The answers to the questions asked at last month’s meeting of the church of England General Synod are now available.
Questions with Answers February 2010.
Our good friend Dennis points us to a gem, Question No. 53 (p. 34), and the answers by Archbishop John Sentamu.
53. Mrs Gill Ambrose (Ely) asked the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
In view of the slow progress towards the development of legislation to enable the consecration of women as bishops, would the House of Bishops consider inviting a number of female observers to its meetings so that the insights of women are not lost to the Church at this high level of leadership and policy development?
The Archbishop of York: The simple answer is No. Although I regret the length of our legislative processes, there are no short cuts. Granting some women – however they were chosen – observer status now would not grant them a full voice in the House and would risk being a diversion from the central task, namely how to find a way of admitting women to the episcopate which also enables as many people as possible to remain in the Church of England whatever their theological convictions on that issue. We must continue to hold on to the view held by the Synod and the rest of the Anglican Communion that those who are in favour and those who are opposed are both loyal Anglicans.
Mrs Gill Ambrose (Ely): Are we to assume then that the Church can still afford not to hear the voice of women at this level when issues on which women have important things to say come up for debate in the House of Bishops?
The Archbishop of York: Many women are, in any event, members of bishops’ staff in their dioceses. Members of the House will consequently have had the benefit of their insights in policy discussions within the diocese which will inform the thinking that they bring to the House of Bishops’ discussions.
The selection of women observers would itself be invidious, I think. Other interest groups, for example young people, could also argue for such representation. Women have been present at the House as supporting staff: currently the assistant secretary to the House is a woman in holy orders. Policy matters are regularly brought to the House on appointments matters, educational issues, HR and training matters by women in advisory roles.
Pursuing this further, it would be invidious to suggest, for example, that when the House of Laity is considering some rather difficult theological issue bishops should be there as observers.
Slow progress toward women bishops in the Church of England, or no progress? If you do not cry at the wrongheadedness exhibited by Archbishop Sentamu's answer, you will laugh. So. It is sufficient that the women underlings have every opportunity to speak plainly to their bosses, the men who have control over their lives. A greater voice would be "invidious", according to the archbishop.
And the folks who fear girl cooties must be given time for what? Does anyone think they will change their minds? Is the extra time necessary for for the powers to find a way that the women can be bishops but not quite real bishops?
For heaven's sake, guys, just do it already!
UPDATE: An Englishman explains it all for us:
themethatisme said...
It would be invidious were it not for the fact that the House of Bishops can veto anything that comes to the floor of synod from the House of Laity so having anyone there as observers would make bugger all difference.
Just keep on pissing in the tea girls.
Lord, have mercy. I opt neither to weep nor laugh but scream with outrage. When the patriarchy is finally small enough to drown in a bathtub I am sure I shan't be around or I would vie for the privilege of shoving it under.
ReplyDeleteKeep on answering phones, taking letters, washing the linens, and arranging flowers, and we'll get back to you on that Bishop thing some day.
ReplyDeletePaul, screaming with outrage is good, too. At present, I find myself dazed and overwhelmed by much of what I see and read in the news. I go through spells like this when the stupidity and cupidity are too much to cope with.
ReplyDeleteStay in your place, girls!
ReplyDeleteGood God!
ReplyDeleteI don't know whether to laugh, cry or scream with Paul.... these guys have really lost it...
--it's margaret
Archbishop Sentamu reflects his heritage as a Ugandan (running for cover from Idi Amin)...scared to death of basic logic many still opt for ongoing state of bullheaded defiance and deceit...actually The Lord of York prefers to do skydiving, camping out in the nave and various other grandstanding religiouslike escapades and probably prefers not to be upstaged by anyone who wears vivid and colorful vestments with more panache than himself.
ReplyDeleteLet's hear it for Mrs. Ambrose. You go Girl!
ReplyDeleteA factor to bear in mind when wanting to see the back of Rowan Williams, is that Sentamu (a Ugandan, apropos of nothing) is a, if not the, front-runner for his job. One reason I posted a couple of days ago "always keep a-hold of nurse, for fear of finding something worse".
ReplyDeleteI can't believe that Sentamu was under consideration for the seat of Canterbury.
ReplyDeleteYes! Let's hear it for Mrs Ambrose!
Many women are, in any event, members of bishops’ staff in their dioceses. Members of the House will consequently have had the benefit of their insights
ReplyDeleteThe Bishops have asked their cleaners what they think, then?
Shades of the bad old days. Just make the coffee and take the minutes. Mrs. Ambrose is a brick.
ReplyDeleteBette Middler is quoted as saying, "When the New Year's Eve ball drops on Time Square, no matter what year, it's still 1950 in London."
ReplyDeleteSomebody give me an 'Amen.'
Amen.
ReplyDeleteAmen!
ReplyDeletePS: No one says it better than Bette!
ReplyDeleteI am reminded of the '70s when the company for which I worked said that women in my department could only be promoted so far because they couldn't come in the middle of the night to deal with emergencies. And why couldn't they? Because company policy didn't allow women to work after hours unless male co-workers were present to "protect" them. This didn't apply to the cleaning staff, of course.
ReplyDeleteOh, yes. The cleaning staff did not need protection.
ReplyDeleteIn 1964, I was forced out of my job when I was 6 months pregnant, although I did not work in a public area, where the obscene sight of a pregnant woman may have offended someone.
"We must continue to hold on to the view held by the Synod and the rest of the Anglican Communion that those who are in favour and those who are opposed are both loyal Anglicans." I think this statement is not correct. By action those opposed to women as bishops are considered more loyal and therefore worth keeping. It is such positions in the Anglican communion that make make believe that TEC should not work hard to remain part of it.
ReplyDeleteIt would be invidious were it not for the fact that the House of Bishops can veto anything that comes to the floor of synod from the House of Laity so having anyone there as observers would make bugger all difference.
ReplyDeleteJust keep on pissing in the tea girls.
Rudo, the main reason that I see for trying to stay part of the AC is for the sake of relationships. Perhaps TEC could continue in the relationships without being part of the AC.
ReplyDeleteTheMe, yours is my comment of the day, luv.
Apparently, it's the ambition of hierarchy to keep the Church an old boys' club (and the world's biggest closet).
ReplyDeleteGod's own cojones.
One can laugh or cry. Laughing's a little less messy.
ReplyDeleteLiberating Lord Christ, give JUSTICE to your Image made female, and grant the gifts of those made female FULLY to the Church, in ALL orders!
I'm convinced Sentamu's difference from Orombi is awareness of the value of P. R. in a Western society.
ReplyDeleteIn this year of 2010, it's hard for me to believe that the English church is still dragging its feet on the question of women bishops.
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid Mark may well be right. Sentamu's better at saying nothing than at defining his position. Don't believe this would continue were he ABC. On the other hand, he's just under a year younger than Williams and if Williams stays put through the mandatory retirement age for bishops [70] it's most unlikely he will be appointed to succeed him.
ReplyDeleteFrom now on, whenever I get depressed about the machinations in TEC, I will think of the CofE and feel better.
ReplyDeleteAt least TEC elects its bishops, Mimi.
ReplyDelete