EVERY July the General Synod meets in York to debate issues facing the Church's life and mission.

It agrees budgets, discusses issues facing our church's life and ministry and oversees the drafting and forming of legislation.

The four or five days together in York are full and lively. Those elected come from diverse walks of life. Many sacrifice annual leave to be part of the proceedings and the breadth of experience and specialist knowledge is extensive.

What is abundantly clear, to anyone observing the Synod is that there are wide differences in opinion among the members. We do not speak with one voice on all matters of policy, finance or values. We do nevertheless have a duty to come to a mind on the matters before us and make decisions that affect many not only in this country but at times in the world wide Anglican communion. What we are slowly learning is not only how to agree on issues but also how at times we disagree well.

The press can be quick to pick up on the headline-catching issues such as women bishops and issues in human sexuality. Perhaps less well reported are matters such as authorised forms of worship, ethical investments, education and schools.

What has become apparent to us all is that debate, when dealing with the most controversial, can slip into being adversarial. Then, sadly, people stop listening to one another and instead trade opinions. If unchecked, fear replaces openness and debate metamorphoses from parliament - the genuine speaking to one another - to the defending of positions and party lines.

Debate is necessary and decisions must be made. However openness to one another and space to truly listen in conversation is also vital.

Conscious of this, the Synod this year spent half its time in another mode, namely guided and facilitated conversations. Listening to one another in a variety of different-sized groups enabled new levels of attentiveness and understanding. Firmly held views were not necessarily abandoned but a deeper respect and understanding of the other was achieved. This in turn did much to dispel caricatures, distance and fear.

Disagreement does not disappear but done well removes fear and deprecation of the other.

Synod's experience has its counterparts in our society as a whole. We have a new Prime Minister. The country is embarking on new and uncharted waters. Deep divisions and differences in our nation have come to the fore in recent weeks. Fear of the other can threaten openness and tolerance.

Good government needs to be pursued. In the challenges ahead mine is a plea for good listening and the pursuit of good disagreement that respects and values the other.