The parliamentary reaction to this week’s synod vote tells a powerful tale. Wearing his Garrick Club tie, the Second Church Estates Commissioner answered questions from MP’s, all of whom expressed amazement and moral repugnance about the official and institutionalised sexism of the Established Church. (note to overseas readers ”” The Garrick Club is an exclusive Gentleman’s club in the West End).
The Garrick Club Tie Gaffe (if such it was) underlined an important aspect of the problem: the Church claims to be far more than a private organisation like a golf club, masonic lodge, or Gentleman’s London hang-out. It claims to be good news for everyone, and the fury of our legislators when they see it acting as though it were a private club, disconnected from society, was unmistakable….
Errr, yes it is.
A misleading article.
+Alan Wilson glosses over the fact that the man wearing the Garrick Club tie in parliament, Tony Baldry, was arguing strongly *in favour* of women bishops!
That was the hypocrisy which the British media immediately noticed – that +Alan Wilson’s ally, Tony Baldry, delivered a blistering attack in Parliament on those members of the Church of England who rejected women bishops, whilst proudly wearing the tie of a men-only club!
One British journalist quipped that Tony Baldry is obviously very strongly in favour of women becoming bishops, as long as one of them doesn’t turn up at his club and expect to be served a drink!
[blockquote] “Whatever the procedural arcana of the General Synod, politically well-informed people are now saying it’s probably a one-clause measure within two years or curtains for the establishment.”
[/blockquote]
Really? And what if that one-clause measure is defeated – what will +Alan Wilson and the “politically well-informed people” do then?
It is interesting to see that the good bishop is not interested in any sort of accommodation for those who cannot accept women bishops – they must be given no place in CofE, i.e. expelled.
Some conservative evangelicals will view the bishop’s hard line as a god-send: He will do their work for them, to create a new alternative Anglican polity in England.
The measure fell because enough Synod members were persuaded that it didn’t make appropriate provision for those who disagree with it.
It’s weird isn’t it that it’s apparently the work of the Lord to accept mutually critiquing points of reference and networks at the level of the Communion, but that within the CofE it’s ecclesiologically unthinkable.
My advice, for those who want to see a revised measure quickly passed: actually listen to those who just want a better provision for those who oppose it.