The afternoon session started with a presentation by Sir Joseph Pilling (chair of the Senior Church Appointments Review Group) about the group’s report Talent and Calling (GS 1650).
As we have already reported the proposed consideration of the report was overtaken by the Government’s green paper The Governance of Britain (online here and here) proposing that the Prime Minister should no longer play an active role in the selection of diocesan bishops. As a result the debate and motion were extended to include this.
The Bishop of Leicester moved
That this Synod, noting that proposals in the Government’s Green Paper of 3 July (attached to GS 1650A) will necessitate further discussion with the Church:
(a) welcome the prospect of the Church achieving the ‘decisive voice in the appointment of bishops’ for which Synod voted in 1974;
(b) affirm its willingness for the Church to have the decisive voice in the selection of cathedral deans and canons appointed by the Crown, given the Prime Minister’s wish no longer to play an active role in the selection of individual candidates;
(c) invite the Archbishops, in consultation with the Archbishops’ Council and the House of Bishops, to oversee the necessary consequential discussions with the Government and to report to the February group of sessions, including on the implications for those matters covered by chapter 8 of GS 1650; and
(d) endorse the recommendations in chapter 10 of GS 1650, with the exception of recommendations 20-30, invite those responsible to give effect to them and invite the Archbishops’ Council to report to Synod during 2008 on progress with implementation.
Several amendments to the motion were proposed, two of which were carried, so that the final wording of the motion became
That this Synod, noting that proposals in the Government’s Green Paper of 3 July (attached to GS 1650A) will necessitate further discussion with the Church:
(a) welcome the prospect of the Church achieving the ‘decisive voice in the appointment of bishops’ for which Synod voted in 1974;
(b) affirm its willingness for the Church to have the decisive voice in the selection of cathedral deans and canons appointed by the Crown, given the Prime Minister’s “commitment to a process of constructive engagement between the Government and the Church” (The Governance of Britain Green Paper, CM7170);
(c) invite the Archbishops, in consultation with the Archbishops’ Council and the House of Bishops, to oversee the necessary consequential discussions with the Government and to report to the February group of sessions, including on the implications for those matters covered by chapter 8 of GS 1650; and
(d) subject to the above, endorse the recommendations in chapter 10 of GS 1650, invite those responsible to give effect to them and invite the Archbishops’ Council to report to Synod during 2008 on progress with implementation.
At the end of the debate the amended motion was carried by 297 votes to one.
8 CommentsMonday morning started with the Archbishop of York’s presidential address on the theme “Do Not be Afraid” – online here and here.
The First and Third Church Estates Commissioners (Andreas Whittam Smith and Timothy Walker) made a presentation on the commissioners’ report for 2006.
Diocesan Synod motion on the Church Commissioners
Mr Adrian Greenwood moved on behalf of the Southwark Diocesan Synod.
That this Synod request an urgent review by the Archbishops’ Council of the status and accountability of the Church Commissioners.
Mrs April Alexander (Southwark) moved as an amendment.
Delete all words after “That this Synod” and insert
“request:
(a) the Archbishops’ Council to prepare an independent report to the Synod on the Church Commissioners’ own proposal that there should be a General Synod Select Committee on the Parliamentary model to facilitate their further accountability to the Synod, having due regard to:
i. representation of the House of Laity on the Select Committee; and
ii. the interest of the Synod in the major investment and disinvestment decisions of the Assets Committee;(b) the Ethical Investment Advisory Group to prepare a report to the Synod on the feasibility of advising the Church Commissioners on the ethical implications of their major decisions in the purchase, sale and management of land and real estate and on the EIAG’s recommendations for making this advice effective, acceptable and within the spirit of the Commissioners’ own policy statements; and
(c) both to report back by July 2008”.
Even though Mr Greenwood supported this amendment it was defeated by 110 votes to 93. The unamended motion was then put to the vote and clearly defeated on a show of hands.
Background papers from the diocese of Southwark and the Church Commissioners.
Disability issues for ministry in the Church of England
The Revd John Naudé made a presentation on disability issues for ministry in the Church of England.
Background paper GS 1663.
The Bishop of Sheffield moved:
That this Synod affirm the value of the contribution made by disabled clergy in the life and witness of the Church of England and its commitment to and support for their ministry by asking dioceses to:
(a) take note of the report Disabled clergy in the Church of England and the outcome of this debate;
(b) ensure that a “lead” person on disability issues is appointed in each diocese and that appropriate training is made available; and
(c) ensure that disability issues are made an integral part of the functioning of diocesan structures.
The Revd Stephen Lynas (Bath & Wells) moved two amendments:
Leave out the words “disabled clergy” and insert “clergy with disabilities”.
At the end of paragraph (c) insert “, particularly Diocesan Advisory Committees and Parsonage Boards”.
Both amendments were carried so that the substantive motion became:
That this Synod affirm the value of the contribution made by clergy with disabilities in the life and witness of the Church of England and its commitment to and support for their ministry by asking dioceses to:
(a) take note of the report Disabled clergy in the Church of England and the outcome of this debate;
(b) ensure that a “lead” person on disability issues is appointed in each diocese and that appropriate training is made available; and
(c) ensure that disability issues are made an integral part of the functioning of diocesan structures, particularly Diocesan Advisory Committees and Parsonage Boards.
The amended motion was overwhelmingly carried.
1 CommentThe complete audio recording of the debate is linked from the official report page here.
The full text of the opening address by Archbishop Drexel Gomez can be found here.
Also, the speech of the Bishop of Rochester here.
News reports of the debate:
Church Times Synod: Sunday 8 July
BBC Church agrees plan over disputes
Update And Robert Pigott also has Nervous support for Church rules.
Guardian Stephen Bates Synod agrees deal over discipline to head off church rift over gay clergy
The Times Ruth Gledhill Church takes a step back from schism with gay expulsion plan
Update And now also Ruth’s blog comments on this at: Synod Days 2,3 & 4.
Daily Telegraph Jonathan Petre Anglican covenant ‘will halt slide to a schism’
Press Association Synod try to avoid schism over gays
Church Society has this version of what happened.
31 CommentsOther items of business concerned The Anglican-Methodist Covenant and Minority Ethnic Anglicans.
See the official report here for details of the motions that were passed on these two subjects.
21 CommentsThe Sunday afternoon session of General Synod opened with an address by the Most Revd Drexel Gomez (Archbishop of the West Indies and chair of the Anglican Covenant Design Group). Synod then went onto a full-scale debate on the proposed Anglican Covenant. The debate was on the following motion moved by the Bishop of Chichester.
‘That this Synod:
(a) affirm its willingness to engage positively with the unanimous recommendation of the Primates in February 2007 for a process designed to produce a covenant for the Anglican Communion;
(b) note that such a process will only be concluded when any definitive text has been duly considered through the synodical processes of the provinces of the Communion; and
(c) invite the Presidents, having consulted the House of Bishops and the Archbishops’ Council, to agree the terms of a considered response to the draft from the Covenant Design Group for submission to the Anglican Communion Office by the end of the year.’
Three amendments were moved. Mr Tim Cox (a council member of Church Society) moved:
Leave out everything after “That this Synod” and insert:
(a) note the unanimous recommendation of the Primates in February 2007;
(b) believe that the Covenant process will prove inadequate to address the problems presently dividing the Communion; and
(c) urge all the Provinces of the Anglican Communion to declare themselves in communion only with those Provinces, dioceses and congregations that:
(i) assert whole-heartedly that the Scriptures are the Word of God;
(ii) uphold the historic Anglican formularies (the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion, 1662 Book of Common Prayer and Ordinal); and
(iii) on the current presenting cause of division, uphold the Biblical teaching that sexual intercourse belongs solely within the lifelong commitment of a man and woman in marriage.
Mr Justin Brett (Oxford) moved:
In paragraph (a) leave out the words “affirm its willingness to engage positively with” and insert “note”.
The Revd Jonathan Clark (London) moved:
In paragraph (c) leave out all the words after “the Archbishops’ Council” and insert “to bring back to the next group of sessions of Synod for approval a considered response to the draft from the Covenant Design Group for submission to the Anglican Communion Office”.
Each of the three amendments was defeated on a show of hands. Finally the Bishop of Chichester’s unamended motion was put to the vote and carried on a show of hands.
The background paper to the debate is here with Annex 4 and Annex 5.
30 CommentsThe official report of this afternoon’s session can be found here.
The afternoon started with some appointments which Synod was asked to approve. Allan Bridgewater’s appointment as Chair of the Church of England Pensions Board was extended until 31 December 2008. Andrew Britton was appointed to the Archbishops’ Council for a five-year term from 1 October 2007, where he will replace Michael Chamberlain, and Katherine McPherson and Anne Sloman’s membership of the Council was extended to 31 December 2009.
Synod then moved onto the clergy pension scheme and gave final agreement to the modifications to the scheme provisionally agreed in February. These will reduce the benefits for future service a little but will keep costs within manageable limits.
The debate on the Private Member’s Motion about Possible Military Action Against Iran that should have been debated during the afternoon was terminated early.
The original motion was:
That this Synod, in the light of growing international concern about possible US military action against Iran, believe that in present circumstances unilateral pre-emptive military action by the US or any other government against Iran cannot be justified.
There was also a long amendment proposed by Dr Philip Giddings which replaced the above with a series of more detailed recommendations, including one urging the government of Iran to comply with UN Security Council resolutions and Treaty obligations.
Immediately after the proposer, The Revd Canon Simon Bessant, had made his opening speech, Dr Chris Sugden put a procedural motion to move to next business. His stated reason for this was to avoid prejudicing the position of the new and soon-to-be-installed Anglican bishop in Iran.
This motion was eventually passed, but only after a formal division of the synod. The voting was 113 to 96. The motion therefore lapsed and the topic cannot be taken up again in the lifetime of this synod, without express approval of the business committee.
This opened up a half-hour space in the agenda so Synod started to consider amendments to its standing orders.
Finally, there was a short presentation on plans to provide hospitality to visiting bishops in the days leading up to next year’s Lambeth conference.
Church Times Report of Saturday
11 CommentsThere was an unusually large number of Questions directed to the Ministry Division about the supervision and inspection of theological colleges. Most of these did not mention Wycliffe Hall by name. One however did:
The Revd Jonathan Alderton-Ford (St Edmundsbury & Ipswich) to ask the Chairman of the Ministry Division:
Q. Given the reports in the media that staff relationships have broken down at Wycliffe Hall theological college, what steps is the Ministry Division taking to resolve the matter?
The Bishop of Derby to reply as Vice Chairman of the Theological Education and Training Committee
A. The Bishop of Norwich, the Chair of Ministry Division has been in regular contact with the Bishop of Liverpool, the Chair of the Wycliffe Council. Further, the Bishops’ Committee for Ministry has set in place 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, which can then take any further action, if required.
0 CommentsThe official report of the morning’s business is here. Full audio recordings are available there.
The revision stage of the Marriage Measure was completed with no substantive changes to the draft published at GS 1616B.
The BBC has a report on this: Church relaxes rules on marriage.
The Parochial Fees Order was approved with one substantial amendment: the fee payable to the PCC in respect of a service for the burial of cremated remains in a churchyard was increased: from £55 to £74.
The item to consider the report of the Standing Orders Committee was not reached before the lunch break and will probably be taken up on Monday afternoon.
Further report of the afternoon’s business to follow.
0 CommentsColin Slee writes in the Guardian about the Anglican covenant proposal.
Jonathan Sacks writes in The Times about Elijah and the prophetic truth of the ‘still, small voice’.
Christopher Howse writes in the Daily Telegraph about Iraqi Christians, in On the plains of Nineveh.
Giles Fraser writes in the Church Times about how Faith is on the front line in the war on terror.
5 CommentsThe official reports, including audio of the entire proceedings, can be found here.
TA will publish some further details of Answers to Questions later today. Meanwhile, Church Society has some notes here.
The Church Times has a brief report here.
Jonathan Petre has a report of the presentation by the Children’s Commissioner, Prof Sir Albert Aynsley Green: Church told to defend youth ‘failed by Britain’.
Alastair Cutting also has a report of this, see Children have more fun – (b) 6July2007.
GS 1650A has been issued, in which it says:
…The Synod agenda already provides for substantial consideration of appointments issues on Monday afternoon. The report Talent and Calling (GS 1650) did not, however, consider the appointment arrangements for diocesan bishops and its recommendations in respect of Crown appointments to cathedral posts were made before this week’s announcement from the Government. The Presidents have decided, therefore, that some change is needed to Monday’s business so that there can be a debate that takes account of the Green Paper.
The Presidents have directed that after item 26 (address from Sir Joseph Pilling) there should be a debate on a motion moved by the Bishop of Leicester [copy below]. This will be place of items 27 and 28 in the agenda.
The new motion will give Synod the opportunity to consider how it wishes to respond both to the Government’s proposals and the recommendations in Talent and Calling.
The new motion is:
That this Synod, noting that proposals in the Government’s Green Paper of 3 July (attached to GS 1650A) will necessitate further discussion with the Church:
(a) welcome the prospect of the Church achieving the ‘decisive voice in the appointment of bishops’ for which Synod voted in 1974;
(b) affirm its willingness for the Church to have the decisive voice in the selection of cathedral deans and canons appointed by the Crown, given the Prime Minister’s wish no longer to play an active role in the selection of individual candidates;
(c) invite the Archbishops, in consultation with the Archbishops’ Council and the House of Bishops, to oversee the necessary consequential discussions with the Government and to report to the February group of sessions, including on the implications for those matters covered by chapter 8 of GS 1650); and
(d) endorse the recommendations in chapter 10 of GS 1650, with the exception of recommendations 20-30, invite those responsible to give effect to them and invite the Archbishops’ Council to report to Synod during 2008 on progress with implementation.
In the light of this direction, the Bishops of Sheffield and Leicester give notice that they do not intend to move items 27 and 28.
0 CommentsPat Ashworth in the Church Times reports: Synod members to urge caution over Anglican Covenant.
and also PM to withdraw from choosing diocesan bishops.
Jonathan Petre in the Daily Telegraph has Church of England coalition to tackle liberals.
Earlier in the week, he had Biggest change since Henry VIII and Pope.
9 CommentsIt appears that Church Society doesn’t think so. Read Is an Anglican Covenant a good idea? and then also read General Synod The Anglican Covenant.
23 Commentspress release from InclusiveChurch
Covenant proposals and extra-Provincial Bishops
5th July 2007
The growing number of bishops created by African provinces for “pastoral oversight” in North America (and potentially in other provinces), the attempts to create a Covenant that defines Anglican doctrine and ethics, and the apparent intention to organise an alternative to the Lambeth Conference in London next year all point towards one thing. The strategy to destabilise the Anglican Communion is moving into another phase.
The creation by the provinces of Uganda, Kenya and Nigeria of extra-provincial Bishops is against the expressed wish of the Windsor Report and the post Lambeth ’98 process of listening and reconciliation. It is more evidence that the Primates of those provinces and their supporters in the US and Britain profoundly misunderstand the nature of the Communion. We very much regret that the Chair of the Covenant Design Group, the Archbishop of the West Indies, has welcomed these appointments.
Inclusive Church’s aim is to support and celebrate the traditional breadth and generosity of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as it has been received and passed on through Anglican history and lived out in the Communion. This creates challenges when there are fundamental disagreements. But the way to respond to disagreements is not to walk apart, nor to create separate structures, nor to seek to impose one particular point of view on the Communion. It is to engage, to communicate, to speak, to listen and to learn.
Clearly there are outstanding issues over how the Communion should respond to the reality that many Provinces include lesbian and gay Christians who live with partners in loving, faithful relationships. But the extraordinary way in which this issue has been allowed to dominate the life of the Communion over the past ten years is not coincidence.
There can be little doubt that the issue is being used by some, mainly conservative, Christians as a lever to try to change the Communion into something it is not; from a conciliar church into a confessional one. From a praxis-based Communion where the bonds between us are the bonds of fellowship and love to a codified Communion where exclusions are legally determined and legally enforced, and where the Communion defines itself not by who it includes but by who it excludes.
The Covenant process has been moved, by this group, away from its original intention which was to affirm the bonds of fellowship which exist. The way in which the draft was received by some at the Primates meeting in Tanzania is indication that, whatever the intention, it will be used to enforce a particular interpretation of the Scriptures to the detriment of the life of the Communion. We do not need a Curia, and the process of drafting a Covenant is already giving more power to the Primates than is justified by our history, by our life and by some of their actions to date.
Hard cases make bad laws. We wish to see, urgently, greater understanding between provinces, and we can see the value of a Covenant which enables this to happen . But the proposed draft before us is likely to be an instrument of further division, not unification. Some of our structures may need reform – but it is already clear that this Covenant process is unlikely to help.
The suggestion of an alternative “not the Lambeth Conference” is, simply, sad. Those who suggest it are walking away from the possibility of dialogue. The suggestion has little to do with dealing with our post-imperial past, and little to do with ensuring that particular voices are heard. It has a great deal to do with power; and with the location of power in the Communion.
We call on those supporting these actions to recognise that there is more than one answer to the questions which face us. Resolution will be achieved only through mutual respect and communication, and an acknowledgement that different views are sincerely held by faithful and loyal members of the Communion.
Inclusive Church is deeply committed to continuing the debate over these questions. The Anglican Communon has faced problems before and moved through them. With God’s help, we will again.
Giles Goddard
Chair, IC
Jonathan Aitken a former Conservative cabinet minister and subsequent student at Wycliffe Hall, writes in today’s Guardian about the situation there. See This isn’t the Anglican split.
16 CommentsIn The Times tomorrow Ruth Gledhill interviews Peter Akinola.
The main newspaper article is titled For God’s sake.
There is also African bishops ready to boycott conference in row over gay clergy.
And there are two items on Ruth’s blog that expand on this:
Peter Akinola: ‘Unity will never be at the expense of truth’ and
Akinola on Lambeth, Canterbury, Islam and ritual sacrifice.
The Archbishop of York has issued this statement:
0 CommentsArchbishop Responds to Prime Minister’s Statement
The Most Revd. and Rt. Hon. Dr. John Sentamu, Archbishop of York, has welcomed the announcement by the Prime Minister regarding changes to the process by which diocesan bishops are appointed.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, who is on study leave, was made aware at the outset of the Government’s wish to talk to the Church about its intentions announced today. Dr. Williams agreed that the Archbishop of York was to deal with the matter and was briefed by Dr. Sentamu in advance of the Prime Minister’s statement.
Dr Sentamu said: “The Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Justice consulted me about his intentions which I believe accord with the declared wish of the Church of England.
“I welcome the prospect of the Church being the ‘decisive voice in the appointment of bishops’ which the General Synod called for 33 years ago (in 1974).
“I am grateful for the Prime Minister’s thoughtfulness and for his overt support for the role of the Queen and the establishment by law of the Church of England which have been strongly reiterated in the Green Paper.
“The challenge we face as the Church of England is to use the sacred trust, enshrined in law, for the common good of all the people of England. Our vocation is to love God and to love our neighbours as ourselves: doing to others that which we would wish to be done to us. Our presence in every part of England must be used for bridging, bonding, partnership and friendship for all.”
Following the Prime Minister’s Statement and the publication of the Green Paper outlining his proposals, the Church of England will also engage in a constructive conversation with the Government concerning the appointment by the Monarch of Deans, Canons and Parish Clergy where the Sovereign has a prerogative.
Here is what the Green Paper from the Ministry of Justice says about church matters:
The Government’s role in ecclesiastical, judicial and public appointments
Appointments in the Church of England
57. The Church of England is by law established as the Church in England and the Monarch is its Supreme Governor. The Government remains committed to this position.
58. Because The Queen acts on the advice of Ministers, the Prime Minister as her First Minister has a role in advising The Queen on certain appointments within the Church. Diocesan and Suffragan Bishops, as well as 28 Cathedral Deans, a small number of Cathedral Canons, some 200 parish priests and a number of other post-holders in the Church of England are appointed by The Queen on the advice of the Prime Minister.
59. In the case of Archbishops and Diocesan Bishops, reflecting the agreement reached between the Church and the State in 1976, the Crown Nominations Commission (formerly the Crown Appointments Commission) passes two names to the Prime Minister, usually in order of preference, who may recommend either of them to The Queen, or reject both and ask for further nominations. The Crown Nominations Commission is a Church based body, with the Archbishop of Canterbury as Chair and the Archbishop of York as Vice-Chair. However, the Prime Minister’s Secretary for Appointments is an ex-officio and non-voting member. The chair of the Crown Nominations Commission is taken by the Archbishop in whose province the vacancy has arisen.
60. For the appointment of Suffragan Bishops the relevant Diocesan Bishop is required by law to submit two names to the Crown. These are passed to the Prime Minister by the Archbishop of the Province concerned with a supportive letter. It has been the convention for more than a century that the Prime Minister advises the Monarch to nominate the person named first in the petition.
61. In the case of Deans appointed by the Crown, it is the practice for the Prime Minister to commend a name to the Queen, chosen from a shortlist provided by the Prime Minister’s Secretary for Appointments and agreed with the Diocesan Bishop, and following consultations with the Cathedral, Bishop, Archbishop of the province concerned and others as appropriate. (The aim is to reach agreement with the Bishop on the preferred order of the list.) In the case of the Crown canonries and parishes, following consultations led by the Downing Street Appointments Secretariat, the Prime Minister recommends the appointment to The Queen.
62. In considering the role which the Prime Minister and the Government should play in Church appointments, the Government is guided by four principles:
63. To reflect the principle that, where possible, the Prime Minister should not have an active role in the selection of individual candidates, for diocesan bishoprics the Prime Minister proposes that from now on he should ask the Crown Nominations Commission to put only one name to him, a recommendation he would then convey to The Queen. The Government will discuss with the Church any necessary consequential changes to procedures. The current convention for appointing Suffragan Bishops will continue.
64. The Government respects and understands the different arrangements for Cathedral, parish and other Crown appointments in the Church. Developing any new arrangements for such appointments will require a process of constructive engagement between the Government and the Church, and the Government is committed to ensuring a productive dialogue. The Government is aware that a Church review of certain senior appointments, including Cathedral appointments, is to be debated by General Synod later this month; it hopes that this will be a good starting point for that dialogue. Until new arrangements are agreed, the Secretary for Appointments will continue to assist as appropriate.
65. These changes would also have implications for the Lord Chancellor’s patronage of some 450 parishes and a small number of canonries. It would be sensible for any changes agreed to the procedures for Crown patronage to be also agreed for the Lord Chancellor’s patronage.
66. No changes are proposed to Crown appointments to the Royal Peculiars such as Westminster Abbey and St. George’s Chapel,Windsor, reflecting the personal nature of the relationship of these institutions with the Monarch. Current conventions will continue.
25 CommentsThe Affirming Catholicism press release published below mentions that an amendment has been tabled by Jonathan Clark.
The amendment reads as follows:
to delete all the words after “the Archbishops’ Council,” and replacing them with:
“to bring back to the next group of sessions of Synod for approval a considered response to the draft from the Covenant Design Group for submission to the Anglican Communion Office.”
The original motion would then read this way:
That this Synod:
32 Commentsa) affirm its willingness to engage positively with the unanimous recommendation of the Primates in February 2007 for a process designed to produce a covenant for the Anglican Communion;
b) note that such a process will only be concluded when any definitive text has been duly considered through the synodical processes of the provinces of the Communion; and
c) invite the Presidents, having consulted the House of Bishops and the Archbishops’ Council,
to agree the terms of a considered response to the draft from the Covenant Design Group for submission to the Anglican Communion Office by the end of the year.to bring back to the next group of sessions of Synod for approval a considered response to the draft from the Covenant Design Group for submission to the Anglican Communion Office.
Affirming Catholicism press release:
Alarm raised over draft Covenant
In the week before the General Synod of the Church of England will be asked to endorse the process to create an Anglican Covenant, Affirming Catholicism has sounded alarm over the current proposed draft. In a commentary on the Covenant design group’s proposal to give the final say on Anglican doctrine to the meeting of the leaders of national churches, the Primates, The Rev’d Dr Mark Chapman, editor of a forthcoming Affirming Catholicism publication on the Anglican Covenant, and Vice-Principal of the Ripon College, Cuddesdon, said:
The emphasis given in the current proposals to the Primates’ Meeting (composed of 38 men and one woman) downplays the importance of synods. There is something disingenuous about giving power to determine membership of the Communion and to decide what constitutes the ‘common mind’ of the Churches to a group who at the moment refuse even to share Eucharistic communion with each other.
Affirming Catholicism has previously welcomed the idea of an Anglican Covenant as one possible way of healing divisions over Church discipline regarding homosexuality which have fractured the global communion, and Dr Chapman’s paper reiterates the movement’s hope that an instrument which creates dialogue and affirms the progressive elements within Anglicanism might provide a way forward.
The Chair of Trustees, Canon Nerissa Jones, MBE, said:
We support any attempt by the Archbishop of Canterbury to hold us all together. Affirming Catholics are progressive and inclusive Anglicans who value our place in a diverse and global Communion. And that is why we argue that only a covenant which values the role of local Synods, and recognises that episcopal power must be shared with lay people, can win the support of ordinary Anglicans. We hope that Synod will vote to support the ongoing process provided that it also insists that these features are vital to the future of Anglicanism as we know it.
This weekend’s Synod motion, if passed, would give authority to top officials in the Church of England to comment on the draft ahead of next year’s gathering of Anglican Bishops at the Lambeth Conference. Fr Jonathan Clark, a member of the group Affirming Catholics in Synod and rector of the Anglican Society of Catholic Priests, has tabled an amendment to the motion to ensure that the Synod itself – the only elected body in the Church – endorses the Church’s official response to the current draft covenant. Fr Clark has also jointly published an article with the Rev’d Canon Dr Graham Kings, theological secretary of the evangelical organisation, Fulcrum, in which the two affirm the need for a covenant which can build mutual respect and increased tolerance amongst Anglican Christians.
3/ 07/ 07
5 CommentsUpdated
Andrew Goddard has written another briefing document, now available at Fulcrum The Anglican Covenant: Background and Resources. It now includes many links, including to a few articles that Thinking Anglicans has not mentioned previously. Reading this document is strongly recommended.
28 Comments