I wrote a report of the July 2005 General Synod for Anglicans Online a little while ago; you can read it here. I have done one of these for every Synod meeting for the last quinquennium; they are all linked from here (near the bottom of the page). There are also a few earlier ones here.
0 CommentsThe quinquennial synod election season is upon us. This article provides links to national (not local diocesan) sites that contain information relevant to these elections. Provision of a link here does not imply endorsement of any campaigning group by Thinking Anglicans. If we have omitted a group that you think should be included, write a Comment.
Church of England: General Synod Election 2005
Note: deadline dates vary from diocese to diocese. Check your local diocesan website for details.
Open Synod Group
Affirming Catholicism
InclusiveChurch
Reform
Forward in Faith
The Church of England website now includes the answers to questions and transcripts of some of the debates from last month’s meeting of General Synod.
Links to the transcripts can be found here.
0 CommentsAs this information is not yet available online elsewhere, the textual amendments contained in GS 1535C are reproduced below the fold.
UPDATE (26 July 2005)
This paper (which includes an explanation of the bishops’ actions) is now available on the CofE website.
Church Times
Women bishops clear first hurdle in Synod
Women bishops: law to be tackled
Admitting children to communion is ‘gaining ground’
Euthanasia rejected as ‘bad medicine’
Southwell name
Ordinal passed after last-minute changes
presidential address
Synod hears of impatience for unity
‘Learn from good interfaith experience’ Synod told
Fund launched to fight poverty gets Synod backing
Code for clergy discipline agreed
standing orders
‘In God we trust – but everybody else we audit’
synod revue
Hind follow-up
parochial fees
2006 budget
Farewells
Church of England Newspaper reports are below the fold.
0 CommentsThe official record of the business done at this month’s General Synod is now online here.
0 CommentsOn Saturday evening, the General Synod considered the subject of euthanasia, in the context of legislation recently before the UK Parliament. Christopher Herbert, Bishop of St Albans opened the debate with this speech.
The synod briefing document is Assisted Suicide and Voluntary Euthanasia (RTF format)
A press release from the Diocese of St Albans is here
Press coverage:
Daily Mail Synod prays after rejecting bill
Press Association
Synod prays after rejecting bill
Euthanasia ‘motivated by cost’
The Archbishop of Canterbury said he fears moves towards legalising voluntary euthanasia were being motivated by the need for cost-cutting in healthcare.
Dr Rowan Williams reaffirmed his opposition to euthanasia and assisted suicide at a meeting of the the General Synod of the Church of England, in York.
The archbishop said: “This is not simply a debate about medical ethics, it’s also about economic ethics.
“In a climate where the pressure is all towards a functionalised, reduced style of healthcare provision, this (assisted dying) must be a very, very tempting option to save money and resources.
“We have to be honest about this but we have to recognise that this is also an economic question and therefore a question about power.”
Speaker after speaker at The Synod spoke against the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill which was introduced by Lord Joffe in the House of Lords last year and is likely to return to parliament later this year.
Many members gave moving personal accounts of the deaths of terminally ill relatives before The Synod voted resoundingly to continue The Church’s opposition.
In September last year, Anglican and Roman Catholic bishops issued a joint statement opposing Lord Joffe’s Bill which concluded: “It is deeply misguided to propose a law by which it would be legal for terminally ill people to be killed or assisted in suicide by those caring for them.”
The Synod voted by 293 votes to just one to support that stance.
Liverpool Daily Post Church leaders’ attack on voluntary euthanasia Bill
19 CommentsUPDATE
The voting on the motion (as amended) was as follows:
Bishops: 41 in favour, 6 against
Clergy: 167 in favour, 46 against
Laity: 159 in favour, 75 against
The motion was therefore CARRIED.
The final text of the motion was:
That this Synod
(a) consider that the process for removing the legal obstacles to the ordination of women to the episcopate should now be set in train;
(b) invite the House of Bishops, in consultation with the Archbishops’ Council, to complete by January 2006, and report to the Synod, the assessment which it is making of the various options for achieving the removal of the legal obstacles to the ordination of women to the episcopate, and ask that it give specific attention to the issues of canonical obedience and the universal validity of orders throughout the Church of England as it would affect clergy and laity who cannot accept the ordination of women to the episcopate on theological grounds; and
(c) instruct the Business Committee to make sufficient time available in the February 2006 group of sessions for the Synod to debate the report, and in the light of the outcome to determine on what basis it wants the necessary legislation prepared and establish the necessary drafting group.’
————
Four amendments have been put down for debate. The text of these will be published here below the fold, in the order in which they are going to be considered. The original motion is here.
The Bishop of Gibraltar in Europe formally moved his amendment. Voting FOR the amendment was effectively to vote AGAINST the original motion.
It was very clearly lost on a show of hands. There was more support for it, though, than I had expected.
The Archdeacon of Norwich’s amendment, similarly but very quickly, also lost.
It is now clear that the concept of delay has been rejected decisively by the synod.
The last two amendments were then debated.
The Archdeacon of Berkshire moved his amendment. After debate, it was PASSED by 233 votes to 216.
The fourth amendment by Dr Bridger was not resisted by the Bishop of Southwark and quickly passed on a show of hands.
The debate subsequently completed, and a vote by houses is taking place. It seems very likely now that this motion will pass.
41 CommentsRowan Williams delivered his presidential address to the General Synod meeting at York. The full text of this is already available on his own website.
A substantial portion of it was devoted to the recent Anglican Consultative Council meeting.
1 CommentFINANCE COMMITTEE
Mr Michael Chamberlain to reply as Chairman of the Finance Committee
Dr Susan Cooper (London) to ask the Chairman of the Finance Committee:
Q52 What are the financial implications for the Church of England of the Episcopal Church (USA) and the Anglican Church of Canada voluntarily withdrawing from the meetings and committees of the Anglican Consultative Council for the period up to the next Lambeth Conference?
Answer:
Financial implications would arise for the Church of England only if the Anglican Consultative Council were to approach us for an increase in our contribution. We have received no such approach. The budget which the Synod will be asked to approve on Monday incorporates a 3% increase in our contribution on 2006, the same as the increase between 2004 and 2005.
HOUSE OF BISHOPS
The Bishop of Peterborough to reply on behalf of the Chairman
The Revd Jonathan Baker (Oxford) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q14 What attempts has the House of Bishops so far made to seek the views of other episcopal churches about the proposal to admit women to the historic episcopate?
Mr Martin Dales (York) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q15 Have all our ecumenical friends been consulted and given sufficient time for their theological reflection on the report Women Bishops in the Church of England, only published last autumn?
Mrs Margaret Tilley (Canterbury) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q16 Why has the House of Bishops thought it appropriate to invite the Synod to take a decision of principle whether or not to ordain women as bishops before receiving any responses from our ecumenical partners?
Mr James Cheeseman (Rochester) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q17 What attempts has the House of Bishops so far made to seek the views of other episcopally led churches about the possibility of ordaining women to the historic episcopate?
Mrs Mary Nagel (Chichester) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q18 Has there been any correspondence on behalf of the House with the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity on the possible inclusion of women in the episcopate since the publication of the Rochester Report?
Mrs Maryon Jägers (Europe) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q19 Given that the Rochester Working Party recommended that the Anglican Communion be invited to make responses to its report, what steps have been taken to elicit those responses and with what results?
Answer:
With permission, Madam Chairman, I should like to answer the questions from the Revd Jonathan Baker, Mr Dales, Mrs Tilley, Mr Cheeseman, Mrs Nagel, and Mrs Jägers together.
The House of Bishops proposed in February that the Synod should have the opportunity at this group of sessions to decide whether it wished to start down the legislative road to enable women to become bishops. In making that proposal, which the Synod accepted, the House had been mindful of the diocesan synod motions already passed on the subject. What decisions if any to take now will of course be for the Synod itself to determine on Monday.
As to ecumenical views, a Methodist and a Roman Catholic served on the Rochester Working Party. Our ecumenical partners and other Provinces of the Anglican Communion were indeed sent copies of the report Women Bishops in the Church of England? [GS1557] on its publication last year and were invited to submit a response. Some ecumenical partner churches have now done so (and copies are available for inspection at the Information Desk); other responses are awaited.
4 CommentsHOUSE OF BISHOPS
The Bishop of Chelmsford to reply as Chairman of the Bishops’ Committee for Ministry
Mrs Jane Pitts (Liverpool) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q10 In view of the harm the Church of England has inflicted on itself in its polarized arguments over the understanding of sexuality as a whole, would the House of Bishops consider not asking clerical candidates for any posts personal questions about their sexual orientation or attitudes to the same, with a view to respecting the individual’s conscience before God in this deeply felt issue?
Answer:
As is clear from the Ordinal under discussion at this Group of Sessions, clergy make public undertakings to ‘fashion their life according to the way of Christ’. They also make an Oath of Canonical Obedience to their bishop. Bishops have a duty, in confidence, to explore with a priest all matters which are affected by the oaths and declarations which they make. All such conversations should be conducted with great sensitivity and respect.
The House of Bishops’ teaching as set out in Issues in Human Sexuality represents the position of the House. There is a proper expectation that clergy should hold to its discipline.
14 CommentsHOUSE OF BISHOPS
The Bishop of Peterborough to reply as a member of the House’s Civil Partnerships sub-group
The Revd Paul Collier (Southwark) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q11 Will the proposed Pastoral Statement on Civil Partnerships address the question of how a bishop should act if clergy such as myself exercise our right to enter a Civil Partnership, alongside a joyful celebration of a relationship of love, fidelity and commitment, and at the same time refuse to answer any questions about our private life, including whether the relationship is a sexual one or not?
The Revd Stephen Coles (London) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q12 Synod was told in February that a report was being prepared in good time for the first registration of civil partnerships this December. Can Synod be given an update on the progress of this Pastoral Statement as there have already been some suggestive reports in the media about its contents?
The Revd Canon Paul Brett (Chelmsford) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q13 Is it true, as reported in the Church Times on 3 June that, if Church of England clergy wish to register civil partnerships under the new legislation, they will be required to assure their bishops that their relationships are ‘not sexual’ and, if so, how will a bishop ascertain whether such a relationship is sexual or not?
Answer:
With permission, Madam Chairman, I should like to answer the questions from the Revd Paul Collier, the Revd Stephen Coles and Canon Paul Brett together. The Bishop of Norwich, who chairs the House of Bishops’ sub-group of which I am a member, has been taking a funeral this afternoon and is sorry not to be here.
The House has now had two discussions of the implications of the new legislation that will come into force on 5 December. It has agreed to issue a Pastoral Statement and that is likely to be ready for issue within the next few weeks.
I do not intend to answer questions now based on press reporting of what the statement may or may not be going to say. Let me instead simply urge Synod to study the document calmly and prayerfully when it appears.
0 CommentsQuestions to be answered at this weekend’s General Synod are now online. The answers will be given tonight starting at 8.30pm.
0 CommentsA few more Synod papers have appeared since my earlier lists here and here.
GS 1582 Archbishops’ Council’s Annual Report 2004
Report of Proceedings – February 2005
And there’s now a zipped version of one file which reduces its size from 20 to 2.6 MB.
GS 1577 Presence and Engagement
0 CommentsTo put into context the letter recently published arguing for further delay in the process of deciding about women bishops in the Church of England, the full wording of the motion to be debated is published below the fold.
The motion does not, as was the expectation earlier, ask synod to decide anything about the specific options for proceeding (see here for what the Rochester report said about options.)
It only asks for a decision yes/no about proceeding further at all.
If a yes decision is made, it asks that a further report be published before the February 2006 synod meeting and that options should be debated at that time. (No action on this topic is proposed for the November 2005 meeting.) A committee of the House of Bishops chaired by Christopher Hill is already working on this report.
2 CommentsAs well as the remaining papers for debate at next month’s meeting of General Synod (already listed by me here) the following papers have now been sent to members.
None of the papers below appears to be online.
Getting the Message: A resource pack for communicating the General Synod
GS Misc 780 Bodies Answerable to Synod
GS Misc 781 Children in the Midst
GS Misc 783 Membership of the Archbishops’ Council, its Committees, Boards and Councils and details of their meetings in 2004
GS Misc 786 Clergy Discipline Commission: Annual Report for 2004
GS Misc 787 Review of Marriage Law update
GS Misc 790 Activities of the Archbishops’ Council
GS Misc 792 Implementation of the Church of England’s Strategy for Children
and a covering note from the Bishops of Liverpool and Portsmouth
GS Misc 793 Parish Mission Fund
GS Misc 794 Review of Senior Church Appointments [see below for the text of this paper]
HB(05)2 Summary of decisions of the most recent meeting of the House of Bishops (25-26 May 2005)
GS Misc 794
REVIEW OF SENIOR CHURCH APPOINTMENTS
1. As members will recall, at the last Group of Sessions the Synod passed a resolution requesting the Archbishops’ Council:
‘to commission a working party (to be chaired by a person independent of the Council and the Synod) to review and make recommendations (without limitation) as to the law and practice regarding appointments to the offices of suffragan bishop, dean, archdeacon and residentiary canon’
2. A review group has now been appointed. It will be chaired by Sir Joseph Pilling, who is due to retire as Permanent Under-Secretary of State at the Northern Ireland Office this autumn. The other members of the group are:
Canon Dr Christina Baxter (Southwell)
Canon Professor Michael Clarke (Worcester)
Mr Aiden Hargreaves-Smith (London)
The Rt Revd Jack Nicholls, Bishop of Sheffield
The Revd Rod Thomas (Exeter)
The Very Revd Robert Willis, Dean of Canterbury
The Revd Canon Lucy Winkett
3. David Williams (Clerk to the Synod) will serve as an Assessor to the Group and Dr Colin Podmore will be its Secretary. The Archbishops’ Secretary for Appointments, Caroline Boddington, will be available to support the Group throughout its work. The Group will also be able to call on legal and theological advice from relevant Church House staff, and others, as required.
4. The Group will be meeting immediately before the July Group of Sessions and it is expected that invitations to submit evidence will be issued later in July. A further notice about this will be circulated in due course.
2 CommentsThe main bulk of the papers for next months meeting of General Synod arrived in the post this morning, and are listed below. I’ve also included papers due to be circulated next week (marked with an asterisk).
I’ll add links to online copies as they become available.
GS 1571 Agenda
Friday 8 July Saturday 9 July Sunday 10 July Monday 11 July Tuesday 12 July
GS 1572 Report of the Business Committee
GS 1574 Formation for Ministry within a Learning Church: Reviewing Progress
GS 1575 Assisted Suicide and Voluntary Euthanasia: Report by the Mission and Public Affairs Council *
GS 1576 Children and Holy Communion *
Annex 1
Annex 2
GS 1577 Presence and Engagement [This is a 20 MB (sic) document.]
GS Misc 788 Covering Note from the Mission and Public Affairs Council
GS 1578 Thirty-Ninth Report of the Standing Orders Committee
First Notice Paper (listing proposed amendments to standing orders)
GS 1579 Church Urban Fund: A New Future
GS Misc 789 Covering Note from the Mission and Public Affairs Council
GS 1580 Strategic Spending Review
GS 1580A Accountability and Transparency
GS 1580B Resourcing Mission
Annex A Annex B Annex C Annex D Annex E
GS Misc 782 Review of Administrative Costs *
GS 1583 Annual Report of the Archbishops’ Council’s Audit Committee
GS 1582 Archbishops’ Council’s Annual Report *
In the Spirit of the Covenant: Report of the Joint Implementation Commission
GS Misc 784 Covering Note by the CCU
Listing continues below the fold.
0 CommentsThe interim Report of the Joint Implementation Commission under the covenant between the Methodist Church and the Church of England – In the Spirit of the Covenant – has just been published. It is online here. It’s quite substantial – 112 A5 pages plus appendices.
The report will be debated at the Methodist Conference later this month and at General Synod In July.
The Methodist Church website carries a news item on the report here.
0 CommentsHidden away at the bottom of the Church of England’s papers webpage is this item.
Resourcing Mission Group
The Resourcing Mission Group was one of the groups created by the Archbishops in 2004 following the adjournment by General Synod of the consultation document GS1529: “Future use of the Church Commissioners Funds”. This is the Group’s interim report, on which the Church’s views are being invited. Its final report will be prepared in the autumn after the consultation process has finished.
Main report 179kb
Annex A 26kb
Annex B 72kb
Annex C 27kb
Annex D 36kb (Excel document)
Additional Annex 49kb
The terms of reference of the group were “to identify achievable ways in which the financial and other resources of the Church of England might be best deployed (a) to secure their equitable distribution across the Church and (b) to facilitate local mission objectives and plans”.
Nothing about the consultation process has appeared on the CofE news page or on the rather obscure Church Commissioners’ own news page so it is unclear where comments should be sent. I suggest “Resourcing Mission Group Secretariat” at Church House Westminster.
0 Comments