This post will be updated regularly – ‘Sticky’ for now
SUNDAY P.M. Manifestation of Faith in Public Life
The following Private Member’s Motion was passed For: 263; Against: 25; Abstentions: 52 [among other business]
[blockquote]’That this Synod express its conviction that it is the calling of Christians to order and govern our lives in accordance with the teaching of Holy Scripture, and to manifest our faith in public life as well as in private, giving expression to our beliefs in the written and spoken word, and in practical acts of service to the local community and to the nation.’
audio of session[/blockquote]Summary of business conducted on Sunday 8th July PM
[*NEW] Christians should show their faith in public, Synod says – Church Times
MONDAY A.M. Women Bishops The Church of England debate on women bishops has taken place this morning and has been adjourned until November – a report is here with audio of the debate this morning. There is a report on the debate and reaction by the BBC here and reactions by Forward in Faith, WATCH and Reform
[blockquote]The Bishop of Manchester (Chair of the Steering Committee) moved:
‘That the Measure entitled “Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure” be finally approved.’
The Steering Committee for the draft Measure had indicated its intention to seek the permission of the Chair, immediately following the moving of the motion for Final Approval of the draft Measure at item 501, to move an Adjournment under Standing Order 94(b).
Following permission from the Chair, the Bishop of Dover moved:
‘That the debate be now adjourned to enable the new clause 5(1)(c) inserted by the House of Bishops into the draft Measure entitled “Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure” to be reconsidered by the House of Bishops.’
Following a debate and a division of Synod, the motion was carried.
For: 288
Against: 144
Abstentions: 15
audio of session [/blockquote]
– This afternoon Synod passed unamended a private member’s motion on Israel and Palestine – details below the fold. With business set down for Tuesday being completed early, Synod has ended.
As it developed:
– the Archbishop of Canterbury has spoken advising that he would like to hear all the speakers but if Synod is minded to adjourn for a period of reflection then that will enable the church to spend more time on understanding what the bishops proposed and for the bishops to understand what is being said in the speeches in Synod today.
-The Bishop of Durham is speaking in favor of adjournment for mutual listening in the House of Bishop to listen to the Church – a plea for the creation of a brief space for discussion and then a clearer and more thoughtful decision
– listen to the speeches, and the audio podcast of this morning’s debate will be available in due course
– Archbishop of York closes the debate having asked Synod
– Bishop of Dover summing up for adjournment – asks Synod to vote with this in mind “that the world might believe”
– Results: For 288; Against 144; Abstained 15 – women bishops debate is adjourned [Archbishop of York advises at least until November the next Synod date – the Bishops to consider it in their meeting 12/13 September] – text to follow
– Motion to adjourn proposed by the Bishop of Dover was carried – text is:
[blockquote]That the debate be now adjourned to enable the new clause 5(1)(c) inserted by the House of Bishops into the draft Measure entitled “Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure” to be reconsidered by the House of Bishops
– thanks to Thinking Anglicans for the text[/blockquote]- The Church Mouse ”@thechurchmouse tweets: “Is it significant that exactly one third of #synod voted against adjournment? Shows how finely balanced final vote will be.” [For the main motion to pass it will require a 2/3 majority in each of the three houses of Synod: bishops, clergy and laity]
– Agenda for Monday afternoon is being reorganised over lunch given time set aside for women bishops debate has been vacated
– Forward in Faith responds – [see below] “Forward in Faith is disappointed that the General Synod today resolved to adjourn the debate on final approval of the draft Measure to permit women to be ordained as bishops in order to give the House of Bishops an opportunity to rethink its recent amendments to the Measure. We call upon the House of Bishops to stand firm in the face of this unwarranted pressure and to return the draft Measure to the Synod in a form which will provide for the future of traditional Catholics and conservative Evangelicals in line with the clearly expressed mind of the Synod throughout this morning’s debate”
– Reform: Rev’d Rod Thomas, chairman of Reform, said: “We stand ready to co-operate to find a solution if there is a genuine desire to see a permanent place secured within the Church of England for those who on theological grounds cannot accept women as bishops.”
Some press reports and responses
Women bishops: Church’s General Synod delays vote – BBC
Statement by Forward in Faith – FiF
Adjournment motion passed – draft Measure sent back to House of Bishops for further consideration CofE
General Synod – Summary of business conducted on Monday 9th July AM CofE
Permission to be sought to move adjournment motion – CofE
Women bishops: Church’s General Synod to delay vote – BBC News
MONDAY P.M. Israel/ Palestine
Synod passed the following Private Member’s Motion unamended in a division by houses [results from Church Times]:
Bishops: 21 for; 3 against; 14 abstentions
Clergy: 89 for; 21 against; 44 abstentions
Laity: 91 for; 30 against; 35 abstentions
[blockquote]”˜That this Synod affirm its support for:
(a) The vital work of the World Council of Churches Ecumenical Accompaniment
Programme in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI), encouraging parishioners to volunteer for the
programme and asking churches and synods to make use of the experience of returning
participants;
(b) Mission and other aid agencies working amongst Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and
elsewhere in the region;
(c) Israelis and Palestinians in all organisations working for justice and peace in the area,
such as the Parents Circle ”“ Families Forum; and
(d) Palestinian Christians and organisations that work to ensure their continuing presence in
the Holy Land.[/blockquote]
General Synod – Summary of business conducted on Monday 9th July PM
Press Reports:
[*NEW] Jewish lobbying with Church of England ”˜backfires’ – Times of Israel
[*NEW] Jewish group: Church Synod Israel vote ‘inflammatory’ – Jewish Chronicle
Church Synod vote in support of EAPPI motion – The Jewish Chronicle
Church of England weighs link to anti-Israel group – Jerusalem Post
Jewish campaign targets Synod motion on Israel – Church Times
GENERAL SYNOD LINKS
AUDIO/TWEETS
Live audio when in session is being provided by Premier Christian Radio
Tweets #Synod ***
REPORTS AND AGENDA
Reports from Synod and audio podcasts of each session available from the CofE Media Center
Agenda and Papers for Synod
Timetable
Full Agenda
OTHER REPORTS
Evangelicals Now – [Church Society]
Thinking Anglicans
Anglican Mainstream
Church Times
***Particular tweets which may be worth following are:
Church of England
Church Times
+Pete Broadbent
Ruth Gledhill [Times]
So if I correctly understand this they have delayed the vote, probably in order to apply pressure on the bishops to rescind the amendment which offered some degree of protection to traditionalists. Sad. I hope some English readers will comment to give their perspective.
The analysis in number 1 is succinct and pretty well accurate.
The pressure for adjournment came from the group who are in favour of women bishops and find it unacceptable that those with conscientious objections should have a guaranteed acceptable oversight. Some degree of oversight is offered by the unamended original document, but not enough to reassure conservatives on either the Catholic or Evangelical side.
A new ABC might have something to do with the delay, too, I’d think.
I am impressed that a motion as clear as this one was passed with 263 yea votes, and only 25 nay and 52 abstentions:
[blockquote] ‘That this Synod express its conviction that it is the calling of Christians to order and govern our lives in accordance with the teaching of Holy Scripture, and to manifest our faith in public life as well as in private, giving expression to our beliefs in the written and spoken word, and in practical acts of service to the local community and to the nation.’ [/blockquote]
Re adjournment of the women bishop measure:
1. I have heard that the House of Bishops made their controversial amendments because they had formed the view that the measure in its unamended form would not pass (remember it must achieve a 2/3 majority in EACH of the houses of laity, clergy and bishops, or it is dead in the water, and the whole process can start again – see you in 5 years). However, I haven’t had any corroboration of that rumour.
2. Members of GS have published comments on blogs to the effect that yesterday they did not believe that the measure with the bishops’ amendment would get the 2/3 majority required to pass the house of laity.
3. Its interesting that almost exactly 1/3 of members of the House of Laity voted aganist adjourning the measure. So they clearly wanted to bring it on. But as to how many wanted to bring it on because they felt they could defeat it, or how many wanted to bring it on because they felt they could pass it, that is the $64 question.
4. The issue now is one for horse-trading, but the problem is that one of the parties is the irresistible force and another is the immoveable object: The ultra-liberals have called for this adjournment so they can have the amendments removed, whereas Reform and other groups say the amendments don’t go far enough. How is the HOB supposed to broker a compromise from that, which will gain support from both groups?
5. Both Reform and Watch have said they will oppose the measure unless they get their respective ways. In Reform’s case, that is credible – its members have largely quarantined their churches from liberal involvement, and they have been ignoring or bypassing liberal bishops since 1998 or earlier, so even if the worst measure for them is passed, it is not clear that it means the end for them. In some ways it might be business as usual for many years yet, plus they always have the option of forming an alternative ACNA-type entity in Britain.
But will WATCH members really vote against the measure if they don’t get their way, I wonder? It is a big ask for them: At present, women bishops are illegal in the Church of England. If some sort of measure is not passed, then that will remain the position for at least the next five years. That delay would probably mean that the women priests who at present are most likely candidates for bishop, will in fact miss out.
Well, from the point of view of WATCH and their supporters, if the vote was held and they did support it, they would have to live with the results, some small degree of protection for traditionalists, or if they did not and it failed to have five more years before the measure could be brought back.
So they teamed up with their chums from the Affirming Catholics and the so called ‘open’ evangelicals to play merry hell with the bishops, whining and stamping their feet in the papers and giving those MP’s they knew such grief that they started agitating as well in order to get the matter adjourned in the hope the Bishops would buckle.
I am not sure the Bishops buckled, but I think it became clear to the Bishops and to the Business Committee, that with neither end supporting the measure, it was heading towards a defeat which would embarrass the Church of England, even more than this wretched process already has with the Ordinariate, Rowan paraded as a Catholic hostage, and now AMiE all directly resulting.
So there we are, back to square one, it seems, and with no certainty if the Bishops were to concede ground to the bandy-legged strutting black shirts of WATCH, that it would pass in November. But that is not my problem. The Church of England has bigger issues of mission it should be concentrating on than rearranging the vestments in our Cathedrals.