GENERAL SYNOD

NOVEMBER 2007

QUESTIONS

of which notice has been given under Standing Orders 105-109.

INDEX

QUESTIONS 1-15 MINISTRY DIVISION

Wycliffe Hall: progress of reporting process Q1

Wycliffe Hall: information and action Q2

Wycliffe Hall: action taken or likely to occur Q3

Wycliffe Hall: possible action Q4

Wycliffe Hall: independent investigation of allegations Q5

College/course governance and management: staff recourse Q6

College staff: redress of grievances Q7

Wycliffe Hall: independent enquiry and appeal mechanisms Q8

Wycliffe Hall: mini inspection Q9

Wycliffe Hall: information Q10

Wycliffe Hall: reputational damage Q11

Training Partnership: adequacy of Synod representation Q12

Distinctive diaconate: plans for debate Q13

Parochial clergy: encouragement to exercise leadership gifts Q14

Motoring: increase in tax-allowable mileage allowance Q15

QUESTIONS 16-22 MISSION AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS COUNCIL

Third Sector: role of churches and faith groups Q16

Ivory Coast chocolate: guidelines on consumption Q17

Diocese in Europe: church planting and pioneer ministries Q18

Law on abortion: submissions to Commons committee Q19-20

Prisoners: attendance at funeral and committal Q21

‘Son of Star Wars’ facilities: reaction Q22

QUESTION 23 BUSINESS COMMITTEE

Women bishops: consideration of Diocesan Synod Motions Q23

QUESTION 24 CHURCH COMMISSIONERS

Lambeth Conference: Commissioners’ contribution Q24

QUESTION 25 ETHICAL INVESTMENT ADVISORY GROUP

Petrochina and Sinopec: effects of engagement Q25

QUESTION 26 ARCHBISHOPS’ COUNCIL

ITV: future of religious broadcasting Q26

QUESTIONS 27-35 HOUSE OF BISHOPS

Readers: age when permission to officiate is required Q27

Fairtrade: Church of England plans Q28

Freedom of religion: promotion and defence Q29

Lambeth Conference: reasons for not accepting invitation Q30

Lambeth Conference: support for the Archbishop of Canterbury Q31

Communion by Extension: proper survey of use Q32

Under-representation in senior appointments: monitoring progress Q33

Lancashire and Yorkshire: peace initiative Q34

Women bishops: results of drafting group work Q35

QUESTIONS 36-40 SECRETARY GENERAL

Parochial ministers: contracts of employment Q36

Terms of Service Measure: implications of appeal judgment Q37

Lambeth Conference: contribution from non-Commissioners’ funds Q38

Service Reviews: recommendations and response Q39

‘Full Communion’ Q40

QUESTION 41 CLERK TO THE SYNOD

Diocesan Synod Motions: amendment by mover Q41

QUESTION 42 BOARD OF EDUCATION

Activities for young people: representations Q42

QUESTION 43 COUNCIL FOR CHRISTIAN UNITY

Episcopal sees: divorced and remarried candidates Q43

MINISTRY DIVISION

The Revd Brunel James (Ripon & Leeds) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q1. In reply to question number 65 asked at the July 2007 Group of Sessions, Synod members were informed that the Bishops’ Committee for Ministry would be asking for reports on the situation at Wycliffe Hall from ‘a small team of independent advisers drawn from current senior inspectors’. Could Synod members be informed as to whether this reporting process has indeed been initiated, what progress it has made, and when it might be concluded?

The Revd Jonathan Alderton-Ford (St Edmundsbury & Ipswich) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q2. At the last Group of Sessions in July the Bishop of Derby promised that there would be “a process to inform itself regarding the situation at Wycliffe. A small team of independent advisors, drawn from current Senior Inspectors, will report to the Bishops’ Committee for Ministry ...”. Would you confirm if this “process to inform itself” has taken place, and what action will the Bishops’ Committee be taking?

The Revd Brunel James (Ripon & Leeds) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q3. In reply to question number 65 asked at the July 2007 Group of Sessions, Synod members were informed that the Bishops’ Committee for Ministry would “take any further action required” in response to reports from its appointed advisers about the situation at Wycliffe Hall. Could Synod members be informed if any action has already taken place, or is likely to occur before the Synod meets again in 2008?

The Revd Jonathan Alderton-Ford (St Edmundsbury & Ipswich) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q4. Given public concern about events at Wycliffe Hall, has the Ministry Division considered whether it could take any action, if to do nothing else but exonerate those involved?

The Bishop of Norwich to reply as Chairman of the Ministry Division:

A. I will answer Questions 1, 2, 3 and 4 together. The reporting process has been initiated and concluded. On receiving the initial reports from the advisers, the Bishops’ Committee for Ministry decided that the most appropriate course of action was to ask the Inspections Working Party to bring forward the inspection of Wycliffe Hall. This was with a view to being able to review the formation and education that the college is offering, rather than a partial account of aspects of governance and management. The Inspection will take place in autumn 2008, which will also give the college, along with other colleges, the chance to respond to the University of Oxford’s own review of its Permanent Private Halls, which include Wycliffe and St Stephen’s House.

The Revd John Chorlton (Oxford) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q5. During the last year various allegations have been made about Wycliffe Hall. With a view to preventing further damage being caused by those allegations, will the Ministry Division commission an independent investigation which will either dispel the allegations or lead to corrective measures?

The Bishop of Norwich to reply as Chairman of the Ministry Division:

As indicated in the answer to Questions 1 - 4, the Bishops’ Committee for Ministry has decided to bring forward the inspection of the college to autumn 2008. It sees this as the best way to bring about the independent investigation being called for here, with the capacity for clear recommendations to be made as appropriate, which can then be followed up in a systematic way in a visit a year after the inspection.

The Revd Katie Tupling (Derby) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q6. Has the Ministry Division any advice to offer to staff of a theological college or course as to whom they should turn to when they face serious problems with the governance and management of their college or course and all internal appeals for Christian reconciliation and mediation seem to have been ignored?

The Bishop of Norwich to reply as Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Staff have a series of options including raising matters with the governing body of the training institution, taking up grievance procedures, consulting with colleagues through the Conference of Anglican and Ecumenical Institutes for Ministerial Training or take up any HR services offered by the related university, where that applies.

Mrs Christina Rees (St Albans) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q7. Is there any procedure within the Church, outside the college chair and board of governors, whereby staff or students of a Church of England recognised theological college can seek redress of a grievance without having to wait for up to five years for the regular inspection of the college?

The Bishop of Norwich to reply as Chairman of the Ministry Division:

In line with the answer to question 6, staff can consult with colleagues through the Conference of Anglican and Ecumenical Institutes for Ministerial Training and staff and students can take up any HR or grievance procedure offered by the related university, where that applies. Ordinands can also discuss issues with and seek advice from their sponsoring diocese.

The Revd Hugh Lee (Oxford) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q8. Given the now long-running, seemingly intractable and public nature of the difficulties at Wycliffe Hall, how soon will the Ministry Division or some other part of the national church institutions commission an independent inquiry (separate from the normal five-yearly inspection) into both its governance and its staff management, that includes taking evidence from current and recently serving member(s) of the Council that disagreed with its chair and from the staff that have left, voluntarily or involuntarily, and will they consider establishing mechanisms whereby affected parties in such crises can appeal to the national church for help in resolving their differences, without having to resort to the secular courts or the Charity Commissioners and without having to wait for the five-yearly inspection of their college?

The Bishop of Norwich to reply as Chairman of the Ministry Division:

There are no plans to commission an independent inquiry separate from the inspection. The Bishops’ Committee for Ministry, and its successor body the Ministry Council, will want to keep the adequacy of the measures available to it under review.

The Revd Hugh Lee (Oxford) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q9. Will the General Synod be given a full explanation of why the Bishops' Committee for Ministry decided to have a mini inspection into the situation at Wycliffe Hall and then changed its mind and decided not to have any inspection or inquiry until the normal five-yearly inspection is due in October 2008?

The Bishop of Norwich to reply as Chairman of the Ministry Division:

As indicated to the last Synod, the Bishops’ Committee for Ministry asked for a report to be made to inform itself, rather than a mini-inspection. As set out in the answer to Question 1, on receiving the initial reports from the advisers, the Bishops’ Committee for Ministry decided that the most appropriate course of action was to ask the Inspections Working Party to bring forward the inspection of the college.

Mrs April Alexander (Southwark) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q10. In view of the assurance in July that the Bishops’ Committee for Ministry has “set in place a process to inform itself regarding the situation at Wycliffe”, what information can the Committee pass on to the General Synod, particularly in relation to individuals whose work may have been interrupted or curtailed during the last few months of reported turbulence?

The Bishop of Norwich to reply as Chairman of the Ministry Division:

The Ministry Division is not able to pass on information about individuals who are employed by training institutions, which are responsible for the management of their employees. At the same time, the Division is always keen to support the valuable work of theological educators through developing a proper professional framework for their work, through staff development conferences and through informal conversation.

Mrs April Alexander (Southwark) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q11. In view of the reports in the press about the bishops’ inspection of Wycliffe Hall taking place during 2008, can the Ministry Division tell the Synod what mechanisms are in place to manage any reputational damage which results from continuing press coverage in the meantime?

The Bishop of Norwich to reply as Chairman of the Ministry Division:

The Ministry Division issued new guidance on governance to all theological training institutions in 2006 and is planning to make some follow-up training available in view of the increased focus within the voluntary sector generally on good governance arrangements. All theological colleges are, of course independent institutions and it is for each of them to keep both their governance arrangements and their communications strategies in good repair.

The Revd Dr John Hartley (Bradford) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q12. In transferring to the new ‘Regional Training Partnerships’ arrangements, the Carlisle and Blackburn Diocesan Training Institute has been wound up and replaced by the ‘Lancashire and Cumbria Training Partnership’. The new body, instead of having a single council to govern it, has a two-tier system of governance: a smaller council meeting fairly frequently, and a larger ‘stakeholder body’ meeting only very infrequently and without executive powers. As the General Synod representative I have been given a place only on the larger body. Has the Ministry Division considered the question of whether the General Synod is adequately represented by these arrangements and, if so, what view has it taken?

The Bishop of Norwich to reply as Chairman of the Ministry Division:

A. The Ministry Division warmly welcomes the work that has been done towards the setting up of the regional training partnership that will serve the Church in the region. It also notes the need for the size and membership of governing bodies to be kept under regular review in order to maintain good standards of practice. In the light of the changing patterns of governance, it will be reviewing this question with a view to ensuring that the General Synod is represented at the appropriate level.

Mrs Debbie Sutton (Portsmouth) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q13. Are there any plans to debate the role of the distinctive diaconate within the overall review of Mission and Ministry (GS Misc 854) to enable the Church to consider how to build on and expand such a significant and (very) long established vocation?

The Bishop of Norwich to reply as Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Currently, there are no plans to debate the role of the distinctive diaconate in the General Synod. The Ministry Division recognises GS Misc 854 as a helpful contribution to further consideration of lay and ordained ministry for discussion within the dioceses.

The Revd David Primrose (Gloucester) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q14. The Pilling Report, Talent and Calling, identified that there is leadership capacity among stipendiary parochial clergy in excess of that required for senior appointments within the Church of England. At the same time public service and charitable organisations are increasingly looking for high-calibre non-executive directors and trustees. Whilst recognising that clergy already have a commendable record in serving as governors of local schools and on charitable bodies within their own parishes, what is being done to encourage parochial clergy to exercise these surplus leadership gifts within the statutory and the voluntary sectors beyond their own parishes?

The Bishop of Norwich to reply as Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Most appointments of non-executive directors and trustees of public service and charitable organisations are made following public advertisement in local and national newspapers. There is nothing to preclude clergy from applying for such posts if they have the necessary time available and believe that they possess the skills and abilities.

The Revd Richard Hibbert (St Albans) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:

Q15. In the light of increasing costs of motoring, especially fuel, since 2002 (the AA advising that the average cost is now 44p per mile), what steps have been taken and can be taken to urge the Government to increase the tax allowable threshold of 40p per mile for clergy who use their own cars in the furtherance of their ministry?

The Bishop of Ripon and Leeds to reply as Chairman of the Deployment, Remuneration and Conditions of Service Committee:

The Churches Main Committee (CMC) made representations to HMRC in 2005 and 2006 concerning Approved Mileage Allowance Payments (AMAPs). However, the Government declined to increase their rates, on the grounds that (a) there was no evidence that total motoring costs had increased significantly, and (b) the existing rates encouraged “greener” motoring.

Following the 2007 Budget, HMRC commenced a wide-ranging review of the structure of AMAPs, especially whether (a) differing costs could be better recognised, (b) environmental awareness could be encouraged, and (c) tax and NIC treatment could be aligned.

All diocesan offices were notified of this review and invited to make submissions. In their submission, CMC stressed (a) the particular problems faced by clergy in rural areas, and (b) the need for any new system to be simple to administer.

HMRC have not yet announced any conclusions.

MISSION AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS COUNCIL

Mr Andrew Presland (Peterborough) to ask the Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

Q16. What steps, if any, is the Council taking to quantify the significant role played within the third sector by churches and other faith groups, and to bring the resulting information to the attention of central and local government and other public bodies?

Dr Philip Giddings to reply as Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

A. The resource implications of quantifying the contribution of churches and faith groups to the third sector are beyond the capacity of MPA. However, the MPA Council takes every opportunity to alert local and national government to this role. Enabling this at local level, the recent Commission on Urban Life and Faith, with the Church Urban Fund and the Research and Statistics Department, developed the Churches Community Value Toolkit, available on the CULF website. This has been further developed following consultations with the national rural advisor and is designed for ecumenical use. The Cathedral and Church Buildings Division monitors and publicises the surveys conducted at regional level indicating the contribution of churches and faith groups to social and community activity.

Similar points are highlighted by the Faith in Rural Communities report; the Bishop for Urban Life and Faith; and the Church Heritage Forum report Building Faith in our Future.

The Revd Richard Moy (Lichfield) to ask the Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

Q17. Has the Mission and Public Affairs Council considered giving any guidelines or can it suggest where to go to get authoritative guidelines on what we should advise congregations re the consumption of chocolate where cocoa may have originated in the Ivory Coast, in the light of allegations that major brands of chocolate may be using cocoa harvested by children kidnapped from their homes and used as slaves for that purpose?

Dr Philip Giddings to reply as Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

A. This is an issue which is being monitored by the Ethical Investment Advisory Group in the light of the Church’s investments in listed food and confectionary companies. Regular meetings have been held with the main manufacturers of chocolate products to discuss progress. The Group welcomed the international protocol, signed by the Chocolate Manufacturers Association and the World Cocoa Foundation which brought together the main manufacturers, processors and trade associations in a public statement of needs, initiated the foundation of a multi sectoral advisory group on labour practices and led to a joint statement on child labour under the umbrella of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). The international cocoa initiative represents a serious and comprehensive attempt to understand the issues, and put in place a framework of best practice for the entire industry. We will continue to monitor progress.

(See also http://www.cofe.anglican.org/info/papers/tradejustice.pdf)

Mr Paul Eddy (Winchester) to ask the Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

Q18. As an example of Mission Shaped Church initiatives, is the Council aware of any strategies for planting new churches or encouraging (and authorizing) pioneer ministries within the Diocese in Europe? And if not, could the Council encourage such developments?

Dr Philip Giddings to reply as Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

The Council encourages implementation of the recommendations of Mission-shaped Church in every diocese. In the case of the Diocese in Europe there is much to thank God for. For example new churches – in the form of classical church plants or of café-churches – have been planted in Leipzig, Poitou-Charents, Kiev and Geneva.

Fresh Expressions led a chapter residential for the Council of Anglican and Episcopal Churches in Germany in 2007 and has been invited to lead a similar gathering for the Scandinavian and Baltic deanery in 2008.

The Church as a whole has clear guidelines for ordained and lay pioneer ministry approved by the House of Bishops in 2006 and 2007. Any ordinand from any diocese (including the Diocese in Europe) can now test a vocation to pioneer ministry as a recognized focus of ordained ministry. The lay guidelines are for each Diocese to implement in its own way.

Mr Gerald O’Brien (Rochester) to ask the Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

Q19. What submissions were made on behalf of the Church of England to the Science and Technology Committee which has been considering matters relating to abortion?

Mr Clive Scowen (London) to ask the Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

Q20. In the light of the clear expressions of opinion contained in General Synod resolutions over the years, what submissions have been made to the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee’s recent consultation concerning the law on abortion?

Dr Philip Giddings to reply as Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

A. The Church of England made no submission to the Science and Technology Committee’s consultation on abortion because the Committee explicitly excluded moral and ethical considerations, seeking evidence only in relation to the science of abortion. The Mission and Public Affairs Division took the view that since we had no special scientific knowledge, we could not contribute within the terms of reference set by the Committee. The recommendations in the Committee’s subsequent report are worrying because they stem from an inadequate remit. Considering scientific evidence in isolation from moral issues means that nothing can be said about the direction in which social policy ought to be moving. Mission and Public Affairs regrets this and has said so in a press statement.

The Revd Dr John Hartley (Bradford) to ask the Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

Q21. I recently conducted the funeral of a close relative of a prisoner, and found that he had been offered the opportunity to attend either the funeral service in church or the committal at the graveside but not both. As a result he had felt obliged to attend the committal and so had missed all the ‘personal’ elements of the event: the tribute to the deceased, the sermon and so on, and the chance to meet family friends who were not going on to the committal. Anecdotal evidence suggests that it is normal for prisoners to be allowed to attend only one of the funeral and committal. Has the Council taken a view on whether this ‘policy’ of the Prison Service should be challenged and, if so, what action has been taken?

Dr Philip Giddings to reply as Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

The Council has not had the opportunity to discuss this topic, and therefore has not taken a view. I understand that the requirement that a prisoner attending the funeral of a close relative should choose between attending the funeral service in church or the committal is not set out in any central policy of the Prison Service. Detailed arrangements are the responsibility of the Governor of each establishment, having regard to their own Local Security Strategy. Governors must take into account both the security risks and the resource commitments involved in escorting prisoners to funerals. I will discuss with the Bishop to Prisons whether it would be helpful for the Council to take up the general issue with the Prison Service.

Mr Roy Thompson (York) to ask the Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

Q22. How has the Mission and Public Affairs Council reacted to the news, released at the end of the Parliamentary Session, that Menwith Hill and Fylingdales were both to be upgraded to provide additional “Son of Star Wars” facilities?

The Bishop of Southwark to reply as Vice-Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

A. The Board for Social Responsibility issued a briefing paper on Ballistic Missile Defence in 2003, a copy of which can be found on the Church of England’s website. The matter has not been considered since.

BUSINESS COMMITTEE

Mr Philip French (Rochester) to ask the Chairman of the Business Committee:

Q23. When, and how, will the motions relating to women bishops from Southwark Diocesan Synod and Rochester Diocesan Synod be considered by the General Synod?

Prebendary Kay Garlick to reply as Chairman of the Business Committee:

A. The Business Committee reported to the July Group of Sessions (GS 1657) its conclusion that consideration of the Southwark Diocesan Synod Motion on the Episcopal Ministry Act of Synod would not be timely while the legislative drafting group on women in the episcopate, established at the request of the Synod, was proceeding with its work. That remains its view. The Rochester Diocesan Synod Motion concerning pastoral provision for those unable to accept women bishops has only just been received. It has been brought to the attention of the legislative drafting group and will be reported to the Business Committee at its next meeting.

A place will be found on the Synod’s agenda for considering the report of the legislative drafting group as soon as the House of Bishops requests it.

CHURCH COMMISSIONERS

Brigadier Ian Dobbie (Rochester) to ask the Church Commissioners:

Q24. How much are the Church Commissioners contributing to the Lambeth Conference 2008?

Mr Andreas Whittam Smith to reply as First Church Estates Commissioner:

A. The Commissioners have agreed to contribute to the costs of the Conference up to an overall limit of £1.05 million. This will include the cost of attendance by Church of England bishops and their wives and is on the understanding that any savings on attendance fees and/or hospitality (to which part of their contribution relates) will be reflected in a lower contribution.

ETHICAL INVESTMENT ADVISORY GROUP

Mr Joseph Brookfield (Blackburn) to ask the Chairman of the Ethical Investment Advisory Group:

Q25. What has been the result of the EIAG’s engagement with Petrochina and Sinopec following allegations that revenues generated by these two companies, in which the CBF holds shares, are being used to help fund the Janjaweed militia in Darfur?

The Revd Jeremy Crocker to reply on behalf of the Chairman:

The EIAG received a detailed update on the political situation in Sudan and Darfur at its September 2007 meeting, and continues to keep the situation under close review. Staff are working collaboratively with the Aegis Trust (on behalf of the Sudan Divestment Taskforce) to understand the issues surrounding the international call to disinvest from companies operating in the region. Steps have been taken to commence an informed engagement process with PetroChina and Sinopec where the Church has an investment interest, and this is ongoing. The EIAG will review progress at a future meeting and when the results of the engagement process become clear.

ARCHBISHOPS’ COUNCIL

Mr Nigel Holmes (Carlisle) to ask the Presidents of the Archbishops’ Council:

Q26. Following the statement of the Executive Chairman of ITV, Mr Michael Grade, at the Royal Television Society Convention in Cambridge in September, that he wanted ‘any kind of genre prescription’ to be dropped, saying that the market should define what ITV showed, is the Church of England to express its concern to Ofcom about the future for religious broadcasting on that channel?

Mrs Anne Sloman to reply on behalf of the Presidents of the Archbishops’ Council:

The Bishop of Manchester has written to Ofcom expressing serious concern about ITV’s proposal to drop prescribed genres. This might all but end their religious output and have further serious repercussions for all public service broadcasting, especially for the regional output that is vital for the health of local communities.

The Bishop has made clear his view that the place religion occupies, for good and ill, on the world agenda requires increasingly well-informed religious content across the genres - and especially in news coverage.

He has also emphasised the important contribution of public service broadcasting to our democracy and considers that damage may be done to it if the BBC is left as the sole major provider of public service output. Mr Grade is on record as recognising the value of more competition for the BBC’s public service output if public service broadcasting is to thrive.

HOUSE OF BISHOPS

Mr Christopher Pye (Liverpool) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:

Q27. Given that people are living longer and are in better health both physically and mentally as they age, will the House of Bishops raise to 75 the age at which Readers are required to obtain permission to officiate if they wish to continue in active ministry, and if not why not?

The Bishop of Norwich to reply on behalf of the Chairman of the House of Bishops:

It makes good sense that the age at which Readers require permission to officiate should be the same that applies to clergy. At present all ministers, ordained or lay, are required to seek permission to officiate at 70 years of age. The issue of whether consideration should be given to raising this age will be among those addressed in the report on Reader Ministry currently in preparation. The church greatly values the ministry of many Readers over 70, which should be in no way inhibited by the granting of PTO status.

Mr Christopher Pye (Liverpool) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:

Q28. What plans does the House of Bishops have to encourage the Church of England to become a FairTrade organisation by the time of the Lambeth Conference?

The Bishop of Southwark to reply as Vice-Chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs Council:

A. The Church of England, through the Mission and Public Affairs Division, has played an active role in the FairTrade movement, believing that it guarantees a better deal for Third World Producers. It has consistently worked with the Fairtrade Foundation to encourage dioceses to become fairly traded. The decision, however, as to whether a diocese becomes a Fairtrade diocese is a matter for individual dioceses rather than for the House of Bishops.

Mr Clive Scowen (London) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:

Q29. What progress has the House of Bishops made since the last Group of Sessions in formulating a strategy for promoting and defending the freedom of Christians and other people of faith

(i) to order their lives and contribute to society in accordance with their beliefs; and

(ii) to articulate their faith convictions publicly even when others take offence at what they say?

The Bishop of Southwark to reply as Vice-Chairman of the Mission & Public Affairs Division:

A. As the Archbishop of York indicated in his reply to the earlier question last July, these are issues which come to the fore in the context of particular legislative proposals, rather than in the abstract. For example, in September the Archbishops’ Council submitted a detailed response to the Government’s consultation document on a single equality law. In addition, bishops are regularly bringing a Christian perspective to bear on the public debate on matters touching on religious liberty – in the House of Lords, in the media and elsewhere. A recent example has been the Archbishop of Canterbury’s widely reported Observer article on abortion.

Mr Nigel Greenwood (Ripon & Leeds) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:

Q30. Following their meeting with the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church from September 19 to 25 in New Orleans, the Joint Standing Committee of the Primates and the Anglican Consultative Council reported that the Episcopal Church has clarified all the outstanding issues relating to their response to the questions directed explicitly to them in the Windsor Report, and on which clarifications were sought by 30 September 2007 by the Primates, articulated at their meeting in Dar es Salaam in February. In the light of that, has the House considered whether there is any reason why any bishop of the Church of England should not accept the invitation extended by His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury to attend the Lambeth Conference to be held in Canterbury in 2008?

The Revd Sister Rosemary CHN (Religious Communities) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:

Q31. Bearing in mind the favourable response of the General Synod in July when urged by the Bishops to show its support for the Archbishop of Canterbury and its concern for the Anglican Communion by affirming its willingness to engage positively with the Covenant process, will the House encourage its own members now to show their support for the Archbishop and their concern for the Communion by accepting His Grace’s invitation to the Lambeth Conference?

The Bishop of London to reply on behalf of the Chairman:

A. With permission, I propose to answer the questions from Nigel Greenwood and Sister Rosemary together.

At its meeting last month, the House received an oral report from the Archbishop of Canterbury on Anglican Communion matters (this was before the Report from the Joint Standing Committee had been received). The House also considered a possible response to the draft Anglican Covenant for the Archbishops to send on behalf of the Church of England before the end of the year.

Since the first Lambeth Conference of 1867 it has always been for individual bishops to decide how to respond to the personal invitation to them from the Archbishop of Canterbury. I have indicated that I will accept his invitation to the 2008 Conference and am looking forward to meeting there a very large number of my episcopal colleagues from the Church of England and around the Communion.

Mr Nigel Holmes (Carlisle) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:

Q32. In the debate on Communion by Extension in July 2000, the Bishop of Chester said that a ‘proper survey’ of its use would be completed within five years. In answer to my question a year ago, the Bishop of Rochester promised ‘a response to the General Synod (possibly in the form of a GS Misc paper) sometime in 2007’. When will it appear?

The Bishop of Rochester to reply as Chairman of the Theological Group:

A. I am afraid that the Theological Group has been very immersed in other matters during the last year. Prompted by your question, I will nevertheless explore with colleagues the scope for publishing the results of the House’s recent Review of Communion by Extension as soon as this can be arranged.

The Revd Mark Sowerby (Ripon & Leeds) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:

Q33. Since the General Synod’s decision to implement the recommendations of the Pilling Report (GS 1650), has the House of Bishops been monitoring progress in appointing to senior positions those clergy whom the report considered underrepresented among cathedral canons, deans and bishops?

The Bishop of Leicester to reply as Chairman of the Senior Appointments Group (Episcopal):

Not yet. The Pilling proposals have been under discussion by the committee of bishops who oversee work on senior appointments, but it is recognized that further process design work will be needed before recommendations can be implemented. In view of the urgent need for a major consultation on senior appointments following the Prime Minister’s Green Paper, The Governance of Britain, this work is not likely to be put in hand until the early part of 2008. The House of Bishops will be informed of progress in due course.

Mr Joseph Brookfield (Blackburn) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:

Q34. Following his becoming Yorkshireman of the Year, will the Archbishop of York be encouraged to use his new found influence to promote peace between Lancashire and Yorkshire?

The Bishop of London to reply on behalf of the Chairman:

A. I am happy to pass on the Synod’s congratulations to the Archbishop of York on this signal honour. My brother bishop may have enough faith to move mountains: only time will tell whether this extends to shifting the Pennines!

Mrs Christina Rees (St Albans) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:

Q35. Can the Chairman assure Synod that the House is confident the Women Bishops Legislative Drafting Group will be able to submit the results of its work to the House in time for the House to be able in turn to submit them to the General Synod in February 2008, as it will then be over 19 months since the Synod mandated the appointment of the Legislative Drafting Group?

The Bishop of Manchester to reply as Chairman of the Women Bishops Legislative Drafting Group:

A. The Group is making good progress: it has met on nine occasions since it was set up last December and had a meeting with the House of Bishops. It will not be practically possible for the Group both to fulfil the terms of the July 2006 Synod motion and to produce a report for the House to consider in time for the February Synod. The expectation, however, is that the House will have received the Group’s report before its May meeting and will have the opportunity then to consider how the Synod in July might best address the next steps.

SECRETARY GENERAL

The Revd Stephen Trott (Peterborough) to ask the Secretary General:

Q36. Does the Secretary General accept that the judgment of the Court of Appeal in New Testament Church of God v Stewart means that members of the clergy serving as parochial ministers are both office-holders and also have a contract of employment as ministers of religion in parish ministry, with attendant rights under the Employment Acts?

Mr William Fittall to reply:

A. No. The Court of Appeal, while upholding the finding of the Employment Tribunal that a contract of employment existed in this particular case, made it clear that this decision did not involve a general finding that ministers of religion are employees. In his leading judgment, Lord Justice Pill stated that ‘Employment Tribunals should carefully analyse the particular facts, which will vary from church to church, and probably from religion to religion, before reaching a conclusion’. The decision does not therefore determine the position in relation to parochial clergy in the Church of England.

The Revd Stephen Trott (Peterborough) to ask the Secretary General:

Q37. Has consideration been given to the effect of the judgment of the Court of Appeal in New Testament Church of God v Stewart on the draft Ecclesiastical Offices (Terms of Service) Measure and related draft legislation, the underlying rationale of which appears to have been substantially superseded by that judgment in its acknowledgement of the employment status of clergy in parochial ministry?

Mr William Fittall to reply:

A. The Revision Committee for this legislation will receive a report on this case at its next meeting. However, it is the view of those advising the Committee that the decision of the Court of Appeal has in no way superseded the proposed legislation since, as I have explained in my reply to Father Trott’s previous question, it involves no finding that ministers of the Church of England are employees. Furthermore, both it and the earlier decision of the House of Lords in Percy v Church of Scotland Board of National Mission leave room for the possibility, in the case of the Church of England, of a clearer statutory framework, which will preserve the office-holder status of clergy while affording them rights equivalent to those enjoyed by employees.

Brigadier Ian Dobbie (Rochester) to ask the Secretary General:

Q38. Does the Church of England contribute to the Lambeth Conference from other funds than those of the Church Commissioners, and if so, what has been budgeted for 2008?

Mr William Fittall to reply:

As the host province the Church of England has traditionally provided a wide range of support for the Lambeth Conference as well as hospitality for those coming from overseas. On this occasion the Anglican Communion Office (ACO) has asked our bishops to arrange pre-conference hospitality in dioceses and is encouraging parishes to raise funds to contribute to the costs of those wishing to attend who are unable to meet the full cost. There are no central funds for this. Additionally, as the Church Commissioners pay for all our bishops and their spouses to attend, the ACO has asked our dioceses, through their bishops, to contribute the equivalent number of bursaries (£3,700 per bursary) as the diocese has bishops and bishops’ spouses. The only national budget (£405,000 in 2008) is for the annual subscription that the Archbishops’ Council pays on behalf of the Church of England for the ongoing costs of the ACO.

Mr Philip French (Rochester) to ask the Secretary General:

Q39. What recommendations have been made in the current round of Service Reviews for the Archbishops’ Council, and what actions are being taken in response to them?

Mr William Fittall to reply:

The Joint Employment and Common Services Board discussed on 30 October the results of the reviews of the common service departments and the Board of Education has the review of the Education Division on its agenda for 7/8 November. It will then be for the Archbishops’ Council to consider all the reviews at its meeting at the end of the month. The reports and the decisions taken on them will, as was the case in previous rounds, be published in due course.

Mr Gerald O’Brien (Rochester) to ask the Secretary General:

Q40. What is the definition of “full communion” and with which other churches is the Church of England in full communion?

Mr William Fittall to reply:

A. Legislation uses the term ‘in communion’, which denotes a relationship involving a mutual interchangeability of baptized members and ordained ministers. A list of churches in communion with the Church of England may be found on pages 206-208 of the current edition of the Canons of the Church of England.

The term ‘full communion’ does not appear in legislation and does not have a single, precise definition. It has often been used to describe a relationship of communion in which the interchangeability of baptized members and ordained ministers is not restricted or impaired. It has also been pointed out that, theologically speaking, communion in this life is always less than full or perfect. The lack of a single, precise definition and the fact that the term has no legal import suggest that it would be both difficult and unnecessary to attempt to categorize churches according to it.

CLERK TO THE SYNOD

Mr Adrian Greenwood (Southwark) to ask the Clerk to the Synod:

Q41. Is it possible for the mover of a diocesan synod motion in the General Synod to amend the motion at any stage, eg in accordance with Standing Order 26(b)? If so, please explain further how this works. If it is not so possible, please state the authority for this prohibition.

Mr David Williams to reply:

A. Under Standing Order 26(b)(ii), a motion can be moved in a form different from that of which notice has been given, provided the Chair gives his or her permission. In principle, that Standing Order can apply to diocesan synod motions. However, under Standing Order 5(c) a diocesan synod motion is brought before the Synod at the formal request of a diocesan synod. Thus before the Chair gives his or her permission under Standing Order 26(b)(ii) he or she is likely to wish to be satisfied that the diocesan synod in question has formally agreed that the motion be moved in the amended form proposed. Chairs may well look unfavourably on requests to make last minute changes which amend the form of a diocesan synod motion into something different from what the Synod had been expecting to debate.

BOARD OF EDUCATION

Mr Andrew Presland (Peterborough) to ask the Chairman of the Board of Education:

Q42. What representations, if any, has the Board made to the Department for Children, Schools and Families (or its predecessor) in response to the fact that not one of the thirty-three varied examples of ‘contacts able to provide information on local positive activities for young people’ listed in its Guidance on Publicising Positive Activities (October 2006) relates to activities provided by churches or other faith groups despite:

• there being many thousands of active church youth groups and associated activities, run by an estimated 87,000 volunteers, in England and Wales;
• evidence from Christian Research that there are 7,9000 full-time paid church youth workers in England and Wales, outnumbering those employed by local authorities by more than two to one; and
• the Government’s Ten Year Youth Strategy document (Aiming High for Young People) favourably quoting research that found that young people who attended a church youth group were significantly more likely than others to gain a level 2 qualification and significantly less likely to become teenage parents, or become separated or divorced, even after accounting for the effects of low income and difficult family background?

The Bishop of Dover to reply as Acting Chairman of the Board of Education:

A. We thank Mr Presland for highlighting the most valued and substantial contribution made by churches and other faith groups to the lives and well being of young people, particularly through the dedicated work of both employed and voluntary youth workers.

Whilst acknowledgement of the opportunities offered by the church and faith groups may not have appeared formally in the publication he refers to, there is wide recognition in Government of the significant contribution that the church makes to the lives of young people.

Education Division staff are in regular contact with Ministers in order to raise the profile of the church’s work with and amongst young people and Mr Presland can be assured that the achievements of the church and faith groups in the provision of opportunities for young people are held in high regard by Government. We shall continue to raise the issues he has highlighted at every opportunity.

COUNCIL FOR CHRISTIAN UNITY

Mr Paul Eddy (Winchester) to ask the Chairman of the Council for Christian Unity:

Q43. Has the Faith and Order Advisory Group been asked to provide theological reflection and/or advice to the Crown Nominations Commission to enable it fully to consider the eligibility of a candidate for a see who has been divorced and remarried?

The Bishop of Peterborough to reply:

A. No.