Enfield Deanery
General Synod Report from Alison Ruoff
The
February 2009 Group of Sessions of the General Synod began on Monday, 9th February at 3pm with the customary welcomes, prayers,
introductions and report on the progress of legislation through Parliament.
The Synod received a report from the Business Committee
which gave an opportunity for members to comment on the content of the agenda.
The main business was an address to Synod by the RC
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor. He was first introduced by the Archbishop of
Canterbury. This was followed by a
debate on the paper on the ARCIC ll report
from 1991 entitled "Church As Communion". (18 years to wait to
debate a report is a long time!)
The day finished at 7.00pm with answers to questions
submitted by members of Synod.
Tuesday
Review
of Constitutions. This was
a presentation on proposals to do away with the present Boards and Councils of
the Church of England. There is a modest cost saving but the intention
appears to be driven by a sense that the Boards and Councils do not deliver at
present. However, the fear of the new proposals would seem to be
undermining the working of democracy and accountability of the General Synod;
in the main, an elected body:
Likewise the Boards and Councils. It is proposed that the Archbishops
will appoint a “lead person” and a small reference group who together with the
staff at Church House will take action. Once a year a sub-committee of
General Synod will meet for a few hours to review what has been done.
Whilst
this may streamline affairs it is at the cost of elected members being
involved. This is another move towards centralizing power in the hands of a small group of
people, the Archbishops and their Council.
Final Approval of Draft Amending
Canon No 28. This concerns Local Ecumenical Projects. At
present a Bishop has to ensure that C of E worship is held ‘reasonably
frequently’ and also that communion must be celebrated at major
festivals. The proposed amendment removes the absolute requirement for
the communions but not that relating to ‘reasonable frequency’. Guidance
is also to be offered to Bishops about what all this means in practice. Being
final approval it required 2/3rd majority in each house. Bishops
voted 19 to 2 in favour. Clergy 84 to 21 in favour and Laity 103 to 23 in
favour. Therefore the amendment to the Canons was passed.
The
Miscellaneous
Provisions Measure was passed with only one vote against.
First
consideration of a measure on Ecclesiastical Fees. This follows the report ‘Four Funerals
and a Wedding’. There are various provisions to clarify the law on fees
and change the way they are handled. At present it is stated that 90% of
clergy assign fees to the Diocese.
It is proposed that the ministry
element of fees should be paid direct to the Diocesan Board of Finance..
Local arrangements will be required for how this is to be handled.
The
parochial element would be passed to the parish.
The level of fees will
come to the Synod more infrequently.
There will be more regulation over
when fees can be waived.
Fees may be implemented for services not
presently covered, such as memorial services, and will not apply for the
funeral of children.
Brief consideration was given to a change to
the rules
relating to pensions. The matter arose because of how clergy in the
Diocese of Europe are dealt with.
This debate was adjourned when it
became clear that it related in part to the Diocese of Europe whose Bishop had
been involved in discussions but was not present due to the matter being moved
forward on the agenda, from contingency business.
The Archbishop of
Canterbury opened afternoon proceedings with an address to the Synod.
He spoke about the Lambeth Conference and recent Primates’ Meeting and made
various observations regarding them. He pointed out that the Primates
Meeting showed that whatever we may make of those with whom we disagree there
is still a conviction that others within the Anglican Communion are fellow
Christians. This does indeed seem to be the impression given and to have
been explicitly stated by some of the Primates. In contrast other people
have insisted that there is every reason to conclude that some of those in the
Communion cannot be counted as brothers and sisters in Christ.
The
Archbishop went on to talk about the debate on women bishops and highlighted
some of the issues of concern.
Debate began on a PM motion
regarding membership
of the British National Party. The motion invited the House of
Bishops to bring in proposals to prevent clergy being members of the BNP,
similar to the Police. Some of the stated views of the BNP do not fit
comfortably with Scripture but there was concern about the notion of forbidding
clergy to belong to a particular political party. Two amendments
attempted to keep the sentiment of the motion without the particular
application but these were both defeated. The House of Bishops will
now be asked to take this forward. ( I was invited to speak about this on the
early Radio 4 Today Programme)
Presentation on the Financial Crisis.
This consisted of a panel of Andreas Whittam-Smith, Lord Brian Griffiths and
Bishop Peter Selby. There were a series of brief statements from the panel
followed by questions or comments from the floor which the panel responded to.
This was a far ranging conversation which raised a number of matters relating
to the causes of the present problems, implications for Christians and ways to
address the problems both from the perspective of the Church and the nation.
Final
business of the day was a debate on a Chester Diocesan Synod motion on the voice of the
Church in public life. In the face of pressure to accept secularism
and exclude religion from the public arena the motion was intended the
re-assert that Christians should be fully involved in the public arena and not
ashamed of their faith.
Wednesday
11 February
Began,
following a Communion service, with the first consideration of the draft measure
to consecrate women as bishops. This was taken in two
parts, first to commit the legislation to revision committee and secondly to
commit the changes to canons, to revision committee. However, the debates
were inter-twined.
Interestingly two Bishops (Norwich and Dover) who
spoke in favour of the principle spoke against proceeding with the legislation
as it stands.
The main issues were rehearsed in the debate. It is clear
that as matters stand the proposals are difficult from all perspectives.
The
vote to commit the legislation to revision committee was carried by 281 to 114,
a vote by houses was not taken. This amounts to 29% of the Synod voting
against. It is hard to extrapolate but on the basis of past evidence it would
not have gained 2/3rds majority of the house of laity. Again this indicates
that when the legislation comes for final approval, the measure could fall.
The
vote to commit the changes to the canons to revision committee was carried by
309 to 79. This was necessary as it would be hard to proceed with one
without the other.
The Synod voted unanimously,(282) after
debate, on a PM motion regarding Church water bills. The Synod heard from many
sources, not just churches, of the high increase in the levels of water bills
for non-profit organisations. The water companies are supposed to take into
account the fact that many users are not for profit but this is not happening.
The motion will request the Government to remind OFWAT of its duties in this
regard. An amendment to give the motion even more teeth was not adopted.
Then
a PM motion on the uniqueness of Christ finally found its way onto the Synod agenda.
There were two amendments which seemed to weaken the motion considerably which
were lost and another which added to it, was passed.
This was a good
debate with several speakers giving their own testimony and speaking of the
impact on others of hearing the gospel of Christ. The final motion was agreed
with 8 votes against and reads as follows:
That this Synod warmly welcome Dr Martin Davie’s
background paper ‘The witness of Scripture, the Fathers and the historic
formularies to the uniqueness of Christ’ and request the House of Bishops to
report to the Synod on their understanding of the uniqueness of Christ in
Britain’s multi-faith society, and offer examples and commendations of good
practice in sharing the gospel of salvation through Christ alone with people of
other faiths and of none.
A paper proposing amendments to the Standing Orders
of the General Synod, including one or two matters relating to the working
of the Crown Nominations Committee was debated. A few minor amendments to
the amendments were proposed and defeated and the whole item was then passed.
The
final vote of the day was on Human Trafficking, from the Diocese of Newcastle, celebrating the
centenary of the death of Josephine Butler. The motion deplored the evil
of human trafficking and proposed various measures to try to help in combating
this. An amendment which asserted that the “male abuse of women” was the
root cause was narrowly defeated. The full motion was then passed
unanimously. The Archbishops Council will now explore the possibility of
affiliating to the UK Human Trafficking Centre as a way forward.
Top of Form
Thursday
First business for Thursday was
consideration of a report on the Anglican Covenant. The latest draft of the
Covenant is referred to as The St. Andrews Draft. Provinces of the
Communion have been asked three questions and the report before Synod was to
respond to the draft and answer the questions. The Synod was asked to
‘take note’ of the report though it would have been possible to pass a following
motion to make particular points. (A take note debate means that there can be
no amendments)
The three questions asked were:
(1) Is the province able to give an “in principle”
commitment to the Covenant process at this time (without committing itself to
the details of any text?)
(2) Is it possible to give some indication of
any Synodical process which would have to be undertaken to adopt the Covenant
in the fullness of time?
(3) In considering the St Andrew’s draft for an
Anglican Covenant, are there any elements which would need extensive change in
order to make the process of Synodical adoption viable?’
The response proposed is:
(1) Yes.
(2) This would be Article 7 business requiring full synodical process and
reference to the Dioceses. It could not take precedence over the present
legally defined doctrinal and organizational basis of the Church of England.
(3) Various comments are made.
The Covenant process is ongoing but it has been
obvious for some time that it will not have the teeth to address the problems
which precipitated it. Further, it
is clear that it will take a very long time before anything is achieved.
Consideration
of two set changes hastened by the Government in relation to the role of the
Crown, in appointments.
First, three changes are being proposed:
•
For suffragan sees, only one name will be put before the Queen.
•
When a Diocesan see is vacant the Queen would no longer take over the
patronage role of the Bishop, rather it would be transferred to another designated
Bishop, except that her Majesty has the right to issue notice that she will
continue to exercise her authority.
• When a person is
appointed as a Diocesan Bishop their post shall no longer come under the
patronage of the Crown.
It was pointed out in debate that despite
the obvious sense of this change it does modify the nature of establishment.
Secondly
and related to the previous item, and to be dealt with by the same Revision
Committee are changes to the role of the Crown where it is the patron of
parishes. The present legislation is not binding on the Crown. The
changes will give parish representatives similar, but not identical rights as
any other parish. In practice this will make no difference since the
Crown already operates the same system of appointments, even though not obliged
to do so.
Pensions. The first of these had been held over from earlier in the
week because of the Diocese of Europe. It appears that the issue for
Europe had been resolved but the debate was adjourned again because of concerns
over the drafting of the text. A second motion was put and carried.
Business
had ‘speeded through’, so a Diocesan Synod Motion from Peterborough was brought
onto the agenda. This called for the production of Eucharistic
prayers which can be used for children. Specifically for communion
services taken in church schools when almost all those present are
children. After debate the Synod voted to move to next business.
The logic appeared to be that a vote ‘no’ would be seen as anti-children (a
rather absurd argument) whereas a vote ‘yes’ would make work for the Liturgical
Commission and take a lot of synodical time. There seemed to be an
assumption that those who wished to have an adapted communion prayer could do
so without concern.
The afternoon began with a debate on the ‘Financial
Crisis’. This naturally followed on from the presentation on Tuesday.
It was wide ranging but the final vote was simply a take note motion of the
report. Synod had the option of supporting a following motion but it was
clear that this would have had some opposition and Synod voted against it being
taken.
Next, Bishop David James of Bradford introduced “Presence and
Engagement” on ministry in multi-faith areas. He reminded Synod
members of the overwhelming vote on Wednesday, of the need to share the gospel
of salvation through faith in Christ alone with all. He then challenged
Synod member whether God might be calling them to do this by moving to live and
work in areas where there are those of many different faiths. Christians are
called to relate to those of other faiths, to show love rather than hate, to
make peace, to witness to Christ and to engage lovingly. The Bishop
stated that we should build bridges of friendship, but bridges over which Christ
can walk.
The debate that followed highlighted differing views about the
nature of engagement. Several speakers also spoke about the problems
faced by converts from other faiths and the apparent discrimination against
Christians in modern day Britain.
After debate the motion to take note of
the report was passed unanimously.
The day ended with a debate on
the future
of Church of England retreat houses. There is concern about the
viability of many of the Diocesan retreat houses. There have been a
number of closures and others may follow.
Retreat houses are a
relatively recent phenomenon, most of them are less than a hundred years
old. Subsidies from Dioceses have become a burden and some houses are in
need of major capital expenditure. Part of the motion requested a review
of the retreat houses and their viability which may have required subsidies but
this was removed by an amendment. The final part of the motion encourages
church bodies to make full use of retreat houses.
Friday 13
February
This Group of
Sessions concluded with two debates:
First, on the plight of asylum seekers in the UK, to
ensure that they are treated with justice and compassion. Specifically
there was call to confer the right to work on all asylum seekers, to have
an amnesty on the ‘legacy cases’ pre-dating the most recent changes and to end
the detention of children. There were some heart-rending stories. This
motion was passed with one vote against.
And secondly, on a
resolution to ensure that Church bodies could take into account environmental
issues in respect of Climate change and the Church’s property transactions. Currently, in line with charitable
properties there is a requirement to act, when selling, to maximise the benefit
for the charity, ie get the best price. Clearly any change would
introduce a considerable element of subjectivity and the motion was defeated by
a narrow margin.
After farewells to the Bishop of Carlisle, Graham
Dow and the Bishop of Peterborough, Ian Cundy, the Synod was prorogued.
Alison L Ruoff
February 2009
THE CHURCHES OF ENFIELD DEANERY
The Clergy of the Enfield Deanery
Minutes of the Last Deanery Synod