Comments: Women Bishops - ten minute rule bill

Anyone know what the implications of this are?

Posted by Stephen at Thursday, 14 March 2013 at 4:43pm GMT

It's a ratcheting up of the parliamentary pressure. Slower than I would have liked. But the bill's second reading is scheduled for May 3.

Posted by Jeremy at Friday, 15 March 2013 at 2:45am GMT

Stephen, there are some pertinent comments on the thread from Friday 8th March, before it got diverted into a discussion on the gender of the Holy Spirit! The second reading of the Bill will be on Friday 3rd May. Private Members Bills are usually opposed by the government at this stage, on the grounds that there is not enough time for them; but given the outcry in Parliament over the November vote, it will be illuminating to see how this one is treated. (Although given Mr Cameron's recent record on alcohol pricing and Leveson I am not too hopeful!) I suppose it depends how much support the bill draws from other MPs and the general public?

Posted by Stephen Morgan at Friday, 15 March 2013 at 8:40am GMT

The reality is that this Bill will go nowhere and those who think otherwise "need to get with the programme" to borrow the Prime Minister's awful phrase. Diana Johnson's intervention is just another way of highlighting the issue. Mr Cameron made it very clear that the government is not minded to interfere in the affairs of the Church, whatever his own views, and that is absolutely right. It would be a retrograde step and one of which Thomas Erastus would be proud. The State can not and should not exercise supremacy in Church matters. That would be a very slippery slope indeed, when Parliament can dictate to the Church on matters of doctrine. I suspect the majority of Parliamentarians are not church members anyway, if they reflect society as a whole. It would be the tail wagging the dog.

Posted by Benedict at Friday, 15 March 2013 at 12:28pm GMT

Benedict: 'The State can not and should not exercise supremacy in Church matters.' Sorry, but while I agree with this claim strongly as a general principle, it does not apply to the Church of England. As long as the church remains established (and church measures must be ratified by Parliament), it does exercise exactly that kind of supremacy. And under the legal rule of parliamentary sovereignty it must have that power (although I'm not a fan of the doctrine). Bottom line: Bishops out of the House of Lords? Fine, use the criteria you like... Bishops in the House of Lords? Parliament has the power to regulate the qualifications of its members...

Posted by Scot Peterson at Friday, 15 March 2013 at 9:02pm GMT

Scot Petersen, although Parliament, in theory, may have supremacy, it has rarely exercised it for the simple reason that it would be viewed as interference in the affairs of the Church which, rightly, are governed by General Synod. What would be the point of that body, otherwise. If you have been following media reports on the debate in Parliament, you have probably heard it stated on a number of occasions that Ms Johnson's bill is unlikely to get anywhere.

Posted by Benedict at Friday, 15 March 2013 at 11:57pm GMT

Most encouraging. Who knows how this seed may sprout and bloom in the fullness....

Posted by Laurence Roberts at Saturday, 16 March 2013 at 2:09am GMT

With regard to Diana Johnson's bill I expect Benedict is right. However, the restriction of bishops' seats in the Lords to men is not a situation which Parliament is likely to allow to continue for much longer.

Posted by Helen at Saturday, 16 March 2013 at 4:30pm 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.