Editor-At-Large: So what are bishops for?

A new Archbishop of Canterbury, and so the Church of England makes news headlines at last. Leave aside the fashion crime of the yellow mitre and matching cope adorned with silver dragons, and ponder the fact that fewer people than ever are prepared to engage with the Church of England, other than by ticking a box marked belief. The Church has failed to rise to the challenge of the present: chatrooms, tele-evangelism and cloning. Without its members in the Commonwealth, it would be a marginal affair. If it was a TV channel it would have gone out of business because of non-existent ratings. If it was a chain of restaurants, the receivers would have been called in. Peruse the guest list at the enthronement: I believe it's called the Establishment, an alien place to most of us.

"A simple priest beams through the pomp" was one headline celebrating Dr Rowan Williams. At a time when the C of E has plummeting attendances and is riven with division, is simplicity of character coupled with a well-meaning intellectuality enough to take this lamentable organisation into the real world? The spectacle of rows of geriatric bishops, bizarrely uniformed officials with titles from the Middle Ages, ill-at-ease politicians and a clutch of African dancers, sends a clear message to the community our spirit- ual leader is supposed to be engaging with: we've given up.

Last week a conservative think-tank published a pamphlet calling for the Church of England's bishops to resign en masse, and take responsibility for the empty pews. Where I part company with the Social Affairs Unit, however, is over the reasons for the current catastrophe. It blames liberalism, acceptance of homosexuality and female priests, and it urges a return to the ideal of marriage as the basis for family life. But it is also true that the fastest-growing group of church members are the evangelicals, many of whom do espouse some of these values. The most successful church in Britain today functions from a converted warehouse on an industrial estate in Walthamstow, east London. Unlike most parish churches, hundreds arrive early to get a good seat. The service is replayed to more worshippers outside London. This is a club for people of all ages, not just for the middle-class and elderly.

There are lessons to be learnt from this kind of celebration of belief, and I fear that Dr Rowan Williams is not the man to reinvent the C of E. Back in the 1960s, the sermon delivered by Alan Bennett's vicar in Beyond the Fringe (life is like a tin of sardines – there's always a little piece you can't quite get out) cruelly exposed the well-meaning shallow waffle our Church excels at. In 2003 we may have female priests, and daffodil yellow vestments and guitar- strumming, but they don't constitute the revolution the church needs. Dr Williams's problem lies with all those rows of grey-haired bishops filling Canterbury last week. His church has far too much in common with the monarchy when it comes to unnecessary titles, antiquated mean- ingless jobs and cushy living.

Last week a new production of Dario Fo's hilarious political farce Accidental Death of an Anarchist opened at the Donmar Warehouse, in a new translation by Simon Nye. This hilarious entertainment revolves around a mesmeric performance by Rhys Ifans as the Maniac. Asked why he hasn't considered the law as a profession he replies: "At an age when your average working man's on the scrap heap – 55, 60 – because he's slowing down a bit, that's when a judge's career really takes off. The older and more gaga – I'm sorry, I mean delightfully eccentric – they get, the more they are promoted". He could have been talking about the entire C of E.

If Rowan Williams wants to make any mark in the history books, then he must remove the layers of bureaucracy from his organisation. Let's talk delivery, targets, results. What are bishops for exactly? Sell their properties, and invest in front-line priests, call centres and counselling services. Ask people what they want – and provide support when they need it – in the home, in the office, on the phone. As you said in your speech, Dr Williams, we are all children of God, so why does your organisation not operate in a more democratic way? You need to become missionaries in your own backyard. Sod tradition and titles.

Crystal balls

One creed that's booming is futurology. Winkcreative, ad agency of the style bible Wallpaper*, has published its first report on impending trends, at £50 a copy, covering elegant prison crockery to overnight luxury trains. The most cringe-making concept is the Winkcottage, a wooden temporary home that applies the Wallpaper* philosophy to trailer parks.

But anticipating the future can be impossible even for people such as its founder, Tyler Brûlé. Last year he was charged with the launch of an airline (Swiss Air). "All passengers must look incredibly attractive, and that can only be done with genius lighting" was one of his more hilarious quotes. But all airline share prices have crashed in recent months, and fewer people are flying. The problem for futurologists – be they the pretentious Martin Raymond and Christopher Sanderson of Future Laboratory, Faith Popcorn, the American who uses terms such as "caveing" (battening down the hatches and spending more time on hobbies) or nesting (pyjamas to be worn as day-wear) – is that, in a recession, luxury goods will be the hardest hit.

So you are hardly going to bite the hand that pays your consultancy fees, are you? Tell me when you hear one of these people predict we won't be wearing designer clothes. Futurologists are expensive therapists for anxious retailers – and don't forget their fees are reflected in the retail prices we pay. Expect Brûlé to come up with backers for a luxury overnight train – a good way of translating one flop (air travel) into a potential hit, still festooned with designer names.

The choice of Daniel Libeskind to rebuild the twin towers site is inspired. Here is an intellectual, a dreamer, an architect whose Jewish Museum in Berlin moves people to tears. Why then do I cringe at the news that it contains a spire 1,776ft tall, said to be a "tribute" to the year of America's independence? Is this notevidence of the US's desire to be seen as the dominant culture? Skyscrapers were born in a previous age. The old US philosophy of consumerism provokes increasing hostility. I don't think Libeskind's design is the solution.