Church in Wales: Code of Practice

Governing Body members vote in favour of ordaining women as bishops       Photo: Church in Wales

The Bill proposed by the bishops of the Church in Wales to enable women to be consecrated as bishops was successfully amended by the  Archdeacon of Llandaff, the Ven Peggy Jackson, and the Reverend Canon Jenny Wigley. Their amendment substituted a voluntary code of practice for the statutory provisions contained in the bishops' bill. Details can be found here along with the Select Committee's recommendations.

Appendix 2 to the May 2013 Report of the Select Committee includes an Explanatory Note to the Jackson/Wigley amendment (Amendment 3):

Our amendment seeks to reflect the overwhelming view of Governing Body members (as expressed in questionnaire responses in 2012), that:- 

 a) there should be provision for women to be consecrated as bishops in the Church in Wales, 

 b) there should be recognition and provision allowed for those who in individual conscience dissent from this move, 

while also keeping faith with other aims, as expressed:- 

 a) in 2008 – that provisions for conscience should not be included in the body of  formal legislation, 

 b) in 2012 – that legislation should not include structural provision to accommodate dissent.

The resulting vote did reflect "the overwhelming view of Governing Body" which, judging by the "huge cheers" that followed, must have been made up largely of like-minded supporters. By contrast the result of the vote against women bishops in the Church of England last November was received in dignified silence. There were no celebratory outbursts but complaints followed alleging that the Synod vote did not represent the will of the Church. It did but not part of it - the Church of England. Nevertheless a campaign was launched to set aside the rules and fast track legislation which included a process of facilitated discussion and reconciliation. This process should provide a model for the Church in Wales to restore the trust that has been lost.

After the Governing Body vote the Archbishop of Wales, Dr Barry Morgan, said, “While we, as bishops, welcome the decision that women can now be ordained as bishops in Wales, we recognise that there are some people who do not. We want to make sure that adequate provision is made for them so that they will still feel valued and accepted in the Church and will continue to worship and minister alongside us.  We have been entrusted to draw up a Code of Practice within a year and we are keen to consult as widely as possible with church members in order to reflect their views as best we can.”

The Church in Wales suffers from a lingering problem. Those with conscientious objections to the decision to ordain women no longer "feel accepted and valued within the Church". The lack of trust caused by the decision of the Bench of Bishops not to replace the Provincial Assistant Bishop has to be addressed if "adequate provision" is to have any meaning.


On the face of it the Church in Wales made its position clear in a press release here: As part of the legislation passed, the Bishops are required to draw up a Code of Practice to ensure all members of the Church, including those with conscientious objections to the decision, continued to feel accepted and valued within the Church. [My emphasis - Ed.]

The Jackson/Wigley duo explain their amendment as follows:
Our amendment seeks explicitly to restore the relationship of Trust between the body of the Church in Wales and the Bench of Bishops, and to reassert the desire for this trust to lie at the heart of the bishops’ ministry and their role as a focus for unity.
Our amendment would bring Church in Wales legislation more closely into line with other churches in the Anglican Communion who have passed legislation to enable the consecration of women bishops - in particular the Scottish Episcopal Church and the Church of Ireland. In none other of the churches of the Anglican Communion so far has provision been made for conscientious dissent in legislation, but only in Codes of Practice. We do not believe that Wales should be the one to set a new precedent on this matter. 

Wales need not be alone. The bishop's role as a focus for unity has suffered badly in Wales while the Church of England, of which Wales was part until disestablishment, has avoided the problem through the ministry of Provincial Episcopal Visitors, a ministry retained under a code of practice based on guiding principles which are to be read together in a spirit of "Simplicity, reciprocity and mutuality" (GS 1924) here:

 Anyone who ministers within the Church of England must be prepared to 

acknowledge that the Church of England has reached a clear decision on the 

matter; 

 Since it continues to share the historic episcopate with other Churches, 

including the Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church and those 

provinces of the Anglican Communion which continue to ordain only men as 

priests or bishops, the Church of England acknowledges that its own clear 

decision on ministry and gender is set within a broader process of 

discernment within the Anglican Communion and the whole Church of God; 

 Since those within the Church of England who, on grounds of theological 

conviction, are unable to receive the ministry of women bishops or priests 

continue to be within the spectrum of teaching and tradition of the Anglican 

Communion, the Church of England remains committed to enabling them to 

flourish within its life and structures; and 

 Pastoral and sacramental provision for the minority within the Church of 

England will be made without specifying a limit of time and in a way that 

maintains the highest possible degree of communion and contributes to 

mutual flourishing across the whole Church of England. 

The expressed intention of the Jackson/Wigley amendment was "to bring Church in Wales legislation more closely into line with other churches in the Anglican Communion who have passed legislation to enable the consecration of women bishops". In the Church of England, "pastoral and sacramental provision for the minority designed to maintain the highest possible degree of communion and contribute to mutual flourishing across the whole Church of England" is an essential part of the new deal. Members of the Church in Wales deserve nothing less. The Church in Wales has 'simplicity' in its legislation. Now it needs 'reciprocity and mutuality' in its application to allow mutual flourishing if the bishops are to regain their credibility.

If the challenge is beyond the Bench permission must be granted and arrangements made for bishops to cross borders in the new spirit of church unity. That at least will ensure that all members of the Church, including those with conscientious objections, feel accepted and valued again.

Written submissions have been invited and should be sent to the Provincial Secretary at 39 Cathedral Road, Cardiff, CF11 9XF, or to julianluke@churchinwales.org.uk before 31 December 2013.

Sell out?

Photo: Getty Images

There is something about this image that makes me feel deeply uncomfortable. Perhaps it is because a person is the focus of attention. It has been used many times to illustrate articles about the ordination of women, most recently here under the heading 'The Church of England is on the brink of resolving its 13-year battle to introduce women bishops'. As the Telegraph puts it: "Under the new proposals, an independent ombudsman would be appointed to intervene when traditionalist parishes complain they are not sufficiently “protected” from women bishops’ authority. Leading opponents of female bishops believe the measure will “go sailing through” this week’s debate and on to final approval by next year or 2015".

This apparently is sufficient for Forward in Faith and Reform to claim that "the latest plan is 'the best way forward' for the Church". Is this a sell out? There is a weariness about the whole affair but is that any reason for those who in conscience are unable to accept the ordination of women to throw in the towel? 'The Church' is much bigger than the Church of England. Can we still claim to belong to the Holy Catholic Church if we fail to oppose what we believe to be wrong? I am heartily sick of listening to the secular drivel trotted out by supporters to justify their covetousness. There is no justification for the ordination of women in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church yet there appears to be a readiness to run up the white flag as Damian Thompson puts it here. 

Reliance on a referee has seen many a battle unjustly lost on the field of play but even assuming that the 'independent ombudsman' is of the highest integrity he/she will have an unenviable task. WATCH have fought tooth and nail to get their own way, objecting to everything they have regarded as a concession to their opponents. How many times will they be prepared to 'lose' before there is pressure to have the new measure rescinded?

The last of the Guiding Principles in the  Report from the Steering Committee for the Draft Legislation on Women in the Episcopate [GS 1924] states:

Pastoral and sacramental provision for the minority within the Church of 

England will be made without specifying a limit of time and in a way that 

maintains the highest possible degree of communion and contributes to 

mutual flourishing across the whole Church of England. 

In the run up to the vote on women bishops in the Church in Wales, the Ass Bishop of Llandaff lost no time in telling people that provision for the Provincial Episcopal Visitors (flying bishops) in the Church of England's Act of Synod was intended to be of a "temporary nature" (here).
Claiming insider knowledge, he testified as to what was meant:

"John Habgood, formerly archbishop of York, is widely acknowledged as the architect of the Church of England's Act of Synod, the Act that was promulged in 1994 and included the provision of PEVs. I was John Habgood's chaplain at the time, worked with him on the Measure and can testify that the intention of the Act was to be of a temporary nature, giving people opposed to the ordination of women a gracious space during a period of reception of women priests. As you probably know, I am now Lord Habgood's official biographer, and so have had recent conversations with him about that crucial period. His recollection coincides exactly with mine, that the intentions of the Act was that it would apply for a limited period of time. Inevitably the provision of PEVs strained the catholic understanding of episcopacy and ecclesiology as expressed in a UK Anglican setting, where formerly the bishop of a diocese was the centre of unity in that diocese; however, it was felt, in the run up to the Act of Synod, that that strain was bearable for a limited period in order to hold things together."

In the Church in Wales the time limit expired when women were ordained to the priesthood. The post of Provincial Assistant Bishop created to get the measure through was immediately dropped when Bishop David Thomas retired in 2008. In September this year the Welsh bishops introduced a bill which included a measure that would have made statuary provision for dissenters, a measure hailed by some as the way forward in the Church of England. That was a farce (here). The bishops voted in favour of an amendment in opposition to their own bill to remove statutory provision and make it voluntary through a code of practice. The mover of the amendment was a former GRAS activist imported into Wales by their scheming archbishop for now obvious reasons (here, and here).

The dissembling Statement of guiding principles in GS 1924 should act as a warning that what we are dealing with is politics, not the faith of the Church. If trust is to be of the essence for the future, the past does not augur well but one thing is clear, those within the Church of England who, on grounds of theological conviction, are unable to receive the ministry of women bishops or priests cannot in all conscience vote in favour of women bishops or even abstain. That we have had to fight, fight and fight again to save the Church we love should be proof of that.