Comments: General Synod - more press reports

Is Sugden's statement that the measure required a 2/3 majority in all three houses correct? If so, the measure failed in every house including, barely, the House of Bishops.

Posted by Lapinbizarre at Saturday, 10 July 2010 at 10:11pm BST

I join Ruth Gledhill in commending the clerical members of the General Synod. Good on them!

Posted by Nom de Plume at Saturday, 10 July 2010 at 10:19pm BST

Already, the voice of Women in general Synod helps the Gentlemen of Synod to understand the need to avoid duplicity in a policy of Episcopal jurisdiction which would aid and abet a two-tier system of jurisdiction within the Church - to the disadvantage of Women Bishops and the ministry of women at large in the Church. Thank God for women of principle whom God has given the grace of Orders!

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Saturday, 10 July 2010 at 10:36pm BST

I did not want the Archbishops' amendment to be carried. Wanting to see Synod vote against our Archbishops went against my every theological and ecclesiological grain. I was deeply impressed by Abp Rowan's speech in favour of the amendment. But I am still glad it was not carried.

However, I cannot rejoice that Synod is so divided, even though I believe the Church made a good decision this afternoon. But, to my Anglo-Catholic and conservative evangelical brothers and sisters I would like to say this: Synod has not rejected a compromise; it has rejected this compromise. The proposed legislation put forward by the Revision Committee is a compromise. I understand that for many of you it is not an acceptable compromise, but it is not my preferred option either.

But I will continue to pray earnestly for grace and wisdom as we discern the way ahead together.

Posted by Hannah at Saturday, 10 July 2010 at 11:10pm BST

Wot Our Ruth said: TBTG! (and the CofE clergy!)

Posted by JCF at Sunday, 11 July 2010 at 12:06am BST

'Following the Vote, Fr Jonathan Baker, Principal of Pusey House, Oxford, immediately called for a "Pause for reflection and prayer".
"We're in a remarkable place" he said'

- Jonathan Wynne-Jones, Telegraph -

I really do suspect that God's Holy Spirit has been busy listening to the Prayers of The Faithful on this issue for a long time now.

We certainly are 'in a remarkable place' - that place where many Provinces of the world-wide Anglican Communion have 'gone before' - a place where Gospel Truth and justice demands that women and men are seen to be equally used by God in the Ministry of God's Church. To have given in to the prejudice of a minority in the Church, even in the quest for 'UNITY' - at the price it was asking - the compromise would have been too great.

If women are acceptable as priests, why should their leadership as Bishops be denied them - or the Church? Misogyny & homophobia have no place in today's Church, or in God's World. If there has to be a 'leaner Church' because of women being given their rightful place in ministry, then so be it!

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Sunday, 11 July 2010 at 3:34am BST

I understand Sentamu's frustration but it's the Princess Diana syndrome - if you use the media, it will use you, and he has not been shy of the camera or the soundbite:

Genie, bottle, I am afraid.

Posted by Achilles at Sunday, 11 July 2010 at 9:00am BST

"Spin" "a remarkable, gifted and much-maligned"... Bad loser.

Posted by Göran Koch-Swahne at Sunday, 11 July 2010 at 9:12am BST

One cannot avoid the impression that "co-ordinate" powers mean sub-ordinate. And the sub-ordination is already in place - only not in women.

Posted by Göran Koch-Swahne at Sunday, 11 July 2010 at 9:29am BST

"I call a dear friend and trusted colleague"

I wouldn't.

Posted by Göran Koch-Swahne at Sunday, 11 July 2010 at 9:31am BST

Guardian :'Crisis' ?

What crisis ? It's called democracy. It's called church government. It's voting. It's following rules and standing orders and procedures agreed in advance.

Hysterical press posturing and late night meetings with archbishops ain't a standard part of the usual non-manipulative adult way of going about things.

Posted by Pantycelyn at Sunday, 11 July 2010 at 6:09pm BST

I really am pretty surprised that this is as big of a deal as it is. It was pretty obvious to me back in the 70s when we started priesting women that having women bishops was an inevitable consequence of that action. The Brits have had women priests since the 90s, but an outsider might be forgiven for thinking that the CofE had only thought of the possibility of women bishops last week.

Posted by Bill Dilworth at Sunday, 11 July 2010 at 8:47pm BST

May I just say that I find the use of "priest" as a verb to be truly abhorrent?

Posted by Pat O'Neill at Monday, 12 July 2010 at 1:14am BST

"May I just say that I find the use of "priest" as a verb to be truly abhorrent?"

You may, but it doesn't create a sense of obligation in me.

Posted by Bill Dilworth at Monday, 12 July 2010 at 11:11am 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.