• Mixed feelings about the Church of England vote on bishops

    I’ve very mixed feelings about the vote that has just taken place in the Church of England Synod regarding the question of whether that church should allow women to be able to made bishops.

    On the one hand, I know some of the women who are likely to be made bishops and I know the joy and the thrill that will be theirs in taking on this role which previously was denied them. They will make fantastic leaders.

    However I also know that the C of E has fallen a long way short of equality. It will still be the case that people will be able to behave in that church as though women are not really bishops at all.

    Here in Scotland we’ve been able to have women as candidates in Episcopal elections for some years now however we’ve not elected anyone who happens to be a woman yet.

    However if a bishop is ordained in Scotland then she is a bishop. Should someone not accept that, she may take whatever action she needs to take in order to facilitate the governance of the diocese. (She might invite another bishop to work with her or she might not, as she judges appropriately). In England, it will still be possible for someone unable to accept that a women can be a bishop (or even a priest) to simply request a male one.

    It is a profoundly different state of affairs and this will embed into the Church of England the notion that the ordination that women receive, whether to the presbyterate or the episcopate can be accepted or rejected by anyone who choses to do so. The same doesn’t apply to men who are ordained.

    For that reason, whilst wanting to get all excited about the new opportunities that lie ahead for friends down south who will make brilliant leaders, my fear is that in due course, women and men alike will regret the decisions that led to women being appointed as bishops on these terms.

    A single measure clause which simply allowed women to be candidates for the Episcopate would have been just and right. This solution feels far from that.

    I know women and men in England who know that this is a vote in favour of allowing women to become second-class bishops.

    I have to admit that my sympathies largely lie with them today.

7 responses to “Remember the Anglican Covenant?”

  1. chris Avatar

    A timely post, with diocesan synod coming up. May well print out. (There is virtually no signal for online devices to be used usefully in the Highland Gathering Halls in Oban. Who knew?)

  2. Anglican Covenant: reports and reactions…

    The Church Times reports this week on the progress of voting in English dioceses on the Anglican Covenant: Covenant tastes defeat in diocesan voting. ALMOST a quarter of C of E dioceses have now voted against the Anglican Covenant. It……

  3. Susan Sheppard Hedges Avatar
    Susan Sheppard Hedges

    “. . .if there is any truth in that thesis, its days are numbered. . .”
    As we say in my home state, ‘your lips to God’s ears.’

  4. Jonathan Clatworthy Avatar

    Excellent post Kelvin.
    If the Covenant does get rejected in England, we’ll certainly need a period of time asking ourselves what really went wrong and how we could do things better. And Scotland will be well placed to set the ball rolling.

    1. kelvin Avatar

      Thanks Jonathan – and thanks for your article on alternatives to the Covenant which we are looking at next week at our Diocesan Synod next week to balance the stuff from the Anglican Communion Office.

  5. Paul Bagshaw Avatar
    Paul Bagshaw

    “Some have worried that we might be the first province to declare ourselves out of sorts with the Anglican Covenant.”

    They need not worry. The Philippines have already voted against it.

    It also seems probable that New Zealand will vote against.

    The Irish voted for it but with the caveat that it would not supplant the existing governing documents – though it’s not clear whether they would be able to sustain this.

    Source: http://noanglicancovenant.org/background.html#cofe

  6. Alan T Perry Avatar

    Thanks for this, Kelvin!

    What really amazes me is that the Covenant has done so well with virtually no attempt to put forward an argument (with reference to the actual text) as to why it is an unalloyed Good Thing. Proponents claim it will save the Communion without explaining just how it will do that. Those voting for it are voting for a black box.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Collating Fr James

    To Hyndland this afternoon for the collation of Fr James Milne as Rector of St Bride’s Church. (For those who care about ecclesiastical arcaniana, a collation happens when the bishop is the sole patron of the charge, whilst an institution happens in almost all other cases). It was a splendid occasion. Over a hundred and…

  • To the synod office

    To General Synod Office in Edinburgh yesterday, where I discovered lying prominently in the reception room (Room 1) an up to date copy of Scottish Field and a small pile of Scottish Fields for recent months. Can anyone confirm whether this is anything to do with the fact that the leader of the Scottish Tory…

  • HMS Pinafore – the Carl Rosa Opera, Theatre Royal, Glasgow

    The libretto of HMS Pinafore has at its centre a character, in the form of Sir Joseph Porter, who has risen to a status far exceding his talent. There was a certain irony then in the casting of Mr John Savident who, though he looked the part, was wading way out of his depth and…

  • Biretta Watch – Snowy Day

    Anyone who has read my 100 things knows that I wear a biretta when it is snowy. People sometimes ask me why. I tell them that it is to keep my head warm. This makes them laugh though I find it hard to understand why. People sometimes ask me whether I know how ridiculous it…