THE General Synod voted to call on the national investing bodies
to ensure that their investment policy was aligned with the
Church's Shrinking the Footprint campaign, and to establish a
working group on the environment.
Moving the motion on behalf of the Southwark diocesan synod,
Canon Giles Goddard (Southwark), said: "The issue
of climate change is real, and it is happening. The average
temperature of the surface of the planet has increased by 0.89
degrees in the last century." The issue had dropped down the
political agenda since the failure of the Copenhagen talks in 2009,
he said. "It almost feels as though there's been a collective
shrug: 'We can't do anything about it, can we?'"
Despite the sceptics, there was "remarkable scientific consensus
about predicted effects. . . Of course, one Synod debate, on its
own, won't change anything. But if the motion is passed, it will
create the conditions for us to do better. . .
"It is really urgent. For the next big conference in Paris to be
successful, there needs to be a renewed national and international
conversation. . . I think the Church can and should facilitate that
urgent public conversation."
The Bishop of Sheffield, Dr Steven Croft,
supported the motion's call for a General Synod working group,
describing climate change as "a giant evil - a great demon of our
"The damage this Goliath will do to our beautiful earth, if
unchecked, is beyond our imagining. It is a giant of
deconstruction, and immensely dangerous to future life on this
earth, to our children, our grandchildren, and to the
"This giant evil of climate change is stealthy and invisible.
Its power rests on the accumulation of gas in the atmosphere, which
cannot be seen, but can be measured. Its power is fed by greed,
blindness, and complacency in the present generation. And we know
that this giant wreaks havoc through the immense power of our
weather systems, which are themselves unpredictable."
He called for a "fresh dose of urgency and reality on this
matter" and said that the Church should put pressure on
Parliamentary candidates to raise the issue at party
The deputy chair of the Ethical Investment Advisory Group,
the Revd Professor Richard Burridge (University of
London), welcomed the motion, saying that climate change was "one
of, if not the, biggest ethical investment issue, particularly
because its impact will be felt most by the poor".
He understood why some were calling for divestment, but said:
"It's not as simple as that: pointing the finger just at the
extractive industries gets us off the hook and avoids the
fundamental problem - which is our way of life has been fuelled by
plentiful, cheap energy.
"Fossil fuels have been the cheapest, most convenient sources of
this energy and more and more people around the world want our
standard of living. Making the transition away from fossil fuels in
a fair and just way is going to be long and hard, and require
sacrifices from all of us."
Madeleine Ratcliffe-Homes (Europe) had "long
waited for this moment when the environment comes on to the
agenda". She called for the General Synod and the Archbishops'
Council to work with other faiths throughout the world to ensure
the issue was taken seriously. "We need to act now."
Tom Sutcliffe (Southwark) spoke to a number of
amendments that he had tabled, saying that he had played no part in
forming the motion, as he had been unable to attend the
"I believe the Church should get behind ecologically responsible
actions and awareness - an immense task in which the Church must
. . . The motion as it stands leaves out so much that is
relevant to any proper ecological understanding, while at the same
time being deluded about the power of either the Church or church
members as investors or consumers to do very much about the
dangerous, if not disastrous situation facing our world."
Margaret Swinson (Liverpool) spoke to her
amendment that would reconstitute the Shrinking the Footprint
working group. She reminded the Synod of the 2005 debate on climate
change. "Were we serious? I question that now," she said. Her
amendment would force the Church to look seriously at church
buildings, government structures, and homes, in the fight against
Mr Sutcliffe moved his amendment, which would change the motion
to recognise only the dangers of "excessive" burning of fossil
Canon Goddardsaid: "We need to reduce to absolutely no burning
to have any hope of stopping runaway climate change. I hope Synod
will resist this amendment."
The Revd Rosalind Rutherford (Winchester) said:
"To quibble over what is 'excessive' is a distraction. In this
context, 'excessive' means more than I use. Is it excessive to heat
our cold churches for half a dozen people?"
The amendment was clearly lost.
Mr Sutcliffe then moved his second amendment, which would leave
out a paragraph in the motion which recognised the large reserves
of fossil fuels and replace it with one that warned of the dangers
of population growth.
Canon Goddard said that it was important to separate the issues
of population growth from climate change. He criticised the
amendment for shifting the burden "from the rich world to poor
world where they have larger families. The average UK citizen emits
in eight days as much CO2 as the average person in one of the 50
developing countries does in a whole year."
April Alexander (Southwark) said that fears
over excessive population growth were misplaced. She cautioned
against diverting the climate-change discussion and avoiding
"uncomfortable conversations" in the "power-hungry developed
Jennifer Humphreys (Bath & Wells) agreed:
"This amendment seems to give the impression that the poor are to
blame for climate change."
Keith Malcouronne (Guildford) said that the
motion was flawed as it only focused on fossil fuels. He said:
"Even if through technological change we were able to adapt and to
minimise the impact of the use of fossil fuels, that wouldn't on
its own alleviate all the impact that humankind is having on the
climate and planet. Don't throw this amendment out because it very
sensibly widens the range of concerns issues and causes."
The amendment was lost, however.
Similarly, Canon Goddard said that the effect of Mr Sutcliffe's
next amendment would be to "abrogate responsibility away from
ourselves. . . We know the issues are complicated. But we do have
£9 billion of assets, and with that we can make a difference."
Canon Robert Cotton (Guildford) said he agreed.
"This amendment will give people who want to avoid facing up to the
difficulties [of battling climate change] an easy way out," he
said. " Peter Smith (St Edundsbury & Ipswich)
said that Mr Sutcliffe's amendment would not acknowledge the
financial responsibility of the Church's investing bodies.
Brian Wilson (Southwark) supported the
The amendment was lost.
Mr Sutcliffe's next amendment was to replace the paragraph
calling for a General Synod working group. Canon Goddard said that
removing this paragraph "would make it less likely to meet the
expectations" of many NGOs and others who were following the debate
Steven Saxby (Chelmsford) also opposed the
amendment. "I am for action and I am for this Synod taking action."
He said that "we need help from the central structures of the
Church of England - not just to take action in parishes, but also
to take action on the UK and global stages."
The amendment sought to "take out one of the vital components of
the Southwark diocesan synod motion", said the Revd Mark
The amendment was lost.
Synod moved on to the Swinson amendment, which was supported by
The vice-chair of the Anglican Consultative Council,
Elizabeth Paver (Sheffield), supported the
amendment: "Actions speak louder than words." She recalled the
presentations made to last year's ACC meeting in New Zealand on
climate change: it "would have melted our hearts". People were
speaking there who were losing family members that week, she
The Revd Janet Appleby (Newcastle) welcomed the
use of the words "all parts of the Church of England", because
"that includes all of us as individuals too. Are we prepared to
take that responsibility and live more simply so that others might
She gave three practical suggestions, which she called the three
Rs: Reduce, Reuse, and Repair. All three should be considered
before recycling, she said.
The amendment was carried.
When the debate resumed on the main motion, Gavin
Oldham (Oxford) warned: "This generation has developed an
ability to impact the lives of others that follow it to an extent
greater than any other generation in human industry, by consuming
resources which rightly belong to those future generations, and by
wrecking their environment."
Dr Jackie Butcher (Sheffield) spoke about the
Government's legally binding target for reductions in CO2 emissions
by 2050. "The only way we will generate enough energy for our needs
and meet an 80-per-cent CO2 reduction target is to generate energy
in a low-carbon manner, and we have to have a grown-up adult and
rational conversation about nuclear energy as part of that."
But it was not just about energy generation: "We will no longer
have gas central heating in our houses; we will no longer be
cooking with gas; domestic and commercial heating will be . . .
using low-carbon electricity; and there will no longer be any
petrol or diesel cars on the road by 2050.
"That's how we get there. That's what the maths say. That's how
The Bishop of Southwark, the Rt Revd
Christopher Chessun, hoped that the motion would "help to raise
awareness within the C of E of the urgency of the moral, social,
and spiritual dimensions of climate change. "We urgently need a new
public conversation," he said. "We are talking about our children's
future and the future habitability of the planet."
Nobody knew who "owns thebrief" within the C of E, he said,
calling for Shrinking the Footprint, the Mission and Public Affairs
team, the diocesan environmental network, and the environmental
group of bishops to be brought together"with experts from outside
Dr Anna Thomas-Betts (Oxford) said she worked
on a government-funded research project on alternative energy
sources in the 1970s, when "petrol prices went sky high." OPEC
reduced its prices, and the Govern-ment stopped the research.
The world wasn't going to need less energy, she said, and argued
for more effort in the development of alternative energy sources,
including carbon capture and storage, and greater use of solar
The chairman of the Mission and Public Affairs council,
Philip Fletcher (Archbishops' Council), urged the
Synod to "take courage". In the 1970s, two "major global threats"
had been identified: lead in petrol and CFCs. "We took urgent
national and international action, and we feel the benefits
The Church should be "making itself heard" in the run-up to the
General Election and the Paris Climate Change Conference.
Summing up the debate, Canon Goddard urged the Synod not to wait
for the working group to be set up before taking action.
The amended motion was passed overwhelmingly, with 274 votes
for,1 against and 3 abstentions:
That this Synod:
(a) recognising the damage being done to the planet through
the burning of fossil fuels;
(b) aware of the huge reserves held by gas, oil and coal
(c) committing itself to taking seriously our Christian
responsibility to care for the planet ("the earth is the
(d) acknowledging the financial responsibilities of the
Church's national investing bodies; and
(e) noting that a review of recommended ethical investment
policy with regard to climate change has been begun by the Church
of England Ethical Investment Advisory Group (EIAG),
(i) call upon the national investing bodies to ensure that
their investment policy (including the option of disinvestment) is
aligned with the theological, moral and social priorities of the
Church which finds expression in the reports Sharing God's
Planet and Church and Earth 2009-2016 and in the
Shrinking the Footprint campaign;
(ii) call upon the EIAG to publish the report of its review
by the end of 2014; and
(iii) request the Archbishops' Council to reconstitute the
Shrinking the Footprint working group, so that it reports direct to
the Council, to monitor, facilitate co-ordination and promote the
responses of all parts of the Church of England to environmental