ACR: This year marks the first session of the 54th Synod of the Diocese of Sydney. To help new members of the Synod to think theologically and contextually about Synod as they prepare to participate, with the permission of the Sydney Diocesan Secretary, we are republishing a condensed form of a report to the Synod from 2021. It contains helpful theological and historical reflections about what a synod is and what it is for.¹

Theology

The New Testament does not mandate one particular mode of church government. Timothy is reminded of how a council of elders were involved in setting him apart for gospel ministry, led as they were ‘by prophecy’ (1 Tim 4:14). Titus, on the other hand was reminded that he had been charged with appointing elders in every town in Crete (Titus 1:5, where the sense seems to be an elder in each town but it may indeed mean more than one). The qualification lists in the Pastoral Epistles are most naturally read as indicating a twofold notion of ‘office’ (overseer and deacon, 1 Tim 3; elders from among whom some are overseers, Titus 1). However, this is nowhere taught as if no other configuration is possible or appropriate. What is more, such an exercise of a ministerial ‘office’ does not eliminate the voice of the congregation as a whole — older women, older men, younger men (Titus 2); playing a role in the evaluation of prophecy (1 John 4:1) and in the administration of discipline (2 Thess 3:14). Over each of these roles or offices stands the ministry of the apostles, as foundational authorities commissioned by Christ himself.

This more general pattern of particular, authorised and acknowledged offices of ministerial leadership and the active participation of the people of God in the governance of the church is reflected in the narrative of Acts as well. In Acts 1 the 120 disciples gathered in the upper room were led by Peter and the other apostles but were all involved in the commissioning of a replacement for Judas (vv.13–15). In Acts 6 the apostles called together “the full number of the disciples” to decide how to handle the crisis about the daily distribution and the Greek widows. However, it is clear that “the Twelve” had a leadership role that was not subsumed by, but rather was exercised in the midst of, the gathering of this larger group. In Acts 11 “the church in Jerusalem” sent Barnabas to Antioch. In Acts 13 the work of the Holy Spirit in separating out Barnabas and Saul for specific ministry work took place in the midst of a gathering of the church at Antioch. In Acts 15 a council of the apostles and elders gathered together to consider the Gentile mission of Barnabas and Saul. Yet there was clearly a leadership role within that group exercised by James (vv. 13–21).

The two theological truths that are held together in this way are (1) God’s gift of particular people to serve for the edification and good order of the churches and (2) the priesthood of all believers, by which every believer has direct, unmediated access to God in Christ. Neither of these truths must undermine the other, whether by a notion of priestly or episcopal leadership that operates on its own prerogative, or by a view of democratic governance that ignores or minimises the dignity and authority of the office or offices of leadership provided by God.

It is worth recognising that the New Testament has little sense of anything resembling our diocesan organisation (let alone a national church or the Anglican Communion). The church, as the New Testament conceives of it, is the local gathering of believers, a manifestation on earth of the gathering of all believers around Christ in heaven. The dignity, purpose and privilege attributed to the church in the New Testament belongs to the local congregation rather than a larger institutional fellowship of congregations. Yet just as this priority of the local congregation over the larger organisation that supports and resources it seems an obvious implication of the New Testament teaching about church as ‘gathering’, so too the New Testament strongly counters any notion of independency, where there are no relationships or obligations to those beyond the local congregation. Paul called on the Gentile Christians to share their relative wealth with the needy Jewish Christians in Jerusalem (e.g., Rom 15:27) and on individual congregations to whom he wrote to pass on his letter to them to other congregations nearby (Col 4:16).

A brief history of Synod

The early synods were essentially meetings of bishops, with a few other clergy and even fewer laypeople (e.g., the Emperor) in attendance. In the English church, one of the oldest recorded synods is the Synod of Whitby (664), which settled the date of Easter, and was attended by bishops and by King Oswiu of Bernicia and Northumbria. The first general synod of the English church, the Synod of Hertford (672) was part of the ecclesiastical reorganisation of the English church by Archbishop Theodore (of Tarsus) (668–90).

A reorganisation of these ‘church assemblies’ by Archbishop Stephen Langton in 1225 and the Convocation of Canterbury established its traditional form (bishops, abbots, deans and archdeacons, with two priests from each diocese) in 1283 under Archbishop Peckham. Originally all met together, but in the fifteenth century they were divided into two houses: the ‘Upper House’ of convocation made up of bishops only, and the ‘Lower House’ comprising the other clergy. In 1885 a ‘House of Laymen’ was introduced, with members elected by the Diocesan Conferences. This arrangement continued until the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act of 1919 created the Church Assembly with a House of Bishops, a House of Clergy (all members of the lower house of Convocation), and a House of Laity (elected by Diocesan Conferences). The Assembly did not pass church law but rather prepared measures that would then be submitted to the British parliament.

On Wednesday 5 December 1866 the first Sydney Synod met in the Church Society’s House in Phillip Street. In his Presidential Address, Bishop Barker remarked:

These works [he had just listed ‘the principal subjects which will occupy our attention on the present occasion’], if somewhat secular, are yet necessary and valuable, and as means to a higher end deserve a portion of our time and of our careful consideration. Yet are they but the means—the scaffolding of the temple. We may frame an orderly system of government; patronage, discipline, and endowments may be wisely arranged; yet is this but the machinery, we want the motive power. We may by the liberality of our gifts, by prudence and diligence in labour, become prosperous outwardly, may have a name to live, and yet before God be dead. A Church does not live by external acts, but by the indwelling spirit, animating, informing, quickening, and enlightening its members; without this it is dead. ‘A Church dies when it does not testify for God, does not maintain Christ’s truth, is not instinct with the Spirit.’

Then let us, my rev. brethren, keep ever in view the great end of our ministry, which is the salvation of souls. Suffer me to remind you of your ordination engagements, of your promises to be diligent in prayer and in the reading of the Holy Scriptures, laying aside the study of the world and of the flesh, to be in yourselves and in your families wholesome examples and patterns to the flock of Christ, that thus giving yourselves wholly to these things, you may be enabled so to see for Christ’s sheep that are scattered abroad, that they may be saved through Christ forever.

And from you, my brethren of the laity, we look for much. We look for your forbearance, for we often need it. We look for your prayers that our hands may be upheld. We look for your co-operation, that you would willingly take upon yourselves those secular duties which occasionally press too heavily on the pastor, and that in all matters of finance you would leave him without carefulness by your care on his behalf. We desire for you that, as fathers in the family, masters among your servants, and members of the community, you would help forward the work of the ministry.

If in this Synod we meet as a united and praying body, I have no fear for the result. The advantages we enjoy as members of the Church of England supply great additional means for usefulness. Our Apostolic order and descent, our Scriptural ordinances, and the strong hold our beloved Church maintains over the affections of her members, are a vantage ground from which we may hope to wage successful war against ignorance, irreligion, and vice. But in order to this success we must be united, sympathising, prayerful. Let us be so, and the work of the Lord will go on. And let me remind you, my brethren, that the progress of the work is the one chief thing to be kept in view. (SMH Thursday 6 December, 1866, p. 5)

The membership of the Synod between 1902 and 1995 consisted of one incumbent and two representatives from each parish, the Chancellor, the Registrar, the representatives of St. Paul’s College and a number of other clergy “holding distinct official positions” summoned by the Archbishop, with the same number of laypersons elected by the Synod. The Synod Membership Ordinance 1995 broadly reflected the principles of the original Schedule (i.e., parish representation; incumbents only; clergy to laity in a two-to-one ratio), but also introduced a new category of membership – “Part 6- Chief Executive Officers of Nominated Organisations”. It also limited the number of “nominated ministers” that the Archbishop could summon under Part 7 to “10% of the total number of Parochial Ministers ….” (s.32[2]), which was to be balanced by the same number of “Nominated Laypeople” elected under Part 8.

The Synod Membership Ordinance 1995 has since been amended in 1997, 2000, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2009, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2019, 2021, 2022, and 2024. These amendments have added Indigenous Representation (Part 8A), expanded and amended the categories of persons recognised under Part 9, allowed for “alternates” for clerical and lay representatives, clarified the arrangements for acting rectors, provided for three of the Nominated Laypeople elected under Part 8 to be Heads of Diocesan Schools, and changed the Part 7 calculation to “10% of the total number of Parochial Units” (rather than Parochial Ministers).

Purpose, role and composition

While the concept of a modern synod as we understand it is not found in the Scriptures, this does not lower its importance or value but simply means that its specific purpose, role and composition are not prescribed in Scripture but instead flow out of our common theological convictions. In that light, while a review of the historical role of synods is of some value, the Synod of the Diocese of Sydney will represent the theology and especially ecclesiology of the Diocese of Sydney.

Therefore, the purpose of the Synod could be summarised –

To support the Christian witness of the parishes of the Diocese, as well as the organisations complementing the ministry of the parishes, by making decisions to promote and govern our common life and mission.

In addition to providing a time for diocesan-wide fellowship through shared Bible teaching and prayer it is generally agreed that the role of the Synod of the Diocese of Sydney is five-fold –

1. Receiving reports on the progress of our commonly agreed mission and other issues as well as reports and audited accounts from the diocesan organisations;
2. Fostering accountability on the part of parishes and organisations to the teaching of Scripture, the Anglican formularies and our commonly agreed mission both in policy and practice;
3. Making ordinances for the good governance of the Diocese;
4. Passing resolutions and making policy that express the collective mind of the members; and
5. Electing persons to diocesan bodies (of which there are currently about 50).

It is important to highlight the Synod’s responsibility, expressed in each of those five roles, in the stewardship of our collective resources for the furtherance of the mission of Christ. The Synod, which is primarily a representative gathering of the parishes, determines the financial contribution of the parishes to the activities of the mission and the structures that facilitate it (welfare agencies, theological colleges, central administration, episcopal ministry). It also determines the distribution of the available resources to these various bodies and activities. The Synod also passes ordinances and policies that establish and regulate our diocesan organisations.

One of the difficulties in considering the role, purposes and especially the composition of the Synod is that it does not fit neatly into any one category. The Synod is more than a governing body (e.g., a school council or board of Moore Theological College), yet it is not strictly speaking a “house of representatives”. Instead it falls somewhere between these two types of bodies. While the Synod is similar to a “house of representatives” it differs in the fact that no member of Synod is there to represent specific interests of those they represent (be it parish or organisation) but rather to act in accordance with the best interests of the whole Diocese being answerable to the Synod. However, as a “representative” of a parish or organisation the expression of differing or alternative views arising from individual interests helps inform Synod in its decision making. Every parish has the right and duty to send representatives to the Synod. Historically, this does not take into account the relative size of a parish (i.e. a parish of 1,000 members has the same representation as a parish of 100 members) making the Synod more akin to the Senate than the House of Representatives in the Australian parliament. However, given the comments above it seems that the current model is the most appropriate model.

Assumed in the above purposes and roles is the understanding that the Synod is primarily a representative gathering of the parishes. This is reflected in the longstanding decision of the Synod that all parishes are guaranteed representation on the Synod. Representatives of diocesan organisations, whose ministry complements the work of the parishes, are also included in the Synod membership because of the perspectives they bring that benefit the Synod regarding the wider life, work and mission of the Diocese. However, under the Constitution, the Synod can determine from time to time the composition of its membership across all categories or classes.

In that light, there is also merit in having the involvement and input at Synod of certain diocesan organisations that make a significant contribution to the gospel work in the life of the Diocese (such as Moore Theological College, Anglicare, Anglican schools and Youthworks). One might argue that while the Diocese is a fellowship of parishes, such organisations are joint initiatives of the Diocese, which are shaped and directed through the Synod. Historically this has been reflected in Part 6, by including the CEOs of certain diocesan organisations in the membership of the Synod.

Importantly (and the reason why not all organisations need to be represented at Synod), the primary connection of Synod to diocesan organisations is not through such organisations having members elected or appointed to the Synod. Instead it is through the Synod’s election of Council and Board members who are responsible to exercise governance in accordance with their constituting ordinance passed by the Synod, and answerable to the Synod through the submission of Annual Reports.

Unlike some other dioceses where all clergy are summoned to Synod, only Rectors are invited to the Sydney Synod (by right). This again reflects the priority of viewing the Synod as primarily representative of the parishes. However, Synod benefits from the input of clergy who are not currently Rectors (long-term assistants, chaplains etc). These clergy can be called by the Archbishop under Part 7. Part 8 ensures that for every additional clergy person summoned one additional layperson is also elected. In this way, the membership of Part 7 and Part 8 do increase the proportion of clergy on Synod (given that parishes generally elect 2 lay representatives for every 1 clergy).

However, Synod membership should always be structured such that the overwhelming majority of members are parish representatives. Over the last 100 years, Synod membership has evolved to the point where membership of Synod by non-parochial representatives forms about 10% of the membership. In the light of the history and ecclesiology of the Diocese, this rule of thumb (while not a hard rule) provides a helpful check for determining the appropriate balance of the Synod. That is, non-parochial representatives should generally form no more than about 10% of the membership of the Synod.

Any adjustment to the membership of Synod should take into account that as a result of its size the Synod is already a somewhat unwieldy beast, and as membership grows in number the difficulty increases for members to contribute and recognise the value of their membership.

[ACR: In the original report, a table was provided showing the composition of Synod in 2019. This has been replaced with more up-to-date figures.]

The website of the Sydney Synod lists the membership of Synod as follows:

• The Archbishop is the President of the Synod (the Archbishop cannot vote on any matter before the Synod but may take part in debate)
• Part 4: Ministers licensed to parishes, provisional parishes, recognised churches and provisional  recognised churches (approximately 260 members)
• Part 5: Lay Representatives elected by parishes, provisional parishes, recognised churches and provisional recognised churches (approximately 490 members)
• Part 6: Chief Executive Officers of Organisations, selected by the Standing Committee (7 members)
• Part 7: Other licensed members of the clergy selected by the Archbishop (26 members)
• Part 8: Laypersons elected by the Standing Committee, including three heads of Diocesan schools (26 members)
• Part 8A: Nominated Indigenous Representatives elected by the Sydney Anglican Indigenous Peoples’ Ministry Committee, and the Director of Indigenous Ministry (3 members)
• Part 9: The Chancellor, the Archbishop’s Executive Officer, the Diocesan Secretary (non-voting), senior diocesan clergy, the Principal of Moore Theological College, and representatives of St Paul’s College (13 members)

An implication for governance

The Synod is more than a governing body so general governance principles that apply to the secular world, or even to organisations accountable to the Synod, may not all have direct application, correlation or relevance to the Synod itself. The principles undergirding Synod membership need to be shaped by the fact that the Synod is a hybrid of a governance body and a unicameral legislative body. The Synod has a particular character borne of a range of factors, including theological, historical, legislative, as well as contemporary governance practices/policies. For that reason, Synod’s own Governance Policy for Diocesan Organisations is designed for application to the Boards and Councils answerable to the Synod but, rightly, does not apply to the Synod itself, which is instead governed by its own ordinances.

1.  Anglican Church of Australia Diocese of Sydney, “43/17 Composition, Purpose and Role of Synod (A report from the Standing Committee)” pp. 115–25 in Synod Proceedings: First Ordinary Session of the 52^nd Synod (3 May 2021), docs.sydneyanglicans.net/s/synod-reports. The original wording has been preserved, but some phrasing has been updated for accuracy on the advice of the Diocesan Secretary and some material has been omitted to save space. The report begins with “a review of [past] materials [that] shows that there is no single authoritative statement that defines the purpose or role of the Synod” (117). These past materials include the Church of England Synod Act 1866; the Anglican Church of Australia Constitutions Act 1902, the Synod Membership Ordinance 1995; the Future Form of Synod Meetings preliminary report to the Archbishop (1995), and the Future Form of Synod Meetings report from the Standing Committee (1997). ↩︎