Fallout from assisted-dying vote
From Fr Benjamin Edwards
Madam, — The Assisted Dying Bill now presents a profound challenge to our understanding of life, suffering, and compassion. While the desire to alleviate immense suffering, beyond mortal sanity, and to offer mercy to those nearing the end of their lives, along with their carers, is deeply understandable and speaks to a natural human empathy, this proposed legislation also introduces significant theological and moral dilemmas regarding the sanctity of life.
From a faith perspective, life is often viewed as a sacred gift, divinely given and not ours to prematurely end. This conviction underpins a deep concern that, in a world where ethical and moral decision-making seem to be at an all-time low, the safeguards intended to prevent abuse of such a process might ultimately prove fragile. The worry is that what begins as an act of compassion for a few could, over time, erode the intrinsic value placed on all human life, leading down a path where the vulnerable are increasingly at risk.
As this Bill has now progressed, it compels us, as people of faith, and particularly as priests, to consider our role. Can this be an evolution of compassion in a way that respects divine principles while acknowledging profound human suffering? Even in our disapproval of assisted dying itself, the Church is called to minister to those in despair and pain.
This raises crucial questions. What counsel, comfort, and spiritual support can we offer to individuals and families facing these agonising choices? How can we be present and provide ministry in situations we would rather not see happen, upholding our theological convictions while demonstrating radical empathy? A trained and rational debate within the Church on these points is not just desirable, but essential to discern our compassionate response.
Yet a profound sorrow lingers at the sequencing of these legislative efforts. It is deeply concerning that the push for assisted dying has gained such momentum before significant and vast improvements into palliative care have been fully realised. From a faith-informed view, true compassion and respect for life demand that every effort be made to alleviate suffering through comprehensive care, pain management, and holistic support.
My fervent hope is that substantial improvement and investment is made into hospice and palliative care simultaneously with, and ideally preceding, any decision on the beginning of assisted dying. This prioritises a life-affirming approach that aligns more closely with the sanctity of life and the inherent dignity of every person, reflecting a truly compassionate and faith-informed society.
BENJAMIN EDWARDS
Church Road, Great Barton
Bury St Edmunds IP31 2QR
From A. Wills
Madam, — I am grateful that MPs voted in favour of assisted dying for terminally ill people who request it. I believe in a compassionate God who never intended humans to suffer painful, long drawn-out deaths from cancer and degenerative diseases — some of which may be caused by modern life.
Studies show that around 70 per cent of Anglicans and 82 per cent of the public are in favour of doctor-assisted help to die at the end of life, as some have seen a loved-one suffer greatly. Of course, no one should have an assisted death if they don’t want one. Doctors intervene in other life and death situations — creating IVF babies and performing heart transplants — so why shouldn’t they intervene at life’s end, if a patient requests this and safeguards are in place? Early Victorians believed that pain relief in childbirth was a sin, until Queen Victoria requested it for her births, and now it is welcomed. Many people would enjoy their lives more if they didn’t have the concern that they might have a long, painful death and loss of dignity.
We don’t want our loved ones to see us suffering, as we want to leave them with happier memories. If a patient knew the day they were going to die, they could arrange to have loved-ones present, perhaps with a chaplain who could pray. We believe we’re going to a better place to be with Jesus.
A. WILLS
67 Dulverton Road
Middlesex HA4 9AF
Bishop Jackson and the call for parish funding
From Emma Robarts
Madam, — Thank God for the Bishop of Hereford, indeed (Letters, 20 June). I applaud his wish and that of his episcopal colleagues to receive funding from the Church Commissioners, direct, in order to keep up or even increase their stipendiary clergy numbers, rather than via grants for projects with hoops to jump through.
His stance not only aligns with the Church’s own growth studies, human psychology, and common sense, as he and your correspondents note. Avoiding a slide into the multi-parish doom loop is also consistent with the canon-law duties of bishops to supply priests to the people. In Canon C18.6, the law states that each diocesan bishop “shall provide, as much as in him lies, that in every place within his diocese [region] there shall be sufficient priests to minister the word and sacraments to the people that are therein. . . ”
The phrase “as much as in him lies” was inserted to avoid the requirement being unrealistically absolute. However, lawyers posit that, as a legal requirement, this cannot be circumvented by relying on a shortage of cash which results from discretionary spending elsewhere. Until legal duties are first discharged, a diocese should not spend elsewhere.
A bishop has not provided enough clergy if those in post are too stretched to meet what Canon C24 in turn requires of them.
EMMA ROBARTS
Address supplied
From the Revd Frank Wright
Madam, — The Church Times of 20 June carries an article reporting the criticism the Bishop of Hereford has made of large grants for major mission projects. Criticism of the bishop’s views was reported in the same article from a spokesperson for Church House. The view from Church House was very narrow in its interpretation of strategy. The strategy, which is fast being lost, is that of parish ministry delivered by people trained and authorised, who are on the spot and ready to respond to those moments when pastoral care turns into evangelism and who equip the mission of the baptised. Ministry is about service, and mission is about drawing others into a relationship with God which builds and transcends human divisions. There will always be a place for large initiatives, but they are not everything. Please, Church House, broaden your vision of mission.
I attended a licensing of new Readers on Saturday. At the point where the candidates were asked to give obedience to “those set over you”, the licensing bishop changed these words to “those set under you”, thereby putting the bishop neatly back into the place of “pastor of the pastors”, rather than their manager.
FRANK WRIGHT
Blackberry Cottage, 55 London Road
Milborne Port
Sherborne DT9 5DW
Sacramental ministry in our parish churches
From the Revd Martin Jewitt
Madam, — In Features, 13 June, the Bishop of Sheffield reminds us of the “exact balance between the ministry of the sacrament of holy communion, and the ministry of the word”, as clearly stated in the Ordering of Priests in the Book of Common Prayer. Deacons are to assist in both, and also preach in the absence of the priest “if (s)he be admitted thereto by the Bishop”, and the concluding rubric indicates the expectation that ordination to the priesthood would follow in due time. So, BCP doesn’t envisage a permanent office of preaching without a sacramental ministry.
This balance of word and sacrament became compromised with the subsequent office of Lay Reader. While the call in some evangelical circles for lay presidency is problematic for Anglican tradition, it would restore the balance of word and sacrament to accompany all licences to preach with an authority to preside at communion, after due training. Whether that would be called ordination would have to be decided.
MARTIN JEWITT
12 Abbott Road
Folkestone CT20 1NG
From Ann Brumfit
Madam, — Are there many other Church Times readers who find the ubiquity of the communion service a deterrent to church attendance? As a cradle member of the Church of England who, since Honest to God, has explored my faith with Don Cupitt, Richard Holloway, the Quaker David Boulton, and others, I no longer regard myself as a sacramentalist and look back with nostalgia to the time when churchgoing did not involve the exclusion entailed in the communion service. Working abroad for many years, I was unaware of the Parish Communion Movement (PCM) and, since reading your article, realise that it is this movement by which I have (in your words) been quietly “unchurched”.
I very rarely attend church these days. For my part, I would suggest that the decline in church numbers may be linked with to the narrow horizons imposed by the PCM.
ANN BRUMFIT
24 Oakfield Drive
Reigate RH2 7HA
Technique as well as technology needed in church
From the Revd Dr Jennifer Zarek
Madam, — Angela Tilby highlights a problem that seems usually not to be acknowledged, let alone addressed, in public worship (Comment, 20 June). In too many churches, too much of what is said is inaudible or unintelligible.
For over nearly 50 years, I was acoustics and sound-system adviser to numerous DACs and sundry cathedrals. I estimate that, while the technology of sound reinforcement has enormously improved, the standard of speaking has deteriorated far more. There seems to be no element of voice tuition in the training of any worship leaders, and congregations are too polite or stoic to provide feedback. It is notable when after a service, the comment is not a polite “Nice sermon, vicar”, but a triumphant “We could hear you!” I wonder why they keep attending, if they cannot usually hear.
The problem is not only one of microphone use, but that even the best microphone system is dependent on the quality of the input. If the user does not learn the basics of enunciation, pace, breath control and maintaining flow, they will be unintelligible whether or not there is a microphone. Quite often, decent voice technique makes the use of a microphone unnecessary for most hearers (though still valuable to provide input for an induction loop for hearing-aid users). There is a prevalent custom of dropping the voice at the end of every sentence, or even phrase, so that the overall sense is lost and there is a faint sense of seasickness from the constant bobbing up and down.
The saying in computing used to be: “Garbage in, garbage out”. Rather earlier, St Paul asked the Corinthians “How will the people say ‘Amen’ . . . when they don’t know what you are saying?”
An essential part of training needs to be making oneself audible. There is little point in having the best spiritual and theological competence if the fruit of it cannot be heard.
Years ago, I had to advise a Cathedral Chapter concerned about their sound-reinforcement system. I said: “Gentlemen, we could fix the sound system, but I’m afraid we can’t fix your bishop.” More joyously, I was able recently to congratulate a bishop on exemplary vocal technique; I learned that her mother is an actress and would sit at the back of the church and give notes.
It is not that sessions on the use of microphones “might be time well spent”, but that tuition in the use of the voice (and then the microphone) is essential. Please, could worship leaders all enlist an actress or other critical friend, for the sake of their patient congregations.
JENNIFER ZAREK
Horsedale House, Silver Street
Huggate
York YO42 1YB
From the Revd James Dwyer
Madam, — Angela Tilby suggests clergy may need microphone training. Quite so. One of the perils of modern amplification is the uncertainty of knowing whether things are working as they should be, leading to the always awkward question of “Am I switched on?” I vividly remember one service where I sat next to a long-retired priest. The preacher got up to speak, and started by asking if he was switched on. “He shouldn’t worry,” the older priest muttered to me. “He hasn’t been switched on for years.”
JAMES DWYER
The Vicarage
Chapel Road
Flackwell Heath
HP10 9AA
No longer welcome
From the Revd Graham Claydon
Madam, — In common with other recently displaced ex-Prebendaries of St Paul’s Cathedral, I have recently received a letter from the Bishop of London on thick and creamy paper absolving my title of Prebend Emeritus. Am I alone in wondering whether she has the authority to do this? Historically, we Prebends would have received the income from our Prebend for life. In my day, this was commuted for a bun, which I humbly received in lieu of the riches of Finsbury. Rather than a letter, maybe we ex-Emeriti Prebends should be invited to submit our buns to the bishop who would then solemnly hand them to the Church Commissioners with all the aplomb that has classically adorned the role of Prebend. After all, one of the blessings of prebending at St Paul’s was quiet, yet dignified, laughter at the goings on in the vestry and on stage.
GRAHAM CLAYDON
Acre End, Tangmere
Chichester PO20 2HW
Clergy shortages, and their conditions of service
From Peter Taylor
Madam, — The Very Revd Dr Michael Higgins says, in his article “Strategy to tackle clergy shortage is needed” (Comment, 20 June): “Any company with a clear shortage of significant staff takes rapid action to address the matter.” It would be more accurate to say that any organisation with a clear shortage of significant staff, and which intends to have a long-term future, takes rapid action to address the matter.
PETER TAYLOR
Cothercott Hill Farm
Pulverbatch
Shrewsbury SY5 8DJ
From the Revd Richard Adams
Madam, — It has been encouraging to hear about the new plan for clergy well-being, encompassing a sizeable stipend increase, and some important pension corrections. Whilst the money is very important, clergy well-being involves a whole lot more. What about changing priorities for bishops and archdeacons to focus on contact with and support to parish clergy? I hear many stories of clergy who never hear from senior staff unless there’s a problem or they’re being told to adopt a new initiative. Regular personal contact would be a real step forward.
RICHARD ADAMS
Tros y Mor, Llangoed
Beaumaris, Anglesey
A mathematical formula for multiplication
From the Revd Jonathan Frais
Madam, — In reply to the Revd Stephen Collier (Letters, 20 June), the difference can be seen in a gold bar. Renewal is when you polish it up, revitalisation is when you stand it up, multiplication is when you double it up, and revival is when you put it up on a wall and it is still there the next day.
JONATHAN FRAIS
11 Coverdale Avenue
Bexhill-on-Sea TN39 4TY
