Stacey Rand ViaMedia.News Leadership for Change: A Response to ‘The Sexism Women Continue to Face in the Church of England’
Rebecca Glover ViaMedia.News Emerging Adults: A Priority for the Churches
Martine Oborne The Guardian Why are female clergy cheering for a bishop who doesn’t believe in female priests?
Rambling Rector Retired Atonement or fakery?
Martie Oborne’s article in the Guardian obviously follows on from the long discussion on TA about +Philip’s new appointment.
In the article she links to some academic research on women’s experiences in church which is well worth reading, so I have copied the link, below, to make sure people don’t miss it.
https://www.academia.edu/44927549/Mutual_Flourishing_in_the_Church_of_England_Learning_from_St_Thomas_Aquinas
I enjoy watching Channel 4’s Caribbean Billionaires’ Paradise, which shows how luxury villas and yachts make life more bearable for the descendants of slaves imported by the Church of England. Once on a visit to Trinidad and Tobago with friends, we apologised to our hosts for sending their ancestors to their lovely country . Their reply was “We’ve got over it”. The Church Commissioners’ gift of £100 million will help soften the blow of living in a lovely climate, with golden beaches and swaying Palm trees. This helps assuage the collective guilt I’m supposed to feel for my Anglican forbears… Read more »
My forebears were singled out in a television programme a while ago by David Olusoga for special contempt for the monies given to them as compensation at the abolition of slavery for the loss of their ‘enslaved assets’. I felt a bit numbed by the story but I cannot feel personally responsible for the behaviour of my ancestors who died long ago. They set themselves up with a country estate and had portraits painted by Gainsborough in the manner of the nouveaux riches of the day. All the wealth dissipated through drunkenness, gambling and the First World War and the… Read more »
My experience of the Caribbean is that the serious money does not flow into the pockets of the local populace. Yes there are luxury villas, 5-star hotel resorts, and super-yachts, but the locals tend to be in quite menial jobs. Yes, there are success stories, but first world exploitation is obvious and embarrassing. While I agree that the £100M from CofE is a classic Welby gesture, the descendants of slaves who live in the former British Caribbean islands have little reason to be grateful to the nation that only gave them independence because their islands had ceased to be profitable,… Read more »
I am very much with you!
This reads to me like classic white middle class self-hatred, Francis: you run down British colonial history while praising the French version instead. Do you actually know anything much about French colonial history? Perhaps you might start by reading a bit about Haiti, followed by Algeria… I don’t think you will find that the non-French subjects of the French Empire had anything like the civil rights you claim. As time goes on I wonder more and more why we put up with people from within our own culture who are determined to do it down at every opportunity, usually by… Read more »
Neither Britain nor France have unblemished colonial history, and my reference to Caribbean concerned how we left, and the fact that the French did the decent thing by making the inhabitants of their islands French Citizens – no Windrush scandal for them. Not sure what class has to do with any of it, but as it happens my ancestors were naval ‘blue lights’ who fought & died to suppress the slave trade, despite the best efforts of British Lawyers.
I had a similar discussion with a cleric many years ago, before this was fashionable; he was burdened with guilt because his many generations past forefathers had owned a sugar plantation and slaves. My feelings then were similar to Struggling Anglican’s. OK. So Georgian and early Victorian treatment of slaves was bad – accepted, it was. Unfortunately the same class of people were similarly abusing and mistreating my own forebears in the pits and potbanks of Cannock Chase and the Potteries – I can say with absolute certainty that my ancestors never owned slaves – and the way some pits… Read more »
I think Dr Stacey Rand’s article at ‘Via Media’ is well-focussed, informative, and helpful. Thank you. It’s great when specific challenges are set out like this with such coherence. Challenges wider than Philip North. I’m afraid I feel saddened that in the Guardian article, Martine has continued to subvert the ministry of Philip North. It’s like a campaign against him, and there seems to be an underlying theme that people like him are, somehow (and to use the word she quotes from another traditional person) ‘dinosaurs’… or misogynists. Martine claims there are two conflicting principles: “that, one, women are fully… Read more »
Susannah it’s quite an accusation you make that Martine Oborne’s article is intended to ‘subvert’ Bishop North’s ministry. As a public figure and in due course a member of the House of Lords, Bishop North’s theology of holy orders and his views on women’s ordination ought to be open for scrutiny and debate. I’ve never met Bishop North but everyone seems to be of the opinion that he is a nice chap, but as a diocesan bishop being ‘nice’ is not enough, his teaching as a church leader should be open to analysis and constructive criticism.
Having known Bishop Philip for a long time, I am not aware of him ever “teaching” non-belief in the ordination of women. However, by all means scrutinise his teaching on the Incarnation and Resurrection, the centrality of the Eucharist, or even his focus on the deprived “salvation begins with the poor” (as someone once said). He is not just “nice” and perhaps, just perhaps, on all Church appointments, a little more care in research before comment would be good. After all, how much integrity would my views on say the appointment of the Bishop of Hertford, of whom I know… Read more »
“I have little energy left for something I thought we had done in 2014 and moved on from.” My feeling is that the objection isn’t really to Philip personally. The real objection is that more men who won’t ordain women have been ordained Philip is just simply the most visible such man and is the lightning rod for those objections. Yes, it’s unfair. He doesn’t deserve it, but it’s also thoroughly understandable and, as Martine Oborne observes, highlights that the Church of England needs to do something which will ensure that the discrimination against women is at least finite in… Read more »
On that basis, to stop ‘discrimination’, any conservative evangelical who opposes gay sexuality and wants to preach against it should also be banned from ordination. I would view that as draconian, and although I support both gay sexuality and women priests (who are just plain priests) I see the diversity of views on these issues not as primarily driven by misogyny, homophobia, or desire to discriminate against women, but… as principles of conscience, sincerely held, and still widely held by millions of Christians. It is possible to be opposed to women priests without being misogynist. It is possible to be… Read more »
It has been noted elsewhere that if this was a matter of race or colour we would not even be having this discussion. Can no one explain why is it different for gender?
Personally I’d have no objection if a future Pope was a gay black woman. But the mind of the Church is not there yet. Presumably, as an Anglo- Catholic, Bishop Philip believes the CoE Synod cannot, unilaterally, by a show of hands, change what constitutes the all-male Catholic priesthood. Others say it can. The different race or colour of a male priest doesn’t unilaterally change a 2000 year old tradition. Some clergy joined the Ordinariate over the issue. +Philip decided to stay. But is now being told, by some, his diocesan leadership is too problematic.
You presumably mean the mind of the Roman Catholic church. As an evangelical I don’t think the church changes things unilaterally and by a show of hands either. Nor was that what happened. There was a very long slow theological journey towards the ordination of women – like the present journey towards full inclusion of LGBTQ+ folk. There was also something called the Reformation at some point too. We do not believe we must wait for the Roman Catholic church to agree or allow us to change. That hasn’t been the case for several hundred years. Something called the Reformation,
An Anglo-Catholic perspective of “the Church” is very different than an evangelical viewpoint. Years of Anglican-RC ecumenical dialogue have changed the relationship between the two Communions, emphasising what we now have in common rather than focusing on the Reformation. Women’s ordination provided a new obstacle to the Unity which, presumably, people like Bishop Philip has as a goal. It may be the RC Church has to catch up. But in the meantime, objections to women’s ordination are much wider than misogyny . The Unity of Christ’s Church isn’t just a personal choice.
Strange to say, the one word I would not use to describe +Philip’s current position is ‘catholic’. To anyone with catholic instincts, the idea of a diocesan bishop who is not in communion with their own diocese is fundamentally absurd. A diocesan bishop is the ‘fons et origo’ under Christ of sacramental ministry in their diocese, ministry flows through and from them, but nothing will be able to flow through or from +Philip if he is not sacramentally connected to the majority of people in his diocese, apart from possibly a small number who are fellow members of the Society.… Read more »
Anglicanism has always had contradictions within itself. Bible-believing evangelical ministers in jeans wouldn’t know what to do if invited to celebrate High Mass with organ and choir. Bishops who believe in male headship must find it difficult relating to female members of the episcopate. Some parishes need a bishop to lay hands on confirmation candidates. Others don’t believe in confirmation, and hardly celebrate communion. Bishop Philip’s inner contradictions are no more confusing and annoying than a messy and self-contradictory Church of England in how it muddles through with people believing opposite things at the same time. Bishop Philip affirms women… Read more »
Fr David doesn’t the Roman Catholic Church believe that Bishop North’s orders, along with yours and mine, are utterly null and void? The Orthodox churches similarly don’t accept our orders as valid. Together they represent something like 3/4 of Christendom.
You are clouding the issue. As you well know liberal Anglo-Catholics are entirely happy with female priests, it is the Ultras of ‘The Society’ persuasion who have such a problem. Moreover it is not just female priests that they cannot accept. Male priests ordained priest along with females are also beyond the pale, as are any male priests ordained priest in all-male group by male bishop who has previously ordained females. Moreover, since the reformation the CofE has made quite a number of decisions without consulting Rome. One big deal in living memory was the CofE accepting contraception, which is… Read more »
I don’t personally believe that the ordination of women is a change at all, so I regard the show of hands as pretty meaningless.
The process for decades, if not centuries has been to accept for ordination anyone who is called by God to the state. We just undertake due diligence to determine whether the call is or is not a true one. So the real change is that God has started calling more women to ordination than ever before. That’s His right and I believe we need to accept it. I don’t see it as a change in doctrine.
God has taken an awful long time to discover He’s a feminist.
I recall that He performed gender reassignment surgery on Adam’s rib!
I think that’s an important point, and whatever views one might hold about the validity or otherwise of the ordination of women, it is necessary to address the question of whether the Church of England is currently doing well at discerning those, men and women, who have such a call.
“it is necessary to address the question of whether the Church of England is currently doing well at discerning those, men and women, who have such a call.”
Indeed. And if the answer were to be “no” then the follow up question would be”were those men who won’t ordain women truly called to be ordained?”. If discernment isn’t reliable it’s not just women who are affected.
Absolutely correct, since (despite the unhinged ravings of racists who conjured the “curse of Ham” from nothing a few hundred years ago) that hasn’t been the normative position of the church for 2,000 years.
Was the normative position of the church wrong? Yes. Do I want ordination open to all regardless of sex or sexuality? Emphatically yes. Do I feel it right, due to the historical background, to tolerate those who disagree? Also yes.
James: “Do I feel it right, due to the historical background, to tolerate those who disagree? Also yes.” And once again, I share James’ belief in a broad and tolerant Church, protecting positions of conscience and tradition. As James says, the concept of a male-only priesthood has been normative in huge swathes of Christian tradition for almost 2000 years. I don’t share belief in that male-only concept, but the arguments in support of it are serious, and sustained in much of the worldwide Church. To say (for one example) ‘if you are black you cannot be a bishop’ is so… Read more »
“…to say ‘I believe priests are male’ is a Church-embraced view to this day in many traditions, based on tradition and on the choice of 12 men by Jesus to lead the Church….” But to hold to this tradition is to ignore two things: 1) that in his choice, Jesus was adhering to the customs and practices of his time and culture, a time and culture we have largely grown past today; and 2) that the Gospels were written in their final form several decades after the events they purport to chronicle, in a period when the Church was threatened… Read more »
Pat, you don’t need to persuade me that women can be priests as well as men. I 100% believe that. But not everyone shares the same view. And they don’t have to, in order to be devoted Christians. Many still hold to the tradition of nearly 2000 years.. We can co-exist together, with differing views: that’s my belief. It just takes grace and goodwill on all sides. I suspect many people in the Church today are willing to ‘live and let live’ with all the different views people hold in churches up and down the land on a whole range… Read more »
Hear! Hear!
I believe that the promotion of Bishop Philip to Blackburn is a good thing. I also believe that we should stop ordaining men who won’t ordain women. The two positions aren’t incompatible. People are what matters, not beliefs. That’s very clearly what Jesus taught if you read the Gospels. Philip is a valued and valuable member of the church and deserves the promotion for which he has many strong qualities. Requiring those entering orders for the first time, however, to agree to ordain women is a very different comparison as it is weighing beliefs against the impact on women. In… Read more »
The Five Guiding Principles say quite a bit about how this situation arose and why the CofE handles it like this.
“It is possible to be opposed to women priests without being misogynist.
“It is possible to be opposed to gay sexuality without being homophobic.”
So by extension it would also be possible to believe that all priests must be white and not be racist? As David Runcorn says, we wouldn’t even tolerate that debate.
It’s worth noting that the Mormons took pretty much that position up until (if memory serves) the 70s.
I incline to the view that “homophobic/misogynist/racist is as h/m/r does”. I don’t much care what complicated logic people use to justify it, any more than I care what the crusaders used to justify the sack of Jerusalem.
Unfortunately there’s no possibility of a rational debate on these topics when people persist in using words such as “homophobic” to mean neither more nor less than “opinion I dislike”.
In the example I gave we would use the term racism, so why should we be more reticent to recognise homophobia?
I believe I and others have explained to you that “homophobic” means nothing of the sort. Your persistence in repeating this canard, not to mention the insistence that there can be “rational debate” about whether to treat people as equal human beings before Christ (in whom there is neither male nor female), is intended to forestall improvements in the attitudes of the church by making it about process rather than substance. If one were proof texting one might reference “disputes over words”.
In previous discussions, it has been rather obvious that each of the people who so kindly explained the meaning of the word had a different interpretation in mind. Some explanations were merely examples, and we have a comment just recently which comes down to “I know it when I see it”. When the explanations are all so subjective, it seems that my comment, that the word has only a subjective, if not solipsistic, usage is indeed correct. Those who do not believe it is possible to have a rational discussion on this issue may reasonably be asked what they expect… Read more »
“It is possible to be opposed to women priests without being misogynist.
It is possible to be opposed to gay sexuality without being homophobic.”
My problem is that every time I ask such people for their reasons what comes back sounds very much like misogyny and homophobia to my ears. I’m sorry, but “tradition” is a poor excuse for denying something to half the human race…and “that’s my conscientious interpretation” of a few brief phrases in the OT and a couple of Epistles really only comes off as an apology for bigotry.
I think it’s very generous of you to admit that.
Perhaps you need to learn what the word ‘tradition’ really means then. It is vitally important. See 2 Thessalonians 2:15.
Rambling Rector Retired raises a number of issues of interest, but I think does not get the financial history right. In the 1970s parish assets which provided stipends were transferred to dioceses, not the Commissioners, in part to deal with a gross disparity between clergy incomes in “poor” and “rich” parishes. Some Dioceses have handled those assets significantly better than others, leaving us now with rich and poor Dioceses. (The 1976 Endowments and Glebe Measure has the detail of what was transferred). The history of clergy pensions involves the Commissioners giving up responsibility for pensions in the 1990s and a… Read more »
Thank you.
Martine Osborne’s article simply draws attention to the two contradictory principles but the harder question is what we think the episcopate is? How does all souls ministry shared actually work in a diocese where for good or ill the bishop is simply unlikely to know much of what you do in your parish. Perhaps the real acceptance needs to be that the role of bishop in the COFE is not that of a RC one, their theological opinions will then be of little practical concern.
Rebecca Glover raises some valid concerns for the Church of England. Too often people drift away from church as they transition from one stage of life to another. The 18-25 should be encouraged to feel fully part of the church. I belong to a church where there is a 20-30s group with dedicated leaders and a programme of social events as well as regular small groups. 18-25 year olds are part of the welcoming teams, reading and praying in services, fully involved in leading worship and in serving alongside others within the church. As a result they draw others of… Read more »