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 How many times will they be prepared to 'lose' before there is pressure to have the new measure rescinded?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.