General Synod February 2016 – Some Reflections
Synod
began, more or less, in silence as we remembered the 21 Coptic Christians
martyred in Libya for their Christian faith on the anniversary of their
death. An important moment. There was little silence thereafter, as we
moved into the normal pattern of debates and presentations. February was a relatively short Synod, across
three days. It was the first meeting of
the newly elected Synod other than the short gathering for its inauguration
last November. This means that there
were lots of maiden speeches, lots of new voices to listen to. It means that we
the newly elected Prolocutors of Canterbury and York (the chairs of the House of
Clergy) and the Chair and Vice-Chair of the House of Laity were presented to
us. It feels like the new Synod is still
being run in.
Business
started with the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Presidential Address. This was mostly about the Primate’s meeting,
and was clear and helpful. He spoke of
the depth of communion between the Primates. He also suggested that the main
issue was one of reception – The Episcopal Church, in changing the doctrine of
marriage, has taken the “consequence” of that step. The Anglican approach to authority, he said, is
one of “spiritual discernment in relationship”, not laws and procedures. It was a hopeful account, careful and realistic
about the remaining challenges. I’m
still left with the sense that “consequences” are a kind of ‘Yes Minister’
irregular verb (I take a prophetic stance for the Gospel; you are heretics;
they suffer the consequences for not being in agreement with others). But the grace and hope that Archbishop Justin
conveyed were significant.
After
the Archbishop, the chamber emptied somewhat as legislation was discussed. An Amending Canon (number 34 if you are
collecting the numbers) was enacted.
This makes changes around safeguarding matters, including a new Canon
C29 ‘Of Safeguarding’. Then we had the
first consideration of a Mission and Pastoral Amendment Measure. This aims to simplify the way the church
works, but it needs scrutiny. Part of it
affects communities with a Bishop’s Mission Order, and Mark Broomhead from the
Order of the Black Sheep in Chesterfield made his maiden speech clarifying some
of the needs of his community that the Measure didn’t address.
Monday
concluded with a presentation about the Shared Conversations in which Synod
will take part in July. The Agenda
described these as Conversations on Spirituality, Scripture and Mission, but
they are actually about sexuality. This
was encouraging, with the Archbishop’s Director of Reconciliation suggesting that
conflict was something that could be creative and helpful for the Church. Then we had questions time, which got through
nearly all of the questions asked (a Synod record?), but lacked some of the whimsy
and sparkle that sometimes comes through such a time.
Tuesday
morning was given over to consideration of evangelism. It began with a really good session in small
groups, and then we had a debate on a Report from the Archbishops’ Evangelism
Task Group. The report, I confess, was a
little disappointing. But the debate was
good and encouraging. The Bishop of
Liverpool who led the debate, spoke well about the need for joy, beauty and
prayer in evangelism. The Bishop of
Burnley spoke passionately on the Church of England’s neglect of people living
in estates. There were helpful
contributions of working with children and young people, and especially on allowing
them to shape what the church does.
Tuesday
afternoon was the first piece of real controversy on which the Synod had a
vote. The Columba Declaration, an
ecumenical agreement between the Church of England and the Church of Scotland,
was up for debate. Ecumenical agreement
seems a good thing, but the Scottish Episcopal Church (the Anglican Church in
Scotland) had not been involved in the final form of the report. This appeared to be the CofE overstepping
boundaries. An amendment was put which
would have required new work involving the SEC.
It lost, but the whole debate was dominated by relations with the SEC
rather than with the Church of Scotland.
In the end, the Columba Declaration was approved but with more than a
third of the Synod voting against or abstaining.
The
pace picked up as Synod rejected a Diocesan Synod motion calling for an
amendment to the way fees are charges, and accepted a proposal to draft
legislation allowing the faster and simpler repeal of legislation. That allowed the Synod to debate another Diocesan
Synod motion on blood and organ donation.
This simple motion raised the profile of donation as a form of Christian
service and was gladly accepted by Synod.
For
the final day, we had yet another Diocesan Synod motion – this time on the
impact of benefit sanctions. There were
many speeches telling hard stories about the way sanctions are used in cruel and
inflexible ways. I spoke about some
research in Derbyshire on the way sanctions increased dependency. The motion was overwhelmingly passed, with
no-one against and only three abstentions.
Lunch
on Wednesday offered an opportunity to hear from a mission society (Us,
formerly USPG) and from three bishops about their work in Ghana, Liberia and
Sierra Leone combatting Ebola. It was only
when the churches became involved that the tide began to turn, because only the
churches had the reach and the standing help communities to change long-help
customs and practices that were enabling the spread of disease. A moving yet hopeful encounter.
After
lunch, it was back to Synod for debates on funding Ministerial Training (a
fraught issue, that seems far from being resolved) and resourcing the Church of
England. And then it was over, at least
until July.
This
was a wide ranging Synod, looking at internal affairs, relations with other
churches, issues affecting society and how faith is shared. If there is a thread running through, for me
it is that of courage. Courage seen in
the Coptic martyrs, refusing to disavow their faith; the Primates of the
Anglican Communion. Meeting together despite serious differences; in ordinary
people who donate their blood and organs; in those facing impossible choices
because their benefits have been sanctioned; and in the bishops who led their
people through the unimaginable horrors of the Ebola crisis in West Africa. Courage is what Synod will need in July as we
take part in our shared conversations. Please
pray for us.
Comments