The House of Bishops has today by an overwhelming majority settled the text of the legislation to enable women to become bishops in the Church of England.
The House of Bishops made clear its desire for the draft legislation to be passed into law when it goes forward for final approval to the Church of England’s General Synod in November.
From what I understand of it, Clause 5 (1) c of the Measure provided that in the Code of Practice to be drawn up by the House of Bishops, guidance should be given as to:
[blockquote]“the selection of male bishops or male priests the exercise of ministry by whom is consistent with the theological convictions as to the consecration or ordination of women on grounds of which parochial church councils have issued Letters of Request under section 3 [of the Measure][/blockquote]
This latest draft provides guidance is given as to:
[blockquote]the selection of male bishops and male priests in a manner which respects the grounds on which parochial church councils issue Letters of Request under section 3 [of the Measure[/blockquote]
So what does this mean? Well here is my best guess:
1. selection which “is consistent with” has been replaced by selection which “respects the grounds on which”
2. Certainty that the guidance ‘will be consistent with’, a provision which is clear and legally binding and certain has been replaced by one which ‘respects the grounds on which’ but which only has ‘respect’; no obligation to observe.
3. Let me give an example: I am obligated to live a life ‘consistent with’ my decision to follow the Lord Jesus Christ. On the other hand, I respect the office of Archbishop of Canterbury but nevertheless may well consider the incumbent a useless twit, and while I may well respect his official office, I need not follow his teaching [nor would I be wise to] or to act consistently with it.
4. Note my example at #3 was purely for illustrative purposes only, but demonstrates that this is a useless amendment.
5. I hope the bishops found something more useful to do with themselves at their meeting, like talking about Jesus, evangelism and how to grow the Church of England, rather than pat themselves on the back for coming up with this meaningless drivel.
It will be interesting to see the reaction of Reform, Society of Hilda & Wilfred, Church Society and other groups to this.