Bishop Forsyth.
Thirdly, it was Archdeacon Jarrett who requested that Dr Jensen’s wife be added to a new team to oversee the ministry of women in Sydney. Ms Jarrett’s vision was to bring those already heading up women’s ministry in the Diocese into one co-ordinating body. Mrs Jensen was required because her role involves overseeing the ministry of clergy spouses. Although initially reluctant, Dr Jensen acquiesced to this request on the proviso his wife would not be paid.
With these facts outlined, we must acknowledge the media was not to ‘blame’ nor totally unfair in its treatment of these matters.
Firstly, the Archbishop’s priesting of his son, Michael, was warmly covered by the media just one year ago. The story changed when people within the Diocese began criticising the Dean decision. We must expect the media to report such criticism and it is up to Christian leaders to consider whether such public comments ‘undermine the gospel’.
Secondly, church leaders – especially bishops – are public figures who are regularly given opportunity to comment on matters of social importance. Media will treat them with the same scrutiny as other public office holders.
Thirdly, the media gave Dr Jensen fair opportunity to respond to the allegations. In fact, the day after the initial story about Mrs Jensen, the SMH ran an article in response which had a very positive headline, photograph and lead. Later in the week the SMH’s opinion page featured an article by Archdeacon Jarrett, looking at women’s ministry in the Diocese.
‘Conflict’ stories are the ‘language’ of most media. It is by integrating media strategy into the planning of public events that we avoid unnecessarily negative public perceptions taking hold.