Australian Diocese Endorses Lay Administration of Eucharist
Episcopal News Service. October 21, 1999 [99-161]
(ENS) For the first time in the history of the Anglican Communion, a diocese has voted to allow lay people to preside at the Eucharist.
In a two-to-one secret vote on October 19 the Diocese of Sydney (Australia) approved a five-year trial period which will allow trained lay people to preside at Holy Communion, with the permission of the archbishop and the local parish. An amendment will require that candidates for lay presidency be approved by parish vestry meetings.
After discussing the freedom of laity to preach and lead services, the author of the bill, the Rev. John Woodhouse of St. Ives, stressed the importance of consistency in dealing with lay ministry. He said that, with increased lay involvement in the life of the church, "there is no sound reason" to prohibit them from presiding at the Eucharist because that "obscures the Gospel we preach." He emphasized that "there are times when forms must change."
Archbishop Harry Goodhew of Sydney issued a statement, pointing out that he has a month "to signify assent" to the action. While acknowledging that he "cannot ignore the strength of support for the matter in the synod, at the same time I must keep in mind my constitutional responsibilities for this move for the Anglican Communion throughout the world, and the strain which this might place upon our relationships with other parts of the Anglican Communion. It may also have implications for our ecumenical relationships." He suggested that the practice, if implemented, could "open the parishes of the diocese to actions against them in the courts."
The Anglican Church of Australia's canon law commission ruled in 1995 that the introduction of lay presidency would not be possible under the church's national constitution. An attempt to appeal to the church's Appellate Tribunal was withdrawn by the Diocese of Sydney.
Goodhew said that most major changes in the Anglican family are the result of "one part of the Communion acting unilaterally and then the Communion follows." He offered the ordination of women to the priesthood and the consecration of women as bishops as examples. He had just returned from a visit to the Episcopal Church in the USA (see separate story) to consult with church leaders over the Lambeth Conference resolutions against homosexuality, especially the ordination of openly gay and lesbian priests and the blessing of same-sex unions. "This is more of a challenge to order and spiritual continuity than who might pray the prayer of Thanksgiving in the service of Holy Communion," he said.
During the debate several participants expressed deep concern for the implications of the bill. Bishop Paul Barnett of North Sydney said that, while he was basically in favor of the bill, he worried about the impact it would have on the diocese's relationship with other Evangelical dioceses in the Anglican Communion. "Lambeth showed that the real strength of Anglicanism was in Africa and Asia. But the African and Asian churches derive their orthodoxy from the Book of Common Prayer and the basic conservatism," he said. "My fear is that, by taking this step, we will effectively take ourselves out of the place of influence."
Justice Keith Mason challenged the right of the diocese to take such an action, arguing that the matter belonged on the General Synod level. After the trial period the diocese has the option of endorsing or rescinding its action.
The issue has been simmering for several years and met with significant opposition. Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey has dismissed such a development on several occasions. And the House of Bishops of the Church of England, in its report on Eucharistic Presidency in 1997, affirmed the distinctive ministry of the ordained.
The bishops said that there is an "essential link" between leadership in the community, for which a bishop or priest has been chosen, and presiding at the Eucharist. The report concluded that there are strong theological arguments for sustaining the inherited tradition that the person who presides at the Eucharist needs to be an episcopally ordained priest.
"There is nothing in Scripture, tradition or reason to justify such a move," said Dr. William Franklin, a layman who is dean of Berkeley Divinity School at Yale. "It will obscure the important distinction, the distinctive character, of the office. It is part of the strength of Anglicanism that we make those distinctions," he said. He quickly pointed out, however, that it is not a matter of one order being superior but it would irreparably harm the polity of Anglicanism to blur the distinction." Such a major change would be "without precedence," Franklin said, "and would harm our relations with ecumenical partners, especially the Roman Catholics."