Friday, 25 July 2014

Women bishops measure - changes by the laity

The legislation to allow women to become bishops in the Church of England failed at final approval in 2012 because it did not achieve a two-thirds majority in the House of Laity. A different measure was passed in 2014, primarily because of laity who voted against in 2012, but in favour in 2014.

I have published the detailed voting results on final approval of the 2012 measure here and of the 2014 measure here.

From these spreadsheets I have calculated that of the laity who voted against the 2012 measure:

45 voted against in 2014
20 voted in favour in 2014
4 abstained in 2014
2 were absent in 2014
3 were no longer members of Synod in 2014

Those who voted against the 2012 measure and in favour of the 2014 measure were:

Glynn Harrison (Bristol)
Anne Williams (Durham)
Peter Bruinvels (Guildford)
Keith Malcouronne (Guildford)
Adrian Vincent (Guildford)
Anne Bloor (Leicester)
Christopher Corbet (Lichfield)
Debra Walker (Liverpool)
Philip Rice (London)
John Barber (Manchester)
Peter Capon (Manchester)
Philip Giddings (Oxford)
John Beal (Ripon & Leeds/West Yorks & the Dales)
Thomas Sutcliffe (Southwark)
Mary Judkins (Wakefield/West Yorks & the Dales)
John Davies (Winchester)
Priscilla Hungerford (Winchester)
David Robilliard (Winchester)
Jennifer Barton (Worcester)
Martin Dales (York)

Those who voted against the 2012 measure and abstained in 2014 were:

Peter Collard (Derby)
Ann Turner (Europe)
Prudence Dailey (Oxford)
Victoria Russell (Oxford)

Nobody who voted for the 2012 measure voted against or abstained in 2014.

Posted by Peter Owen on Friday, 25 July 2014 at 9:30pm BST | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: Church of England | General Synod

So quite a large number of changed votes.

Nevertheless 21% of the House of Laity remains opposed. This percentage is surely not representative of the views of the aggregation of the Deanery Synods laity membership that is the HoL GS electorate, let alone representative of the aggregation of all the electoral rolls of the parishes of the Church of England, who in turn elect Deanery Synod members, and which might loosely be considered to be the "membership" of the CofE for the purposes of this discussion.

Posted by: Simon Sarmiento on Saturday, 26 July 2014 at 10:21am BST

Your remark, Simon, is surely indicative that most lay members of Synods are political activists, rather than open-minded members of congregations.
This may say something about the unwillingness of most lay people to 'rock the boat' by becoming involved in Church politics.

Posted by: Father Ron Smith on Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 12:28pm BST

I can also think of people who voted for a particular lay member of GS. In the personal statement she stated that she supported women's ministry, but has consistently voted against women ministering as Bishops. The people I know who voted for her will not do so again. It all depends on what she mean by "women's ministry" - it can be a slippery phrase in some hands.

Posted by: Peter on Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 9:12pm BST

Thats the crux of the matter, Simon. The Church of England has a governing body which is neither democratically representative of clergy or people. If it was, there would have been no need for the Bishops declaration, which effectively de facto creates a church within a church! Without synod reform, there will be no shift on the gay issue, as the growing conservative evangelicals ( split on divorce and women, but not on this ) will persistently block it.

Posted by: robert ian williams on Tuesday, 29 July 2014 at 10:14am BST
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.