C of E vote backs women bishops

Posted on July 8, 2008 
Filed under News

Church of England General SynodThe Church of England’s ruling General Synod has voted to ordain women as bishops and approved a code of practice aimed at reassuring opponents. However the code falls short of safeguards demanded by traditionalists, such as allowing male “super-bishops” to cater for those against the reforms. … – from BBC News.

From the Church Society’s summary of the day’s business –

In the afternoon the Synod began the debate on Women Bishops. Due to the large number of amendments a total of six hours of debate was allowed going up to 10pm. After the first four hours Synod had covered seven of the fourteen amendments. However, this represented the bulk of the difficult decisions.

The initial motion had been put by the House of Bishops which is sadly unrepresentative of the wider Church.  Once they had put their motion it was going to be very difficult for any alternative to get through General Synod and this proved to be the case. Every amendment was voted on by houses and all bar one was lost. The motion that passed is important but not to do with provision.

The amendment which would have removed even a code of practice, so that there was no provision at all, was defeated but with over a third of the Synod voting in favour.

Motions which would have led to new Dioceses for those who cannot accept Women Bishops were defeated.

A motion from the Bishop of Leeds and Ripon which would have meant that the option of Transferred Episcopacy was explored in more detail for the February Synod alongside a code of practice was defeated in the House of Clergy. However, the majority of Synod members did vote for this amendment.

The evening session began early at 8pm and went on until 10.15pm. It became clear that a number of Synod members were aware that having disregarded what those seeking provision had said would be necessary they had created a problem and the tone of much of the evening was sombre. An amendment was passed to ensure that the code of practice would be statutory.

At a late stage the Bishop of Durham attempted to get the motion adjourned, but this failed by a narrow margin.

The vote on the final motion, which was very much as put in the first place by the House of Bishops was then approved by all three houses. However, once again, if this had been the Final Approval debate for the legislation it would not have gained the 2/3rd majority necessary in the House of Laity.

After the decision the Archbishop of York tried to say that the vote did not amount to a decision to kick traditionalists out of the Church of England. However, the fact that he said it indicates that is exactly how many will receive the decision.

Vote on the final resolution:
Bishops 28 – 12
Clergy 124 – 44
Laity 111 – 68

And The Times Religion correspondent, Ruth Gledhill, has posted a live blog from General Synod – very long but very interesting reading –

… Gerald O’Brien of Rochester said the synod had been very ‘ungenerous’ and had voted down provision after provision. ‘We can legislate, we can force people out of the Church of England. But the experience in America says you can’t force people out of the Anglican Communion. There are a lot of archbishops [hiss hiss] .. you can hiss if you like … there are a lot of archbishops around the communion who would be willing to provide support.’…

… Moving at last to debate the final motion, Alan Hargrave pleaded that none would leave the Church and said that staying in the Church was the ‘test of a true Anglican.’

Stephen Venner, Bishop of Dover, said: ‘I have to say that for the first time in my life I feel ashamed. We have talked for hours about wanting to give an honourable place for those who disagreed. We have turned down almost every opportunity for those opposed to flourish. And we still talk the talk of being inclusive and generous. The Rochester report said in many many pages that there were a variety of ways in which scripture and reason could be read with integrity. It argued over and over again that it is possible to be a loyal member of the CofE and [accept] some legal safeguards for those who oppose the ordination of women. It is not just those who are opposed to the ordination of women who find the motion we have at the moment difficult. I do. Where is the CofE about which we have spoken today? Is this CofE to which we have come to in this vote the CofE at its best? I have to say I doubt it. Is this the CofE to which I thought I belonged? I have to say with huge sadness, I doubt it.’

Massive applause. Venner sitting in chair, weeping.