Day 1
Bill No 2 Seeks to Provide Clarity for Long Term Ill Health in Serving Clergy
A Bill which seeks to provide clarity and compassion by aligning Constitutional provision and Dignity in Church Life financial provision for when clergy find themselves in a situation where they cannot continue in ministry due to long term ill health was introduced at General Synod this afternoon (Thursday May 7).
Bill No 2, in the names of Canon Nicola Halford and Helen Arnopp, seeks to amend Chapter IV of the Constitution of the Church of Ireland. It aims to ensure that members of the clergy or bishops may not remain on leave on the grounds of ill–health for an indefinite period of time. As with Bill No 1, it arises from the work of the Working Group to Review Clergy Tenure.
Currently, members of the clergy can remain on sick leave indefinitely while still receiving a stipend and residing in the glebe with no requirement to bring an application under the Clergy Permanent Health Insurance Policy (Clergy PHI).
If the Bill is enacted, a member of the clergy who is still under Normal Retirement Age who has not been performing or substantially performing the duties of his or her office due to ill health will cease to receive a stipend and cease to occupy the glebe (or other residence connected with their office) unless they have applied for Clergy PHI, in which case, they may continue to receive their stipend and reside in the glebe until their Clergy PHI application has been determined. This Bill also introduces a new mechanism whereby a bishop may trigger a Clergy PHI application on behalf of a member of the clergy, dependent on the individual circumstances.
The provisions of the Bill also extend to cases where a bishop or archbishop may be on sick leave for an extended period of time.
Proposing the Bill, Canon Halford admitted it was a difficult subject noting that when someone enters ordained ministry, they do so out of a sense of calling and vocation, with the hope of a long and fruitful ministry. But she said not all ministries unfold as hoped and physical and mental ill health can affect members of the clergy.
“This Bill is about ensuring that when ill–health arises, we respond with clarity, fairness, and compassion, for both clergy and the parishes they serve,” she explained. She said that both current systems – one outlined in the Constitution and the other in the Dignity in Church Life scheme – were incomplete. One allows action to be initiated by lacks reliable financial support while the other provides strong financial provision but cannot be initiated in the same way or fully align with the Constitution.
“The purpose of this Bill is to bring these two strands together. It combines the authority of the constitutional process with the financial support already provided through Dignity in Church Life and PHI arrangements, creating a single, coherent pathway that is workable, fair, and sustainable,” Canon Halford stated.
Seconding Bill No 2, Helen Arnopp said one of its key strengths is that it balances responsibility with compassion. “It ensures that clergy who are unable to continue in ministry are supported with dignity, through the provision of ongoing financial support and pension contributions,” she stated. “At the same time, the Bill brings important clarity for parishes and dioceses. Prolonged uncertainty can be difficult for parish life, both pastorally and financially. By setting out clearer expectations around stipend and process, this proposal helps to ensure stability and fairness for congregations as well as clergy.”
She added that the Bill preserves the possibility that, where health improves, a return to ministry may be considered. She also acknowledged the strength of the shared financial model which underpins the proposal with the PHI scheme, funded across the Church, being a clear expression of care and responsibility. The Bill recognises the current difficulties which lies not in lack of provision but in lack of alignment, she explained.
Speaking to the principle of the Bill, Brigid Barrett (Glendalough) asked if the leaflet relating to the duties of clergy would also reference the duties of bishops and archbishops. She asked if there was a definition of performance of clergy duties.
Paul Dundas (Derry and Raphoe) asked about the periods of illness allowed.
Dr Scott Brown (Representative Body) supported the Bill. He suggested these situations usually involved a considerable amount of time and parishioners may ask what would be said under charity regulations if they suggested that the Church is misappropriating their funds by paying the stipend of a cleric who is not working. He also commended the Clergy PHI scheme. He said the person who is in this position may lack insight and does not know they are as unwell as they are. Therefore, they may not access a scheme such as PHI through which they may be rehabilitated.
Bill No 2 passed its first and second stages and will go to final consideration on Saturday morning.