Synod is the Parliament of the Anglican Church. The word “synod” comes from the Greek synodos (σύνοδος) – a common way or path.[1] Unlike historic synods, modern Anglican synods, a largely Australian invention, have significant lay representation affirming the priesthood of all believers, and the Westminster tradition of nobility and commoners separately represented.[2] Synods are a powerful tool for oversight, governance and promoting a shared vision for the ministry and mission of the Church. As a human governance construct, it has strengths and weaknesses reflecting our fallen humanity and need for the saving love of Jesus.
A long history but a short one
Synods have been called throughout the Church’s history. Although the specific word is not used in the New Testament, many consider the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 to be the first synod[3] and the archetype for all future synods. Following this example, the purpose of a synod is to resolve disputes[4] and discern together the Holy Spirit’s will for the church.[5] Meetings of mostly clergy often just bishops,[6] referred to as synods and common in the early church, continue in Roman and Eastern churches agreeing on canon,[7] worship practice, and the dates of Easter, [8] and the response to the Reformation. [9] Synods continued in the Church of England as Convocations of Canterbury and York meeting regularly until 1664. [10] Once major doctrinal positions were settled, the English church was largely governed by the monarch and Parliament[11] and clergy synods met more sporadically, often without debate, until their permanent revival in 1966.[12]
Lacking the Church – Parliament connection in Australia, Bishop Broughton[13] called a meeting of bishops in 1850 in Sydney to discuss new governance structures. Bishop Perry of Melbourne pushed to have strong lay representation leading to synods with separate houses of clergy and laity. In 1854, an Act of Victorian Parliament established the Melbourne Synod first convened by Perry in 1856. Bishop Short of Adelaide received advice that no Act was required and convened a synod there in 1855.[14] This new Australian model of synod was then followed by other Dioceses, notably in New Zealand in 1859[15] and England in 1872.[16]
How does synod work?
Modern Anglican synods run like Parliament with standing orders, daily papers, motions, formal amendments, and Bills that then become Acts of Synod.[17] In fact, most Anglican synods in Australia default to the standing orders of the House of Representatives if their own are silent on a matter.
Unlike Parliaments, different houses sit together in the same chamber hearing the same debates. On important matters including Bills, synod must vote separately in each of the houses – a majority of clergy and a majority of laity must vote in favour.[18] For legislation, the Bishop[19] must then assent to the Bill as the King assents to an Act of the Westminster Parliament.[20]
The Bishop calls a synod, issues a mandate to elect representatives, and typically presides over the synod. He or she issues the Charge at the opening of synod[21] setting the tone for both synod and broader activities of the Diocese. As president, the Bishop guides and maintains order within the synod sessions.[22] Even within the context of a synod, we are episcopally lead.
The Council of the Diocese,[23] largely elected by the synod, meets between synods with the Bishop (together the Bishop or Archbishop in Council) to handle matters mostly of property, finance and compliance, but reports to synod on its activities, budget, and priorities. The legislative agenda of synod is largely managed by the Council.[24] Synod essentially delegates some of its governance and leadership to the Council.
Synod as church leadership
The most important contribution of synod is bringing together clergy and lay leaders with their bishops and other central office staff regularly. Here the Bishop sets an agenda for the Diocese, and church leaders can report on activities that impact multiple parishes (for example, leader selection and training, church planting, coordinated evangelism, social justice and other engagement with the broader community). Here clergy and lay people can respond to Diocesan leaders reflecting how their decisions and use of shared resources impact local parishes and other church expressions. When working well, the flow of information and discernment helps us to make better decisions and implement better outcomes together.
Synods provide priorities for ministry resourcing (property, finance and liturgical), for rules governing how parishes are run, how parish and episcopal vacancies are filled, how clergy and laity are licensed, elected or approved for ministry and other leadership roles, how they can be removed for misconduct, how to settle disputes within and between parishes, policies and procedures for keeping vulnerable people safe, and making statements about events in the broader church and society giving a collective response from the church. While Bishops can make such statements, a motion of synod speaks with a communal voice. Arguably, the Bishop and synod together both lead and govern.
Strengths
Unlike clergy-dominated synods, our multicameral synods bring together bishops, clergy and lay leaders. Decisions made by synod are the shared responsibility of a wider group. Lay representatives in synod are elected by the parish or the synod, not appointed by the Bishop giving independence. Decisions are made based on a vote in the synod chamber. This representative democracy governance structure is comfortable and familiar in countries following the Westminster parliamentary tradition (and hence most Dioceses in the Anglican Communion).
This parliamentary tradition manages discussion of disputed matters affording members a chance to persuade other members in an orderly and controlled way, particularly important in hotly contested matters. It provides checks and balances to ensure that major decisions are agreeable, not just to bishops or clergy, but also to laity who often bear the consequences of decisions. Bishops are accountable for their decisions just as Parliament questions the activity of government ministers. The Bishop has some powers of veto and presides over synod, but representatives largely control the agenda and decisions made.
Tension points
The Westminster system assumes a party-political adversarial context with opposing views on foundational concepts such as the role of government. Unlike the first synod in Acts 15, synod decisions are made by the majority not by consensus. Although my favourite part of synod is the opening service, after that, there are limited opportunities to pray and listen to the work of the Holy Spirit in guiding her church. Functionally, we rely more directly on the persuasiveness of our arguments than the guidance of our God (although Scripture and prayer are rightly evident in many of the speeches). While there may be factions within the church, we share the same hope and trust in Jesus as head of our church so an adversarial approach can obscure this greater commonality.
Parliamentary procedure is overly formal and stilted. I am a well-educated, native English speaker with a law degree and a profession that requires me to understand and model parliamentary processes. Despite this, I found my first few synod sessions intimidating and hard to follow. For a lay person who may only be elected for 3 synod sessions, has less than a passing knowledge of how parliament works, or whose first language is not English, it is challenging to follow what is going on, let alone participate in a meaningful way. This means that long serving clergy and seasoned lawyers are heard much more than other voices.
For this reason, people willing to be members of synod tend to have better education, better English, availability to devote time to reading the papers and attending synod, and who value synod above local ministry priorities. This can exclude those with important skills and perspectives, for instance parents of young children, or recent migrants. Smaller churches get more representatives per member of their parish than larger parishes, and, as with all election processes, there are some opportunities to deliberately distort the representation.
Ultimately, synod is an imperfect selection of the diversity of voices in parishes but in the words of Winston Churchill “democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time”.[25] The Spirit works through all God’s people, not just bishops or clergy.
Improvements
So how can we make the democracy that is our synod less “worse”? Thankfully, we have a merciful God who works in us and through us despite our human frailty and sin.
Firstly, we can pray more, together within the synod, and in our preparations and discussions for and about synod. A posture of prayer encourages us to be more Christ-like in our interactions with our sisters and brothers despite differences of opinion and leaves us more open to guidance by the Spirit. Expect God to shape and change us!
Secondly, we can model the use of Scripture to guide our decisions. When we speak at synod, where the bible provides useful guidance, we should use it to support and sustain our arguments. Expect the Spirit to work through divine inspiration rather than relying on the power of our persuasive arguments!
Thirdly, we can work to ensure that particularly newer members of synod receive training and guidance in what to expect and how to engage meaningfully in synod. Within our Melbourne Synod, the New Cranmer Society,[26] a collection of orthodox (mostly Evangelical) members of synod, provide several chat groups,[27] the most important one of which tracks the progress of the synod and alerts members of synod to the options available to them at any point, with some voting suggestions on key votes. There is also a moderated forum for those too timid to speak to synod formally, to discuss the merits of an argument, to ask questions, and provide any useful background that isn’t being revealed in the synod chamber.
Fourthly, we can augment the formal parliamentary processes with less formal interactions that elicit feedback and guidance from all synod members to the leadership of the diocese. Examples used in our synod include guided small group prayer, group discussions with responses recorded and shared in a summary document after the synod, surveys, and pre-synod consultation sessions.
Finally, we should show up and engage.
Why engage?
The coalface of Christian ministry is the parish church. There people often meet Jesus for the first time, worship together, build a community together under God’s leadership, and minister to each other and those nearby. So why distract ourselves from important ministry to read hundreds of pages of papers, sit in a drafty Cathedral for hours, or listen to people who don’t share our ministry priorities?
Unity is literally crucial – Jesus died for it.[28] It’s important for evangelism.[29] The apostles believed that and invested time in the Council of Jerusalem. While Scripture is “useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness”,[30] we all know that there is disagreement in how key passages should be interpreted, and areas of our lives where the bible only helps with general principles rather than specific instruction.
Historically, Evangelicals have often prioritised parish ministry over engagement with synod. Many decisions in our Church even today are guided more by liberal theology or secular concerns than by biblical orthodoxy. Decisions are made by those “in the room where it happens”. We can hardly complain about “decisions of the Diocese” if we aren’t present for the debate. The Diocese is all God’s people gathered under the care of the Bishop, not just a small number of faceless decision makers. In synod, the whole Diocese speak and decide together. I encourage you all to discern the Spirit together to guide God’s church and synod is a great way to do that.
Synod gathers us to celebrate success and ask forgiveness for failure, to see God’s redeeming work within and beyond our local church.
Conclusion
Dissension and debate are inevitable within the gathering of sinners that is our church. A well-managed synod can help us strive with the apostles and elders for the consensus under the guidance of the Holy Spirit we see in Acts 15 in resolving our disputes and speaking as one united body of Christ.
Dr Timothy Arnold-Moore is an elected member of General Synod and General Synod Standing Committee since 2019, Archbishop in Council (Diocese of Melbourne) since 2017 and member of Synod (Diocese of Melbourne) since 2013, and Committee Member of the New Cranmer Society since 2014. Professionally, he has developed commercial software to support bill drafting and amendment in Parliaments and Parliamentary Counsel including those of the UK, Australia, Canada, and Singapore.
[1] I believe deliberately invoking the first name of the Church – “the Way”, see Acts 9:2, 19:23, 24:14 referencing John 14:6.
[2] Which of the House of Clergy or the House of Laity is more noble is left as a question for the reader.
[3] See for instance “Cardinal Schönborn: Lessons from the Council of Jerusalem, the church’s first synod”, Christoph Schönborn (2023) 11 America Magazine 10 https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2023/11/10/schonborn-synod-council-jerusalem-246438/ ; The Apostolic Council of Jerusalem: The Decisive Paradigm for the Church's Synodical Mode of Existence: A Timely Reminder for Today (Philip Kariatlis) https://orthodoxcouncil.org/-/the-apostolic-council-of-jerusalem-the-decisive-paradigm-for-the-church-s-synodical-mode-of-existence-a-timely-reminder-for-today.html
[4] See the reference to “dissension and debate” in Acts 15:2
[5] “We have decided unanimously to choose representatives and send them to you, … For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to impose on you no further burden than these essentials” Acts 15:25-28.
[6] Acts 15:2 “Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to discuss this question with the apostles and the elders.” While it is not clear the extent to which ordination was formalised this early in the life of the Church, the Greek word translated “elder” here is presbyteros (πρεσβύτερος) from which we get the English word “priest”.
[7] The Synod of Hippo in CE393 see Schaff, Phillip; Wace, Henry, The Seven Ecumenical Councils, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Second Series, vol. XIV, Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company.
[8] The Synod of Whitby in CE664, see Brown, Peter (2003). The Rise of Western Christendom: Triumph and Diversity (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell. I note also that the lay King Oswiu of Northumbria presided over the synod.
[9] The Council of Trent refers to itself as “the holy Synod” also setting the pattern of local synods as annual and provincial synods as every 3 years, The canons and decrees of the sacred and ecumenical Council of Trent, Ed. and trans. J. Waterworth (London: Dolman, 1848). See https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/trent/twenty-fourth-session.htm chapter II. We roughly follow this pattern in the Anglican Church of Australia with our General Synod every 3-4 years and mostly annual Diocesan Synods.
[10] In the 16th and 17th centuries, these convocations settled the 39 Articles of Religion, the Homilies, and the Book of Common Prayer (in its multiple editions up until 1662). After the Acts of Submission (1532 and 1534), the Convocation met only by royal command. During, the interregnum they were replaced by the Westminster Assemblies between 1643 and 1649 (which produced the Westminster Confession, the major statements of Presbyterian doctrine). By 1662, the Convocations divided into a House of Bishops and a House of Clergy.
[11] Noting that senior Bishops serve as Lord’s Spiritual in the House of Lords and only Anglicans were permitted to be Members of Parliament from the English Reformation until 1829 (see the various Oaths Acts including the Act of Supremacy 1534 and the Test Act 1673 which prevented non-Anglicans from sitting in Parliament and the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829 for the first in a number of Acts relaxing this requirement).
[12] Church of England Convocations Act 1966.
[13] Then Bishop of Sydney and Metropolitan of Australia which included New Zealand at the time but previously Bishop of Australia. The Diocese of New Zealand was created in 1841, of Tasmania in 1942 and those of Sydney, Adelaide, Newcastle and Melbourne in 1847.
[14] See Bruce Kaye “Strange birth of Anglican Synods in Australia and the 1850 Bishops’ Conference” (2003) 27 The Journal of Religious History 2. https://brucekaye.net/files/AAJ/Strange%20Birth%20JRH%2027%201467-9809.00170.pdf and Synod: A guide for members and prospective members (2016) Anglican Diocese of Melbourne https://www.melbourneanglican.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/A-guide-for-Synod-members-September-2016.pdf.
[15] Although there was a clergy synod in 1844 and a conference in 1857 to establish these governance structures, 1859 is acknowledge as the first synod in New Zealand https://anglicanhistory.org/nz/selwyn/synod1859.html
[16] See Kaye, ibid.
[17] Also called “canons” or “church measures” in some synods.
[18] This process is often managed electronically now. Note in Provincial Synods and General Synod there is a third house of Bishops.
[19] I will use the Anglican Church of Australia tradition to use “Bishop” for a Diocesan Bishop as distinguished from a “bishop” which includes assistant or suffragan bishops and retired bishops without a Diocese. Note that in Metropolitan Diocese, the Bishop is usually an Archbishop.
[20] The Westminster practice of assent is delegated in Australia to the Governor-General or Governor. It is often said that the Bishop is a third House consisting of one representative but strictly, they don’t normally vote, only preside and withhold or provide assent.
[21] A charge is a speech not unlike the King’s Speech at the opening of Parliament or the US State of the Union.
[22] Unlike the King in Parliament, the Bishop takes the role of Speaker as well.
[23] Called Standing Committee in General Synod and some Dioceses.
[24] Although the equivalent of private members bills can be brought by any member of synod.
[25] Hansard, 11 November 1947. Column 207 https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1947-11-11/debates/ab1e1152-6b4a-4d04-ac38-954df6634b08/ParliamentBill
[26] I am Lay Vice-President of the New Cranmer Society. Rev Dr Andy Judd another author in this edition is President.
[27] We use WhatsApp but there are numerous alternatives available. These groups are deliberately open for any member of synod to join in the interests of transparency.
[28] Ephesians 2:13-16, see also Ephesians 4 generally.
[29] John 17:20-23.
[30] 2 Timothy 3:16 (NRSV).