Updated Friday 1 November
General Synod meets next month from 18 to 20 November, and the papers are starting to appear online. Most became available today and others will appear on 1 November.
There is a zip file of all the papers issued today (25 October).
There is now a zip file of the papers issued on 1 November, and a zip file of all the papers.
This list is in numerical order, with links to the individual papers and a note of the day on which debate is scheduled. It will be updated as more papers become available.
GS 1866B – Draft Church of England (Miscellaneous Provisions) Measure [Monday]
GS 1877B – Draft Amending Canon No 31 [Monday]
GS 1866Z-1877Z – Report by the Steering Committee
GS 1906 – The work of the Elections Review Group: Second Report from the Business Committee [Wednesday]
GS 1914A and GS 1914B – Diocesan Synod Motion: A Review of the workings of the General Synod [Tuesday]
GS 1915 – Agenda November 2013
GS 1916 – Report by the Business Committee [Monday]
GS 1917 – Intentional Evangelism [Monday]
GS 1918 – Draft Diocese of Leeds Resolution [Monday]
GS 1919 – Draft Care of Churches and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction (Amendment) Measure [Tuesday]
GS 1919x – Explanatory Memorandum
GS 1920 – The Church School of the Future [Tuesday]
GS 1921 – Draft Church of England (Ecclesiastical Property) Measure [Tuesday]
GS 1921x – Explanatory Memorandum
GS 1922 – Draft Vacancy in See Committees (Amendment) Regulation 2013 [Tuesday]
GS 1922X – Explanatory Memorandum
GS 1923 – Forty Eighth Report of the Standing Orders Committee [Tuesday]
GS 1924 – Report of the Steering Committee for the Draft Legislation on Women in the Episcopate [Wednesday]
GS 1925 – Draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure [Wednesday]
GS 1926 – Draft Amending Canon No.33 [Wednesday]
GS 1925-6x – Explanatory Memorandum [Wednesday]
GS 1927A and GS 1927B – Diocesan Synod Motion: Name of Dioceses [contingency business]
GS 1928A and GS 1928B – Diocesan Synod Motion: Nature and Structure of the Church of England – National Debate
Synod members have also been sent these other papers.
GS Misc 1061 – Women in the Episcopate: Guide to the papers
GS Misc 1062 – Activities of the Archbishops’ Council
GS Misc 1063 – Credit Unions, The Financial Sector and the Church
From GS1924, the Bishops are going to announce:
“The House also accepts that the presence in the College of Bishops of at least one bishop who takes the Conservative Evangelical view on headship is important for sustaining the necessary climate of trust.”
So, we are going to guarantee that there is always at least one serving bishop who teaches that women have to be subordinated to men.
The Church of England really does have a death wish.
So if there aren’t any suitable candidates for the episcopate holding these views, someone unsuitable will have to be appointed?
well it seems to me there has to be graciousness on both sides and this does sem to be just that.
Seems to me this is a bit hard on the diocese this person will be appointed to. ‘Focus of unity’?
And what sort of jurisdiction is this Discriminating Bishop to have?
No. The statement says “college” not house.
So he can be a suffragan or something.
I doubt a diocesan could hold these views now.
But will “presence” in the College suffice?
Or might he be given jurisdiction wherever the diocesan is a woman?
Even given the proviso that this is about the College rather than the House, it must still be a real concern that these words are proposed for inclusion in a Declaration from the HoB itself given authority under the Canons of the Church if England. No other theological opinion is mandated for inclusion in the College, and it does seem incredible in 2013 to mandate this particular one. Does it really fall within the bounds of acceptable Anglican doctrine?
‘At least one bishop who takes the Conservative Evangelical view on male headship’
I think they should appoint a woman.
I think that “Conservative Evangelical view on headship” is poor drafting – how about a bishop who has this view but rejects penal substitution or takes a liberal view of same sex marriage? That is surely not what is meant. Then there is the issue of who decides what the conservative view of headship is if there is a conflict (bishops, team rectors, team vicars, sunday school teachers, youth leaders etc – views are not uniform). There is also the issue that the views of individual bishops can change.
Agree, Mark Bennet. Lots more muddle for everyone to argue about for a decade or three. This really is the gift that keeps on giving.
Mark’s point is absolutely right. I have tried long and hard on evangelical websites to flush out a consistent understanding of biblical headship and what it actually looks like in practice when consistently applied and it is never forthcoming. And that is because there isn’t one view of this in the evangelical world. There is enormous variety and it rightly baffles those genuinely trying to understand from the outside.
David,
yes, that is one of the main difficulties. Did you read Rachel Held Evans’ post on this?
http://rachelheldevans.com/blog/real-complementarian