(1) the first of these is merely a definition of terms and does not change anything - it is a big issue for Trad Caths that the authority for the male bishop should not be derived by means of delegation from the female bishop, and this tries to bridge the gap, albeit merely by defining the terms rather than changing the arrangements.

(2) the second is around the concern that the male bishop chosen to oversee parishes who won't accept women bishops could still not be considered appropriate by the dissenting parishes. This is possible, for example, if the male bishop was in the business of ordaining women priests or was otherwise too liberal. This adds some strength to the point that the male bishop chosen in these circumstances should be one who is appropriate in the context of those who are requesting alternative oversight. It does not change the authority of the diocesan bishop, however.

In Mouse's humble view, these are perfectly acceptable technical refinements and do not change the substance of the measure. Which is jolly good news.

In my opinion it is just one more attempt to make women 2nd class bishops. You are either a bishop or not -- anything else is the Donatist heresy.

With Jim, what does press release mean? I'm not at all clear on what the actual practice will be if the 3 houses pass the legislation at GS.

My initial reaction was that it appears that the writer(s) of the press release is trying to send out a double message to sooth both sides, and, in the process, is not making much sense.

June Butler

June, I take The Church Mouse's analysis of the press release as authoritative.

Why don't they just make an CoE version of DEPO and call it a day?

Separate but equal doesn't work. Weakening the catholicity of the episcopate in order to appease dissenters over women entering the episcopate is wrong.

Gary Paul Gilbert

What I make of it is that the CofE needs to hire some competent writers. This isn't a case of being separated by a common language. The Times's Ruth Gledhill described this meandering bit of busted boilerplate as the worst written news release since the Reformation.

What this means:

"Giles Fraser ‏@giles_fraser
42/44 dioceses of C of E agree legislation for women bishops. Then small group of all male bishops in closed session decide to change it."

>>In my opinion it is just one more attempt to make women 2nd class bishops.
---
While my strong preference/conviction is for completely equal orders for all genders, the actual content of this (indeed, poorly written) explanation seems to suggest a refinement TOWARD equality.

The issue of delegation says that, in the case of a male Bishop invited into a female Bishop's Diocese for the purpose of ministering to those who find it difficult to have a female Bishop- the visiting male Bishop's authority to do so comes from the female Bishop of the Diocese, who remains the actual Bishop and the source of ecclesiastical authority in her Diocese. This allows the conservatives to have what they seem to need in practice (male presence in Episcopal rituals), while enshrining the equalist view with regards to authority into law. I'd say that's a pretty good compromise, all in all.

The second paragraph is a little more troubling. IT is saying that when a parish requests alternative oversight from male clergy, they should also specify what kind of male clergy they want, with regards to their theological position. Conservative parishes were apparently concerned because they feel that maleness is "necessary, but not sufficient." That is, the priest MUST be male, but he MUST ALSO be other things (conservative, or whatever).

This amendment troubles me much more than the other one, and taken together they paint an odd picture of Anglican polity: Authority in operational matters flows down from the Bishop, but authority in matters of theology rests with an individual congregation. Aside from gender issues, this seems bass-ackwards.

Jim, I trust WATCH's take (described on the Cafe above).

It's all about girl-/girl-affirming cooties, or "taint". And taint ain't catholic.

JC Fisher

"Why don't they just make an CoE version of DEPO and call it a day?"

Because they're hung up on the "Delegated" part of DEPO, Nicole. If a bishop-who-is-a-woman can delegate to their precious Forward-in-Faith selves, that means they have to *acknowledge* her power to delegate. Which means they're acknowledging her *oversight*. Which means they're acknowledging her as bishop. Heaven forfend! {clutch pearls} {vapors} {die away in lace-covered horror}

JC Fisher