Christopher Landau reported on the latest developments in the wake of the 17 men bishops letter for the BBC Sunday radio programme:
A senior churchman has warned that hundreds of priests may leave the Church of England if women are ordained as bishops. Andrew Burnham, the Bishop of Ebbsfleet [one of the two PEVs for the Canterbury Province] told the Sunday Times that he would quit along with a possible eight hundred priests if proper provision is not made for them.
The Church is on the verge of a major vote on women bishops. Tomorrow, the general synod, meeting in York, will debate whether it’s the right time to start removing the legal obstacles which currently prevent women becoming bishops. It had been thought that the motion would pass easily – but that’s now in some doubt. A large group of bishops has written to the Church press arguing that it would be pre-emptive to act now, before the church has had sufficient time to debate the issue. Interview with reporter Christopher Landau in York.
Listen here with Real Audio (5.5 minutes)
Here is the Sunday Times report mentioned above:
Christopher Morgan Churchmen on brink of exodus over women bishops (this has an unrelated tidbit about Lord Carey at the end of the story).
And the BBC carried this story, Clergy warn against women bishops based on the above two items (and a few tidbits of synod news thrown in at the end). Later the BBC also published this, Women bishops have ‘vast support’.
Fulcrum has published a major article by Colin Craston, a former chair of the Anglican Consultative Council, Women Bishops and the Anglican Communion Process which has links to many relevant ACC resolutions.
Church Society, not content with its earlier diatribe, has issued a further one, just in case you were not clear what CS thinks.
Equally unsurprisingly, Forward in Faith UK supports the bishops’ letter.
In Colin Craston’s article, he clearly shows the difference in the ACC process between the consecration of women bishops and the consecration of men to the episcopate in sexual relations outside of marriage: ‘At the 1988 Lambeth Conference, with ECUSA likely to appoint a woman bishop, it was resolved “That each Province respect the decision and attitudes of other Provinces in the ordination or consecration of women in the episcopate, without such respect necessarily indicating acceptance of the principles involved, maintaining the highest possible degree of communion with the Provinces that differ”. Recognising the hurt that could be caused on… Read more »
I’m not sure how this counts as “diatribe”: “The recent Annual General Meeting of Church Society reiterated the traditional mainstream evangelical position in relation to ordained ministry within the Church. The following motion was passed unanimously. This meeting resolves that: 1) the Scriptures teach that the office of presbyter (priest) should be occupied by men alone; 2) the 1992 legislation to allow the ordination of women as Priests was therefore contrary to Scripture, it fractured the Church and caused many loyal Anglicans to leave; 3) a decision to consecrate women as Bishops will compound this problem; 4) Church Society will… Read more »
The first BBC article there makes me wonder just what the nature of bishops *is* in anglican / CoE circles. There’s a clear undertone of some acting like it’s a male club perpetuating itself over the centuries, there.
Someone let me know where God comes into the arguments?
Dave, 1) The Primates Meeting is a new innovation: it does not have the 100-plus year status of Lambeth 2) +Gene Robinson had *already been elected by the Diocese of New Hampshire, and consented by the General Convention*, when the Primates met (a woman bishop-elect had not achieved similar standing as of Lambeth ’88) Moreover: 3) The ’03 Primates meeting was *specifically-engineered* to trump the defacto status that Lambeth ’88 had established (and Lambeth ’98 had *not* explicitly-contradicted): that each province decide by their *own autonomous processes* who they ought to have as their bishops Your argument does not stand,… Read more »
JCF wrote: “Your argument does not stand, Dave.” Hi JCF – it woz Graham that argued about the Primates warning ECUSA, not me! But I must say you just seem to be trying to pick and choose your arguements and justifications to suit your predetermined position ! Who cares if one instrument of unity was established before another ? Does history add authority ? Maybe it does… In which case how come you argue that recent developments (in thinking on sexuality for instance) trump earlier biblical statements ? And it would be ridiculous to argue that each Province can choose… Read more »