REPRESENTATIVE CHURCH BODY

SPEECH – THE BISHOP OF MEATH & KILDARE

As someone who (In company, I suspect, with most of the members of this house) has known very little about the Representative Church Body for most of my time as a member of General Synod, I would like to use the opportunity of this seconding speech to reflect on the matter, in the light of my past five years of what we might call “compulsory” involvement with the RCB.

It seems to me that we all need to have clear picture of what the Representative Church Body actually is, in relation to General Synod. Historically, and legally, the RCB actually pre-dates the Synod; in fact it pre-dates the full implementation of the disestablishment of the Church of Ireland. And, in the eyes of the law of the land, the RCB is the C of I as a distinct legal entity or, if you like, the RCB is the C of I incorporated. By this I mean that, in legal terms, it is only the RCB which can sue and be sued on behalf of the Church and which has the legal responsibilities (and, indeed, the burden) of representing the Church in relation to formal business transactions relating to the Church’s real property and investments. It also has statutory responsibilities in relation to PAYE etc. and to a large extent is accountable to the civil law, the law of the land. The Representative Church Body exists, in terms of its trust, biding in law, to ensure the continuance of the ordained ministry in the Church of Ireland, and for the legal guardianship of our property.

In contrast, the General Synod has a representative and legislative role acting in accordance with its own rules and regulations. In terms of the law of the land, the General Synod of the Church of Ireland would be broadly equivalent to a private s or even a private club, with full powers to re-invent itself and to alter its internal rules more or less as it sees fit. The same, incidentally, goes for the oft-quoted Constitution of the Church of Ireland. The General Synod and its workings are essential for the good governance and ordering of the Church. Much of our activity this week is precisely for that good governance, but it has no relationship to the civil law outside.

From the very start, therefore, there was an intentional and absolutely essential division of powers between Synod and RCB. We are, therefore, somewhat misguided if we imagine that the RCB, in governmental terms, is the Exchequer for the Synod or the Standing Committee.

It seems to me that as we launch into a new century, we will therefore have to work at a new concordat between General Synod! Standing Committee and RCB - new relationships, not in the sense of subordination of one to the other (which would almost certainly require an act of parliament) but in terms of collaboration, of cooperation. This has been begun in such groups as the regular meeting of the Policy and Co-ordination Advisory Committee, bringing together the archbishops, honorary secretaries and members of the executive committee of the RCB. It is evident also in the structures of the Commission on Ministry and the College Council, and those proposed for the Central Communications Board, all of which explicitly involve both General Synod and Representative Church Body components.

But we are in vastly changed world form the days of disestablishment of the Church of Ireland. Much of that for which we now require new methods and a new professionalism, and more money - for example, specialist ministries (ordained and lay), communications, adult education, legal advice — was, for generations after disestablishment, done largely by volunteers, and paid for directly by individual volunteers, without recourse to central organisation of any kind. It was a time when there were more people with more time available and when there was what we might call “private means” to do much of the work of the Church of Ireland. Those days have gone. But the structures of the Church have not changed with the changed times. If we are going to professionalise whole rafts of the life of the Church (as we must do), we will have to pay for it, but we will also have to find new ways of paying for it, and of organising it. That requires proper collaboration and mutual understandings — a new concordat.

This brings me to something that I see as a problem that has become far more serious even within the past couple of years and this is a new culture of cynicism and hostility towards others within the Church administrative structures. There seems to be a basic assumption that people with whom we may differ could not possibly be acting in good faith, or be competent or even be is honourable in their intentions. I trulybelieve that this is a way that Satan will destroy this Church if we continue along our present course. Most people do act in good faith; most people are acting honourably and without hidden agendas. Surely it is not part of our Christian calling to assume the worst of those with whom we may not be in agreement?

Finally, I want to say something briefly about another confusion, that between two “RCBs”, but which also relates to what I have just been saying. The first RCB is the body reporting now, a body with, trust responsibilities in law, but for the most part democratically elected from the different dioceses of the Church of Ireland. It is meaningless to refer to this Representative Church Body as a kind of faceless “establishment”, shadowy figures pulling strings. The members of the RCB are not characters in some Kafka novel. They are elected, as is this synod, and they are as removable at election time as are the members of this Synod. Please remember that many of them have given unselfish, gifted and dedicated service to this Church over many years. May I here mention in particular Professor David Spearman and Judge Gerald Buchanan, both of whom have just retired from the RCB. We thank them warmly for all that they have given.

Sometimes, however, the term “RCB” is taken to mean the administrative centre of the Church of Ireland at Church House. This is of course a misnomer. But, more to the point, it is even more unworthy to speak in ungenerous terms of the staff of Church House, who cannot reply to abuse. I think that people know me well enough to know that I would certainly not say it if I didn’t mean it, but I now say unreservedly that I believe we are extremely well served as a Church by our administrative staff. From my first visits to Church of Ireland House — in those days barely ordained and totally unconnected with any central bodies - I have always been astounded by the courtesy, friendliness, co-operation and efficiency that is offered. Many of the staff of Church House, in the current job market, could do a great deal better for themselves, working elsewhere. I believe that we owe them our courtesy, our friendliness, and, most certainly, our appreciation.