EXHUMATIONS, overseas clergy, and the
disciplining of lay workers came before the Synod when it gave
first consideration to a mixed bag of business under the headings
of the Draft Church of England (Miscellaneous Provisions) Measure
and Draft Amending Canon No. 31.
Introducing the debate, the
Revd Paul Benfield (Blackburn) said that it was difficult
to give an overview of the Measure. "If I were to go into all the
provisions in the time available, I would be able to do no more
than list them."
He did, however, mention some of the
provisions, including an amendment to the Burial Act of 1857, so
that the removal of a body or human remains that have been buried
are subject to either secular or ecclesiastical control, but not
both. He said: "At present in some circumstances it can be
necessary to obtain both a faculty in the ecclesiastical courts and
a licence from the Secretary of State."
Another amendment would give the
Archbishops power to grant clergy who had been ordained by overseas
bishops permission to officiate on a general basis in certain
circumstances. The Overseas and Other Clergy (Ministry and
Ordination) Measure 1967 already gave them power to do this on an
individual basis, but not a general permission to all clergy
attending a particular conference, such as the Lambeth
Conference.
The Measure would also provide a
fast-track procedure to allow a priest-in-charge to be appointed as
an incumbent where the patron, the priest-in-charge, and the PCC
agreed that this should be done; this would avoid the need to
follow the full appointment procedure laid down in the 1986
Measure.
Justin Brett
(Chichester) said that the Measure demonstrated a "centralising
agenda"; and he was particularly concerned about clauses that dealt
with how certain lay employees could be removed from office. "To
introduce ways in which we can dismiss one or two classes of lay
people in a Miscellaneous Provisions Measure simply isn't on."
The Dean of the Arches and
Auditor, the Rt Worshipful Charles George, said that
Miscellaneous Provisions Measures were the "bane of lawyers". "It
is extremely difficult to establish what the law is. There is a
danger when one looks up the Burial Act. You think it may have been
amended, so you do a search for 'B' for 'burial' and don't spot
that it has been amended in a Miscellaneous Provisions
Measure."
The Bishop of
Guildford, the Rt Revd Christopher Hill, said that the
Measure would provide a mechanism for bishops to remove permission
to officiate from overseas clergy. He told how he almost appointed
a priest as a hospital chaplain who was not properly ordained. "I
never got around to licensing, because I smelt a rat." He said that
there would have been no mechanism for removal once he had been in
place.
The Revd Hugh Lee
(Oxford) said that the fast-track process for transferring
priests-in-charge to incumbents was done with the permission of the
PCC, a move that he described as an "admirable idea, but a new
departure". This part had previously been played by parish
representatives.
He said that the Measure should enable
the Archbishops to give permission to officiate to clergy
"legitimately ordained overseas by a woman bishop" - something, he
said, that did not currently happen.
He also warned against allowing
employees to serve on PCCs. "We need to keep this very important
principle of English charity law, that employees can't be
trustees."
The Bishop of
Willesden, the Rt Revd Pete Broadbent (Southern
Suffragans), said that the Overseas Clergy Measure, which was "used
fairly frequently in London", was becoming increasingly complex.
Ought the Synod to review the whole Measure, he asked. Clergy from
overseas sought "sensible answers and consistency".
The Revd Mark
Steadman (Southwark) expressed concern about the amendment
relating to the appointment of the chair of the dioceses
commission, which removed the need for the chair to be appointed by
elected members of the Synod.
The Archdeacon of
Lincoln, the Ven. Tim Barker (Lincoln), asked for "further
guidance" on the appointment of parish representatives for large
multi-parish benefices.
The Draft Measure was referred to the
revision committee.
Mr Benfield then went on to present
Draft Amending Canon No. 31, which, he said, would "tidy up or
amend certain aspects of the canons". These included Canon 19,
concerning "the guardians of spiritualities", which was repealed,
but which "should be reinstated in modified form".
During a vacancy in see, "some
statutory provisions expressly confer functions on the guardian of
the spiritualities", he said. "Given that the guardians continue to
have a legal role during the vacancy in see, it is desirable that
Canon C19 should be reinstated, but modified to take account of
legislative changes that have taken place since its predecessor was
promulged."
The amending canon also contained
paragraphs dealing with how to remove deaconesses, Readers, and lay
workers who were found guilty of misconduct. "The new canons allow
a bishop to revoke their licence on grounds of misconduct."
The canon was referred to the revision
committee.