Church of England to reject Women Bishops

A resounding NO to the ordination of women is the decision of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic church, the universal Body of Christ from which the Church of England seems hell-bent on separating itself, not over any deep-rooted theological dispute regarding our Creed, but for secular reasons, specifically, misplaced feminism. If proof were needed, consider the opinion of one of the front runners predicted to be the first woman bishop in the Church of England, the Rev Lucy Winkett, who 'writes, speaks and debates on a wide range of issues reflecting on culture, gender and religion', presumably in that order. Read her account of 'A Half Changed Church' here. I shall pick-up on only one point, although I could challenge all. When the Rev Lucy Winkett writes about "A distinctive Christian women’s contribution to the current debates in society" she makes  five points for the benefit of her WATCH audience, the second of which I find the height of hypocrisy: 

"Second: a sense that sacrifice is not a dirty word, even though it might be incomprehensible to a self-satisfied society. A conviction that when it is chosen freely, we witness to the love of God for all humanity." [My emphasise - Ed] 

That conviction of self-sacrifice does not extend to themselves. Out of pure self-interest they ignore the beliefs of the Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches with whom we are united at the very time they move together to fulfil Christ's prayer for unity. So much for the witness of WATCH.

In a breath-taking piece of arrogance in the Telegraph article linked above, prejudging the vote of Synod, the faith-by-numbers Bishop of Oxford described the ordination of women to the episcopate as 'inevitable'. No matter that Christ, the New Covenant, defined the Way, the Bishop and his chums have to second guess Christ's example and do things their way. But more disappointingly, the subject of the article, the Bishop of Chichester, the Rt Rev John Hind, who has led opposition to ordaining women as bishops also said that it was now 'certain to happen', perhaps forgetting that the only certainty is death when we all shall have to answer to God for our misdeeds. Better then to remain true to our Baptismal promise to:

"Fight valiantly as a disciple of Christ

against sin, the world and the devil,

and remain faithful to Christ to the end of your life."

What is wrong is wrong. Women bishops in the Church of England may appear to be a political reality in terms of gender politics but this has no part in faith, the faith that has sustained men and women for two millennia until a self appointed group of feminists decided to usurp the authority of mother church. In a recent blog entry I wrote about the treatment of a highly respected priest and former Additional Curates Society Chairman, the Very Rev Jeremy Winston. In a Telegraph obituary he was referred to as "the best bishop the Church in Wales never had". In fact he had been told in no uncertain terms that "there is no place for you in this church." Read a moving tribute here. It illustrates the attitude of the Church in Wales towards those whose conscience does not accord with the tunnel-vision views of their Archbishop, views more extreme than those of the Archbishop of Canterbury who at least has made some effort to honour pledges given when women were accepted for ordination to the priesthood. All the liberal propaganda about wasting talents can be seen for what it is when one of the Anglican Church's brightest stars can be eclipsed by secular political correctness.


Generosity is a word that trips easily from the tongues of the liberal elite. Bishop Pritchard says, "I think the code of practice is a generous, rigorous way of making sure that bishops honour both those who want women bishops and those many fewer people who disagree with it in conscience and I think the code of practice interpreted properly by bishops will be more than adequate to do that." Fr Edward Barnes unpacks these meaningless, self-serving assertions here.


As our Church slips evermore towards obscurity, the latest liberal cause célèbre to hit the headlines is the report that one hundred clerics in the diocese of London have signed a letter stating that they should have the right to host civil partnerships on grounds of “individual conscience”, just as they can choose to marry divorcees in their churches. The protesters ignore warnings of the descent of the Anglican Church exemplified in the US, dismissing them with a fleeting, 'Oh that's America, it couldn't happen here!'. I doubt that the Archbishop of York sees it that way having come under attack for his views on the meaning of marriage with one protester handcuffing himself to a lamppost like a modern day suffragette with a sign at his feet bearing the words “Homophobia is so gay”, illustrating how twisted protesters misrepresent Christian values. In common with many Christians, Dr Sentamu welcomes civil partnerships but insists that the state does not have any power to 'change the long-settled definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman'. 


We are all made in the image of God so it is understandable that we all want to be respected but to respect one another does not imply sameness. God's creation sees male and female coming together as one flesh in the sacrament of marriage for the procreation of children. To pretend other is a disservice to those who championed the cause of civil partnerships despite some misgivings that the 'progressive' brigade would soon want more than was asked for, a not unfamiliar situation in today's church. Speaking before the Washington state legislature hearings on the definition of marriage in, Washington, on the subject "Redefine marriage and history will not be kind to you", Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse said, 'Let me remind you that a vast majority of African Americans completely reject same sex marriage. They are deeply offended by the high-jacking of the moral authority of their civil rights movement'. [My emphasis Ed]. Her profound witness to the love of God through the sanctity of marriage can be read here.


The place of women in the Universal Church has been distorted for political ends. There is no discrimination of women in the Apostolic Church. Women 'choosing freely' do 'witness to the love of God for all humanity', a view exemplified by Doctor, lawyer and theologian, Priscilla Noble-Mathews in a broadcast linked here, testimony that this is our church, this is our faith, the faith that binds us to the Holy Catholic Church which says NO to women bishops.  

Honour and Dishonour

Eighty-three year old Kathleen White has worked at Claverley Post Office near Wolverhampton for 68 years becoming sub-postmistress in 1960. She has also spent 38 years on the parish council and ran the Sunday school at nearby All Saints Church for more than 20 years. She has been awarded an MBE in the New Year Honours List for her services as an unsung hero.

Sixty-six year old former south-east London MP Peter Bottomley (pictured left) receives a knighthood  after (only) 35 years in the Commons. "The former Tory minister, an MP since 1975, is honoured for public service in recognition of his "long and distinguished" parliamentary career."

Distanced greatly in their service awards , Miss White and Sir Peter share links of service to the Church of England. While Miss White has been busy teaching the Christian faith to children for over 20 years, Sir Peter has been busy on church business. He is a former Chairman of the Church of England Children’s Society and a trustee of Christian Aid but it is his service on the parliamentary Ecclesiastical Committee which is especially noteworthy, particularly for traditionalists in the Church of England. Asked for his views on the ordination of women bishops his response was "Surely people should be considered on merit. Sex is not merit. Sex is not a qualification or a disqualification." 

In 1992 the Ecclesiastical Committee insisted that provisions must be made for those opposed to women bishops, something conveniently forgotten when the Church of England submitted to the will of Women and the Church (WATCH) who have been determined not to honour pledges given. In 2008 Mr Bottomley's response to this duplicity was "Essentially everyone knew that when you had the ordination of women as priests that this would lead to the ordination of women bishops after a decent length of pause. Some would say it has now been an indecent length of pause." An odd sense of honour for someone in a trusted position. Perhaps having served on the Parliamentary Standards Committee and knowing so much about honesty, openness, evasion, misrepresentation and lying he felt well qualified to distinguish between honour and dishonour.

It is a pity Sir Peter doesn't know the difference between faith and political correctness. If he were to read Pope Benedict XVI's account "On the Church’s position on against women priests in "Light of the World" quoted here, or listen to Dr Priscilla Noble-Mathews linked here, he would be much better informed. Traditionalists in the Church of England must hope that his colleagues on the Ecclesiastical Committee are better informed and pray that God rather than political correctness guides them in their work in 2011 and beyond. 

Women, Discrimination and The Church

I am indebted to an alert follower for this link to a broadcast on Christmas Day describing how one women battled against discrimination. A remarkable woman; God bless her.

"Priscilla, Queen of iPM listeners. Doctor, lawyer and theologian, Priscilla Noble-Mathews talks about her life, death and the hereafter. A homesick wartime evacuee, she's faced down sexism and ageism to work her way from the Bar, through the civil service to medicine. In what many would regard as her retirement, Priscilla has found new challenges working with a helicopter rescue team, risking her own life for others."