PORTSMOUTH DIOCESAN SYNOD
Minutes of a meeting held on Saturday 13November 2010 in Cathedral House. A Eucharist was held in the Cathedral at 9.30 am.
PRESENT: The Rt Revd Christopher Foster (Bishop of Portsmouth), some 49members of the House of Clergy and 52 members of the House of Laity, together with representatives of other denominations and visitors. Apologies had been received from 6clergy and 5 lay members.
THE BISHOP OF PORTSMOUTH IN THE CHAIR
945WELCOME AND NOTICES
The Bishop welcomed and thanked those attending the meeting and noted the apologies.
The Diocesan Secretary,Wendy Kennedy,promulged the amendment to Canon 29 which had been made by General Synod at the July group of sessions.
Synod agreed nem con the proposed allocation of representation (annex 1) from parishes to deanery synods at the 2011 elections.
946MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON 19 JUNE 2010
The minutes of the meeting held on 19 Junewere agreed and signed by Bishop Christopherin the Chair.
947PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS
Bishop Christophergave the presidential address which is attached at Annex 2.
LUCY DOCHERTY IN THE CHAIR
948JOINT PORTSMOUTH AND WINCHESTER DIOCESAN BOARD OF EDUCATION
Trevor Reader as Vice Chair of the Board of Education presented the agenda motion. Following the creation of a single board of education, a new strategic plan had been created to provide the focus for the Board’s work.
Jenny Hobbs, Chair of the Dioceses’ Board of Education(DBE) and Tony Blackshaw spoke to paper 1 and gave a presentation on the workof the Board.
Jenny Hobbs introduced the DBE Strategic Plan and Mission Statement which had been considered and commended to Synod by the Bishop’s Council. Sheassured Synod that a question raised at Bishops Council about the responsibility of the DBE and Staff to support non church schools would be addressed by the Board. The statutory requirement is to work with church schools, but the Board works on a partner level with non church schools. The DBEwould support all schools within the limits of its resources. She also highlighted the need for the DBE to respond to changes at a national level as well as local authority changes.
Tony Blackshawthen addressed the DBE mission statement and aims and commended the strategic plan to the Synod.
Stuart Holt (Bishop’s Waltham)highlighted the opportunities of working with affiliated schools.
Tony Blackshawacknowledged this. Responding to a further question about the provision of Religious Education advice to schools, he advised that the DBE intention is to procure and provide appropriate expertise in this area.
Bob White (Portsmouth)highlighted the need to support parishes that work in local schools.
Trevor Reader proposed the motion:
‘This Synod endorses the Portsmouth and Winchester joint Diocesan Board of Education strategy submitted by the Board and commended by the Bishop’s Council.’
Synod passed the motion nem con.
949MINISTRY FOR MISSION UPDATE
Bob White reported that theMinistry for Mission group has been enlarged and now comprised the Dean, Debbie Sutton, Wendy Kennedy, Bob White, Will Hughes, Chris Feak, Ben Mizen, Lucy Docherty and Alex Hughes.A further consultation day had been held, which 50 people from across the Diocese attended
The working group were drafting the Framework for Ministry for Mission for Bishop’s Council consideration. The version approved by them will form the basis of a full Synod meeting in February 2011.If adopted by Synod, the Framework will then be communicated to the wider diocese for action. Budget implications will become clearer during 2011 and will first impact the 2012 budget.
BOB WHITE IN THE CHAIR
950 DIOCESAN BUDGET 2011
Bishop Christopher as President of Synod and Chair of the DBF referred to his paper on the subject recently issued to Synod (annex 2).
John Gwynn, Chair of the Finance Committee stated that economic problems in the private sector are now hitting the public sector. There should be economic growth next year but this would be slow. However Christian giving was holding up well and there was money in the budget for mission (£50,000) so thiswas not a budget to manage decline. John Gwynn thanked the staff for their work on the budget consultation process. There were strong views across the parishes but no overall consensus. In the light of the views received a compromise had been put forward and he commended this budget to the Synod.
Stephen Collyer, Director of Finance for the Dioceses of Guildford, Portsmouth and Winchester gave a presentation on the key elements within the budget. Hereminded Synod that the way we handle our financial issues was about ourresponse to what God has given us and to what we believedGod was calling us to achieve in 2011. He reported that PortsmouthDiocese was in good financial position with current assets standing at £1.7m. Parish Share payment remained good.
The final budget proposed to reduce stipendiary clergy posts by 5 and set a target to reach the diocese’s allocated Sheffieldshare of this resource by 1 July 2011. The clergy stipend increase proposed was3.1% overall in 2 stages, lay salaries to be lifted for cost of living by 2%. This, with all other changes and savings, resulted in an increase in the overall sum of parish share required of 2.9%.
Bob White opened up the floor for debate.
All but one of those who spoke were in favour of the budget. Concerns were expressed about the ability of deaneries to make the required reductions in stipendiary ministers and about the impact that reduced clergy numbers might have on levels of giving. Others recognised the inherent fairness of the Sheffield allocation and the positive challenge this offered for us to consider how ministry is delivered.
Ian Johnson (Petersfield)spoke against the motion saying the options offered to deaneries had been inadequate and insufficient.
Canon Peter Marshall (representative of retired clergy) felt cutting five posts puts extra reasonability on retired clergy. Costs are saved in budget but then parishes are paying in other ways such as paying retired clergy.
Bishop Christopher stated that he acknowledged that it maynot be possible to reach Sheffield numbers, but committed himself to working to achieve this. Hestated that the clergy are a great asset, but pointed out that it was the responsibility of all in the church to encourage stewardship. The principle of fair share is important and Sheffield numbers are not achieved nationwide: some dioceses are unable to recruit to their share. He also thanked the retired clergy for their hard work
Bishops Christopher proposed the motions that:
‘This Synod approves the budget submitted by the DBF for the year ended 31st December 2011.’
‘This Synod authorises the Board to seek to raise the sum of £4,555,137 in parish share from parishes for the year ended 31 December 2011.
The motions were put to the vote and passed by a large majority, with 1 vote against and 8 abstentions recorded.
The follow on motion as notified under Standing Order 53 was proposed by Michael Oakley, Chair of the Bishop’s Council Investment Advisory Group:
'Synod recognises the excellent track record of parish share payment
over many years from the parishes of Portsmouth Diocese and notes thatthe majority of parishes now pay in regular instalments by banker's
standing order. Synod calls on all parishes to move to payment by
monthly standing order in order to enable the DBF to adopt the
most efficient possible cash flow and investment policies on their
behalf'
Michael stated that the Investment Advisory Group recognisedthat not all churches could do this, but suggested that every parish should be able to commit to a monthly amount that could then be topped up as resources allowed.
The motion was seconded by Anthony Littlejohn.
The motion was then debated. Speakers reminded Synod that Parish Share is a voluntary contribution, supported the proposal that all parishes should support this common responsibility by making regular payments as far as possible. Biblical principles found in the letters of St Paul were cited, also in support.
The motion was put to the vote and passed by a large majority with
4 votes against, and 10 abstentions
951WOMEN IN THE EPISCOPATE
The Article 8 reference from General Synod was brought to Diocesan Synod’s attention. Members were advised that they were to vote on this at the November 2011 meeting. Before the voteit was proposed to hold 2 events to inform the diocese further on the issues involved and that deaneries be invited to debate the motion and pass the results of their deliberations to Diocesan Synod to take into consideration. The supporting documents, with the reference, will be available on the diocesan website and summarised in Pompey Chimes.
Oriel Alby (Portsmouth), attending his last Diocesan Synod before retirement and return to his native South Africa,spoke about apartheid and cautioned Synod to be aware of the past in looking to the future.
952GENERAL SYNOD REPORT
The recently elected/re-elected General Synod members for Portsmouth were introduced by one of the returning members, Debbie Sutton. Debbie also advised Diocesan Synod of key items of forthcoming General Synod business, including a further Article 8 reference to the Dioceses about the proposal for an Anglican covenant.
The Bishop thanked the Vice Chairs of Synod for their work in chairing business and closed the meeting at 1.05pm
Signed as a true record of proceedings……………………………………….....
Date: ……………………………………….
Annex 1
Presidential Address to Portsmouth Diocesan Synod
13th November 2010
I want to speak this morning about fairness. The word has been in frequent use over the past weeks and it is an important concept for any community as well as one of particular relevance to Christians seeking to do God’s will and looking for the establishing of his kingdom. We believe not in a value-less, overwhelmingly subjective view of morality but in kingdom values.
First, though, I cannot let this moment pass without offering my thanks, and Sally’s, for the welcome we have received in the diocese over these last weeks. You were good enough to allow us space and freedom from demands as we settled, with my children on and off in residence, into Bishopsgrove during the summer. We were glad to be present at the ordinations, the farewell to Peter Hancock, and the Methodist Conference ordination incognito, or at least informally. Thank you for that understanding and restraint. We are all conscious that the wait for a bishop has been protracted. Since I began ‘work’ at the start of September and public ministry at the Installation (with enthronement!) you and others in the diocese have been generous in your welcome and in inviting us to share the life of community, parish, chaplaincy and diocese. I know I have much to learn and I am grateful for your help in discerning the highest priorities in these first weeks – soon, but not quite yet, to turn into months. I am excited to be here. Increasingly, I feel I belong and at home in the right sense which does not dull the probing questions which you should expect of a bishop, though to say that is personally daunting as I reflect on this calling to be both pastor and prophet.
Let me turn back to fairness. Much political and economic comment has considered the fairness of proposals and policy over the past weeks. After four set-piece economic and financial statements given in parliament in the last twelve months it is still surprising that the impact of budget measures has raised questions of fairness as all too often in the past such questions have had little attention. Specifically it has been claimed that fairness is a major driver for government decision. Cuts are claimed to be fair, or unfair; benefit changes proposed in part by appeal to a sense of fairness; proportional representation by Alternative Vote put forward as fairer than first-past-the-post; constituency boundary changes intended to reduce the number of MPs and fairly standardise sizes of electoral rolls to plus or minus 5%; even the journalists’ exposure of possible buying of votes in the FIFA decision on the 2018 World Cup venue has been claimed as an unfair sting.
So the newspapers carry tables indicating what percentage reduction in net income will be the impact for a single person, or a couple, or a family earning income in different bands. There’s hyperbolic, almost indulgent language about the unfairness of removing child benefit beyond the higher-rate tax threshold and about capping housing benefit or removing the educational maintenance allowance. While there is rather less attention, for now at least, to the impact of changes to working tax credit and childcare allowances; watch this space, I think.
We are right to welcome this explicit recognition that fairness and justice are important. The decisions we make as individuals, as a community, and in our nation have moral consequences and we should welcome a more open discussion and debate about the implications of what we do ourselves or in our name by those who serve us in local and national government.
My point in this short address is not to make quick or cheap political points, though I imagine I am not alone in having mixed feelings about the package of measures the government is proposing, but to remind us that a concept of fairness is often heavily conditioned by our personal circumstances, self-interest or even our prejudices. We hear young children plead that “It isn’t fair”, and on most occasions they are complaining that they aren’t getting what they want, sometimes by contrast with someone who is. So when a commentator asks, “Is it fair that the savings asked of disabled people roughly equate in monetary terms to the levy on banks”, I want to reply that, although I can give a simple personal answer, the question is a complicated one. That is not to say we refrain from answering, but it is to urge that we must go beyond our gut response, and more deeply consider issues of fairness and justice.
To be fair in judgement is to be impartial: to play fair is to follow agreed rules; to settle something fair and square is to be above-board and transparent. The Bible does not mention fairness in the way our current debates are presently using the term, as far as I can see. It does, however, speak about justice, and we pray in this week’s Collect in this pre-Advent season that we may “be subject to (Christ’s) just and gentle rule.” 1 That is a prayer we do well to use again and again as we consider our response, our Christian response, to the various policy proposals, White Papers, and spending decisions of central and local government.
So today I raise one cheer to welcome a debate which acknowledges the moral issues which surround our decisions. I want, though, to urge that we engage in this in a way which is both more sophisticated and more subtle than an appeal to our own self interest or to what is claimed as ‘self-evident’ fairness. Jesus reminds us of our responsibilities to our neighbours within our Christian understanding that mercy and compassion belong with justice. Rarely in my judgement can these choices be simple and straightforward. There are tough decisions to be made, but we should not take them unadvisedly, lightly or wantonly (as the Book of Common Prayer says of the commitment to marriage). The tougher the challenge or decision the more considered and thoughtful should be our weighing of the moral complexities. For us the call is to this and also to deeper prayer and reflection on Jesus and the Gospel.
It is up to us to ensure that we take this opportunity for a Christian contribution to consideration of fairness in society.
Christopher Portsmouth
1 Collect for 3rd Sunday before Advent (CW)
Annex 2
Portsmouth Bishop’s Council/Diocesan Board of Finance 2011 Budget
The November meeting will, of course, be my first as President of Portsmouth Diocesan Synod and I look forward to meeting you all. I intend to keep my presidential address short as our agenda contains some weighty matters, so I hope it will be helpful to let you have this brief notein advance.
The financial challenges we face at present arise largely from the wider national and international economic situation. Of course these come hand in hand with our church’s social context; where general knowledge and understanding of the Christian message and the relevance of the gospelare no longer givens. There is much to do andwe have not only to agree the way forward, but also to decide how we will resource our ministry and mission in both financial and other practical terms.
The 2011 budget is an interim one. We will not have the Ministry for Mission strategy until next year, and the financial implications of that must inform our budgets in future years. You will also appreciate that I need time to come to know and understand the diocese, in order to reach my own views about what will be right for 2012 and beyond.
I chaired the Bishop’s Council/DBF October meeting where this budget was agreed. The consultation process over the summer had been thorough, and the Council had before it the considered responses of the deaneries and parishes. Although these views were disparate and there was no overall consensus in favour of any of the options, some clear trends emerged and these are explained in the paper accompanying the budget detail. The budget before synod is constructed in the light of this and I believe it provides an acceptable option for 2011. It is certainly a compromise and so leaves many of us uncomfortable.