press release from Women and the Church (WATCH)
7 CommentsWomen Bishops Legislation
Overwhelming support for the draft Measure:
“Follow on Motions” confirm the Dioceses’ desire for draft legislation to be passed unamended by General Synod in JulyBackground
General Synod has just consulted the dioceses on new legislation (a Measure and amending Canon) which would allow women to become bishops for the first time in the Church of England. This legislation outlined a scheme of delegation so that people who could not accept the ministry of a female bishop would have alternative provision – any parish can request a male priest or the oversight of a male bishop.
Such a scheme is a major compromise for many who are in favour of consecrating women as bishops and has been supported by many of them as a way of keeping the Church together.Overwhelming support for the draft Measure
Of the 44 Dioceses which considered this, 42 voted for it and just two against with the overall majority of votes exceeding three-quarters. Overall 85% bishops, 76% clergy and 77% laity have said ‘yes’.
This is significantly better than the Diocesan voting in 1992 for the legislation allowing women to become priests, and is well clear of the two thirds majority required in General Synod for the legislation to pass.‘Follow On Motions’
Alongside the main legislation 42 of the 44 Dioceses considered motions which would request consideration of additional provision for those opposed to the ministry of women as bishops.
9 of the 42 Dioceses passed such motions, while 33 did not. The two dioceses where this was not tested were amongst the strongest in favour of the main legislation with majorities of over 90% in favour.
Fewer than 25% of the dioceses therefore made requests for further provision, and even if the figure of a quarter advanced by some commentators were true, it would be below the one third figure which would be required to block the legislation in General Synod.
The failure to meet even that one third threshhold (let alone a majority) is also indicated by the overall voting figures on the motions for alternative provision.Conclusion
The overall picture is clear. The Measure and Amending Canon on which General Synod consulted the dioceses were supported in the vast majority of dioceses with large majorities.
The case for an alternative approach was extensively tested, and fell well short of a majority, passing in just 9 Dioceses out of 44.
The case for changing the legislation has been put, considered, and lost in the Dioceses. The current legislation with its clear scheme of provision by delegation should be taken forward and passed so that we can, at last, have women as bishops in our Church.Hilary Cotton, Head of Campaign said,
“The clear message from the Dioceses is: this is the right way forward. It would be very puzzling for the House of Bishops to amend the legislation in the face of such overwhelming endorsement from the Church at large. It would also seem dismissive of the ordinary Church of England membership if General Synod members chose to vote against such large majority opinion next July”.
press release from The Catholic Group in General Synod
25 CommentsWomen Bishops Legislation
A quarter of Church of England Dioceses vote for proper provision for traditionalists
While Dioceses showed overall support for women bishops, a quarter of Dioceses voted for proper provision to be made for those who are unable in conscience to accept the oversight of women bishops. This figure is highly significant, given the need for a two-thirds majority for the legislation in all three Houses of General Synod; put bluntly, the legislation needs to be amended if its safe passage through the Synod is to be guaranteed.
The legislation as currently drafted provides neither for conservative Catholics in the Church of England, who need bishops and priests ordained by male bishops, nor for conservative Evangelicals who could not accept the oversight of a woman bishop on scriptural grounds. It relies on a Code of Practice to fill out its provisions – a draft of the Code will be discussed by the House of Bishops in December, and by the General Synod in February. General Synod members will want to scrutinise the draft Code carefully to see how the draft legislation is seen as working in practice, and whether it provides fairly and graciously for the significant minority of traditionalists.
It is likely that the February Synod will also debate a motion calling on the House of Bishops to exercise its powers to amend the Measure in the manner of the amendment jointly proposed by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York in July 2010 – an amendment which commanded an overall majority of the Synod at the time, and could have gone a long way to meeting the needs of traditionalists.
40% of the members of the current Synod are new; it is vital that they have the opportunity to consider these issues properly before the Synod comes to the Final Approval vote in July 2012. Members of the current Synod have already expressed their disquiet on legislation passed by the previous Synod, when they took the unprecedented step last July of refusing to approve a new Parochial Fees Order made under legislation passed by the previous Synod – effectively blocking implementation of that legislation.
Canon Simon Killwick, Chairman of the Catholic Group in General Synod, said, “Final Approval of the current draft Women Bishops legislation is not a foregone conclusion; the best way to secure its safe passage would be to amend it to provide properly for traditionalists; modest amendment of the legislation, together with a suitably drafted Code of Practice could yet enable the Church of England to move forward together on women bishops in 2012. Failure to amend the legislation could result in the failure of the legislation at Final Approval, which would delay the introduction of women bishops for many years to come.”
The Catholic Group in General Synod is the voice of conservative Catholic Anglicans on the General Synod. We include bishops, clergy and lay people among our members, and represent members of the Church of England, male and female, lay and ordained, who hold to the faith and order of the undivided Church, a conviction shared with many other Anglicans worldwide, and with the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches.
The Mission and Public Affairs Council of the Church of England has issued its Response to the Discussion Paper from the Commission on a UK Bill of Rights.
Offering a clear “no” in answer to the question, “Do we need a UK Bill of Rights?”, the response goes on to argue that a UK Bill of Rights would either re-state the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, in which case it would be superfluous, or would add to them, in which case the additional rights and obligations would not be binding in the same sense as the Convention and their status in UK law would be unclear.
If on the other hand the Bill attempted to restrict or abolish Convention rights, it would be incompatible with the UK’s international obligations, the response argues; it is also unclear what specific additional rights would be included in a UK Bill.
The response comments that the parties in the coalition Government have diametrically opposed attitudes to human rights, and therefore the proposal does not offer a coherent basis for legislating on such an important subject.
Then the response offers five considerations in answer to the question “Having regard to our terms of reference, are there any other views which you would like to put forward at this stage?”. One point suggests that “some of the concerns driving the demand for a UK Bill of Rights would be met by appropriate reforms of the operation of the European Court of Human Rights”, the final point adding: “A better way forward might be increased use by the European Court of the ‘margin of appreciation’, whereby variations in the application of the Convention are allowed in view of the diverse history, traditions and institutions of different states.”
Full response (only four pages, but a PDF).
9 CommentsThe Mission & Public Affairs Council of the Church of England is the body responsible for overseeing research and comment on social and political issues on behalf of the Church. The Council comprises a representative group of bishops, clergy and lay people with interest and expertise in the relevant areas, and reports to the General Synod through the Archbishops’ Council.
The following letter has been published in Sunday’s Observer newspaper:
The introduction of a cap on benefits, as suggested in the Welfare Reform Bill, could push some of the most vulnerable children in the country into severe poverty. While 70,000 adults are likely to be affected by the cap, the Children’s Society has found that it is going to cut support for an estimated 210,000 children, leaving as many as 80,000 homeless. The Church of England has a commitment and moral obligation to speak up for those who have no voice. As such, we feel compelled to speak for children who might be faced with severe poverty and potentially homelessness, as a result of the choices or circumstances of their parents. Such an impact is profoundly unjust.
We are urging the government to consider some of the options offered by the Children’s Society before the bill is passed into legislation, such as removing child benefit from household income for the purposes of calculating the level of the cap and calculating the level of the cap based on earnings of families with children, rather than all households. The government could also consider removing certain vulnerable groups from the cap and the introduction of a significant “grace period” of exemption from the cap for households which have recently left employment.
The Bishops of Bath & Wells, Blackburn, Bristol, Chichester, Derby, Exeter, Gloucester, Guildford, Leicester, Lichfield, London, Manchester, Norwich, Oxford, Ripon and Leeds, St Edmundsbury and Ipswich, Wakefield and Truro
In the accompanying news story, Archbishop Rowan Williams backs revolt against coalition’s welfare cuts it is reported that:
…Eighteen Church of England bishops, backed by Williams and the archbishop of York, John Sentamu, are demanding that ministers rewrite their flagship plan to impose a £500-a-week benefit cap on families.
In an open letter in Observer, they say the Church of England has a “moral obligation to speak up for those who have no voice”. Their message is that the cap could be “profoundly unjust” to the poorest children in society, especially those in larger families and those living in expensive major cities.
The high-profile intervention comes after the Church of England became embroiled in an embarrassing row over its attitude to anti-capitalist protests outside St Paul’s Cathedral in London. One cleric resigned over plans to evict the protesters forcibly, arguing that the Church should have been more supportive of their cause.
The bishops are calling on ministers to back a series of amendments to the welfare reform bill – due to be debated in the House of Lords tomorrow – that have been tabled by the bishop of Leeds and Ripon, John Packer.
A spokesman at Lambeth Palace said Williams was fully behind the bishops’ initiative. “As a president of the Children’s Society the archbishop fully supports the proposed amendments to the welfare reform bill.”
Sentamu also threw his weight behind the changes. “I hope that the government will listen to the concerns being raised and ensure that children, especially the most vulnerable, are protected from cuts to family benefits.”
And the newspaper has published an editorial article in support: The welfare state: the social glue that binds us must be preserved.
Here’s the original analysis by the Children’s Society to the capping proposal: More than 200,000 children to be biggest “losers” of Benefit Cap.
15 CommentsThe Bishop of London has issued this pastoral letter: Do this in remembrance of me.
A Pastoral Letter from the Bishop of London on the Eucharistic Life of the Church in London
A PDF version is available here.
His comments on the Ordinariate and the use of Roman liturgical texts by Anglicans in London are copied below the fold. The following excerpt is addressed primarily to other parts of the diocese:
29 CommentsOur liturgy is one which arises from the command of Jesus Christ, “Do this in remembrance of me” not in order to build a temple made with hands but to build his body which the gospel writers say has replaced the physical temple.
It follows from all this that obeying his command is an integral part of Christian discipleship. In this context there are a number of aspects of our own church life which deserve urgent consideration at the present time.
In some parts of our church it can appear that the service of Holy Communion is an appendix to services of the Word and not accorded the central significance which the express command of Jesus would seem to warrant. The reformers of our own church, Cranmer and Ridley [as Bishop of London] desired more frequent communion than was the practice in the late mediaeval Western church. Calvin also commends weekly eucharistic practice in his Institutes [IV: xvii. 46], “At least once in every week the table of the Lord ought to have been spread before each congregation of Christians.”
Despite the teaching of the early Reformers their intention was overtaken later in the 16th century by a near exclusive focus in some parts of the church on the ministry of the Word.
The recent conclusion of more than twenty years work has resulted in a wealth of provision for celebrating the liturgy. Styles will differ in tune with the culture of different parishes and communities and provision has been made for rich variety but there should be a common core and not least our celebrations of the Eucharist on Sunday, the Day of Resurrection.
Updated
The Diocese of Truro voted today on the Anglican Covenant, and rejected it.
According to our correspondent, the voting was over two-thirds against it in both houses. We will report the actual figures as soon as we can.
Update (very belatedly)
Bishops: For: 0 Against: 1 Abstentions: 0
Clergy: For: 5 Against: 18 Abstentions: 3
Laity: For: 8 Against: 28 Abstentions: 3
The Diocese of Birmingham voted today on the Anglican Covenant, and rejected it.
According to our correspondent, the voting was:
Bishops 1 for. (Suffragan bishop absent).
Clergy 17 for, 17 against, 1 abstention.
Laity 12 for, 25 against, 1 abstention.
10 CommentsUpdated Friday 25 November
The Chapter issued this statement on Wednesday:
The Chapter of St Paul’s met today (16 November) and issued the following statement
We are committed to maintaining St Paul’s as a sacred space in the heart of London and we are enormously grateful to all Cathedral staff for meeting the challenges of recent weeks.
We recognise the local authority’s statutory right to proceed with the action it has today.
We have always desired a peaceful resolution and the Canons will continue to hold regular meetings with representative of the protesters.
We remain committed to continuing and developing the agenda on some of the important issues raised by the protest.
Ed Beavan at the Church Times reports today that St Paul’s stays cool as City turns up heat.
Peter Walker and Riazat Butt report in the Guardian that Occupy London: business as usual as eviction deadline passes.
Meanwhile, Giles Fraser also writes for the Guardian that Occupy St Paul’s: no church should insulate itself from raw human need.
And there is a helpful backgrounder on the legal issues by Giles Pinker, see Bid to evict Occupy London is just the start of legal wrangling.
Once again, here is last week’s Church Times press column by Andrew Brown on the coverage of this story, including an explanation of the term “reverse ferret”.
And Christopher Landau wrote about How to stop being a media victim. The fact that Rob Marshall has strongly attacked this article today in the letters to the editor (to which only subscribers have access until next week) should make you want to read it.
Update this letter from Rob Marshall is now available: St Paul’s Cathedral: a PR adviser’s response to criticism, and further reflections. See what you think.
On Monday, the Archbishop of Canterbury spoke at the annual Lord Mayor of London’s Banquet. The full text of his speech is available here.
This was reported by Riazat Butt in the Guardian as Archbishop pays tribute to St Paul’s cathedral clergy for ‘holding balance’.
And Nick Spencer of Theos published Comment: St Paul’s protest has revealed pressures at the heart of the Church at politics.co.uk.
Earlier, the Church of England Mission and Public Affairs Council had published The Church and capitalism (press release, leading to PDF document.)
On Tuesday, Riazat Butt and Shiv Malik at the Guardian reported Occupy London camp given 24 hours to disband or face legal action
Activists camped outside St Paul’s Cathedral will be given 24 hours to remove their tents and equipment before high court proceedings are issued, the City of London corporation said on Tuesday.
Occupy London, which arrived in the churchyard on 15 October, last week rejected a request to scale back part of its camp to allow better fire engine access. The notice applies to tents standing on public highways.
St Paul’s is meeting on Wednesday to decide how to respond to the corporation’s decision. A spokesman said the cathedral was still “working towards a peaceful outcome”.
Stuart Fraser, policy chairman at the corporation, said: “We paused legal action for two weeks for talks with those in the camp on how to shrink the extent of the tents and to set a departure date – but got nowhere. So, sadly, now they have rejected a reasonable offer to let them stay until the new year, it’s got to be the courts. We’d still like to sort this without court action but from now on we will have to have any talks in parallel with court action – not instead…
Cathy Newman at Channel 4 News interviewed Stuart Fraser, see Talks break down between St Paul’s protesters and officials.
The protesters have issued this: Occupy London statement on renewed legal action from the City of London Corporation.
9 CommentsUpdated Saturday night to add Portsmouth results.
Updated Monday morning to add links to reports on diocesan websites of Oxford, Portsmouth and York.
In the final day of diocesan debates, Liverpool, Newcastle, Oxford, Portsmouth, Southwark, and York diocesan synods debated the draft legislation to allow women bishops today. In each case the main motion was
That this Synod approve the proposals embodied in the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure and in Amending Canon No 30.
The CEEC following motion was
This Synod
1. desires that all faithful Anglicans remain and thrive together in the Church of England
2. calls upon the House of Bishops to bring forward amendments to the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure to ensure that those who are unable to accept the ministry of women bishops are able to receive Episcopal oversight from a bishop with authority (i.e. ordinary jurisdiction) conferred by the Measure rather than by delegation from a Diocesan Bishop.
1) Liverpool passed the main motion in all three houses.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 2 0 0 Clergy 40 8 0 Laity 26 12 2
The CEEC following motion was defeated with 16 votes in favour, 61 against and 8 abstentions.
The diocese has promptly published this report: Synod votes in favour of women bishops legislation.
2) Newcastle passed the main motion in all three houses.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 2 0 0 Clergy 34 10 1 Laity 28 7 1
There is a report on the diocesan website: Newcastle Diocesan Synod supports Church of England’s proposals for women bishops.
3) Oxford passed the main motion in all three houses.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 4 0 0 Clergy 46 19 0 Laity 55 15 2
CEEC following motion was divided. Paragraph 1 was overwhelmingly carried. Paragraph 2 was defeated as follows.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 0 4 0 Clergy 19 53 1 Laity 15 52 1
The diocesan website has: Oxford votes for women bishops draft.
4) Portsmouth passed the main motion in all three houses.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 1 0 0 Clergy 36 2 0 Laity 36 6 0
A following motion described as “positive” by our correspondent (a supporter of women in the episcopate) was lost – by 13 votes to 58 with 11 abstentions. A second “negative” following motion was also lost – by 13 votes to 66 with one abstention.
There is a brief report on the home page of the diocesan website.
5) Southwark passed the main motion in all three houses.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 2 0 0 Clergy 50 14 0 Laity 38 13 3
There were three following motions. Details are on the diocesan website: Southwark Diocesan Synod votes for the Women Bishops legislation.
6) York passed the main motion in all three houses.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 3 2 0 Clergy 25 14 1 Laity 42 8 0
This following motion
This Synod calls upon the House of Bishops, in exercise of its powers under Standing Order 60 (b), to amend the draft…Measure in the manner proposed by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York at the Revision Stage for the draft Measure
was carried by 62 votes to 24 with 6 abstentions. Details are on the diocesan website.
70 CommentsPress release from the Church of England: Archbishops question case for elected House of Lords.
The Archbishops of Canterbury and York question the rationale for a wholly or mainly elected House of Lords in their submission to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Government’s Draft Bill and White Paper (the submission can be read on the CofE website).
Whilst welcoming the Draft Bill’s proposals to provide continued places for bishops of the established Church in a partly appointed House, the Archbishops ask that the appointments process also have regard to increasing the presence of leaders of other denominations and faiths.
The Draft Bill and White Paper proposes a House of Lords of 300 members, with either 80% or 100% elected by proportional representation. If the reformed House were to retain an appointed element, there would be places for Church of England bishops, though reduced to 12 from their current 26. Bishops would not be allowed to remain in a 100% elected House under the Government’s plans…
The full submission is available as a PDF file here.
15 CommentsFirst, there were several articles in the Church Times last week, that have only now become available to non-subscribers. Although events have moved on, I list them:
Richard Chartres Time for the Church to be heard
Arnold Hunt Lessons from history at St Paul’s
Paul Vallely Turn the debate back to the money
Andrew Brown Press: With the Express on their side
…FROM a PR point of view, there was a special difficulty with the whole story. The Church of England is widely misunderstood to be an organisation. Therefore, the man at the top is expected to be able to control his subordinates. Thus the wider Church, which largely disagreed with the Chapter’s line, was unable to say anything to criticise it.
But these difficulties are made to be overcome. The fact that the cathedral had outsourced its PR to the Revd Rob Marshall, a nice man but one based outside Hull, suggests that the Church is so used to being ignored that, when the country was, for a moment, interested in its opinions, it was almost entirely unable to handle it.
Now, turning to this week’s issue:
Ed Thornton Church support for camps is tested by protesters’ conduct
…Senior clerics this week expressed unease at the way that St Paul’s had initially responded to the protesters. The Bishop of Salisbury, the Rt Revd Nick Holtam, told Salisbury diocesan synod last Saturday that the threat to evict the protesters “showed the cathedral as willing to use the power of the City of London to protect itself, which is the very thing that worries the rest of us.
“Whilst it is not clear from the New Testament whether the Church is of, with, or for the poor, the Church isn’t credible if we don’t attempt something along one of those lines. St Paul’s seem not to have asked themselves that root question, and they lacked the instinct to respond to the great opportunity of a crisis.”The Bishop of St Edmundsbury & Ipswich, the Rt Revd Nigel Stock, said this week that he “was not alone in being astonished that the decision was taken to close St Paul’s”. The decision to reopen the cathedral, and the high-profile resignations of the Dean and the Canon Fraser “increased the impressions of chaos”.
In an article published on his diocesan website, the Bishop of Coventry, Dr Christopher Cocksworth, wrote of the “irony of careful, professional, well-meaning advice on managing a potentially dangerous and threatening situation closing the doors on the gospel practices of hospitality, engagement and the patient building of trusting relationships.”
St Paul’s had, though, managed to realign itself, he said, “through some brave decisions, some courageous public contrition, and decisive leadership from the Bishop of London”. This helped to “open up an opportunity for real debate on the matters that really do count”.
and also
We shan’t listen to advice, say bankers
…Seventy-six per cent of those surveyed in the report disagreed — most of them strongly — with the statement: “The City of London needs to listen more to the guidance of the Church.” In addition, 47 per cent said that they “never attend a religious service or meeting, apart from special occasions”, and 38 per cent said that they did not believe in God…
Leader Restoring a human scale to the City
0 CommentsTHERE are perhaps other interpretations, but it is reassuring that 76 per cent of the bankers interviewed for the St Paul’s Institute do not think that they should listen more to the guidance of the Church. Had they thought otherwise, and the present injustices of the City been practised by sermon-listening citizens, it would have pointed to a much more fundamental problem than the Church’s being just a bit feeble at putting its arguments across. Now, at least, its task is clear: to develop the sort of knowledge that professionals in the financial sector will respect, and use it to argue the case for the imposition of the checks and balances that will bring the City back in touch with some sort of moral code…
The Group for Rescinding the Act of Synod (GRAS) has published a table (the “Furlong Table”) showing how far the Church of England is from gender equality in 2000, 2005 and now 2010.
The 2010 table is below the fold, and below is the accompanying press release giving an explanation and GRAS’s commentary on the figures.
PRESS RELEASE 9.45am
THURSDAY 10 NOVEMBER 2011
GRAS (GROUP FOR RESCINDING THE ACT OF SYNOD)
The Furlong Table 2010
Figures show that The Church of the England is a Third of the way to Gender Equality
The Furlong Table was first produced for GRAS, and is named in honour of the late Monica Furlong, who first suggested that these statistics be gathered. The table uses official Church of England statistics and published data. It combines the percentage of women employed as clergy in each diocese with a score indicating the percentage of women in senior posts. The first table was published in 2000, with an update in 2005. The 2010 statistics have just become available, and so we can now reveal movement in women’s employment and deployment in the Church of England over a full decade, from 2000 to 2010.
A perfect score in this table would be 100, representing 50% of senior clergy and 50% of all other full time stipendiary clergy in a diocese being female.
On average, the Church of England is a third of the way to gender equality: the average score across all dioceses is 34.9. This remains disappointing, but is a significant improvement on the position in 2005, when the average score was 25.8. Since 2000 the average score has nearly doubled, from 18.6 to 34.9, so things are moving in the right direction.
The top-scoring diocese in 2010 was St.Edmundsbury & Ipswich. Their score of 60.7 represents them being nearly two thirds of the way to gender equality, and a more than doubling of their score (up 117%) from 2005.
Most dioceses have improved their scores from 2005. Winchester, the most improved diocese, has increased its score by 135% from 13.5 to 31.8.
Five other dioceses can be congratulated on over 100% improvement: Canterbury, Birmingham, Exeter, Portsmouth and (from a very low starting point!) Chichester.
There are signs of some complacency amongst dioceses that were highly ranked in 2005. Oxford, which topped the table in 2005, has increased its score by a respectable 15%, but the 2nd and 3rd ranked in 2005, St.Albans and Ely, have each improved by less than 1%.
As the Church of England moves towards the final vote on women bishops in July 2012, these figures confirm that there is a great pool of untapped talent among the female clergy.
The diocesan synod of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich has debated the Anglican Covenant, and voted against the motion put to it by the General Synod, i.e.
“That this Synod approve the draft Act of Synod adopting the Anglican Communion Covenant”.
The voting was as follows:
For Against Abstentions Bishops 2 0 0 Clergy 9 29 4 Laity 8 33 9
The papers provided in advance for this debate can be found here.
More details of the meeting will be posted on the diocesan website soon.
4 CommentsUpdated again Thursday morning
The Guardian has published a news report by Riazat Butt concerning an article published on 28 October in the Church of England Newspaper.
Anglican newspaper defends ‘Gaystapo’ article.
An Anglican newspaper has defended the publication of an article that compares gay rights campaigners to Nazis, saying the author has “pertinent views”.
The column, by former east London councillor Alan Craig, appeared in the 28 October edition of the Church of England Newspaper, one of the oldest newspapers in the world. Although it is independent of the institution bearing the same name, it carries adverts for Church of England jobs and is read by its clergy…
The full text of the original article can be found here.
Although the formatting is hard to decipher, you can see some of the CEN letters to the editor which are referred to in the article, by going here.
See also this article on the Anglican Mainstream website, whose trustees etc. are listed here. This extract from the article by Alan Craig is not linked or credited to the CEN.
Updates
Alan Wilson has written at Cif belief Hitler and the ‘Gaystapo’ have no place in gay rights debate
Nick Baines has written Allo Allo?
50 CommentsThe report from St Paul’s Institute that was recently delayed is now published.
See Value and Values: Perceptions of Ethics in the City Today
Download the full report from here. (PDF, 1.6 Mb)
From the press release:
Professionals in the Financial Services sector believe that City bond traders, FTSE Chief Executives and stock brokers are paid too much, teachers are paid too little and that there is too great a gap between rich and poor in the UK, according to a survey carried out by ComRes on behalf of St Paul’s Institute.
Marking the 25th anniversary of the financial ‘Big Bang’, the survey also indicates that the majority of Financial Services professionals do not know that the London Stock Exchange’s motto is ‘My Word is My Bond’ and many think that deregulation of financial markets results in less ethical behaviour…
From the Notes:
3 CommentsBecause the report was completed preceding the Occupy London encampment outside the cathedral it makes no mention of it and contains contributions from both the former Dean and Canon Chancellor of St Paul’s Cathedral. We are releasing the report in its original and unaltered form. The report was always intended to help develop a context for serious engagement that moves beyond colloquialisms about the financial sector and towards an understanding of true opinion and the culture of ethics in the City today.
Independent Matt Thomas, Brian Brady We are paid too much, bankers confess in St Paul’s survey
Mail Jonathan Petre and Lawrie Holmes St Paul’s Cathedral funded by 80 wealthy City asset-strippers
Yorkshire Post John Sentamu Our unequal, unjust society… the richest are getting richer and the poorest lose all hope
Telegraph Ken Costa St Paul’s initiative: ‘It’s time for radical change’
Joan Bakewell My verdict on the St Paul’s protest
Observer Yvonne Roberts Is capitalism broken… and what is the world going to do to fix it?
Guardian Richard Coles St Paul’s, the church’s reality check
4 CommentsThe report below will be updated as more details become available.
Updated Sunday evening to add Derby votes, and again to correct the bishops’ votes and to add to the Chester details.
Updated Wednesday morning to add Coventry breakdown from WATCH website and Derby abstentions and Bradford votes and following motions.
Updated Wednesday evening to correct Coventry breakdown.
Updated again Wednesday evening to clarify what actually happened to the following motion at Coventry
Updated Sunday 13 November to add link to updated Coventry press release.
Bradford, Chester, Coventry, Derby, and Lincoln diocesan synods debated the draft legislation to allow women bishops yesterday. In each case the main motion was
That this Synod approve the proposals embodied in the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure and in Amending Canon No 30.
1) Bradford passed the main motion in all three houses.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 1 0 0 Clergy 22 9 1 Laity 22 14 3
The synod also passed two following motions.
This Synod desires that all faithful Anglicans remain and thrive together in the C of E and therefore calls upon the House of Bishops to bring forward amendments to the draft Bishops and priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) measure to ensure that those unable on theological grounds to accept the ministry of woman bishops are able to receive episcopal oversight from a bishop with authority (ie ordinary jurisdiction) conferred by the Measure rather than by delegation from a Diocesan Bishop
voting: for 41; against 18; abstentions 5
This Synod deplores the exemption in the Measure from the Equalities Act, and requests the HoB to produce a Code of Practice or other measure which does not require the Cof E to continue legal discrimination against women
voting; for 51; against 4; abstentions 12
Our correspondent points out that these two motions are incompatible.
2) Chester passed the main motion in all three houses.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 2 0 2 Clergy 46 21 3 Laity 50 15 3
This following motion
This Synod
1. Desires that all faithful Anglicans remain and thrive together in the Church of England; and therefore request the General Synod to debate a motion in the following form:
“That this synod [ie the General Synod] call upon the House of Bishops, in exercise of its powers under standing order 60(b), to amend the draft Bishops and Priests[Consecration and Ordination of Women] Measure in the manner propose by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York at the Revision Stage for the draft Measure
was voted on by houses, and failed because the vote was tied in the house of laity.
Details are on the diocesan website.
3) Coventry has issued this press release. This gives the votes on the main motion as 71 votes in favour, 6 votes against, 5 abstentions, but there is no breakdown by houses.
Coventry has issued (on 13 November) an updated version of the press release with full details of the votes in each house on the main motion.
WATCH gives this breakdown by houses, but there is clearly a mistake somewhere as the total of votes in favour is only 47.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 2 0 0 Clergy 35 2 4 Laity 34 4 1
There was extensive debate on a following motion, to which an amendment was proposed. The amended motion eventually read as follows:
This Synod:
• Desires that all faithful Anglicans remain and thrive together in the Church of England;
• And supports efforts being made by the Diocese to achieve reconciliation; and therefore,
• Calls upon the House of Bishops to ensure that sufficient provision is made within the Code of Practice for those who cannot in conscience agree with the Measure.
• Calls upon the House of Bishops to bring forward amendments to the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure to ensure that those unable on theological grounds to accept the ministry of women bishops are able to receive episcopal oversight from the bishop with authority (i.e. ordinary jurisdiction) conferred by the Measure rather than by delegation from a Diocesan Bishop
Each of the four sections was voted upon separately.
The first three were carried by substantial majorities. The fourth one was rejected: 17 votes in favour, 58 votes against, 3 abstentions.
There were two following motions
This Synod:
• Desires that all faithful Anglicans remain and thrive together in the Church of England;
• And supports efforts being made by the Diocese to achieve reconciliation; and therefore,
• Calls upon the House of Bishops to ensure that sufficient provision is made within the Code of Practice for those who cannot in conscience agree with the Measure.
was carried by a substantial majority.
This Synod calls upon the House of Bishops to bring forward amendments to the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure to ensure that those unable on theological grounds to accept the ministry of women bishops are able to receive episcopal oversight from the bishop with authority (i.e. ordinary jurisdiction) conferred by the Measure rather than by delegation from a Diocesan Bishop.
was rejected: 17 votes in favour, 58 votes against, 3 abstentions.
4) Derby passed the main motion.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 2 0 0 Clergy 18 7 1 Laity 27 10 3
The CEEC following motion was defeated.
That this Synod
1. Desires that all faithful Anglicans remain and thrive together in the Church of England; and therefore
2. Calls upon the House of Bishops to bring forward amendments to the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure to ensure that those unable, on theological grounds, to accept the ministry of Women Bishops are able to receive episcopal oversight from a Bishop with authority (i.e. ordinary jurisdiction) conferred by the Measure rather than by delegation from a Diocesan Bishop.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 0 2 Clergy 8 18 Laity 12 27
5) At Lincoln the main motion in favour of the legislation was passed in all three houses.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 2 0 0 Clergy 39 9 3 Laity 40 5 2
There were two following motions, which were both defeated.
This Synod
1. Desires that all faithful Anglicans remain and thrive together in the Church of England; and therefore
2. Calls upon the House of Bishops to bring forward amendments to the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure to ensure that those unable on theological grounds to accept the ministry of women bishops are able to receive Episcopal oversight from a bishop with authority (ie ordinary jurisdiction) conferred by the measure rather than by delegation from a Diocesan Bishop.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 0 1 1 Clergy 18 27 5 Laity 13 38 4
This Synod calls upon the House of Bishops to bring forward amendments to the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure to ensure that the Measure contains only a single clause permitting the ordination of women to the episcopate in the Church of England.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 0 1 1 Clergy 5 38 8 Laity 3 41 10
The diocese has issued a press release.
18 CommentsToday’s Church Times has extensive coverage, some of which will not be available to non-subscribers until next week.
Ed Thornton Dean goes, Chartres steps in, as St Paul’s turns 180 degrees
Also Cameron comes out in support of Dr Williams
And scroll down that page for Ed Beavan Protesters are tired but sympathetic.
Giles Fraser Sitting on a fault-line at St Paul’s
Leader St Paul’s: going in the right direction
There is also comment elsewhere:
Economist Bells and yells
Telegraph Martin Beckford, and Victoria Ward Giles Fraser: Church risks being ‘spiritual arm of heritage industry’
And Nick Baines has written Playing the game.
9 CommentsWe have previously reported on the proposals of the Dioceses Commission on the four Yorkshire dioceses of Bradford, Ripon & Leeds, Sheffield and Wakefield, and their boundaries with the Diocese of York in July and last December.
The Dioceses Commission has now begun the formal consultation phase of its proposals for the Yorkshire dioceses with the publication of a Draft Dioceses of Bradford, Ripon and Leeds and Wakefield Reorganisation Scheme. The Commission’s report, draft scheme and associated documents can be read at www.diocom.org/yorkshire.
There is also this press release, Formal consultation begins on reorganisation of West Yorkshire dioceses, which is copied below the fold.
5 Comments