Debate is hotting up today, yet it is without rancour. Finally we were getting somewhere at General Synod, with a better balance of motions rather than just legislation.

Archdeacon Bob Jackson began the day with Bible study from Romans 12. He only briefly explained the passage, before moving quickly to describe a fine-sounding program from his UK Diocese of Lichfield, called Back to Church Sunday. This was a professionally produced outreach program, with integrated training. I thought it would work especially well with established older Anglican congregations, (such as the two morning congregations I serve). However I would have liked a little more attention to the Scriptures in the Bible study, especially of the nature of the mercies (Rom 12:1), in view of which we were urged to act. Once again, these gospel mercies were left unsaid and unproclaimed.

Making poverty history

Next motions in regard to the UN Millennium Development Goals. I was struck by statistics like the fact that 19% of the world's population live on less than US$1/day. Especially shocking was the fact that on average 1200 children would die around the world from preventable diseases during the single hour which this debate took place.

Practical suggestions were made as to how Christians can act in support of the MDGs. E.g. Directing 0.7% of a Synod's income towards development activities; supporting initiatives for good government and democracy internationally; changing one's own habits (for example, purchasing fair trade products). The Micah Challenge and Make Poverty History campaigns were commended.

I was encouraged to hear about one of our own Archbishop's Overseas Relief and Aid Fund projects. This involved the provision of insecticide-impregnated mosquito nets, which reduced the incidence of malaria by 80-90%. A young lady from Perth also spoke emotionally about the difference made by the provision of just one water tank to a Philippians community, where open sewers drained into drinking sources.

Reconciliation and NT intervention

Two motions concerning indigenous Australians were passed. The first encouraged relationships of mutual trust and respect between indigenous and non-indigenous Anglicans. The Synod was glad to join indigenous Bishop Arthur Malcolm as he led us in a prayer for reconciliation written with his non-indigenous wife. A video accompanied this motion. Sadly unhelpful, it was more reflective of vague, new age spirituality than Christian gospel, and quite a contrast to Bishop Malcolm's words on forgiveness being based on the love of Christ.

Regarding the intervention in NT Aboriginal communities, the second motion urged the Federal Government to evaluate rigorously the effectiveness of quarantining welfare payments, enforcing medical examinations of children, and any plans to acquire land compulsorily; and to listen to the concerns and advice of Aboriginal community leaders.

Huge division over marriage

The afternoon was dominated by the most spirited debate of Synod regarding a bill to amend the Solemnization of Marriage Canon (Anglican law). Bishop Glenn Davies moved to delete the requirement that at least one of the intending parties must be baptized, and to leave such decisions to the pastoral wisdom of the local Minister.  To readers of this blog, this may seem like an arcane matter. However it exposed huge fault-lines of theology in the Synod.

For many, the catholic view of marriage as a sacrament of redemption requires people to be baptized. And for them, baptism is the essence of entry into relationship with God. (On this view, to be consistent, surely both parties should be baptized!) Proponents of the bill " in accord with Article 25 " disagree that marriage is a sacrament of the gospel. They wanted liberty to promote mission to the unchurched that would help reclaim the ordinance of marriage as an ordinance for all people, rather than only as believers.

As required for such legislation, the votes had to by houses with a two thirds majority required in each to pass as a provisional canon (requiring feedback from all dioceses). Quite an exciting matter to see the result of the vote unfold house by house, passing first the laity, just, then the clergy, finally just scraping home past the bishops!

Crisis in Communion

The evening had another dramatic debate " this time on the Communion-rending matter of same sex relationships. The particular issue was the adequacy or otherwise of The Episcopal Church's House of Bishops' response to the Windsor Report and the Primates' Dar Es Salam communiqué. The Primate in his Presidential Address, and Robert Fordham from Melbourne in this debate suggested it was an adequate reply. Archbishop Peter Jensen gave a wonderful address putting the alternative view, suggesting that despite good intentions, the American Bishops' response has not been adequate and will not heal the rift in the Anglican Communion.

Peter spoke without compromise , but with compassion and deep emotion over the hurts caused on all side on this issue. I know Sydney reps had been much in prayer for Peter in the difficult task of speaking on this issue. In the discussion groups (mixed across dioceses) afterwards, anecdotal evidence was that many groups (though not all) felt the US Bishop's reply was equivocal and inadequate.

A personal win

Lastly, on a personal note, to great surprise, my motion passed concerning the standard on sexual conduct expressed in the national Code of Conduct Faithfulness in Service, namely that clergy and churchworkers should "be chaste and not engage in sex outside of marriage". To my knowledge at least two dioceses had watered down this standard in their own diocesan codes. My motion again urged all such dioceses to adopt this standard (as General Synod has requested back in 2004).

In the "callover' of motions, no one called "Object". (Who knows if this was because no one was quick enough, or if it was a tactic to avoid debate?) This "fast track' option in our standing orders meant a vote could be taken without any debate, and the motion passed on the voices. Once again, and thankfully, a majority of the General Synod had affirmed an orthodox, biblical standard of sexual ethics, rather than a more subjective approach that exists in some other dioceses' versions of their code of conduct.