The Reformation cut the English church away from Rome, and in doing so it destroyed any credibility so far as the apostolic succession was concerned. Despite the removal, sometimes by murder, of England’s Catholic bishops, it was still important to pretend that it could be ecclesiastical business as usual. The Virgin Mary had disappeared, but the Tudor monarchs were prayed for in the Prayer Book and they could replace the Queen of Heaven. Even today, the Anglican hierarchy remains one of the last places of refuge for those who take the royal family at all seriously.

Bishops really came into their own from the 16th century onwards in England because they were supposed to show that the CofE, though it had no pope, was still respectably antique ”“ and therefore worthy of obedience ”“ despite the loss of that Roman link. Fussiness about episcopacy is in fact Anglicanism’s implicit acknowledgment that it does not actually have the kind of historic authority it would like to have.

Greater honesty about itself should lead the Church of England to get rid of bishops altogether and rejoice in the freedom that comes with being a sect. But that would involve the abandonment not just of pretension but also of a career structure that means too much to too many Anglican minds.

Read it all.

After a bitter vote, the Church of England decided Monday that women can be consecrated as bishops. But the secretary of the Vatican’s unity council says ecumenical dialogue will continue as before.

The synodal decision must be put to a referendum within a year by another similar synod; nevertheless it is a vote that marks an important point within the history of the Church of England.

The vote was noteworthy in another regard: a conciliatory amendment proposed by the archbishops of Canterbury and York, Rowan Williams and John Sentamu, was rejected.

Bishop Brian Farrell, secretary of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, told ZENIT that the Anglican decision does represent an “enormous obstacle.” Nevertheless, he said, the effects of this vote must be kept in a proper perspective.

Read it all.

After two emotional days of debate on women bishops, Synod members’ reactions ranged from joy to deep disappointment.

Owing to the number of amend­ments to the draft legislation, its re­vision stage was a long haul last week­end. But every bid to give opponents bishops with their own jurisdiction ”” even “co-ordinate”, as proposed by the two Archbishops ”” fell.

Though supported by a majority of Synod members, the Archbishops’ amendment lost by five votes among the Clergy when a vote by Houses was required. An amendment for hard­ship provision for clergy resigning office also fell. Traditionalists are left with a code of practice (as yet unseen), which they have repeatedly said “will not do”.

Writing to his clergy, however, the Bishop of London, the Rt Revd Richard Chartres, said that it was “emphatically not true to say that the Measure as it stands contains no provisions”. But he recognised there was anxiety among traditionalists because the contents of the code had not yet been worked out.

Read it all.

Over the next few months the Archbishops of Canterbury and York have an opportunity to provide leadership, and this too will be monitored well beyond the borders of England….

…as the synod debate made manifest, there is a huge theological gap between opponents and the majority in favor. Ecclesiology was not to the fore during the debate in York. As Bishop N.T. Wright of Durham has urged, there needs to be much more exploration of mono-episcopate, headship, and sacramental assurance.

The archbishops are in a difficult place. It is their responsibility to be a focus of unity. Anglicanism has always depended on an element of compromise in the interest of the health of the wider communion. Compromise is weakened when there is even a hint that this is at the expense of principles and good theology.

Complexities abound. On the face of it, the ecclesiology of those on different sides in the debate seems to be irreconcilable. Moreover, there is the question of eventual reunion with the Church of Rome ”” and again the circles appear impossible to square.

Read it all.

A Code of Practice which means that a woman bishop would delegate her authority to a male bishop (for pastoral and sacramental care) for parishes which cannot accept her authority does mean that the parish concerned would have to recognise the apostolic authority of the female bishop in order to make this request. That’s what some of the opponents find so difficult. That’s also why our Archbishops proposed an amendment which suggested co-ordinate jurisdiction deriving from the Measure itself. It would not have impaired the jurisdiction of the female bishop but required her (and male bishops too) to work with an episcopal colleague in order to provide pastoral and sacramental care for every parish within any diocese. It was this amendment which was carried by majorities in the House of Bishops and House of Laity but fell by five votes in the House of Clergy.

The Archbishops made it clear that it was not a test of loyalty to them but a way of so re-shaping the Code of Practice to make it something which could work for everyone without any losers. I voted for it and regret that it failed so narrowly to receive the Synod’s approval.

However, the House of Bishops is intending to get on with the work of drawing up the Code of Practice with some urgency. One of the difficulties is that we do not have a Code of Practice to work with yet which is why so many people were in the dark about the Archbishops’ intentions or what the consequences would be of what they had suggested at what seemed like the last minute (though this was inevitable).

Read it all (Word document).

From here:

The Catholic Group in General Synod is encouraged by the remarks of the Archbishop of Canterbury that there is still ”˜unfinished business’ and that ”˜the Church is only part of the way through the process’ of determining the way forward for women bishops legislation.

The Group was, however, disappointed that there was a lack of support for financial hardship where clergy feel by conscience that they need to resign from the Church of England. The onus now is on the Church of England to provide for its clergy to remain within the Church for which we have always fought as loyal Anglicans.

We remain committed to both the process and our Church, and would wish to play a major part in helping the Church in its ongoing journey in a spirit of unity that is Christ’s way.

The Church of England will proceed with legislation to allow the ordination of women bishops, despite fierce opposition from Anglican traditionalists.

After a marathon, 12-hour debate in York, the church’s General Synod on Monday (July 12) rejected calls for further delays in developing a draft law to allow female bishops. The earliest women bishops could be ordained is 2014.

But the decision did little to tamp down furious infighting that some fear could prompt conservatives to defect to the Roman Catholic Church.

Read it all.

The Archbishops’ proposal failed to secure a majority in the House of Clergy although it passed the Bishops and the Laity. The important point is that valiant attempts are being made to open the way for women to be consecrated bishops without excluding from the church those who adhere to the present position and who share the faith which inspires our mission. We now have an opportunity to consider the draft legislation in the Diocese and I shall be setting out the process for doing this in due course. At the same time the House of Bishops is charged with working on the vital question of the Code of Practice. The Bishop of Willesden and I will be fully involved in these discussions. There will be a special meeting of the Diocesan Synod to ponder and vote on the advice which London will be sending back to the General Synod. I do hope that anyone questioning their place in the Church of England on the basis of media reports or premature judgements about the final shape of the legislation will get in touch with me or with their respective Area Bishop before making any personal decisions or public statements. I returned from York clear both that the majority will is to ordain women bishops while at the same time preserving, as far as possible, the unity of the church in her mission and service to our country.

Read the whole thing.

The largest Anglo-Catholic group in the Church of England is expecting an exodus of thousands of Anglicans to Catholicism after a decision to ordain women as bishops without sufficient concessions to traditionalists.

Stephen Parkinson, director of Forward in Faith — a group that has about 10,000 members, including more than 1,000 clergy — told Catholic News Service in a July 13 telephone interview that a large number of Anglo-Catholics are considering conversion to the Catholic faith.

His comments came after the General Synod, the national assembly of the Church of England, voted at a meeting in York to approve the creation of women bishops by 2014 without meeting the demands of objectors.

Read it all.

It has been clear for several years that the Church of England’s synod wanted to ordain women as bishops.

But that left a critical question – what concessions should be made to traditionalists who objected?

During a long weekend of impassioned and sometimes emotional debate, it decided that the concessions being sought came at too high a cost.

Read it all.

A leading traditionalist has warned it is “inevitable” people will leave the Church of England after it voted to move ahead with allowing women bishops.

Bishop John Broadhurst, who is on the Church’s Catholic wing, told the BBC’s Today programme other opponents would stay in the Church but “defy” the move.

However, Rachel Weir of the pro-women bishops group Women and the Church, said it was a “momentous” decision.

The general synod will make a final vote on the issue next year.

Read it all.

From here:

Today the General Synod overwhelmingly endorsed the draft legislation prepared by the Revision Committee with only a couple of minor amendments. After rejecting the ways of accommodating those opposed, that were debated on Saturday, Synod accepted the proposals suggested by the Revision Committee in clause 2 of the draft legislation.

After a moving debate, the motion was passed with an overwhelming majority; 373 in favour; 14 against with 17 abstentions.

Several powerful speeches made it clear the sacrifice that had been made by the majority who welcomed women’s ordained ministry in voting for this compromise. “This is good news for the whole Church and we are delighted” says the Revd Rachel Weir, Chair of WATCH. “Synod’s decision gives the Church a powerful mandate to move forward enthusiastically; welcoming the ministry of women at all levels within the Church whilst making space for those who are opposed to stay within our body”.

Traditionalists have been beaten four-square. When (though, strictly, it is still ‘If’) the Measure comes into force, there will be no more Resolution A and B, no more ‘petitioning parishes’. There will be no more ‘flying bishops’, no more Beverley, Ebbsfleet, and Richborough. There will be again the assurance of good behaviour: no one will be over-faced by women priests and bishops ministering where they are not wanted. But there will be no guarantees (and, increasingly, no likelihood) that male bishops and priests ministering to us will share those convictions, or derive their orders from an unbroken apostolic succession of bishops in the Catholic line. Avoiding women ministers will become not a conviction about Catholic Order, shared throughout the ages, but a matter of sexual discrimination, abhorrent to all of us. In a very short time, it will have become unacceptable to invoke a sexist Code of Practice.

It is important for us all to understand how momentous all this is and what the implications are for our life together. I was never very hopeful of the Archbishops’ amendment, though it was good that it was debated. It would not have brought a clear and certain place for the Catholic understanding of Faith and Order. But it would have allowed a new generation of Provincial Episcopal Visitors – flying bishops – to try to work out, with the Archbishops, some sort of corporate life for our priests, people, and parishes. It is fair to say that both Archbishops wanted that. Moreover 60% of the bishops in Synod (though not two thirds) were prepared, more or less enthusiastically, to support the Archbishops and accept their spiritual lead.

Come the final judgment when, as the Prayer Book says in the Marriage Service, ‘the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed’, some will have to account for the broken promises of the early 1990s. Traditionalists were then assured of a permanent and honoured place. Great store was set by the doctrine of reception (whereby no change in Holy Order would finally thought to be ‘received’ until it was accepted by the ancient churches of East and West). It was on the basis of these promises – both now very hollow – that Provincial Episcopal Visitors were appointed, ordinands and their families exchanged comfortable life styles for theological college, curacies, and what promised to be a lifetime of ministry, and parishes set to work energetically with the task of evangelism and catechesis. However honourably these promises were made, there were liberal pressure groups intent on destroying them….

Read it all.

The Archbishop of Canterbury admitted today that it will be “desperately difficult” to keep the Church of England unified in light of its schismatic vote on women bishops.

In a heartfelt appeal for unity after a particularly fraught week, Dr Rowan Williams called on Anglicans to push ahead with the consecration of women bishops despite the fact that a minority of traditionalists, conservative evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics have threatened to leave the church over the issue.

The beleaguered church leader suffered an ignominious defeat on Saturday evening when the general synod ”“ the church’s legislative assembly ”“ rejected his personal appeal for a series of safeguards that would have provided a separate class of male-only bishops to administer to those who remain vehemently opposed to female leadership in the church.

Read it all.

The Archbishop of Canterbury suffered a humiliating blow yesterday after his efforts to force through a last ditch compromise on women bishops was rejected.

Dr Rowan Williams risked his moral authority by attempting to persuade the Church of England’s ‘ Parliament’ to accept proposals aimed at preventing thousands of opponents of women bishops quitting the Church.

Under the proposals, woman bishops would have retained their authority in principle, but in practice would allow traditionalists to serve under acceptable male bishops.

But after a tense debate in York, the compromise package he introduced jointly with the Archbishop of York Dr John Sentamu was narrowly voted down.

Read it all.

The Church of England’s ruling synod has decided that women bishops should be allowed, but there are further steps to take before they can be ordained.

The General Synod has given minimal concessions to traditionalist Anglicans who opposed the move.

They had sought exemptions from serving under women bishops and guaranteed access to a male alternative.

But the synod decided women bishops should be able to decide the identity of any bishop entering their dioceses.

Read it all.

From here:

The draft Measure to permit the ordination women as bishops, approved today by the General Synod and sent for discussion and approval by Diocesan Synods, contains nothing which can satisfy the legitimate needs of members of Forward in Faith.

Now, though, is not the time for precipitate action. There will be ample opportunity for priests to take counsel together at the Sacred Synods called by the Catholic Bishops in each province in September, and for Forward in Faith to take stock at the National Assembly in October.

As the votes on Saturday illustrated, we remain as a Synod, it seems, committed by a majority to the desirability to seeing women as bishops for the health and flourishing of the work of God’s Kingdom in this Church and this nation. We’re also profoundly committed by a majority in the Synod to the maximum generosity that can be consistently and coherently exercised towards the consciences of minorities. We have not yet cracked how to do that. We all know that. To recognise it is not at all to gloss over it or to say that there is some kind of ”˜synodical juggernaut’ which has to roll on regardless of the unfinished business that Saturday put before us.

So, that’s it really – we have to recognise that those two goals are still the goals before us. Holding together is desperately difficult and to see it perhaps in terms of the service we give to one another may at least give us all a sense that we have something to work for in this process – and that, I hope, is what today will help us forward with. So I hope we can this morning recommit ourselves to that search for the goals that Synod seems to have settled upon, to do that in love and in hopefulness, in awareness of the extremely difficult decisions that face many and not minimising those and yet also in the belief that we are ”“ in serving one another here ”“ quite simply, serving the God who calls us.

Read it carefully and read it all.

Read it all.

Canon David Houlding, a prebendary at St Paul’s cathedral, estimated that as many as 200 traditionalist clergy could leave the Church, taking thousands of worshippers with them.

“People’s patience is running out and many will now be asking whether they should try and practice their Catholic faith in the Church of England,” he said.

“The vote was a severe blow to the archbishop [of Canterbury] and it has pushed us closer to the door.”

A group of 70 traditionalist clergy met with a Catholic bishop on Saturday to discuss plans to defect to the Roman Catholic Church. Earlier this year three bishops travelled to the Vatican to talk over an offer made by Pope Benedict XVI inviting disillusioned Anglicans to convert to Catholicism.

Read the entire article.

The main problem for Dr Williams is not that his last-minute compromise was rejected; it is that he allowed so much of his authority to be invested in it ”“ and Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, did not help, it must be said, by lecturing Synod on the need to support his colleague, drawing attention to Dr Williams’s vulnerability.

How can the Archbishop of Canterbury restore his authority? As the continuing saga of Dr Jeffrey John shows, the debate over gay bishops is far from over; but that about women bishops seems to have reached its conclusion. The Pope’s Ordinariate provides a structure for Anglo-Catholics who recognise the full authority of Rome. For them, the weekend’s events will clarify matters. Other traditionalists have hard choices to make, and we feel sympathy for them. But history suggests that most Church of England worshippers will accept women bishops as readily as they accepted women priests. They would welcome a little less agonising from Dr Williams and a more self-confident proclamation of the Gospel.

Read the whole thing.

Sixteen years after the first women priests were ordained in the Church of England, the bitter controversy about female authority in the church refuses to go away. This weekend it reached a new stage, when the archbishops of Canterbury and York narrowly failed to persuade the General Synod to accept a compromise on women bishops. Could it be time, perhaps, to end the acrimony and accept that the Church of England will have to split?

It is no exaggeration to say that the climate in the Anglican church for a generation and the whole of Rowan Williams’s seven-year tenure at Canterbury have been poisoned by the conflict between liberals and traditionalists, of which the role of women is a touchstone. The church is divided nationally, and it is divided even more deeply internationally. In essence, it could be said, there are already two Anglican churches, with the Archbishop of Canterbury striving heroically to hold them together.

Read it all.

As the votes flickered up on the digital screen hanging inappropriately above the Archbishop of Canterbury it became slowly clear that the Church of England was being rent asunder.

For much of the past decade, the issue of women bishops has threatened to tear apart Britain’s state religion. This weekend, it finally did in York when the general synod, the church’s legislative assembly, refused to approve safeguards for the minority coalition of conservatives, evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics who feel that female leadership within the church is incompatible with their beliefs.

Barring a last minute reversal today when the synod continues its discussions over how it will consecrate women bishops, the church will signal that it intends to become a place where gender discrimination at its highest levels is officially outlawed.

Read the whole thing.

The Church of England’s ruling synod is due to return to the women bishops debate, with little chance of major concessions to traditionalists.

Little remains to limit the power of women bishops in the legislation under consideration on Monday.

But objectors say they have not given up trying to gain exemptions from serving under women bishops.

Read it all.

It’s fair to say that there was an appetite for compromise, or comprehensiveness. You can see that in the very different voting figures for the amendments that would have given the opponents of women all they wanted: the one to preserve a system of parallel flying bishops failed by majorities of over two thirds in the clergy and bishops and nearly that figure among the laity. It’s interesting that it was those who would have been most concerned in these arrangements who rejected them most decisively.

But though the synod clearly didn’t want to give opponents all they had asked for, it was more reluctant to give them nothing at all. What the difference would have been in practice between the two sets of arrangements is quite unclear to me. Even under the new system, where there will be a code of practice, rather than legislation, to cater for the sensibilities of those who oppose women, it will be perfectly possibly for parishes and priests opposed to continue as if nothing much has happened. But it will be very obviously “as if”. The opponents will have what women bishops allow them and no more.

Read it all.

On Saturday night, the Archbishop of Canterbury suffered the most humiliating defeat of his time in office when the Church rejected his compromise deal over women bishops. It followed a week in which Rowan Williams had found himself at the centre of a storm over the blocked appointment of Jeffrey John, the homosexual Dean of St Albans, to be Bishop of Southwark.

Castigated by liberals who accused him of betraying his old friend by not securing his promotion, the Archbishop arrived at the General Synod in York also facing a mutiny over his plans to avert an exodus of traditionalists opposed to women’s ordination.

On the eve of one of the most pivotal debates in the Church’s recent history, liberal bishops had met to discuss how they would derail proposals put forward by Dr Williams and Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York.

They were well aware of the impact that their rebellion would have on Dr Williams’s authority. But they were still prepared to take drastic action because of their despair at his suggestion that a new tier of male-only bishops should be created to minister to traditionalists. This would undermine the role of women bishops, they believed.

Read it all.

The Church of England moved another step closer to an unbridgeable schism between traditionalists and reformers on Saturday when its General Synod, or parliament, rejected a bid by the archbishop of Canterbury to strike a compromise over the ordination of women bishops aimed at preserving the increasingly fragile unity of the worldwide Anglican Communion.

The rejection of proposals aimed at accommodating those who oppose women bishops appeared to strike a serious blow to the authority of the Most Rev. Rowan Williams, whose position as archbishop of Canterbury makes him the spiritual leader of the Communion. Although he has a long-established reputation as a liberal on theological issues, the archbishop, 60, has spent much of his seven years as the Anglican leader seeking to fashion compromises with traditionalists over the role of women and gays as priests and bishops.

But the votes on Saturday appeared to have blocked, perhaps conclusively, a settlement under which hard-line traditionalists might have accepted the appointment of women bishops. The proposals would have provided for a “complementary” male bishop with independent powers, working alongside a woman bishop, to minister to traditionalists unwilling to accept a woman as the head of their diocese.

Read the whole thing.

The Church of England was in fresh turmoil after two of its most senior clerics failed in their bid to avert a split over women bishops when a vote at the General Synod went against their compromise proposals.

New safeguards for objectors put forward by the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams and the Archbishop of York Dr John Sentamu received the backing of a majority of the houses of bishops and laity of the General Synod.

Read it all.

Update: You may find good details of the debate, including the vote margins in the three houses, here.

Members of the Crown Nominations Commission, which includes Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, rejected calls for Dr Jeffrey John to be made the next Bishop of Southwark.

The Dean of St Albans, who is in a civil partnership with another priest, was on the shortlist for the post and was considered to be a front-runner for the job.

Read it all.

Dr John is a hugely divisive figure in the church after he was forced to stand down from becoming the Bishop of Reading in 2003 after it emerged he was in a homosexual, but celibate, relationship.

Promoting him to one of the most senior offices in the Church would trigger a civil war between liberals and conservatives and exacerbate existing divisions within the Anglican Communion.

Members of the Crown Nominations Commission, the body responsible for selecting bishops, will vote this week on whether Dr John’s name should now be put forward to the Prime Minister for final approval.

David Cameron has been made aware that Dr John is on the shortlist for the post and is understood to be supportive of such an appointment.

Read the whole thing.