Following yesterday’s defeat at the CoE’s Synod of the archbishops’ scheme to provide for softened episcopal oversight by women (the story from yesterday is here, and it’s engendering quite a discussion), a number of associated groups are throwing forth commentary on what’s being termed an impasse.
Peruse, and ask yourself: To which of these groups (or any other) might John Sentamu have been speaking when he said
It deeply saddens me that there is not only a general disregard for the truth, but a rapacious appetite for ‘carelessness’ compounded by spin, propaganda and the resort to misleading opinions paraded as fact, regarding a remarkable, gifted and much-maligned Christian leader I call a dear friend and trusted colleague – one Rowan Williams.
Anglican Mainstream’s Chris Sugden demanded face-time with Rowan Williams and John Sentamu:
The subsequent crisis in the CofE, and its Synodical and Episcopal leadership has led senior Anglo-Catholic and Evangelical leaders this evening to request an urgent meeting with both Archbishops to discuss the matter before Synod resumes its Women Bishop debates on the issue on Monday morning.
Later, Anglican Mainstream tried to be clear about procedure, and sparked a good debate here about this blogger’s new favorite term, monoepiscopacy:
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. Synod had two objectives:
i) To affirm that all bishops would be of equal status and
ii) To enable those who, on grounds of scripture and theology, cannot accept women as bishops, to continue to flourish within the Church of England without diminishing the status of women bishops.
So far we have yet to find a solution.
WATCH (Women and the Church) says it’ll keep watching:
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.
To the inattentive ear, it may seem as though Forward in Faith UK has planned a pub crawl:
We naturally share the Archbishops’ disappointment at this turn of events and will now take counsel together, as we await the resumption of the debate on Monday.
Catholic Group in Synod, meanwhile, may be found at confession:
We deeply regret that the General Synod has decided to ignore the leadership of the chief pastors of the Church of England Archbishops of Canterbury and York….
By rejecting the opportunity for unity that the Amendments they proposed would have achieved, it has made it very difficult for those who in conscience cannot accept the ministry for women priests and bishops.
h/t Thinking Anglicans and Simon Sarmiento (confer recent item press comment on the women bishop debate).
More press reports:
Independent – Barring a last minute reversal Monday, the church will signal that it intends to become a place where gender discrimination at its highest levels is officially outlawed.
Daily Mail – Sentamu: “You are a child of God, start behaving like one.”