Back from General Synod
Well, I spent what will probably be “summer” in UK, locked away in the stifling Central Hall of York University (why haven’t they invented air-con in the academic sector?)
The agenda to my mind was not exactly the most stimulating I’ve ever experienced, but of course we did have the debate on women bishops. Since this has attracted some interest in my part of the blogosphere, some comment might be of interest…
What were we debating? Before everyone gets too excited, it was about starting the process, not the actual decision which will ‘do the deed’. Following Monday’s debate, the Synod is now committed to drawing up the legal instruments under canon law which would allow women to be made bishops in the CofE. However, before these instruments get passed into law they need to achieve a 2/3rds majority in the three ‘houses’ of the synod: bishops, clergy and laity. The voting figures from Monday give in interesting breakdown of how the opinion is currently biased. In the houses of bishops and clergy the voting is confortably over the 2/3rd point. However, in the house of laity (which, being filled with a high number of elderly, retired people, tends to be the most conservative house) the vote was just over the 2/3rds point: 159 to 75.
However, it is important to realise two key things about Monday’s vote: 1. The vote was only to begin the legislative process, it was not on the legislation itself, which will come in about five years’ time. 2. There is an election coming up which will change the personnel involved.
The narrow 2/3rds majority in the House of Laity achieved this time should not lull anyone into believing that somehow the final outcome is certain. By my calculations it would only take a 2% swing for any legislation to fail in the House of Laity. Furthermore, even if the House of Laity stayed exactly the same, the vote on Monday was for moving to legislation, not for passing that legislation itself. It can be fairly guaranteed that some of those voting “For” proceeding to drafting legislation would vote “Against” when it came to the actual final vote. Therefore any swing in the House of Laity in the forthcoming election will be crucial to the final outcome. No doubt the traditionalist lobby are well aware of this, but how aware is the wider church?
Posted on Wednesday, 13 July 2005 by Paul | Posted in good ole cofe | 2 comments
Comments
Hi
excuse my ignorance, but how do the members of the house of laity get chosen, and is it for life.
I’m not arguing for change for the sake of it, but while the membership might represent those active in CofE, my hope is that younger people would be invovled also at this level IN ORDER THAT change in the church would make church a place where those under 45, let alone under 20 would actually want to come.
Sorry if this has been debated before. I’m not an anglican, but a member of the UMC, but we have exactly the same frustrations here in europe, albeit on a much smaller scale.
Be blessed
All members of the Synod (except bishops – ha!) are elected for five years by the STV system. The electorate of the House of Laity are lay members of Deanery Synods – each parish has, typically, two such lay members who are elected each year by the AGM of the parish. (Larger parishes have more reps).
The principal problem is that to spend the time sitting on the General Synod needs the kind of job and time availability to allow it. This is why so many members of the House of Laity are retired, others are lawyers, academics and the self-employed. To offset the effects of the high average age of the house of laity, the Church of England Youth Council was set up which appoints non-voting representatives. However, young members of the House of Laity are few and far between, and those that are sometimes find that their careers mean they move outside their original diocese after election, so they have to resign their seats. Personally, I think that the rules should be adjusted to insist that no more than 33% of the members returned from a diocese are over 65, but this could be challenged under human rights legislation.
