A grassroots response

Sir, — As a Methodist minister, I feel I should apologise on behalf of my denomination to Bishop Colin Buchanan for the Anglican-Methodist Covenant.

It is indeed a meaningless agree ment, but I feel that this is owing to the foolishness of Methodists rather than the indifference of Anglicans.

In 2003, our districts and circuits voted by clear majorities to endorse the Covenant, and this duly happened, even though it was always clearly stated that the Covenant would lead to the introduction of bishops to British Methodism.

Accordingly, in 2006, the Meth odist Conference sent down a document to the districts with lots of different options for which Methodist post-holders should become bishops. The Newcastle district where I am a minister was not untypical in sending the docu ment back with a flea in its ear. We voted more than two to one against having any bishops in British Methodism on principle, and the whole issue was quietly dropped.

The Methodist Conference has said for decades that we are willing to “accept episcopacy into our system”. If this was going to happen, it would have happened years ago. Unfortunately, the kind of people who find the Conference exciting are not at all representative of the ordinary Methodists in the districts. (I’m sure your General Synod is very different.)

This has left us in a farcical position. The Methodist Conference wants to take the next step, but the same people in the districts who voted in favour of the Covenant three years before have since voted against any conceivable way of implementing it.

The Joint Implementation Commission remains in limbo, trying once again to find a form of Bishop acceptable to the wider Methodist Connexion, which is about as easy as a butcher trying to cater a vegetarian banquet. It’s time to stop their impossible task and move on.

DAVID E. FLAVELL
39 Elvaston Road
Hexham NE46 2HD