Thinking Anglicans

General Synod – Covenant Vote

The results of the electronic vote on the Anglican Communion Covenant at last month’s General Synod are now available.

For convenience I have made this available as a webpage.

Readers might like to note that the speculation about which bishop abstained was incorrect.

15
Leave a Reply

avatar
3000
15 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
13 Comment authors
frozenchristianRichard AshbyCynthia GilliattJeremy PembertonFather Ron Smith Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Fr Mark
Guest

Could someone please enlighten me as to how many voting bishops there are in Synod exactly? Your table shows 40 – is that all there are, or were some absent? I looked at the Church of England’s General Synod webpages, which states that all the diocesans plus a number of suffragans plus several others are members of the House of Bishops, but it does not give a list of their names or job titles, nor indeed of the names of the members of the other houses of synod. Am I the only one to find it rather odd that one… Read more »

Pluralist
Guest

That sets up James Jones to have an alternative policy for his elevation should this Archbishop fail.

Simon Sarmiento
Guest

As you can see from here
http://peterowen.org.uk/articles/gsmembers.html
there are potentially 52 members of the House of Bishops, but at present there are a few vacancies. Three to be exact.

So several were absent from the vote.

Simon Sarmiento
Guest

To save the rest of you the time, here is a list of the bishops who had no recorded vote. I know that two of them, at least, were absent entirely from the group of sessions. And I believe that neither Conway nor Chessun, although listed by Peter, are yet entitled to vote in respect of their new sees.

Chartres
Urquhart
Rowell – absent abroad
Broadbent – absent by agreement
Redfern
Croft
Platten

RPNewark
Guest
RPNewark

… and please note that John Saxbee is Lincoln, not Lichfield.

john
Guest
john

Jones is certainly an interesting fellow. Maybe also a good one and a reformed one. Better than many, anyway.

Fr Mark
Guest

Thanks for the clarifications.

Hugh of Lincoln
Guest
Hugh of Lincoln

Given the obvious scepticism of many of the speakers, the overwhelming vote in favour comes as something of a surprise. After an emotional eleventh hour plea from the ABC, it is clear that personal affection and loyalty will have had some bearing on the outcome. The worry is that there was scarcely any enthusiasm during the debate for something which claims – in its preamble – to be rooted in Scripture and Tradition and appropriates the word Covenant. And THIS is the document that is supposed to bind us together as Anglicans? In fact, there is such a theological leap… Read more »

Lister Tonge
Guest
Lister Tonge

Pluralist:

Was your post meant to be complementary to +Liverpool or was it meant to be cynical? Whatever the answer: why?

Father Ron Smith
Guest

Hurrah for James Jones – putting his vote where his heart is! Fear of offending on account of recrimination must be a dreadful thing.

Jeremy Pemberton
Guest
Jeremy Pemberton

It was probably meant to be complimentary

Cynthia Gilliatt
Guest
Cynthia Gilliatt

I’ve encountered =Liverpool at one of the Dio of VA’s annual retreats. Our diocese has had a longstanding relationship with him and his diocese, as Liverpool was a major player in the Triangular Trade, as was our city of Richmond. I was very well impressed by him.

Richard Ashby
Guest
Richard Ashby

I do wonder what was the point of abstaining. Either the Covenant was to be sent to the Dioceses or it wasn’t. What does an abstention mean?

frozenchristian
Guest
frozenchristian

Some people tell me they abstained because they do not think the Covenant a good idea but also wanted to support ++Rowan.

The list of abstainers and voters against contains many who are not exactly radical, inclusive church types or troublemakers. If the mild mannered middle ground is not enthusiastic, it is in trouble!