I had an interest in this piece of legislation from way back, as a member of both the Dioceses Commission and the Commissioners’ Pastoral Committee, both destined for the melting-pot of the original Review Group, which started work in 2002, and of which our Editor, Shirley-Ann Williams, was a member. Then I warmed to the report itself, which seemed to have grasped all the right nettles, warming particularly, if frivolously, to the Shakespearean flavour of its title, A Measure for Measures, to the extent of summarising my (genuine) views on the subject matter into sonnet form, (prudently checking this would not be contrary to Standing Orders, and with a nod to the Prologue to Romeo and Juliet):

Two Measures, both alike in dignity,
In fair Westminster, where we lay our scene,
In solemn Synod suffer scrutiny —
And lo! What slothful servants they have been!
The Dioceses Measure pines neglected—
Lord Bishops can be hard to regulate,
So ancient boundaries remain protected
And fresher thoughts are destined to stagnate.
The Pastoral Measure hath been seen as rigid,
Unhelpful to the growth of innovation,
Red tape and legal language? Dated? Frigid?
While local hearts cry out for liberation.
May Flexibility now lead Inspiration
To capture the changed spirit of our nation.

Professor Peter Toyne, Review Group Chairman, introduced the debate by making the general statement that the law must be fit for purpose and not outlive its usefulness. Five main points had guided their thinking: a proper ecclesiological understanding of the issues in Church of England terms, particularly regarding the dioceses, a new look at their numbers, distribution and provision of Episcopal posts, the need to have one sole Measure to replace the existing plethora, fourthly, following the immediately previous debate, “Mission-shaped Church”, the power to authorise and facilitate “fresh expressions”, and lastly, simplifying procedures for making decisions over church buildings no longer required for worship.

Have these hopes and aspirations been met? The building blocks of the proposed new Measure were warmly welcomed, with a few reservations on points of detail, the main recommendations were accepted, and a follow-up group established to transform them into formal legislation.

I reappeared on the scene as a member of the Steering Committee, and we laboured long and hard, as you do, over the detailed wording, and in weighing the value of the large number of written and oral representations received. Then to Synod debate and revision stages, until, in February, Final Approval crowned all the hours of effort and acres of paper— the heftiest piece of legislation for a generation! The Chairman, members and staff of the Steering Committee had a convivial meal together to speed it on its way (staff colleagues having, as always, maintained their patience, cheerfulness and professional expertise throughout).

The original Review Group wanted the new legal framework to be “as devolutionary, minimalist, light of touch, enabling, flexible, straightforward, comprehensible and user-friendly as possible” — a tall order! But a tall edifice of consultation, serious thinking, real debate, open minds and an overarching desire for the good of our church, refreshed to face 21st century challenges, should encourage us to have faith in the work that has been done.

To return to Measure for Measure:

... “our doubts are traitors
And make us lose the good we oft might win
By fearing to attempt”...

Janet Atkinson
Vice Chair, OSG