The question of clergy employment comes up yet again. We are told once again that clergy are not employed, even though there have been recent circumstances where clergy have been treated as though they are employed in the law.
A question is asked as to whether or not we need to deal with every employment issue seperately or whether the church could not pass a canon simply according the clergy employment rights.
We are told that the clergy overwhelmingly want this to be dealt with on an issue by issue basis and not by a single enabling canon.
I get up to ask whether or not I have missed this consultation.
I feel sure that question has not been asked of the clergy. I am told that lots of consultation has taken place.
hmm.
I think I missed it too but suspect it may have taken place before we were ordained. time for another questtionnaire methinks.
I have no recollection of being asked either Ruth, and a member of G&G in orders for over 30 years was certain he had never been asked.
The odd thing about this is the certainty which those on the Committee had in their view that the clergy had been consulted extenstively and had always overwhelmingly supported dealing with things on an issue by issue basis rather than simply saying that the practises of the church would mirror those of the law of the land in employment matters.
It is difficult for me to believe that we were being intentionally misled and that people were standing up to deliberately mislead synod with bald lies. I’ve a lot of respect for those who do this kind of work on such committees in the church.
I think they genuinely did believe that they had consulted people and that we all agree with them.
However, I’m still puzzled that what was being said seems so far from what what (at least some) clergy think is true.