A general synod vote went against compromise proposals, offering safeguards for objectors, put by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York.I'm sure there will be more to come on this one, so stay tuned ... but -- for my money -- it is VERY good news that the Church of England has been willing stand up and "just say no" to this ill-conceived and last ditch effort to "institutionalise intolerance" (as yesterday's Guardian editorial so aptly put it.)
And ... for the record in general and for those who might think I'm being too hard on his Archbishop of Canterburyness in specific ... here (from the BBC piece) is what was rejected in the synod today:
If accepted, these proposals would have created a kind of Orwellian episcopacy making some bishops more equal than others and reducing the Church of England into a 21st century "Animal Farm."They proposed that a female bishop would have full authority in her diocese but "in practice refrain from exercising" certain functions in a parish which objected to her.
A "complementary bishop" would have independent powers, and the powers of the two bishops would be "co-ordinate".
The general synod also voted against an amendment that proposed three new dioceses to cater for objectors to women bishops.
Also proposed in the rejected amendment was the idea that male bishops appointed to minister in these dioceses would declare that they would not participate in the consecration of a woman bishop or priest.
Disaster narrowly averted. Good job, CofE ... Bravo!
6 comments:
Very true. But we haven't seen the last of this.
You are seriously misrepresenting the nature of the Archbishops' amendment. The second part of our Measure to permit women bishops requires all bishops, male and female, "to make and publish a scheme containing arrangements in his or her diocese for the exercise by way of delegation to a male bishop who is a member of the House of Bishops of the diocesan synod of that or another diocese of episcopal ministry which appears to the bishop of the diocese to relate to-
(a) the celebration of the sacraments and other divine service in parishes which request such arrangements in accordanc with section 3, or
(b) the provision of pastoral care to the clergy and parishioners in those parishes.
The words the Archbishops wanted omitted were "way of delegation to" - and frankly this omission was an insignificant gesture not gender-specific at all which would have brought a happy and urgent outcome to our deliberations in York. Not referring to delegation increased ambiguity. But the harm in that is hard to see. I fear the women priests and others who opposed this are placing as much emphasis on words meaning the same thing to different people as Bishop Graham Leonard placed on the proposed mutual re-ordinations whereby the Methodist Church in England was to be reconciled and reunited with the Church of England - a plan proposed by Archbishop Michael Ramsey which Leonard to his eternal shame succeeded in defeating. Most faith claims use ambiguous language which means different things to different people. That is part of the cement that holds a church together.
The amendment was endorsed by 216 votes to 191, with 9 abstentions, but very sadly was defeated in the House of Clergy by 90 noes to 85 ayes with 5 abstentions - because it was a division by houses. Some think that Archbishop Sentamu's second finger-wagging speech in the debate sealed the fate of the amendment. People do not like being bullied. But perhaps it was Rowan Williams's refusal to impose an obligation on the synod to go along with what he proposed and his instruction that people should vote according to conscience. Williams is a good old left-wing democrat who does not pull rank. The schemes are an essential part of holding together the Church of England - an objective about which a number of us in England feel passionate.
Tom Sutcliffe
Lay member 419 (Southwark Diocese) of General Synod of the Church of England
The amendment applied to men and women bishops.The words the Archbishops wanted omitted were "way of delegation to" - and frankly this omission was an insignificant gesture not gender-specific at all which would have brought a happy and urgent outcome to our deliberations in York. Not referring to delegation increased ambiguity. But the harm in that is hard to see.
I fear the women priests and others who opposed this are placing as much emphasis on words meaning the same thing to different people as Bishop Graham Leonard placed on the proposed mutual re-ordinations whereby the Methodist Church in England was to be reconciled and reunited with the Church of England - a plan proposed by Archbishop Michael Ramsey which Leonard to his eternal shame succeeded in defeating. Most faith claims use ambiguous language which means different things to different people. That is part of the cement that holds a church together.
The amendment was endorsed by 216 votes to 191, with 9 abstentions, but very sadly was defeated in the House of Clergy by 90 noes to 85 ayes with 5 abstentions - because it was a division by houses. Some think that Archbishop Sentamu's second finger-wagging speech in the debate sealed the fate of the amendment. People do not like being bullied. But perhaps it was Rowan Williams's refusal to impose an obligation on the synod to go along with what he proposed and his instruction that people should vote according to conscience. Williams is a good old left-wing democrat who does not pull rank. The schemes are an essential part of holding together the Church of England - an objective about which a number of us in England feel passionate.
Tom .. thanks for stopping by to share your perspective and experience from "across the pond."
I remain unconvinced that the amendments were going to accomplish anything other than create a second-class order of bishops ... which makes no sense at all to most within the church and absolutely NONE to those outside the church.
May God continue to bless you and all who struggle with the challenge of being the Body of Christ in this 21st century as we seek to proclaim God's love, justic and compassion to absolutely everybody.
Post a Comment