Support the Café

Search our Site

CofE and women bishops: not “if” but “when” and “how”

CofE and women bishops: not “if” but “when” and “how”

Thinking Anglicans has posted links to a series of articles from the Church Times, which have now peeked out from behind the paywall, called “Women Bishops: A Church Times Guide.

As the question is being considered by Diocesan Synods in advance of final voting in a General Synod next year, the question of women in the Episcopate in the Church of England has moved from “if” to “when.” The debate has changed. The big question now is how best minister to those priests and parishes that do not accept the ministry of ordained women (who haven’t already left for Rome) without watering down the authority of women Bishops.

Essentially, the debate boils down to whether or not the current Code of Practice is adequate (as the majority of the Synod seems to believe) or if a more structured system that “protects” those that want only the ministry male clergy (as the Archbishops propose).

In the Leader, the Church Times says:

One difficulty is that there appears to be no middle ground, an uncomfortable situation for Anglicans in which to find themselves. Or, rather, there are two middle grounds. The majority continues to argue that the existing Measure, with its attendant Code of Practice, is an adequate, even a generous compromise. The minority believes that the offer to work alongside women bishops in a guaranteed scheme, such as that proposed by the Archbishops last year, ought to be recognised as a significant concession. The problem is a straightforward lack of trust: traditionalists do not believe that the Code of Practice is a sufficient safeguard, not least because the guarantees made when the women-priests Measure went through are being swept aside less than 20 years on.

The editors point out that the practical experience of women in ministry and time will change the equation. The dissenters know this and their lobbying for guaranteed schemes are really a holding action against the inevitable.

The nature of the debate might change, however. A key element since 1987, when women were first ordained deacon, has been experience. Whatever views were held previously, an encounter with the work of ordained women has caused the evaporation of earlier Johnsonian doubts about a woman’s ability to preach, preside, and run a parish. When women begin to be appointed to episcopal posts, it will quickly become clear that the argument against their elevation was not based on lack of ability. Most traditionalists, accepting the present situation, do not wish to see the ministry of women curtailed in any way; they simply wish their own ministry to enjoy the same freedom. It is the task of diocesan synods, and then, next year, the General Synod, to decide whether the two aims can be held together in the same structure. Had it been an easy decision, we would not still be discussing it.

Pat Ashworth talked to four women bishops, three in the Episcopal Church and one in Canada:

The structures and polity of the Episcopal Church in the United States differ from the Church of England in that parishes “call” their own rectors, with the supervision and consent of the bishop, and dio­ceses elect their own bishops.

The Bishop of Indianapolis, the Rt Revd Catherine Waynick, explains: “This means very few women wind up in places where they will en­counter substantial negativity and challenge. If a parish does not want a woman as its Rector, they will not call her. If a diocese does not want a bishop who is a woman, they will not elect her.”

Half of the seminarians in the Episcopal Church are women, but they remain in the minority as rec­tors of parishes, deans of cathedrals, and as bishops. Bishops who are women are still a novelty because there are so few of them, Bishop Way­nick says. “When I visit or func­tion in other dioceses, it is still a brand new thing for many people to meet, shake hands with, or hug a bishop who is a woman.”

For most, their gender is not now an issue in their own countries and contexts. In the parishes where the clergy do not want to have a woman bishop, successful strategies have in­cluded asking a male bishop to visit, Bishop Waynick says. “She is still the bishop, makes visits at other times than Sunday mornings, meets with Vestry and other mem­bers, and re­tains a firm hold on her authority.

“These are arrangements which the bishop makes with one of her episcopal colleagues; there is no scheme which mandates that she must invite a male bishop, or which takes that decision and authority out of her hands.”

Bishop Catharine Waynick of Indianapolis was one of those interviewed:

“Most frequently, in my ministries as priest and bishop, I have had persons tell me they weren’t sure about the whole idea of women in orders: ‘But now I’ve had the chance to meet you, it seems perfectly fine.’

“I learned long ago not to be frightened just because another per­son is angry about something, making it possible for me to stay en­gaged and in conversation as a ‘non-anxious, self-differentiated pres­ence’.

“Roman Catholics are often very excited to have me in their midst, and Protestants who do not have bishops tend to view me as exotic . . . sort of like a talking frog. The younger members of the Church regard it as ‘way cool’ that some bishops are women, and would think it odd if there were none.

“This ministry is filled with deep unreasonable peace and holy joy — and I look forward to sharing it with more of my sisters in Christ.”

There is also an interview with a woman bishop already serving in England.


Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The term “woman bishop” is problematic because it makes it sound as if the Church of England will eventually create a new category in ordained ministry. Catherine Waynick, the Bishop of Indianapolis, does use “woman bishop” once in this citation, but then she also uses “a bishop who is a woman” and “women in orders.” As Catherine Roskam, Suffragan Bishop of New York, said in a Wall Street Journal interview, “I have to say in my own diocese I am not a ‘woman bishop.’ I don’t even feel like a ‘woman bishop’ in our synod [a governing body made up of clergy and laity in a diocese], I am just a bishop who happens to be a woman.”

It is also interesting that there is no “man bishop”–only “male bishop.”

Gary Paul Gilbert

Josh Thomas

Oh, do I love Cate Waynick’s comments! In DioIndy we’re proud to have her as our bishop.

Kiss the talking frog and she turns into a princess.

Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café