Full text of women bishops' legislation posted

Yesterday we linked to Ruth Gledhill's report on the imminent release of the draft legislation that will allow the Church of England to open their episcopate to their women priests. Today the full report has been posted.

Given Ruth's report there aren't too many surprises in the full text. There is one small discrepancy; Ruth reported that for a parish to request alternative episcopal oversight, the parish council would have to vote by 2/3rds majority (which means that it won't be something controlled by the incumbent.) That provision doesn't seem to be in the posted text.

Thinking Anglicans' has links to the text plus earlier revisions here.

Thinking Anglicans' report has elicited a comment by Lambeth Conference non-attender and traditionalist Diocese of London bishop Peter Broadbent pointing out what he perceives to be the failings of the proposed legislation and that it is still open to amendment.

WATCH (Women and the Church) have issued a statement about the legislation that is posted on Thinking Anglicans.

Addendum, Sunday: Thinking Anglicans has a roundup of press reports.

Posted by Nicholas Knisely on May 8, 2010 9:46 AM | |
Comments (4)

The concern all along is that in making provision for traditionalists, bishops who were women would be 2nd class bishops.

The proposal ensures that won't be the case. But how about complete symmetry? There are provisions for traditionalists. Where are the provisions for those who have conscientious objections to male priests?

Posted by John B. Chilton [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 8, 2010 10:24 AM

Pete is no traditionalist.

Posted by Simon Sarmiento [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 8, 2010 10:35 AM

Bp Broadbent wrote,

"For those who are opposed, conservative evangelical [evidently from Simon's comment and this Broadbent is conservative evangelical] and traditionalist catholic, the rubicon is crossed at paragraph 148."

The paragraph in question is:
"148.The Committee then considered the Bishop of Willesden’s proposal that, in addition to sacramental functions, complementary bishops should be vested with responsibility for the pastoral care of the parish, together with authority to institute and licence clergy. He also proposed that some requirement should be built into the draft Measure for clergy in petitioning parishes to take oaths both to the diocesan bishop and the complementary bishop. After discussion, the Bishop of Willesden’s [hmmm - that's Broadbent] amendment was defeated by 11 votes to 7."

Broadbent goes on to comment at TA,

"Our transatlantic correspondents need to know that there is a Revision Stage in the Synod in July, when every clause of the draft legislation is open for possible revision."

How odd. Who are these "transatlantic correspondents"? ACNA? And why "transatlantic" -- where's the Global South in this remark?

Posted by John B. Chilton [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 8, 2010 11:41 AM

Bp Pete Broadbent is an evangelical, but not - in the sense the term is used in the Church of England - a "conservative evangelical". In England that term is applied to a very specific group, exemplified by Reform and Church Society.

Posted by Simon Sarmiento [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 18, 2010 5:34 PM

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Advertising Space