T A

Women Bishops Legislation

Two more diocesan synods have voted on the legislation to allow women to be bishops. On the main motion to support the legislation both synods voted in favour in all three houses.

Salisbury

Main Motion
For
Against
Abstentions
Bishops
1
0
0
Clergy
37
2
1
Laity
48
6
1

Several following motions all failed. See details in the comments below.

Southwell & Nottingham

Main Motion
For
Against
Abstentions
Bishops
1
0
0
Clergy
31
6
2
Laity
39
2
0

At Southwell & Nottingham a following motion seeking greater provision for the opponents of women bishops was defeated (For: 8 Against: 68 Abstained: 4).

WATCH is maintaining a list of all the votes on the main motion.

30
Leave a Reply

avatar
30 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
23 Comment authors
Ted BadgerJohnRosalindJCFRosemary Hannah Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Grandmère Mimi
Guest

Excellent news. I’m especially pleased that the greater provision motion was defeated in both dioceses.

A J Barford
Guest
A J Barford

Bring it on!

Robert Ian williams
Guest
Robert Ian williams

This is a landslide..but is the General Synod as representative?

Simon Dawson
Guest
Simon Dawson

Could someone please remind me of the voting figures on this issue at General Synod. If my memory is correct there would appear to be a huge difference in attitude between the General Synod and the various Diocesan Synods. A significantly large and vocal grouping in General Synod is arguing for greater provision for the opponents of women bishops, but when put to the vote at diocese level across the country that same view is held by only a very small percentage of synod members. It might appear that the vocal activists at the centre of the C of E… Read more »

visitor
Guest
visitor

Is it the job of the church to be in sympathy with public mood?

One might ask if those voting at these synods have a full grasp of all theological arguments

Philip Hobday
Guest
Philip Hobday

Simon – I think the significant statistic is that the Archbishops’ amendment proposing greater provision for those opposed was lost by five votes in the House of Clergy, securing a majority in the other two houses. That at least hints at the possibility that, without further such provision, General Synod might back the proposals by a majority but not the two-thirds majority required. I’d have guessed that it will be much more difficult to get through General Synod with the required majorities.

A J Barford
Guest
A J Barford

“It might appear that the vocal activists at the centre of the C of E are out of touch with the wider mood nationally and in the pews” – Simon Dawson

They should be directly elected from the parishes…

martin sewell
Guest
martin sewell

Simon, You may be right but this suggests that our General Synod election mechanism is failing. It favours the organised, the established, and those with the time to lobby in person We desperately need to embrace new technology so that the hustings can be more probing, debate more substantial and available to wider numbers In my area there was one hustings with 30 people held in the richest church that alone delivers 4 votes to Synod with others from the same deanery, whilst swathes of the poorer parts of the diocese have no representation. This is where the problem may… Read more »

Dan BD
Guest

When did S&N Synod meet? I’ve been seeing today’s date, but you had the results yesterday!

Is this a miracle?

Anne
Guest
Anne

According to figures I have just received from WATCH, Salisbury Diocese voted on 4 following motions, two of which were passed. Does anyone reading this know what those motions were?
(Quite a few of the Dioceses seem to be passing following motions, but without details of the wording it is hard to know what this is telling us.)

Fr. Graeme Buttery SSC
Guest
Fr. Graeme Buttery SSC

The system we have odd one. Diocesan synod votes only materially matter to deny a piece of legislation. Even if all dioceses approve this current legislation it has no real authority or effect on General Synod’s final vote. it may have some persuasive effect, it may not. Is this a fair system? I doubt it, but then we are where we are, and knew what the system was when we started.

RPNewark
Guest
RPNewark

S&N Dio/Syd met on Tuesday, 28th June.

Rosalind
Guest
Rosalind

Anne – none of the following motions proposed in Salisbury diocese was passed – 2 were voted on by houses and failed by significant margins in all houses; one was lost on a show of hands (ie the majority against too big to be worth voting on) and one was not put. The information that they had failed was on Salisbury diocesan website last Sunday or Monday; the WATCH figures show clearly that they were lost – just check the column headings!!! AS far as I know, Sodor and Mann met on 17th June. Philip -The archbishops’ amendment was only… Read more »

Nat
Guest
Nat

“Is it the job of the church to be in sympathy with public mood?” No, but the public is often years ahead of the church in its perception of changes and new issues. The established hierarchy is entrenched, often old, frequently deeply conservative, and its lethargy drives thousands of young people into thinking that the church is stuffy and irrelevant. “One might ask if those voting at these synods have a full grasp of all theological arguments” Rather a snarky question, don’t you think? You seem to have decided already, but many of us may feel that the Holy Spirit… Read more »

Mark Bennet
Guest
Mark Bennet

Anne – many of the Dioceses seem to be debating following motions, but they are not being passed.

Mark Bennet
Guest
Mark Bennet

If the results continue to come in like this, and General Synod does not vote the legislation through – some suggest defeat by a blocking vote in the House of Laity – there will be a huge credibility problem for the House of Laity in General Synod. But there has been talk of passing following motions in lots of dioceses, and suggestions that the votes in some of the Dioceses would be much narrower (eg Chelmsford, Guildford) did not come to pass. So rather than speculate, let’s see what happens – the talk of the legislation failing is an attempt… Read more »

John
Guest
John

I don’t regard these results as unequivocally good news. They are good news in that they affirm a very large majority for women bishops. They are less good news in that they appear not to countenance the provision for anti-WO people that the latter want. I don’t understand – and actively dislike – the primitive triumphalism here exhibited by some on ‘my side’. No issue here (we’re not talking genocide) is a single issue; all issues intersect with others. I had a conversation last night with an equally liberal Anglican in which we agreed to liking far more and for… Read more »

Richard Franklin
Guest
Richard Franklin

Having been at the Salisbury Diocesan Synod I can assure you that all the following motions were lost. The two asking for greater provision were lost thus: 1. Clergy for: 2; clergy against: 31; abstentions 3 Laity for: 4; laity against: 44; abstentions: 2 2. Clergy for: 1; clergy against: 35; abstentions: 1 Laity for: 6; laity against: 46; abstentions: 2 There was also a following motion which was in effect a ‘one clause’ motion. This also lost but less heavily (some abstentions from supporters of women bishops). I didn’t keep records of this vote. The whole debate went very… Read more »

A J Barford
Guest
A J Barford

“primitive triumphalism” – John

Steady on John! Isn’t this a clear matter of principle? After all, we don’t talk about a partial abolition of slavery, or partial equality for black people. It’s all or nothing. You get sidetracked into talking about personalities.

Once the legislation is passed, the effects will be revolutionary. After all, the pool of talented women priests who qualify for the episcopate is far larger than the male one. To paraphrase the late Gwyneth Dunwoody in relation to MPs: ‘Equality will only be achieved when there are as many stupid women as there are stupid men’…

Richard Ashby
Guest
Richard Ashby

In this connection it is interesting to see that there is a paper from the London Diocesan Synod requesting a review of the way the laity in Diocesan and General synods are elected. As they say, it is highly questionable as to how representative synod members are of their parishes or their electoral rolls. Judging by the result shown above, were GS more representative of the person in the pew there would be no problem at all with the Consecration of women to be Bishops, nor, I suspect of GLTB people either. I do hope that the London proposal will… Read more »

Lister Tonge
Guest
Lister Tonge

‘After all, the pool of talented women priests who qualify for the episcopate is far larger than the male one.’

Can someone explain this, please?

Father Ron Smith
Guest

We onlookers from other provinces of the Anglican Communion who have already approved of, and lived fruitfully with, the ordination of women clergy and bishops, are still wondering why the Church of England should still be dragging her heels on this issue.

This is probably why we are in no great hurry to be imprisoned within the proposal of a ‘Covenant’ that promises yet more examples of an ultra- conservative and restrictive culture of mission in and to the modern world for which Christ died.

Old Father William
Guest
Old Father William

“Is it the job of the church to be in sympathy with public mood?”

In the United States, the Church has consistently come late to full acceptance and support of issues of social justice which a large segment of society has been demanding for some time. From slavery to civil rights to the role of women, and so on, down to this day.

Rosemary Hannah
Guest

The argument for women priests and woman bishops is a profoundly theologically one, and people understand it well. It is that there is no great profound difference between man and woman, that Christ is in both and both are images of him. Understanding this, people have very very little time for the other argument – though they may have sympathy for those who hold it. Equally, I get the feeling that post people are now losing sympathy with those who fail to get the argument… It is arguable they should keep remembering their needs, but – but…

JCF
Guest
JCF

[Well said, AJ Barford. An unpleasant “well-known liberal woman priest of {y}our acquaintance”, John M, may be a great argument for THAT woman to not be consecrated bishop, not that NO woman should be consecrated bishop!]

@Lister Tonge: I assume “the pool of talented women priests who qualify for the episcopate is far larger than the male one” because the male pool has had an *outlet*—y’know, the episcopate?

john
Guest
john

Dear A J Barford, Implicit in my comment was rejection of any polarity between doctrine and ‘personality’ (not the word I’d use but let it stand): ‘personalities’ embody doctrines. (I know at the very extremes this is not true – Stalin was nice to his house-keeper, Hitler nice to his dog, etc. – but we’re not talking ‘very extremes’ here.) Explicit was the claim that moral calculuses are difficult and require consideration of a host of factors. Dear JCF, I have never argued that there should be NO women bishops. I am entirely in favour of women bishops. I am… Read more »

JCF
Guest
JCF

Yes, John, I gathered you were in favor of OOW. But why cite any given less-than-bishop-material woman then? Does not follow. Not being CofE, I try not to get involved in the specifics of CofE legislation… …nevertheless, I *get* that any legislation which would make a woman diocesan juridically *less than* her male episcopal counterpart, is a non-starter. Even among putatively for-equality, feminist men, I often find a curious ***lack-of-trust of women***, collectively. For example, in abortion restrictions: “we can’t have a ‘health of the woman’ exception, because women will lie.” And so also here: “we can’t leave pastoral provision… Read more »

Rosalind
Guest
Rosalind

John – if you fully support clause 1 of the current C of E legislation to enable women to be appointed bishops then this excludes transferred authority as a possibility. Transferred authority is only needed if the person asking for it does not believe that his/her (sic) diocesan bishop who is also a woman (or also a man who has ordained a woman priest) is truly a bishop. So, if women can be made bishops, then there is no need to transfer authority directly to a man. If you argue for transferring authority rather than delgating, you are by implication… Read more »

John
Guest
John

‘they could not find any roles of a bishop that the committee could agree on to transfer!’

Indeed. They couldn’t agree. That’s the point. The next step doesn’t seem to me to be absolute majority rule: it seems to me precisely to agree to disagree. I repeat, for the umpteenth time, this is not a big deal. It’s actually a very small deal.

Ted Badger
Guest
Ted Badger

The fact is the majority of members in the Church of England (in which I am an Emeritus Reader)
does not want the catholic wing in its midst at ANY cost.
I have no allegiance to the Roman Church and never will have, so where do I go? as I believe the C of E is (or was) the true catholic church of this country,and that is the faith I was baptised and confirmed into.