I never thought I would say it, but WATCH (Women Against the Church, or some such thing) have written something sensible. Mind you, it comes in the midst of a deal of rubbish about how Hilda of Whitby would have really been ordained and so on; still, credit where it is due, when it comes to writing about the 'Society Model' they are almost as accurate as Fr Hunwicke. This is what they wrote:-
'The “Society model” (which this proposal seems to embody), was discussed in depth by the Revision Committee when it looked at how best to provide for those who would not accept women as bishops. It was rejected because, ‘Crucially the majority of us came to believe that there was some risk of creating a society that was an even weightier body than a Diocese. This was because some of the representations made to us seemed to envisage that jurisdiction would in some way be conferred on the society itself and through it to its bishops… we therefore voted by 11 votes to 7 that we did not wish the draft Measure to be amended to give effect to a society model.’ (Report of the Revision Committee, page 22 paras 110, 115)'
Now Fr Houlding, at least, knows all this, because he made the report which the Revision Committee threw out. So why was he supporting it (albeit very luke-warmly) at the "Sacred Synod" last week?
(rt)The Bishop of Ebbsfleet enthralled by Fr Houlding's defence of the Society Model
BTW, is it only me who thinks of Christine Keeler when they say "Society Model" ?