Westward Ho!

On a day of foul weather we headed West to join in the Ordination of an old friend. It was some years since Paul Andrew left the Church of England. Now at last he is a Priest in the Catholic Church - not in the Ordinariate, but a Diocesan Priest of Plymouth Diocese. This means he is on home ground, being in origin a Cornishman.

The Parish Church of the Sacred Heart is a very grand Gothic Revival pile, a worthy neighbour to the Cathedral just a few hundred yards to the East.

I have posted another blog about the occasion at the "Anglo-Catholic" site,so this is just an opportunity to show a few more pictures from last evening.


Mercifully the gale had subsided and the rain ceased by the end of the Ordination Mass, and so many were able to make their way to the Pastoral Centre for splendid refreshments and barely any speeches. Good to catch up with old friends, some in the Ordinariate (Fr Robin Ellis is one of my longest-standing friends - we were undergraduates at Pembroke, Oxford, in the 1950s - and yesterday was his birthday, too). The diocese of Plymouth seems to be largely staffed by former Anglicans, some in the Ordinariate but many who made the journey some years ago.



Of forty priests present last evening I would certainly count fifteen, and probably more, who had once served in the Church of England. How will those numbers alter during the next year, as the CofE moves on its inexorable path towards 'ordaining' women as Bishops? Will many who said "a Code of Practice will not do" live up to their words and join the Ordinariate when no real Jurisdiction is afforded them?

A very pleasant surprise was the hotel where we stayed the night; an ancient coaching Inn which has retained much of its character. The sculpture is in white marble; it is a trick of the camera (perhaps reacting to pigeon guano) which has turned her pink - but she's a jolly image to conclude this blog.

A time to plant, and a time to pluck up...(?courage?)

Signs of the Fall

Americans call this Season "The Fall". How especially appropriate that seems this year. Curiously, though as a retired bishop I have no vote, I was sent some of the addresses by would-be synodspersons. They will all be anxiously waiting on the result of the General Synod elections. For me, I fear (as someone said of Parliamentary elections) it is just "One lot of sinners out; another lot of sinners in". The sinners on Synod, though, have a very tedious time ahead.




On one hand there is the monstrous regimen, champing at the bit, wanting to see which of them will be first past the post in the Episcopessa Stakes. On the other, the far smaller group (and, I expect, much diminished even since 2005) of 'traditionalists' doing their utmost to win some concessions for those opposed to women's consecration.




Neither party will have had much cheer from the announcement of the Revision Committee on the Legislation. There are some of those eight appointed members about whom I know nothing at all - but even from those I do know it is clear that the liberal ascendancy has the majority. So that might encourage WATCH and its friends. The timetable, though, can only annoy them. "The expectation is that the House will bring a draft of the code to Synod in February 2012". The House is, of course, the House of Bishops. It is their Standing Committee which set up the working group, and that working group is expected to "conclude its report for the House (of Bishops) by next autumn, having consulted the House and the legislative Steering Committee first".

Rowan in the Fall

For six years I had the joy of attending (but not voting at) meetings of the House of Bishops. The Agenda was always overpacked, and discussion, even of the most serious matters, often cursory. So this new working group will have to meet, get to know one another, look at previous reports and see why they were rejected, discover their terms of reference, begin to make suggestions, go to the House of Bishops and ask them to comment, wait for the response, make a stab at a draft, get the legislative Steering Committee to look at it, redraft it in the light of what the Steering Committee said and the House of Bishops and (provided they have not been simply told "go back and do it again") produce the rabbit from the hat "by next Autumn". A busy twelve months for those three Bishops (Ed & Ips, Coventry and Whitby) two archdeacons (Christine Hardman of Lewisham and Greenwich, and Jane Sinclair of Stow and Lindsey) one parish clergyman and two unordained ladies.




Assuming this is achieved, "the expectation is that the House (of Bishops) will bring a draft code to Synod in February 2012 - though the final version of the code cannot be drawn up by the House and approved by Synod until the legislation itself has received Royal Assent - which cannot in practice be before 2013".




I suppose that is because Royal Assent will only be given once the Ecclesiastical Committe of Parliament has looked at the legislation, and determined whether it is satisfied with the draft statutory code of practice. Last time round, in '92, it was not. It might not satisfy them this time, either, but for quite different reasons. Whereas last time Parliament wanted to put in safeguards for those unable to accept women's ordination, now the reverse might be true; they could well say that in view of equal opportunities legislation &c, there should be NO permission for any priest to refuse the ministrations of a woman bishop. They might then demand of the church a single clause measure, without any safeguards.




Yet many, I guess, will be hanging on in the C of E by their fingertips during all that time, desperate that something will be done which will make it possible for them to remain. For me, and I suspect many others, this is the culmination of what began with Keble's 1833 Assize Sermon. He started there the movement to free the Church from the power of the State; to enable it to become truly a part of the One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Now, the battle is all but ended, with the Church rolling over and assenting to every new wind of doctrine, based not on Revelation but on Rights: the rights of women, gay and transgendered rights, the right to end one's life. What a blessing is the Ordinariate!

A Cunning Plan

The Archbishops have come up with a cunning plan to try to save their embarrassment, caused by the Synod's determination to make it impossible for many good Anglicans to remain in the Church of England. It comes in the form of Amendments which they mean to put down at the York Synod next month.

First, I think the plan will be rejected; possibly some bits of it will make it through the system, but even if the entire thing were accepted by Synod, it is not acceptable to many catholic Anglicans; for it relies on Code of Practice. Come on now, what did we say? A code of practice will not do. And why not? Because it can be ignored and got around, as the Bishops' Code of Practice accompanying the Act of Synod was ignored, in spirit if not in letter, in so many dioceses.

The great plan is that diocesan bishops male and female, shall have jurisdiction. The replacements for the PEVs (if any mug can be found to take the job on) are said to have "ordinary jurisdiction" too; but in reality, jurisdiction is only given them 'by virtue of the measure to the extent provided for in the diocesan scheme'. So in each diocese there would be a scheme, and that scheme could be amended by the diocesan bishop at any time after consulting, not with the pseudo-PEV, nor with the Archbishop, but with his or her own diocesan synod.

It will not do. It really will not do. It is just empty promises dressed up to appeal to a few 'catholic minded' Anglicans who want any excuse not to do what they clearly ought to do, which is to accept the Pope's offer.

It is cunning, this plan, but not cunning enough. I hope everyone will see through it. It ought to fail in the Synod. It leaves no possibility of anyone saying in future "The Church of England is part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church' Rather it is a congregationalist protestant sect from the moment women are consecrated. I've written at greater length, if you can bear it, in the Anglo Catholic blog (see the link to it on the right) about all this. Oh hurry up, Synod, get on with your miserable work, and let us say our farewells with honour.

A Code of Practice Will Not Do

As was widely predicted, the Church of England has chosen the day after a General Election to bury its bad news. Tomorrow the various reports concerning women in the Episcopate are to be published.* Meanwhile we have to make do with Ruth Gledhill's blog, where she leaks as follows:

"As the Bishop of Manchester indicated to General Synod in February 2010, the draft legislation continues to provide special arrangements for those with conscientious difficulties by way of delegation from the diocesan bishop under a statutory Code of Practice.
The legislation has been amended in a number of detailed respects.
Provision for statutory declarations by bishops unable to take part in the consecration of women as bishops or their ordination as priests has been removed as has an obligation on the Archbishops to nominate particular suffragan sees to be occupied by those who do not consecrate or ordain women.
Added to the Measure are new provisions requiring each diocesan bishop to draw up a scheme in his or her diocese that takes account of the national Code of Practice and provides local arrangements for the performance of certain episcopal functions in relation to parishes with conscientious difficulties.
A further new provision allows such parishes to request, when there is a vacancy, that only a male incumbent or priest-in-charge be appointed. It is expected that much of the July group of sessions of the General Synod in York (9-13 July) will be devoted to debating the Revision Committee’s report and conducting the Revision Stage of the legislation. "

There will, alas, be some priests and parishes who are taken in by this. 'Oh, we shall still be able to have a male priest here, so that's all right!..' No, it is not. First, note that all bishops must participate in the consecration of women bishops. No conscience clause for them. And when a man is consecrated there will doubtless be women bishops joining in the consecration even before we have our first women Archbishop. And do you suppose any priest opposed to women's ordination could be instituted? And how could he swear allegiance to the Bishop of X and her successors...?

"But we will still have the PEVs to protect us!" Oh no you won't. The Archbishops will not have to retain the sees of Ebbsfleet, Richborough or Beverley for those opposed; and so any safeguard there is removed. How could a new PEV accept office in the first place, though? He would have to accept that he was part of a college of bishops which included women whom be believes are not bishops; but he would not be allowed to say that, and women bishops would participate in his consecration. Since at least three of those functioning as Episcopal Visitors are committed to joining the Ordinariate, there would just be the PEV of the Northern Province hanging on until forced to retire by reason of age just four years from now. This is not the provision we asked for, "for our children and grandchildren".

So what shreds of a fig-leaf are left? Any special arrangements are by way of delegation from the diocesan bishop. A woman bishop would have to draw up a code of practice in her diocese which would "take account of a National Code of Practice". As a PEV until nine years ago I had the 'protection' of something much stronger than a code of practice. Yet even those legal provisions of the Act of Synod were largely ignored by many bishops. Now at least two of the women straining at the leash to be consecrated have said that when they are bishops they will do all they can to ensure any such code would be a dead letter. And even if they do make provision for those benighted parishes which do not accept their ministry, how will it be achieved? Will they ask a neighbouring male suffragan bishop, who himself fully approves of women bishops and joins in their consecrations, to take confirmations in that parish? What is that but pure misogyny.

The fact is, we are not (as is falsely alleged) 'opposed to women'. Many of those most firmly against women in the episcopate are themselves women. What we assert is our belief that women may not and should not be bishops in the Church of God. It would be very much easier for us if we could accept them; but, as Archbishop Rowan has recognised, we cannot, and this is a matter of conscience.

What is to be done, then? Far better end the pretence, scrap the fig leaf, go ahead with consecrating women and tell us to go. After all, the fig leaf is not for us; we have told you, A Code of Practice Will Not Do. Its only purpose is to try to hide your own embarrassment.

And, dear Synod, while you are about it, remember that you are breaking all the promises you so solemnly gave us when women were first ordained. You are ignoring the conclusions of the Eames Commission, that the Anglican Communion by itself could not resolve the question of whether women might be ordained. You are setting aside the decisions of the last two Lambeth Conferences, that those opposed to women's ordination have an opinion of equal value to the opposite opinion. And as a new Parliament is elected, you seem to forget that the Ecclesiastical Committee of Parliament required you to make proper financial provision for those who were being driven out of their livings by a decision they could not, in conscience, accept. Until that was promised, the Measure could not pass into law.

Go ahead, but don't pretend your Codes of Practice hold any interest for us. It is only you who need them, to cover your naked ambition in striving for your own will and intention. Forget the Codes; let us part honestly, as fellow Christians. Don't patronise (or even matronise) us any longer.

*The reports are now published, Sat 8th, and dismal reading they make. You will find a link to them at Fr Ivan Aquilina's blog (listed alongside this posting: St John's Sevenoaks)