General Synod opened at 3 pm today. The following reports appeared over the weekend and earlier today.
Jonathan Wynne-Jones in the Telegraph Historic plans to introduce women bishops rejected by key traditionalist leaders
BBC Synod to discuss women bishops
Trevor Timpson at the BBC Waiting for the women bishops
Ruth Gledhill and Sean O’Neill in The Times Bishops resist moves to outlaw BNP membership
Ekklesia has Bishop backs ban on Church racism
Also at Ekklesia Church of England Synod to tackle key economic and social issues
George Pitcher in his Telegraph blog writes Will the General Synod ban golliwogs?
and Anglicans at their best when they’re boring
The Times also has Four decades of rule: How the General Synod works
My teaching Union banned BNP mebership…but are Christians next , if we do not support the political correctness of the liberal establishment?
The PEVs seem to be under the misapprehension that they would be invited to become the ‘complementary bishops’ under the proposed plan, but that does not follow at all. If the proposal is accepted their role may be discontinued; and new people interviewed for the new role. Rather a good idea as the PEVs seem implacable in their opposition to the mind of the Church as expressed in Synod. They seem to imagine that these temporary ‘pastoral’ provisions are meant to give future generations the option of opposing the ministry of ordained women. I find the flying bishops’ use of… Read more »
Rt Rev Keith Newton, the Bishop of Richborough: “Under these plans, there is no future for our constituency because they are based on a woman bishop giving us permission.”
Rt Rev Martyn Jarrett, the Bishop of Beverley: “It doesn’t make sense to be a bishop who acts at the delegation of episcopal authority I do not accept.”
Or in other words, “YOU’RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME!”
Skip the cover-blather re Scripture and Tradition. The reality is, these are childish little boys. So sad.
Lord have mercy!
“According to the report to be debated by the Synod, the ‘flying’ bishops would no longer be autonomous, but would have to accept the authority of the women bishop.”
Oh, the shame, the horror, the humiliation of it all! I mean how could any right-thinking male accept the authority of a woman! I wonder how many of these traditionalists thought Margaret Thatcher did a bang up job as PM?
That’s an interesting question. How many of these bishops owe their appointments to Mrs. Thatcher?
“The Rt Rev Martyn Jarrett, the Bishop of Beverley, said that he could see no way that he could act as a complementary bishop. “It doesn’t make sense to be a bishop who acts at the delegation of episcopal authority I do not accept. It lacks theological coherence,” he said. “The present position [with flying bishops] is bearable, but the new proposals are not.” – Jonathan Wynne-Jones – Telegraph What makes the Bishop of Beverley think that he would be asked to be a complementary Bishop? Anyway, as an Anglican Bishop, within the Church of England, it seems silly that… Read more »
Synod is going to be bloody. I wish it weren’t so. Obviously, I hope the proposals go through. I think many FiF people have played a bad game (not our friend Bloomenblue [apologies if name wrong]). I don’t think the position of Jarrett and co. is ‘incoherent’. Perhaps if and when the proposals go through, people will have time to take stock and there can be some sort of healing. I don’t think it helps now or will help then if reference is made to ‘temporary pastoral provisions’. Supporters of WO have to be generous, have also to ‘support’ whose… Read more »
Oh, oh… the Culture Wars are coming to England ;=)
By coincidence, yesterday (9th February) was the 450th anniversary of the Bill being laid before Parliament for annexing the supremacy of the Church to the Crown. After 3 months of debate, the Acts of Supremacy and of Uniformity received the Royal Assent on 8th May 1559. While the Act of Supremacy did not transfer to the Sovereign the power to minister religious rites, the Sovereign is the supreme head of the Church of England in all matters spiritual and ecclesiastical as well as temporal. It is ironic that when people stand up in General Synod this week to argue against… Read more »
The Coronation of an English monarch is more properly a service of sanctifying or hallowing of the Sovereign. The form of service is the same as the consecration of a bishop except that whereas a bishop is consecrated by the laying on of hands, the Sovereign is “anointed, blessed and consecrated” with holy oil. After an introduction, both services begin with the Office of Holy Communion, down to the Creed. There then follows the consecration, after which both bishop and Sovereign are invested. First comes the amice, then the colobium sindonis (the rochet or alb). Then the girdle is fastened… Read more »
“It must nevertheless be difficult for people who cannot recognise the ministry of women priests and bishops to belong to a Church that has a consecrated woman as its head.” – Terence Dear – I think, Terence Dear, that you would find that most Anglicans, like most other Christians, see that Jesus Christ is Supreme Head of the Church, Her Britanic Majesty being only titular Head, and a very good one too. I think that even Roman Catholics would acknowledge Christ as Supreme Head of the Church – a title which even caps that of Supreme Pontiff. Incidentally, Terence Dear,… Read more »