Report on the February 2009 synod
Monday 9th.
A difficult week ahead
Everyone knew that we had a difficult week ahead. Everywhere there were corridor conversations as members try to second guess the outcome of Wednesday's debate on Women's Episcopacy.
Apart from a spirited but incoherent outburst from one member on the balance of the individual parts of the agenda possibly leading to inconsistent messages, the debate on the agenda was a fairly dull affair. A number of members were concerned about the way in which the changes to the constitution had emerged. This is where the plan is to do a radical reform of the boards & councils.
The dates of Synod for 2011 & 2012 were agreed.
The Chair of the Appointments Committee was reappointed.
The principal item for the evening was a brief but interesting couple of speeches from the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, & the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster, Cormac Murphy O'Connor.
Rowan said the major conversations had been about who is in and who is out of communion. The issue lies with the flexibility of the word communion.
We need to recognise that communion has always been impaired. It isn't that we are out of communion but that it is impaired.
We need to pursue an intensified communion - searching for a greater completeness.
In response, the Cardinal Archbishop said it was all about "koinonia". ARCIC I described koinonia as a guiding principle. As a subsequent thing it was essential that ARCIC II had a major report on Church as Communion. It was important that this recognised tolerable diversity and an understanding of what disrupts.
This leads to the idea that there's a mutual interdependence. The consequence is that if the Church of England is impaired the Roman Catholic Church is impaired.
Referring to the meeting between Pope John Paul II & Robert Runcie he described how an affective communion can become an effective communion.
The report Church as Communion is a challenge to both our churches.
Sadly in the subsequent debate none of the speeches reached a satisfactory level. With the Bishop of Guildford talking about soteriological ecclesiology the debate became inaccessible to a lot of members.
The most interesting intervention was from the Bishop of Durham as he described the concept of receptive ecumenism. This is about how we recognise the gifts that others can offer us.
The day finished with Questions.
Tuesday 10th.
The morning was taken up with Legislative business.
The first piece of business was a presentation on how the Archbishops' Council's Boards & Councils might be reformed.
The major debate related to the change to legislation for ecclesiastical fees. The new measure includes a framework for the definition of fees and clarifies ownership and scope. There are still some areas of concern around the operation of the new measure but the general view of Synod was supportive.
At lunchtime I attended a fringe meeting about the operation of microcredit financing.
The Presidential address referred to issues concerning seemingly irreconcilable positions on matters for debate and how we can respond to them. He referred to Lambeth and the recent Primate's Conference. In particular he felt that Lambeth was successful in demonstrating the right of every participant to be heard.
He noted that, while the Walk of Witness did a lot of good in publicising the Millennium Development Goals, we still have a long way to go in areas like Zimbabwe where, for example, Bishop Sebastian is continuing his struggle to support people there.
Turning to more local issues (with international ramifications) he talked of the desire for both sides in the Women Bishops debate to strive for purity and the fact that where they disagreed was what that purity represented.
He continued by stating that, even if the opponents of Women’s' Episcopacy left the Church of England, they would not be going away. Their presence elsewhere would continue to be a challenge.
The challenge for the Church is to understand how we get the best legislation for the Church.
The other argument is that whatever we do could be a model for the rest of the Communion.
The afternoon brought us the racism debate.
In this the proposer sought to suggest that the Church of England should adopt a comparable policy to the Association of Chief Police Officers regarding membership of the BNP.
During the debate there were attempts to water the motion down.
My amendment sought to widen the application of the motion from the somewhat narrow application to Clergy, Ordinands & Employed Lay People to include all members of the Church of England.
Although my amendment was lost on a technicality, I believe it will survive long term. I was heartened by an enthusiastic endorsement from the Archbishop of York and support from the Bishop of Chichester (invoking “filial” loyalty - although I suspect he meant fraternal).
The last two sessions were about the Financial Crisis (more later in the week) and about how we make sure that the legitimate voice of the Church continues to be heard.
Wednesday 11th
In his homily at the Holy Communion, the Archbishop of Canterbury said that our response to God's call (from Jeremiah) is often "Ah!" but sometimes "Aargh!!".
This set the scene for the debate on Women Bishops.
In the opening statement by the Bishop of Manchester we heard that, although the legislative drafting group responded specifically to what was passed in July, everything is up for grabs - nothing is out of bounds. Again although we are seeking change to legislation we are also seeking the will of God for our Church.
Christina Rees stated clearly that the provision for designated suffragan sees is a visible denial of the universal acceptance of women’s' episcopacy.
The Bishop of Beverly stated equally clearly that delegated transfer of authority from a female bishop is an unacceptable situation. It isn't a sufficient representation of jurisdiction.
The Bishop of Bath & Wells asked for further study to be engaged in to look both theologically and anthropologically at the subject of gender equality and not just restricted to ministry issues.
The Archbishop of Canterbury asked whether the current proposal was sufficiently close to be "Good News" for all. And, if we are close, is the gap a deep cut?
Many speeches expounded the view that the proposal was flawed and the solution was either to reject the proposal and seek for an alternative or to accept the proposal and work through the revision procedure.
The voting on the committal of the Measure was
Ayes Noes Abstentions
281 (71%) 114 (29%) 13
Submissions need to be made by 5:30pm on 16th March 2009.
The voting on the committal of the Amending Canon was
Ayes Noes Abstentions
309 (80%) 79 (20%) 14
Submissions need to be made by 5:30pm on 16th March 2009.
The afternoon had a couple of private members motions. The first sought to remind OFWAT of its obligations to ensure that water companies adhere to the guidance from the Government to treat non-household users that are not businesses appropriately.
We even sang a song "The rain came down and the tax went up".
The second asked for the House of Bishops to provide advice on the way in which we can share the gospel with other faiths. A couple of amendments were proposed which tried to change the motion in terms of the way it would be implemented but not the thrust. Neither was passed. A friendly amendment recognising some of the specific work already done in this area was accepted.
After a little dull relief offered by the 43rd Report of the Standing Orders Committee, we had our most challenging presentation on the issue of Human Trafficking. This was followed by a call to action to prevent sex workers being trafficked into Britain - specifically during the 2012 Olympics. The debate was actually wider than this focussed issue as it sought to cover economic trafficking as well where workers are shipped in to do menial tasks and not provided with appropriate support and advice.
Thursday 12th
The report on the Anglican Covenant was debated. The thrust of the report was to inform Synod on the response of the Church of England to three questions. First, as to whether we are comfortable to agree in principle to the process going forward. Secondly, we were invited to advise what our process would be to take any formal statement through to acceptance. Finally, we were asked whether there were any serious obstacles raised by the St Andrew's draft.
The report was noted.
Legislative business, at the end of the revision stage for the Draft Vacancies in Suffragan Sees & Ecclesiastical Offices Measure and the Draft Crown Benefices (Parish Representatives) Measure, followed. They were ably steered by Timothy Briden.
One of the changes to Pensions Rules for the Clergy scheme (relating to exclusion of ineligible persons) was deferred pending clarification. The other relating to debt apportionment was passed.
As things had taken less time it was possible to add an extra item relating to Eucharistic Prayers which can be used when young people are present. In the end the motion was not put due to a procedural motion to move to next business. The reason for the adjournment was to prevent the motion being lost (which would have suggested that we do not support the provision of accessible language services). It was clear that there was a mood that said that the time taken to develop services of this kind would be too long. By the time it took the Liturgy to be written a new popular culture would already be in place.
At lunchtime there was a fringe meeting hosted by the Amos Trust. We saw a film which highlighted the inhuman treatment of the Palestinians - and in particular in Bethlehem. As a suggestion of something practical that could be done to promote the cause would be to have a crib at Christmas that was obscured by a wall.
The Archbishop of York kicked off the debate on the implications of the financial crisis & recession. He explained that in the depth of despair there is always hope.
Orientation - we have all been worshipping at the altar of money.
Disorientation - we are likely to feel that the crisis is deep and there appears to have no solution.
Reorientation - we need to have a vision for the way forward.
Bishop of London highlighted the loss of jobs and that one needs to pray for those who become unemployed and those who are left who pick up the increased burden.
One speaker referred to the fact that we are still working through the impact of the previous recession. Another spoke of the concern that we all have in respect of church finances and pensions in particular. There will be more on these in July. For the balance of the impact we could do well to take the position of Jeremiah who bought a field during hard times.
The Bishop of Durham pointed out that by baling out the banks & car manufacturers we are doing for the rich what we have not been doing for the poor nations of the world.
In the second social issue debate the Bishop of Bradford's group's report on progress against the Presence & Engagement agenda on Inter-Faith relations and what the plans are for implementation of the programme.
The final debate looked at the future of Retreat Houses and how they might be rejuvenated and sustained.
Friday 13th
We had two Diocesan Synod motions today before we all headed home. The first asked for a compassionate treatment of Asylum Seekers and the second related to the disposal of church land in a way that enabled us to demonstrate our commitment to the environment.
In the first debate we heard of the need for asylum seekers to be able to work while they wait for a decision; for an amnesty on "legacy" cases. There was also a call for children not to be detained in Immigration Removal Centres. We were advised that the Government's slogan of "every child matters" rings hollow when the child is the child of an asylum seeker.
What was clear from the debate was that the church is at the forefront of the support for asylum seekers. The current regime was likened to something that might have been invented by King Herod after reading Kafka!
Speakers gave many disturbing stories of the inhumanity exercised by the immigration authority and by some of the lawyers appointed to support the asylum seekers.
Ayes Noes Abstentions
242 1 1
The debate on the disposal of land got lost in the mire of concerns over charity law. Would the consideration of environment be a different purpose in relation to the trust rules? Would that be at cross-purposes to the requirements of any specific trust? The motion was lost on a vote.
Ayes Noes Abstentions
83 98 18
Voting on different debates shows how there is an ebb and flow in the chamber depending on topic. There is frequently a low count shortly after an intense debate as people go out to have a coffee and forget to return.
The Archbishop of Canterbury paid tribute to the Bishops of Peterborough and Carlisle who are retiring.
The Synod was a good one but there was a muted air about the place for much of it. Everyone held their breath until Wednesday lunchtime and then breathed out very slowly as the ramifications were discussed. A solution along the lines of the “Jesuit” model was getting a lot of air time during the back end of the week.
Two steps forward …
