What’s being debated at General Synod?

In my terminal fourth dimension on General Synod (from 2000 to 2005) it seemed to take some time to gather momentum and go its teeth into the substantial issues for debate. That is ordinarily the case, since there is e'er a turnover of membership, and new members take fourth dimension to get up to speed with both the content of argue and the fashion of process in Synod itself.

I thought that might be the example this fourth dimension round likewise—non least because (with the legislation on women bishops now past) there has been a higher than usual turnover of membership. Just the debate seems set to be joined in earnest sooner rather than afterward. The main items coming upwards this calendar week, from Monday to Midweek, are as follows.

i. Presentation on Shared Conversations on sexuality

Although this is conspicuously going to be a big result this Synod, the first main business will come up in July, and this presentation is unlikely to be controversial.

ii. Report from the Evangelism Job Group

This is a fascinating initiative, part of which I take already discussed. We volition spend part of the time during this particular sharing out stories in 20 mixed groups of around 25 people, facilitated past a bishop. Although the previous Synod did this (so it is repetitive for returning members), it is hard to object to this every bit an do in edifice trusting relationships and focussing on questions of how we, and others, really come to religion, and how that affects the way we contend the business concern of the C of East.

3. The Columba Annunciation betwixt the C of East and the Church building of Scotland

I confess to being slightly baffled by these kinds of ecumenical statements. In that location is an episcopal church in Scotland with which we are (in theory at least) in communion, so why nosotros demand to have an understanding with the Presbyterian established church in the same territory escapes me. I am not sure the Scottish Episcopal Church accept received this warmly, and it raises some interesting questions almost the necessity of episcopal leadership in ecumenical partners. Wikipedia notes that 'The Church of Scotland faces many current difficulties. Betwixt 1966 and 2006, numbers of communicants vicious from over 1,230,000 to 504,000,^[ix] reducing further to 446,000 in 2010 and 398,389 by yearend 2013.' Is partnership here going to be of much help to either of us in our electric current challenges?

4. Worcester Diocesan motion on Parochial Fees

There is a proposal to include the costs of heating and of vergers in standard fees. I don't think I have yet understood the problems hither, and so volition continue reading, thinking and listening on this 1.

5. Proposed Enabling Measure

This is function of the Simplification calendar, led past Pete Broadbent who is Bishop of Willesden. Every bit I understand it, the detail issue at stake hither is that, if a bishop wants to engage in pastoral reorganisation, then there is at present no provision for making clergy redundant and putting in identify appropriate compensation. Although the details look rather technical, this is a manifestation of ane of the fundamental principles current being debated in the wider church building: to what extent should bishops have 'management' authority in order to effect necessary change, and to what extent should the Church eschew this style of leadership and retain a relational consensus in its approach to implementing modify?

Those objecting to this measure are concerned about pushing the residue of ability away from parish clergy and towards bishops, which in plough raises concerns about the boundaries of the legitimate practice of power overunnecessary change. Others are concerned near the basis for computing compensation even whilst recognising the need for this kind of process. These issues are not trivial; much of complexity of practical arrangements for date, movement and deployment of clergy have come up virtually because of finely balanced settlements in relation to the balance of power between clergy and bishops over centuries.

six. Diocesan motion: the impact of sanctions on benefit claimants

This is part of Synod's regular engagement with issues in the country, in this case arising from Leeds Diocesan Synod. They are an of import part of the Church's work, sometimes throw upwards interesting insights, and are rarely contentious in debate.

7. The Reform and Renewal Programme

Near of Tuesday afternoon and all of Wednesday morning will be focussed on this. This is the programme of change which some regard as essential in making the Church fit and flexible for delivering and supporting ministry in the 21st Century, and others regards as a poisonous acceleration of the 'managerialist' agenda first introduced by George Carey when he was Archbishop of Canterbury.

The nearly controversial part of the agenda this fourth dimension round is the proposals for Resourcing Ministerial Education, led by Steven Croft, Bishop of Sheffield, on which I reported when information technology was in its offset typhoon. The aim is (once again) to simplify what to some appear to be complex processes in finalising patterns of preparation, to brand space for a growth of the numbers entering grooming, and to give greater buying to bishops and dioceses of both decisions about and financing of ministerial training. Critics of the proposals as they stand up argue that this looks like a render to a regionalisation of training first mooted in the Hind Report more than ten years ago, that information technology volition lead to greater inconsistency in patterns of training, and that there will exist an inevitable turn down in the financing of residential training and a consequent reduction in both theological engagement and ministerial (priestly) formation in training. The principals of the residential colleges take issued a detailed analysis of the proposals, and written to the Church Times expressing their concern. In reply, Steven Croft has blogged about why the concerns are unfounded. It is bound to be a lively debate! I will offering my own views in a separate blog post, and will report on the contend itself when it happens.

---

For those who are members of Synod, please feel gratis to comment on or correct whatever of my judgements here. For those who are not, I hope this gives you a flavor of what volition be happening, and enable you both to pray for us, and sympathize the extent to which Synod debates practice and do not have an impact on your ministry building and discipleship. There are going to exist some significant moments when there will be a testing of relationships of trust as we innovate change in a Church facing significant challenges.

---

Follow me on Twitter @psephizo

---

Much of my work is done on a freelance basis. If y'all have valued this post, would you considerdonating £1.20 a calendar month to support the production of this blog?

If you enjoyed this, practice share it on social media (Facebook or Twitter) using the buttons on the left. Follow me on Twitter @psephizo. Like my folio on Facebook.

Much of my work is done on a freelance basis. If you take valued this mail service, you can make a single or repeat donation through PayPal:

Comments policy: Good comments that appoint with the content of the post, and share in respectful contend, tin add together existent value. Seek first to understand, then to be understood. Make the about charitable construal of the views of others and seek to learn from their perspectives. Don't view debate equally a conflict to win; address the argument rather than tackling the person.

colsontheyeasion1997.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.psephizo.com/life-ministry/whats-being-debated-at-general-synod/

Share this post