the draſt Measure. However, synods are being asked to approve, or disapprove, the secific proposals contained in the draſt Measure – which of course includes the provision made for us by delegation. Tere is some evidence that where the Following Motion is tabled for debate, it helps people to focus on the secific proposals of the Measure, including the provision, or lack of provision, for us. While we had originally thought of the Following Motion as being mainly aimed at diocesan synods, it has helped deanery synods to have beter debates focused on the contents of the Measure itself. Tere is some encouraging news from in


early debates deanery synods;


some have passed the Following Motion, and others have even rejected


the main


motion; however, most deaneries and almost all dioceses have not yet had their debates, so it is early days.


Advance preparation If the Following Motion is to be put, either at deanery or


diocesan synods, it needs to be tabled in advance. Diocesan synods are governed by standing orders, and the motion must be tabled in accordance with those standing orders; contact the secretary of the diocesan synod or the diocesan registrar well


in


to all: the draſt Measure so clearly makes us second-class Anglicans. Tirdly,


there is comprehensiveness; many


people value the comprehensiveness of the Church of England, and want to see it continue to include us and our tradition. Te fourth point is the missing Code of Pracice; we are told that the Code will include provision for us, but even a draſt Code will not be available until aſter every deanery and diocesan synod has voted on the draſt legislation. We are being asked to sign a blank cheque! Even when a draſt Code eventually appears, there is no saying that it will be anything like the final Code, which can only be brought to General Synod some time aſter the Measure comes into force.


Briefing paper In Manchester


diocese, a briefing paper was produced for deanery synods by a representative group. Te


briefing paper


advance to find out how to do so. Deanery synods do not generally have standing orders, but it is important to give the text of the motion well in advance to the Rural Dean or the secretary to the synod, so that it can be included on the agenda. Tere is nothing to prevent following motions being tabled, though they may not be debated if the meeting runs out of time; even then, the presence of the motion on the agenda may help to focus the debate on the provisions of the Measure, rather than the principle. Advance preparation for a synod debate is important; some good seakers need to be identified and primed to seak, lay people as well as clergy. It is good to try and have a meeting of key people well before the synod meeting to plan for the debate, including sympathizers and well-wishers from other traditions.


Points to highlight From debates that have taken place so far, a number


of issues have proved helpful to bring out in debate. He first is broken promises: in 1993, the Church of England promised itself, us and Parliament that the legal provisions for Resolutions A and B, together with the Act of Synod, would remain for as long as they were needed by anyone. Te draſt Measure removes the legal provisions which we were promised would last; it also envisages that the Act of Synod will be rescinded. Te second issue is that of fairness


this debate will continue in deaneries and dioceses, and we must all play our part in it


explains that there are theological arguments for and against women bishops. It quotes the Lambeth Conference resolution that those in favour and those opposed to women bishops are loyal Anglicans. It describes how the draſt legislation provides for us by means of bishops with authority delegated from the diocesan bishop. It explains that those who favour delegation consider that giving any independent authority to bishops for us would undermine the authority


of diocesan bishops, particularly female diocesan bishops. It also says that those who are opposed to delegation point out that diocesan bishops do not now have jurisdiction in all places in their dioceses; for example, Armed Forces bases, prisons, Royal Peculiars and some university colleges do not come under the jurisdiction of the diocesan bishop. Considering that the number of parishes seeking provision is not large, it is difficult to see how the authority of diocesan bishops would be undermined by conferring some independent authority on bishops for us. We have always been clear that provision would be needed in all dioceses, so the authority of female diocesan bishops would not be ‘undermined’ any more than that of their male colleagues. For most of the rest of the year, this debate will continue


in deaneries and dioceses, and we must all play our part in it. ‘Delegation will not do’; we need to get that message across very clearly, because whatever is in the Code of Pracice cannot undo the principle of delegation enshrined in the draſt Measure. We need to get the House of Bishops to amend the Measure, as is their prerogative. Te Following Motion will help to focus our concerns with the flimsy provision in the draſt Measure, which singularly fails to provide for our theological convictions. ND


April 2011 ■ newdirections ■ 5


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40