Women Bishops in the Church of England

Women Bishops in the Church of England July 19, 2014

This week the Church of England decided that women could not only be priests but also bishops. The Church of Uganda has supported this decision, as seen here:

The Primate of Uganda, the Most Rev. Stanley Ntagali, Archbishop of Kampala, has released a statement welcoming Monday’s vote by the General Synod of the Church of England to allow for the appointment of women bishops. A statement given to Anglican Ink during a break in the Ugandan House of Bishops retreat on 16 July 2014 said:

The canons (laws) of the Church of Uganda indicate that anyone who is ordained is eligible to be elected as a Bishop. “We do not have a problem with women becoming bishops in the Church of Uganda or elsewhere,” said Archbishop Stanley Ntagali.

The Anglican Communion is comprised of autonomous Provinces. So, the Church of England’s decision to consecrate women as Bishops is a decision that applies to their Province alone.  We recognize there are some members of the Church of England who do not support the ordination of women and we appreciate the careful work of their General Synod to make provisions for their conscientious objection.” 

“In Uganda, we have women priests and Archdeacons, and many of them work for the church in various capacities,” said Archbishop Stanley. “We have ordained women since the 1980’s, so we have qualified women who could be elected Bishop.”

As a GAFCON Province, we support the 2013 Nairobi Communique that said, “We affirm the ministries of women and their vital contribution to the life of the church.”  The Nairobi Communique also said, “We recognize that we have differing views over the roles of men and women in church leadership.”The Church of Uganda is one of the Provinces that believes the ordination of women is Biblical and whose canons permit the consecration of women as Bishops in the Church.

 The most important matter in selecting Bishops is their personal commitment to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, an apostolic calling, and a demonstrated commitment to living and leading under the authority of God’s Word written.

Canadian theologian, Ephraim Radner, has weighed in — in prose that is not entirely clear:

On July 14, 2014, the General Synod of the Church of England voted to permit women to be consecrated as bishops in their church. It followed a long, and sometimes bitter debate, and a vote in 2012 that barely fell short of the required two-thirds majority among lay representatives. Part of the decision—debated as to its enforceability—guarantees parochial opponents access to male priests and bishops.

For some, the decision was too late in coming. For others, though supportive of the concept, it is comes too early, putting another thorn in the bleeding flesh of the Anglican Communion and erecting a new barrier to reconciliation with Catholics and the Orthodox. For others, many of whom have already left the church, it is but one more sign of the inevitable slide of Anglicanism into a failed cultural accommodation with modernity’s egalitarian politics.

My own views are most sympathetic with those of the second group. Nonetheless, it should be acknowledged that the Church of England has labored hard and responsibly to reach this turning point, and, with whatever missteps, has done so in in sharp and positive contrast to several other Anglican churches around the globe. One may not accept the premises of Anglican polity, but in this case the polity has done its work with integrity according to its own self-understanding….

The Church of England, with its complicated establishment structures and great theological diversity, moved slowly. Significant numbers of its membership, including in the clergy and episcopacy, were strongly Anglo-Catholic or Evangelical in their commitments, and could not see their way theologically to accepting the ordination of women. Although there were acts of protest and provocation, women advocates and their supporters did not pursue a strategy of the fait accompli, as in the U.S., but worked to organize, debate, and persuade. Indeed, a number of British women who had been ordained priests elsewhere in the Communion returned to the Church of England and willingly worked as deacons as they awaited a potential change….

Yet the approval of women bishops reflects the fact that ecumenical “consensus” is an empty slogan at best. If women in the episcopate are not considered worth such consensus, one must ask, “what is?” And, when the time comes, will there be the means to achieve it? My own concerns mostly lie here: Even if most Anglicans consider this a secondary issue of Christian “truth” or moral imperative, should we not have worked much harder to implement the means of open discussion, debate, and accommodation with our Christian sister churches, if only to fulfill our calling to such a work on its own terms?


Browse Our Archives