Updated Friday morning
I linked to the raw voting lists from this month’s General Synod earlier today.
I have now compiled tables of how each member of Synod voted (or abstained or was absent) on the main votes on the legislation to allow women to become bishops. These tables are available as a web page.
At present only the bishops and clergy are included; the laity will be added later.
The tables are now complete.
Updated Friday
The detailed voting lists from the electronic votes at the July General Synod are now available.
We will be publishing analyses of some of these votes. [Now available here]
Women in the Episcopate legislation – major votes
item 512a – additional dioceses
item 513a – compulsory delegation
item 514 – archbishops’ amendment
item 518 – include clause 2 in the measure
Vote for recommittal – to the revision committee
Women in the Episcopate legislation – other votes
item 522 – remove the need for a two-thirds quorum at PCC meetings considering making a request
item 525 – remove a clerical veto
item 541a – require two-thirds majorities in each house for any subsequent amendment or repeal.
Other votes
item 27 – amend motion on clergy pensions
item 601 – final approval of Additional Weekday Lectionary
Does Hywel Williams have the answer to one of the Church of England’s problems? He writes in The Guardian: Ditch the bossy-boot bishops. Rather than debating if women are eligible, the church should scrap the absurd post of bishop.
The archbishop of Canterbury spoke on the precious gift of Martyrs on BBC Radio 4.
Gerald Warner writes in the Telegraph about Why it is a mistaken policy for Rome to offer Anglicans converting en bloc a church within the Church.
Janet Street-Porter writes in The Independent that The C of E will die if it shuts out gays and women.
Ruth Wishart in HeraldScotland Why won’t men in frocks let women wear the trousers?
Christopher Howse writes in the Telegraph about Religious pilgrimages: The hard slog that refreshes the soul.
This week’s The Question at Comment is free belief is Can science explain everything? Here are the responses.
Monday: Sue Blackmore Science explains, not describes. The experience of consciousness seems incommunicable and ineffable. Yet science can hope to explain how it arises.
Wednesday: Mark Vernon Chaos theory and divine action. Physicist John Polkinghorne is often accused of offering up a God-of-the-gaps argument. But his work has subtler shades.
Thursday: Adam Rutherford Ever-increasing circles. The domain of knowledge amenable to science has only ever changed in one direction: at the expense of all others.
Friday: Keith Ward The parts science cannot reach. We need to distinguish in detail all the different sorts of explaining we do in life. No one key opens every lock.
Here s the official summary of the final session of this month’s meeting of General Synod.
Summary of business conducted on Tuesday 13th July 2010
0 CommentsHere are the official summaries of Monday’s business at General Synod.
[link to afternoon and evening summary to follow when available now added]
Summary of business conducted on Monday 12th July 2010 AM
Summary of business conducted on Monday 12th July 2010 PM
The archbishop of York’s presidential address to General Synod, delivered on Saturday, is now online.
Presidential Address to the General Synod
Theme: The way to come closer to God is to be generous and honest towards everyone.
Amended late Monday afternoon to correct the Clause 11 items
This follows on from our report on Saturday’s debates.
This page will be updated during the debates.
These are the relevant papers.
GS 1708-09Y Report of the revision committee.
GS 1708A Draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure
GS 1709A Draft Amending Canon 30
Notice Paper 5 Amendments before Synod
We will update the following two web pages during the debates to show what happens to the amendments and how those amendments that are passed change the text of the draft measure.
Draft measure as amended by Synod
Annotated copy of Notice Paper 5 showing what happened to amendments
Monday morning
After BCP Morning Prayer, and statements from the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishop of Manchester, Synod resumed its consideration of the draft measure.
Clause 2
This is the clause that requires diocesan bishops to make arrangements for delegation of functions to a male bishop for parishes who request the ministry of such a male bishop.
9.57 am Geoffrey Tattersall, on behalf of the Steering Committee, moved item 518 “that Clause 2 stand part of the Measure”.
10.55 Synod votes in favour of closure of debate on item 518. Sufficient members stood to require a division of the whole synod. Item 518 was carried by 373 votes in favour, with 14 against and 17 recorded abstentions.
Clause 3
This sets how parishes can issue a letter of request asking for the ministry of a male bishop.
11.01 am Anthony Berry moved his amendment 519 to require PCCs to consult with electoral rolls before making such a request. The steering committee resisted the amendment. Fewer than 40 members stood so the amendment lapsed.
11.10 am Gerald O’Brien moved amendment 520 to require PCCs to consider making, or not making, a request every five years. The steering committee resisted the amendment, but more than 40 members stood so the amendment was debated.
11.26 am Synod voted against item 520 by a show of hands.
11.27 am Hugh Lee moved amendment 521 to require those involved in appointing incumbents or priests in charge to take into account whether or not a parish has issued a letter of request. The steering committee resisted the amendment, but fewer than 40 members stood and the amendment lapsed.
Several amendments (522 – 527) then followed changing the rules for votes at PCC meetings when considering making a request.
11.33 am Peter Hobson moved amendment 522 to remove the need for a two-thirds quorum at PCC meetings considering making a request. The steering committee resisted the amendment, but more than 40 members stood, so the debate continued.
11.53 am Synod agreed to proceed to a vote. This was a division of the whole synod. The amendment was defeated with 128 votes in favour, 239 votes against and 5 recorded abstentions.
11.56 am Clive Scowen moved amendment 523 to stop a minority being able to frustrate a majority by simply staying away from a meeting.
The steering committee were in favour of the amendment.
Synod voted in favour of the amendment on a show of hands.
Gerald O’Brien moved amendment 525 to remove a clerical veto. The steering committee resisted the amendment, but more than 40 members stood so the debate continued.
12.20 pm Synod voted to proceed to the vote. Sufficient members stood to require a division by houses. The amendment was defeated in all three houses with the following votes.
| Voting figures | for | against | abstentions |
| bishops | 2 | 34 | 3 |
| clergy | 35 | 136 | 8 |
| laity | 83 | 104 | 7 |
Brian Walker moved amendment 527. The steering committee was in favour of this technical amendment. Synod voted in favour on a show of hands.
Synod then moved onto the debate on item 528 “That clause 3 (as amended) stand part of the Measure”. The motion was carried.
Clause 4
12.37 pm Synod voted in favour of 529 “That clause 4 stand part of the Measure”.
Clause 5
12.38 pm Synod voted in favour of 532 “That clause 5 stand part of the Measure”.
Clause 6
12.39 pm Synod voted in favour of 533 “That clause 6 stand part of the Measure”.
Clause 7
12.40 pm Synod debated 534 “That clause 7 stand part of the Measure”.
1.00 pm Synod voted in favour of item 534 on a show of hands.
Monday afternoon
2.30 pm Debate resumed
Clause 8
Amendment 536 was carried, as consequential on item 523.
Synod voted in favour of 537 “That clause 8 (as amended) stand part of the Measure”.
Clause 9
Synod voted in favour of 538 “That clause 9 (as amended) stand part of the Measure”.
Clause 10
Synod voted in favour of 539 “That clause 10 (as amended) stand part of the Measure”.
After clause10
Miranda Threlfall-Holmes did not move her amendment 540a
2.35 pm Paul Benfield moved amendment 541a, to generally approve a new clause that would require two-thirds majorities for future amendment of the legislation. The steering committee resisted the amendment. More than 40 members stood so the debate continued.
Sufficient members stood to support a division of the whole synod.
3.00 pm The amendment was passed with 287 votes in favour, 78 against and 20 recorded abstentions.
Synod then passed 541b “That the clause be inserted in the Measure”.
Clause 11
3.02 pm Paul Benfield moved his amendment 542 to amend clause 11 to require a provision for the relief of hardship to be made available before the measure comes into effect. The steering committee resisted the amendment. More than 40 members stood, so the debate continued.
3.47 pm Synod voted to close the debate.
Synod then defeated the amendment on a show of hands.
Synod then passed 543 “That clause 11 stand part of the Measure.”
Schedules and Long Title
Finally Synod voted in favour of all the following.
544 That Schedule 1 stand part of the Measure.
545 That Schedule 2 stand part of the Measure.
546 That Schedule 3 stand part of the Measure.
547 That Schedule 4 stand part of the Measure.
548 That the Long Title stand part of the Measure.
Further Revision
3.54 pm Simon Killwick then proposed that “That the Measure entitled Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure be committed for further revision in
committee.”
4.19 pm Synod voted to close the debate and move to a vote.
Sufficient members stood to require a division of the whole synod.
The motion was defeated with 102 votes in favour, 293 votes against and 12 recorded abstentions.
Amending Canon
Synod then voted in favour of 549 “That paragraphs 1-9 stand part of the Canon.”
4.25 pm That completed the revision stage of the Measure and Canon.
The measure will now be referred to dioceses.
4 CommentsHere is the official summary of Sunday’s business at General Synod.
Summary of business conducted on Sunday 11th July 2010 PM
0 CommentsAndrew Brown writes in his blog about The triumph of Anglican women. As the strap line says “The General Synod’s rejection of compromise on women bishops is historic. There’s no return from here.” He concludes with:
20 CommentsAnyway. I have been watching this story, more or less, for nearly 25 years now, and in all that endless wrangling this is only the second time I can remember the synod making an unequivocal choice. From now on, things really will be different.
This page will be updated during the debates.
*Debate continued on Monday, and our report is here.*
After morning worship and the presidential address from the archbishop of York, Synod started its mammoth series of debates on the Women in the Episcopate legislation this morning.
These are the relevant papers.
GS 1708-09Y Report of the revision committee.
GS 1708A Draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure
GS 1709A Draft Amending Canon 30
Notice Paper 5 Amendments before Synod
We will update the following two web pages during the debates to show what happens to the amendments and how those amendments that are passed change the text of the draft measure.
Draft measure as amended by Synod
Annotated copy of Notice Paper 5 showing what happened to amendments
Saturday morning
This started with a “take-note” debate on the report of the revision committee.
The Chair of the Revision Committee (the Ven Clive Mansell (Archdeacon of Tonbridge)) moved:
501 ‘That the Synod do take note of this Report.’
This was a general debate. Voting in favour did not necessarily imply supporting the report, but the take-note motion had to be passed before any further progress on the legislation was allowed.
11.47 am Synod voted to close the debate. Archdeacon Mansell the responded to the debate.
11.52 am Synod voted in favour of item 501 on a show of hands.
12.00 noon Synod started the revision stage.
Canon Simon Killwick proposed the creation of new, parallel dioceses by moving amendment 512a in Appendix 1 of notice paper 5.
The steering committee resisted the amendment. In these circumstances standing orders require more than 40 members to stand for the debate to proceed. Many more than 40 stood.
12.52 pm Synod voted to close the debate on amendment 512a. Enough members (standing orders require at least 25) then stood to require a division of the whole synod, ie an electronic count. There were 134 votes in favour, 258 against and 8 recorded abstentions, so the amendment was defeated.
12.58 pm Synod broke for lunch.
Saturday afternoon
2.00 pm Synod resumed the revision stage
The Revd Rod Thomas proposed complementary bishops and compulsory transfer of functions from the diocesan bishop by moving amendment 513a in Appendix II of notice paper 5.
The steering committee resisted the amendment, but more than 40 members stood so the debate proceeded.
3.26 pm Votes to close the debate on the amendment and move to the vote. Sufficient members stood to require a vote by houses. The motion was defeated in all three houses.
| Voting figures | for | against | abstentions |
| bishops | 10 | 28 | 2 |
| clergy | 52 | 124 | 3 |
| laity | 73 | 118 | 4 |
The combined figures (135 for, 270 against and 9 abstentions) were almost identical to the vote on the previous amendment.
Synod then took a ten minute break.
Clause 2
3.45 pm Synod resumed.
The archbishop of York then moved the amendment 514, which (with 531) would set up co-ordinate jurisdiction, proposed by him and the archbishop of Canterbury.
The steering committee resisted the amendment, but more than 40 members stood so the debate proceeded.
5.07 pm Synod voted to close the debate and proceed to a vote. A call for a vote by houses was successful.
The amendment was defeated, because it was lost in one house (House of Clergy).
| Voting figures | for | against | abstentions |
| bishops | 25 | 15 | 0 |
| clergy | 85 | 90 | 5 |
| laity | 106 | 86 | 4 |
In the light of the result, there was a motion to adjourn the debate until Monday. This was defeated on a show of hands.
5.25 pm Bishop of Salisbury, David Stancliffe, proposed his amendment 515 to restrict the delegation of functions to the celebration of the sacraments and other divine service.
The steering committee resisted the amendment. Fewer than 40 members stood so the amendment lapsed.
5.37 pm Kevin Carey proposed amendment 516. The steering committee resisted the amendment. Very members stood so the amendment lapsed.
5.41 pm Tom Sutcliffe proposed his amendment 517 to set up a Review Commission.
The steering committee resisted the amendment. Fewer than 40 members stood so the amendment lapsed.
5.52 pm The next item on the agenda was the motion to include clause 2 in the measure. The chair adjourned the debate until Monday as he judged there was insufficient time to complete this before the scheduled closure time of 6.15 pm.
*Debate continued on Monday, and our report is here.*
20 CommentsUpdated Sunday morning
Here are the official summaries of Saturday’s business at General Synod.
[We will add links to the afternoon and evening’s business in due course.]
These summaries are now complete.
Summary of business conducted on Saturday 10th July 2010 AM
Summary of business conducted on Saturday 10th July 2010 PM
Dave Walker has this view of the Synod at his Church Times blog.
The Seminal has this Saturday Art article: William Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury by Hans Holbein the Younger.
Emma John asks in The Guardian Should women ever be bishops? It’s an issue which could result in schism and put the future of the church in jeopardy. Four women who would be in line for the top job, reveal why it’s time for Christians to put their differences behind them.
Ellen Painter Dollar writes on the her.meneutics blog: Confessions of a Church-Skipping Mom. Is it better to attend church burnt out and stressed, or occasionally stay home but miss corporate worship?
Theo Hobson writes in The Guardian about A new model Christianity. The “emerging church” movement may offer something more than new manners and styles if it breaks free of establishment.
Albert Radcliffe argues in The Guardian that The Bible is an open book. The Bible does not end moral debates on gay rights and the role of women. Its pronouncements are there to open discussion.
Jack Valero writes in The Guardian about The sad demise of celibate love. It is symptomatic of modern values that we conclude Cardinal Newman’s intense love for a man meant he was a homosexual.
Philip Ritchie writes on his blog about Gossip: cancer of the community.
Giles Fraser writes in the Church Times that Turkish scars need healing
Graham Kings asks at Fulcrum Should Christians share Christ with People of other Faiths?
11 CommentsRiazat Butt in The Guardian General Synod meets to discuss Catholic defection
Martin Beckford in the Telegraph Archbishops face test of authority over women bishops at Synod
Ruth Gledhill in The Times and reproduced here, Bishops ready to sabotage Williams over consecrating women.
ENS Matthew Davies General Synod set for lengthy debate on women bishops legislation
Press Association Further debates over women bishops
BBC Views differ on women bishops compromise bid
5 CommentsUpdated Saturday morning
Here are the official summaries of Friday’s business at General Synod.
[We will add a link to the evening’s business in due course.]
The page linked below now includes the evening business.]
Summary of business conducted on Friday 9th July 2010 PM
These entries also include links to audios of the sessions and to relevant papers.
0 CommentsJim Naughton writes in The Guardian that Rowan destroys his own credibility. Rowan Williams cannot speak truth to power when he has so clearly capitulated to it himself.
1 Comment… as the General Synod convenes once again, to discuss issues about which its members can actually be presumed to know something, I find myself walking right up to the precipice of that promise to say a few words about what it will mean if the synod embraces Rowan Williams’ poorly conceived ecclesiastical innovations.
Nick Baines writes in The Guardian today to say that Jeffrey John was not the favourite. The stories about Jeffrey John’s nomination as bishop of Southwark are mischief-making based on ignorance.
He wrote on the same topic earlier in his blog: Media literacy: Lesson 1
Nick Baines is the suffragan bishop of Croydon in the diocese of Southwark.
39 CommentsUpdated again Friday morning
The Guardian has three articles this evening all connected in some way with the choice of the next bishop of Southwark.
Riazat Butt How to become a bishop – secret ballots and royal approval
Andrew Brown Jeffrey John and the global Anglican schism: a potted history
Stephen Bates How the Church of England became the church of state
Stephen Bates also has this news item: Rowan Williams under siege over gay bishop veto
Stephen Bates also has this: Profile: Dr Jeffrey John
And in The Guardian Riazat Butt and Stephen Bates write Church divided over gay rights: new fears of schism and anguish for archbishop
And for good measure, there is an editorial in the Guardian The state and religion: The church risks looking absurd.
…This week a gay but celibate cleric, Jeffrey John, the dean of St Albans and a man of the highest intellectual and moral standing, was rejected as a candidate for the diocese of Southwark because of his sexuality. No other private or state institution would have been allowed to do this. No institution, either, would be allowed to bar women from applying for the job, allowing them to be ordained but not promoted.
The internal agonies of a church caught between its Protestant and Catholic, and its liberal and conservative, tendencies cannot excuse this official institutionalisation of intolerance. It is true that disestablishing the church would require a huge amount of constitutional unpicking – much of it beneficial, such as the removal of anti-Catholic discrimination from the Act of Settlement. No government is likely to devote parliamentary time to the cause. It is true, too, that the established part of the church tends to be the more liberal, and that pulling back state involvement may do little to advance the cause of men such as Jeffrey John. Any mechanism that allows dialogue and change between the hard core of the committed and the penumbra of the vaguely supportive has something to be said for it. Religions that are entirely cut off from the surrounding culture neither die nor fade away, but turn crazy and dangerous. But formal disestablishment need not mean isolation, only the end of an unhealthy pretence that one church above all others can speak for a diverse nation.
David Hume once argued: “The union of the civil and ecclesiastical power … prevents those gross impostures and bigoted persecutions which in all false religions are the chief foundation of clerical authority.” The Church of England can obey his advice and accept the tolerant norms of modern society, as defined by the state. Or it can decide, privately, what it believes. Caught between the two, it risks becoming, as its archbishop feared, absurd
Damian Thompson writes in his Telegraph blog about The second humiliation of Jeffrey John: Rowan’s liberal credentials go up in smoke
Martin Beckford in the Telegraph has Archbishop of Canterbury accused of second ‘betrayal’ of gay cleric
Jonathan Wynne-Jones on his Telegraph blog writes The Church of England looks mad following the Jeffrey John snub
Updated Tuesday afternoon to include comment on the effect of deleting certain clauses
Note: “clause” and “section” are used interchangeably.
The text of all the proposed amendments to the draft Women in the Episcopate legislation was published in a notice paper yesterday.
Here is a simplified explanation of what I think is the intended effect of the various amendments.
The first three make provision for transfer of episcopal functions by right and not by delegation from the diocesan bishop.
512 This set of amendments will create additional dioceses for parishes unable on grounds of conviction to accept the episcopal ministry of women. There will be no women bishops or priests operating in these dioceses. The additional dioceses will exist in parallel with the current geographical dioceses. A PCC will be able to vote for its parish to join or leave one of these additional dioceses.
513 This set of amendments will set up complementary (or transferred) episcopal arrangements (sometimes abbreviated to TEA). There will be suffragan bishops acceptable to those who cannot accept the episcopal ministry of women. Parishes will be able to require that the episcopal functions of their diocesan bishop be transferred to one of these complementary bishops.
514 and 531 These are the Archbishops’ amendments to set up Co-ordinate Jurisdiction.
The remaining amendments leave intact the principle of delegation from the diocesan bishop.
515 This will restrict delegation of episcopal functions to sacraments and other divine services by removing the reference to “the provision of pastoral care to the clergy and parishioners”.
516 This provides that schemes of delegation to a male bishop will also include support for parishes not seeking such delegation.
517 This will set up a Review Commission to regularly review the arrangements for male bishops.
519 This will require PCCs to consult with electoral roll members before requesting episcopal ministry from a male bishop.
520 This will require every PCC to consider requesting episcopal ministry from a male bishop every 5 years.
521 This will require those involved in appointing incumbents and priests in charge to take account the fact that a parish has not requested episcopal ministry from a male bishop as well as the fact that it has.
522 to 527 These will relax in various ways the voting requirements when PCCs vote on requesting episcopal ministry from a male bishop.
530 This will give the House of Bishops complete discretion about what to include (or not include) in the Code of Practice.
531 See 514 above.
535 and 536 These relate to guild churches and are consequential on 523 and 524.
540 This will cause the provisions of the measure (except for allowing women bishops) to expire after 40 years.
541 This will require two-thirds majorities in each house of General Synod to subsequently amend or repeal this legislation.
542 This will require compensation to be made available to those who resign from ecclesiastical service before the measure comes into effect.
Synod procedures require a vote to be taken on the inclusion of each clause in the draft measure, and the relevant motions are also included in the notice paper. Notice has already been given that speeches will be made against the inclusion of clauses 2, 3, 4 and 7. The effect of deleting these clauses (in particular 2 and 3) would be to give the “simplest possible solution” with no provision for those opposed to women bishops and priests other than a code of practice.
There are no proposed amendments to the accompanying amending canon.
20 CommentsA notice paper listing all the proposed amendments to the Draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure (GS 1708A) has been published.
It is 37 pages long.
3 CommentsRoz Kaveney in The Guardian asks What are demons, really? Christians and Satanists are both divided about the reality of demons. But even liberal believers can be led to silliness by their beliefs.
And John Casey writes in The Tablet about Talk of the Devil: Satan in Catholic theology.
Mark Vernon writes in The Guardian about The eroticism of the Church of England. The BBC’s new sitcom, Rev, is a surprisingly realistic picture about the sexual undercurrents of normal Christianity.
Alex Klaushofer writes in The Guardian about New wine in old church buildings. All over the country small churches are growing while the large buildings that once housed them decay.
And Ian Jack writes, also in The Guardian, about Saving churches for their history – not religion. These buildings are an important part of our landscape – even if they are not used for worship.
Symon Hill writes in The Guardian about Queer, Christian and proud. Ultra-conservative anti-gay Christians are a just a noisy minority. That’s why this coming Pride, the rest of us should raise the roof.
Peter Stanford has this Face to faith article in The Guardian: Christianity, arrogance and ignorance. After decades of discussion on world faiths, how could I know so little of their core beliefs?
Giles Fraser writes in the Church Times about The football babies come home.
Jay Michaelson asks in Religion Dispatches Does the Bible Really Call Homosexuality an “Abomination”? This word, used for centuries to justify an anti-gay posture, has been badly translated and even more poorly understood.
This week’s The Question at The Guardian’s Comment is free belief is Should religions compete? Would the world be a better place if religions concerned themselves only with the crimes and follies of their own?
Here are the responses.
Monday: Alan Race Conversation demands mutual respect. Without trust we cannot talk about God, but to build trust we must avoid trying to convert or lecture people
Thursday Maggi Dawn Religions should not compete for power. The call for peace at the heart of most religions contrasts with the way they behave as competing communities.
Friday Mehdi Hasan
Islam should not be missionary. Muslims must shun the divisive idea of a marketplace of religions which all compete for believers.
The Times has now hidden itself behind its paywall.
8 Comments