Jim Hutton, Co-ordinator   

1.         The Anglican Diocese of Algoma (headquarters in Sault Ste. Marie) stretches over five regions (deaneries) of Ontario: Thunder Bay, Sault Ste. Marie, Sudbury-Manitoulin, Temiskaming-North Bay and Muskoka.  Within that territory there are 100 parishes, missions and Thorneloe University (in Sudbury)).  Membership (2006) is 14,660 people with an average attendance on a Sunday of 4,263.

2.         A “synod” is the mechanism within the Anglican Church for visioning, setting goals and determining diocesan policies and laws for the operation of parishes and diocesan structures.

3.         The Synod meets every two years.  The 2007 Synod had 175 delegates: 52 (out of 54) clergy and 123 laity (youth and adults). The Synod assembly is presided over and chaired by their Bishop Ronald Ferris.  He is assisted by the staff of their headquarters (Synod Office) and a variety of committees that helped prepare for the Synod agenda.

4.         In between Synods, the implementation of various decisions is made by a group of 31 people called the Executive Committee (14 clergy, 17 laity).  This group meets regularly (often in Sudbury at Villa Loyola).  The diocese also has 9 Diocesan Advisory Boards and 4 Bishop’s Advisory Boards.

5.         The Synod opened with a Eucharist at St. Luke’s Cathedral.  Ordination of two women to be priests was part of the opening liturgy.

6.         On the second day, the Bishop gave his “Charge”- a type of “State of the Diocese” presentation - outlining what has happened since the last Synod and items to be addressed at the present Synod.

7.         During the Synod, there was time spent on information - education of the delegates.  A resource person (Dr. John Bowen, an Anglican priest teaching at Wycliffe College in Toronto) gave three presentations on the topic of “EVANGELISM” (evangelization).  The presentations were very topical, easily understood, down to earth and practical in response to the effort to share the good news - especially with those who have left the Anglican Church and with the “unchurched”.  This is a similar area of concern for the Catholic Church.  I would propose in this regard that if an educational program is offered in our Diocese, that Dr. Bowen would be a most useful facilitator.

8.         The Synod offered short study sessions of which participants could choose two.  Issues addressed were:

            a)            “Evangelism (further reflections)”

            b)            Parish and diocesan renewal efforts,

            c)            Anglican presence in northern Canada - especially to aboriginals

            d)            Financial matters

            e)            Rules and regulations (canons) for diocesan operations

            f)            Report on the summer (Winnipeg) General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada and issues relating to same-sex blessings and an attempt to produce an ANGLICAN COVENANT statement for all Anglican dioceses throughout the world.  This COVENANT proposal emerged out of the serious controversy and tensions over sexual matters.  It is an attempt to find common ground for a sense of identification and belonging to the Anglican Communion throughout the world.

9.         The Synod also dealt with a variety of motions relating to changes or additions to the Diocesan Code of Canons.  Not having any universal Code of Canon Law, each Anglican Diocese makes its own code of laws that regulate the life of the Diocese.  Topics addressed and voted upon:

·         Diocesan policy on lay delegates

·         Same sex marriage reflections and reaction (no policy decisions emerged - only a statement of concern for civility in the on-going dialogue).

·         Reactions to the proposal for a universal Anglican Covenant

·         Policy for Closure of Church buildings

·         Youth Ministry in the Diocese

·         Alcohol and Parish functions

·         Guidelines for driving children and youth in Church events           

·         Decisions concerning Renewal in Ministry efforts (relating to closing, clustering, amalgamating parishes, etc.)

·         Financial reports and approval of a variety of financial decisions for 2008-2009.

·         Ecological concerns for any new construction

·         Graveyards owned by the Anglican parishes

·         Issues of insurance coverage for parish officials

·         Sexual misconduct policy

·         “Back to Church” Sunday project for Sept. 30, 2008           

·         Issue of performance review of clergy

·         Appointments (by election) of a variety of people to diocesan positions                       

All items on the Agenda (both financial and pastoral) showed a very deep sense of TRANSPARENCY and ACCOUNTABILITY even to identifying in detail all financial investments.  The dialogue leading to approval or rejection of motions was very articulate, professional and well thought out.  The Bishop, as Chair of all sessions, was very skillful and pastorally sensitive to protocol and respect for all who spoke.

My Participation

            Apart from just sitting at a table with another observer from the Evangelical Lutheran Church (in full communion for the last 5 years into the Anglican Church of Canada) and diocesan newspaper reporters, I was asked by Bishop Ferris to bring greetings and remarks.  I did so and was warmly received.  My observations were focused on my very positive experience on the Synod process which obviously flowed out of a deep and healthy respect for a sense of COLLEGIALITY and COLLABORATION of clergy and laity.  This expresses a deep sense of ownership and responsibility.  I pointed out that this is an aspect of Church life with which the Catholic Church has been struggling since the Second Vatican Council.  At the same time, I shared my observation that the controversial issue of same sex marriage blessings is something which is making the Anglican Church agonize over the absence of a strong central teaching authority -“MAGISTERIUM”- which is a strength and gift within the Catholic Church.  So, in this regard we have something to learn from each other.

            I also shared an observation that in both our churches a great deal of time, talent, energy and money is being spent on dealing mostly with INTERNAL matters of church structures, bureaucracy and challenging moral issues.  As a result, we are both finding ourselves without adequate time, talent, energy and money to focus adequately on the EXTERNALS of mission to the world.  Church personnel “burn out” is present in both our communities. 

            My presence and participation was very warmly received.

            I thoroughly enjoyed the Synod experience and learned a great deal of how the positive and healthy aspects of democracy make possible a sense of collegiality and co-responsibility.  At the same time, I also experienced (as shared above) on the absolute need for a Magisterium to balance the negative aspects of democracy which can ignore the apostolic roots and authentic tradition of the gospel through the ages.  Of course efforts to function in a collegial manner are more time consuming and can easily lead to divisions if everything is up for grabs by a vote of the majority.

            So, I am most grateful for the opportunity to attend this Synod and thank Bishop Jean-Louis for his encouraging endorsement that I attend such a gathering.