ESSENTIALS
Christ-centred Biblical Ministry

Index of Articles

General Synod 2004: personal reflections of a (very) green first-timer.
reprinted from the Spring/Summer 2004/5 edition of Essentials

 

   It may surprise some readers, but there have been very few occasions in my life where I have wished that I had studied Law or Politics. It is true. I have rarely felt the lack of these academic disciplines in my day-to-day life. Yet, as I sat at my little desk in the University of Notre Dame, Fremantle, on the first day of the 13th General Synod of the Anglican Church in Australia, I found myself wishing I had chosen to do an LLB or a politics major – or even just watched more episodes of "Parliamentary Question Time"! Not only did my desk feel small, but I felt even smaller, surrounded by Lawyers-turned-Priests, Supreme Court Justices, Chief Judges, and Directors of Public Prosecutions. Even the fact that our church is governed by way of legislation had been breaking news to this very green upstart who became a Christian in her teens, grew up in the faith at St. Hilary's Kew, and who had never even attended Melbourne Synod!   Megan Curlis-Gibson is an Ordination Candidate for the Diocese of Melbourne, studying at Ridley College. She is married to Phil, and is currently (2004) the student minister at St. Luke's, South Melbourne.
   Yet, as my first General Synod progressed, I found myself amazed at the way God really did mean what He said about the body of Christ having many parts, every one of them arranged "just as he wanted them to be" (1 Cor. 12:18). It was essential that the lawyers used their skills in this situation, yet we also needed the input of the local parish minister, the indigenous bishop, the journalist, the teacher, the Defence Force Chaplain, the parent. Certainly, this wasn't the local the church, the primary place where our spiritual gifts are exercised to build up the body, but so much of what we were doing would eventually affect the ministry of local churches: Professional Standards, Mission and Attendance, Sexuality, and it actually felt good even to be able to participate in shaping the church in these areas just by saying "Aye" or "No."
   That was the bulk of my involvement at my first Synod – attempting to make an informed vote. Sometimes this was routine, sometimes I needed to look down the row to see how my regional bishop was about to vote, but sometimes it was exciting. For example, when we passed bills concerning Child Protection and Professional Standards, the entire Synod clapped and cheered. For delegates from Melbourne, it was quite a bittersweet moment, as we were at the same time reading press releases concerning the involvement of a minister from our Diocese in child pornography. To know that the media present that day in Fremantle were finally seeing some action on this issue still makes me incredibly thankful to God.   
   One issue that I did work to involve myself in as a younger person was that of Mission and Attendance. A report on the issue had been prepared in conjunction with the National Church Life Survey and the statistics were sobering. Over the decade from 1991-2001, the Anglican Church in Australia's weekly attendance declined by a minimum of 7% across the metropolitan dioceses, and by an average of 20% in the rural dioceses. (Only two places, Canberra/Goulbourn, and Sydney, broke this trend, yet even in these areas, church growth did not quite match population growth.) Furthermore, we are now seeing the fruit of the past 30 years' lack of youth in the Anglican Church– that is, we've got fewer and fewer "over thirties", "over forties" and even "over fifties". Apart from the fact that these people aren't hearing the gospel, the demographic shift is presenting a huge hurdle to the work of growing the church: as the report put it, "the scope for undertaking planned and orderly change may be shrinking given our demographic profile and evidently high levels of identification with the status quo" – that is, we're older, we're stubborn, we have less energy, less resources, and less vision for a renewed future. Given that the rate of loss of the under-50 age group is 21% over ten years, these statistics are cause for grave concern.   
   The motion that arose from this report proposed that the solution lay in "fresh expressions of church and new communities of faith." It skirted the issue of evangelism, and what many believed was the core problem: the gospel health of our churches. Two of the five delegates under thirty, a man from Sydney and a man from North Queensland, approached me with the idea that we work on revising this motion. It seemed a good opportunity to cut our teeth on an issue, which, although essential, could hardly be called "controversial": how many people would stand up and say we don't need to grow? But despite working on it for a few hours, much of our changes seemed only to skim the surface (evidenced by the fact that the mover was happy to re-move the motion in our amended form). Sure, we were able to give the wording more punch, add some sobering statistics, incorporate an amendment defining the gospel as that "revealed in Holy Scripture," use the word "evangelise" (!), and include a clause that asked the Standing Committee to consult with the Children's and Young Person's Taskforce, but I think I got my first real taste of how difficult it is to use this kind of process across churchmanship/theological lines when trying to get at core gospel issues. Nevertheless, perhaps it was important for three young people to been seen attempting to do so.   
   My other contribution to the Synod was a reluctant, knees-knocking, hands-shaking, heart-pounding one: taking part in the debate on sexuality from the floor. After this debate had been continuing for some time over the issues of whether the church should give liturgical blessing to homosexual unions, whether practising homosexuals could be ordained, and whether we accept the Parliament's definition of marriage as between a man and a woman, it became clear that my youth and gender could be used to some advantage. (Was it fighting fair to begin my maiden speech with the words "as a young woman, and as a woman training for ordained ministry"?) I knew that God had given me a passion to promote the life-giving nature of the Biblical worldview on marriage and sexuality, which flows from and exemplifies the truth that "God created man in his own image… male and female he created them" (Gen. 1:27), so I stood up and read my statement. I was surprised and blessed by how many people later thanked me for my contribution. Once again, I was grateful to God for the opportunity to shape the Synod's decision, as we affirmed our commitment to the Bible's teaching on some of these issues.   
   Informed readers will have noticed by this time that I have not mentioned the "big ticket" item of the synod – the ordination/consecration of women to the episcopate. Why is this? Firstly, because throughout the Synod my own feeling was that this issue – although desperately important to a great many present – was surely secondary in importance to our dealing with the issues affecting the attendance in the Anglican church. What difference would the presence of women in the house of bishops make, if bishops in general were out of a job? Undoubtedly this was pure idealism, but I think still an important principle to hold onto, because internal issues can and have become all-engrossing for far too many people in our Communion.   
   Secondly, it's not an easy issue for me to comment on as a "second generation" woman training for ordination. I did not have to fight the battles that my older colleagues, male and female, began to fight some twenty or so years ago. I am in a position of great privilege, where, for the most part, I can "get on with ministry" without too much thought to my gender. Because of this, I think, I did not feel either the deep pain or the quiet triumph felt by some of my evangelical colleagues from across Australia. I could not say whether it was the right decision for this time. Despite what the media reported, the debate was conducted well and with grace. Certainly, it was personally difficult to hear the arguments against women's leadership in principle rehearsed again by those I respect, and disheartening to hear arguments for women's ministry presented by those who do not take the Scriptures seriously. Furthermore, I was also painfully aware of my reticence to show my cards for fear of being boxed, and even reluctant, in the first part of the week, to tell people my reason for training at Ridley College. It was a strange experience to feel nervous about meeting fellow evangelicals, but one that has both taught me (once again) about our human need to be accepted, and given me a passion to work for the unity of evangelicals in Australia.   
   I am immensely grateful to God for the opportunity to go to General Synod. Not only was I able to witness the Anglican Church in Australia making some great decisions, I was able to see how important it is for evangelicals to be part of that. I met some great people and grew up a bit more. The liberal theology I had only read about was given a human face, which challenges the way I take my stand against it. Perhaps it was a risky experience for someone so green to go, because it could have left irreversible scars. And maybe in some ways it did, but I think battle wounds are OK. On the second day of Synod, I shared my initial feelings with two colleagues in the car on the way back from church. I told them that I was despairing, and that I couldn't understand why evangelicals stayed in the Anglican Church of Australia when so much energy was wasted fighting for Biblical orthodoxy. One of my fellow passengers, the Archbishop of Sydney, said he knew exactly how I felt. But his friend, the Bishop of Armidale, said to me, "Why should we leave when we are the ones upholding what this church is really about?" I hope I never forget his words.   
     
       


       
 

Home

Index of Articles