Tuesday, 7 February 2006

Press reports of Monday's debates

The Times Ruth Gledhill
Disunity ‘is the cost of women being bishops’
Synod in disinvestment snub to Israel
Also, Ruth’s blog has Church-Israel row looms as synod backs Caterpillar divestment

Telegraph Jonathan Petre
Williams backs bid to disinvest in firms that aid Israeli ‘occupiers’
Cardinal’s warning on women bishops

Guardian Stephen Bates
Church votes to sell off shares in Caterpillar

BBC Robert Pigott
Synod tackles women bishop debate

Today radio programme excerpts (Real Audio)

The spring Synod of the Church of England is attempting to reach a compromise over women bishops. Listen here

The Rt Rev Christopher Hill, Bishop of Guildford, and Dr John Broadhurst, Bishop of Fulham, on the proposals for a compromise over the issue of women bishops Listen here

Church Times
Monday’s Synod round-up

Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Tuesday, 7 February 2006 at 8:05am GMT
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: General Synod
Comments

The debate and the reports of it invite several responses.

The first, following the arc of several reports, concerns the position of the Roman Catholic Church. I read their responses with a degree of bewilderment, insofar as their position against female ordination and consecration, is rather rote, devoid of any position other than that eucharist given by any woman bishop or priest ordained by her, would be void.

I suppose then the question becomes for them, if there were a Roman Catholic female priest, would the body and blood of the Lord refuse to transubstantiate itself because she had said the Mass? How precisely would this occur, what would be the mechanism?

The second, leading from the first, is informed by the position of the Virgin Mary in the Roman Catholic Church, who state her own immaculate conception, bodily assumption, and other tenets, based on a "growing understanding" of her role since the time of the Lord.

Barring for a moment the argument that the immaculate conception and assumption present certain enduring theological and Christological issues, and likewise ignoring the "growing understanding" that could also lead us to understand female priests and bishops as being called by God, would not the Virgin's invocations (as per Catechism) "under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix" suggest that perhaps she might be working towards the very end of female bishops and priests?

The third, is the clear sense that the Church of England is moving closer to the position of the North Americans and Scottish on the issues of female ordination, consecration, and, through its statements on civil partnerships, glb in the clergy. How much longer will it be before a partnered priest is consecrated as a bishop in the CoE?

Will we then hear calls that the Church of England, the mother Church of the Anglican Communion, is thereafter "walking apart" from the Communion and until it repents, must be barred from participation in any of its consultative bodies or processes, including its participation in the Instrument of Unity the Archbishop of Canterbury?

That would be an interesting Synod.

Posted by: RMF on Tuesday, 7 February 2006 at 2:59pm GMT

Ruth Geldhill's reporting of the disinvestment decision is an absolute disgrace. I would agree with her(though as one who hasn't heard the arguments made in synod) that it looks like outdated gesture politics, and is unlikely to be remotely helpful to anyone, but Ruth's biases in focussing on Jewish reaction are seriously one-sided. She has spun this story atrociously, Only on her own blog does she disclose her sympathies for Anglicans for Israel, which is an unashamedly Zionist organisation. It is this kind of abuse of the media that ought to be flagged up on blogs like this.

Posted by: Doug Chaplin on Tuesday, 7 February 2006 at 7:14pm GMT

Quite. I wish she would listen to the views of John Stott on this one. Zionism, particularly its Christian variety, ahould not be something Anglicans offer support to.

Posted by: Merseymike on Wednesday, 8 February 2006 at 1:01am GMT

RMF wrote, "Will we then hear calls that the Church of England, the mother Church of the Anglican Communion, is thereafter "walking apart" from the Communion and until it repents, must be barred from participation in any of its consultative bodies or processes, including its participation in the Instrument of Unity the Archbishop of Canterbury?"

Heh. Yes, that *would* be an "interesting" synod. You must declare yourselves out of communion with, errr...yourselves! Please desist from walking apart from yourself! ;->

Posted by: David Huff on Thursday, 9 February 2006 at 9:24pm GMT

And that surely is why defining 'Anglican' as simply "in communion with Canterbury" is so inadequate.

Incidentally, according to the Church of England web site, the See of Canterbury barely gets a look-in when defining what it means to be an Anglican:

http://www.cofe.anglican.org/faith/anglican/

Interesting eh?

Posted by: Neil B on Thursday, 9 February 2006 at 10:54pm GMT

The bullet points on that web page follow closely the wording of the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral which was an output from the Lambeth Conference of 1888 Resolution 11.

Posted by: Simon Sarmiento on Friday, 10 February 2006 at 12:00am GMT

Neil B said,

"And that surely is why defining 'Anglican' as simply "in communion with Canterbury" is so inadequate."

Well this isn't the only element, but Communion with ABC is certainly necessary.

Posted by: RMF on Wednesday, 15 February 2006 at 11:54pm GMT
Post a comment









Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.