THINKING ANGLICANS

Fulcrum statement on Women Bishops

Fulcrum has published this Fulcrum Press Statement.

WOMEN BISHOPS AND THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND
Statement by the Fulcrum Leadership Team

3 July 2010
(read the Commentary on this Statement here)

The Bible supports ending restrictions on the ministry of women by making women bishops and the mission challenges of our times require it. It is vital that the General Synod debate later this month does not produce a stalemate. We need to move forward now toward women bishops in the life of the Church of England and we need them serving from 2014 and not 2018 or 2025.

We recognise that those who dissent from, as well as those who assent to, the ordination of women to the priesthood and episcopate are loyal Anglicans. Those who oppose this development need a space and a future in the Church of England. We believe this would be best served by appending a Code of Pastoral Practice to the Measure, not permanent legislation.

We believe the new legislation must not be framed to create what might be deemed to be a second class of bishops based on gender or a “Church within a Church”.

For these reasons we believe the legislation as proposed by the Revision Committee provides the best framework for a practical way forward.

Comment on the relationship between the work of the Revision Committee and the alternatives suggested by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York is posted on the Fulcrum Website.

Do read the full commentary.

14
Leave a Reply

avatar
4000
14 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
10 Comment authors
chenier1WilfPantycelynFr MarkGöran Koch-Swahne Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Fr Mark
Guest

“The Bible supports ending restrictions on the ministry of women by making women bishops.”

Good heavens, these people can be flexible with their biblical interpretation, and sit very lightly to St Paul, when the occasion demands!

Pantycelyn
Guest
Pantycelyn

The Bible supports ending restrictions on the ministry of women by making women bishops.”

Good heavens, these people can be flexible with their biblical interpretation, and sit very lightly to St Paul, when the occasion demands!

Posted by: Fr Mark on Saturday, 3 July 2010 at

Yes,especially given that bishops and ordination are not to be found in the NT.

Pluralist
Guest

Have they fallen out with Rowan Williams? At one point he could do no wrong.

chenier1
Guest
chenier1

Fr Mark Well, given all the other things which the Bible supports, a certain flexibility is required. As David Plotz notes: ‘I began the Bible as a hopeful, but indifferent, agnostic. I wished for a God, but I didn’t really care. I leave the Bible as a hopeless and angry agnostic. I’m brokenhearted about God. After reading about the genocides, the plagues, the murders, the mass enslavements, the ruthless vengeance for minor sins (or none at all), and all that smiting—every bit of it directly performed, authorized, or approved by God—I can only conclude that the God of the Hebrew… Read more »

Nom de Plume
Guest
Nom de Plume

Well said.

It seems to me that the amendment should cause the proposed Measure to read “alternative bishop” rather than “male bishop”. This would allow a parish which objects to not have a female bishop to request one under their diocesan scheme. Then there would actually be gender-equality of bishops.

Are we to look foward to a patchwork quilt of diocesan schemes?

Fr James
Guest
Fr James

Good Lord! These Evangelicals are supporting the consecration of women bishops, and the only thing you people can do is have a go at them for their biblical interpretation?

Why not try for some gratitude that an Evangelical organisation is supporting your way forward?

Unbelievable…

Father Ron Smith
Guest
Father Ron Smith

“Does this intervention by the Archbishops (notwithstanding their seniority and leadership role in the church) not simply disregard and over-turn the committee’s careful work and short-circuit debate on its proposal?” – Fulcrum – And the answer is, of course, YES IT DOES! Despite Fr. James’ comment, I think that many of us who are in favour of Women Bishops do, in fact, applaud this statement. Obviously, to go along with the Archbishops’ Amendments would course jurisdictional ramifications for the Church of England in the future, which far outweigh any short-term gain. What is being questioned here, by Fulcrum, and many… Read more »

JCF
Guest
JCF

[Disclaimer: this is rather off-topic] “‘I began the Bible…” With this, um, beginning, it’s no wonder that David Plotz concluded as he did. The whole notion of “beginning the Bible” (as in “I’ll read Genesis Ch 1, V1, and continue through Revelation”) is ALREADY *surrendering* to the FUNDAMENTALIST conception of what the Bible IS: a book like any other book, to be read “literally,” like any other book. But what if it isn’t? What if the LAST way to read the Bible, is to begin w/ Genesis? What if “The Bible” is collection of books written over a THOUSAND YEARS… Read more »

Göran Koch-Swahne
Guest

“Good Lord! These Evangelicals are supporting the consecration of women bishops, and the only thing you people can do is have a go at them for their biblical interpretation?

Why not try for some gratitude that an Evangelical organisation is supporting your way forward?

Unbelievable…”

The falsehood, the falsehood!

Fr Mark
Guest

Fr James: I was being ironic.

Conservative Evangelicals can be surprisingly flexible and sit light to traditional biblical interpretation when it suits them (i.e. here regarding women bishops, or remarriage after divorce, etc: in short, when dealing with everyone except gay people, it seems).

Pantycelyn
Guest
Pantycelyn

It seems to me that the amendment should cause the proposed Measure to read “alternative bishop” rather than “male bishop”. This would allow a parish which objects to not have a female bishop to request one under their diocesan scheme. Then there would actually be gender-equality of bishops …

Posted by: Nom de Plume on Saturday, 3 July 2010 at 10:14pm BST

This is of course, essential.

Pantycelyn
Guest
Pantycelyn

The whole notion of “beginning the Bible” (as in “I’ll read Genesis Ch 1, V1, and continue through Revelation”) is ALREADY *surrendering* to the FUNDAMENTALIST conception of what the Bible IS: a book like any other book, to be read “literally,” like any other book. But what if it isn’t? What if the LAST way to read the Bible, is to begin w/ Genesis? What if “The Bible” is collection of books written over a THOUSAND YEARS apart, with its myriad authors having little or no concept of their works being read in the context of other works? As I… Read more »

Wilf
Guest
Wilf

This is good news. What it is showing us is that there is theological and practical consensus in the mainstream of the Church of England. Most evangelicals in the Church of England are of the ‘Fulcrum’ type rather than the very conservative type; just as most catholics in the Church of England are not Forward in Faith. God-willing this means that there can be a truly inclusive central groundswell of support for the legislation as drafted. This is what the theological argument supports and what the church generally supports. The conservative fringes on both wings are small, but loud. Hopefully… Read more »

chenier1
Guest
chenier1

Since David Plotz was reading the Hebrew Bible, I think we can acquit him of getting himself into a muddle because Christians have re-ordered it…