25 February 2012
It seemed right to leave a pause for reflection after the meeting of the
General Synod in February, which devoted much time to further consideration of
the draft legislation on women bishops.
We are hugely grateful to the
Venerable Cherry Vann, Archdeacon of Rochdale, for introducing the Diocesan
Synod Motion on behalf of the Diocese of Manchester, and for the gracious and
generous way in which she did so. This motion invited the House of Bishops to
consider amending the legislation, in order to introduce provisions for those
unable to accept the ordination of women to the episcopate along the lines of
those contained in the amendment proposed by the Archbishops of Canterbury and
York, which was very narrowly defeated in July 2010.
While the Manchester motion was not
passed in the form proposed, the debate was a helpful one. Many members of
Synod, including those from the Catholic Group, but by no means only them, spoke
eloquently and forcefully in favour of arrangements whereby those unable to
accept women in the episcopate, on theological grounds, would be able to
continue in the Church of England with integrity and a real opportunity to
flourish. It was enormously encouraging to hear the speeches of younger lay
people, women and men, and younger priests, putting our case.
It was encouraging, too, that a third
of the House of Clergy and well over 40% of the House of Laity voted against any
amendment to the Manchester motion, indicating significant dissatisfaction with
the legislation in its present form. In the House of Bishops, 16 bishops voted
against amending the Manchester motion, among them the Archbishop of York, the
Bishops of London and Durham, and a number of other senior diocesan bishops. A
further 5 members of the House of Bishops, including the Archbishop of
Canterbury and the Bishop of Winchester,
abstained.
The motion which was passed in its
final form still gives the House of Bishops room to take a fresh look at the
legislation; and, of course, it remains true that the House of Bishops has the
discretion to amend the legislation in any way its sees fit, irrespective of the
voting on this particular motion in the General Synod.
We shall be praying hard now for fresh
wisdom at the meeting of the House of Bishops in May, and for a willingness to
listen to those many voices in Synod which urged that, for the sake of the
Church of England as a whole, and her unity and mission, a way forward may be
found to enable supporters of women in the episcopate and those who cannot
assent to the development to move forward together. We are not there yet.
Forward in Faith continues to stand ready to help in any way, that such a
solution may indeed be found.
X Jonathan Ebbsfleet
Chairman of Forward in Faith
No comments:
Post a Comment