Acting primate urges Anglicans to join work of transformation
The church is approaching a time of important decisions—one which Anglicans can and should embrace with hope, Archbishop Anne Germond, acting primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, told Council of General Synod (CoGS) in her opening remarks March 7. Her comments came as a commission established by former primate Archbishop Linda Nicholls recommended major cuts to the size of the church’s organizational committees and governing bodies.
“This is not just tweaks, this is big change,” commission chair Archdeacon Monique Stone told CoGS later that day.
The commission’s 48-page document offers six pathways along which the church could organize work to update and strip down its governance to improve efficiency, clarity and inclusion.
In her speech, Germond encouraged CoGS to see the challenging conversations involved as part of a hopeful story of renewal feeding into the upcoming General Synod national gathering June 23-29. That synod will include discussions of the pathways, the implementation thus far of the “five transformational commitments” made by General Synod at its last meeting in 2023 and the election of a new primate—all of which, Germond said, make this a time of vital spiritual discernment.
“Let us embody bold hope through our words and in our actions as we prepare for this extraordinarily important time,” she said, adding that the church’s leaders and all its members were being invited to participate not just in the rebuilding of a small part of the church, but in its perpetual and holistic transformation. “We’re being constantly invited into that space,” Germond said. “The Church [is] in constant formation, is being built, and our part is to steward that ‘building’ now in this time.
”The commission’s recommendations are aimed at adapting the church to the needs of a smaller membership and a 21st-century social and political landscape. Its report is based on feedback—in the form of 297 responses to an online survey as well as interviews and Zoom meetings with General Synod staff and Anglicans across the country—regarding a set of seven conversation-starting “hypotheses” that the commission put forward in 2023. CoGS voted March 7 to commend the six pathways to June’s General Synod gathering for discussion and action.
The six pathways along which the document recommends the church proceed are:
1. Organizational structure: “Current institutional structures are larger than necessary at every level (General Synod, ecclesiastical provinces, and the number of dioceses),” the document, titled “Creating Pathways,” reads. “This top-heavy structure focuses human and financial resources on maintaining outsized institutions rather than proclaiming the gospel in local communities.”
The focus of its recommendations is what form the church’s governance structures would take if they were being designed for the first time to meet the needs of the church today, said Stone. In addition to changes at the General Synod level, that may involve restructuring at the diocesan and provincial levels, which General Synod does not have the authority to mandate directly, she said. What it can do, however, is play a leadership role in the conversation, encouraging regional governance bodies in the church to cooperate on a unified vision of the new shape of the church.
The report recommends General Synod 2025 give the officers of General Synod the mandate and resources to propose a major revision to the church’s organization which they would discuss at a specially scheduled “Constitution Convention” and begin implementing at the following General Synod in 2028. A working group would be tasked with asking, among other things, how national and provincial structures can be “drastically reduced in size,” and how the number of dioceses can be cut.
2. Management overview and restructuring: During the consultation process, the report states, it became apparent many Anglicans were unclear as to the jurisdiction, responsibilities, functions and accountability mechanisms of General Synod.
As a result, it continues, “Deep frustrations exist amongst members of the wider church who are asked to share their own declining financial resources with the office of General Synod without a clear understanding of what takes place there or where accountability lies.” Meanwhile, staff have experienced frustration as mandates from CoGS, General Synod, department heads and individual Anglicans conflict, the document says
To address these problems, the second pathway proposes a managerial review to align national office departments’ work with the current needs of the church and clarify their mandates and scope of responsibilities to staff , leadership and Anglicans across the country.
3. Inclusion and diversity in decision making: The third pathway describes the current format and procedures of General Synod meetings as failing to be inclusive to people from a variety of cultural backgrounds, incomes, ages and other social and cultural classes. “It was felt the legislative debate format of meetings has left many people feeling left out and created barriers to participation,” the report says, resulting in a system that “continues to attract and privilege older, affluent, white and able-bodied individuals.”
To address this, the pathway recommends the church review and adapt canons to encourage wider participation. It also calls on the church to appoint a national diversity, equity and inclusion team to consider how the church’s processes and structures could be more inclusive to a range of identities and encourage future meetings of General Synod to facilitate wider exchange of ideas and closer cooperation between diverse people.
4. Communications: The fourth pathway incorporates a varied set of perspectives surrounding the Anglican Journal and General Synod’s broader communicative function. These include the Journal’s role as a mechanism of accountability for the national church, its presence as the “only meaningful source of communication” from the wider church available in some areas of the country and concerns about its journalistic independence or the perception that its work can be divisive.
To accomplish these goals, it recommends examining the current mandate, format, and funding model of the communications department. This would include a discussion of the purpose of the Anglican Journal. It also recommends the communications committee of General Synod create a plan for the church’s communications work.
5. Walking in partnership with the Indigenous church: The fifth pathway says that while General Synod and the Indigenous church’s Sacred Circle have made significant progress in agreeing on the principles of walking together, there are still obstacles to overcome.
Among these, the document names uncertainties about the exact relationship between the two organizations, the methods of making joint decisions with two different procedures, remaining distrust of the non-Indigenous church among Indigenous Anglicans and colonial attitudes and lack of awareness of the Indigenous church’s founding principles. “Non-Indigenous Anglicans are hesitant to engage in dialogue and discussion for fear of being considered offensive or racist,” it adds.
The pathway recommends the next primate of the Anglican Church of Canada—to be elected at General Synod in June—and the presiding elder of Sacred Circle produce a shared definition of the partnership between the two churches, explaining what it means for both to be independent and also connected as the Anglican Church of Canada. It also recommends forming a task force of Indigenous and non-Indigenous Anglicans to educate Anglicans on the nature of the Indigenous church and develop methods of decision making, conversation and—if necessary—mediation to discuss past challenges between the two organizations and forge a “good path forward for future work.” This will need to be done in concert with work on the sixth pathway, the report says.
6. Ministry in remote northern communities. This final pathway calls the church to re-examine the funding and functions of the Council of the North, a grouping of northern dioceses that contains many Indigenous communities and receives funding from General Synod. The council’s functions and those of the Indigenous church will need to be delineated, the commission writes, to determine where they do and do not overlap.
To do that, the report says, an in-depth conversation between the Council of the North, General Synod and the Indigenous church will be needed. Likewise, it says, “General Synod must be clear and transparent about its inability to fully fund vital ministry in remote areas.”
Still, it adds, General Synod may be able to make some difference by investing in training and support designed to help remote ministries improve their ability to support themselves. It asks the Council of the North and the other institutions to consider how the national context has changed since the council was established in the 1970s.
CoGS discussed these recommendations with particular attention to what they thought General Synod would agree with and where they might expect pushback. Several members said they believed the church would likely see the urgency of the need for change. Others noted that some members would likely object to what Brenda Brochu, lay representative of the ecclesiastical province of the Northern Lights, described as a “chainsaw approach” to rapid cuts.
