Women Bishops

Women Bishops in the Church of England: where now?

The failure of General Synod to pass the measure to ordain women bishops last November was a huge disappointment for a great many in the Church of England and a cause for considerable incredulity to those outside the church. In fact it was only the House of Laity that failed to obtain the necessary two-thirds majority. It is also worth pointing out that when this was debated by the 44 diocesan synods. 42 dioceses were in favour, and the percentage of lay opposition was only 23%. How did the Church of England get into this mess? After all, when the first women priests were ordained in 1994, it was thought it would only be a matter of time when there would be women bishops. Today a third of the clergy are women and within the Anglican Communion there are women bishops in the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Swaziland and Cuba. As a result of the vote, a lot of people are wondering about the credibility of the Church of England. So what went wrong?

It is no exaggeration to say that there are divisions within the Church of England which come to the attention of the public over issues like women bishops. There are Anglo-Catholics, although not all of them who place much stress on the traditions and authority of the Church. They argue that from early on the Church’s ordained ministry consisted of bishops, priests and deacons who were all male. Jesus was a male and so were his twelve apostles. They further argue that in the interests of unity, especially with the Roman Catholics, the Church of England should never have ordained women to the priesthood. If it proceeds with the ordination of women bishops the gap will between the two churches will be even wider. Some of them also say that although men and women are equal, intrinsically they are not the same and have different roles. Just as it is impossible for men to give birth so it is impossible for women to perform the sacramental ministry of a priest or a bishop. In reply we know from church historians that we cannot be certain exactly how ministry in the New Testament church evolved into the threefold ordained ministry we have today. We are also much more aware that gender distinctions in the created order are not as clear cut as we once thought.

On the other hand there are Evangelicals who put greater emphasis on what they believe the Bible teaches. Some use Paul’s letters as evidence against women bishops - for example when he argues for male headship (1 Cor.11:3; Eph.5:22-24; Col.3:18) and women forbidden to speak in church services (1 Cor.34-35; 1 Tim.2:11-17). In the latter passage, Adam is actually defended at Eve’s expense for his part in the Fall of humankind (Gen 3)! These arguments raise the question of the degree to which these passages are valid for the 21st Century? Should we continue to interpret them in the context of the age in which they were written? In any case we should also take into account further passages in Paul’s letters where women are specifically named implying that had a significant part to play in the mission and ministry of the church, for example Paul sending greetings to friends including an apostle called Junia and also entrusting the sending of his letter to a deacon, Phoebe, who was travelling to Rome (Rom 16:7). And in John’s Gospel Mary Magdalene is commissioned by Jesus to pass on the good news of his Resurrection to the Apostles, and traditionally Mary Magdalene has the title, ‘Apostle to the Apostles’ (John 20:17).

What about the Liberals who overwhelmingly support the ordination of women as bishops? They are frequently criticised by opponents for pandering to modern culture. This is an age old dilemma for the Church: how far should we embrace the spirit of the age, and how far should we be counter cultural? Christians who favour the latter frequently fail to realise just how much they themselves have been influenced by contemporary culture. We should also realise that so many cultural assumptions over the years have been male inspired, and a good case could be made that much of Bible was written from a patriarchal viewpoint. We must be thankful for the passages which weren’t!

There is the praiseworthy desire to show courtesy and generosity towards opponents of women bishops so that they won’t feel excluded. However there is also the danger of a measure being so accommodating that it would be demeaning to women, both clergy and laity, and would make the Church of England, to all intents and purposes, two separate churches. It is extremely difficult to see what kind of compromise could satisfy everybody. Liberals certainly do not want to lose sight of the fact that women bishops, rather than being a problem, will provide a real opportunity to enrich the Church of England’s life and ministry. Whatever else, the General Synod vote last November means that this is unfinished business. So what can be done?

Apparently the House of Bishops is drawing up new proposals for General Synod members to consider at their meeting next July. Naturally we hope this will succeed, but in all probability they won’t. My guess is that we will have to wait until General Synod’s next five-year cycle which begins with the meeting in November 2015. Clearly, elections for this General Synod will be critical and the campaigning group for women bishops, Women and the Church (WATCH), is already planning for these elections. They will also be pressing for a law which simply says women can lawfully be bishops, without any extra compensatory clauses for opponents.

As it was only the House of Laity that failed to obtain the necessary two-thirds majority, the focus will be on the composition of this house in the next General Synod. It may come as a surprise to some that the people qualified to vote for candidates to the House of Laity are the lay members of the Church of England’s 718 deanery synods. This means that the next elections to deanery synods which will take place at the annual parish meetings in the spring of 2014 will be very important. As you will know, electoral-roll members are allowed to vote for deanery synod members. The probability is that there will be close scrutiny in both elections as to candidates’ views on women bishops.

In the meantime, there are some practical things which can be done. It has been suggested that, on an informal basis, a significant number of senior women could be invited to all bishops’ meetings, both nationally and regionally, with the intention that they play a full part in the discussion and planning of the church at national level on a regular basis. Perhaps bishops’ meetings will become rather different! As well as appointing women to senior posts, bishops could imaginatively provide opportunities for senior women to perform ‘episcopal tasks’ e.g. chairing important working parties and committees and representing the diocese at outside functions as the bishop’s emissary. Perhaps there might also be the opportunity for there to be a thorough study of the nature of episcopacy in the 21st Century, what is the purpose of bishops and what do we now need them to be and to do? At the same time we should pay more attention to the way we study and interpret the Bible given the fact that this usually figures prominently when controversies arise in the Church of England, and in the interests of unity more opportunities for differences should be aired with greater charity and trust.

Canon David Driscoll

Posted: 5 February 2013, 2.55 pm