The nomination period for this year’s elections to General Synod has closed. Dioceses are now required to post candidates’ election addresses on their websites before sending out voting papers. Some of these have already appeared, and the remainder should be available shortly. I am compiling a list of links to all the addresses, which you can find here. I will update this list as more information becomes available. So far as I am aware there is no similar requirement for the special constituencies.
The timetable for the election is:
I am also compiling a list of the members of the new synod here.
Additions and corrections to either list can be emailed to me here.
If you are planning to download any election addresses for future reference I advise you to do so now. Past experience tells me that some dioceses remove the addresses from their website as soon as voting ends.
Update: The election address of each elected candidate must be kept on the diocesan website until the new Synod is dissolved, or the person ceases to be a member if that is earlier.
Update: I have added the numbers of members to be elected in each constituency to my list of members. I have taken these from GS 2431.
Thanks for your hard work in compiling this list.
Are there fewer clergy candidates than in previous election? Only six each in Guildford, Winchester and St Edmundsbury & Ipswich.
Is this indicative of the reduction in clergy numbers since the last election ?Or are the clergy busier now with less time for General Synod.
Yes thank you – this is so helpful. Good that Exeter has contested elections, 10 clergy for 5 places and 15 laity for 5 places. But my goodness the election addresses need careful reading! More between the lines than in the lines themselves. I guess twas ever thus, but particularly important to be sure where to put your vote this time
Anne Foreman
member GS 1991-2021
A lot of spot the ConEvo is going to go on, especially with the laity. It’s more transparent with the clergy all of the candidates being known to many electors. It does cut both ways, but to a lesser extent. Inclusive candidates are keen to be clear about where they stand, but in my diocese there are candidates who are silent on LLF, but probably more liberal generally. I will do some analysis and report back!!
Anthony Archer
GS 1993-2010; 2015-2021
Some of the con evo clergy are being pretty evasive also. I’ve noted the attempts to redefine inclusion around the bits of it they agree with and just leave out mention of the bits they don’t. Presumably that’s to dupe those who don’t want to spend time reading between the lines but who are looking for the headline key words. So far I’ve seen that in 6 addresses by clergy I know to be con evo. Not many, but I haven’t spent that much time going through the list.
Are ConEvo’s really the enemy? It sounds like it. Also sounds like little boxes.
How many are from complementarians from either wing, but hiding it? How many have abused female priests but are hiding it? How many are ‘smells and bells’ but are hiding it?
Yes, I object to the term ‘happy clappy’ and I object to the term ‘smells and bells’, unless they really are focussed on smells and bells.
There has been a bit of a track record of certain conevos not declaring their true views – e.g. saying they support the ministry of women but not saying ‘so long as they are not ordained’. Other groups probably do this too but it is the conevo constituency where it has been an observable trend. And did not some conevo group actually advise candidates to hide their views on such matters once?
Yes – I think it was the CEEC last time around who secretly briefed candidates how to make a more general statement and hide their views on woman and sexuality. It got leaked.
A local CoE church talks about gafcon which certainly has a restricted view of the ministy of women. https://gafcon.org/priorities/womens-ministry/ I think my worry is that ‘some of’ and ‘certain’ may be misread as meaning ‘all’. Maybe I am misinformed, but how many evangelical, or conservative evangelicals, disagree with ordination of women? Maybe prominent ones like Jonathan Fletcher, but do the congragations share their views? I would like to think these archaic views will gradually die out. I do not consider them at all central to an evangelical view. HTB supports ordination of women. I would not be amazed if the… Read more »
Randomly in response… yes, most evangelicals in the C of E have supported the ordination of women since before the 1992 vote on women priests – hence REFORM was formed to organise those evangelicals who were opposed and in passing to try to narrow the definition of evangelical to those who believed the correct things about e.g the ordination of women experience shows that opposition to o/w does not die out it is possible to say that you agree with or at least don’t mind about o/w but in practice not be very keen or not do much to support… Read more »
The C of E has only just installed a woman ABC for the first time, so it does take time for leaders to develop, especially were there is no quota system, Trophy wives phenomenon – I don’t recognise it. All part of the culture wars hate speech sadly. No unity, only division. You should be utterly ashamed.
Thanks. I think my main concern is the idea that evangelicals, or even conservative evangelicals, are a homogenous whole. They are not. There is also a disconnect between some evangelical leaders and their congregations.
Of course, deliberately disguising views is reprehensible.
From a statistician’s viewpoint, candidates for GS are not an unbiased sample.
I am a disinterested observer!
According to Wikipedia, which might not get everything spot on, a trophy wife “has little personal merit besides her physical attractiveness, requires substantial expense for maintaining her appearance, is often unintelligent or unsophisticated, does very little of substance beyond remaining attractive, and is in some ways synonymous with the term gold digger.” In a thread a while back it was suggested the ABC might get a new hairstyle. That led to outrage and suggestions that no one would similarly comment on the appearance of a male ABC, which turned out not to be entirely true. Anyhow, given that it was… Read more »
I was not using the term in the way you and Wikipedia are doing. I discourage students from believing what they read on Wikipedia, unless i have written the entry of course!
I know exactly what you mean Charles though I might not use the word trophy. It is not so long ago that the leaders page on the New Wine website carried photos of the (male) list of leaders – and alongside them, photos of their wives. The warden of the Lee Abbey movement is always photographed with his wife beside them. This is a long evangelical tradition the wife as the helper of the man, who leads. It happens in local churches too. Historically single people have had little place in this line up.
Yes i agree it is a long evangelical tradition and one that we should long ago have abandoned – which is the point i was trying to make. Women minister in their own right and not just because of who they are married to. Hence churches that treat the pastor’s wife as ‘in ministry’ by dint of being married to the pastor are not actually promoting the ministry of women – quite the reverse. Interesting that we seldom see pastors’ husbands in such photos! (And of course the ‘trophy’ word was not intended to denigrate said women – only to… Read more »
I notice the HTB plants near me use the term ‘pastor’ as a catch-all, with nothing to suggest whether they’re ordained or not. Is this because ‘priest’ is still off-bounds to a few Evangelicals, or is it a fig-leaf to cover the fact that none of the female pastors are in orders?
The way to address that justifiable concern will be to also include pictures of spouses of female clergy who help with their ministry. I don’t think the tradition should be abandoned. It’s good for families to support each other, and right now the CofE doesn’t have enough money to be able to tell people doing ministry for free not to bother.
David’s point about the lack of place of single people, presumably within evangelical churches, overlooks John Stott, Dick Lucas, Vaughan Roberts – not many but prominent.
it was myself who commented on the ABC hair style! I thought it was fair game, given that in her youth she had been a hair dresser. In the lives of most people, appearance matters, men and women. A dull appearance does nothing to help communicaton. I think I was also thinking about the uniform of certain roles. Male clergy uniform used to be thick rimmed glasses, hair parted in the middle/side, black shoes and trousers, and maybe an old sports jacket. So I was extending this to the possible conventional uniform of female ministers. Or maybe I was just… Read more »
Not *that* Reform, for members of TA who may be thinking the absolute worst. They are now called ReNew… And I think Charles’ comment on HTB and women is out of date – there are now many women clergy leading in HTB affiliated churches.
Charles has beat me to it, Nigel. For me, it’s not a question of them being the enemy, it’s the failure to be up front about their position on things to the point (for some) of deliberately deceiving others that’s the problem. Deliberately saying you’re supportive of inclusion, whilst meaning something other than the conventional understanding of the word, but not setting out what you mean by it is deceptive in my view. It may mislead people into voting for candidates whose views they would not wish to support.
As has been pointed out above, it works both ways for both liberals and conservatives. Both can choose what they wish to reveal about themselves as flawed human beings, but chose not to.
It is a matter of public knowledge that in the last synod elections conservative evangelical candidates were privately briefed to hide their views about woman and sexuality. Something more than personal choice was going on. That was to deliberate mislead the electorate.
I have the DEF sponsored candidate list!!
I was once secretary of a DEF. I cannot now even be a member. I have not changed my views on key credal / evangelical doctrines.
what’s a DEF?
I think it’s Diocesan Evangelical Fellowship.
Diocesan Evangelical Fellowship
The Church of England is a broad church. I am in favour of diversity. The problem for me isn’t conservative evangelicals and their parishes. The problem for me is when they seek to impose their views on everyone else. I am content that conservative evangelicals refuse to marry same sex couples in church but I object very much when they seek to bann any Church of England parish from marrying same sex couples in church.
Diversity yes, Intolerance no.
Ian Paul of Southwell & Nottingham Diocese makes his position perfectly clear in his address. Credit where it’s due for that, I suppose. Other conservative clergy in S&N, not so much.
Could you do a similar analysis for Anglo-Catholic candidates, please?
I don’t think too many traditionalist (FinF , Society ) candidates are standing. However for the Suffragans two catholic” flying bishops ” are standing, and Ebbesfleet the complementation conservative Evangelical.
Does a woman priest head up any HTB church?
In answer to your last question, I am pretty sure the answer is ‘No’. A disgrace.
Simply not true. Near me, Westway (East Acton) and Hounslow for starters.
There are certainly fewer clergy candidates here in Coventry than last time – just 4 candidates for 3 places. I wonder if the turnout will be reduced given the narrower range of options to vote for.
Whereas in Norwich we have more candidates in both Houses than anyone can remember before!
The rules provide that the election addresses of elected candidates must remain on the diocesan website until the dissolution of the next Synod (probably in 2031)
Election addresses shouldn’t be removed when voting ends this year, as presiding officers are required to keep them published until General Synod is next dissolved.
Many of the addresses in Southwell and Nottingham demonstrate that candidates do not know about the function of Synod. Evangelicals are mostly silent about LLF. The Inclusive Church member is clear. The majority of candidates seem to think that Synod can directly enliven parishes, of which there are relatively few. HTB money has created Minsters and similar worship centres. Hardy any refer to the ways in which our Church can relate to wider societal questions. It is grim.
Does the wider society care about LLF? I think the wider society moved on many years ago.
Can you think of any issues where the Synod has been a leader rather than laggard?
So agree with Nigel. I have 2 sounds in my head which I can’t get rid of when I think of the C of E and these ‘issues’! One is of many hooves clattering down the street, and the other is the noise of stable doors being shut after those horses have bolted. What an opportunity has been lost with our navel-gazing and concentration on second order issues. Milton wrote: The hungry sheep look up and are not fed” How much does this apply in our parishes whilst we waste time on issues that are not real for people in… Read more »
Why is what the “Wider Society” thinks about LLF at all relevant ? What the Church of England thinks about LLF is absolutely crucial for this reason. My reading of the Gospels makes the concept of first and second class human beings completely impossible. We should all be equally welcome at God’s table. I would ask the married hetrosexuals reading this “how would you feel if you had been forbidden from getting married in Church” ? I suggest that this rejection would render “the friendly welcome” of the congregation each Sunday pretty meaningless and hollow. Nobody enjoys being treated as… Read more »
I think you misunderstand me. The wider society (not all, but in Europe I would assume most) has long ago accepted people of different sexualities, so they don’t see why it is being discussed, just get on with it.
Are lists of voters published. Can a member of the public contact voters (e.g. using email addresses) arguing for or against specific candidates? If so how is such a list obtained?
The electoral rolls are available to candidates only.
But you should be able to determine who are your own parish’s deanery synod lay reps and talk to them. Encourage them to attend hustings meetings if your diocese is holding them, and encourage them to ask questions. And you can talk to clergy — all licensed clergy are members of their deanery synod.
And indeed to make sure your Deanery Synod reps vote at all. I understand turnout has been about 50% in the past. I find this surprising as I see it as the most important duty of a Deanery Synod member.
About the only duty, I’d say, other than sitting through utterly pointless and tedious evenings.
Someone said a Deanery Synod is a group of well-meaning Anglicans waiting to go home!
Do they vote for Diocesan Synod members too?. They may not always exercise this right/ power as many ( most/ all?) Diocesan Synods have vacancies with more places than candidates for election.
Yes, Deanery Synod members form the electorate for the diocesan synod. Each deanery synod is a separate constituency in these elections. (And clergy and laity are voting in separate elections of course.)
LOL!
Yes it’s rather depressing. I always voted when I was in full time ministry and discussed matters with my two deanery reps. Clearly I was rather eccentric. I gather diocesan hustings are not particularly well attended. Perhaps bishops might suggest that voting is an important duty? I remember on my finals paper in 1969 there was a question ” A church gets the sect it deserves”. Perhaps a church gets the synod it deserves “?.
I just hope that those entitled to vote actually do so. The turn out usually seems to be about 55- 70%
Perry, on a previous thread you suggested reading H..R. McAdoo. I have just finished reading three of his books ( careful reading required! ). I was able to pull my copy of More and Cross from my shelf and review some of the Divines in tandem with the reading. The Mystery of the Eucharist, with Kenneth Stevenson, is most engaging. We have had a proliferation of new Eucharistic Prayers, so definitely of interest and relevance. Canada is celebrating the fiftieth anniversary of the ordination of women the coming November. His book on the subject is interesting in retrospect. Finally, Anglican… Read more »
Re para 3 Rod, not much chance. When I returned from being the Anglican student at the Venerabile/ Gregorian 1979/ 80 I wrote in my report that I thought the profile of Anglicanism should be raised in training ( by which I meant history, Anglican sources, liturgical principles, and the work of the more important theologians etc) I received a letter from Professor Stephen Sykes ” I am bound to say that the project of raising the profile of Anglicanism in ordinands’ minds was vigorously assailed on the education committee on which I sit. It is regarded as a retrograde… Read more »
A cursory survey of TEI websites indicates that few teach Anglicanism in any discernible way. Mine does of course!
I’m astonished that anyone wants to stand, but it takes all sorts…
Diocese in Europe lists are now published.
Armchair analysis of General Synod candidates for the House of Laity for the Diocese of St Albans No of candidates: 14 No of places: 5 Questions – (1) Incumbent? (2) Grouping – ConEvo/DEF, Inclusive, Save the Parish, Other (3) Explicit reference to LLF/marriage? (4) Detail on major issues – high/medium/low Peter Adams (1) Yes; (2) Other; (3) No; (4) High. Sheila Bissell (1) Yes; (2) Inclusive; (3) Yes; (4) High. Nicholas Brent (1) No; (2) DEF?/StP; (3) No; (4) Medium. Richard Currie (1) No; (2) Inclusive/Other; (3) Yes; (4) Medium. Ruth Dearnley (1) No; (2) Inclusive; (3) Yes?;… Read more »
Since this lists candidates for the House of Laity, does the term ‘incumbent’ in the first question mean (presumably) = was a member of the last GS? Slightly confusing since ‘incumbent’ usually has a rather different meaning in CofE contexts!
Yes!
Armchair analysis of General Synod candidates for the House of Clergy for the Diocese of St Albans No of candidates: 12 No of places: 5 Questions – (1) Incumbent? (2) Grouping – ConEvo/DEF, Inclusive, Save the Parish, Other (3) Explicit reference to LLF/marriage? (4) Detail on major issues – high/medium/low Matt Austin (1) No; (2) Other; (3) No; (4) Low. Anne-Marie Kramer (1) No; (2) Inclusive; (3) Yes?; (4) High. Edward Keene (1) No; (2) ConEvo/DEF/StP; (3) Yes; (4) Medium. Chris Kilgour (1) No; (2) ConEvo/DEF; (3) Yes; (4) Medium. Joseph Adewale (1) No; (2) ConEvo/DEF; (3)… Read more »
No clergy or lay candidate for St Albans listed above as ‘ConEvo/DEF’ has disclosed that they are in theological partnership with The Alliance, which for the uninitiated is a grouping of membership organisations including, for example, CEEC, Church Society, HTB Network etc.
Anthony Archer is throwing around labels and designations seeking to brand candidates as one thing or another.
I am grateful to the people who have put themselves forward as candidates.
They are entitled to speak for themselves. Anthony Archer would help us all if he were to desist
Candidates would help voters if they declared their interests and alliances – why would they seek to avoid doing so?
Charles,
How do you know they are avoiding doing so ?
You are taking it to be self evident that this election is essentially a single issue election – for or against SSM. The candidates are perfectly entitled to hold a different view
Because they are silent on the issue. Read the election addresses. I have been sent copies of all emails to electors. The ConEvos are hiding as usual.
The election does not belong to you. You don’t decide what issues people must speak on. That is for the candidates to decide.
Because I know some of the candidates and know their views. This is not just about same sex marriage, but also e.g. the ministry of women. Other issues are available!
If a candidate has shared their views with you, then you are clearly entitled to reach your own conclusions on their position.
You appeared to be suggesting that concealment is some kind of general problem or strategy. I think that view – if it is one that you hold – is unhelpful and unwarranted.
At least the candidates disclose their names, as a minimum.
It’s interesting/notable that the only candidates he ranked as giving high level of details were all inclusive. Having read through the statements, I wouldn’t say that is a fair assessment in any way.
No ConEvo candidates in St Albans (lay or clergy) were members of the last General Synod. Of course it’s a subjective analysis, but none in my view properly understand the challenges. One ConEvo lay candidate has emailed electors to say she ‘wants to serve God.’ Her God in her way. They just want to block LLF progress.
It is not for you to pronounce what candidates want to do.
Have some respect for people.
Perhaps we should elect 2 General Synods, one to talk about sex and the other to talk about everything else. It’s massively frustrating that all the other issues and challenges the CofE faces are crowded out by this one issue.
Quite! I was in a same-sex relationship. My wife and I had the same sex for forty years.
That made me laugh! My problem is that the church is seen as sex-obsessed and not inclusive. This brings the church into ridicule. None of that matters one jot. But it also becomes a blocker, a stmbling block, for anybody wanting to hear about Jesus and follow him. One should listen a bit more to what the younger generation non-churchgoers think of the church. I think one would find that many find it a bit weird. I would hate for non-churchgoers to read some of the posts on TA. Being born with homosexual urges was never a salvation issue. I… Read more »
Having sat on Synod for the last 5 years I can confirm that the large majority of the time we discussed things other than LLF. I suspect the press and public interest in licencing arrangments for Army Chaplains and the National Governance Measure was not as strong, so went under reported. I can also confirm that we approved motion after motion on LLF, but found the democratic will of the Synod was repeatedly frustrated by pressure groups (e.g. the CEEC and the Alliance) campaigning outside of Synod with threats of withdrawing parish share, appointing alternative pseudo-bishops and holding irregular ordinations.… Read more »
Let them disafilliate: I can live with it. Fiat iusticia etc, whatever iusticia is.
That’s a pretty partial reading of history.
The synodical democratic process requires a greater majority for radical doctrinal change than was present in the last Synod.
The numbers were not there for the changes you wanted. That is all that happened.
I am coming late to this discussion but would make a couple of observations and points. Firstly, how many dioceses are holding some kind of hustings this time round? Mine is not due it is argued, to the likely large number of candidates standing which I had come to pass for the laity. I think this is a mistake especially as many laity have scant direct knowledge of candidates for the House of Laity, while clergy at least in smaller dioceses, probably have a greater personal knowledge of their fellow priests/ministers. Perhaps some kind of ‘speed dating’ format could work… Read more »
I co-chaired hustings meetings in this diocese (Ely). We held them online, as we had done in 2021. Turnout was not as good as then, Last time we had about a hundred attendees — we were still in covid times — but this time about 50. That’s still worth doing, I reckon, but it’s not a fantastic turnout, especially given that lay people (even someone like me!) know very few if any of the candidates.
My observation and personal experience is that “wider church bodies” as you describe them are all to keen to adopt a proprietorial attitude towards the elections.
The last thing we need is anything that gives them an even greater sense of their own importance.
We have a synodical government structure – change it by constitutional means if you wish.
Please spare us lobby groups who treat the laity like fools who need to be shown how to hold a pencil the right way up to put the cross in the designated place.
But I think that’s the problem re lobby groups. The laity are definitely NOT fools, but the blandness of many election addresses coupled with an absence of hustings makes it genuinely difficult for many folk to make an informed choice. That’s not me speculating but comes from direct experience of a couple of fellow voters directly mentioning it to me. I guess what I am asking for is greater transparency and a chance for electors to engage easily with the candidates. Even reading between the lines in some addresses is pretty when knowing candidates’ stance on some issues. I should… Read more »
The other problem with this year’s elections is that the triennial cycle for deanery synod elections and the quinquennial cycle for general synod elections have coincided. I know of some newly-elected deanery synod lay reps, who have yet to attend a deanery synod meeting, who are struggling to know what to make of the bombardment of e-mails from candidates of whom they have never heard.
No candidate in St Albans (clergy or lay) who is a member of the Diocesan Evangelical Fellowship has disclosed this. They dare not because the electorate usually know what that means. No more progress on LLF; doubtful support for women in all three orders of ministry etc. It couldn’t happen in national politics because candidates stand for a party or are independent. Imagine being able to stand for Reform without revealing the association. It’s deceitful and devious. They have been doing it since 1990 when they tried to stop the women priests legislation.
DEFs are not a political party or anything resembling one. They are an occasional meeting. People turn up and may never attend again. There will generally be a mailing list but we will are all be on any number of mailing lists.
They will have an organising committee of clergy but that has little bearing on the laity.
Judge candidates by what they actually say and on their background experience.
Conspiracy theories about “ConEvos” and their deceitful ways are unworthy of consideration
I am a laity candidate in the Diocese of Norwich. Feel free to ask me whatever you like and I will give you an answer. It may or may not be the answer you want to hear, but you will learn something from it, I trust.