Today the focus of media comment has moved to a speech given by Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, who is leading the largest ever UK Government delegation to the Vatican, to mark the 30th anniversary of the establishment of full diplomatic relations between the United Kingdom and the Holy See. In it she claimed that “a militant secularisation is taking hold of our societies”.
The full text of the speech is published by the Cabinet Office, and is also available here.
In advance of the speech, she also published this article at the Telegraph We stand side by side with the Pope in fighting for faith.
Channel 4 News published this FactCheck article: Is militant secularisation taking hold in Britain? And last night’s news broadcast had further coverage of the story.
Telegraph Baroness Warsi attacks ‘liberal elite’
Guardian Lady Warsi gets rapturous reception at Vatican for speech on faith
Some of the reactions to this:
Guardian Julian Baggini Is religion really under threat? and also
Giles Fraser Richard Dawkins and Lady Warsi should live and let live
Independent Mark Steel If religion is ‘marginal’, I’m the Pope
Spectator Douglas Murray Why Baroness Warsi has it wrong
Cranmer What kind of idiot does Baroness Warsi take the Pope for?
Mail Online George Pitcher Thank God for Baroness Warsi – a Muslim with the courage to defend our Christian nation
12 CommentsThere was a great deal of comment in the media on Tuesday about a poll undertaken by Ipsos MORI for the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science.
You can read the survey results for yourself. Here is the Ipsos MORI summary:
A poll carried out by Ipsos MORI for the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science (UK) in the week after the 2011 Census focused on the beliefs, attitudes and practices of UK adults who say they were recorded as Christian in the 2011 Census (or would have recorded themselves as Christian had they answered the question).
Attitudes
UK Christians are overwhelmingly secular in their attitudes on a range of issues from gay rights to religion in public life, according to new research.
Religion and government
Three quarters (74%) strongly agree or tend to agree that religion should not have special influence on public policy, with only one in eight (12%) thinking that it should.
More oppose than support the idea of the UK having an official state religion, with nearly half (46%) against and only a third (32%) in favour. The same pattern is repeated with the question of seats being reserved for Church of England bishops in the House of Lords: 32% of respondents oppose, with only 25% in favour.
There is overwhelming support for religion being a private, not public, matter. Asked how strongly they support the statement that governments should not interfere in religion, 79% strongly agree or tend to agree, with only 8% strongly disagreeing or tending to disagree…
For full details, see the survey topline, and the full computer tables (both PDF).
Some informed comment about all this comes from Linda Woodhead in Richard Dawkins has uncovered a very British form of Christianity.
There’s nothing new in Richard Dawkins’s findings about the British way of being religious. But it’s always good to be reminded of the findings of a poll commissioned by his Foundation for Reason and Science: that most of us are not “true believers” in either religion or in secularism, and that Britain is neither a religious country nor a secular one, but an interesting mix of both. That doesn’t make us muddled, or woolly, or confused – it just makes us British.
We have always been instinctively wary of the bright-eyed, fanatical enthusiast, of whatever hue. We don’t really do big ideologies or revolutions – and when we do, we never see them through to their conclusion. We prefer modest proposals, pragmatic solutions, and a bit of muddle – so long as it works. As Kate Fox rightly observes in Watching the English, our natural response to anyone who believes in their own propaganda too much is: “Oh come off it.”
And see also Ekklesia ‘Census Christians’ not very committed, opinion research suggests.
18 CommentsWATCH Press Release 12.15pm Monday 13 February 2012
71 CommentsTo the Bishops: ‘Keep faith with the Dioceses’ – do not amend the draft legislation for women bishops.
We urge the House of Bishops not to make any change to the draft legislation that would further discriminate against women bishops and those male bishops who ordain women: if they do this then the Measure will be at serious risk of being voted down in July.
Over and over again last week speakers urged General Synod, and the House of Bishops in their deliberations in May, to acknowledge the huge majorities across the dioceses and not amend the draft legislation which already contains substantial provision for those opposed to the ordained ministry of women.
We trust that the House of Bishops has heard this message and in its discussions will leave the draft Measure unamended and in the form that the dioceses have debated and approved.
Reasons for standing by the present compromise
In WATCH’s view, anything in either the Code of Practice or the Measure that tries to spell out what kind of ‘male’ bishop should be offered to parishes that do not accept female bishops would be unacceptable. This is because it would set in law two strands of bishops in the Church of England: those who have had sacramental contact with women, and those who have not. On no other issue about which Bishops disagree (sometimes profoundly) has such a structure been written into law, indeed it is the essence of Anglicanism not to do so.This debate is about the place of women
The opposition to women bishops is based on their being women – whether that is about an interpretation of the Bible which maintains that women are forbidden to have authority over a man, or about following the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches in not recognising that women can represent Christ at the altar.Synod agrees that the Archbishops’ Amendment is not the right way forward
We are very pleased that the Archbishops’ Amendment has been fully debated by Synod for a second time, and that Synod has decisively voted not to follow that route.Women lead the debate
It was particularly significant to see two women leading the debate: surely a foretaste of the way that women will lead as bishops – with wisdom, grace and understanding for those who have difficulty in accepting their ministry.
The Church Times will publish its detailed reports from General Synod next week, but today they publish these news items.
Ed Thornton and Glyn Paflin Women vote now rests substantially with the Bishops
Madeleine Davies Synod condemns ‘outrageous’ attack on the sanctity of life
Gavin Drake Dr Williams issues warning on Nigeria
All three are available to non-subscribers.
And The Lead asks What really happened in the Church of England’s debate of female bishops?
In Christian Today is Bishop defends presence in House of Lords
0 CommentsJohn Bingham in The Telegraph Women bishops a step closer after Church of England vote
Ruth Gledhill in The Australian Leaders lose on female bishops
Trevor Timpson for the BBC Women bishops law must not be changed, say campaigners
7 CommentsThis page will be updated during the day.
The final day’s business of this group of sessions started with worship led by the Deaf Anglicans Together representatives.
Synod then moved onto Additional Eucharistic Prayers. These are prayers intended for use when many children are present, and were being returned to Synod from the revision committee. Synod accepted the committee’s report and did not ask for any further revision.
These prayers will not be authorised for liturgical use unless and until they receive final approval at a later meeting of Synod.
Papers for Additional Eucharistic prayers
GS 1822A Additional Eucharistic Prayers
GS 1822Y Report by the Revision Committee
Synod then moved onto the final drafting of the draft legislation to allow women to become bishops. The only proposed amendments were Drafting Amendments (amendments where only the wording of the Measure is altered and not its substance) which are supposed to be non-controversial.
There was a vote by houses and the final drafting was passed by all three houses.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 28 0 2 Clergy 149 14 8 Laity 132 37 10
It is likely that those who voted against were voting against the general principle of the legislation rather than against the final drafting.
Papers for final drafting
GS 1708B Draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure
GS 1709B Draft Amending Canon
GS 1708-9Z Report by the Steering Committee
The morning’s business ended with a presentation on Higher Education Funding Changes
Background paper for this item
GS Misc 1008 Higher Education Funding Changes
Here is the official summary of the morning’s business.
Summary of business conducted on Thursday 9th February 2012 AM
The afternoon session opened with a debate on Reform of the House of Lords.
The debate was on this motion moved by Professor Anthony Berry (Chester)
That this Synod request that the Archbishops’ Council establish a working group with members from each House of the General Synod to prepare the Church of England’s official response to the Government’s consultation on the reform of the House of Lords and that any such Church of England response should be tabled at General Synod in February 2012 for debate and approval.
Mrs April Alexander (Southwark) moved an amendment, which was accepted by Synod and which reworded the motion to read:
That this Synod, welcoming both the Archbishops’ submission to the Joint Parliamentary Committee on the draft Bill on House of Lords Reform and the extension of the Episcopal group on Lords Reform to include members of the other two Houses of Synod:
(a) invite the extended group to bring to the February 2013 group of sessions
(i) an assessment of the implications for the Church and nation of any Bill to be brought forward by the Government, and
(ii) recommendations for changes in custom and practice to accommodate any new requirements placed on the Church; and(b) recognising the unpredictable nature of the passage of any such Bill through parliament, request that the extended group allow Synod members to contribute to published statements by alerting them in advance, by email where necessary, and inviting comments.
Synod voted on parts (a) and (b) separately. Part (a) (and the preamble) was passed, but part (b) was not. So the motion, as passed, was:
That this Synod, welcoming both the Archbishops’ submission to the Joint Parliamentary Committee on the draft Bill on House of Lords Reform and the extension of the Episcopal group on Lords Reform to include members of the other two Houses of Synod invite the extended group to bring to the February 2013 group of sessions
(i) an assessment of the implications for the Church and nation of any Bill to be brought forward by the Government, and
(ii) recommendations for changes in custom and practice to accommodate any new requirements placed on the Church.
Papers for this item
GS 1856A and GS 1856B
Synod then moved onto a debate on Health Care and the Church’s Mission. The motion before Synod was:
That this Synod, mindful of Our Lord’s ministry of healing and his charge to his disciples to heal the sick in his name:
(a) affirm the ministry of all who promote health and wholeness in body, mind and spirit, and call upon Her Majesty’s Government to ensure that chaplaincy provision remains part of the core structure of a National Health Service committed to physical, mental and spiritual health;
(b) call upon Her Majesty’s Government to apply as the test to any proposed changes to the NHS whether they are best calculated to secure the provision throughout the country of effective and efficient healthcare services provided free at the point of delivery and according to clinical need;
(c) commend the work of mission agencies and the networks of the Anglican Communion in embodying the churches’ contribution to health and wholeness and promoting fairer sharing of health resources worldwide.
One amendment to the motion was carried (to add some words to paragraph(a)) so that the motion became:
That this Synod, mindful of Our Lord’s ministry of healing and his charge to his disciples to heal the sick in his name:
(a) affirm the ministry of all who promote health and wholeness in body, mind and spirit, and, recognising in particular the role of chaplains in the NHS as an expression of the Church of England’s commitment to minister to all in the community, whether as patients or healthcare
workers, call upon Her Majesty’s Government to ensure that chaplaincy provision remains part of the core structure of a National Health Service committed to physical, mental and spiritual health;(b) call upon Her Majesty’s Government to apply as the test to any proposed changes to the NHS whether they are best calculated to secure the provision throughout the country of effective and efficient healthcare services provided free at the point of delivery and according to clinical need;
(c) commend the work of mission agencies and the networks of the Anglican Communion in embodying the churches’ contribution to health and wholeness and promoting fairer sharing of health resources worldwide.
The motion (as amended) was carried by 208 votes in favour with none against and one recorded abstention.
Background paper for this item
GS 1857 Health Care and the Church’s Mission: Report from the Mission and Public Affairs Council
The Archbishop of Canterbury then paid tribute to John Hind, the Bishop of Chichester, who will be retiring before the next meeting of General Synod.
Here is the official summary of the afternoon’s business.
Summary of business conducted on Thursday 9th February 2012 PM
That completed the business of this group of sessions. General Synod next meets from 6 to 10 July 2012 in York.
2 CommentsMichael White in The Guardian Fratricidal tensions at the Church of England Synod
Riazat Butt in The Guardian Church of England reaches compromise on women bishops
Avril Ormsby for Reuters Church of England takes step towards allowing women bishops
Christian Today Church of England nears consensus on women bishops
Nelson Jones in the New Statesman When is a bishop not a bishop?
Torey Lightcap for The Lead Another step in female-bishop process in Church of England
[The last part of this appears to be copied from my article here on Thinking Anglicans.]
And two that I missed earlier.
Christian Today Archbishop seeks greater provision for opponents of women bishops
Christian Today India Church of England’s legislation on women bishops ‘needs more work’
12 CommentsThe Archbishop of Canterbury spoke during this (Wednesday) morning’s debate on women bishops. There is a video, an audio file, and a transcript of what he said on his website.
Archbishop Rowan speaks in Synod debate on women bishops
In his remarks the Archbishop spoke about at two things.
First then – I’d like to pick up some of the questions that were asked yesterday about this question of ‘derivation’ and ‘delegation’, and see if that can be clarified at all for members of Synod.
and
3 CommentsNow, the second point relates to the second principle that I enunciated at the beginning – provision for minorities that respects theological integrity and pastoral continuity.
Update Thursday night I have corrected the voting figures on item 35; the number of bishops voting against was 16 (and not 15).
This page will be updated during the day as business proceeds.
The day started with a service of Holy Communion.
Synod then moved onto this motion on Recent Violence in Nigeria proposed by the Bishop of Durham
That this Synod, gravely concerned at the desperate plight of Christian communities in parts of Nigeria, as described in GS 1861, request the British Government to do all it can to support those in Nigeria seeking to protect religious minorities of all faiths and enable them to practise their religion without fear.
There is a brief background paper (GS 1861).
The Archbishop of Canterbury made this contribution to the debate.
The motion was carried with 344 votes in favour, none against and one recorded abstention.
Synod them moved onto the first of two items of business on the legislation to allow women to be bishops. This was the report (GS 1847) of the Business Committee on the reference of this legislation to the diocese. A couple of items were omitted from the report, and are listed in Notice Paper 10.
The motion before Synod was ‘That the Synod do take note of this Report’. Motions of this type allow a general debate on the report. Synod duly took note of the report and then adjourned for lunch.
Here is the official summary of the morning’s business.
Summary of business conducted on Wednesday 8th February 2012 AM
Synod resumed at 2.30 pm.
The Diocesan Synod Motions on this topic, taken after lunch, are below the fold.
Initially the motion from Manchester was moved. The proposers of the other two motions have spoken, but will move their motions later. This procedure allows a general debate to be held on all three, before Synod moves onto debating and voting on each one specifically in turn (in the order 36, 35, 13).
4.50 pm All motions and amendments have now been moved. Voting will take place shortly.
5.05 pm Pete Spiers’ amendment (item 36) was carried on a vote by houses, voting figures below.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 40 5 1 Clergy 122 70 1 Laity 107 85 4
Following this amendment, the text of item 35 (a proposed amendment to item 13), became:
35 (as amended by item 36) Leave out all the words after “That this Synod” and insert –
“(a) noting the significant support the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure has received in the Houses of Bishops, Clergy and Laity of diocesan synods, and
(b) desiring that the draft Measure be returned to the Synod for consideration on the Final Approval Stage substantially unamended so that it can be seen if the proposals embodied in it in the form in which it has been referred to the dioceses can attain the level of support required to achieve Final Approval,
request the House of Bishops in the exercise of its power under Standing Order 60(b) not to amend the draft Measure substantially.”.
5.25 pm Item 35 (as amended by item 36) was carried on a vote by houses, voting figures below
For Against Abstentions Bishops 26 16 5 Clergy 128 64 0 Laity 111 85 1
5.30 pm Item 13 (as amended by item 35) was then carried on a show of hands. Here is the final text of the motion as passed by Synod.
13 (as amended by item 35)
That this Synod,
(a) noting the significant support the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure has received in the Houses of Bishops, Clergy and Laity of diocesan synods, and
(b) desiring that the draft Measure be returned to the Synod for consideration on the Final Approval Stage substantially unamended so that it can be seen if the proposals embodied in it in the form in which it has been referred to the dioceses can attain the level of support required to achieve Final Approval,
request the House of Bishops in the exercise of its power under Standing Order 60(b) not to amend the draft Measure substantially.
Synod then took a ten minute break before moving onto a debate on its standing orders. There was then a delay as too many members had taken the opportunity to have a cup of tea, and some had to be called back to make up a quorum.
The only item requiring debate was a proposed change to standing orders to make the Chair of Synod’s Business Committee an elected position, rather than a position appointed by the Archbishops’ Council and subject to confirmation by Synod.
The Bishop of Willesden proposed an amendment to restrict the position to members of the houses of clergy and laity (ie not a bishop). This was defeated with 99 votes in favour and 103 against, with 9 recorded abstentions.
The original proposal was then carried on a show of hands.
There was not time to take a following motion, so this concluded the day’s business.
Here is the official summary of the afternoon’s business.
Summary of business conducted on Wednesday 8th February 2012 PM
Ekklesia C of E General Synod hears of climate change chaos in Bangladesh
Mark Hennessy in The Irish Times Church of England synod to decide on women bishops
Christian Today Church of England’s legislation on women bishops ‘needs more work’
BBC General Synod discussing women bishops compromise bid
Lancashire Evening Post Are we ready for a female bishop?
Richard Vernalls in the Worcester News Women should be bishops, says city’s top churchman
Matthew Davies in Episcopal News Service Church of England resumes women bishops debate
John Walsh in The Independent Church debate: Who’d be a bishop?
2 CommentsRiazat Butt in The Guardian Church of England votes to increase marriage and funeral fees
Press Association C of E wedding fees to rise by 40%
The Guardian offers this Head to head between Rosie Harper and Adrian Furse: Should the Church of England allow female bishops?
The Telegraph CoE synod: Cost of weddings and funerals to dramatically rise
1 CommentThere were a number of questions asked relating to the two recently announced House of Bishops working groups dealing with sexuality issues. None of these questions were reached during the session, so here are the written answers that would have been given.
Judith Maltby asked
Q. Given the inclusion of a man who is not a bishop in the group to advise the House of Bishops on the Church of England’s approach to human sexuality, are there any plans to include some women members in order to achieve at least a partial gender balance on this currently all-male group addressing the complex issue of human sexuality?
The Archbishop of York to reply:
A. The Archbishop of Canterbury and I made the appointments to this group, after consultation with Standing Committee of the House. It was, like the parallel group on civil partnerships, established as a small episcopal group. We concluded, however, that there was advantage in inviting a distinguished and independent outsider to chair and facilitate the process.
We do not intend to enlarge the membership of the group but it will be open to the group to consider how others can help it in its work, including, if it so decides, through inviting individuals to serve as consultants or assessors.
Giles Goddard asked:
Q. In the interests of transparency and of gaining the confidence of the Church of England in their reports, how are the terms of reference for the House of Bishops’ working groups on human sexuality and civil partnerships to be agreed and when will they be published?
The Bishop of Sodor and Man to reply on behalf of the Chairman:
A. The 1 July statement from the House of Bishops constitutes the terms of reference for both groups.
Stephen Coles asked
Q. What provisions are being made to ensure that Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Anglicans are consulted by both the group reviewing the Pastoral Statement on Civil Partnerships and that advising the House on the Church of England’s approach to human sexuality.
The Bishop of Sodor and Man to reply on behalf of the Chairman:
A. Before Christmas I wrote on behalf of the civil partnership group to a number of groups inviting them to submit representations and have now received replies from them all and some submissions from others. These include a detailed submission from the LGBT Coalition and some of its associated bodies. I understand that the group on human sexuality is to have its first meeting shortly and will be considering then how it is going to go about its task.
Stephen Coles asked:
Q. To what extent were the provisions of the Equality Act taken into account by the House of Bishops when they declared a moratorium on the appointment of clergy in civil partnerships to the episcopate?
The Bishop of Sodor and Man to reply on behalf of the Chairman:
A. On this as on other matters where legal issues are at stake, the House had the benefit of support from its Legal Adviser who had been involved both in the preparation of the relevant papers and was present at the discussion which took the decisions set out in the 1 July statement.
April Alexander asked:
Q. Recent press statements (5 January 2012 and 1 July 2011) on human sexuality and on civil partnerships indicate that the appointed working groups undertake to “draw together material from the listening process”. Can further information be provided about this process, including such matters as who has listened to whom (in broad terms), when they listened, what they heard and how they overcame the difficulty that homosexual priests do not feel free to declare themselves in order to participate?
The Bishop of Gloucester to reply on behalf of the Chairman:
A. The House of Bishops’ mandate for drawing together material from the listening process was set out in its statement of 1 July and given to the group of which I am now a member. We have a more extended timescale than the group reviewing the 2005 statement on civil partnerships and are just about to have our first meeting. So I can’t say much today about how we shall be setting about our task. But I can give an assurance that we shall certainly want, among other things, to assemble and reflect on the very considerable range of material and experience that has emerged from the listening process around dioceses since 1998.
The Church of England has announced a new project to resource Christian Community Action.
How to serve your community’s needs without reinventing the wheel in every parish: that is the challenge posed by a new project to be launched by the Archbishop of York at this week’s General Synod.
…
The report from Professor Hilary Russell – and a new website – respond to Gavin Oldham’s Following Motion in the “Big Society” debate at Synod in November 2010. More than 45 projects and initiatives are covered in detail in the report and form the core of the website.
Full details are below the fold.
1 CommentOrder paper for Tuesday’s business
The first item of business was Parochial Fees.
Some, but not all, of the amendments listed in the order paper were carried. The amended Fees Order was then approved by Synod.
Background Papers for this debate
GS 1852 Draft Parochial Fees and Scheduled Matters Amending Order 2012
GS 1852X Explanatory Memorandum
GS Misc 1015 Draft Fees Order, An explanation of the proposed fee levels
Synod then moved onto the Draft Clergy Discipline (Amendment) Measure
Papers for this debate
GS 1814A Draft Clergy Discipline (Amendment) Measure
GS 1814Y Report by the Revision Committee
The final business in the morning was the Draft Diocese in Europe Measure
Papers for this debate
GS 1853 Draft Diocese in Europe Measure
GS 1853X and Explanatory Memorandum
Here is the official summary of the morning’s business.
Summary of business conducted on Tuesday 7th February 2012 AM
The afternoon started with a presentation by the Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich on the Draft Code of Practice (GS Misc 1007) required by the Draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure.
Presentations at Synod allow members to ask questions, but not to make speeches.
After the presentation Synod moved onto The Ecclesastical Offices (Terms of Service) (Consequential Provisions) Order 2012
The amendment in the order paper was agreed, after which the order was approved.
Papers for this item
GS 1858 The Draft Order
GS 1858X and Explanatory Memorandum
As Synod finished this business earlier that expected, a gap opened up in the agenda which was filled with this Chichester diocesan synod about the Appointment of Archdeaccons originally planned to be taken tomorrow.
That this Synod request that Canon C 22.1 be amended to read “No person shall be capable of receiving the appointment of archdeacon unless he has been six years complete in holy orders at the time of appointment
At the end of the debate the Bishop of Chichester successfully called for a vote by houses. The motion was defeated in all three houses.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 9 21 0 Clergy 31 118 1 Laity 53 84 9
The day’s business finished with a presentation by Mrs Sally Keeble (Director of the Anglican Alliance for Relief, Development and Advocacy) about the work of the Alliance, followed by questions.
Here is the official summary of the afternoon’s business
Summary of business conducted on Tuesday 7th February 2012 PM
updated Tuesday at noon and in the afternoon
Andrew Brown in The Guardian General Synod: the perfect forum for Anglicans who want to avoid decisions
Riazat Butt in The Guardian Church of England has ‘no plan B’ on female bishops
The Australian Anglican male co-bishop talk rubbished
Christian Today Call to Church of England to defend traditional marriage
Steve Doughty in the Mail Online Legalising assisted dying would be a disaster that undermines sanctity of life, Archbishop warns
Updates
Peter Mullen wrote this comment article for the Telegraph: Let us pray for those against women bishops.
John Bingham in The Telegraph Archbishop Rowan Williams: assisted suicide could spell ‘disaster’
2 CommentsThere is a change to the agenda for Wednesday morning. See GS 1861 which contains a background briefing note by the Bishop of Durham, Justin Welby.
1 CommentRecent violence in Nigeria
In view of the recent serious violence in Nigeria the Bishop of Durham travelled to the country at short notice on behalf of the Archbishop of Canterbury to meet members of the Anglican Church in Nigeria and others caught up in the deteriorating situation there.Following the Bishop’s return we have decided, in the exercise of our powers under Standing Order 4 (b) in relation to urgent or other especially important business, to direct the addition to the agenda for the February Group of sessions of a short debate. This will enable the Synod to hear from the Bishop of Durham, to reflect on the attached briefing note and, if it agrees, to pass a short motion that the Bishop will move on our behalf in the following terms:
“That this Synod, gravely concerned at the desperate plight of Christian communities in parts of Nigeria as described in GS 1861, request the British Government to do all it can to support those in Nigeria seeking to protect religious minorities of all faiths and enable them to practise their religion without fear.”
+ Rowan Cantuar: + Sentamu Ebor:
3 February 2012
The LGB&T Anglican Coalition will hold an Act of Witness at General Synod on Thursday 9 February. The poster advertising this event can be downloaded here.
1 CommentOn Wednesday General Synod will be holding a debate on two diocesan synod motions relating to women bishops. The details of this have already been explained here.
There were several other dioceses that passed resolutions in support of the Archbishops’ Amendment, although many more dioceses rejected such an amendment. However, it turns out that all those who did will get some preferential treatment in the debate, as revealed by this Question and Answer from tonight’s Questions session. As this was the very last question on the list, it was not reached during the session, which is why I am reporting it now.
The Revd Hugh Lee (Oxford) to ask the Clerk to the Synod:
Q. As it is normal practice, where more than one diocese has submitted a DSM in identical or similar terms, for the diocese(s) concerned to be invited to nominate someone who could speak on behalf of their diocesan synod in the General Synod debate on the DSM and then to draw this to the attention of the person chairing the debate, is it also normal practice to invite the diocese(s) whose synods had rejected a motion in identical or similar terms to those of the DSM to nominate someon who could speak on behalf of their diocesan synod in the debate on the DSM and then to draw this to the attention of the person chairing the debate?
Dr Colin Podmore to reply as Clerk to the Synod:
2 CommentsA. The reason for the practice to which the question refers is that a motion moved at the instance of a diocesan synod can only be moved once in the same, or a substantially similar, form, yet it would be discourteous to a diocesan synod that submitted a motion listed in Special Agenda IV if it (or a motion in a substantially similar form) were debated without a representative being called to speak.
That consideration does not apply in the case of motions that diocesan synods have rejected, or have passed without submitting them for inclusion in Special Agenda IV. However, individual members may of course seek to speak in the debate.
In any event, the overriding duty of the Chair in all debates is to ensure that there is a balance of speakers for and against the motion and any amendments.
The Church of England General Synod opened this afternoon. I will update this page with reports of the Synod’s business during the day. The full agenda is here.
There is a live audio link from Synod here.
The Church of England’s own summary of the day’s business is here.
Monday’s Business
The Archbishop of Canterbury moved a Loyal Address to the Queen to mark her Diamond Jubilee; Synod members were all in favour.
Synod debated the report of the Business Committee. This is largely an opportunity for members to complain about items that are not on the agenda, eg same-sex marriage, and how the debate on the Manchester and Southward motions on women bishops has been arranged.
The dates of Synod sessions in 2014-2015 were agreed. I have posted these dates here.
The Archbishops’ nomination of Rebecca Swinson for a five-year term on the Archbishops’ Council was accepted. Andrew Britton’s membership of the Council was extended for twelve months to 30 September 2012.
Independent Commission on Assisted Dying
Mrs Sarah Finch (London) moved her private member’s motion:
That this Synod express its concern that the Independent Commission on Assisted Dying is insufficiently independent to be able to develop proposals which will properly protect the interests of vulnerable and disabled people.
Mr Philip Fletcher (Archbishops’ Council) proposed this amendment, which was carried.
After the words “That this Synod” insert “(a)”.
After the words “Assisted Dying” leave out “is” and insert “was”.
And
After the words “disabled people” insert –
“;
(b) endorse the responses to the Commission on Assisted Dying referred to in paragraphs 7 and 8 of GS 1851B;
(c) affirm the intrinsic value of every human life and express its support for the current law on assisted suicide as a means of contributing to a just and compassionate society in which vulnerable people are protected; and
(d) celebrating the considerable improvement in the quality of care of the dying brought about by the hospice and palliative care movements and by the input of clinicians, clergy and others, encourage the Church’s continued involvement in the wider agenda of the care of those approaching the end of their lives and the support of those caring form them.”.
The amended motion then read:
That this Synod
(a) express its concern that the Independent Commission on Assisted Dying was insufficiently independent to be able to develop proposals which will properly protect the interests of vulnerable and disabled people;
(b) endorse the responses to the Commission on Assisted Dying referred to in paragraphs 7 and 8 of GS 1851B;
(c) affirm the intrinsic value of every human life and express its support for the current law on assisted suicide as a means of contributing to a just and compassionate society in which vulnerable people are protected; and
(d) celebrating the considerable improvement in the quality of care of the dying brought about by the hospice and palliative care movements and by the input of clinicians, clergy and others, encourage the Church’s continued involvement in the wider agenda of the care of those approaching the end of their lives and the support of those caring form them.
The amended motion was carried with 284 votes in favour and none against. There were 4 recorded abstentions.
The Archbishop of Canterbury spoke in this debate and has published this summary of his speech.
Background papers for this debate: GS 1851A and GS 1851B
Synod then moved onto the final business of the day: Questions.
Some live blogs from Synod
General Synod blog
Jeremy Fletcher
Riazat Butt
There have been several recent reports of an interview in The Times given by the Bishop of Salisbury, Nick Holtam. The original newspaper articles remain behind a paywall. The bishop also spoke on the BBC radio programme Sunday yesterday.
The BBC programme can be found here (available on iPlayer or as podcast).
The Diocese of Salisbury has these reports:
Briefing note following the interview published in The Times on Friday 3 February
Bishop urges open debate – Bishop Nicholas said on BBC Radio 4’s ‘Sunday’ programme this week that there are more views on civil partnerships in the church than have been expressed officially.
Changing Attitude has The Bishop of Salisbury first to make public his support for gay marriage and Pete Broadbent predicts Synod will be talking about gay marriage in the tea room this week
37 Comments