Presidential Address

        The Presidential Address was delivered by the Most Reverend R H Goodhew, Archbishop of Sydney on Monday 9 October 2000.

        INTRODUCTION

        My dear brothers and sisters in Christ, this is the last time I will address you in this forum as the bishop of the diocese. I am grateful for the privilege of serving God in this office for the last seven and a half years. I thank you for calling me to this role. It has been an eventful, stimulating and challenging time for my wife and me. There have been a number of unexpected events: things that no one could have anticipated. However, I look back with a sense of gratitude to God for the experience of serving as the Archbishop of Sydney and Metropolitan of New South Wales.

        THANKS

        I trust that somewhere closer to 19th March 2001 I will have an opportunity to thank personally the extensive list of people who have shared this ministry with me and to whom I owe much. However I wish, in the presence of this Synod, to express to my episcopal colleagues and their wives, to all the archdeacons and their wives, to Archdeacon Nicolios, and to Mr Geoff Kyngdon, my profound gratitude for their fellowship and their service to Christ. They have been good friends and loyal companions. Some have gone on to other ministries but I thank God for them all. I thank the Synod again for the opportunity to appoint Canon ROBERT FORSYTH as the new bishop of South Sydney. I welcome him to his new task and thank him for accepting this position. It is a regret that I will only have a limited opportunity to work with him. However, I wish to say to each of my colleagues in your presence: "may the Lord God bless you greatly and thank you for everything". Nor can I let this occasion pass without recording my pleasure at the appointment of Bishop Peter Watson as Archbishop of Melbourne. May the Lord equip him in every way for his new ministry.

        As I thank my immediate colleagues I wish also to thank my clerical brothers and sisters in the diocese. You render your service to the people of God out of loyalty to Christ, but I thank you for your fellowship in this ministry. To the lay men and women of the Synod I say thank you. Please carry my expression of gratitude to all Christ’s people in your churches. There will be little opportunity for me to convey my best wishes and thanks to those who matter most – the people of God who form the congregations of the Diocese. You and they are the church. It is for your increase and your spiritual wellbeing that we have clergy and whatever other organs are developed to advance and support ministry within the diocese.

        We also wish to thank you for the opportunity of living in, and ministering from, Bishopscourt. We participated in the discussions associated with the future of Bishopscourt at the time of my election. In fact the offer made to me of the position as Archbishop came with the possibility of living there or in some other location. I have no doubt that the matter will be considered once more in the light of the election of a new Archbishop. It is not proper for me to make comments on how you should decide on that issue but I do wish to record our appreciation of the decision taken when this was last considered. We have found it to be an excellent home. In addition, the work that was carried out at the time of our appointment has made it an excellent venue for a ministry of hospitality and for providing accommodation for visiting bishops and other overseas guests. It has been a great venue for small conferences, selection conferences, personal and church group retreats, planning conferences, open days, and prayer gatherings as well as other special functions associated with the life of the Diocese. We simply wish to say ‘thank you’ for providing us with such a special place from which to exercise our ministry.

        DIOCESE

        Perhaps you can appreciate how difficult it is for my wife and me to be now beginning the process of saying goodbye. We have loved this diocese. It has been the setting in which we have lived the greater part of our lives. Most of our spiritual nurture and our service for Christ has taken place within its borders. We have twice served outside the Diocese but have been glad to return when we believed that it was right to do so. Our time with B.C.A in the old Ceduna Mission in South Australia was an immensely valuable time for us. We learned a great deal. We hope that the mission area had some benefit as well, but we are debtors to those to whom we ministered. One of the most difficult choices of our shared life in ministry was the decision to leave behind the work we had embarked upon in Brisbane and to return to the Diocese. God knows the struggle that was and he alone is the final arbiter over our decision. We greatly loved our time in Wollongong. It was a privilege to work with Ken and Gloria Short and the people of the Region were wonderfully generous and kind to us. It is the place that most of our children think of as home. During my time of service as Archbishop it has been my prayer that I might do good to God’s people in the Diocese and no harm: that I might offer leadership that would enable us to walk in his will and purpose. He is the judge of that service and, as with everything else, our hope is in his mercy.

        You are well aware of what I wanted to achieve during my episcopate. Primarily it has been to promote amongst God’s people, love for their heavenly Father, holiness, faith and obedience. I have wanted to stimulate a caring pastoral spirit in our churches that is consistent with the command to love one another and to promote the growth of the body to spiritual maturity. I have aimed at seeing new people won to Christ and the gospel made known to an ever-increasing number of people at home and abroad. I have sought to encourage the work of showing loving care to others both inside and outside the churches and of meeting human need. I have wanted, where possible, to be a voice on issues affecting people generally and Christians particularly. These things I have wished to pursue within the context of a dynamic expression of Anglican faith, public worship, and church order. Those five points have appeared annually in the Year Book of the Diocese and I have unashamedly run the risk of straining your patience by constantly repeating them. For that I make no apology. For me, they have expressed succinctly those things for which the church in this Diocese exists.

        There is so much for which to give thanks to God concerning the life of our diocese. When others are experiencing decline we have, under God, seen growth. Though we would wish to see more candidates for ordained ministry we are blessed with a constant supply of able people offering for this service. The diocese has for a large part of its history represented a commitment to an Evangelical understanding of Anglican Christianity. It has resulted in robust witness within the diocese and beyond its borders. We have strong work on the campuses of our Universities and a developing work on TAFE campuses. We have scholars whose quality is recognised overseas, as well as evangelists and Bible teachers who are valued internationally. We have, under God, developed some of the finest caring ministries that exist in the Anglican Communion. These have grown along with a desire to preach God’s Word and live out its implications in service to others. In the diocese people pray, share their faith, and engage in ministries like Cursillo and the Emmaus Walk, Kairos and Life After Prison, Evangelism Explosion, Christianity Explained, Christianity Explored, Lifeworks, Liberty, the Ministry Training Scheme and Club 5, to name only a few. There is work amongst a variety of cultural groups and, until funding ceases next year, a developing ministry to sport-minded Australians. Our schools, both old and new, are anxious to offer high quality education and to expose their students to the Master. Our Media Dept successfully produces material for television, and the print and radio media. We maintain a significant work in our State Schools and among youth in our camps and other youth programs. Godly people have managed well the resources that God has given us, providing our parishes with an enhanced capacity to use their resources to support ministry locally and overseas. Beyond this, our parishes seek actively to make Christ known and to nurture the fruits of the Spirit’s work by assisting people to grow in Christ. In some situations the results are nothing short of remarkable.

        THINGS TO CELEBRATE

        Year by year an impressive volume of Christian work goes on in the life of the Diocese. For the greater part, it goes unremarked but it is never unremarkable. Clergy do their work. Lay people go about their lives. Our organisations carry out their appointed tasks. All of it is an expression of spiritual life and of the grace of God apparent in ways too numerous to catalogue. All of it needs to be celebrated and God is to be thanked and praised for every bit of it. However, fresh developments emerge from time to time and they provide particular opportunities for thanksgiving.

        Regionalisation

        For example, we have navigated our way into the regionalisation of the diocese. That has been a major step for us all. For me, the chief consideration was the opportunity to place a pastorally experienced bishop and archdeacon in an area with a lesser number of parishes than had previously been the case. In this way I hoped to increase each bishop’s potential to bring not only encouragement and care to the clergy and lay leaders of his region but also stimulation and support for fresh efforts in congregational nurture and gospel outreach. This has been the operational expression of my vision for the Diocese. By this means I saw my five points taking flesh and becoming practical realities in the varied contexts of diocesan church life. The Bishops, Archdeacons, and their Area Deans have been the carriers of that vision to the churches. I have seen my role as providing an umbrella under which they could operate to help each church grow in every way and for new work to develop within each Region. The formation of Regional Councils has provided a group of clergy and laity to work with the bishop and archdeacon to plan for the work of the region. Funding has been provided to assist Regional Councils stimulate fresh initiatives. No system is perfect, and our regional pattern has its difficulties, but the opportunity for people of a Region to plan and work with their bishop to spread the gospel in a particular segment of the diocese must, I think, be seen as a gain. Larger churches with inbuilt resources for their own development may feel less need for this type of oversight and help. It is my sense that our smaller churches value the support and stimulation this system provides. The creation of the George’s River Region out of the former very large South Sydney Region has allowed the bishops of both new regions to give greater attention to their parishes. It is my assessment that the move has been demonstrably positive.

        Selection of Clergy

        The structures that make up the diocese, and we, the clergy who serve within it, exist for the sake of God’s people. They are his sheep and the focus of his attention. We are called to assist them as they, and we, "grow up to salvation". The most effective way for an Archbishop to assist God’s people to be all that God would have them be, is to provide clergy who are godly, motivated, prayerful, well instructed and competent, and who genuinely care for people. To that end, the revision of our processes for the selection both of candidates for training and of candidates to be ordained as deacons and priests has been worthwhile. I wish to express personal appreciation to those who have given leadership in this, and to all who are, or have been, involved either as selectors or as ordination chaplains.

        Ministry Assessment Centre

        As an addition to what was already available for in-service training we have developed the Ministry Assessment Centre. I am grateful to those who have brought this into being. It has had a slow beginning but is increasingly being recognised as a valuable tool for clergy to assist themselves in improving their capacities in ministry. The Centre is a process not a place. It is designed to help a minister identify personal and ministerial strengths and weaknesses. The details are confidential to the participant. It provides a basis for discovering where new gains can be made in ministerial capacity. If required, it will work with individuals in developing a personal program for further growth. Those who have undertaken the Centre’s program have spoken of its worth and help. I pray it will grow in its usefulness and that the number of people who avail themselves of its potential to stimulate personal growth will continue to increase. It also has the capacity to be developed as a tool for use in a selection process but to date it has not functioned in that capacity. I was involved in the development of the Report that resulted in the creation of our present CEFM. Rev. Ian Mears has given thoughtful leadership in this work for a decade. Many have benefited greatly from his efforts and I am personally grateful to him for his dedication. It may well be that after a decade in our fast changing world there are grounds for considering a thorough review of all In-Service Training. If such a review were ever undertaken I would suggest that the work of the Assessment Centre, with its capacity to offer a valuable service across the Commonwealth as well as in the Diocese, ought to be included within its terms of reference.

        Candidates for Ordination

        We must all be grateful to God for the calibre of the men and women who are offering to train for ministry in the diocese. Please pray for an increase in their numbers. Our thanks must go to those who work hard at placing the call to ordained ministry before their congregations and before friends and associates, and who offer support to those who believe this is God’s will for them. However, we need to continue to pray for more. Needs are increasing not decreasing. For this we must be thankful to God for his goodness. I will refer later to some issues associated with this question but we need to acknowledge what God is doing in our midst.

        A particular cause for praise is the increased numbers of people seeking serious theological education in Australia. This is a phenomenon that is apparent across a range of theological and bible colleges. Moore College has a record number of students enrolled. Mary Andrews College finds a growing interest in the courses they offer for women in parishes. As God lays this need for theological education and training upon the hearts of more people we need to consider what our response should be. Whatever secularists may wish to say about Australia and its religious landscape, it cannot be denied that many Christian people want to know and understand Christ for fully and wish to make him known more effectively.

        Our Schools

        When addressing the Synod in 1994 I said,

        An initiative that I would like to encourage in 1995 is the establishment of low-fee, mission minded, Anglican Schools, in growth areas.

        … I recommend that we should consider two aspects of a new strategy. First, one that continues actively to support the State system seeking to contribute a Christian perspective and enriching it through the provision of a high standard of Special Religious Education. Second, that at the same time we seek to offer some complementary models to the State system, that in addition to our existing schools, we offer some low-fee Anglican Schools that are linked through the local parishes with a strategy of church growth and gospel outreach. I recommend that we explore vigorously this second aspect whilst an opportunity still exists.

        … I commend this initiative to the Synod and the diocese to give the exploration of this possibility enthusiastic support.

        We must be grateful to Rev. Dr. Lindsay Stoddart, to Dr. Grant Maple, and to all those associated with the work of Scripture in Schools for all they do to provide good material and good people to teach Special Religious Education in our State Schools. We have a large stake in the success and quality of our State Education system. It is still probably the largest mission field open to us in the Diocese.

        Since 1994, in pursuit of the second element of our new strategy, seven new schools have been commenced in the Diocese: Shoalhaven, Arndell, Richard Johnson, Penrith, Thomas Hassall, Nowra, and Rouse Hill which is to be on its own site in 2002. Within the Province of New South Wales five new schools have commenced and another three are in the planning stage. This, by any measurement, is a gratifying outcome. We need to place on record our appreciation of the work done by Mr. John Lambert and the Sydney Schools Corporation under the Chairmanship of Rev. Ian Mears. These new schools are a credit to those who have worked so hard to see them created. We must thank God for all the faith and dedication represented in the creation of each one of them. As resources become available there are additional opportunities to advance this very strategic ministry.

        We must also celebrate the work of our longer standing Church Schools. It has been my privilege to meet annually with the Heads of all our Schools, and in recent years with the Chaplains as well. They are a fine body of men and women and I thank each of them for their dedication and hard work. I convey my appreciation also to the Councils of these schools: to the Chairpersons and to the Council members. These Schools are wonderful assets in the life and ministry of the diocese. Let us gratefully acknowledge those who earnestly and prayerfully seek to make them enjoyable and enriching centres of true religion, character building and sound learning.

        The Archbishop’s Liturgical Panel

        In 1996 I addressed the Synod on issues of public worship in the light of the need to make a decision on the status of A Prayer Book for Australia in our Diocese. At that time I said,

        … we must not abandon the task of developing liturgical material for ourselves and for the church in this country. We may be wise to consider in due course the development of services of our own, first as an attempt to encourage the wider use of well prepared services in this diocese, and as a contribution to whatever may follow APBA. This is a course which is not without its difficulties. Others may well feel free to do the same and in directions which we might feel are not in the best interests of Anglicans generally. Whatever we do we must be more consistently involved in the process of liturgical revision

        and then,

        Since with the production of APBA the Diocesan Liturgical Committee has completed its brief and lapses with the appointment of a fresh Standing Committee, it is my intention to appoint an Archbishop's Liturgical Panel. I will ask it to do at least two things. First to plan and conduct a series of seminars across the diocese to assist clergy and laity in the preparation and conduct of liturgies fitted to the variety of settings in which our churches operate. Then to begin work on fresh material as a contribution to future liturgical developments. We need to produce from among us people who can serve the church with excellence in this area of expertise

        I can now report to you that the Panel has completed its work and has received detailed comments from the Doctrine Commission. In the light of the Doctrine Commission’s comments some changes have been made. The amended work ready for release. It contains services for Sunday worship. Two issues are being considered. The first is, Under what proper authority may they be circulated for trial use? The second is the source from which funds may come to cover the costs of publication and distribution. If they are to be made available my hope is that this can happen before the end of this year or early in 2001.

        As I said in 1996, "Developing good liturgy is a skill", and we can rightly add, plain hard work. I thank Dean Jobbins the Chairman of the Panel, and all who worked with him for their commitment, expertise and hard work. Let us pray that the fruit of their labours will prove a blessing to many.

        Olympic Games Task Force

        The Sydney Olympic Games are now history. We were hosts to the world. Many church people took the opportunity to display friendship and hospitality and to share something of the grace of Christ with our visitors. Next week Sydney will be host to the Paralympics with some 4,000 athletes with disabilities and their friends and relatives. We need to pay tribute to Bishop Brian King, David Tyndall, and to all who have worked with them, for their strenuous endeavours as members of our Olympic Games Task Force. Their task was to prepare Sydney Anglicans for these Games as an opportunity for witness to Christ. The sports ministry developed by Rev. David Tyndall was a part of that program. David’s ambition was to equip churches to use sport as a way of reaching a significant segment of the Australian population. Our Task Force co-operated with the Quest 2000 ‘Greater Than Gold’ initiative to make a combined Churches impact on the city with its many visitors. Their task was complicated by many factors but they stayed the course and served us well. The future of sports ministry is something the Synod may wish to consider. For my own part, as I observe what happens overseas, I can only believe that if handled well, sports ministries will be an important sector ministry for the future. If we exercise specialised ministries to journalists, actors, business people, and university and TAFE students, we ought not to overlook this field of community interest and specialisation.

        Indigenous People’s Ministry

        The Task Force appointed to advance ministry amongst Aboriginal people in the Diocese and to advise the Archbishop on matters related to their issues began its work in 1996. It is now known as the Indigenous Peoples’ Ministry Committee. We must thank Archdeacon Allan Donohoo, Rev. Ray Minniecon, and all who have served on this Committee for their work. You will recall that the Synod allocated $1 million for this ministry. The work progresses slowly but purposefully. The training and placement of clergy and workers amongst aboriginal people in the Diocese is of great importance. It is also necessary that we have thoughtful people who are well-informed on issues of concern to Indigenous Christians. We must do all we can to assist indigenous believers in this diocese, and across Australia, to build strong and vigorous churches to witness to their people and to all segments of our society. The National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Anglican Council (NATSIAC) provides a forum in which our Committee and similar groups in other dioceses can meet and plan together.

        Cross Cultural Ministry

        A working party created to consider Cross-Cultural ministry in the Diocese reported in July 1999 with a Demographic Analysis of Ethnicity in the Sydney Diocese. Since then discussions have taken place between the Archbishop’s senior staff and representatives of Anglicare and their Cross Cultural Ministry staff. Regionalism has had its impact on the previous arrangements for cross-cultural work. Before regionalisation, the initiative for this work rested principally with Anglicare and their Cross-cultural team. Now the Bishops and Regional Councils wish to have that initiative. Anglicare is closing down the Cross-cultural Department and, in its place, creating a new position of Senior Consultant in Strategic Ministry. This person’s role will be to provide an effective consultancy service to the pastoral leadership within the Diocese. The Consultant will be available as a resource for Regional Bishops and their Councils as they assume responsibility for cross cultural work in their own Regions. This appointment is an element of a proposed structure for enabling the Regions to have good information available upon which to make decisions. It is to be hoped that the envisaged structure will enable us to have both the benefits of Regionalism and also those that come from an overarching perspective on the whole diocese.

        We have much to celebrate in the formation in recent years of cross-cultural congregations in the developing work of the Diocese. There are now 56 cross-cultural ministries currently operating. There are 43 English as Second Language (ESL) classes functioning, some with over 20 nationalities present. There are more than 250 helpers involved and over 1,000 people attending on a weekly basis. We owe much to the vision and passion of those who have worked with Anglicare to pioneer and advance this ministry. The Rev. Ernest Chau has agreed to act as Chairman of an Archbishop’s Committee for Chinese ministry. The Committee will serve as a source of advice to the Archbishop. The number of Chinese congregations is increasing.

        My greatest concern with the initiative for cross-cultural work now passing to the Regions is that it may in time languish. That will not be for any ill will towards this work. It will be solely the result of limited financial resources. It is already apparent as an issue in the George’s River Region. The ethnic diversity of that Region means that a significant percentage of its grant monies go to fund cross-cultural ministries. However the Region needs the capacity to enhance its work amongst Anglo-Celts and longer term Australians. With Regional Councils mainly representing the majority Anglo-Celts it is not hard to see where the tide of natural tendencies will move financial resources. My friend David Fairfull talks about the role of "champions": people with the passion, drive and commitment to see particular things happen. The old Cross-cultural Department of Anglicare provided that energy in the past. The new steps taken by Anglicare are designed to assist in overcoming what may emerge as a difficulty. Time alone will tell how effective the Regions will prove to be in advancing cross-cultural work. I certainly hope they prove to be eminently effective. This Church will be locking itself up to a limiting mono-culturalism if it fails to minister adequately to new-comers from other ethnic backgrounds.

        Advances in Media Work

        Under the leadership of Deaconess Margaret Rodgers and the reconstructed Media Council our Media Division has achieved significant recognition. Five journalistic awards came their way this year. In addition material from the production unit has been well received. Some of their creations have found a place in the commercial media. On a relatively limited budget they have achieved highly commendable results. The web site is visited by many overseas agencies that have found it a valuable source of reliable material. 50% of the visits to the site are from outside Australia.

        The Cursillo Movement

        The Cursillo movement has brought remarkable blessing to many people in the Diocese since it was introduced here from the Diocese of Armidale. We should be grateful to the pioneers of this ministry in the Diocese both for their perseverance and their keen desire to enrich the lives of others. Thanks are due to those who now carry it forward. Perhaps Cursillo’s major contribution is its capacity to help participants experience the reality of theological ideas. The concepts of faith, love, joy, repentance, and fellowship have taken fresh life and meaning for many who have participated in Cursillo weekends. That refreshment has been taken back to invigorate the churches from which the participants have come.

        An amazing offshoot of Cursillo is the Kairos ministry in our jails. The transformations that God has worked in the lives of men and women in our prison system are breathtaking in their graciousness and power. Few things have so greatly moved me personally in my years in this position as the experiences and testimonies of people in prison whom Christ has changed. Together with Prison Fellowship and the Life After Prison ministry, Kairos provides the possibility of new beginnings for people in the jails of New South Wales. One very real issue is the capacity of our churches to receive such believers into our churches. The transition from jail to a new way of life is not easy.

        The Diocesan Executive Board

        The DEB was formed as one element in a program of reorganisation proposed by the Archbishop’s Ministry Commission promoted by Archbishop Robinson. It was not ultimately formed with the role envisaged by the writers of the Report. However, it has taken up many of the tasks that the Report considered such a group should adopt. It currently operates as a committee appointed by the Standing Committee and subject to its oversight. Its main achievements have been to guide the process of Regionalisation particularly as that applies to questions of financial grants. It has shepherded the process of moving to a three–year budget and the operation of our Appropriations Ordinances. It is now turning its attention to longer term planning especially in the provision of funds for what has been described as "infrastructure", that is, costly capital items needed within the Diocese. It has struggled at times to fulfil its responsibilities but given some of its constraints I believe it has served, and will serve, a useful role in the Diocese. We should sincerely thank all those who have given of their time and skills to its work.

        For the elements of our Diocese to which I have referred, as well as for all the others too numerous to mention now, we are bound to give thanks to God. Let me say again what a privilege it has been to survey this bubbling restless cauldron of spiritual life and vitality from the perspective of being your Archbishop.

        CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

        In this final address I would like to try and outline briefly some of the challenges and opportunities that I see present with us now and which, in my judgement, will form part of the terrain that you and a new archbishop will need to traverse in the future. I do not attempt this with the prospect of inappropriately intruding myself into that future. My desire is simply to set out the state of play as I see it as I move into another sphere of ministry.

        Global Influences

        In his recent book Church Next (IVP p.19f) Dr. Eddie Gibbs, who is professor of church growth at the School of World Mission, Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena and who has recently visited this diocese, writing under the heading of "A Cultural Shift of Seismic Proportions" says,

        Churches can become so traumatized by their internal problems that they fail to notice that society at large is in the midst of a cultural shift of seismic proportions, which affects every area of society. William Easum describes this shift in terms of a transition from the Industrial Age to the Quantum Age. He observes that "established Protestantism was born into the Industrial Age, a world of slow, incremental change." By about the middle of the twentieth century the rate of change quickened and became increasingly complex. Today a momentum has been generated to such a degree that change has become discontinuous and chaotic. Mike Regele issued a wake-up call to American Christianity in The Death of the Church, in which he alerts church leaders to the fact that they minister in a world out of control, characterized by stress and uncertainty. He believes that "if we do not understand the forces of change, we will be overwhelmed by them." The transition from modernity to postmodernity represents a seismic shift that can result in churches becoming paralyzed in the midst of the shock waves. The changes are deep-rooted, comprehensive, complex, unpredictable and global in their ramifications. Unlike most institutions the church cannot confine its attention to certain groups of people. Rather it endeavors to respond sensitively to all comers, caring for them from the cradle to the grave. At the same time it must also give high priority to reaching beyond its ranks to meet people in every walk of life, to demonstrate the love of Christ in practical ways and invite them to join their ranks in following Christ as Lord and Savior. In some areas of the country, such as rural locations and small towns, churches continue to minister in traditional societies, where they still occupy a central place. In other settings churches find themselves marginalized by modernity, a mindset represented by self-assertive secular presuppositions that allow no place for the transcendent. In yet other areas they find themselves grappling with a different set of challenges posed by postmodernity. This is especially true of churches located near university campuses or in locations where the media and entertainment industries are influential.

        Furthermore, within many congregations, groups exist that represent each of these three mindsets: traditional, modern and postmodern. It is no wonder that church leaders find it hard to secure consensus and set a clear direction. And they are not alone because the cultural shifts represented by these three worldviews run throughout society. Leaders in many institutions - educational, religious, commercial and medical - face similar conflicts as they try to deal with differing and oftentimes conflicting assumptions.

        It is both challenging and heartening to know that some of the tensions we feel in our work operate on a far larger canvass than simply that of our own Diocese. A number of concerns are not of our own making. They are present as aspects of our global environment. Others may well be locally generated, products of our own national and ecclesiastical cultures. Even these latter may themselves be coloured by aspects of the former. Whatever the origins, we are in the midst of "a cultural shift of seismic proportions". This is the context in which we must serve the Lord Christ with faithfulness and wisdom.

        Differing Vision of the Church

        Some of our concerns I judge develop from differing visions of the church. Please be generous and grant me a liberal indulgence as I make use of some rather crude and maybe unhelpful labels as a framework within which to consider a number of issues and with which to distinguish what are undoubtedly more subtle and varied nuances.

        There has existed from a time prior to my election a distinction between Evangelicals that I will characterise as ‘REPA’ and ‘Blue Ticket’ approaches. One, sees the churches of the Diocese, as being under constant threat from ‘liberalism’ and Romish influences which, if unchecked, will eat out their Evangelical and gospel heart. The other, while wishing to defend the purity of the gospel and Christian truth, might consider itself as having a more ‘open’ stance. Though the lines of demarcation are blurred, one probably sees the diocese as a fellowship of almost autonomous churches, while the other reflects a view more akin to that of the Prayer Book and Constitution with respect to issues of order and ministry. On the question of the ordination of women to the priesthood, or women addressing mixed audiences, one group strongly resists this possibility as the first line of an attack made by a process, fuelled from a faulty way of handling the Bible, that would lead on inexorably to the justification of homosexual practices. The other may be more open to women in ordained ministry believing that they can justify their position from Scripture without compromising the Bible’s position on sexual practices. A further example of difference may be demonstrated in concern for the well being of the Diocese that has focused attention on the Boards and Councils of our diocesan organisations, schools and colleges. One group has given careful attention to the membership of these bodies and the regulations under which they operate. Their fear is that over time these organisations will drift from their Christian foundations because of a failure to elect truly committed Christians. While sharing the same concern for the character of these institutions and their Christian heritage, others feel uncomfortable about ‘single brand’ believers being vigorously promoted to these positions to the exclusion of other godly and able people whose sympathies may be of a slightly different kind. In matter such as these, as well as others, one group considers the other to be ‘soft’ in their Evangelicalism: the other sees their brothers and sisters as ‘hard line’ and unnecessarily limiting in their approach. So one begins to hear accusations and counter-accusations on the theme of Love versus Truth. Some are thought to abandon Love in a desire to maintain Truth. Others are said to compromise Truth because of a propensity to give Love a pre-eminent role in their thinking. Some resent being labelled by others as "liberals" because they hold views that differ on issues they judge to be neither credal or morally destructive. Negative reactions are generated in people who resent what they interpret as an over zealous desire for control and regulation, and the use of fear as a motivator to establish that control.

        The ‘Catholic’/ ‘Evangelical’ polarity within the diocese is not new but now has some fresh aspects. While some of the old issues remain, matters of churchmanship do not seem to me to be quite what they used to be. Perhaps because the General Synod’s Canon Concerning the Vesture of Ministers declared that this Church "does not attach any particular doctrinal significance to the diversity of vesture worn by its ministers", certain items of clothing seem to attract less attention than they may have done in the past. Now the divide is more likely to be between those who wear no special dress and those who do. Currently it might be argued that the divide runs between those who have a strong attachment to the liturgical forms of the church and those who do not. Or between those who accept the order of this church and those who find it unnecessarily restricting.

        Evangelicals of my own era defended the theology and liturgical forms of the Book of Common Prayer and the Church order that it represented. The claim was that they represented a biblically supportable way of expressing and practising the Christian Faith. But things have changed. There are now comments that this order represents "Episcopal territorialism", that the present parish system restricts ministry, that we face the problems of "ongoing clericalism" and "Diocesanism", and that authorised forms of services have not maintained Reformation emphases.

        Dr. Gibbs writes that "institutions that have an inherited culture" easily fall victims to "protective entrenchment" when faced with rapid change. In the light of evidence showing the serious decline of mainline denominations in Europe and North America, claims of outmoded forms cannot be quickly dismissed. The need to address "traditional, modern and postmodern" constituencies within one church, or denomination may well represent an unanswerable argument for a great deal more flexibility than was contemplated in more stable times.

        Three issues are testing our structures and I think will continue to do so. The first is the matter of planting new churches. The initial thing to be said is that this strategy has a great deal to commend it as one of a number of ways in which new people can be reached for Christ. It allows for greater flexibility in responding to particular needs. It has a certain appeal to the postmodern distaste for institutional structures and it does not necessarily require, in the early days at least, expensive capital works. It has a capacity to enlist new believers in the work of evangelism from the beginning of their Christian life. The testing will come as we work out how this is to be managed in the life of our Diocese, which is a fellowship of churches emanating from a bishop and a synod. Who will stimulate and guide the church plants? Will it be larger churches within the Diocese, or transdenominational organisations created for that purpose such as The Gospel Patrons Society? Will it be Regional Bishops and their Councils, or the Archbishop and the Synod? What protection will existing churches have, if indeed they should have any? If new churches are to be recognised and their ministers validated if not already ordained, how is that to be done? Some of these issues will be considered in legislation on our present Agenda. I trust the Synod will appreciate that at this point in my episcopate I am unlikely to sign away responsibilities that have hitherto lain with this office. Consequently I will give careful attention to any legislation you might pass at this session that bears on this issue.

        The testing, however, goes a little further. What is to be said of planting churches beyond the borders of the Diocese? The process is now well under way, and though it does not have legitimisation from me as Archbishop, that fact is a very minor issue for Anglican people who feel strongly motivated to create ‘gospel churches’ in situations where they believe gospel preaching is "unclear and ambiguous". The fact that significant clergy and laity in the Diocese actively support these new churches makes our protestations of non-approval a little less than the whole truth. I have raised with my brother Metropolitans the prospect of finding some way by which new church plants of this kind might be included within the framework of the dioceses involved. I am not sure however that either side finds this an attractive option. However, I will continue to express to my brother bishops my willingness to enter into discussion, should any of them ever wish to form churches that approximate the predominant ethos of this diocese. The attraction of new ‘evangelical’ churches in places beyond Sydney is beginning to express itself in a trickle of people leaving the Diocese to serve them or to serve student ministries. A number of students at Moore College express an interest in planting new churches without the encumbrances of existing structures. This again may be very ‘postmodern’ but it is a reality. Understandably, it will continue to strain relationships between dioceses that exist in a church structure constitutionally committed to the autonomy of individual dioceses.

        A second issue to test our structures is the prospect of the consecration of women as bishops. For those who support the ordination of women to the priesthood this is a logical and necessary step in the democratisation of life in God’s church. For those opposed to women priests the notion of women bishops brings added complications and a severe challenge to their understanding of church order, if not of church teaching. This issue has created new alliances across the older "Catholic"/ "Evangelical" division with conservative "Catholics" and "Evangelicals" finding common cause in their opposition to this perceived departure from God’s order for his church. One of the models offered for coping with the consecration of women as bishops is to dismantle totally the existing territorial structure of the church as it is expressed in the Constitution of the Anglican Church in Australia. In its place it recommends a non-territorial diocesan arrangement. While this may win support from some of the "Evangelical" side of the equation I doubt if it will be embraced by the "Catholic" component. If women are made bishops some arrangement will need to be developed to make a place for those who cannot in conscience agree. The situation that has developed in the Episcopal Church of the United States of America (ECUSA) needs to be avoided here. Some commentators on the last General Convention held in July this year, believe that the passing of resolution A-045 "which mandates enforcement procedures for women’s ordination in all dioceses" endangers bishops who, in conscience, cannot agree. Women as priests or bishops ought not to be the occasion for the exclusion of those who continue to maintain the long held position of the maleness of these orders.

        The third issue is the question of who should be authorised to conduct the Lord’s Supper. Where once "Evangelicals" and "Catholics" would have shared a common mind on this question that is no longer the case, at least for some of the "Evangelicals". A great number in the wider Anglican Communion sees what has become a major cause for a majority in this Synod as an unwarranted departure from Anglican Church order. If lay people and/or deacons are authorised to conduct Holy Communion it will have at least two outcomes. It will isolate the Diocese in the Anglican Communion and lessen the impact of its voice in those circles. In addition it will limit the portability of clergy from the Diocese. Bishops from other parts of the Communion will be less likely to license our clergy or to make use of our resources for training clergy and laity. Yet there may yet be room for further developments in this area. Addressing his Synod last month the bishop of Canberra and Goulburn said,

        May I also suggest that theologians from our two Dioceses discuss the vexed question of Lay Presidency? For my part Archbishop, I am not closed to the possibility, but I come to the proposition from an entirely different direction. …

        I would like to enter dialogue that we might jointly consider the issue. While no conclusions could be assumed, we might find a common meeting place.

        I have written to Bishop Browning with some suggestions as to how this dialogue might be set in motion.

        A third rough categorisation of differing visions of the church is that of "Charismatic" versus "Non-Charismatic". The categories I am seeking to describe are a little wider than whether or not one requires speaking in a tongue as proof of conversion or being filled with God’s Spirit. One vision sees the church as a Spirit lead fellowship where visions, tongues, dreams, prophecies, anointed preaching and clear demonstrations of the Spirit’s presence in the life of the believer are an accepted feature of its life. The other is more prosaic, with the exposition of Scripture and the understanding of Christian teaching as the chief motifs. On a broader front the two contrasted models may demonstrate a differing potential for flexibility and response to new needs and visions. Though not wholly true, the ‘Non-Charismatic" vision might be thought to be more closely linked to institutional Christianity than the essential "Charismatic" vision. There is not doubt that the Charismatic Movement has had a dramatic impact on world Christianity in the latter part of the 20th century. Much of the vitality of the churches both denominational and non-denominational in the 2/3’s world is linked to this movement in one way or another. It would appear that across the world new associations some smaller, some larger are forming around ‘gifted’ or ‘anointed’ leaders. Here in Australia we have witnessed the formation of the Australian Christian Church. In our own Diocese the debates of the 1960’s and 70’s left the "Non-Charismatic" vision as the dominant though not the sole living option for the church. Some of those who left Anglican Churches to join Charismatic and Pentecostal Churches have returned: many have not. What is undeniable is the profound impact "Charismatic" music has had on "Non-Charismatic" churches. If we are to share with others in realising the vision enunciated at Amsterdam this year of reaching all the unreached of humanity in the next 20 years, believers from both sides of this divide will need to be able to work with one another with a greater measure of mutual respect.

        Our Perceived Culture

        If we were wanting a comment on how we as a Diocese are perceived by some observers at least, if not by all, then the 4 Corners program "An Unholy Row" gave us a mirror in which to take some sort of a look at ourselves. Granted that such programs are built on the basis of exploring conflict, it is clear that no program would be produced if nothing existed to justify the effort. I am not interested in pursuing the issues that were raised but I do want to remark on what is perceived to be part of our culture as a diocese. I believe I have heard three descriptions used of us: arrogant, polarising and aggressive. There are occasions when any Christian man or woman, any church, or any denomination will be required, out of loyalty to Christ, to express a clear conviction, to do this in contradistinction to the convictions of others, and to do it firmly and with insistence. If ‘arrogant’, ‘polarising’, and ‘aggressive’ only referred to such actions we might wear them as badges of honour. But we must take seriously the possibility that they are saying more about us than that. The Petrine encouragement to make our defence for the hope that is in us with gentleness and reverence betokens a humility expressed before both God and other people. Truth and love are not alternates: neither are firmness and generosity of spirit. When I was elected, the Synod spontaneously broke into singing "A new commandment I give unto you that you love one another as I have loved you". I took that as the expression of a desire for all of us to find a deeper experience of Christian love, generosity and kindness in our shared life across the Diocese. Presumably that would have an impact on the way we relate outside our boundaries and consequently on how others perceive us. I think my greatest sadness in relinquishing this office will be my sense of failure in doing anything significant towards the realisation of that prayerful song. I am all too conscious of my own contributions to that failure. I take it as a rebuke to me and to all of us who have pastoral responsibilities, when I hear church people say that they appreciate our teaching and our stand for the truth, but, what they deeply desire is that we really love them, and that we love them in a way they can recognise. We all wish to be respected and valued, and we are commanded to love one another eagerly, fervently, constantly. While we can never hope to be free of all conflict we can pray for a quiet and gentle spirit to prevail in all our debates and disagreements.

        What Shall Women Do?

        In the matter of the role of women in ministry we stand divided. There are those who believe development to be a key concept in Scripture. They hold that, when drawn together, the threads of Scriptural teaching and example require, in our present social context, that suitably gifted and godly women should be able to minister in all the offices of the church. Others believe that Scripture stands not only against women in the priesthood and the episcopate, but against women doing anything by way of public ministry when men are present. The latter category believes that the former, by their concept of ‘development’, provide a logic for opening a door for the justification of homosexual practice. The former, contend that they do not, arguing that there is no approval ever given anywhere in Scripture for such behaviour while there are numerous expressions of approval for the ministry of women. Thus the matter stands. It will continue to be a point of contention. The Chancellor’s Bill to permit the ordination of women to the priesthood but with a restriction on such persons being placed in charge of a parish failed to win the support of the Standing Committee for it to appear on the Business Paper among motions at the request of Standing Committee. Some uncertainty must now exist about the prospect of it being considered at all.

        At this point I can make no further contribution to the debate than I have done already. I hope no further restrictions are placed on our women Deacons. I also hope that when these issues are discussed in this house it will always be with due regard for the sensitivities involved for all parties. May the Lord guide you to know his will and to do it with sincerity and grace.

        Training for Ministry

        The promise extracted from one who is being consecrated as a bishop that he will "be faithful in Ordaining, sending, or laying hands upon others" ensures a bishop’s interest in the preparation of his candidates. Bishops of this diocese have consistently trained their prospective ordinands at Moore College. This has been supported by the Synod setting aside funds for training candidates and by the Standing Committee determining that bursaries from those funds be paid for those who study at Moore. I am a graduate of the College. As Archbishop I am President of its Council. I am also one of the three Trustees. You will therefore understand that I am a keen supporter of the College. In that capacity I want to draw your attention to some of the issues that are current in its present life and for its future.

        The College is currently enjoying a remarkable increase in the number of people wishing to be trained there. This raises certain matters. One is the proportion of candidates for Anglican ministry in the Diocese to the total number students and what that means for Anglican formation. Is something lost by this inclusion in a much larger body of students? A second is the need for increased facilities to cope with greater numbers. Already the principle of all students living on campus has had to be breached because of insufficient accommodation. A third is the need for an expanded library to keep up to date and to serve the increased number of students. This has prompted the Council to develop plans for a new library. That will not come cheaply. You will be aware that training for ministry is the first call on the funds of the Diocesan after other necessary expenses are covered. The Synod however will need at some appropriate time to decide the degree to which it will assist the College in its major capital developments.

        There is no doubt that the College’s reputation is drawing people for training. To have the opportunity to train theologically not only our own candidates but people who will go out to a wide range of ministries in other churches and missions is significant. The Diocese often benefits by independent students opting, part way through their course, to become Sydney candidates. The question of the responsibility of the Synod towards the training of candidates as well as the provision of facilities to train a wider group of potential ministers will need to be considered thoughtfully. If the College is to function as a training facility for those who wish to exercise ministries in other denominations, new or existing independent churches, or other ministries such as overseas missionary service or student work, the Diocese will probably need to be prepared to support extensive capital works. The source of that support will be the income that is distributed triennially through the Appropriations Ordinance. There is always a tension in that Ordinance between requests and available income.

        Increasing demands for staff and the fact that more churches are seeking to retain clergy in teams has meant that in recent times not all requests for curates could be satisfied. In addition there have been some difficulties in persuading men to see some of the areas considered to be more difficult, as places in which they should serve. An additional concern for me has been the lack of people from our own diocese who can serve in parishes with a church style different from the dominant culture of the Diocese. Both these circumstances suggest to me that the Synod may wish to provide some resources for people to be trained elsewhere but under appropriate supervision by the bishop, and that some suitable Bible College graduates be assisted so that they may offer for ordination. As more clergy are required you may need to cast your net a little wider than in the past.

        From time to time criticisms of the College are directed to me. One has been to the effect that our College is not an easy environment for students who may be open to the possibility of an extensive ministry for women in teaching and preaching. Another has been that not all staff members give consistent support to Anglican patterns of church order and worship. When I have taken up these matters with the Principal he has assured me that the comments are ill founded.

        As the training ground for the vast majority of those who lead the churches of our Diocese Moore College has an unparalleled role in shaping the future of this diocese and of the men and women who make up our churches. Few institutions, if any, are of more importance to us than it is. I commit it to your prayers and to your sustained concern, interest and support.

        Youthworks

        The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. George Carey was speaking the truth when he said recently, "Churches that have a vision for children and young people will grow". My hope for the merger of our separate Departments for Youth and for Christian Education was the formation of a new combined restructured youth and education ministry that would give fresh impetuous to our work with children. Gospel opportunities among children are great and I welcome the production of Under Construction, Youthworks’ new learning resources for children’s groups. The biblical and theological foundations for this material are strong. Its instructional value has been ensured by the guidance of highly competent educationalists. I hope it will have an increasing use among those interested in working with children. This material, now available for use in term one in 2001, provides great opportunities for our future work with children. I also commend to you the Anglican Youthworks Children and Youth Ministry Training College. Encourage young people interested in working with youth and children to train with the College and remember it in your prayers and financial support.

        BUILDING LINKS FOR THE FUTURE

        Australia is a long way from everywhere. Even in a world of television and cyberspace communications we are, for most of the world, the end of the line. Consequently we can both be overlooked in matters of international concern, and isolated and parochial in our own thinking. I have made it my business in the last couple of years to build links with other parts of the world and especially with other theologically conservative elements of the Anglican Communion.

        Lambeth Resolutions on Human Sexuality

        The Lambeth Conference of 1998 brought the question of the Church’s recognition of the acceptability of same sex unions and the ordination of practising homosexual people onto the agenda of the Communion. I have been involved with a number of the Primates who have been seeking to win support for a Communion wide stance against the acceptance of any such recognition and acceptance. The recent ECUSA General Convention appears, in my judgement and in that of a number of other people, to have given recognition to a range of alternate relationships other than marriage as we have it in Scripture and in our Book of Common Prayer. Resolution D-039 said in part,

        Resolved, we acknowledge that while the issues of human sexuality are not yet resolved, there are currently couples in the Body of Christ and in this Church who are living in marriage and couples in the Body of Christ and in this Church who are living in other life-long relationships, and be it further

        Resolved, we expect such relationships will be characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God …

        Observers have not been slow in pointing out that the Scriptures and our Church are not ambiguous or uncertain in defining the type of sexual relationship that God sanctions. D-039 permits not only male/female relationships, both the duly recognised and the de facto, but also homosexual and lesbian sexual relationships that bear the marks of permanence and fidelity.

        In August a group of Primates, bishops and other church leaders and theologians met in Nassau to discuss the situation. The Statement issued as a result of their meeting said in part,

        Careful study of the 73rd General Convention documents, and first hand
        accounts of ongoing practices in the ECUSA demonstrate a clear departure
        from historic Anglican practice as articulated in the Virginia Report
        and re-affirmed by both the Lambeth Conference and the last Primates
        meeting.

        The passage of resolution A-045, which mandates enforcement procedures
        for women's ordination in all dioceses, by the Convention, constitutes a
        repudiation of the consensus of Anglicanism as expressed at the 1998
        Lambeth conference (See Resolution III:2) It also ignores the
        recommendations of the Virginia Report and the Eames Commission

        The passage of resolution D-039 together with the frank admission on the
        convention floor that "local option" (with respect to the ordination of
        practicing homosexuals and the blessing of same sex unions) is the
        present practice in many dioceses, seeks to normalise a new sexual
        ethic. According to Resolution D-039, recognition and support must be
        given to an unspecified number of sexual relationships which are placed
        alongside Christian marriage. This resolve departs from historic
        Christian teaching and practice, and represents a decision beyond the
        competence of a single member church in the Communion. It wilfully
        disregards the central concern of the Lambeth resolution 1.10 on
        sexuality and shows no adequate respect for the warning against divisive
        teaching and practice issued by the Primates meeting in March 2000.

        These departures have created a situation of Pastoral Emergency in the
        ECUSA. Many Christians seeking to remain loyal to Anglican teaching and
        practice, do not believe they have a future in the ECUSA in its present
        condition. Many have already left; many more are leaving. This
        Pastoral Emergency clearly effects the ECUSA, but it also threatens the
        integrity of the Anglican Communion. It entrenches impaired communion.

        In the absence of an appropriate arrangement within the ECUSA for
        traditional Anglicans to exercise their ministry without let or
        hindrance, an alternative arrangement with the full recognition of the
        Primates and the Archbishop of Canterbury needs to be provided as a matter of urgency.

        In the mean time, the Pastoral Emergency is so serious special Episcopal
        visitations become necessary. In our opinion, this will involve the
        crossing of diocesan boundaries in appropriate circumstances.

        Orthodox Anglicans around the Communion are seeking to assist conservative believers in ECUSA either to have some place within that Church where orthodox Anglican faith and practice may be maintained or some parallel jurisdiction that will be recognised by the Primates of the Communion and by the Archbishop of Canterbury.

        It is my opinion that orthodox bishops will need to stay in touch with each other if the effects of liberal theology within the Anglican Communion are to be resisted. I am informed that one of the homosexual groups based in the USA is in the process of setting up branches in some parts of Africa where the Church has expressed opposition to such a lifestyle. I have ongoing contacts with the two men who were consecrated as bishops by the previous Archbishop of Singapore and by the Archbishop of Rwanda to serve conservative people in the ECUSA. Though I did not support the consecrations at that time I have great sympathy with the reasons that prompted the move. My hope is that the various orthodox elements in the USA will find common cause in creating an arrangement that can give protection and recognition to those who wish to remain Anglican and orthodox.

        China

        With the assistance of Deaconess Margaret Rodgers and her connections with the Christian Conference of Asia and Archbishop Peter Kwong of Hong Kong I was able to visit parts of China in January this year. This visit was undertaken in co-operation with the Bible Society of NSW. The Bible Society has an active connection with the Amity Press where Bibles are produced for China with official approval. The growth of the church in China is remarkable. As a consequence the need for teachers for its Seminaries and Bible Colleges and for good theological literature is pressing. Anything that can be done to assist them in an appropriate fashion should be attempted. It was a great personal pleasure to meet again at Amsterdam 2000 members of the China Christian Council and the Three Self Movement who welcomed us so generously in China. All God’s people in that great nation deserve to be remembered in our prayers. May God continue to pour out his Spirit on that vast nation.

        South East Asia

        Archbishop Yong Ping Chung has succeeded Archbishop Moses Tay as the Primate for South East Asia. I attended his installation as well as the consecration of John Chew as the bishop of Singapore. It is, I believe, extremely important that we maintain contacts with the churches to our immediate north. We share much in common with them. The Diocese of Sabah has sent a mission team to our Diocese and the Archbishop has been here to teach and preach. Bishop Piper has formed a close working relationship with the Archbishop and that Diocese. Mission teams from Moore College visited Sabah this year with benefit both for the students and lecturers who participated and for the Diocese of Sabah. I trust these contacts will be strengthened in the future. Archbishop Yong is, as was his predecessor, an important voice for the orthodox faith in the Anglican Communion.

        East Africa

        Over the time of my episcopate I have developed relationships with bishops and dioceses in East Africa. Some of you will have met and heard Bishop Alexis Bilindabagabo of Gahini Diocese in the Province of Rwanda. We have been able to offer some help in that diocese through my Overseas Relief and Aid Fund. In May I visited the Diocese of Bujumbura in Burundi. This country has been torn by strife. Bishop Pie Ntukamazina has visited this Diocese. The parish of Christ Church North Sydney at Lavender Bay supplied a number of bicycles for evangelists in this diocese. I was able to offer a dedicatory prayer for their use, as well as deliver some of the 800 Bibles and 800 hymnbooks we were able to purchase, into the hands of those who would use them. It was moving to hear a 76-year-old evangelist give thanks that his 4-hour journey to the bus stop to travel further on was now reduced to one hour. I was able to meet and talk with the president of Burundi and with the Speaker of the House in the National Parliament. They are all hoping the peace talks in which Nelson Mandela has participated will, in spite of the severe tensions that exist, eventually produce peace and stability in the nation. The bishop has a major task in seeing that ministry is exercised amongst the people displaced because of armed conflict. He is also endeavouring to lift education and theological training amongst his people and their clergy. Involvement in the life of a diocese such as Bujumbura not only enables us to offer some help but it keeps us tied to the realities of the wider Communion and the wider world. These people love Christ, honour the Scriptures, and are keen to evangelise. They want to know that fellow believers in the Anglican family have not forgotten them. The growth of the church in this part of the world needs the support of good theological training. This is an area in which we should be able to help them.

        Nigeria

        I have also visited Bishop Josiah Idowu Fearon and the Diocese of Kaduna in Nigeria. You will remember that Bishop Fearon spoke at this Synod last year. The Diocese is facing the prospect of living under strict Islamic law although the Constitution is meant to guarantee religious freedom. There was rioting around the City of Kaduna while we were present. Reports of those killed vary between 200-300. One Roman Catholic priest was killed and a senior Government official. It is alleged that the riots are instigated by Muslims to intimidate the Christians in the area. Bishop Fearon is making use of Moore College material to train his clergy. I made it possible for Rev. Bart Vanden Hengel to visit Kaduna for a month during July and August to teach the Moore College material in the diocese. Bart speaks the Hausa language. This gave him a usefulness well beyond someone speaking only English. I am grateful to him and his parish for this contribution to the life of Kaduna Diocese and its people. The Anglicans of Kaduna are Bible loving people. They are keen to make disciples and establish churches.

        One cannot leave a reference to Africa without noting the awful dimensions of the problems they face with respect both to HIV/Aids and poverty. War and internal strife exacerbate these matters. The issues are of monumental proportions. I hope this diocese will not forget Africa. In my judgement anything that can be done to relieve their burden of debt and secure the use of the funds thus released to assist those most in need, should be done.

        Overseas Ministry Fund

        With the aim of providing a further opportunity for people of the diocese to help in Gospel witness and Christian caring I am opening, in November, an additional Archbishop’s Fund. This fund will not offer tax deductions and will be able therefore to assist ministries other than strictly humanitarian ones. It will stand alongside my other funds that do offer a tax benefit. Funds offering their donors tax benefits incur thereby certain limitations in the use of the monies received. They cannot be used directly to advance outreach. I hope there will be many generous people who will wish to assist evangelistic endeavours in Anglican dioceses in parts of the world like those I have mentioned. In those parts of the world preaching the gospel and care cannot easily be divorced the one from the other. I would like to leave this additional fund as a legacy to the Diocese and to my successor.

        Our Pacific Neighbours

        In the course of developing relationships with Primates in the Communion I have talked with the Archbishops of both Papua New Guinea and Melanesia. I consider also that the time has come for this Diocese to refresh its relationships with the Diocese of Nelson in New Zealand. Bishop Derek Eaton was a participant in the Church Leaders Track at Amsterdam for which I had responsibility. Contacts with this diocese go back a long way. Renewed associations will have mutual benefits for both sides of the Tasman Sea.

        Amsterdam 2000

        A number of people from Australia attended the Amsterdam 2000 Conference held in July/August. It was a conference for evangelists and attracted more that 11,000 participants from every part of the globe. An additional feature of the Conference was the operation of three separate Tracks. One focused on Strategies for taking the gospel to those who are yet unreached, the second dealt with theological issues associated with gospel preaching in the present world context, and the third was for church leaders. This diocese was well represented and plans are in process of being formulated to hold a national conference on evangelising Australia. A ‘Covenant for Evangelists’ was produced with a series of theological and ethical commitments to which evangelists might subscribe. The ‘Amsterdam Declaration’ is a longer document describing a number of key theological and doctrinal subjects with pledges to honour these truths in the practice of ministry. These two documents had their genesis in the work of the Theologians’ track under the leadership of Dr. James Packer with representatives from the other two. Both Bishop Forsyth and I were involved in the drafting process. The Strategists committed themselves to plans to make the gospel accessible to all people in the world in the next 20 years. The Church Leaders defined problems and opportunities for advancing gospel preaching throughout the world. They produced a document outlining issues for all church leaders seeking to see the gospel made known to everyone. Individual leaders pledged themselves to pursue this end in their own areas and beyond. Bishop Piper, Bishop Forsyth and Archdeacon Edwards were all active participants in this group.

        Amsterdam 2000 was probably the last, and may be the greatest, contribution of a great servant of God to the task of stirring others to reach the whole world for Christ. Only God knows what the real impact of the Conference will be, but Dr. Billy Graham has played his part in seeking to raise the vision and the skills of evangelists around the world. He has been a model of faithfulness and rectitude. Those who have served with him have likewise honoured Christ by their faithful and consistent service. It was a fitting tribute to the man who has probably preached the gospel to more people than any other man in history. There was no lack of commitment evident in those who were present for the task of going into all the world. May God in his mercy use the connections formed and the enthusiasm generated to fulfil his purposes.

        Church of England in South Africa

        In August/September I fulfilled a promised response to an invitation to visit the Synod of the Church of England in South Africa. The links between this diocese and CESA are of long standing. My predecessors back to Archbishop Mowll have maintained connections with this Church. Archbishop Mowll sent Stephen Bradley from this diocese. Bradley was later to become a bishop in the CESA. Archbishop Loane visited them and Archbishop Robinson consecrated Rev. Dudley Foord as a bishop for the CESA. Bishop Retief and others from CESA have visited Australia. Canon Dr. Broughton Knox was the first Principal of their new theological college. The current Principal, Dr. David Seccombe, is from this diocese. It is a healthy and vigorous church with an active gospel witness. My perception is that the current Archbishop of the Church of the Province of South Africa is genuinely desirous of establishing goods relationships with the CESA.

        The sum total of these varied contacts leads me to comment that this Diocese can, if it will, play an very useful, influential, and appreciated role in the life of the Anglican Communion and of the wider church. Impediments to this wider influence, I think, will be the pursuit of the lay administration of the Lord’s Supper, a capitulation to the tyranny of distance, and a determination to maintain an unnecessarily narrow basis for association with other people. Being involved in gospel outreach, or in the preservation of key elements of the Faith, will involve working with some people who are ‘charismatic’, with others who are more ‘catholic’ than our prevailing culture, and yet with others who have women in prominent ministry roles. Both the opportunities and the responsibilities are, I believe, very great.

        AND NOW TO CONCLUDE

        And now to conclude. I have no difficulty in believing that we live in days when a "cultural shift of seismic proportions" is in progress. It makes charting the future a hazardous task. Furthermore it is not for me to try to do so. That is your task and the task of whoever follows me in this role. I wish you all God’s mercy and grace as you move forward.

        For my part, I have followed two principles in functioning with an entity like the Anglican Church, especially that Church here in this Diocese.

        The first is that the Catholic Church, in the Prayer Book sense, has been around for a long time. It has weathered many storms. Institutions that are old may suffer the fate of the dinosaur. On the other hand they often exhibit a great capacity to revive themselves, changed perhaps, but recognisably the same. They carry values over long periods of time, some of which can easily be overlooked or forgotten in the super-heated or heady atmosphere of the immediate. There is value in ‘form’. Therefore I have not been quick to take the knife to things which have stood the test of time.

        On the other hand in days of discontinuous change new patterns will need to be found to do the essential things effectively. In that regard I have been impressed by what Nelson Mandela offered as his approach to leadership. He has written,

        As a leader, I have always followed the principles I first saw demonstrated by the regent at the Great Place. I have always endeavoured to listen to what each and every person in a discussion had to say before venturing my own opinion. Oftentimes, my own opinion will simply represent a consensus of what I heard in the discussion. I always remember the regent’s axiom: a leader, he said, is like a shepherd. He stays behind the flock letting the most nimble go on ahead, whereupon the others follow, not realizing that all along they are being directed from behind. (Abacus p.25)

        I hope that does not sound too self-promoting. I do not quote it for that purpose. To the contrary, I quote it because it reflects the truth that the best ways forward often spring up at the grass roots and from the minds and experience of others. People in a position like mine fly a helicopter. That is valuable for seeing the broad picture and seeing what is happening up ahead. But it is often down on the ground that the ideas are generated to deal with the issues that press upon us, and in that way show a new way forward. God graciously gives us many "nimble" members of the flock. Their innovations and fresh efforts will often show the way forward. This is freedom at work

        ‘Form’ on one hand, and ‘freedom’ on the other, are the two poles between which I think we must continue to function. The tensions that this creates are not always easy to resolve but to abandon oneself wholly to either one of these poles is, in my judgement, to court disaster. May you manage those tensions well. I quote again for the last time the wise counsel of that godly and able reformed pastor, the Rev. Richard Baxter: "In essentials unity; in non-essentials liberty; and in all things charity." May He who guides his flock as a shepherd be merciful and gracious to the Church in this Diocese.

        All that said I nevertheless believe it is necessary to have a clear notion of what you are about. So for the future I pray that whatever the circumstances, you will be Observably God’s People, Pastorally Effective, Evangelistically Enterprising, Genuinely Caring, and without apology, Dynamically Anglican. To stimulate you as you pursue the last mentioned of these characteristics, I append a final addendum to the printed form of this address for your thoughtful reflection.

        IN THE DIOCESE

        We now move to the business of Synod. Let me first record my appreciation and that of the Diocese to those who have retired during the past year and those who died during the same period.

        Under the good hand of God, time moves us all along and the 'changes and chances of this mortal life' take their toll. I thank God for the ministries of all those listed who through their faithfulness have devoted themselves and their gifts to Christ's service and to his people.

        The retirees were: the Rev David A West, rector of Hurstville; the Rev Ron L Coleman, rector of Mona Vale; the Rev John Peacock, chaplain at Anglican Retirement Villages; the Rev Clive H Norton, rector of Hunters Hill; the Rev Brian Findlayson, rector of Cronulla; the Rev John E Jones, rector of St Philip's York Street; the Rev Dr R N (Bob) Mirrington, rector of Kingsgrove; the Rev Canon Peter S Kemp, rector & senior canon of St John's Parramatta; the Rev Gordon Blackwell, chaplain of the Central Sydney Area Mental Health Service and the Rev Brian Wynn, rector of Naremburn/Cammeray.

        Our clergy who died were: the Rev Marco A Garlato, Assistant Minister at Miranda, the Rev W Bloxham; the Rev Alan J Guyer; and the Rev Peter J Spartalis and I record our sadness because of their loss to us, and our sympathy to their loved ones. May we, with them, be brought to a joyful resurrection and the fulfilment of Christ's eternal kingdom.

        God be with you and thank you one and all. Amen

        R.H.Goodhew
        Archbishop of Sydney Anglican Church
        October 9, 2000

        ADDENDUM

        I have on more than one occasion endeavoured to take up what ‘Dynamic Anglicanism’ might mean for us within the Diocese and in our local churches. I have reproduced here a piece that I think is worthwhile putting in your hands. It is material written last year by Bishop Tony Nichols of the Diocese of the North West. In essence he says:

        Last year was the 450th Anniversary of the first English Book of Common Prayer. It is the only Reformed vernacular liturgy to have remained in living use since the mid-sixteenth century. That heritage should not be lightly abandoned.

        1. The Prayer Book delivers us from the spirits of our age. It is a legacy tried in the fire of centuries of Christian experience.

        2. Its lectionary provides for the systematic reading of Scripture: Old Testament, Psalms and New Testament. No Church in Christendom reads the Bible more than Anglicans.

        3. The services have an evangelical structure - God’s law, confession of sin, assurance of forgiveness through the cross of Christ, nourishment in the Word, faith and thankful surrender. My own coming to Christ was very much influenced by the memorisation and internalisation of the Communion service.

        4. This ‘gospel route’ of the service provides a model of approach to God, as does the content of the collects, prayer gems which channel our intercessions along Biblical lines.

        5. The fixed form of service provides the opportunity to memorise key Scriptures, psalms, the creeds and good prayers. Today’s generation is being cheated of a corporate Christian memory because we have capitulated to modern educational theory that denigrates rote learning.

        6. It is common prayer i.e. for everyone. Previously congregations had observed the priest perform Mass. They had no role and did not understand what they heard. Archbishop Thomas Cranmer provided congregational and participatory services that illiterate people could understand and learn by heart.

        7. Again, a fixed form of common ‘worship’ delivers the congregation from the tyranny of the minister’s whim or his sheer limitations. Extempore prayer can be wonderfully edifying. But it can also be as lifeless as rote prayers. Moreover, it can be misused to send veiled messages to others present and to straighten them out.

        8. The language of the Book of Common Prayer was elevated and eloquent without being verbose or ornate. It was generally economical, doctrinally meaty, intelligible and memorable. It had an immense impact on our culture and language.

        By contrast, our Sunday intercessions often degenerate into a grocery list of needs to which the Almighty has to be alerted while extempore prayer becomes the "Prayer of the Just"; "Father, we just want to thank you. Father we just want to praise you. Just help us Lord, just help us to enjoy this time of sharing now". etc.

        9. The Prayer book’s services are God-centred and objective, not sentimental and self-centred, as a Pentecostal friend rightly observed. How often in our services today do we feel that we are entering the presence of the Sovereign Lord of the universe?

        10. How you pray both reflects and shapes your doctrine.

        I commend these considerations to you for both your good and that of others.

        Navigation

        Parish People & Governance

        Parish Property & Insurance

        Parish Finance & Remuneration

        Synod & Standing Committee

        Diocesan Structure & Organisations

        Acts, Ordinances & Regulations

        We acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land upon which our churches meet: from the Hawkesbury River south to Ulladulla and Sutton Forest, and west to the Blue Mountains and Lithgow. We acknowledge and pay our respects to their elders, past, present and emerging, and pray that God will unite us all in a knowledge of his Son, in whom all things were created.

        © Sydney Diocesan Services. All rights reserved 2019.  |  Privacy  |  Christianity explained