If there was a theme for today at General Synod, it was the search for unity.

For example, we sought unity in encouraging a wide variety of ‘fresh expressions’ of church. In other circles this covers what might be called church planting and innovation, as well as other initiatives like “Back to Church Sunday”.

There was an agreed desire to give permission for new and creative Christian fellowships and ministries. In this, we heard of some impressive and sacrificial examples of meeting human need. People felt we were talking about core business.

However the emphasis was all about how to do it, especially on what leadership skills were needed. Agreement in the gospel was taken for granted, yet is the very thing that appears to be lacking across the denomination.

As I said at a previous General Synod, this is like discussing how to market a medicine: what sort of colour and flavour and name and packaging it needs; but all without ensuring the active ingredient is present and effective in the pill!

A couple of Sydney speakers pointed this out, that we needed to preach Jesus, not marketing, and should not downplay theological education. The muttering and grumbling under the breath from some delegates when these points were made, especially when a speaker quoted John 14:6, proves the very point that agreement in the gospel can never be taken for granted.

Another theme for the day was the issue of human rights. The first motion in this area focused on freedom of religion. It called on federal and state/territory governments to safeguard religious freedom in Australia, including freedom to:

• manifest a religion publicly
• appoint people of faith to faith organizations
• teach and uphold moral standards
• discriminate between right and wrong according to one's conscience
• teach and propagate religion
• change religion.

There was some opposition to this, claiming it was protective of our own sectional interests, with an attempt to raise the spectrum of the Christian religious right. As a Christian conservative, who has opposed Fred Nile when he called for a ban on the burqa and a ten year moratorium on Muslim migration (despite disagreeing passionately with Islam), I found the accusation of self-interest that a fairly offensive brush with which to tar those in favour of this motion. As a non-conservative noted, he did not like what a fringe Christian group might say but he defended their right to preach whatever rot they wished, so long as it did not breach criminal or civil legislation. The motion passed.

A second motion supported better understanding and protection of human rights more generally. However, Bishop Rob Forsyth moved for the deletion of a paragraph that would have called for the Federal Government to find ways to enshrine in law rights from a couple of International Rights Covenants. This was a push in a direction towards a human rights charter, which many Christians have been concerned about, and which the Government has already rejected. In a very close vote, and much to the Bishop's surprise, the clause was deleted, 111 to 106! However, the motion's overall thrust about respecting human rights received great support—the disagreement was in how best to do it.

Returning to the theme of unity, there was considerable debate about a motion seeking to advance Anglican-Uniting Church relationships via a Covenant of Understanding. Such inter-denominational dialogue is often welcome. However, the affirmations of the proposed Covenant were problematic for many. For some of those of catholic view, the lack of episcopal ordination of Uniting clergy is deeply problematic. That does not worry evangelicals, but we were concerned by the facts such as the Uniting Church's officially permitting homosexual clergy at the national level—something that has certainly not happened in the Anglican Church of Australia.

On the other hand, many speakers testified to productive relationships with individual Uniting Churches, for example in rural areas where stipendiary ministry cannot easily be supported, and people did not want to lose the progress from such dialogues. So instead of endorsing the Covenant for ratification or rejecting it outright, it was decided after amendment and negotiation, to express appreciation for the work and to refer it to the Dioceses and our national Doctrine Commission for examination.

One other critical discussion concerned whether a contribution to the international Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) should be funded through General Synod compulsory, or voluntary assessments on the Dioceses. It is well known in national Anglican circles that the Sydney Diocese has chosen not to pay the voluntary assessments for about 15 years. We don't like many of the projects which the denomination chooses to fund at the national level, although we send a similar amount as would be levied on us to various ministry works outside our own Diocese. But this independence is a source of pain to many other Dioceses!

Now there was to be an attempt to make Sydney pay its share for the ACC. This is the so-called Anglican ‘instrument of unity’ that many conservative Global South Anglicans have withdrawn from, like Bishop Mouneer Anis of Egypt, as it has repeatedly failed to discipline The Episcopal Church (TEC) for its departure from orthodox standards of human sexuality. For example, the ACC permits TEC's Presiding Bishop to continue to attend, despite her involvement in consecrating bishops in same-sex relationships.

In the end it was made politely plain that forcing this issue would shatter our ‘negotiated fellowship’ among wings of very different theology in the Anglican Church of Australia. This structural unity was likened to an eggshell, very fragile, though still intact in Australia, but impossible to repair if shattered. A liberal bishop won the day by indicating that, although he found our position abhorrent, he appreciated our plain speaking on this matter, because that was the only way our differences could be truly addressed. He realized that bashing us over the head with something like this was not going to help. The move was dropped and the eggshell continues intact.

I pray more in the Anglican Church of Australia can find or regain confidence in the active ingredient in the only medicine we have: the gospel of Jesus Christ, crucified for our sins and risen as Lord of all.

3 Comments »