Reform News July 2010 (abridged)

Where Now On Women Bishops?

Rod Thomas, Chairman of Reform, writes:

The General Synod

At the General Synod’s meeting in York earlier this month, I moved an amendment to the proposed measure on women bishops which, had it passed, would have enabled parishes to opt for a ‘complementary bishop’ when it came to key issues like selecting ordinands for training, disciplining clergy and appointing incumbents. There was a good debate but the amendment was lost in the subsequent vote. The voting figures were:
               For            Against
Bishops     10                 28
Clergy      52                124
Laity         73               118

These figures are significant because they show that more than 1/3rd of the House of Laity felt the present draft Measure to be in need of major revision.

The Archbishops of York and Canterbury put forward their own amendment. Although it did not go as far as our preferred option, it was nevertheless something that would have been very helpful for us had it passed. The amendment would have made it clear that when parishes opted out of having a woman bishop, the resulting male episcopal oversight wouldn’t be ‘delegated’ by her but would operate by statutory right. A majority of General Synod voted in favour of this amendment (216 to 191) but it fell because it didn’t get a majority in each House. The House of Clergy voted against it by 90 to 85 with 5 abstentions.

The result is that the draft Measure will now go round all the Dioceses for consultation before coming back to the General Synod for final approval sometime in 2012. As it has emerged from the General Synod, the draft measure requires every diocese to devise a scheme for female diocesan bishops to delegate certain functions to a complementary bishop in order to provide for those who cannot in conscience accept the ministry of women bishops. In doing so they must have regard to the Code of Practice. Exactly what might result from this, however, will vary from one diocese to another.

My Assessment

Any legislation which provides for a woman bishop to ‘delegate’ her functions is a far cry from the exercise of male headship that we believe should characterise episcopal leadership. However, what makes the situation much worse is the fact that there can be no certainty about how much oversight a complementary bishop might be allowed to exercise. The Code of Practice (not yet drafted) might provide for all sorts of functions to be passed to such a bishop but diocesan schemes won’t be required to act on this: all they will have to do is to take the Code into account. This leaves a great deal of uncertainty. There is also the likelihood that over time, diocesan schemes would become more restrictive as people became more intolerant of those taking a stand on the Bible’s teaching.

That said, this is no time to lose heart. There is still much that can be done as is outlined below. In all this we need to keep stressing:

  1. Our argument is not against equality or justice. It stems from the Bible’s teaching about how to organise our churches and families in ways that help people to understand God’s love. Male headship of churches is not about authoritarian leadership but self-sacrificing service, thus revealing something of God’s character. Similarly, female ministry should help all of us understand the nature of discipleship better.
  2. The present draft measure is unsatisfactory and unless it is amended it is unlikely to secure final approval. All the voting figures from this General Synod show that it is unlikely to achieve a 2/3rd majority in each House – the majority required for new legislation. If people don’t want this issue to drag on for another five years, the draft measure needs to be substantially amended.

 

What Do We Do Now?

There are steps we need to take in both the short-term and the long-term.

Short-Term

  1. We must do everything we can to put up candidates for the current election to the General Synod so that we can preserve our present ability to block this legislation. If we don’t do that, we will never get the concessions we need. If you can play your part in this please telephone your Diocesan Office now and ask for an application form to stand as a candidate.
  2. Secondly, we must really pull the stops out in our various dioceses. This means:

Deanery Synod Reps. Make sure a resolution is passed on to the diocese saying that the legislation needs to be changed to allow a greater sense of security to people who cannot in conscience accept the ministry of women bishops.

Diocesan Synod Reps. Urge your synod to pass a ‘Following Motion’ if they decide to vote in favour of the legislation. This motion should ask for changes to be made so that ‘traditionalists’ don’t feel excluded. If enough dioceses pass Following Motions, the House of Bishops will be able to introduce changes to the draft legislation before it comes back to the General Synod.

Long-Term

If the draft measure is eventually approved in something like its present form, the clearest warning bells will be ringing for us. It may be that we will be able to make use of arrangements under the Code of Practice but at the very least it seems likely that some of our best young men will be put off offering themselves for the ordained ministry in the Church of England. If that happens – if the tap is turned off – then new incumbents for our churches will be harder and harder to come by and the future of our churches will be called into question.

Our response to this must be twofold:

  1. We must encourage people to keep offering themselves for the ordained ministry for as long as it is possible. Hopefully they will be able to have a life-time of service in the Church of England. But if not, they will be no worse off when they make a move than if they had never entered. This will particularly be the case if we are able to use the time now available to us to forge closer links between our churches.
  2. We must forge closer links with one another. As the future looks increasingly uncertain, we need to bring the issues to our congregations now and then get PCC backing to the idea of linking up with other like-minded churches in a close fellowship. If more difficult times lie ahead, we need to support one another.