Updated on Monday and again on Tuesday
Three suffragan bishops will be consecrated in Lambeth Palace chapel on 15 July: Will Hazlewood as Bishop of Lewes, Ruth Bushyager as Bishop of Horsham, both in the Diocese of Chichester, and Hugh Nelson as Bishop of St Germans in the Diocese of Truro.
Forward in Faith has issued this press release: Statement regarding the Consecration of The Revd Prebendary Will Hazlewood. In this they say that Prebendary Hazlewood will be consecrated in a separate service from the other new bishops. In his case the Bishop of Richborough will act as the Archbishop’s delegate as chief consecrator, and the Bishops of Ebbsfleet and of Fulham will act as co-consecrators. This is because “all candidates must experience the sacramental assurance and joy of full communion with the bishops who ordain them”.
I assume that the Archbishop of Canterbury will be the chief consecrator for the other two new bishops, but I can find nothing online to confirm this. [But see the comments.]
Update 1
The Diocese of Chichester has published links for the livestreaming of the two consecration services
MORNING SERVICE: Consecration of the Bishop of St Germans and the Bishop of Horsham at 11.30 am
AFTERNOON SERVICE: Consecration of the Bishop of Lewes at 2.30 pm
Update 2
The Diocese of Chichester has issued this statement from the bishops-designate of Horsham and Lewes: A daunting and exciting venture of faith. In part it says
It is untrue to say [as some are reporting] that Prebendary Will Hazlewood declined to be consecrated as bishop of Lewes by the Archbishop of Canterbury. The arrangements for consecrations are the sole responsibility of the Archbishop: we are thankful for the distinctive arrangement he has made for a traditionalist provision.
but do read it all.
For another view read this statement from WATCH.
So will the Bishop of Chichester take any part in either service?
Won’t Martin Warner be one of the two bishops who present the two new Chichester Suffragans?
Curious that one of the three new suffragan bishops is to be consecrated by three suffragan bishops. Has this happened before in similar cases?
So much for mutual flourishing, then! It’ll be quite a shock for the denizens of the Lewes episcopal area to have gone from a ‘headship’ ConEvo bishop to a traditional catholic, who can only be consecrated by the untainted, in only two translations. Shades here of the disgraceful arrangements for the consecrations of Philip North and Libby Lane, which could and should have been done at the same time but were done a week apart in the same place. I had hoped that such thinking might have retired with the former ABY, but it is clear that the faulty… Read more »
The shift at Horsham is surely no less remarkable.
Quite so, but at least +Mark Sowerby became a more liberal catholic, and accepting of women priests, whilst he was at Horsham.
Though you (conveniently) ignore that the Bishop of London is presiding at the other consecration, thus representing an even more significant change, albeit more to your taste by the sound of things. Sauce and goose come to mind.
When I posted my original comment, I was unaware of who was to preside at the other consecration and, contrary to your assertion, the fact that +Londin is to do it is not at all to my taste. In my view the ABC should preside at both, for reasons explained at length by Jonathan Jamal lower in this thread. It is his responsibility and duty to do it unless he is unable to be there for good reason. As he is apparently to preach at both ceremonies, that excuse does not apply. So it was at the consecration of +Philip… Read more »
Are either consecrations being live streamed, do we know? I can’t see any reference to it.
Ignore me. Links to the live streams for both services now in the Chichester diocesan Facebook page.
More information at
https://www.chichester.anglican.org/glitter_news/2020/07/13/prayers-ruth-will-their-consecration-approaches/
So we will now have two ‘Society’ bishops in Chichester.
And two non-Society. So much for generosity of spirit.
Purely for my education, who is the second “non-Society” bishop?
My understanding is that Chichester diocese has three bishops, a diocesan and two suffragans (Horsham and Lewes). Am I wrong?
tribal and divided.
I thought they’d had to give up their silly notions of ‘taint’ as part of mutual flourishing. What a load of old tosh. Glorious and profligate diversity?
your side of the church has got 90% of your own way let the FinF have a small piece of tradition to hang onto please
Taint is not an accepted dogma of those loyal Anglicans who cannot in good conscience assent to the ordination of women as priests and bishops.
The question is of the creation of an “impaired communion” (to use a CofE 1993 term), created not by adherence to the practice of almost 2,000 years, but by the doing of something new.
There is evidence that women were priests and possibly bishops in the earliest church. . Abbesses also had equal rank to bishops. Not such an innovation after all. What is an innovation is the concepts of ‘impaired communion’ and ‘taint’.
One cannot be in “impaired communion” with one’s diocesan bishop, regardless of who created it.
I have been told that the Bishop of London will preside at the consecration of the other two Suffragans. And that the Archbishop of Canterbury will preach at both services and deliver pastoral staffs to all three.
Was any explanation given for the Archbishop’s not consecrating?
I have not yet seen any official statement about who will be performing any role at either of these services, much less any explanation of why the archbishop is not presiding at the earlier service.
In normal circumstances, which these aren’t, consecrations in the Southern Province are by the Archbishop of Canterbury with the Bishops of London and Winchester usually as the principal co-consecrators. These consecrations are to take place on the Feast of St Swithun, but that might just be a coincidence.
The forecast is for fine weather on the feast day, luckily.
I had considered the implications of that, but this year the 40 days (and more) have preceded our Saint’s feast day. Might 40 more possibly be too much of a good thing? I see that our current successor to Swithun participated in Monday’s virtual proceedings, and I wondered whether he might again tomorrow, as he would under ‘normal’ circumstances.
St Swithun’s day if thou dost rain
For forty days it will remain
St Swithun’s day if thou be fair
For forty days ’twill rain nae mare
We’ll see, when the forty days are o’er.
As I have always understood in both the Provinces of Canterbury and York, the prerogative of Consecration Bishops has always been in the hands of the respective Archbishops of these Provinces and any other Bishop be they Diocesan Or Suffragan would only otherwise Consecrate if this was delegated to them by Mandate, if the respective Archbishop was indisposed by illness or some engagement that took them away from their Province and made them unavailable to perform ther Provincial Primatial metropolitical functions. In the Scottish Episcopal Church the Primus would normally Consecrate Bishops and is only allowed by the Canons of… Read more »
To ensure all parties in the CofE get a sweetie as well as a bitter pill to swallow.
For the record, the Bishop of London has presided at the first service, and the co-consecrators were the Bishop of Guildford and the Bishop of Dover.
Other bishops present at the service were: Canterbury, Truro, Chichester, and the Bishop at Lambeth.
This has a certain logic. Under the Covid-19 advice, there should be the minimum number of consecrators (3) and if +Cicester and ++Cantuar do neither they display a certain neutrality.
Neil, I don’t know what a ‘certain neutrality’ means theologically here in terms of holy orders. I’m really not being ‘difficult’ – I just don’t recognise ‘neutrality’ in ecclesiological terms. What would an analogue be?
Judith, perhaps a better word might be ‘impartiality’ which is how we’ve somehow managed our messy (and often contradictory) compromises between our various traditions since the Reformation.
Judith, I deliberately used a rather guarded expression; i don’t think it’s ideal, but I am not sure what would be. It does seem to me all this is predicated on the next +Cicestr probably ordaining women, which presents a rather different long-term balance.
Andrew: I don’t want to sound uppity, but I do actually know quite a lot about the history of Anglicanism. I would challenge anyone to come up with an analogue in our history to these different ordination ‘pedigrees’ as a way of handling our theological differences. We seem to be able disagree about the Eucharist, baptism, free will, predestination, works, grace, the Person of Christ, even the Trinity, but we’ve never handled them in this way. Neil: words like ‘balance’ and ‘neutrality’ and ‘impartiality’ – are there any other categories of human beings besides women (only 50% of the… Read more »
Thank you, Judith, for the reference to Pope Leo’s Bull. You’re right to point out Rome’s ambiguous attitude towards Anglican orders. As you suggest elsewhere, a discussion document would be welcome.
Andrew: Sorry, I missed Dr Maltby’s note, and I am glad that she has touched upon Apostolicae Curae. Of course lakes of ink have been spilt on the question of the validity of Anglican orders since 1896. What is clear to me, however, is that Rome’s attitude to Anglican orders is very far from ambiguous: phrases like ‘absolutely null and void’ are clear. Of course, the Anglicans (William Maclagan advised by Frank Brightman and Lord Halifax) were able to rebut Roman allegations that Matthew Parker had not been properly consecrated, perhaps because William Barlow (of Chichester) may not have… Read more »
Sorry, Herbert, not Henry, Vaughan. Must have had the metaphysical poet in the back of my mind!
Sorry I missed this. So difficult to keep up with all the posts on TA. Rome still tweaks the C of E, perhaps more gently. When Benedict XVI visited the UK (including Evensong at Westminster Abbey) Monsignor Marini packed in the Papal suitcase Leo XIII’s stole which was duly worn. Not malicious, one hopes, just a leg-pull reminder by ‘HQ’!
Thanks for this. I’m most grateful to you and Dr Maltby for stimulating a debate about orders from a historical perspective, which helps to shed light on current dilemmas. I’d cheekily copied the phrase ‘ambiguous attitude’ in relation to holy orders from the WATCH statement. One of the most ecumenical occasions was Benedict’s visit a decade ago on the beatification of John Henry Newman. The gracious way he greeted the clergy of Westminster Abbey (both men and women) at the festal evensong, was noted – a hopeful sign. The descendants of the Oxford Movement bridge this seemingly irrevocable… Read more »
And it makes sense to bring the fewest bishops the shortest distance – use +Londin, Southwark and one of their suffragans. Oh, and fly in two extra non-Tainted for the afternoon…
Slightly off-topic, but relevant to this Diocese, Dr Warner – in the tradition of the former Dean of Chichester and Patron of the Arts, Walter Hussey (1909 – 85) – was on yesterday morning’s Sunday programme on Radio 4. He was being interviewed about Rushi Sunak’s bailout of the arts industry following the pandemic, and the importance of the arts to our national life. It was quite interesting.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kww2
P.S. There’s also an interview with the new archbishop of York.
*Rishi* Sunak
I find it sad that those of us in Chichester are again going to be stuck with two bishops who appear to be from the extremes of the CoE. What we need now is people who can pronote a unified and strong christian presence that does not pander to backward thinking
I know the national media are unlikely to cover this, but it’s interesting to think through how they might try and explain this complete muddle we’ve got ourselves in to…it will make sense to few in the ‘real’ world!
I wonder if the Archbishop will at least preach the same sermon at each consecration?
The phrase,”another fine mess you have got me into”, reveals the comedy of the situation.
How can someone share a church with other bishops if he believes that having those bishops present at his confirmation would taint him? Essentially FiF are saying that ‘their’ bishops enjoy pay and rations from the Church of England but aren’t in full communion with it. Absurd.
Never mind FiF – on the assumption that Martin Warner will not receive Communion from Ruth Bushyager, I simply do not understand an ecclesiology that says he can share his episcopate with her.
For the record, although +Martin was present at both ceremonies, he did not receive Communion at either.
I find it telling that the FiF statement (and specifically its “all candidates must experience the sacramental assurance and joy of full communion with the bishops who ordain them”) is all about the clergy.
‘Sacramental assurance…all about clergy.’ What nonsense! Are lay people who are not yet convinced by the timing and arguments that have led to the ordination of women not concerned that the sacraments they are receiving flow from the continuity of the Catholic church? Very interesting in this thread that little credit has been given to +Martin Warner, a traditionalist Catholic, for appointing a female episcopal colleague (he didn’t have to) in the spirit of mutual flourishing. And yes, this is a mess; but that is the messy compromise the Synod voted for and accepted in 2013 as the means… Read more »
Actually this is not what we voted for. We voted for a rather general motion which left the details to the bishops / archbishops. Several of us spoke to warn about the pitfalls of separate consecrations and having a ‘headship’ bishop. We were told ‘trust us to sort out the details’.
Could I therefore ask Charles whether you support the 5 Guiding Principles or not?
I did not say ‘Sacramental assurance…all about clergy’, so please do not suggest by these quotation marks that I did. Please read what I did say, and what the referenced FiF statement says.
To Confused Sussex: I think you will have three extreme bishops; I understand Mrs Bushyager has given a platform to those advocating gay conversion therapies in the past.
Are you able to post a source for this claim? I’ve googled ‘Ruth Bushyager’ alongside a number of other search words: gay, same-sex, conversion, LGBT etc. and can find nothing other than your comments on Thinking Anglicans.
Sorry did not make myself clear I should have made it clear that I was just referring to the two new bishops.. The existing one’s views are well known
‘Mrs Bushyager’? Really? It’s come to that now?
Crockford gives a detailed guide on how to address the clergy and I certainly did not mean to cause any offence.
Thank you, Mr Henley.
Fr Dean Henley, you’re not the first on this site to suggest this, but is there any evidence to which you could point?
https://womenandthechurch.org/news/the-consecration-of-the-bishops-of-horsham-and-lewes/
And yet, as far as I can ascertain, the Bishop-designate of Doncaster, whose appointment was announced in early December, still has not been consecrated! Anyone know why?
Northern Province, so up to the new Abp of York to arrange.
Could someone explain to me what is meant by “sacramental assurance”? If someone is ordained in the Church of England then the sacraments they preside over are valid as far as the Church of England goes, aren’t they? And if people in the Church of England think they aren’t they must have extra-Anglican reasons for thinking this. Which is fine – but if there is doubt about the sacraments of some clergy in the C of E, then what of the sacraments of those who have ordained them? So we roll it all backwards, until it becomes clear that real… Read more »
Interesting about the RC communicants. That ‘hospitality’ is not reciprocated, at least not officially.
RC priests are rather less well remunerated than CofE ones. There is a reason that clergy tend to swim the Tiber only after the pension has started paying out.
As a Roman Catholic, I would say that although some Roman Catholics do this, it is not officially encouraged by the Roman Catholic Church, and is strictly forbidden by the 1983 Code of Canon Law, The Documents of the Second Vatican Council and the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church. As one Priest, who was one of my first Parish Priests as an RC told me, they only allow this at Funerals.Normally Roman Catholics are allowed to be present at Anglican Eucharists and can come up for the Blessing, just as Non Roman Catholics who are present at our masses… Read more »
And now, more information here
https://www.chichester.anglican.org/glitter_news/2020/07/14/statement/
I think the statement is right that the Archbishop of Canterbury is acting in accordance with the five guiding principles. But the FiF statement that Will Hazelwood needs to be in ‘sacramental assurance’ with all participants is counter to the guiding principles because it doesn’t recognise the sacramental status of some bishops.
Although admirably loyal, there is much muddled thinking in this statement from the bishops-designate, which shows every sign of having been drafted just a few yards from where they are to be consecrated. It is not the Archbishop’s ‘responsibility to make arrangements for the consecrations’ – it is his solemn duty as Metropolitan to carry them out personally, unless he is unable to be there for good reason. I see nothing in the 2014 legislation which enables him to delegate this duty at his discretion. I hope that the new Primate of England has a better understanding of… Read more »
The poor Bishop-designate of St Germans, Hugh Nelson is not getting much airtime here, but readers may be interested to know that he does not share a surname with his father, retired archdeacon Guy Wilkinson, because he elected to take his wife’s surname on marriage.
I am always bewildered at how uncharitable people within the CofE can be – Focus on your salvation, whether you spoke for and against the ordination of women will not get us into heaven… There’s a greater hills for us to die on 1) I am shocked why people feel surprised at their being two separate consecrations. While not impossible but it would have been a bewildering expectation to expect both consecrations to happen together 2) Those that expressed sadness that Chichester has “Two society bishops again” and somebody with “backwards thinking” has been appointed; probably need to… Read more »
Am I the only one to be struck by the fact that there is an awful lot of anger from one group of ideological purists (WATCH) towards another group of ideological purists (FiF and SSHW)? From their current (and previous) statements, the former appear not to have accepted the terms of the Synod measure that enabled women to be ordained to the episcopate in 2013 in completely good faith, giving the impression that they believe that they could simply either renege on commitments made by the Church as a whole to those who cannot accept this development on theological… Read more »
The division in the church is one that grieves us all (no matter what side of the spectrum you stand on). I thank God for +Ruth Horsham and the words she expressed on Twitter yesterday that “her and Will are being ordained by the same person – The Holy Spirit”; the individual principal consecrator is merely a vessel carrying out God’s work but it’s the Holy Spirit through the special grace of God that does the real work. Traditionalist within the CofE have been quite open to working within the Five Guiding Principles and offered a generosity of spirit,… Read more »
I’ve just come to this after reading the following words in Rabbi Jonathan Sacks’ latest book: ‘A healthy culture protects places that welcome argument & respect dissenting views. Enter them & you will grow, others will grow & you will do great things together. But resist with all your heart & soul any attempt to substitute power for truth.’ Sometimes it takes someone outside the heat of the self-obsessed bubble to point to what is going on here, especially when those who have won the war are attempting to redefine the truth of the situation. I’m no… Read more »
I am a WATCH Trustee and a lay woman. WATCH speaks out on behalf of all women who want to see an end to discrimination and inequality within the structures and practices of the Church of England. I am also a member of General Synod and agree with Charles Read’s comments above.
Well, Jenny, here’s one woman you don’t speak for. And I know I am among a growing number who are just tired of the flippant, knee-jerk cries of misogyny and discrimination, fighting past battles, banging on about structures of inequality when you are the very people seeking to diminish a valid minority in our church. WATCH’s seeming inability to engage with intelligence and generosity with those who hold a perfectly legitimate but different theological position is becoming an embarrassment. It’s time you packed up and put all that pent-up energy into fighting real injustices on behalf of those forced to… Read more »
It’s very sad to read this. Much of my personal and professional life has been spent working for women’s equality. Until relatively recently I was, like many lay women, under the impression that the 2014 Settlement had completed the journey towards gender equality in the Church of England. Not that everyone agreed with the decisions made, but that women would be treated with dignity and respect, not least for their order and office, across the church. To my sorrow I have discovered that this is not the case, so I am raising my voice for women in the church, as… Read more »
As a supporter of womens’ ordination (or at least someone who takes it in his stride and rejoices in what I see and experience of it) I actually agree with Jane Thomas. The war has been won by those who have been fighting since the 1960s (a short span of Christian history, by the way) to allow women to be ordained to the three historic orders. More women than men were ordained last year. Female bishops have preferential treatment in becoming members of the legislature. There seems to be a genuine attempt (even by a traditionalist Catholic bishop like Martin… Read more »
Sadly, it’s premature to say ‘the war has been won’. Yes, the ordination of women to the presbyterate and episcopate is a great achievement. But the fact is that the Church of England’s current position is still that it is as acceptable to reject the ordained ministry of women as it is to welcome and affirm it. The need to hold together this deplorable position is what leads to the ecclesiological nonsense of holding two consecration services at different times in the same place, with different bishops presiding, for new suffragans in the same diocese, each of whom will on… Read more »
In this new world, it is at least educational for those of us who’ve for months now seen only recordings of our parish priest receiving communion to observe the different methods possible with a mask on. Take it off and then put it back; drop it under the chin; leave it hanging on one ear; keep it on and tuck the Host underneath. Is guidance on this expected? I’d have thought some methods were more in keeping with government guidelines than are others.
As just ordinary pew fodder I am so very sad about this. Only returned to church in the last few years as it seemed we were beginning to be accepted as souls. Now perhaps not real souls again. Feeling rejected, invalidated.