WATCH Response to General Synod decisions, July 2006

The July 2006 General Synod of the Church of England passed two key motions to advance the process of appointing Women as Bishops in the Church of England. This note contains the text of both motions together with commentaries on the content in [italics].

The first motion

“That this Synod welcome and affirm the view of the majority of the House of Bishops that admitting women to the episcopate in the Church of England is consonant with the faith of the Church as the Church of England has received it and would be a proper development in proclaiming afresh in this generation the grace and truth of Christ.”

[The House of Bishops had been unable to reach a consensus on the issue, hence the phrase “the majority of the House of Bishops”, despite considerable work by the Rochester working party, the Guildford working party and the Bishops of Guildford and Gloucester. So the Bishops decided to hand the matter over to all three Houses of the General Synod in the hope that a way forward could be found. After debate, the Bishops’ majority view was accepted by significant majorities in all three Houses.

In spite of previous General Synod motions, there has never been a definitive statement that the Church of England does, in fact, support women bishops in principle. That debate is now at an end and the terms of the debate will change. The question now is not whether women may be bishops but how.]

The second motion

“That this Synod, endorsing Resolution 111.2 of the Lambeth Conference 1998 "that those who dissent from, as well as those who assent to the ordination of women to the priesthood and episcopate are both loyal Anglicans" and believing that the implications of admitting women to the episcopate will best be discerned by continuing to explore in detail the practical and legislative arrangements:

[The idea that both those who accept and those who dissent from the ordination of women are “both loyal Anglicans” has been church policy since women were first ordained as priests in 1994. The endorsement of this by General Synod means that some effort will have to be made to accommodate those opposed to the majority view. WATCH agrees that this should be done.

The decision to “explore in detail the practical and legislative arrangements” opens the way to a fresh consideration of the various options for the way forward, including that preferred by WATCH of a simple enabling Measure with associated Regulations and Code of Practice as necessary, thereby ensuring that discrimination is not enshrined in primary legislation (the Measure).]

“(a) invite dioceses, deaneries and parishes to continue serious debate and reflection on the theological, practical, ecumenical and missiological aspects of the issue;

[Some Dioceses, notably Hereford, have already begun the debate in general terms; all are now encouraged to do so, pending the more formal reference to Dioceses of the draft legislation in due course. WATCH will be producing material to assist in these debates. The ideal situation would be for Diocesan Synods to move formal motions, for reference up to General Synod, calling for legislation to be in the form of a simple enabling Measure with associated Regulations and Code of Practice as necessary; such motions would indicate clearly to General Synod the feelings in the Dioceses and reinforce the strong signals sent by the earlier six Diocesan Synod motions calling for legislation to enable women to be consecrated as bishops.]

“(b) invite the Archbishops’ Council, in consultation with the Standing Committee of the House of Bishops and the Appointments Committee, to secure the early appointment of a legislative drafting group, which will aim to include a significant representation of women in the spirit of Resolution 13/31 of the Anglican Consultative Council passed in July 2005, charged with:

[An amendment to the original motion ensured that women would be properly represented on the drafting group - itself a significant marker of the leadership position women are already acknowledged as holding. Membership of the group will be largely determined by the General Synod Appointments Committee and WATCH is encouraging members with key expertise to put their names forward]

“(i) preparing the draft measure and amending canon necessary to remove the legal obstacles to the consecration of women to the office of bishop;

[This is essentially what WATCH has been arguing for – a simple enabling Measure with associated amending Canon to remove the legal obstacles]

“(ii) preparing a draft of possible additional legal provision consistent with Canon A4 to establish arrangements that would seek to maintain the highest possible degree of communion with those conscientiously unable to receive the ministry of women bishops;

[The wording “possible additional legal provision” is significant as, although it is very likely that such “provision” may well be needed it is specifically not considered to be essential or inevitable. It is still only “possible” and the use of “additional” indicates that it would not form part of the main Measure. WATCH‘s preferred arrangements of Regulations with a Code of Practice fall under this heading.

The key reference is to Canon A4, which reads as follows:

“Canon A4
The Form and Manner of Making, Ordaining, and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, annexed to The Book of Common Prayer and commonly known as the Ordinal, is not repugnant to the Word of God; and those who are so made, ordained, or consecrated bishops, priests, or deacons, according to the said Ordinal, are lawfully made, ordained, or consecrated, and ought to be accounted, both by themselves and others, to be truly bishops, priests, or deacons.”

The reference to Canon A4 was inserted as an amendment to the original motion, passed by clear majorities in all three Houses. It is highly significant, as the Canon asserts the legitimacy of the orders of all those ordained by the Church of England – of women who are currently priests, and eventually of women bishops and of those ordained or consecrated by women bishops. The Canon refers not just to the BCP ordination services, but implicitly also to more recently approved rites. It excludes what some have called a ‘theology of taint’ and asserts the public belief of the Church that its public acts are valid. In addition, the suggestion that male priests may actually have to be conditionally re-ordained in order to serve in “traditional” parishes is forestalled by this amendment. Other opponents of women as priests and bishops have published opinions which suggest that they cannot accept even that the intention to create priests is present when women are ordained – Canon A4 is clear, not only on intention, but also on effect – we have true priests and in due course bishops. The affirmation of Canon A4 strengthens the assertion that a so-called ‘Third Province’ would in fact be a separate church. The Act of Synod has allowed some stepping back from the full force of Canon A4 by those opposed. This General Synod motion moves from that position and in fact, on its face, suggests that a ‘loyal Anglican’ in the context of the Church of England is one who respects both the Canon Law of the Church and its Synodical Government.

This may not seem to be a radical step - simply affirming what the Church already is, and the validity of its existing Canons – but it is a very serious matter for some of those opposed. The logical conclusion seems to be a model providing for a dissenting minority, conscientious objection and private reservations – a position which WATCH has supported, knowing that many members would prefer a simpler approach without reservation at all. The Church’s task is not to appease an implacable minority, but to accommodate those who remain ‘loyal Anglicans’ in the terms of the motion.]

“(iii) submitting the results of its work to the House of Bishops for consideration and submission to Synod; and

[This is standard practice and will give the House of Bishops the opportunity to comment on any proposals before they are put formally to General Synod. Unfortunately, there is no timescale attached to this part of the motion – an attempt to introduce one failed – so it will be important to monitor the process to ensure that it does not drag on too long. The whole process of getting new legislation passed through General Synod and thence by Parliament will take several years even if all goes smoothly. It would be unfortunate if it were left to the next General Synod, elected in 2010, to make the final decision]

“(c) instruct the Business Committee to make time available, before first consideration of the draft legislation, for the Synod to consider, in the light of any views expressed by the House of Bishops, the arrangements proposed in the drafting group’s report.”

[This indicates that the first task for the legislative drafting group will be to come back to General Synod with a range of proposals, possibly in the form of draft legislation, to enable Synod to express a preference for the way forward. Such a debate would be crucial as it would effectively set the boundaries for the consequent legislation.]

No doubt other interpretations of the motions will be advanced. General Synod has set a good direction. Let us pray for those who will take this issue forward.