Why the Church of England rejected female bishops

Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams said the vote against female bishops was 'not intelligible' to the British or global public. The proposal was passed by the bishops and priests, but not by the Church of England's laity.

(AP Photo/PA, Yui Mok, Pool)
Dr Rowan Williams, the outgoing Archbishop of Canterbury, speaks during Tuesday's meeting of the General Synod of the Church of England in London. The vote went against the ordination of female bishops.

The Church of England's governing body blocked a move Tuesday to permit women to serve as bishops in a vote so close it failed to settle the question of female leadership and likely condemned the institution to years more debate on the issue.

On Wednesday, Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron told the Church of England to "get on with it" and reverse the decision now, not five years from now.

And the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, said on Wednesday: "We have – to put it very bluntly – a lot of explaining to do," he said. "Whatever the motivations for voting yesterday … the fact remains that a great deal of this discussion is not intelligible to our wider society. Worse than that, it seems as if we are willfully blind to some of the trends and priorities of that wider society."

RECOMMENDED: Seven women who shaped the world in 2011

The General Synod's daylong debate Tuesday ended with the rejection of a compromise that was intended to unify the faithful despite differing views on whether women should be allowed in the hierarchy. But backers failed to gain the necessary majority by six votes.

"There is no victory in the coming days," said Rev. Angus MacLeay. "It is a train crash."

The defeat was a setback for Archbishop Williams, who retires at the end of December, and his successor, Bishop Justin Welby. Both had strongly endorsed a proposed compromise that would have respected the decision of those who objected to the ordination of women bishops.

Instead of ending decades of debate on the issue in the church, the narrow defeat opens the church, which has around 80 million members worldwide, to further years of internal discussions. It also forms an uncomfortable backdrop to the start of Welby's leadership. He is due to be enthroned in March.

Passage of legislation to allow women to serve as bishops must be approved by two-thirds majorities in the synod's three houses: bishops, priests and laity. Some took heart in the fact that both the bishops and the clergy voted overwhelmingly in favor. But among the laity, the vote fell short, with 132-74.

"This leaves us with a problem," said Bishop Graham James of Norwich. "Forty-two out of 44 dioceses approved the legislation and more than three-quarters of members of diocesan synods voted in favor.

"There will be many who wonder why the General Synod expressed its mind so differently," James added.

Rev. Rachel Weir, leader of Women and the Church, said the group was "absolutely devastated."

"Obviously this will be an enormous blow to clergy women, it's awful for their morale — but it's a disaster for the Church of England."

Despite the vote, several bishops noted that a woman, Queen Elizabeth II, is the church's supreme governor.

It has been 36 years since the General Synod declared it had no fundamental objection to ordaining women as priests, and 18 years since the first women were ordained. But that change never won universal acceptance in the church, with a determined minority arguing that that the move was contrary to the Bible.

That group, affirming what it sees as the Biblical idea of male "headship," has demanded special arrangements to shield it from supervision by female bishops.

Synod members were voting on the latest compromise. It called for church leaders to "respect" the position of parishes that oppose female bishops — without saying what "respect" would mean in practice.

"The trouble is our disagreement is absolute: either a woman can be a bishop, or she cannot," said Rev. Janet Appleby, a parish priest who drafted the compromise.

But she added that "respect ... ensures that parishes that are unable in conscience to accept women priests and bishops will be able to receive appropriate ministerial and episcopal oversight."

But some found fault with the measure itself. Canon Simon Killwick from Manchester argued that it was "possible to be in favor of women bishops in principle, but to believe that this was the wrong legislation for introducing women bishops."

Church officials say it may take five years to go through the process of taking new legislation to a final vote.

There was much talk from opponents about fresh negotiations, but few ideas about how to resolve the split. Bishops called an emergency meeting for Wednesday morning to assess the result, church officials said.

"We all think something different is right," said Rev. James Dudley-Smith. "We are divided and yet today we are forcing ourselves to vote."

Sister churches of the Anglican Communion in Australia, New Zealand and the United States already have women serving as bishops.

Southern Africa joined that group on Sunday with the consecration of Ellinah Wamukoya as the Anglican bishop of Swaziland.

RECOMMENDED: Are you smarter than an atheist? Take the religion quiz

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why the Church of England rejected female bishops
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2012/1121/Why-the-Church-of-England-rejected-female-bishops
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe