Following Synod’s vote to adjourn, the House of Bishops will reconsider its amendment to clause 5(1)(c) of the draft measure at its meeting on 12/13 September. The General Synod will meet in November (19-21) in London to resume the Final Approval debate in the light of the House of Bishops’ consideration.
There are two official press releases on this morning’s business and its consequences.
Latest on women bishops legislation from General Synod
General Synod – Summary of business conducted on Monday 9th July AM
Women and the Church (WATCH) has issued this press release.
Press Release 9th July 2012
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Adjournment gives bishops opportunity for the House of Bishops to reconsider Clause 5(1)(c)
WATCH is relieved that General Synod has today adjourned the final vote on consecrating women as bishops in the Church of England. 288:144 with 15 abstentions.
There has been widespread opposition to the inclusion of an amended Clause 5 and this adjournment gives the House of Bishops the opportunity to reconsider.
WATCH hopes that the bishops will withdraw Clause 5(1)(c) so as to allow General Synod the opportunity to vote on legislation that is as close as possible to that which was approved by 42 out of 44 dioceses.
WATCH’s petition asking the House of Bishops to withdraw Clause 5(1)(c) has now attracted nearly 6,000 signatures after just over a week See link on our website.
The Reverend Rachel Weir, Chair of WATCH, said
5 CommentsWe are very relieved that the House of Bishops now has the chance to reconsider Clause 5(1)c and we hope that there will be a thorough consultation process over the summer so that whatever is presented to General Synod in November keeps faith with the dioceses that voted overwhelmingly for the unamended Measure.
General Synod has just voted to adjourn its debate on final approval of the legislation to allow women to be bishops. The vote was 288 in favour of the adjournment and 144 against with 15 recorded abstentions. The measure will now go back to the House of Bishops, and return to General Synod at a later group of sessions.
In more detail, immediately after the motion
That the Measure entitled “Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure” be finally approved.
was moved by the Bishop of Manchester, the Bishop of Dover proposed an adjournment to allow the House of Bishops to reconsider their amendment to clause 5:
That the debate be now adjourned to enable the new clause 5(1)(c) inserted by the House of Bishops into the draft Measure entitled “Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure” to be reconsidered by the House of Bishops.
It was this latter motion that was carried.
11 CommentsThe General Synod debate on women bishops will start at about 10.00 am this morning. Here are some more predictions of what might happen.
BBC Women bishops: Church’s General Synod to delay vote
John Bingham in the Telegraph Women bishop vote set to be suspended
Avril Ormsby of Reuters Church of England seen delaying women bishop vote
And here are some reports on some of yesterday’s business
0 CommentsLizzie Davies in The Guardian Church report on riots warns about effects of cuts
Madeleine Davies in the Church Times Christians should show their faith in public, Synod says
Cal Flyn in the Telegraph Archbishop warns followers ahead of crucial vote
Lizzy Davies in The Guardian Church of England vote on women bishops likely to be postponed
Ed Thornton in the Church Times Don’t get depressed, Dr Williams tells Church of England
Here is the official summary of today’s business.
General Synod – Summary of business conducted on Sunday 8th July PM
Ed Thornton writes in the Church Times Whittam Smith ‘shocked’ by banking scandal.
Edward Malnick writes in the Telegraph: Women bishops must be given full powers, MPs warn.
Lizzy Davies writes in The Observer that Women bishops campaign approaches crucial synod vote.
BBC has Women bishops vote facing postponement at general synod.
The BBC Radio 4 programme Sunday this morning presented this special programme from General Synod in York.
The Archbishop of Canterbury gave this speech on Saturday in the debate on World-shaped Mission.
The Archbishop of Canterbury preached this sermon in York Minster this morning.
Lizzy Davies in The Guardian reports on the Archbishop’s sermon: Rowan Williams issues warning ahead of women bishops vote.
4 CommentsIt was announced at lunchtime today that the Steering Committee for the draft legislation on Women in the Episcopate will seek permission to move a motion to adjourn tomorrow’s debate to allow the House of Bishops to reconsider the amendment that they made to clause 5 of the draft measure. Here is the press release.
3 CommentsLatest on women bishops legislation – General Synod July 8
08 July 2012Permission to be sought to move adjournment motion
The Steering Committee for the draft legislation on Women in the Episcopate has indicated that it intends to seek permission from the Chair of the debate on the Final Approval of the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure to move a motion adjourning the debate to enable the House of Bishops to reconsider the amendment made by the House to clause 5 of the draft Measure.
Permission will be sought to move the motion during the Final Approval debate on Monday morning (July 9).
If permission is given to move the motion, and the Synod passes it, the effect will be to adjourn the Final Approval debate on the draft Measure until the House of Bishops can meet (probably in September). When it does so it will have power to amend the part of the text of the draft Measure previously altered by the amendment it made in May to clause 5.
Following the reconsideration by the House, the Final Approval debate would be resumed at the next group of sessions of the General Synod – the earliest date for which would be in November this year.
Notes
The two amendments made by the House of Bishops in May (see press release).
The amendment made by the House to clause 5
The House accepted an amendment to express in the Measure one of the three principles which the House had agreed in December. This amendment adds to the list of matters on which guidance will need to be given in the Code of Practice that the House of Bishops will be required to draw up and promulgate under the Measure. It will now need to include guidance on the selection by the diocesan bishop of the male bishops and priests who will minister in parishes whose parochial church council (‘PCC’) has issued a Letter of Request under the Measure. That guidance must be directed at ensuring that the exercise of ministry by those bishops and priests will be consistent with the theological convictions as to the consecration or ordination of women which prompted the issuing of the Letter of Request. Thus the draft Measure now addresses the fact that for some parishes a male bishop or male priest is necessary but not sufficient.
Amendment to Clause 8
The House accepted an amendment making it clear that the use of the word ‘delegation’ in clause 2 of the draft Measure relates to the legal authority which a male bishop acting under a diocesan scheme would have, and is distinct from the authority to exercise the functions of the office of bishop that that person derived from his ordination. For example, when another bishop ordains someone to the priesthood he needs permission to do from the bishop of the diocese (“delegation”), but the power to ordain derives from his consecration as a bishop. The amendment also makes clear that delegation should not be taken as divesting the diocesan bishop of any of his or her authority or functions.
Diarmaid MacCulloch writes for The Guardian about Women bishops: Jesus was happy with female apostles. What is the CofE’s problem?
Madeleine Davies writes for the Church Times that Archbishop defends gay-marriage response.
Lizzy Davies writes for The Guardian that Church of England votes to ban clergy from discriminatory political parties.
Edward Malnick writes in the Telegraph: Archbishop of Canterbury: Government has no right to introduce gay marriage.
Gavin Drake writes in the Church Times: Ban on clergy in racist groups approved.
Official summary of Saturday’s business
General Synod – Summary of business conducted on Saturday 7th July AM
General Synod – Summary of business conducted on Saturday 7th July PM
On 3 July The Times published a letter from a group of bishops, led by the Right Rev Geoffrey Rowell, Bishop of Gibraltar in Europe, in which they write:
We are wholeheartedly committed to honouring those women whom the Church of England calls to the ordained ministry. We ask, too, for that proper respect for conscience which will continue to allow all traditions in our Church to flourish without detriment to one another.
The original copy of the letter is behind The Times paywall, but it has now been published elsewhere, including here on the Better Together website.
8 CommentsGeneral Synod – Summary of business conducted on Friday 6th July PM.
This summary also includes links to audios of the sessions.
0 CommentsThe Press Association CofE to vote on BNP membership ban
BBC Church of England to ban race group membership
Paul Vale in The Huffington Post: Women Bishops: Church Of England To Vote On Female Ordination
Benny Hazlehurst writes about last night’s Questions & Answers (& more Questions).
1 CommentWATCH (Women And The Church) issued this press release this morning.
4 CommentsLoyal Anglicans say “Enough!”
WATCH petition gains over 5,000 signatures in its first weekTo the House of Bishops [of the Church of England]: Withdraw Clause 5(1)c
Today WATCH (Women And The Church) sent the interim results of their Petition, to the House of Bishops in advance of their emergency meeting this morning.
The Petition calls upon the House of Bishops to withdraw their last minute amendment to clause 5(1)c which many feel will entrench discrimination against women in the Established Church and place a permanent question mark over the validity of women’s orders, if passed into law.
Over 5,000 have signed in the first week and the numbers are still rising rapidly.
The signatories represent a very broad constituency including lay and ordained women and men, committed church goers, and those who are on the fringes and put off deeper commitment by (amongst other things) the Church of England’s perceived ambivalence towards women.
The comments that many people have made when signing the petition offer lucid and powerful arguments for the withdrawal of the amendment to Clause 5(1)c, but there is also much anger and sadness that the House of Bishops have seen fit to override the opinions of the overwhelming majority who voted in diocesan synods to approve the unamended legislation.
Most worryingly, there are many people who are truly beginning to lose faith in the Church of England, and there is clearly a danger that by falling over backwards to accommodate the loud demands of those who will not accept the ministry of women bishops the church will lose many thousands of quietly despairing loyal but weary Anglicans.
Comments can be viewed can be viewed online here.
The following quotes give a flavour of the responses;
“As a lay woman in the C of E, I have observed developments in this field for nearly 50 years. It is now time to say that ‘enough is enough’. I value the Anglican approach to holding views in tension, but there comes a time when it is simply a matter of refusing to address prejudices”
“This amendment gives permanent support to a theology of ‘taint’ and a theology of male headship. As the co-founder of a women’s refuge and worker there before ordination I am sadly aware this has ramifications far beyond the priesthood and reflects badly on the C of E. General Synod has a responsibility to look beyond itself. ‘What God has made clean, you must not call profane.’ Acts.10.15, this morning’s NT reading.”
“There comes a point at which the Church of England must find the courage to make a decision and stick to it – there is no way to square this particular circle. I am fed up with being expected to accept being a kind of “Shroedinger’s Priest” – simultaneously a priest and not a priest, depending on who is looking at me – and it baffles and offends most of those outside the church that this should be the case.”
“This measure implies that women can only make second class bishops and maintains the perception that male bishops are ‘tainted’ by association once they’ve ordained women. I’ve been a member of the CofE for over ten years since becoming a Christian, moved churches at the beginning of the year and recently became an Adherent member of the Salvation Army. It’s so refreshing and affirming to be in a church where gender just isn’t an issue and women are treated as equals.”
“Having worked as a Training Officer in Chaplaincy, relating to Chaplains of several denominations and World Faiths, I have always found myself to be respected as fair, sensitive and generous in my dealings. I am profoundly shocked that fellow Anglicans seem unable to trust potential women Bishops to be just and generous. It is time to pass this measure in the form in which it has already been affirmed by a large majority.”
“Too many questions have been raised by this late addition to draft legislation that has already been through a long process, including overwhelming approval in the dioceses. There is insufficient time for General Synod members to consider and weigh all the implications of enactment of the legislation as amended before taking a final vote.”
“I am an Anglican worshipper, married to an Anglican priest. I don’t want the polite internal schism we agreed to when women were ordained to the priesthood to be perpetuated for further generations. The arrangements for woman-free enclaves of the church should only ever have been transitional: the amendment threatens to make the division, and the injustice, a lasting feature.”
Following the preliminary debates yesterday, the measure will be considered again on Monday. WATCH urges General Synod to adjourn the debate on Monday to allow the House of Bishops to reconsider and withdraw the amendment.
John Bingham reports in the Telegraph on what the Archbishop of Canterbury said to his convocation this afternoon: Women bishops: Church is looking into the abyss, says Archbishop of Canterbury.
Lizzy Davies writes for The Guardian: Rowan Williams urges speedy solution to row over women bishops and Debate on women bishops goes to General Synod.
Gavin Drake writes for the Church Times: Convocations and laity say preliminary yes to women bishops.
Steve Doughty writes for the Mail Online: Archbishop of Canterbury warns supporters of women bishops they face years of delay if they do not accept compromise.
Christian Today has Rowan Williams: I long to see women bishops in CofE.
Robert Pigott at the BBC has Church of England votes to allow women bishops vote.
The Guardian has published this editorial: Church of England: what women don’t want.
Christina Rees writes for The Guardian: Female bishops: this is about the church’s attitude to all women.
5 CommentsThe House of Laity and the two Convocations (the clergy and bishops) met separately this afternoon to debate the legislation to allow women to be bishops.
The votes below are for the main vote on the approval of the draft measure. There were also votes (all in favour) on the consequential draft amending canon.
The bishops of the Canterbury Convocation approved the legislation by 27 votes to nil. The Canterbury clergy voted 95 for and 19 against with one recorded abstention.
In the York Convocation the bishops voted 11 for and 2 against. The clergy voted 38 for and 11 against with 2 abstentions.
The House of Laity voted 123 for and 53 against with no recorded abstentions.
Since all votes were in favour the draft legislation can now go to the whole Synod for the debate on final approval on Monday.
Many members will have voted to approve the legislation not because they are in favour, but to allow it to be debated in full Synod on Monday.
The Church of England website has this press release Latest on women bishops legislation from General Synod 06 July 2012 which starts “Convocations and House of Laity approve draft legislation”.
7 CommentsMadeleine Davies in the Church Times Bishops to meet amid fevered pre-Synod lobbying
Lizzy Davies in The Guardian Fears Church of England vote on women bishops has begun to unravel
Robert Pigott for the BBC Women bishops: Vote could change Church forever
The BBC also has Q&A: Women bishops vote and Church of England meeting ahead of women bishops vote.
The Artsy Honker on her blog: A Provisional Note
Jeremy Fletcher on his blog: General Synod – What’s a chap to do?
Benny Hazlehurst on his blog: Trouble at the Top…
Richard Coles in The Independent: A typically Anglican compromise on women bishops
Avril Ormsby for Reuters: Church of England vote on women bishops could be derailed
Jerome Taylor in The Independent: Can the Church finally embrace women bishops?
5 CommentsThe group Proper Provision has written to members of General Synod urging them not to vote for an adjournment of the women bishops debate next Monday. The letter can be read on the Anglican Mainstream website, and is copied below.
Time to put this Measure to the test – from Proper Provision
Dear Member of General Synod,
We are writing to you on behalf of the thousands of loyal Anglican women who believe that men and women are inherently equal, and that our families and churches prosper when men take responsibility to provide godly oversight and headship. You may have heard about the petition we took to the House of Bishops asking them to amend the Measure.
We would urge you not to seek an adjournment for three reasons:1) The House of Bishops have listened:
- To the laity and clergy in the Dioceses, of whom 23% rejected the unamended Measure and 3% abstained.
- To General Synod:
- who in February voted to ask the House of Bishops to make amendments as long as they were insubstantial. The Group of Six has ruled that they are insubstantial.
- and who historically have never given two-thirds majority support to an amendment or motion on this topic unless it specifically moved towards proper provision.
The House of Bishops have listened to the concerns of this substantial minority and simply sought in their amendments to clarify two points in order that it would make it easier for these people to give their consent to this innovation, the heart of which goes against their conscience.
2) The amendments have revealed how unwilling to compromise some proponents of women bishops can be.
WATCH have suggested that both sacramental assurance and headship are “non-gospel theologies” which “indirectly contribute to domestic and sexual abuse and violence against women”.
A Statement of our Concerns 11/06/12 p5
WATCH have also criticised the House of Bishops for attempting to “provide a permanent, guaranteed doctrinal space” for those who seek male clergy and bishops.
A Statement of our Concerns 11/06/12 p6
The suggestion that we are not fellow-Christians and that the women in our congregations are unsafe is personally hurtful. Doctrinally, it makes a mockery of the 1998 Lambeth statement, affirmed by General Synod in July 2006, which recognized that both those in favour of women bishops and those opposed were loyal Anglicans.
The House of Bishops deemed the amendments necessary to provide proper provision for all loyal Anglicans. The adjournment motion is simply an attempt to remove even that (inadequate) provision in favour of arrangements that are anticipated to be purely temporary and which will immediately be wholly insecure.
3) An adjournment will be expensive and may achieve very little.
In November 2010 it was estimated that a four-day Synod in London cost approximately £400,000 (including the lost revenue from Church House). While recognizing that our meeting may be shorter, we are not convinced that this would be money well spent.
If the Measure returns in its present form then nothing will have changed; we will have simply delayed the day when supporters of a female episcopate finally have to decide whether their priority is the Bishop’s attempt at church unity or their own particular understanding of equality.
If the Measure returns without the amendments then, unless it is defeated, we will have confirmed that there is no secure place in the Church of England for those who until now have been considered loyal orthodox Anglicans.
It has been the constant desire of the majority of General Synod both to consecrate women as bishops and to provide for those who seek male clergy and bishops. Let’s use the time we have in July to try and convince one another that this Measure could work and if we can’t do that, then so be it.
Surely the time has come to put this Measure to the test and move on.
Lorna Ashworth GS 287
Jane Bisson GS 428
Mary Durlacher GS 272
Sarah Finch GS 344
Susie Leafe GS 416
Andrea Minichiello Williams GS 293
Jane Patterson GS 403
Kathy Playle GS 275
Alison Ruoff GS 350
Ruth Whitworth GS 277
Alison Wynne GS257
The petition referred to at the beginning of the letter can be found at the end of this article on the Reform website: Media Statement: Proper Provision Petition 2012: 2,200 Anglican women say.
19 CommentsThe BBC has covered the debate over women bishops in several ways today.
The Sunday programme on Radio 4 this morning included an interview with Lucy Winkett. You can listen to this here; it runs from 23 min 49 sec to 28 min 48 sec.
Also on Radio 4 Charlotte Smith presented a half-hour documentary: The Frock and the Church which can be listened to online.
And Charlotte Smith also wrote this: Anglican agonies over women bishops.
Emily Dugan writes in the Independent: Church set to reject ‘deal’ on female bishops.
Christian Today has: Orthodox Anglicans to vote against legislation on women bishops.
Jonathan Petre writes in the Mail Online: Historic vote on women bishops put in jeopardy as senior female clergy say concessions would make them second-class citizens.
7 CommentsWATCH: Women and the Church has launched an online petition urging the House of Bishops to withdraw its amendment to clause 5 of the Draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure.
The petition can be seen, and signed, here: The House of Bishops [of the Church of England]: Withdraw Clause 5(1)c.
4 CommentsThe Church Times has today published this longer than usual leading article: Women bishops: what should happen next.
THE General Synod is in trouble. In ten days’ time, it is to consider giving final approval to the consecration of women bishops. In the normal run of things, this would be the stage for a general debate in which the participants return to first principles, examine whether the legislation does or does not fulfil their wishes, and vote accordingly. This debate looks increasingly unlikely to happen…
The effect of the amendments has been the opposite of what was intended, however. The failure of opponents to endorse them, understandable though this may be, and the fierce rejection of them by many of the proponents, to the extent that some have been calling for the Measure to be voted down, mean that the Measure might fall in both the Houses of Laity and Clergy. This would be a farcical end to the long, tortuous synodical process, and hard to square with the overwhelming vote in the diocesan synods…
The Synod is in danger of attracting widespread puzzlement if it fails to agree women bishops after such a long process. Put simply, it must not fail. Anxiety has been expressed about the precedent set by allowing parishes to choose their own type of priest (as if this did not happen at present). A far more worrying precedent will be set if Synod members cannot find a way to live in the same Church as those with whom they disagree.
There is also this news item: Women bishops: ‘little silver balls won’t stay in their holes’.
29 CommentsAnother letter to General Synod members about the bishops’ amendments to the women bishops legislation is circulating. This time it is from the Chairman of the Catholic Group in General Synod.
21 CommentsSubject: Women Bishop Legislation
Dear fellow member of General Synod,
Some supporters of women bishops are now urging us to send the draft Women Bishops legislation back to the House of Bishops for them to reconsider their amendments; the same people are advising us to vote against the Measure if the House of Bishops do not withdraw their amendments. We need to reflect very carefully what referring the matter back to the Bishops would do to the Church of England.
What the Bishops have done is entirely reasonable in terms of the synodical process. It is consistent with how the majority of the Synod voted in February: the Southwark motion calling for no amendments at all to be made by the House of Bishop was itself amended by Pete Spiers so as to request that no substantial amendments be made.
The Bishops’ amendments are consistent with the original substance of the Measure; that is the clear advice of the Legal Office (reproduced in the annex to GS 1708-1709ZZ); it is also the decision of the majority of the Group of Six (Archbishops, Prolocutors, Chair and Vice-Chair of the House of Laity). Members of Synod would do well to read the Legal Office’s advice very carefully before forming a view on the amendments.
The House of Bishops’ amendments are consistent with their responsibility to try to hold the Church of England together; their amendments are also consistent with their responsibility to find a way forward that stands a reasonable chance of success at Final Approval. Synod’s voting in May showed that unamended, this Measure was doomed to fail at Final Approval.
The present agitation also provides a warning as to what would lie ahead of us were this Measure to be passed, with or without amendment. The formation of the Code of Practice would become a new battleground. Were the House of Bishops to be forced to retreat over their amendments to the Measure, they would be forced to have the contents of the Code of Practice dictated to them. Even after the Code were initially agreed, it would be open to pressure groups to campaign to whittle away its provisions over time.
A recent survey by Christian Research has found that 69% of CofE members surveyed wanted to see women bishops, and 75% wanted to see proper provision made for opponents so that they are not forced out of the Church of England. We have to ask ourselves: how do we achieve legislation that is faithful to the majority of CofE members? Pressurising the House of Bishops into withdrawing their amendments is most clearly the wrong way. Reliance on a Code of Practice is now looking to be an increasingly shaky and temporary foundation for making provision – which is what the Catholic Group in General Synod and others have consistently said.
The Bishops’ amendments are very modest but welcome steps in the right direction for the Catholic Group, though they do not go far enough. We appreciate the good intentions of the House of Bishops, but we are surprised that even the little they have offered, others are now determined to take away.
With prayers and good wishes,
Simon Killwick.
The Revd. Canon Simon Killwick (Manchester 163)
(Chairman of the Catholic Group in General Synod)