NOTES OF GENERAL SYNOD 15-16 NOVEMBER 2005

General Synod met for two days in London, mainly to inaugurate the new Synod, which has about 150 new members and 300 re-elected ones. In her address the Queen observed that we've now finished with revising liturgy, haven't we? This was received with general laughter.

Synod debated and approved a response to terrorism, which has hit the media headlines under the title "C of E backs shoot to kill policy" - based on an admission in the report that sometimes the police may have no other option in extreme circumstances. Nevertheless there was a good debate on whether it was right for us "without excusing" terrorism to seek to understand its causes, or whether the phrase should be "while condemning"? After a clear speech pointing out that progress only came in Northern Ireland when people backed off from condemnation, the amendment was clearly lost.

Legislative business included trying to turn "Mission Shaped Church" into law which will allow more flexible church plants and fresh expressions, and hence to arguments about whether diocesan synods should be able to resist their diocese being reorganized in the larger interest? It also included regulations about admitting children to communion, which appear to signal the bishops backing off from their previous line of "no-one who has been admitted to communion should ever again be denied it anywhere". And finally there was a robust and interesting question time.

Synod will meet next February and July, but not in November as the planned refurbishment of Church House will mean it won't be ready for a meeting.

John Hartley (Clergy)

NOTES OF GENERAL SYNOD JULY 2005

General Synod met over the long weekend of 8th-12th July (Friday to Tuesday), in breathtakingly hot weather. There was a some "end of term" feeling and the agenda showed signs of wrapping up business in order to clear the decks at the end of five years, before the new Synod is elected in the autumn.

The proposed Common Worship Ordination Services needed to pass through 22 different stages before being finally approved, so they were debated several times. Under pressure from members, the House of Bishops agreed to make the confession mandatory, and to move the giving of the bible closer to the laying on of hands: the point is not that ordination is by giving the bible, but that we need to strengthen the message of the newly-ordained being under the authority of scripture. There was also a protracted, fruitless and obscure argument about whether the ordination of bishops should be called "ordination and consecration" or "ordination or consecration".

Synod passed a Code of Practice and a set of Rules for the Clergy Discipline Measure which applies in cases of misconduct (but not in cases to do with doctrine, ritual or ceremonial).

John Hartley (Clergy)

NOTES OF GENERAL SYNOD 13-17.2.05

February's General Synod was packed with weighty subjects, but I didn't find it nearly as thought-provoking as last summer. Was I not so much a new-boy, or is London just a lot more impersonal than York? Or had the pressure of importance submerged the wit and repartee of the synod members?

The major debate on women bishops was very tame. Members rose with prepared speeches - but few upped and took issue with previous speakers. One had the distinct feeling that the lines were drawn up and both sides were saving ammunition for next June's starting pistol.

Likewise the Windsor Report (which is about keeping the Anglican Communion together in the aftermath of the consecration of a gay bishop in America) had been attacked from many sides before the debate, but on the day there was a strong feeling of let's not rock the boat! The ship of the Anglican Communion may be holed at the water-line, she may be sinking as we speak, in fact she may deserve to fragment into canoes - but let's none of us be seen to pull the plug ourselves! On the contrary, let's bale out with all vigour in the hope that our hands will be clean when she goes! Let the Americans jump before they are pushed! Am I too cynical?

But there were some lively topics for debate. Take the Ely Diocese's motion to excuse Local Ecumenical Projects (LEPs) from having to have Anglican Communion on special days like Christmas and Easter. At present a LEP with a non-conformist minister has to wheel in a C of E priest, casting doubt on the worthiness of their own minister. "This problem is of Ely Diocese's own making," claimed an opponent: "If they hadn't been lax in the past, LEP's wouldn't now be surprised. The bishop himself should go and officiate on Christmas Day … no better way to spend his time!!" The Council for Christian Unity itself was against the motion, fearing it would set back the acceptance of LEPs by the church at large. Nevertheless the majority felt we needed to send out a message of full confidence in the local minister whoever s/he was. Let's do away with this instrument of C of E imperialism!

The discussion of Clergy Terms of Service could have got similarly heated. But Professor David Maclean, the report's author, is unflappable. Most clergy accept that freehold will have to go, but if they are not to be the title owners of their vicarages and churches, then who is? The suggestion of "vest the property in the Diocesan Board of Finance" looked like being shouted down. "Actually, we do see the wrong messages have got out," conceded David in his opening remarks. "We will be looking at this again, for parishioners rights must be safeguarded." And so it came true that a soft answer turneth away wrath. (David is coming to our Diocesan Synod in June - he's well worth hearing!)

With relief Synod turned to the ordination services, knowing that as liturgical terriers we could snap away to our hearts' content. With wild abandon we debated good practice in appointing archdeacons, deans, suffragan bishops and canons. And with joy we approved amendments about the environment, having at last found a subject on which the top table were not too wedded to their words to see the sense of the improvements.

In his sermon at worship, the Archbishop said "we may find it hard to believe that when we've debated for a whole week, we haven't actually done anything." By Friday I felt convicted by his words. Democracy is a necessary but poor form of government, only worth it because all the alternatives are worse.

John Hartley (Clergy)

NOTES OF GENERAL SYNOD 9-13.7.04

General Synod met over a long weekend on 9th-13th July, and was attended by all eight Bradford members including the newly-elected clergy. Others from the diocese visited as observers, particularly for the debate on Europe. Our own Tony Hesselwood was appointed chairman of the Archbishops' Council Audit Committee until 2009.

After a slow start, excitement hotted up on Saturday when the report on a possible Clergy Discipline (Doctrine) measure was thrown out by 4 votes in the house of clergy, even though it had a 3:1 majority in the house of laity. The idea was to replace the 1963 "Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Measure", which is so cumbersome and costly that it is now felt to be unusable - and it also runs contrary to human rights legislation. But some clergy obviously felt threatened by a measure which could be used to try them as heretics!

A debate on marriage law was equally frustrating. It seems everyone agrees that the present system, where people can only get married in their parish church, needs freeing up. The working group wanted Synod's opinion on whether people should be able to marry in any church, or whether they should need to be "connected" in some way with the church they wished to marry in. So a proposal for a free-for-all was first approved by a majority of 5 on a show of hands. Then someone asked for a count by houses. After ringing of bells, locking the doors and the shouting of "divide", synod members filed out through their different doors ... and the proposal was lost in all three houses! As the proposer said, it was difficult to know what sort of "steer" Synod was giving to its working group.

There were several "worthy but predictable" debates: Synod approved of the work its Partners in World Mission were doing; it approved of Trade Justice; it approved of the role of Christianity in Europe; it approved of getting more involved in helping with the problems of drugs misuse and domestic violence. But Synod members could be quite volatile, and there were deep disputes as bishops argued over prayers for the dead and about whether "Christ the King" (the Sunday before Advent) had upstaged the festival of Ascension Day and should be scrapped.

And I missed the dramatic high point: I skipped Sunday morning's communion at York Minster and went to support one of the former curates of this diocese at his local church. So I wasn't there for the protest by "Fathers for Justice" in which they smashed their way into the Minster, injured someone on the way in, held up a banner, and condemned the church for its attitude of often taking the mother's line against the absent father's, and in baptizing children without checking what the father thought. Synod members deplored violence, but many of them also thought these fathers had a good point and deserved a hearing.

John Hartley (Clergy)