Support the Café

Search our Site

For Anglicans who want to avoid decisions

For Anglicans who want to avoid decisions

Today in Comparative Ecclesial Polities, we look at the General Synod of the Church of England, which is now in session, but spent most of today just warming up. Riazat Butt, soon to be late of the Guardian, kept this live blog on the day’s events.

Required reading for today’s installment comes from Butt’s colleague at the Guardian, Andrew Brown. It begins:

Returning from a General Synod meeting in York with a story to write, I once typed “The Church of England yesterday decided”, and fell immediately into a profound sleep over my laptop. I was entirely sober at the time. It’s just the effect that synod has; and I’m beginning to wonder whether this isn’t part of its real purpose.

The General Synod now meets only twice a year. This week it’s in Church House, in Westminster. In theory it is there to make the decisions that parliament can no longer be bothered with about the Church of England; but in fact it’s a device to make decision-making more or less impossible.

Some Christian churches can’t make decisions because they don’t have decision-making bodies. The Baptists are the best example of this. Some can’t make big decisions because they think that all the interesting ones were made by about 787 AD. That would be the Orthodox – although they do in fact meet in synods to discuss other matters. The Roman Catholics don’t believe in democracy as a form of church government, but the bishops gather every century or so to make decisions too large even for a pope.

But the Church of England can’t even decide whether it wants to make decisions. The arguments about women bishops that will take up much of this week illustrate the point very well, because what the opponents deny is that the synod should ever be capable of deciding who is or isn’t a bishop. For that matter, they don’t believe that the synod should decide who is or isn’t a priest. So what appear to be wrangles about what decision to make are in fact disputes about whether to make a decision at all.

Is there something about unicameral legislatures that include bishops, clergy and laypeople that bring on this kind of paralysis, or are the problems Brown sees with the synod particular to the Church of England?


Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Avoiding decisions? The whole notion’s terribly Anglican. And while I’ve never seen a synod, my bet is that the whole thing is quite the show, replete with thundering organs and a visit from the queen. After all, when you can’t make a decision, make a commotion.

Eric Bonetti


“Riazat Butt, soon to be late of the Guardian”: oh, what’s becoming of the becoming Riazat* ? :-/ [Her profile page didn’t say]

JC Fisher

* aka, the lovely Butt (I got a million of ’em, folks! ;-p)

Seriously, I hope we’ll still hear from the estimable RB on the Religion Beat somewhere (RB on the RB? Stop me! ;-X)

Bonnie Spivey

There was one very delicious-funny comment on Riazet Butt’s twitter comments that I read earlier today which said:

“priests wear shoes, bishops flip-flop”

Best solution might be to buy the bishops some shoes.

Leslie Scoopmire

Andrew Brown says it well, and says it with style!

Jim Naughton

I think I could live with a unicameral body that observed the rules of the House of Deputies. I would be less comfortable with a unicameral body that went into closed session as often as the HoB.

Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café