www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Church of England Votes for Female Bishops

Church of England split on women bishops
By MEERA SELVA � 3 hours ago

LONDON (AP) � The Church of England's ruling body has voted its support for women to become bishops without giving traditionalist supporters of male-only priesthood the concessions they had sought.

One bishop broke down in tears at the meeting of senior British church leaders Monday in York, northern England, as he described his distress at the church's lack of willingness to accommodate traditionalists who have threatened to leave if they felt they were not adequately protected.

"I feel ashamed," said the Right Rev. Stephen Venner, Bishop of Dover, who is in favor of women bishops. "We have talked for hours about wanting to give an honorable place to those who disagree. We have been given opportunities for both views to flourish. We have turned down every, almost realistic opportunity for those who are opposed, to flourish."

Both sides conceded that tradition of male-only bishops would be changed, and the lengthy debate centered on what accommodation would be given to dissenters. This was not billed as a final decision; church legislation to implement the change is to be debated next year.

More than a dozen other Anglican churches around the world have authorized women to serve as bishops. The Episcopal church, the Anglican body in the U.S., is led by a woman, the Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori.

Hundreds of traditionalists have threatened to leave the British church if sufficient safeguards were not put into place for those who objected. Advocates of women in the episcopate had argued that any concessions would effectively make women second-class bishops.

The synod � composed of bishops, clergy and laity � rejected a traditionalist proposal for new "super bishops" who would cater to objectors. Some traditionalists believe church leaders should be men, as were Jesus and the 12 apostles.

Instead, the General Synod voted for a code of practice to deal with the sensitivities of traditionalists.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, said he did not want to limit the authority women bishops had within the church.

"I am deeply unhappy with any scheme or any solution to this which ends up, as it were, structurally humiliating women who might be nominated," he said.

Church of England officials say it is unlikely that any woman would be consecrated as a bishop before 2014. The church has ordained women as priests since 1994, but hasn't allowed them to become bishops.

The women's ordination vote also complicates Anglican relations with the Roman Catholic Church, which does not ordain women. Leaders of the two traditions have been meeting regularly in an effort to find unity.

The Vatican on Tuesday condemned the Church of England's support for women to become bishops, saying the decision is an obstacle to reconciliation and will have repercussions on dialogue.

The decision is a "further obstacle to reconciliation between the Catholic Church and the Church of England," said a statement by Cardinal Walter Kasper, head of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity.

Kasper expressed "regret" at a move that breaks with tradition.

"For the future, this decision will have consequences for dialogue, which so far had been fruitful," said the statement.

The Anglicans split from Rome more than four centuries ago when King Henry VIII bolted in 1534 over the pope's refusal to grant him an annulment.

But as difficult as the issue is, the differing views of the Bible and homosexuality have been more divisive to the overall communion, a 77 million-member family of churches that trace their roots to the Church of England. It is the third-largest grouping of churches in the world, behind Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians, and has always held together different views.

Already, Williams, the Anglican spiritual head, is under intense pressure in the buildup to this month's Lambeth Conference, a once-a-decade gathering of all Anglican bishops, over the homosexuality issue. Some traditionalist Anglican bishops are boycotting the meeting, which opens July 16.

At a meeting in Jerusalem in late June of conservative Anglicans from Africa and some north American and British churches, participants expressed outrage at what they consider a "false gospel" that has led churches in the U.S., Canada and elsewhere to accept gay relationships.

Long-standing divisions over how Anglicans should interpret the Bible erupted in 2003 when the U.S. Episcopal Church consecrated the first openly gay bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire.

The 2.2 million-member Episcopal Church comprises only a tiny part of the world's Anglicans. But the wealthy U.S. denomination covers about one-third of the communion's budget.

Within the Episcopal Church, most parishioners either accept gay relationships or don't want to split up over homosexuality. However, a small minority of Episcopal traditionalists are fed up with church leaders.

In the 1980s and subsequent, some U.S. Episcopalians were reconstituted as "Anglican Use" parishes (now 7?) under the Pastoral Provisions, still in place.

Recently the TACs were knocking on the doors of the Roman Curia for a special status when they convert en masse (about 400,000 of them but thinly dispersed worldwide).

Now the "Anglo-Catholics" of England and Wales (after the latest round of defeat at the hands of the pro-female bishops), apparently led by the Rt. Rev. Andrew Burnham, the Bishop of Ebbsfleet, and seconded by the Rt. Rev. Keith Newton, the Bishop of Richborough, both in the Canterbury Province of the CofE, have publicly declared they will seek admission into the Catholic Church, together with their respective clergy and laity.

If only the "Global South," led by Abp. Akinola of Nigeria and the conservative wing of the worldwide Anglican Communion, could join the fray! (However, this group is intent on preserving what they call the "traditional" Anglican Church "doctrines!")

What there is left?

Amado

If only the "Global South," led by Abp. Akinola of Nigeria and the conservative wing of the worldwide Anglican Communion, could join the fray! (However, this group is intent on preserving what they call the "traditional" Anglican Church "doctrines!")

What there is left?

Amado

Sometime around 1993 I was in England when Bartholomew of Constantinople addressed the House of Bishops of the Church of England - and termed them "Bishops of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church." I wonder if he would now feel able to say that!

Fr. Serge

General Synod Vote - A Message from the Chairman of Forward in Faith
Jul 9, 2008

A Message from the Chairman of Forward in Faith



The vote in General Synod on the proposal for Women Bishops will have been a real shock to many in our parishes. This is not the time for rapid decisions or knee-jerk reactions but rather a time calmly to take counsel together.


It was obvious in November 1992 that the Church of England had changed substantially for the worse. In the years that followed we have lived together with a real Gospel sense of purpose and they have been good years for us and our parishes. This week�s vote at General Synod came as a real shock to me, not because I expected to win but because I had not realised the depth of the uncharitable and unchristian attitudes held by the majority. It became absolutely obvious that, in spite of appeals from both Archbishops, the majority of so called liberals were determined to see us out. I have been quite impressed today that a liberal bishop and an archdeacon have both phoned me saying they shared our sense of shock. The Bishop of Dover, who is a supporter of women bishops, said in Synod: �for the first time in my life I feel ashamed�.



So what has changed apart from clarity about the nature of our opponents? I suspect not very much. As a priest and as a bishop, and as Chairman of Forward in Faith, I have always believed that the changing ecclesiology in the Church of England made collective demands on us. My conviction has always been that we have to seek a common ecclesial way forward. Our hope was that this would be established by the General Synod and though this now seems unlikely, it is still not an impossibility. I remain determined to find a way forward.


There has been speculation in the media about contact with Rome. I am strongly committed to Christian unity and, as many of you know, I was involved in the talks with the Roman Hierarchy in 1992 and later spent a considerable time with the then Cardinal Ratzinger in 1996. My problem then was that, although there was great generosity, there was no offer of an ecclesial reconciliation. In other words, our common Eucharistic and spiritual life was not recognised. That remains a problem for me. I am fascinated by the conversations between the Traditional Anglican Communion and Rome as well as those between some of our Bishops and the Holy See. Will these now offer a way forward?



Many of you have phoned me in the last twenty four hours, angry or distressed. Several have suggested that we should declare war on those who seek to destroy us. Particularly, the suggestion has been made that we stop paying Diocesan Quota. I am open on this matter but think that now is not quite yet the time for such drastic gestures, for whatever we do needs its timing to be agreed by us all so that we can act together. Be assured of my commitment to our common life and of my determination to continue to seek a common way forward in faith for all of us.



Every Blessing,



+John Fulham

I've never heard of an Anglican convert to Catholicism being required to assert that his previous sacramental and Christian life was all a sham and a mockery.

The Catholic Church does not recognize the validity of Anglican Orthodox - and neither do the Orthodox, when push comes to shove. But "invalid" does not always mean "inefficacious".

Fr. Serge