The Church Times has this report: Synod to vote in February on future of church safeguarding
For background and context see Safeguarding and independence.
The new document mentioned can be found here: Wilkinson-Jay Response Group – Emerging Proposals
This describes the two models (out of the original four) between which the General Synod will be asked to make a choice in February. It’s worth the time to read the whole of this document to get the sense of where the Response Group is heading.
The differences are summarised by the Church Times this way:
Updated Wednesday
The Rochester diocesan synod has passed a vote of No Confidence in the Archbishops’ Council with reference to safeguarding.
“That this Synod resolves to pass a vote of no confidence in the Archbishops’ Council’s oversight of safeguarding and urges for the necessary reforms to restore trust, safeguard the vulnerable, and uphold the Church’s moral and legal responsibilities.”
The voting was:
In favour: 51
Against: 5
Abstentions: 9
The diocesan bishop supported the motion.
For more details, including a link to the full text of the proposer’s speech, see here: Diocesan Synod backs vote of no confidence
This action has attracted some media attention:
The Church of England’s General Synod will meet in London from 10-14 February 2025. An Outline of Business has been published, and is available for download. It is copied below the fold. (more…)
25 CommentsDecember 2024
The Church of England has recently published two press releases on this topic.
This describes progress to date by the Wilkinson and Jay Reports Response Group which will report to the General Synod in February 2025.
This describes work being done by the National Safeguarding Team in conjunction with dioceses and others, to follow up the recommendations of the Makin report. A four stage process is outlined.
The following reaction to the latter has already appeared at Church Abuse: Church of England announces response to Makin review: kick it into the long grass.
We will add any further items relating to these two releases as they appear.
30 CommentsThis web page was published today:
LLF Working Groups continue: Update on membership and residential meeting
Following the decision at July General Synod to develop proposals to introduce standalone services including Prayers of Love and Faith (PLF) alongside pastoral reassurance, there will be continued input from four working groups into this process. The group membership includes bishops and members of General Synod, drawn from a wide range of backgrounds. Some of the members were part of the working groups that began their work in March 2024, while others have joined since the July Synod…
…There are four working groups in total, each with a different remit, looking at specific questions connected to:
- Prayers of Love and Faith – Guidance for registration and use including arrangements for use of the PLF in Standalone Services.
- Pastoral Reassurance – Code of Practice for Delegated Episcopal Ministry.
- Bishops’ Statement – Drafting group for an overarching rationale for a settlement around current and future practice for implementing the objectives of LLF.
- Ministry and Vocations Guidance – Development of guidance as part of the work to replace Issues in Human Sexuality (in parallel with decisions on a timetable to address questions around clergy in same sex marriage).
Full membership lists are included in the web page linked above.
There are two other new documents:
And there is this video, which was published earlier
39 CommentsThe Church Times reports: Opponents and supporters of prayers for same-sex couples lobby bishops
TWO Church of England pressure groups wrote to the House of Bishops before its meeting this week to express hopes and expectations about the next steps in the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) process.
The groups–Together for the Church of England, which campaigns for wider provision for LGBTQ people in the Church, and the Alliance, which represents opponents of the proposed blessings of same-sex couples–wrote the letters at the invitation of the House of Bishops, before their meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday this week…
The full texts of these letters are linked below.
The Alliance Letter 8 – October 24
Together for the Church of England Letter to House of Bishops (October 2024)
69 CommentsThe Church Times reports: New working group to look at issues raised by Soul Survivor scandal
AFTER the exposure of “appalling practices and a shocking abuse of power” at Soul Survivor, in reviews by the National Safeguarding Team (NST) and Fiona Scolding KC, a group is being formed to carry out further work, the Bishop of Stepney, Dr Joanne Grenfell, the lead bishop for safeguarding, said this week.
The working group will look at ordination processes, clergy training and supervision, and safeguarding and governance in church-plants, bishop’s mission orders (BMOs), and mission charities that have an Anglican focus to their work…
The article refers to recent correspondence between a group of General Synod members and the Bishop of Stepney.
See letter to the Bishop of Stepney. And her reply.
Some background. At General Synod in July a motion was proposed by Robert Thompson but this was substantially amended by Bishop Joanne. See here and then here for the briefings prepared at that time, and over here for the Order Paper containing the motions. The outcome is recorded in the Business Done report.
Today on X (formerly Twitter) Robert Thompson has written this.
17 CommentsThe Diocese of St Albans has published this 8 minute video on YouTube: Diocesan Synod LLF October 2024.
28 CommentsTwo previous articles dealing with this:
Two Church Times articles (both linked previously):
Other opinions:
Andrew Goddard Choosing Bishops: A Failure to Discern?
Anthony Archer Crown Nominations Commission Back in the Firing Line
108 CommentsUpdated Friday evening
As we reported earlier the Church of England’s House of Bishops met today to consider proposals to reform the CNC (Crown Nominations Commission) procedures for nominating diocesan bishops. The proposals are in paragraphs 12 to 14 of HB(24)30. They were accepted with one amendment (which did not alter the proposed change to the CNC procedures) by 27 votes to nine, with three abstentions.
The proposals and their background are summarised in a press release, which is copied below.
The House met in public and there is a report of their debate in the Church Times.
The CNC procedures are part of the standing orders of General Synod. The bishops’ proposed changes must be agreed by the Synod, which next meets in February 2025. Changes to standing orders can come into effect immediately.
Friday evening update
The Church Times has published a further article House of Bishops’ CNC debate rouses ire of central members.
Press release
Bishops back proposals to simplify nomination process for diocesan bishops
18/09/2024
House of Bishops supports proposals to simplify the Crown Nominations Commission process
The House of Bishops has given its support to proposed changes to the process of nominating future diocesan bishops to the Crown, to simplify the process and help enable a broad representation.
The House – which is made up of the diocesan bishops and other senior bishops in the Church of England – agreed to ask General Synod to consider changing the rules governing how Crown Nominations Commissions (CNCs), which nominate future diocesan bishops, operate.
It follows two cases in the last year in which CNCs were unable to reach agreement to fill vacancies for new bishops.
When a see becomes vacant a CNC gathers to consider possible candidates and put forward a name to the King through the Prime Minister. Once the nomination has been approved by the King, the new bishop is announced by Downing Street. (Note: a ‘see’ is the area of a bishop’s authority and jurisdiction.)
In each case the CNC is made up of a combination of representatives from the local diocese and a group of “central members”, elected from the General Synod to represent the national Church.
Following the two recent cases in which the CNC was unable to appoint (for new Bishops of Carlisle and Ely), the Bishop of London, Sarah Mullally, who chairs the Advisory Group for Appointments and Vocations, suggested a series of changes including to the voting threshold required to make an appointment.
Under the current Standing Orders, at least two thirds of the members of a CNC must support a nomination before it goes forward. That includes any who decide to abstain.
However, as Bishop Sarah explains in a paper to the House, currently, with 14 members on a CNC, this means 10 members must agree, meaning the threshold is in fact above 71 per cent.
Bishop Sarah proposed:
Speaking at the bishops’ meeting in Oxford today, she said: “There is a lack of diversity on the CNC, including gender, race, and theology, which has led to a loss of trust in the process.
“Restoring trust will require the process to be competent, consistent, full of integrity, and compassionate. Ultimately, we need to restore confidence in this discernment process under God.”
The House approved a motion welcoming the recommendations by 27 votes to nine, with three abstentions.
Notes to editors
The motion agreed by the House was:
‘That this House, regretting the difficulties in the recent CNC processes as set out in HB(24)30 welcome the recommendations as set out in paragraphs 12 to 14 of that paper and request that work be undertaken to bring the proposals to Synod.’
51 CommentsUpdated Thursday
Updated again 17 September
The House of Bishops meets on 18 September. The Agenda is published here.
The paper to be discussed HB(24)30 is published here: Crown Nominations Commission September 2024.
General Synod members have today been sent an email, which includes the following:
House of Bishops
The House of Bishops will meet on Wednesday 18 September at St Hugh’s College Oxford to consider proposals for reform of CNCs. The paper and agenda will shortly be available on the House of Bishops section of the website . This will follow on from a meeting of the College on this topic at which all bishops will be able to speak. The House of Bishops Standing Committee has agreed that this part of the meeting should be open to the public and press, subject to limitations in the room, to observe. Priority will be given to central members of the CNC but if General Synod members wish to attend they are asked to notify synod@churchofengland.org and seats will be allocated on a first come, first served basis.
Updates
Law & Religion UK has this report: Bishops to discuss difficulties in Crown Nominations Commission processes
Church Times has this: After deadlocks, Crown Nominations Commission’s secret ballots may end
Second Update
An order paper has been issued for the House of Bishops meeting. The meeting will now last an hour (5.00 to 6.00 pm) instead of the originally planned 25 minutes. The bishops of Oxford and Rochester will be proposing amendments.
Law & Religion UK has also published the Order Paper text here. This copy includes live links to the GS documents referenced.
69 CommentsAndrew Goddard has written a detailed discussion on this subject, which includes
There is a précis of this article here: Is the Church in an episcopal stalemate? But I recommend reading the full article.
The electronic voting results from this month’s General Synod are now available online and are linked below, with links to the order papers containing the relevant texts.
Electronic voting results
Inquiry into Allegations of Abuse within the Soul Survivor Network (Order Paper IV)
Living in Loving and Faith (Order Paper VII)
20 CommentsUpdated Thursday
Together has issued this Statement following LLF debate at July 2024 General Synod.
The Church of England Evangelical Council has published this: CEEC expresses deep disappointment on ‘milestone day’ as Synod approves bishops’ Living in Love and Faith proposals.
Update 11 July
The Alliance has published this Statement from the Alliance after July 2024 General Synod
Other statements will be linked when they are published.
181 CommentsThis post will be updated as the meeting proceeds.
The Church of England’s General Synod is meeting this weekend. The timetable is here, the agenda is here and the papers are here.
Live video etc
All sessions are streamed live on YouTube and remain available to view afterwards. Links have been provided in advance.
There is an official X/Twitter account.
Official July 2024 list of members
Order papers
Business done
Official press releases
Press reports and comment
Church Times
Independent
The Guardian
89 Commentstogether for the Church of England has published this letter to Martyn Snow.
The full text is copied here (the signatures list is below the fold).
Dear Bishop Martyn
LIVING IN LOVE AND FAITH – JULY SYNOD
We are writing to thank you for your work over recent months in guiding the LLF project forwards and for the publication of the latest proposals before General Synod. It is clear that you and the LLF staff team have taken great pains to ensure that different perspectives were able to contribute, and we see this reflected in the papers before Synod. We would also wish to extend our thanks to the College and House of Bishops for their continuing engagement with LLF, and hope that there will be support for the measures being proposed.
We welcome the proposal to remove restrictions on the use of the Prayers of Love and Faith in standalone services. Many of us have already seen the pastoral and missional potential of the PLF material within existing services, which will be enhanced by making them available for use in standalone services. That this opportunity occurs on a voluntary opt-in basis helps to respect conscience all round and is something that we support. While it is not the gold standard of equal marriage that many of us seek, we recognise that this is a proportionate compromise that can be offered while the Church continues to explore these areas.
We are pleased that serious discussion is progressing on the freedom of clergy to enter a same-sex civil marriage. While we would have preferred to see more on this at the July Synod we welcome the clear timetable stating a decision will be taken by the House of Bishops in January 2025. For many clergy in faithful, stable, permanent relationships this decision cannot come soon enough. It is also a decision that many lay people already in same-sex marriages and who wish to explore a vocation to ordained ministry have been patiently waiting for. We firmly believe in marriage and the benefits it offers in regularising and honouring the love between two people. All of our clergy should be able to structure their closest and most intimate relationship in this way and we look forward to the further work from FAOC and the decision of the House of Bishops.
We look forward to hearing more about the model of specific and defined delegation of episcopal ministry to maximise inclusion under episcopal pastoral care. We support the rejection of hard structural approaches to managing differences in the life of the Church and welcome an approach focussed on pastoral relationships. As a Church we must never neglect that personal relationships contribute most strongly in building up the Church as the body of Christ, and managing difference is best achieved through good interpersonal relationships ahead of recourse to legalistic frameworks.
We remain fully committed to the unity of the Church, creating a generous space where all can thrive regardless of either sexuality or sincerely held theological conviction. We appreciate your comments in the LLF papers that what is proposed may not be ideal, but will allow us a space to discern God’s will in the longer term. Sometimes the best is the enemy of the good, and seeking perfection only delivers paralysis. We therefore welcome these proposals, acknowledging that they cannot deliver everything that all seek from the LLF process, and look forward to engaging with them further.
Please be assured of our prayers during the upcoming Synod and in the work that will follow.
Yours sincerely (more…)
24 CommentsThe Questions (and answers) for this weekend’s meeting of the Church of England’s General Synod were issued today. They can be found online here:
Questions will be taken on Friday afternoon and Saturday morning. There are 221 questions, four fewer than at the last group of sessions.
2 CommentsSome further items to record:
Eleven members of the LLF Working Groups have written to criticise GS 2358: LLF: from Leicester to York
CEEC has issued this invitation to a “Commissioning of Overseers” service.
Neil Patterson writes in the Church Times: Called to live together, not apart
66 CommentsUpdated Wednesday evening and again Thursday morning; also on 3 July
The latest LLF proposals are in GS 2358. (31 pages long) , and are explained more briefly by Helen King in LLF: Moving Forward as One Church (also linked in today’s Opinion roundup).
There are several items expressing various concerns about these proposals.
They are:
Ruth Bushyager, Bishop of Horsham
Jill Duff, Bishop of Lancaster
Jonathan Gibbs, Bishop of Rochester
James Grier, Bishop of Plymouth
Richard Jackson, Bishop of Hereford
Rob Munro, Bishop of Ebbsfleet
Mark Rylands, Assistant Bishop in the Diocese of Exeter
Ric Thorpe, Bishop of Islington
Paul Thomas, Bishop of Oswestry
Andrew Watson, Bishop of Guildford
Paul Williams, Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham
The seven signatories are
The Rt Revd Jonathan Baker, Bishop of Fulham, Chairman of The Society’s Council of Bishops
The Rt Revd Stephen Race, Bishop of Beverley
The Rt Revd Philip North, Bishop of Blackburn
The Rt Revd Martin Warner, Bishop of Chichester
The Rt Revd Will Hazlewood, Bishop of Lewes
The Rt Revd Paul Thomas, Bishop of Oswestry
The Rt Revd Tony Robinson, Bishop of Wakefield
The Jay Response Group has produced a report, published today, for the July General Synod to consider. This is scheduled for debate on Monday 8 July. This document is 137 pages long. This synod will not be asked to make any decisions concerning the specific way forward, all of which are considered to require substantial further work.
Readers will recall an earlier post: Wilkinson-Jay Response Group survey findings. This survey is incorporated into GS 2364. Among its reported comments, there were a number which dealt with the issue of whether the Jay report was answering the right questions. See for example, pages 45 to 47 of the survey findings. But also in its Executive Summary, on page 4, summarising
Reaction to the Wilkinson and Jay Reports (emphasis added):
Reactions to these reports highlight intense difference of opinion between stakeholder groups. Strong feelings, including frustration, were expressed by many participants.
- Many participants welcome the insight that these reports offer on issues surrounding safeguarding in the Church of England.
- There is a suggestion that the two reports are incongruent; one being seen as promoting patience and careful consideration, while the other encourages urgency.
- There are voices that call for the immediate implementation of these recommendations.
- Other voices highlight perceived flaws in the methodology used in the Jay Report.
- The governance role of Archbishops Council is frequently questioned, particularly surrounding the terms of reference set for the Jay Report and its financial cost.
- There is a recognition that the Jay Report has damaged the morale of safeguarding staff.
These questions have been taken up in a letter sent earlier this week to the Archbishop of York, and others, by a number of General Synod members. A PDF copy of that letter can be found here. This letter asks a number of detailed questions about the way in which the Jay report was commissioned. Obviously this letter was sent before today’s voluminous report was published.
14 Comments