The Church of England is to rush through legislation to consecrate women bishops after the defeat last week at the General Synod in London.
The Archbishops’ Council, the executive of the established Church, met behind closed doors this week to discuss the crisis. In a statement at the end of the two-day meeting, it said: “Many council members commented on the deep degree of sadness and shock that they had felt as a result of the vote and also of the need to affirm all women serving the Church ”” both lay and ordained ”” in their ministries.
“The council decided that a process to admit women to the episcopate needed to be restarted at the next meeting of the General Synod in July 2013 … The council therefore recommended that the House of Bishops, during its meeting in a fortnight’s time, put in place a clear process for discussions in the new year with a view to bringing legislative proposals before the synod in July.”
Read it all (requires subscription).
My, my. One wonders if “A Commination or Denouncing of God’s Anger and Judgements Against Sinners” from the 1662 Book of Common Prayer will be re-purposed to a proper clerical “feeling” to the occasion.
Of course, it will be re-titled: A Commination or Denouncing of Man’s Anger and Judgements Against the Politically Incorrect.”
My English friends tell me that if the present system of Parochial Church Council resolutions and “flying bishops” is maintained the votes are there to pass women bishops. The stated problem was that these protections for the tender consciences were to be abolished in the name of Equality.
A vote to deviate from a traditional practice fails, which is characterized as a ‘crisis.’ I suppose some might consider it a crisis to be slowed in innovating away from traditional Christianity, but the rhetoric and attitudes are over the top – especially given that the innovation is hardly theologically _necessary_ for the innovators, yet is impossible for many of the minority opposed. At any rate, from whence comes this pressing “need to affirm,” and why is it given such prominent consideration? What dysfunction is at play that maintenance of the status quo should carry such neediness.
I was quite disappointed by the ready willingness of some to excommunicate traditional Anglicans, as displayed in the debates. Post-synod behavior has only disappointed me more.
Okay so the Archbishops’ Council is going to try again. It will have to grapple with reconciling two contrary concepts:
On the one hand, they are sure of getting the votes if they provide what the “traditionalists” have been asking for – i.e. a guarantee that they can continue to practice their beliefs among their own congregations in perpetuity. That includes rejection of Womens Ordination. Even if the traditionalists wanted to dig their heels in, they can’t – they don’t have the numbers in Synod to block women bishops legislation. So the archbishops only have to persuade the liberal “no” voters that sufficient protection has been given to the traditionalists, and then they will vote “yes” and the measure will be passed.
Yet on the other hand, this whole idea is anathema to the hard-line liberals who want NO provision made for anyone who does not accept women’s ordination. Co-existence is not permissible for them.
How will the Archbishops reconcile these two conflicting movements and come up with a viable solution by July? Your guess is as good as mine. Pass the popcorn.