HL Deb 04 March 1992 vol 536 cc971-6

11.38 p.m.

The Lord Bishop of St. Albans rose to move, That this House do direct that, in accordance with the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act 1919, the Church of England (Miscellaneous Provisions) Measure, passed by the General Synod of the Church of England, be presented to Her Majesty for Royal Assent.

The right reverend Prelate said: My Lords, it is with some temerity at this hour that I beg to move this Motion. As its short title suggests, the Measure contains provisions on a wide range of matters which are subject to the ecclesiastical law of the Church of England. Most of them are not controversial or even particularly exciting but they will be extremely useful in their own fields. I do not want to detain your Lordships by attempting to deal with them all. However, I feel that I owe it to the House to mention just a few of them. The provisions deal with such things as parochial registers and records of importance to historians and genealogists. They deal with the rights and responsibilities of the rector or vicar of a parish to look after and care for the funerals of his own parishioners if requested, even if the cemetery or crematorium lies outside the parish boundaries. The intention behind two of the clauses is to save unnecessary paperwork and thus unnecessary expense.

Clause 6 helps the Church of England to forge closer links with churches abroad. I am sure that at a time when all the Churches are trying to move towards greater unity, your Lordships will be pleased to hear that a good deal of effort is going into the work of improving relations with other Christian Churches in Europe as well as in this country.

I must say something to your Lordships' House about three clauses - Clauses 14 to 16 - relating to the appointment of deacons to various posts, which gave rise to a certain amount of concern among some members of the Synod and to some members of the Ecclesiastical Committee. I begin, however, by stressing that, although these clauses are controversial, there is nothing in the Synod's constitution or standing orders to prevent them forming part of the Measure or to make it in any way improper to include them. In practice, of course, the word "deacon" means "woman deacon", but I shall return to that in a moment.

The background to the provisions lies in Section 10 of the Act of Uniformity 1662, which is one of only two sections of that Act that are still in force. It does not relate to the Book of Common Prayer, but provides, in effect, that the holders of certain types of office in the Church must have been ordained as priests.

The first of the three clauses is Clause 14, which provides that, in spite of anything in Section 10 of the 1662 Act, deacons may be appointed as rural deans. The clause says it is for the avoidance of doubt",

and that is precisely what its purpose is. Some ecclesiastical lawyers take the view that it is already lawful to appoint deacons to the posts of rural or urban or area dean—as it is often called these days —and that Section 10 of the 1662 Act contains nothing to prevent it. Some experienced deacons have, in fact, been appointed as rural deans on that basis. On the other hand, some lawyers take a different view, and because of that apparent ambiguity it seemed desirable to clarify the legal position.

The office of rural dean is a responsible one, but the rural dean's role is essentially pastoral, and does not involve supervision or oversight of priests in the rural deanery or carrying out essentially priestly functions. According to Canon Law, the rural dean's main task is to report various matters to the bishop, such as illness or distress among the clergy, and there seems no real reason why this should not be done by an experienced deacon. While in the vast majority of cases, the clergy of a deanery will continue to prefer a beneficed incumbent to fulfil that role, it is not unknown for them to ask for a retired priest to take on this responsibility, especially when they are all hard-pressed with their own parish work. Where there are few retired clergy, as in my own diocese, I am frequently asked—because I always consult their wishes before making an appointment—if they can nominate a woman deacon from among their number. My answer has to be, "I don't know". With the help of Clause 14, I shall be able to say "Yes, it is perfectly permissible, if that is your wish."

Next comes Clause 15, which makes it possible to appoint a deacon who has been ordained for at least six years as a residentiary canon of a cathedral. This, too, represents a change in the law and, of course, the position of a residentiary canon is a senior one, but mature and experienced deacons are already able to and do hold senior posts in their dioceses, for example as Director of Ordinands, as Director of Education or as Director of Social Responsibility. However, posts of that kind are quite often linked to cathedral canonries, partly for financial reasons and partly because it is desirable that these senior people in the diocese should have a spiritual home in the life of the mother church of the diocese, and where that happens at present deacons are excluded from the posts in question, which means that the best available person cannot necessarily be appointed.

So Clause 15 would open the way to the appointment of deacons both to residentiary canonries and to diocesan posts linked with them, and it would also ensure that, where it is thought desirable to appoint a deacon but the cathedral's constitution and statutes mirror the existing law, the cathedral will not need to go through the lengthy process of having its constitution and statutes amended. Nevertheless, the clause makes clear that deacons who are residentiary canons will not be entitled or required to perform exclusively priestly functions, such as celebrating the Holy Communion, and for that reason there can be no question of there being more than an occasional residentiary canon of a particular cathedral staff being a deacon as then there would not be sufficient staff of the cathedral to fulfil the basic sacramental duties at that place of worship.

Finally, Clause 16 deals with non-residentiary canons. The office of a non-residentiary canon is primarily an honorary one, and is normally intended to give some recognition to a clergyman who has played a significant part in the life of the Church in the diocese, so that will allow deacons who have had an effective ministry there for some time to be considered suitable persons to appoint. Most ecclesiastical lawyers consider that the 1662 Act does nothing to prevent a deacon holding that office, and several deacons have in fact been appointed as non-residentiary canons of various cathedrals where the statutes appear to allow it. However, the object of the clause is to set at rest the few doubts about the legal position which have been expressed, and to ensure, as in the case of residentiary canons, that where a cathedral's constitution and statutes stipulate that the non-residentiary canons must be priests—as against clerks in holy orders, which would allow deacons—the cathedral will not need to go through the wearisome process of getting them altered. Once again, the clause makes it absolutely clear that non-residentiary canons who are deacons would not be entitled or required to perform exclusively priestly functions.

Although the position may change in the future, it is well known that at present most male deacons regard their office as something of a stepping-stone to the priesthood. Because of that, the real relevance of the three clauses I have outlined is to women deacons. Some members of the Ecclesiastical Committee were concerned that the clauses appeared to be an attempt to edge towards the ordination of women to the priesthood by the back door, but I should like to assure your Lordships that that is not the case. The offices covered by the three clauses do not in themselves involve carrying out exclusively priestly functions, and their supporters in the Synod included some people who were opposed to the ordination of women to the priesthood, but who thought it important to allow mature and experienced women clergy to progress to posts of responsibility in the Church which they could properly hold as deacons, rather than being left to feel that the only way forward for them in their ministry was to be ordained as priests.

It may seem somewhat surprising to some of your Lordships that a deacon would be able to hold those responsible posts but could not he an ordinary vicar or rector. To that I would say that the office of rector or vicar of a parish is one of the most honourable and important in the Church, because it involves the care of the souls of the parishioners entrusted to him by the Bishop at his institution and is the cornerstone of the parochial system which is such an essential feature of the Church of England. The three posts which are the concern of this Measure do not involve the presidency of a Eucharistic community, and therefore do not infringe upon what are at present exclusively priestly and therefore, under the present law of the Church, exclusively male responsibilities.

In conclusion, this Measure was debated at length and in detail by the Synod, passed by substantial majorities in all three of the Synod's houses, and contains a large number of provisions which will be for the benefit of the Church of England and those whom the Church serves. I beg to move.

Moved, That this House do direct that, in accordance with the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act 1919, the Church of England (Miscellaneouds Provisions) Measure, passed by the General Synod of the Church of England, be presented to Her Majesty for Royal Assent—(The Lord Bishop of St. Albans.)

11.50 p.m.

Lord Beaumont of Whitley

My Lords, I hope that your Lordships will agree to this measure. The Ecclesiastical Committee looked at it carefully. A number of the doubts came from a confusion on the concept of orders—the orders of deacon, priest and bishop—with the idea of appointments. They are different matters; there are all kinds of historical hangovers about how they should be separated. For example, we have archdeacons who are primarily deacons because they are primarily people who are appointed to serve. It is valid and ecumenically correct that the Pope of Rome can be elected if he is only a deacon. He will have to pass through the orders of priesthood and bishop before he takes the throne; but a deacon is a single and highly respected order. To give deacons responsibilities is not in any way to pre-judge the whole question of the ordination of women. I think that the Ecclesiastical Committee appreciated that finally, wholeheartedly and unanimously.

Having said all that, I must close this Ash Wednesday by saying that I celebrated Communion at a church in Southwark this morning which was being looked after in the interregnum by a lady deacon, about 40 years old. She was the daughter of a bishop who has sat in your Lordships' House recently, and I think the granddaughter of another bishop who has also sat in your Lordships' House. I thought it was remarkably silly that she had to import me from quite a long way to perform a function which she, who had all the responsibility for the parish, was not able to perform herself. However, that is irrelevant to the issue which does not concern that matter. I heartily commend the measure to your Lordships.

11.52 p.m.

Lord Graham of Edmonton

My Lords, those who follow these matters will find it strange that the measure is not being dealt with from these Benches by the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Elvel. As noble Lords will appreciate, he takes a keen interest in these affairs, and I am sorry that owing to a mix up between the Government Whips' Office and the Opposition Whips' Office on the timing of the matter, he is unable to be here this evening. He apologises, but it is through no fault of his that he is not with us. He asked me to say that he wishes the measure well and has no adverse comment to make about it.

I believe that the House is well served by the Ecclesiastical Committee which we know represents all sides of both Houses and guides us in our attitude towards the special relationship that we have with the Church of England. The House has been well served this evening by the care and lucidity of the right reverend Prelate, the Bishop of St. Albans. I listened and fully understood not only what he said but also the grounds upon which controversy could arise from what he said, despite the care that he took. I know that the Synod will be dealing with a subject of a major character in this matter later this year. There may be greater controversy as to what is in the mind of the Church of England and the Synod when the House is apprised of the matter.

Meanwhile, from these Benches, we appreciate very much the work done on behalf of all of us by the Ecclesiastical Committee, in particular by the Synod and its representatives here this evening. We wish the measure well.

The Lord Bishop of St. Albans

My Lords, there is little for me to add. I wish to express my thanks to the noble Lord, Lord Beaumont of Whitley, for the support he gave me today and for the work that he and the members of the Ecclesiastical Committee carried out in scrutinising the measure in the way it should be properly scrutinised and eventually giving it their warm support.

I also thank the noble Lord, Lord Graham, for his kind words. I am glad to think that my speech was at least clear to some Members of the House. I also thank the noble Lord, Lord Graham, for the message he delivered from the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Elvel, which is much appreciated. I feel indebted to those Members of your Lordships' House who are present for their noble presence, as they have stayed up so late. If this is not a Lenten penance on Ash Wednesday, the first day of Lent, which deserves every kind of reward on earth and in Heaven, I do not know what is. It will be an act of kindness on the part of noble Lords to pass this Measure. I conclude, as I moved this Motion, by wishing your Lordships a very good Lent.

On Question, Motion agreed to.