The amendment put forward by the ABC and ABY to soften the provision for women bishops so as to appeal to opponents of women bishops has been debated and failed to pass in the clergy order.
simonsarmiento
#synod bishops for 25 against 15 abstain 0 clergy 85 for 90 against 5 abstain laity 106 for 86 against 4 abstain fails in clergy
5 minutes ago via web
Because it was defeated in one house, the amendment fails.
This was their amendment:
The Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of York have given notice of the following amendment:
(This amendment will not be moved if the amendments to which either item 512 or item 513 refers are carried)
514 In clause 2(1) leave out the words “way of delegation to” and after clause 2(1) insert —
“(2) The episcopal ministry referred to in subsections (1), (3) and (5) shall be exercisable by virtue of this section and shall not divest the bishop of the diocese of any of his or her functions.”
Subsequent to the vote on 514 other amendments brought up for consideration failed (technically “lapsed” because not enough members stood for the amendment). Thinking Anglicans has an outline of today’s debate on women bishops; it ends,
5.52 pm The next item on the agenda was the motion to include clause 2 in the measure. The chair adjourned the debate until Monday as he judged there was insufficient time to complete this before the scheduled closure time of 6.15 pm.
The Press Association has the first report of this defeat and includes thes tidbits,
Dr Williams earlier insisted that the concessions did not represent a “loyalty” test to himself and Dr Sentamu. “We should both be very disappointed if this was seen as some kind of covert loyalty test. Synod must scrutinise our suggestion in the way it would scrutinise any other,” he said.
…
The Venerable Christine Allsopp, Archdeacon of Northampton, told the General Synod she was “dismayed” by the concessions put by the archbishops. “We recognise their good intentions in trying to help us all to hold together but I do not believe that this is good news, I do not believe that this will deliver and it is certainly not good news for women clergy. A considerable number of us wrote to the archbishops to indicate our views because they had not been sought before,” she said.
Updates:
WATCH (Women and the Church) has a press release that concludes with this helpful look towards Monday’s debate,
On Monday the Synod will decide what minor amendments to make. It will also be given the opportunity to vote for the simplest possible legislation, in other words that ‘the Church will appoint male and female bishops’. Arrangements for those opposed would then be entrusted to individual bishops under a Code of Practice that will be drawn up in the near future.
This is not the end of the journey. The wider Church will now be invited to debate the proposals and if approved General Synod will have a final vote on them in about eighteen months time.
Amendment 514
The Archbishop of York moved Amendment 514. Following debate and a division by houses, the Synod voted as follows:
Bishops Clergy Laity
In favour 25 85 106
Against 15 90 86
Abstentions 0 5 4
The amendment was therefore not carried.
Thinking Anglicans is maintaining a full list of media reports including Ruth Gledhill from behind the paywall. Ruth writes, “Well done the clergy. There is a God, it seems.”
Chris Sugden issues his own press release in which he says,
Despite a majority of synod voting FOR the Archbishops’’ amendment, it failed on a “procedural device” of requiring a two-thirds majority in all three houses: Bishops, clergy and laity. In the House of Clergy, the vote was split 50/50.
WATCH responds:
WATCH is disappointed that some opponents of women bishops are seeking to discredit the standard practices of General Synod after the vote on the Archbishops’ amendment yesterday. The procedure of votes being taken “by houses” is standard practice for many issues. It must be requested from the floor and supported by 25 members of synod. Once this decision is taken, the votes of each House of Synod (Bishops, Clergy and Lay) are added separately. A majority is required in all three houses for the motion to be carried. This ensures that all three groups are prepared to support a proposal and the Church can move forward together.
Ironically the same procedure was used in 1978 when Synod first fully considered ordaining women as deacons, priests and bishops. Although it obtained a majority overall, the motion failed to achieve a majority in the House of Clergy and therefore fell.
Sugden has another statement which our commenters below are discussing. Sentence to ponder:
The problem the Archbishops were trying to address was trying to address was the problem of monoepiscopacy, the belief that only one bishop can have jurisdiction in one geographical area.