Sunday, 6 November 2011

Women Bishops - diocesan debates - 5 November

The report below will be updated as more details become available.
Updated Sunday evening to add Derby votes, and again to correct the bishops’ votes and to add to the Chester details.
Updated Wednesday morning to add Coventry breakdown from WATCH website and Derby abstentions and Bradford votes and following motions.
Updated Wednesday evening to correct Coventry breakdown.
Updated again Wednesday evening to clarify what actually happened to the following motion at Coventry
Updated Sunday 13 November to add link to updated Coventry press release.

Bradford, Chester, Coventry, Derby, and Lincoln diocesan synods debated the draft legislation to allow women bishops yesterday. In each case the main motion was

That this Synod approve the proposals embodied in the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure and in Amending Canon No 30.

1) Bradford passed the main motion in all three houses.

 ForAgainstAbstentions
Bishops1 0 0
Clergy22 9 1
Laity22 14 3

The synod also passed two following motions.

This Synod desires that all faithful Anglicans remain and thrive together in the C of E and therefore calls upon the House of Bishops to bring forward amendments to the draft Bishops and priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) measure to ensure that those unable on theological grounds to accept the ministry of woman bishops are able to receive episcopal oversight from a bishop with authority (ie ordinary jurisdiction) conferred by the Measure rather than by delegation from a Diocesan Bishop

voting: for 41; against 18; abstentions 5

This Synod deplores the exemption in the Measure from the Equalities Act, and requests the HoB to produce a Code of Practice or other measure which does not require the Cof E to continue legal discrimination against women

voting; for 51; against 4; abstentions 12

Our correspondent points out that these two motions are incompatible.

2) Chester passed the main motion in all three houses.

 ForAgainstAbstentions
Bishops2 0 2
Clergy46 21 3
Laity50 15 3

This following motion

This Synod
1. Desires that all faithful Anglicans remain and thrive together in the Church of England; and therefore request the General Synod to debate a motion in the following form:
“That this synod [ie the General Synod] call upon the House of Bishops, in exercise of its powers under standing order 60(b), to amend the draft Bishops and Priests[Consecration and Ordination of Women] Measure in the manner propose by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York at the Revision Stage for the draft Measure

was voted on by houses, and failed because the vote was tied in the house of laity.

Details are on the diocesan website.

3) Coventry has issued this press release. This gives the votes on the main motion as 71 votes in favour, 6 votes against, 5 abstentions, but there is no breakdown by houses.

Coventry has issued (on 13 November) an updated version of the press release with full details of the votes in each house on the main motion.

WATCH gives this breakdown by houses, but there is clearly a mistake somewhere as the total of votes in favour is only 47.

 ForAgainstAbstentions
Bishops2 0 0
Clergy35 2 4
Laity34 4 1

There was extensive debate on a following motion, to which an amendment was proposed. The amended motion eventually read as follows:

This Synod:
• Desires that all faithful Anglicans remain and thrive together in the Church of England;
• And supports efforts being made by the Diocese to achieve reconciliation; and therefore,
• Calls upon the House of Bishops to ensure that sufficient provision is made within the Code of Practice for those who cannot in conscience agree with the Measure.
• Calls upon the House of Bishops to bring forward amendments to the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure to ensure that those unable on theological grounds to accept the ministry of women bishops are able to receive episcopal oversight from the bishop with authority (i.e. ordinary jurisdiction) conferred by the Measure rather than by delegation from a Diocesan Bishop

Each of the four sections was voted upon separately.

The first three were carried by substantial majorities. The fourth one was rejected: 17 votes in favour, 58 votes against, 3 abstentions.

There were two following motions

This Synod:
• Desires that all faithful Anglicans remain and thrive together in the Church of England;
• And supports efforts being made by the Diocese to achieve reconciliation; and therefore,
• Calls upon the House of Bishops to ensure that sufficient provision is made within the Code of Practice for those who cannot in conscience agree with the Measure.

was carried by a substantial majority.

This Synod calls upon the House of Bishops to bring forward amendments to the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure to ensure that those unable on theological grounds to accept the ministry of women bishops are able to receive episcopal oversight from the bishop with authority (i.e. ordinary jurisdiction) conferred by the Measure rather than by delegation from a Diocesan Bishop.

was rejected: 17 votes in favour, 58 votes against, 3 abstentions.

4) Derby passed the main motion.

 ForAgainstAbstentions
Bishops2 0 0
Clergy18 7 1
Laity27 10 3

The CEEC following motion was defeated.

That this Synod
1. Desires that all faithful Anglicans remain and thrive together in the Church of England; and therefore
2. Calls upon the House of Bishops to bring forward amendments to the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure to ensure that those unable, on theological grounds, to accept the ministry of Women Bishops are able to receive episcopal oversight from a Bishop with authority (i.e. ordinary jurisdiction) conferred by the Measure rather than by delegation from a Diocesan Bishop.

 ForAgainstAbstentions
Bishops0 2
Clergy8 18
Laity12 27

5) At Lincoln the main motion in favour of the legislation was passed in all three houses.

 ForAgainstAbstentions
Bishops2 0 0
Clergy39 9 3
Laity40 5 2

There were two following motions, which were both defeated.

This Synod
1. Desires that all faithful Anglicans remain and thrive together in the Church of England; and therefore
2. Calls upon the House of Bishops to bring forward amendments to the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure to ensure that those unable on theological grounds to accept the ministry of women bishops are able to receive Episcopal oversight from a bishop with authority (ie ordinary jurisdiction) conferred by the measure rather than by delegation from a Diocesan Bishop.

 ForAgainstAbstentions
Bishops0 1 1
Clergy18 27 5
Laity13 38 4

This Synod calls upon the House of Bishops to bring forward amendments to the draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure to ensure that the Measure contains only a single clause permitting the ordination of women to the episcopate in the Church of England.

 ForAgainstAbstentions
Bishops0 1 1
Clergy5 38 8
Laity3 41 10

The diocese has issued a press release.

Posted by Peter Owen on Sunday, 6 November 2011 at 12:14pm GMT | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: Church of England
Comments

Derby figures

Main motion passed: Bishops 2/0, Clergy 18/7, Laity 27/10

CEEC following motion defeated: Bishops 0/2, Clergy 8/18, Laity 12/27

Posted by: John on Sunday, 6 November 2011 at 4:56pm GMT

The Chester figures can be found at http://www.chester.anglican.org/page_admin.asp?Page=492 (or find Diocesan Synod from the homepage using the dropdown menu under "home". Includes abstentions and has 2 bishops abstaining rather than voting against.

Posted by: Peter on Sunday, 6 November 2011 at 10:24pm GMT

Could someone please explain to this American the significance of the motion favoring a "single clause" noted in the report from Lincoln? I thought I had been following the topic, but obviously have not been sufficiently attentive.

Posted by: RobinD on Monday, 7 November 2011 at 3:55am GMT

Please, can any of our 'T.A.' hosts give us an arithmetical update of the figures For v Against in the diocesan debates on the proposal to ordain Women Bishops in the church of England - to date.

Also, how many dioceses are there still to vote?

Posted by: Father Ron Smith on Monday, 7 November 2011 at 8:40am GMT

Although not updated for Saturday as I write, the best status list is here
http://womenandthechurch.org/campaign-debatedates&results.htm
which shows six more to go.
Only two against so far on main motion.

Posted by: Simon Sarmiento on Monday, 7 November 2011 at 9:21am GMT

'Only two against so far on main motion'.

and it is worth remembering that in Chichester, one of those voting against the main motion, on the legislation, the majority against was very small, and moreover on the first 'Chichester Question', there was a majority in favour of women bishops.

Posted by: Richard Ashby on Monday, 7 November 2011 at 9:30am GMT

The Answer to Father Ron is that 38 of the 44 dioceses have voted. The remaining 6 vote next Saturday (just before the deadline) and this phase of the process will be complete.

36 Diocesan Synods have approved the measure. Chichester was against, and London was split with the laity approving it and the clergy against.

Full figures for all except the most recent can be found on the WATCH website at http://womenandthechurch.org/campaign-debatedates&results.htm

The totals to date (which do not include Coventry or Bradford or any Derby abstentions) are as follows:

Bishops
For: 58 - Against: 13 - Abstain: 3
of those who voted 82% in favour

Clergy
For: 1217 - Against: 389 - Abstain: 44
of those who voted 76% were in favour

Laity
For: 1396 - Against: 413 - Abstain: 52
of those who voted 77% were in favour.

Posted by: Peter on Monday, 7 November 2011 at 9:52am GMT

RobinD,

A Single Clause Measure would have enabled simply that women be ordained to the episcopate, without any provision at all for those opposed. The legislation on which dioceses are currently voting is a compromise: the Code of Practice makes provision for those who will be unable to accept women's episcopal ministry, but is less than the stronger statutory provision that they requested.

General Synod has already voted that they would not support a Single Clause Measure.

Posted by: Hannah on Monday, 7 November 2011 at 10:10am GMT

For RobinD - as I understand it the "single clause" legislation would allow women to be Bishops and would provide no concessions at all to those who have theological objections.

Posted by: Peter on Monday, 7 November 2011 at 11:19am GMT

Fr Ron (et al.) – I keep a spreadsheet of the scores so far, and a version of it is available here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Danbarnesdavies/Women_in_the_episcopate

(But I shan't add Saturday's figures til we have them in full...)

Posted by: Dan Barnes-Davies on Monday, 7 November 2011 at 11:29am GMT

Thanks Everyone, for your helpful response to my query on diocesan voting on Women Bishops. Let's hope the percentage in favour bears equal weight in the General Synod discussions to follow.

Posted by: Father Ron Smith on Tuesday, 8 November 2011 at 10:37am GMT

Coventry voting figures are up on the WATCH website:

Bishops: 2 For, 0 Against, 0 Abstentions
Clergy: 18 For, 2 Against, 4 Abstentions
Laity: 40 For, 5 Against, 2 Abstentions
(Low turnout in the House of Clergy)

No results from Bradford yet?

Posted by: Wilf on Tuesday, 8 November 2011 at 8:16pm GMT

On reviewing the Coventry motions, I noted this:

"Calls upon the House of Bishops to ensure that sufficient provision is made within the
Code of Practice for those who cannot in conscience agree with the Measure.”

As a final Motion to provide alternate provision for dissenters - apart from delegation through the Diocesan Bishop (who could be a Woman) - was substantially defeated, I take the mood of the Coventry Meeting was affirming the right of the Diocesan Bishop (male or female) to have the right to delegate his/her authority to minister to dissenters.

This would be preferable to the provision of an alternative oversight - without the Diocesan's express permission. But would it meet the demands of the dissidents?

Posted by: Father Ron Smith on Tuesday, 8 November 2011 at 10:33pm GMT

Where are Bradford's results?.. I do note that Bradford voted for alternative episcopal oversight enshrined in canon law?

Posted by: Robert ian Williams on Wednesday, 9 November 2011 at 6:20am GMT

Further to Wilf's comment WATCH also have the Derby abstentions: 1 clergy and 3 laity.

Posted by: Peter on Wednesday, 9 November 2011 at 8:55am GMT

Wilf

You have copied the Lincoln laity votes in the figures for Coventry. I have added the figures from WATCH to my article but there is clearly a mistake somewhere as the total yes votes do not agree.

Posted by: Peter Owen on Wednesday, 9 November 2011 at 9:39am GMT

Thanks for pointing that out, Peter. Also, it is curious that the WATCH figures (set out above) for votes in favour are the same in Coventry and Derby.

Has there possibly been a transcription error?

Posted by: Wilf on Wednesday, 9 November 2011 at 10:51am GMT

Coventry results now corrected on WATCH site:

Bishops 2-0-0
Clergy 35-2-4
Laity 34-4-1

Posted by: Wilf on Wednesday, 9 November 2011 at 4:47pm 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.