Wonderful news.Well done Peggy Jackson and colleague
The best possible outcome, and voting well above the required super-majorities: Bishops 100%, Clergy 78%, Laity 80%. That’s a healthy shift of opinion since 2008.
Hooray. Three down,one to go!
Yes, very good ! Well done.
Maybe England can now get on and introduce a similar or even the same legislation.
Then get on with it !
Congratulations to the Governing Body for recognising the logic of the theology in the ordination of women to the priesthood and their refusal to enshrine discrimination and doubts about the validity of women's ordained ministry. And to Archbishop Barry for his patient persistence in winning enough support for this long-desired change. I'm afraid it leaves the CofE looking even more isolated this evening.
Church of England take note!
Well done Governing Body, Peggy Jackson and Jenny Wigley. So we see a single clause measure to bring about women bishops, with a code of practice, has clarity, simplicity and power and could well gain sufficient support to be decisive.
Allowing women to speak for themselves and decide for themselves how to present the form of legislation and the case for it works.
The tide is turning - is this 'reception' ? A new form of ministry has been tried, tested and seen by a majority of the church to be good.
I am delighted to hear this.
Now I hope that we will quickly see a woman elected. Unlike Scotland, where women can theoretically be bishops, but we have still to see any women succeed in an election to a diocese.
Thank you Thank Thank you Jenny Wigley, Peggy Jackson and Governing Body, thank you for voting for a single clause measure, & for ecclesiological & theological integrity & for giving us here in England a pure & hopeful shaft of light.
Don't forget the Governing Body was purposefully reduced in numbers and the number of women members increased. Women membership is now proportionate to their numbers unlike England.
With no strong evangelical presence in Wales,there was no real blockage, as the Anglo-Catholics are in melt down. No one made the point that none of the latter resigned when their provincial bishop was retired and not replaced.
So there we have it, a largely high church conservative denomination with asa of 120,000, fifty years ago has turned into a liberal protestant denomination with 30,000 attendance.
How have other denominations fared during the same period in Wales?
The votes for women as bishops was by a wide margin; can the larger number of women in the governing body account for that?
What was especially good about the debate, was that, at a point where a vote might have been prejudiced, the decision was made to keep on talking - with the result that the more equitable decision appears to have been made by a majority of the Synod.
Let's hope this will convey the right sort of message to the would-be equivocators in the Church of England's upcoming General Synod in September!
Richard,The other denominations,all now mainly liberal are all in serious meltdown. All over Wales, many chapels are now houses or warehouses.
Even the Catholic Church is dependant on immigration,virtually vocationless and importing priests from India, Poland and Nigeria.
Conservative evangelicals are doing quite well. The largest Church in Wales parish ( ASA) of nearly 500 is in Aberystwth. Its rector spoke at the Governing body about male headship.
The conservative evangelicals also have a thriving parish in Cardiff, but are virtually absent from the north. Evangelical presence became limited after patronage was ended in 1920, and for 60 years Wales was virtually high church monochrome.
Could I add, that whilst I believe that the Roman Catholic Church is right in its understanding of women's ministry, I felt more of a degree of sympathy with the women rather than the so called traditionalists. If they had any real integrity, they could not exist in a church which had become heretical in their understanding.
How could a small body of 30,000 active people support a two track ministry...and B....in which B did not recognise A?
Indeed men ordained by women would not be accepted by B.. it makes no sense.
When will some one say the truth ..its not about theology its all about money and endowments.
Does anyone have any views on the numbers who are likely to move to the Ordinariate as a result of this decision? I understand that at present, there is just one fully formed Ordinariate group in Wales, and about another three exploratory groups.
Paul, to answer your questions about the Ordinariate in Wales....
A retired Anglican vicar who lived in Presteigne , Wales ( which by a fluke of history is a geographical Welsh parish in the Church of England!) joined.However previous to his move he served in the tiny sect calling its self the Traditional Anglican Communion.
Another cleric , a German serving in the Church in Wales joined with six of his parishioners in South Wales.The Swansea and Cardiff groups on the Ordinariate web site do not exist in reality.
Two lay persons joined in North Wales and overall the Ordinariate in Scotland and Wales is a damp squib. In England it has attracted one in thousand of active Anglicans.
Meanwhile the Church in Wales has received two former Catholic priests into its ministry. The Catholic Church in wales is at rock bottom, due to poor pastoral leadership. Vocations are very few and priests are imported from abroad. There are Church closures everywhere and congregations are only replenished by immigration. The wonderful school system built up over the years is simply not producing good Catholics, and still employing the flawed catechetics of the 1960s.
Robert, or perhaps it's "tradition", as in "I was born and Anglican and I'll die an Anglican even if Richard Dawkins is ABC." Or perhaps they choose to be "the remnant" of "true believers" trying to get the rest to see sense. I don't see why liberals expect traditionalists to assume the best of them while they assume the worst of traditionalists.
As for it all being about money, one could just as easily make the opposite case. If liberals who want gay and women clergy, gay marriage, or don't believe the creeds or the BCP had any integrity, they would have left earlier and joined the Quakers or started their own denomination with lots of women and gay clergy instead of infiltrating and tearing the church apart. Obviously the only reason the liberals stayed was because of the money and power.
"Obviously the only reason the liberals stayed was because of the money and power."
I am a bit gobsmacked, Chris H. Do you really believe this?
I am a liberal and I certainly do not stay in the church for either the money or the power. I stay in it because I believe that the Christian message is an important one for the people I serve,helping and equipping them to deal with the reality of their lives.
I am also aware, from looking at the breadth of Christian opinion over the centuries, that there is nothing narrow about that message. Liberal Christianity is not a new invention. The inclusive message it proclaims can be traced through the Church's history right back to Jesus. That inclusiveness is reflected in the writings of some of our greatest English Christians, including people like Julian of Norwich and Thomas Traherne as well as the many unsung Christians who have worked in their parishes for the good of others regardless of the faith (or lack of faith)of those they have sought to serve.
Can you really, possibly, believe these things about liberals? Who told you this? On what do you base it?
The comment was a "turnabout is fair play" on a comment further up the list by Robert Ian Williams saying that the only reason traditionalists stay in the church is "..its not about theology its all about money and endowments."
If liberals really believe that traditionalists are nothing but greedy liars after the money then there's no reason conservatives can't say the same about liberals, and yes, I know some conservatives who do believe this of liberals. And I can't help but observe they have a point about some liberals. Why would people who laugh at the idea of the resurrection or miracles, cross their fingers at the creeds etc. stay? Or some of the commenters here who've said, "It doesn't matter whether you call me a Christian or an atheist. What I believe doesn't change." They want gay equality and marriage and "justice"; "Christianity" is just another way to get what the want. Or those who call traditionalists "cultists", etc. Why do they stay? Why not start a new religion/denomination instead? Perhaps because their new religion would be small and powerless and taking over an established one gives one power?
Do I believe all liberals are like this? No. Do I know liberals who are more Humanists than Christians but who call themselves Christians? Yes. Some have been my priests in the past, but there's no good trying to do anything about it. TEC is so "inclusive" that unless one is a Pagan/Episcopal or Muslim/Episcopal priest, nobody will stop it and they only stop those when the secular press gets a hold of it and the general public starts laughing.
Most unfortunate, Chris H., that you can't see that liberals believe as we do on very strong theological grounds. The radical life of Jesus, healing, teaching, and hanging out with women in a culture where that was taboo, and women being the first witnesses to the Resurrection. So much biblical writing on how to treat the widow, the orphan, and the outcast. And that bit about women and men being created in the image of God.
I understand that traditionalists take certain parts of the Bible quite literally. But liberals are also taking our cues from the life and teaching of Jesus. Ultimately, it depends on how you weight Scripture, Tradition, and Reason. Liberals are stronger on Scripture and Reason - conservatives on Tradition.
On gay marriage, liberals can easily point to the multiple wives of the OT and the churches acceptance of divorce - a topic Jesus actually did speak about (unlike gay marriage).
The Bible is from a pre-scientific age. It isn't unreasonable to think that our relationship with God grows as we come to understand more about God's Creation.
Of course, it is more convenient, if utterly dishonest, to think that we liberals are sucking up the money and power... I could use a little of that liberal money right now! Could you point me the way?
"If liberals really believe that traditionalists are nothing but greedy liars after the money then..."
But you're doing your "turnabout is fair play" contra Robert Ian Williams, Chris H, an obedient-to-the-Pope-in-all-things Roman Catholic. Ergo, everything else you say above does NOT follow. To put it politely.
Your description of your fellow Christians as "infiltrators" says it all Chris.
Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of the vote on women bishops in the Church in Wales is that the House of Bishops voted unanimously in favour. This presently could not be repeated in the Church of England where we still have a few orthodox Traditionalist bishops, even though they are vastly outnumbered by their more liberal brothers. Hence the introduction of this innovative novelty this side of Offa's Dyke would be more problematic in that it would further rupture the already fragile collegiality of the English House of Bishops and further impair communion among our chief pastors.
Lets keep things in perspective.. How many clergy converted after the Welsh flying bishop was grounded. None. They've coped quite well for five years.
However if they were men of genuine theological conviction and integrity..they would worry that many laity in Welsh parishes are now robbed of the sacraments, because the Church has ordained women and gone into heresy. No such thing..they are happy to stay where thay are, and inhabit a ghetto world, with their stipends, perks and accomodation intact.
One last comment off topic. Sorry, Simon. I didn't mean to hijack the thread.
The original point I was trying to make was about not assuming ALL traditionalists are evil greedy power seekers. I also made the point in my comment that I personally do not think ALL liberals are Humanists masquerading, but some are. From the responses, I guess the writers agree with Robert.
Helen, I do know at least two Humanist priests and the only reason I can see for them to stay is for the pension or to influence/control the "fools" who actually believe. Our rural parish is poor and has trouble finding/keeping a priest. Our bishop won't hire a conservative, so the ones we get are usually out to "broaden and improve" our faith by making us liberals, probably at the bishop's request. Then they leave when they don't win the parish over. Infiltrate might not be the best word, but take over is the goal.
Cynthia, since you never use modifiers such as "some", I take it you agree that all conservatives are greedy and all liberals the epitome of true Christianity? Since the "cultist" remark was of your making, I assumed no less, but the goal of the post was trying to get people to moderate their tone by turning the extreme back at them. I really do think there are real liberal Christians, I just don't think all of them are, just as I don't think all "conservatives" are either.
If there is ever to be peace in this fight, then liberals are going to have to learn to police their own and say he/she is going to far, and conservatives are going to have to do the same.
Apologies again, Simon. No more, at least on this thread. God's will be done in Wales and the rest of His church.
It's not a question about being uncharitable, but being realistic.Yes God is the judge of all interior motives, but I believe the point I make is a cogent one. How is it the so called traditionalists have coped without a flying bishop for five years?
If they believe that women's ordination is a serious heresy, why do they continue to wish to stay in the same Church? The only conclusion I can draw is that the real reasons are less than noble and certainly not in line with my understanding of the Gospel.
"Cynthia, since you never use modifiers such as "some", I take it you agree that all conservatives are greedy and all liberals the epitome of true Christianity?"
You are making a "straw man' out of me. I didn't get involved in the "greed" discussion, except to joke that I would like some liberal money. I am not ascribing motives for why clergy stay in or leave the CoE. I'm sure it's very complicated and personal.
My topic was theological, and you have not addressed it. You painted liberals as not being rooted in Scripture or theology. I pointed out the very strong liberal roots in Scripture, theology, and Reason.
No, I don't use moderated language in the face of clear injustice, nor in the face of being painted wrongly, such as "liberals are going with culture, not Jesus." In the first case there is MLK's Letter from the Birmingham (Alabama) Jail. In the second case, I think liberals need to be crystal clear that our beliefs are firmly rooted in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
What I believe about traditionalists is more nuanced than I let on. The inability to accept ALL people at the Table is a human failing. While compassion is called for, what degree of accommodation is appropriate for those whose positions hurt others? The injustice against women has taken place on a massive scale and had horrific consequences through the ages. I prefer to see that as a human failing than to see it as "God's Plan."
All are welcome. All. That has implications at every level of our being, individually, communally, globally. Americans and Ugandans, gay and straight, male and female, rich and poor, resourced and under resourced.
Wales has moved in a terrific direction.
How nice it must be to be able to see into men's souls Chris.
"Our bishop won't hire a conservative, so the ones we get are usually out to "broaden and improve" our faith by making us liberals, probably at the bishop's request. Then they leave when they don't win the parish over."
Worst of all, they've resolutely REFUSED to answer your query as to whether they've stopped beating their spouses! I see your duty as Grand Inquisitor, ChrisH, is neverending. But I'm sure you agree ("police their own"), qua G&S, "A Policeman's Lot Is Not A Happy One."
Cynthia, liberal theology is so varied, you'll have to be more specific if you want an agreement on it. Ask 10 liberals what they believe, get 10 different answers. "New Testament characters ....are as real as Harry Potter." is a position held by a very well known liberal bishop, based on Reason? SOME liberal theology is right; some is out near Pluto. You posted awhile back that anyone who didn't believe in female priests was a "cultist". What nuance is there in that? Cultist=non-Christian. Why can't you "let on"? I don't understand why my saying what I do after talking to specific people makes me a reader of souls, when you judge most of the world's Christians like that without a quibble from liberals. That is what I'm talking about.
Helen and JCF, did I miss you at the parish meetings? Were you spying on my parents' or my meetings with my priest? Sometimes you don't have to read souls; sometimes people say it.
Of course Chris: didn't you notice that fly on the wall? But do refresh my memory; what exactly did "people say" (and what did you infer)?
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.