The Revision Committee met for its third scheduled meeting yesterday (13 November) since 8 October (see earlier statement). It concluded a substantial exploration of ways in which the draft legislation could be amended to enable certain functions to be vested by statute in bishops who would provide oversight for those unable to receive the episcopal and/or priestly ministry of women.
After much discussion, the members of the Committee were unable to identify a basis for specifying particular functions for vesting which commanded sufficient support both from those in favour of the ordination of women as bishops and those unable to support that development. As a result all of the proposals for vesting particular functions by statute were defeated.
The effect of the Committee’s decision is therefore that such arrangements as are made for those unable to receive the episcopal ministry of women will need to be by way of delegation from the diocesan bishop rather than vesting.
Alas, this comes as no surprise. All along, neither the Bishops nor this Revision Committee have seemed able to come up with any workable plan to assure a safe, honored, longterm place for traditionalist Anglo-Catholics in the CoE. Which is all the sadder and more ironic in light of the fact that the Pope DID come up with such a plan.
So the CoE continues to head relentlessly toward disaster. “Like a train wreck in slow motion.”
Whether it’s due to laziness, stupidity, lack of imagination or perhaps the will to find a way, or even an outright desire to hasten the departure of anti-WO Anglo-Catholics may be debatable, but the likely outcome seems all too clear. Given BabyBlue’s HHHB principle (the Hammerstein Hierarchy of Human Behavior), my guess it’s more likely to be laziness and stupidity than sheer malice. But the outcome is just as tragic regardless.
David Handy+
If the C of E really valued its traditionalist Catholics it would be pulling out all the stops to offer something as equally generous and cohesive as the Bishop of Rome has offered.
Instead they have withdrawn the tiny concessions they had already made- which is just awful and unbelievable. What a damning, hurtful and petulant response.
If any orthodox Catholics were sitting on the fence this morning (I was not!) then they will not be there this afternoon. This is truly shameful – a pathetic withdrawal of sincere promises made in 1992.
Its not the final story yet but it is a real indication that we have NO future where we are. Time to start mobilising then……and start fighting for the precious little we currently have.
If Synod dare offer us this little and yet ALSO begrudge us our buildings (we are for the main part serving in the most impoverished parts of Britain) it will be a very, very sorry reflection on them. This was cruel…..once again – after claiming they care for us- they offer what they KNOW will not suffice.
Why do they find it so difficult – when the Pope clearly found it easy?
What lies ahead for the CofE if it loses the bulk of its Anglo-Catholics? Will not the Evangelicals and the Liberals fight to a draw and an eventual split, either de facto or explicit?
What hope has the CofE in regaining its position as the recognized leader and center of the Anglican Communion? For, considering GAFCON and FCA, there is surely a split already existing that challenges Canterbury’s legitimacy for leadership.
With lack of a legitmate center, if this situation continues, the Anglican Communion can steer no other course than a complete and explicit split, with one Communion led from Abuja and another communion led from New York City.
How the mighty have fallen.
#1 New Reformation Advocate says:
#2 rugbyplayingpriest says:
To be fair, the Pope happens to have on hand a world-wide church structure in which not only are women not ordained to any clerical order, but in which the question cannot even arise in any serious way; and since that’s what the traditional Anglo-Catholics want, he’s in a position to offer it to them.
The Church of England has no such structure to offer. Whatever your views on ordaining women, it seems clear to me that it is vastly harder to have some sort of “halfway” structure — where women are ordained to some orders but not others, or in some places but not others, or are ordained with limited statutory powers compared to men — than it is to either ordain women exactly as men are ordained, or to not ordain women at all. The Church of England has already gone down the road of ordaining women, so their choices really are either to go all the way to the logical conclusion, or to tie themselves in knots with some kind of we-do-but-we-don’t position.
The Pope, as noted above, has no such difficulty.
Once the COE decided to start ordaining women, they were already on the same path experienced by American Anglo-Catholics – from optional to mandatory, from ‘conscience clause’ to scorn. Liberals aren’t liberal. Theological conservatives and moderates where this hasn’t yet taken hold: take heed!
#5
You echo the late Fr Richard John Neuhaus who said “Whenever orthodoxy becomes optional, it will sooner or later be proscribed.â€
Earlier I said this:
http://new.kendallharmon.net/wp-content/uploads/index.php/t19/article/26247/#398610
[blockquote] the Revision Committee are between a rock and a hard place. If they go with proper statutory provision for the Anglo-Catholics they might make a difference to so many and give a lead to the rest of the Communion in that the CofE can still deal with things in a Christian manner and keep the balanced mix that we have always had.
Then again if they do not go with the WATCH/AffCath bunch they will hack off the liberal end and no doubt Christina Rees and her friends will have a complete fit of the screaming hab-dabs – toys being thrown all over the back of the Merc.
If the Revision Committee do go with the WATCH bunch then we can expect the Pope’s offer to be increasingly attractive, and the FCA will move in.
And for the rest of the Communion, they will see who we have decided to become, and whether we are either capable of giving a lead or for that matter worth following any longer; whether our future lies with the intolerance of TEC or with the Communion.[/blockquote]
and on why it mattered I said this:
[blockquote]So why does it matter?
1. The Pope – now with his generous pastoral offer, the Anglo-C’s have another option, one they received with deep gratitude at their recent FiF Conference which was humble, gentle and extremely thoughtful and theologically argued in comparison to the theologically light offerings above.
2. GAFCON, or rather FCA – who have served notice on the CofE as well that if proper provision is not made for conservatives in the CofE, they are going to:
http://www.anglican-mainstream.net/?p=16521
3. Reform have also issued a statement making it clear that there is no need for those who do not wish to to go to Rome, because FCA is here now, if the Revision Committee do not pass muster:
http://www.reform.org.uk/pages/press/latestpress.php
4. And the Global South Council have stated:
“We urge the Archbishop of Canterbury to work in close collegial consultation with fellow Primates in the Communion, act decisively on already agreed measures in the Primates’ Meetings, and exercise effective leadership in nourishing the flock under our charge, so that none would be left wandering and bereft of spiritual oversight.â€
http://www.globalsouthanglican.org/index.php/weblog/comments/pastoral_exhortation/%5B/blockquote%5D
But I am not going to comment further for the moment and will see what our “Leadership†has to say, if we have any. Doesn’t look good does it?