Things do not bode well for those of us who want a result tonight, one way or the other, from Synod on the Episcopal issue. The debate has been given leave to extend beyond it's customary four hour slot to make space for the sixteen(!) episcopal amendments. Those of us who believe that this issue is being deliberately made impossible to vote on this session are feeling justified in this. I wonder if the leaked news of the flying Bishops travel plans have coloured things somewhat? The reasoning goes 'if their Bishops want to go, let them, see the disarray this will cause and then face the issue again when they are decimated and demoralised'. I am unhappy with these developments and I think the Church is unhappy as well. for once, we need action, not fudge. However, all shall be revealed (or not, as the case may be), later.
As you will be aware by now, the Bishop of Leeds has tabled one of these 16 amendments offering a 'super Bishop' plan which basically extends the provision of the PEV Bishops, increasing their jurisdiction and making them answerable to the Archbishops rather than the Diocesan Bishops. The only question is who will consecrate them? This is, though, a plan I am in support of, much to some of my colleagues dread. We need to give a little bit, compromise a bit as the Church has learned to do from Peter and Paul. We would also need strong Bishops, firm in their faith, who believe in Anglican Order and Catholic teaching and who are sure of their Holy Orders. Anglican Catholics rather than Roman Catholics in the Anglican Church.
Thanks to Justin, those amendments in full.....
Monday 7th July 20072.30 p.m. to 6.15 p.m.8.30 p.m. to 10.00 p.m.ORDER PAPER VIWOMEN BISHOPS:REPORT OF THE WOMEN BISHOPS LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING GROUP (GS 1685)REPORT FROM THE HOUSE OF BISHOPS (GS 1685A)
The Bishop of Gloucester to move:20.‘That this Synod:(a)reaffirm its wish for women to be admitted to the episcopate;(b)affirm its view that special arrangements be available, within the existing structures of the Church of England, for those who as a matter of theological conviction will not be able to receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests;(c)affirm that these should be contained in a national code of practice to which all concerned would be required to have regard; and(d)instruct the legislative drafting group, in consultation with the House of Bishops, to complete its work accordingly, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice, so that the Business Committee can include first consideration of the draft legislation in the agenda for the February 2009 group of sessions.’
PROPOSED AMENDMENTSPART I – AMENDMENTS AFFECTING PARAGRAPH (a)The Bishop of Winchester to move as an amendment:66. After “That this Synod” leave out paragraph (a) and insert:“(a) anticipating the ordination of women to the episcopate in the Church of England, and noting the Manchester Group’s assertion in paragraph 22 of GS 1685 that “far and away the most important question that the Church of England now has to face is the extent to which it wishes to continue to accommodate the breadth of theological views on this issue that it currently encompasses”,i)affirm the assurances included in paragraphs 67-69 of GS 1685;ii)reaffirm (GS 1685 paragraph 74) Resolution III.2 of the 1998 Lambeth Conference “that those who dissent from, as well as those who assent to the ordination of women to the priesthood and the episcopate are both loyal Anglicans”;In paragraph (b) leave out “within the existing structures of the Church of England”; andIn paragraph (c) after “in” insert “legislation and in”.If item 66 is lost the Revd Prebendary David Houlding (London) to move as an amendment:67. Leave out paragraph (a) and insert:“(a) affirm that the wish of its majority is for women to be admitted to the episcopate”.
PART II – ALL ‘MANCHESTER’ REPORT OPTIONS KEPT OPENIf item 66 is lost the Revd Stephen Trott (Peterborough) to move as an amendment:68. Leave out paragraphs (b) and (c) and in paragraph (d) leave out “, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice,”.
PART III – ‘MANCHESTER’ REPORT OPTION 1 (SIMPLEST STATUTORY APPROACH)If items 66 and 68 are lost the Revd Miranda Threlfall-Holmes (Universities, York) to move as an amendment:69. In paragraph (b) leave out all the words after “affirm its view that” and insert “this should be done with the simplest possible statutory approach, with local diocesan arrangements for pastoral provision and sacramental care;”;Leave out paragraph (c); andIn paragraph (d) leave out “, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice,”.
PART IV – ‘MANCHESTER’ REPORT OPTION 3 (NEW STRUCTURES)If items 66, 68 and 69 are lost the Revd Canon Simon Killwick (Manchester) to move as an amendment:70. In paragraph (b) leave out “the existing structures of”;In paragraph (c) leave out “national code of practice to which all concerned would be required to have regard” and insert “Measure”; andIn paragraph (d) leave out “accordingly, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice,” and insert “by preparing a draft Measure and associated code of practice providing new dioceses for those who cannot in conscience receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests,” and after the words “so that” insert the words “, if possible,”.If items 66, 68, 69 and 70 are lost the Bishop of Exeter to move as an amendment:71. In paragraph (b) leave out “the existing structures of”;In paragraph (c) leave out “national code of practice to which all concerned would be required to have regard” and insert “Measure”; andIn paragraph (d) leave out all the words after “accordingly” and insert “by preparing drafts of possible legislation in accordance with paragraph (c), to include further draft Measures, together with associated codes of practice, based on diocesan structures for those who cannot in conscience receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests, so that, if possible, the Business Committee can include consideration of these options in the agenda for the February 2009 group of sessions.”
PART V – ‘MANCHESTER’ REPORT OPTION 2 (ARRANGEMENTS WITHIN EXISTING STRUCTURES)If items 66, 68, 69, 70 and 71 are lost the Bishop of Ripon and Leeds to move as an amendment:72. In paragraph (c) after the words “affirm that these should be” insert “either by way of statutory transfer of specified responsibilities or”; andIn paragraph (d) leave out “complete” and insert “develop” and leave out the words “first consideration of the draft legislation” and insert “further consideration of both alternatives envisaged in paragraph (c)”.If items 68 and 69 are lost Miss Emma Forward (Exeter) to move as an amendment:73. In paragraph (b) leave out “special”.The Revd Gillian Henwood (York) to move as an amendment:74. Insert after paragraph (b):“(..) affirm its view that special arrangements should be available, within the existing structures of the Church of England, for those who as a matter of theological conviction wish to exercise or receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests in episcopal areas where the bishop has stated that he is not able to ordain women;”.If items 66, 68, 69, 70, 71 and 72 are lost Canon Dr Christina Baxter (Southwell and Nottingham) to move as an amendment:75. After paragraph (c) insert as a new paragraph:“(..) require that the Measure enabling women to be admitted to the episcopate should require:i)that the Measure should only come into force once the code has been agreed;ii)that in order for the code of practice to come into effect, it must receive the approval of the General Synod with a two-thirds majority in each House; andiii)that any future changes to the code can only be made by the General Synod with a two-thirds majority in each House;”.If items 66, 68, 69, 70, 71 and 75 are lost Ms Jacqueline Humphreys (Bristol) to move as an amendment:76. In paragraph (c) insert “statutory” before the words “national code of practice”.If items 66, 68, 69, 70, 71 and 72 are lost the Revd Canon Robert Cotton (Guildford) to move as an amendment:77. Insert as a new paragraph after paragraph (c):“(..) agree that the code of practice should relate only to the exercise of episcopal functions and describe a commitment to mutual support and cooperation between members of the House of Bishops to help with pastoral provision and sacramental care when situations arise affecting those with conscientious difficulties relating to ordination to the priesthood and the episcopate; and”.If items 66, 68, 69, 70 and 71 are lost His Honour Thomas Coningsby QC (ex officio) to move as an amendment:78. In paragraph (c) leave out all the words after “national code of practice” and insert “which all concerned would be required to follow”.Note: The headings to the Parts of this Order Paper are included solely for ease of reference.
The Bishop of Gloucester to move:20.‘That this Synod:(a)reaffirm its wish for women to be admitted to the episcopate;(b)affirm its view that special arrangements be available, within the existing structures of the Church of England, for those who as a matter of theological conviction will not be able to receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests;(c)affirm that these should be contained in a national code of practice to which all concerned would be required to have regard; and(d)instruct the legislative drafting group, in consultation with the House of Bishops, to complete its work accordingly, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice, so that the Business Committee can include first consideration of the draft legislation in the agenda for the February 2009 group of sessions.’
PROPOSED AMENDMENTSPART I – AMENDMENTS AFFECTING PARAGRAPH (a)The Bishop of Winchester to move as an amendment:66. After “That this Synod” leave out paragraph (a) and insert:“(a) anticipating the ordination of women to the episcopate in the Church of England, and noting the Manchester Group’s assertion in paragraph 22 of GS 1685 that “far and away the most important question that the Church of England now has to face is the extent to which it wishes to continue to accommodate the breadth of theological views on this issue that it currently encompasses”,i)affirm the assurances included in paragraphs 67-69 of GS 1685;ii)reaffirm (GS 1685 paragraph 74) Resolution III.2 of the 1998 Lambeth Conference “that those who dissent from, as well as those who assent to the ordination of women to the priesthood and the episcopate are both loyal Anglicans”;In paragraph (b) leave out “within the existing structures of the Church of England”; andIn paragraph (c) after “in” insert “legislation and in”.If item 66 is lost the Revd Prebendary David Houlding (London) to move as an amendment:67. Leave out paragraph (a) and insert:“(a) affirm that the wish of its majority is for women to be admitted to the episcopate”.
PART II – ALL ‘MANCHESTER’ REPORT OPTIONS KEPT OPENIf item 66 is lost the Revd Stephen Trott (Peterborough) to move as an amendment:68. Leave out paragraphs (b) and (c) and in paragraph (d) leave out “, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice,”.
PART III – ‘MANCHESTER’ REPORT OPTION 1 (SIMPLEST STATUTORY APPROACH)If items 66 and 68 are lost the Revd Miranda Threlfall-Holmes (Universities, York) to move as an amendment:69. In paragraph (b) leave out all the words after “affirm its view that” and insert “this should be done with the simplest possible statutory approach, with local diocesan arrangements for pastoral provision and sacramental care;”;Leave out paragraph (c); andIn paragraph (d) leave out “, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice,”.
PART IV – ‘MANCHESTER’ REPORT OPTION 3 (NEW STRUCTURES)If items 66, 68 and 69 are lost the Revd Canon Simon Killwick (Manchester) to move as an amendment:70. In paragraph (b) leave out “the existing structures of”;In paragraph (c) leave out “national code of practice to which all concerned would be required to have regard” and insert “Measure”; andIn paragraph (d) leave out “accordingly, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice,” and insert “by preparing a draft Measure and associated code of practice providing new dioceses for those who cannot in conscience receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests,” and after the words “so that” insert the words “, if possible,”.If items 66, 68, 69 and 70 are lost the Bishop of Exeter to move as an amendment:71. In paragraph (b) leave out “the existing structures of”;In paragraph (c) leave out “national code of practice to which all concerned would be required to have regard” and insert “Measure”; andIn paragraph (d) leave out all the words after “accordingly” and insert “by preparing drafts of possible legislation in accordance with paragraph (c), to include further draft Measures, together with associated codes of practice, based on diocesan structures for those who cannot in conscience receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests, so that, if possible, the Business Committee can include consideration of these options in the agenda for the February 2009 group of sessions.”
PART V – ‘MANCHESTER’ REPORT OPTION 2 (ARRANGEMENTS WITHIN EXISTING STRUCTURES)If items 66, 68, 69, 70 and 71 are lost the Bishop of Ripon and Leeds to move as an amendment:72. In paragraph (c) after the words “affirm that these should be” insert “either by way of statutory transfer of specified responsibilities or”; andIn paragraph (d) leave out “complete” and insert “develop” and leave out the words “first consideration of the draft legislation” and insert “further consideration of both alternatives envisaged in paragraph (c)”.If items 68 and 69 are lost Miss Emma Forward (Exeter) to move as an amendment:73. In paragraph (b) leave out “special”.The Revd Gillian Henwood (York) to move as an amendment:74. Insert after paragraph (b):“(..) affirm its view that special arrangements should be available, within the existing structures of the Church of England, for those who as a matter of theological conviction wish to exercise or receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests in episcopal areas where the bishop has stated that he is not able to ordain women;”.If items 66, 68, 69, 70, 71 and 72 are lost Canon Dr Christina Baxter (Southwell and Nottingham) to move as an amendment:75. After paragraph (c) insert as a new paragraph:“(..) require that the Measure enabling women to be admitted to the episcopate should require:i)that the Measure should only come into force once the code has been agreed;ii)that in order for the code of practice to come into effect, it must receive the approval of the General Synod with a two-thirds majority in each House; andiii)that any future changes to the code can only be made by the General Synod with a two-thirds majority in each House;”.If items 66, 68, 69, 70, 71 and 75 are lost Ms Jacqueline Humphreys (Bristol) to move as an amendment:76. In paragraph (c) insert “statutory” before the words “national code of practice”.If items 66, 68, 69, 70, 71 and 72 are lost the Revd Canon Robert Cotton (Guildford) to move as an amendment:77. Insert as a new paragraph after paragraph (c):“(..) agree that the code of practice should relate only to the exercise of episcopal functions and describe a commitment to mutual support and cooperation between members of the House of Bishops to help with pastoral provision and sacramental care when situations arise affecting those with conscientious difficulties relating to ordination to the priesthood and the episcopate; and”.If items 66, 68, 69, 70 and 71 are lost His Honour Thomas Coningsby QC (ex officio) to move as an amendment:78. In paragraph (c) leave out all the words after “national code of practice” and insert “which all concerned would be required to follow”.Note: The headings to the Parts of this Order Paper are included solely for ease of reference.
It is now twenty past two, the debate begins at half past and finishes, if that will prove to be the right word, at ten this evening.
_Black_s_s_s_s_s.jpg)
