wfn.org | Archbishop of Canterbury's Presidential Address to the Church of England General Synod

[Worldwide Faith News <wfn@igc.org>]

Archbishop of Canterbury's Presidential Address to the Church of 
England General Synod

Posted On : February 12, 2010 3:01 PM | Posted By : Webmaster
ACNS: http://www.aco.org/acns/news.cfm/2010/2/12/ACNS4685
Related Categories: England  Lambeth

> Tuesday 09 February 2010

In a wide-ranging address to the General Synod in London, the Archbishop
of Canterbury discusses the nature of human freedom and the value of
listening and learning from one another, in both national and
international debates, as well as those occurring during Synod this
week.

The Archbishop began his address by urging caution in the debate on the
Equality Bill:

"The basic conflict was not between a systematic assault on Christian
values by a godless government on the one side and a demand for licensed
bigotry on the other. It was over the question of how society identifies
the point at which one set of freedoms and claims so undermines another
that injustice results."

"The freedom of government to settle debated moral questions for the
diverse communities of civil society is not something we should endorse
too rapidly: governments and political cultures change, and it is a
mistake to grant to governments authority that could impact on us in
other and even weightier areas, whatever authority we grant government
to define fundamental and universal legal entitlements in society at
large.

"It cuts both ways. The diverse communities of civil society cannot and
should not try to determine for the whole of society what legal freedoms
should be granted to any particular category of people; but they will
argue stubbornly for the freedom on their side to settle for themselves
- not at the government's command - how they define the jobs people do
publicly on their behalf as specific communities of belief or interest.
It is blindingly obvious that there are grey areas here, and that this
formulation does not absolve us from argument; it is equally obvious
that civil society communities, even religious ones, may change their
expectations and conventions. But looking at it strictly from the rather
abstract viewpoint I have been taking here, what matters is that
government acknowledges that there is a boundary that it is risky to
cross without creating ideological powers for the state that could be
deeply dangerous for liberty in general."

Dr Williams also addresses the question of assisted suicide and the
dangers in trying to build a legal framework around it:

"The freedom of one person to utilise in full consciousness a legal
provision for assisted suicide brings with it a risk to the freedom of
others not to be manipulated or harassed or simply demoralised when in a
weakened condition. Once the possibility is there, it will not only be
utilised by the smallish number of high-profile hard cases but will also
create an ethical framework in which the worthwhileness of some lives is
undermined by the legal expression of what feels like public impatience
with protracted dying and 'unproductive' lives.

"But most of us here, I suspect, would say that the balance of liberties
still comes out against a new legal framework, and in favour of holding
to the principle - not that life should be prolonged at all costs, but
that the legal initiating of a process whose sole or main purpose is to
end life is again to cross a moral boundary, and to enter some very
dangerous territory in practical terms. Most of us would still hold that
the current state of the law, with all its discretionary powers and
nuances about degrees of culpability in extreme cases, serves us better
than an opening of the door into provision for the legal ending of
lives."

In speaking about the both Anglican Communion Covenant and also the
debate on Women Bishops, Dr Williams stresses that 'people have a claim
to be heard in their own terms':

"Here in the Synod, we face not only the question of how we are to frame
legislation that, as I think I've said before in this context, has
something of good news in it for everyone, not only for one group, but
also the longer-haul question of how we go on learning from each other
beyond the point of decision. Whatever we decide, we need to look for a
resolution that allows some measure of continuing dignity and indeed
liberty to all - in something like their own terms. It isn't enough to
brush aside the problems some find with codes of practice or others find
with the need for women bishops to transfer authority automatically.
People have a claim to be heard in their own terms, just as we have been
arguing in Parliament. And we have to make difficult judgements about
whether granting this freedom to this group is more likely to undermine
someone else's freedom than if the position were reversed. Only - as
Christians we somehow have to add to that the question of how granting
any freedom anywhere is going to set free the possibility of
contributing to each other's holiness.

The Archbishop urges people to listen to one another with a 'three
dimensionality':

"Seeing something in three dimensions is seeing that I can't see
everything at once: what's in front of me is not just the surface I see
in this particular moment. So seeing in three dimensions requires us to
take time with what we see. It may help us look more critically at
solutions that seek to do much all at once; and perhaps to search for
structures that will keep open the ability to learn from each other."

As an example of where this 'three-dimensionality' may be seen, he says:

"But there is the simpler sense of three-dimensionality which just
reminds us that the other we meet is the person he or she is, not the
person we have created in our fantasies. The priest from Forward in
Faith finds himself going to a woman priest for spiritual counsel
because he has recognised an authenticity in her ministry from which he
can be enriched. The Christian feminist recognises that the Resolution C
parish down the road has a better programme for community regeneration
than any other in the deanery."

He concludes by describing how a three-dimensionality can help Synod
look beyond conflict and:

".... oblige us to ask not how we can win this or that conflict but what
we have to give to our neighbour for sanctification in Christ's name and
power. It will oblige us to think hard about freedom and mutuality and
the genuine difficulty of balancing costs or restraints in order to keep
life moving around the Body. It will deepen our desire to be fed and
instructed by each other, so that we are all the more alarmed at the
prospect of being separated in the zero-sum, self-congratulating mode
that some seem to be content with...... And we may be able to show to
the world a face rather different from that anxious, self-protective
image that is so much in danger of entrenching itself in the popular
mind as the typical Christian position. I deeply believe that this
Church and this Synod is still capable of showing that face and pray
that God will reveal such a vision in us and for us."

Full Text of the Archbishop's Presidential Address can be found  here:
http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/2752

___________________________________________________________________
ACNSlist, published by Anglican Communion News Service, London, is
distributed to more than 8,000 journalists and other readers around
the world.

For subscription INFORMATION please go to:

http://www.anglicancommunion.org/acns/help/acnslist.cfm