Update Thursday night I have corrected the voting figures on item 35; the number of bishops voting against was 16 (and not 15).
This page will be updated during the day as business proceeds.
The day started with a service of Holy Communion.
Synod then moved onto this motion on Recent Violence in Nigeria proposed by the Bishop of Durham
That this Synod, gravely concerned at the desperate plight of Christian communities in parts of Nigeria, as described in GS 1861, request the British Government to do all it can to support those in Nigeria seeking to protect religious minorities of all faiths and enable them to practise their religion without fear.
There is a brief background paper (GS 1861).
The Archbishop of Canterbury made this contribution to the debate.
The motion was carried with 344 votes in favour, none against and one recorded abstention.
Synod them moved onto the first of two items of business on the legislation to allow women to be bishops. This was the report (GS 1847) of the Business Committee on the reference of this legislation to the diocese. A couple of items were omitted from the report, and are listed in Notice Paper 10.
The motion before Synod was ‘That the Synod do take note of this Report’. Motions of this type allow a general debate on the report. Synod duly took note of the report and then adjourned for lunch.
Here is the official summary of the morning’s business.
Summary of business conducted on Wednesday 8th February 2012 AM
Synod resumed at 2.30 pm.
The Diocesan Synod Motions on this topic, taken after lunch, are below the fold.
Initially the motion from Manchester was moved. The proposers of the other two motions have spoken, but will move their motions later. This procedure allows a general debate to be held on all three, before Synod moves onto debating and voting on each one specifically in turn (in the order 36, 35, 13).
4.50 pm All motions and amendments have now been moved. Voting will take place shortly.
5.05 pm Pete Spiers’ amendment (item 36) was carried on a vote by houses, voting figures below.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 40 5 1 Clergy 122 70 1 Laity 107 85 4
Following this amendment, the text of item 35 (a proposed amendment to item 13), became:
35 (as amended by item 36) Leave out all the words after “That this Synod” and insert –
“(a) noting the significant support the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure has received in the Houses of Bishops, Clergy and Laity of diocesan synods, and
(b) desiring that the draft Measure be returned to the Synod for consideration on the Final Approval Stage substantially unamended so that it can be seen if the proposals embodied in it in the form in which it has been referred to the dioceses can attain the level of support required to achieve Final Approval,
request the House of Bishops in the exercise of its power under Standing Order 60(b) not to amend the draft Measure substantially.”.
5.25 pm Item 35 (as amended by item 36) was carried on a vote by houses, voting figures below
For Against Abstentions Bishops 26 16 5 Clergy 128 64 0 Laity 111 85 1
5.30 pm Item 13 (as amended by item 35) was then carried on a show of hands. Here is the final text of the motion as passed by Synod.
13 (as amended by item 35)
That this Synod,
(a) noting the significant support the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure has received in the Houses of Bishops, Clergy and Laity of diocesan synods, and
(b) desiring that the draft Measure be returned to the Synod for consideration on the Final Approval Stage substantially unamended so that it can be seen if the proposals embodied in it in the form in which it has been referred to the dioceses can attain the level of support required to achieve Final Approval,
request the House of Bishops in the exercise of its power under Standing Order 60(b) not to amend the draft Measure substantially.
Synod then took a ten minute break before moving onto a debate on its standing orders. There was then a delay as too many members had taken the opportunity to have a cup of tea, and some had to be called back to make up a quorum.
The only item requiring debate was a proposed change to standing orders to make the Chair of Synod’s Business Committee an elected position, rather than a position appointed by the Archbishops’ Council and subject to confirmation by Synod.
The Bishop of Willesden proposed an amendment to restrict the position to members of the houses of clergy and laity (ie not a bishop). This was defeated with 99 votes in favour and 103 against, with 9 recorded abstentions.
The original proposal was then carried on a show of hands.
There was not time to take a following motion, so this concluded the day’s business.
Here is the official summary of the afternoon’s business.
Summary of business conducted on Wednesday 8th February 2012 PM
Ekklesia C of E General Synod hears of climate change chaos in Bangladesh
Mark Hennessy in The Irish Times Church of England synod to decide on women bishops
Christian Today Church of England’s legislation on women bishops ‘needs more work’
BBC General Synod discussing women bishops compromise bid
Lancashire Evening Post Are we ready for a female bishop?
Richard Vernalls in the Worcester News Women should be bishops, says city’s top churchman
Matthew Davies in Episcopal News Service Church of England resumes women bishops debate
John Walsh in The Independent Church debate: Who’d be a bishop?
2 CommentsRiazat Butt in The Guardian Church of England votes to increase marriage and funeral fees
Press Association C of E wedding fees to rise by 40%
The Guardian offers this Head to head between Rosie Harper and Adrian Furse: Should the Church of England allow female bishops?
The Telegraph CoE synod: Cost of weddings and funerals to dramatically rise
1 CommentThere were a number of questions asked relating to the two recently announced House of Bishops working groups dealing with sexuality issues. None of these questions were reached during the session, so here are the written answers that would have been given.
Judith Maltby asked
Q. Given the inclusion of a man who is not a bishop in the group to advise the House of Bishops on the Church of England’s approach to human sexuality, are there any plans to include some women members in order to achieve at least a partial gender balance on this currently all-male group addressing the complex issue of human sexuality?
The Archbishop of York to reply:
A. The Archbishop of Canterbury and I made the appointments to this group, after consultation with Standing Committee of the House. It was, like the parallel group on civil partnerships, established as a small episcopal group. We concluded, however, that there was advantage in inviting a distinguished and independent outsider to chair and facilitate the process.
We do not intend to enlarge the membership of the group but it will be open to the group to consider how others can help it in its work, including, if it so decides, through inviting individuals to serve as consultants or assessors.
Giles Goddard asked:
Q. In the interests of transparency and of gaining the confidence of the Church of England in their reports, how are the terms of reference for the House of Bishops’ working groups on human sexuality and civil partnerships to be agreed and when will they be published?
The Bishop of Sodor and Man to reply on behalf of the Chairman:
A. The 1 July statement from the House of Bishops constitutes the terms of reference for both groups.
Stephen Coles asked
Q. What provisions are being made to ensure that Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Anglicans are consulted by both the group reviewing the Pastoral Statement on Civil Partnerships and that advising the House on the Church of England’s approach to human sexuality.
The Bishop of Sodor and Man to reply on behalf of the Chairman:
A. Before Christmas I wrote on behalf of the civil partnership group to a number of groups inviting them to submit representations and have now received replies from them all and some submissions from others. These include a detailed submission from the LGBT Coalition and some of its associated bodies. I understand that the group on human sexuality is to have its first meeting shortly and will be considering then how it is going to go about its task.
Stephen Coles asked:
Q. To what extent were the provisions of the Equality Act taken into account by the House of Bishops when they declared a moratorium on the appointment of clergy in civil partnerships to the episcopate?
The Bishop of Sodor and Man to reply on behalf of the Chairman:
A. On this as on other matters where legal issues are at stake, the House had the benefit of support from its Legal Adviser who had been involved both in the preparation of the relevant papers and was present at the discussion which took the decisions set out in the 1 July statement.
April Alexander asked:
Q. Recent press statements (5 January 2012 and 1 July 2011) on human sexuality and on civil partnerships indicate that the appointed working groups undertake to “draw together material from the listening process”. Can further information be provided about this process, including such matters as who has listened to whom (in broad terms), when they listened, what they heard and how they overcame the difficulty that homosexual priests do not feel free to declare themselves in order to participate?
The Bishop of Gloucester to reply on behalf of the Chairman:
A. The House of Bishops’ mandate for drawing together material from the listening process was set out in its statement of 1 July and given to the group of which I am now a member. We have a more extended timescale than the group reviewing the 2005 statement on civil partnerships and are just about to have our first meeting. So I can’t say much today about how we shall be setting about our task. But I can give an assurance that we shall certainly want, among other things, to assemble and reflect on the very considerable range of material and experience that has emerged from the listening process around dioceses since 1998.
The Church of England has announced a new project to resource Christian Community Action.
How to serve your community’s needs without reinventing the wheel in every parish: that is the challenge posed by a new project to be launched by the Archbishop of York at this week’s General Synod.
…
The report from Professor Hilary Russell – and a new website – respond to Gavin Oldham’s Following Motion in the “Big Society” debate at Synod in November 2010. More than 45 projects and initiatives are covered in detail in the report and form the core of the website.
Full details are below the fold.
1 CommentOrder paper for Tuesday’s business
The first item of business was Parochial Fees.
Some, but not all, of the amendments listed in the order paper were carried. The amended Fees Order was then approved by Synod.
Background Papers for this debate
GS 1852 Draft Parochial Fees and Scheduled Matters Amending Order 2012
GS 1852X Explanatory Memorandum
GS Misc 1015 Draft Fees Order, An explanation of the proposed fee levels
Synod then moved onto the Draft Clergy Discipline (Amendment) Measure
Papers for this debate
GS 1814A Draft Clergy Discipline (Amendment) Measure
GS 1814Y Report by the Revision Committee
The final business in the morning was the Draft Diocese in Europe Measure
Papers for this debate
GS 1853 Draft Diocese in Europe Measure
GS 1853X and Explanatory Memorandum
Here is the official summary of the morning’s business.
Summary of business conducted on Tuesday 7th February 2012 AM
The afternoon started with a presentation by the Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich on the Draft Code of Practice (GS Misc 1007) required by the Draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure.
Presentations at Synod allow members to ask questions, but not to make speeches.
After the presentation Synod moved onto The Ecclesastical Offices (Terms of Service) (Consequential Provisions) Order 2012
The amendment in the order paper was agreed, after which the order was approved.
Papers for this item
GS 1858 The Draft Order
GS 1858X and Explanatory Memorandum
As Synod finished this business earlier that expected, a gap opened up in the agenda which was filled with this Chichester diocesan synod about the Appointment of Archdeaccons originally planned to be taken tomorrow.
That this Synod request that Canon C 22.1 be amended to read “No person shall be capable of receiving the appointment of archdeacon unless he has been six years complete in holy orders at the time of appointment
At the end of the debate the Bishop of Chichester successfully called for a vote by houses. The motion was defeated in all three houses.
For Against Abstentions Bishops 9 21 0 Clergy 31 118 1 Laity 53 84 9
The day’s business finished with a presentation by Mrs Sally Keeble (Director of the Anglican Alliance for Relief, Development and Advocacy) about the work of the Alliance, followed by questions.
Here is the official summary of the afternoon’s business
Summary of business conducted on Tuesday 7th February 2012 PM
updated Tuesday at noon and in the afternoon
Andrew Brown in The Guardian General Synod: the perfect forum for Anglicans who want to avoid decisions
Riazat Butt in The Guardian Church of England has ‘no plan B’ on female bishops
The Australian Anglican male co-bishop talk rubbished
Christian Today Call to Church of England to defend traditional marriage
Steve Doughty in the Mail Online Legalising assisted dying would be a disaster that undermines sanctity of life, Archbishop warns
Updates
Peter Mullen wrote this comment article for the Telegraph: Let us pray for those against women bishops.
John Bingham in The Telegraph Archbishop Rowan Williams: assisted suicide could spell ‘disaster’
2 CommentsThere is a change to the agenda for Wednesday morning. See GS 1861 which contains a background briefing note by the Bishop of Durham, Justin Welby.
1 CommentRecent violence in Nigeria
In view of the recent serious violence in Nigeria the Bishop of Durham travelled to the country at short notice on behalf of the Archbishop of Canterbury to meet members of the Anglican Church in Nigeria and others caught up in the deteriorating situation there.Following the Bishop’s return we have decided, in the exercise of our powers under Standing Order 4 (b) in relation to urgent or other especially important business, to direct the addition to the agenda for the February Group of sessions of a short debate. This will enable the Synod to hear from the Bishop of Durham, to reflect on the attached briefing note and, if it agrees, to pass a short motion that the Bishop will move on our behalf in the following terms:
“That this Synod, gravely concerned at the desperate plight of Christian communities in parts of Nigeria as described in GS 1861, request the British Government to do all it can to support those in Nigeria seeking to protect religious minorities of all faiths and enable them to practise their religion without fear.”
+ Rowan Cantuar: + Sentamu Ebor:
3 February 2012
The LGB&T Anglican Coalition will hold an Act of Witness at General Synod on Thursday 9 February. The poster advertising this event can be downloaded here.
1 CommentOn Wednesday General Synod will be holding a debate on two diocesan synod motions relating to women bishops. The details of this have already been explained here.
There were several other dioceses that passed resolutions in support of the Archbishops’ Amendment, although many more dioceses rejected such an amendment. However, it turns out that all those who did will get some preferential treatment in the debate, as revealed by this Question and Answer from tonight’s Questions session. As this was the very last question on the list, it was not reached during the session, which is why I am reporting it now.
The Revd Hugh Lee (Oxford) to ask the Clerk to the Synod:
Q. As it is normal practice, where more than one diocese has submitted a DSM in identical or similar terms, for the diocese(s) concerned to be invited to nominate someone who could speak on behalf of their diocesan synod in the General Synod debate on the DSM and then to draw this to the attention of the person chairing the debate, is it also normal practice to invite the diocese(s) whose synods had rejected a motion in identical or similar terms to those of the DSM to nominate someon who could speak on behalf of their diocesan synod in the debate on the DSM and then to draw this to the attention of the person chairing the debate?
Dr Colin Podmore to reply as Clerk to the Synod:
2 CommentsA. The reason for the practice to which the question refers is that a motion moved at the instance of a diocesan synod can only be moved once in the same, or a substantially similar, form, yet it would be discourteous to a diocesan synod that submitted a motion listed in Special Agenda IV if it (or a motion in a substantially similar form) were debated without a representative being called to speak.
That consideration does not apply in the case of motions that diocesan synods have rejected, or have passed without submitting them for inclusion in Special Agenda IV. However, individual members may of course seek to speak in the debate.
In any event, the overriding duty of the Chair in all debates is to ensure that there is a balance of speakers for and against the motion and any amendments.
The Church of England General Synod opened this afternoon. I will update this page with reports of the Synod’s business during the day. The full agenda is here.
There is a live audio link from Synod here.
The Church of England’s own summary of the day’s business is here.
Monday’s Business
The Archbishop of Canterbury moved a Loyal Address to the Queen to mark her Diamond Jubilee; Synod members were all in favour.
Synod debated the report of the Business Committee. This is largely an opportunity for members to complain about items that are not on the agenda, eg same-sex marriage, and how the debate on the Manchester and Southward motions on women bishops has been arranged.
The dates of Synod sessions in 2014-2015 were agreed. I have posted these dates here.
The Archbishops’ nomination of Rebecca Swinson for a five-year term on the Archbishops’ Council was accepted. Andrew Britton’s membership of the Council was extended for twelve months to 30 September 2012.
Independent Commission on Assisted Dying
Mrs Sarah Finch (London) moved her private member’s motion:
That this Synod express its concern that the Independent Commission on Assisted Dying is insufficiently independent to be able to develop proposals which will properly protect the interests of vulnerable and disabled people.
Mr Philip Fletcher (Archbishops’ Council) proposed this amendment, which was carried.
After the words “That this Synod” insert “(a)”.
After the words “Assisted Dying” leave out “is” and insert “was”.
And
After the words “disabled people” insert –
“;
(b) endorse the responses to the Commission on Assisted Dying referred to in paragraphs 7 and 8 of GS 1851B;
(c) affirm the intrinsic value of every human life and express its support for the current law on assisted suicide as a means of contributing to a just and compassionate society in which vulnerable people are protected; and
(d) celebrating the considerable improvement in the quality of care of the dying brought about by the hospice and palliative care movements and by the input of clinicians, clergy and others, encourage the Church’s continued involvement in the wider agenda of the care of those approaching the end of their lives and the support of those caring form them.”.
The amended motion then read:
That this Synod
(a) express its concern that the Independent Commission on Assisted Dying was insufficiently independent to be able to develop proposals which will properly protect the interests of vulnerable and disabled people;
(b) endorse the responses to the Commission on Assisted Dying referred to in paragraphs 7 and 8 of GS 1851B;
(c) affirm the intrinsic value of every human life and express its support for the current law on assisted suicide as a means of contributing to a just and compassionate society in which vulnerable people are protected; and
(d) celebrating the considerable improvement in the quality of care of the dying brought about by the hospice and palliative care movements and by the input of clinicians, clergy and others, encourage the Church’s continued involvement in the wider agenda of the care of those approaching the end of their lives and the support of those caring form them.
The amended motion was carried with 284 votes in favour and none against. There were 4 recorded abstentions.
The Archbishop of Canterbury spoke in this debate and has published this summary of his speech.
Background papers for this debate: GS 1851A and GS 1851B
Synod then moved onto the final business of the day: Questions.
Some live blogs from Synod
General Synod blog
Jeremy Fletcher
Riazat Butt
There have been several recent reports of an interview in The Times given by the Bishop of Salisbury, Nick Holtam. The original newspaper articles remain behind a paywall. The bishop also spoke on the BBC radio programme Sunday yesterday.
The BBC programme can be found here (available on iPlayer or as podcast).
The Diocese of Salisbury has these reports:
Briefing note following the interview published in The Times on Friday 3 February
Bishop urges open debate – Bishop Nicholas said on BBC Radio 4’s ‘Sunday’ programme this week that there are more views on civil partnerships in the church than have been expressed officially.
Changing Attitude has The Bishop of Salisbury first to make public his support for gay marriage and Pete Broadbent predicts Synod will be talking about gay marriage in the tea room this week
37 CommentsUpdated 11 Feb to add Gloucester voting figures
On Saturday both Derby and Gloucester dioceses voted decisively to reject the proposed Anglican Covenant. Canterbury voted strongly in favour.
In Derby the voting was:
Bishops: 0 for, 1 against
Clergy: 1 for, 21 against, 2 abstentions
Laity: 2 for, 24 against, 2 abstentions
In Gloucester the voting was:
Bishops 1 for, 0 against, 1 abstention
Clergy: 16 for, 28 against, 1 abstention
Laity: 14 for, 28 against, 6 abstentions
Update: from the comments below, we now have figures for Canterbury:
Bishops: 1 for, 0 against, 0 abstentions
Clergy: 26 for, 14 against, 0 abstentions
Laity: 39 for, 13 against, 0 abstentions
Recently, the No Anglican Covenant Coalition announced the appointment of Oxford University Professor Diarmaid MacCulloch, DD, as a Patron of the Coalition. The full press release is here (PDF).
…“Anglicanism was born in the Reformation’s rejection of an unwarranted and unhistorical over-centralization of ecclesiastical authority,” according to Professor MacCulloch. “This pernicious proposal of a Covenant (an unhappy choice of name if you know anything about our Church’s history) ignores the Anglican Communion’s
past, and seeks to gridlock the Anglican present at the cost of a truly Anglican future…
Also a paper written by Peter Doll, Canon Librarian of Norwich Cathedral, in support of the Covenant, was comprehensively critiqued by Jonathan Clatworthy and also by Lionel Deimel.
24 CommentsThis petition has been organised by Changing Attitude:
We support the growing number of Church of England clergy who wish to bless civil partnerships in their churches.
Many lesbian and gay Christians wish to have their civil partnerships registered in their parish church by their parish priest in the presence of their community. They wish to affirm their love and commitment in the presence of God in their spiritual home.
Since December it has been legally possible to bless civil partnerships on religious premises. It is time for the Church of England to openly affirm the love, ministry and fidelity of all LGBT people, supporting them in their journey in faith.
We ask the General Synod of the Church of England to allow churches wishing to register civil partnerships the freedom to do so under the new legislation.
We ask the House of Bishops to give clergy the freedom to register civil partnerships in church followed by a service of prayer and dedication.
For more background on this, see Changing Attitude launches petition to allow priests to bless civil partnerships in church and also this earlier article: London clergy challenge Civil Partnership ban.
11 CommentsScot Petersen has written at OpenDemocracy about the bishops in the House of Lords. See Lords Spiritual: a problem of transparency and legitimacy.
…For purposes of the upcoming synod debate, however, the following question by Baroness Young of Hornsey merits attention:
If someone says, in relation to the appointment of Bishops, that the Bishops come from a relatively narrow spectrum of society and that they have separate rules of appointment, separate discipline and no women, does not all that undermine the notion of legitimation either through democratic election or through a rigorous independent appointments procedure? (p. 14)
The archbishop’s response was a restatement of the passage quoted above. But recent events have shown that the episcopal appointments procedure is neither legitimate, rigorous nor independent. In fact, the appointments procedure, which is conducted in secret by the Crown Nominations Commission, is not fit for purpose. A single case study will illustrate the point…
The synod debate in question is discussed in this earlier TA article.
2 CommentsAn Early Day Motion has been filed in the House of Commons by Frank Field, MP.
That this House welcomes the moves by the General Synod of the Church of England to pass legislation permitting women to be bishops; notes that the Synod has now concluded its consultation with the dioceses on the Women in the Episcopate: draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure; further welcomes the result of those consultations, with 42 out of 44 dioceses voting in favour; is encouraged by the overwhelming support shown by 85 per cent. of bishops, 76 per cent. of clergy and 77 per cent. of the laity voting in favour; encourages the House of Bishops to commend the Measure for final approval as currently drafted; and calls on Her Majesty’s Government to work with the governing authorities of the Church of England including the Archbishops’ Council, the House of Bishops and the General Synod to ensure that the express wishes of the overwhelming majority of those consulted across the Provinces of Canterbury and York are met by expeditiously tabling the Measure in Parliament for its approval.
A press release from Frank Field gives background information:
4 CommentsSimon Jenkins writes about his Epiphany in a bookshop. His article prompted this editorial at Anglicans Online.
Giles Fraser compares his new surroundings in the Guardian newsroom with his former workplace at St Paul’s Cathedral: Thinking Aloud podcast: a period of noisy reflection.
And in his weekly Church Times column he writes that Atheists can’t borrow the clothes of true faith.
Savi Hensman writes for Ekklesia about Women bishops and the church’s core purpose.
Martin Beckford in The Telegraph asks Will the Church of England ever find peace? “Arguments about women bishops will dominate public proceedings of the Synod, but gay marriage is one of the burning issues behind the scenes.”
Andrew Brown writes for The Guardian about Anglican Mainstream and the enemies of Christianity. “The anti-gay group deserves the censure it has received – unlike a small Evangelical Christian group in Bath.”
5 CommentsPress Release from the LGB&T Anglican Coalition
‘Embrace Civil Partnerships’ – Bishops told.
2nd February 2012 – for immediate use
The time has come for a change in stance on Civil Partnerships is the message from pro-gay groups in the LGB&T Anglican Coalition.
In its submission to the House of Bishops review group on Civil Partnerships, (made public today) the Coalition calls on the Church of England to allow churches to register Civil Partnerships, authorise services of Thanksgiving and Dedication, and end the ban on Bishops in Civil Partnerships.
With over 47,000 Civil partnerships had been registered by the end of 2010, the submission notes that “As social attitudes towards those in same-sex relationships have become increasingly open and accepting, the Church of England is becoming increasingly isolated. This is in turn damaging both our mission and our ability to provide pastoral care to those in our parishes, congregations, and clergy.”
On offering Civil Partnerships in Parish Churches, the Coalition has already identified 95 churches who want to press ahead but General Synod would need to approve the application. Although negative statements have been made by the Church of England’s Press Office,
“the fact that there has been no possibility of discussion within the Church about whether individual churches should be allowed to register their for Civil Partnerships is in itself a retrograde position for the Church of England to be in.”
On services of Thanksgiving and Dedication, the Coalition has called for an experimental liturgy to be introduced in the same way that such services were permitted following marriage after divorce in the 1990’s.
“The present situation where services of blessing are proscribed and the creation of public liturgies deemed to be wrong, is creating pastoral tensions, ecclesiastical ambiguity, and a culture of double standards… As a minimum step, therefore, the Church should permit services of thanksgiving and dedication to take place in pastoral response to the large number of civil partnerships. To refuse to respond in such a way would confirm fears that the present ban is motivated by prejudice rather than theology or religious belief. “
On the current ban on appointments of openly gay clergy to be Bishops the Coalition calls for an immediate end to the moratorium:
“One of the most pressing needs is to see an end to the moratorium on appointment of bishops in civil partnerships even if celibate. There is no justification for the current moratorium and it should be repealed immediately.”
The submission also warns against putting up barriers to such appointments:
“Furthermore, any attempt to deter or exclude such candidates by singling them out for intrusive questions is not only unjust and hurtful to the individuals concerned but also damaging to mission and ministry.”
In response to the submission, the House of Bishops review group has invited members of the Coalition to meet with them to discuss the issues further.
The Coalition is also organising an Act of Witness at General Synod drawing attention to the many hundreds of LGB&T clergy who minister in the Church of England despite the discrimination and suspicion which they often suffer. The Act of Witness will take place on Thursday 9th February, 8:30-10am in Deans Yard, Westminster.
The full text of the submission is available as a PDF file from here.
9 CommentsThere is a news report in the Church Times of reactions to the Archbishop of York’s interview by Madeleine Davies headlined Sentamu’s words on gay marriage backed by MPs.
Benny Hazlehurst, who is quoted in that news story, has published God, Marriage and the State giving more background on how marriage has changed.
For more on the demonstration outside York Minster, see local press reports here, and here.
The Church Times has a leader: In the end, it comes down to a word.
…It is good that the C of E is examining its earlier reservations about civil partnerships. Experience has proved them to be serious affairs, with many qualities — dedication, nurture, love, faithfulness — that look like marriage. Libby Purves has quoted the saying: “If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck… it probably is a duck… People who want to marry and treat one another properly should not be made second-class.” If Dr Sentamu and others wish to argue differently, they need to make a stronger case for discriminating against same-sex couples than merely appealing to “tradition and history”.
The Spectator has splashed out with a cover story headlined Sentamu for Canterbury!
7 CommentsFrom the Diocese of Southwark: Two new Area Bishops for Southwark Diocese.
6 CommentsDowning Street has announced this morning that the Rev Jonathan Clark has been appointed the 10th Bishop of Croydon and the Venerable Dr Michael Ipgrave OBE has been appointed the 12th Bishop of Woolwich. The Revd Jonathan Clark succeeds the Rt Rev Nick Baines who is now the 10th Bishop of Bradford and the Venerable Dr Michael Ipgrave OBE succeeds the Rt Revd Christopher Chessun who is now the 10th Bishop of Southwark. They will be consecrated in Southwark Cathedral on 21 March 2012…