This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/20/women-bishops-vote-disaster-church-of-england

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Women bishops: this vote is a disaster for the church I love The vote against women bishops is a disaster for the church I love
(about 13 hours later)
On Tuesday afternoon, while the General Synod was detonating its credibility with contemporary Britain, I was with a group of homeless people in central London. These men and women were frank, they brooked no faffing or dissembling. We talked about the debate about women bishops happening nearby; it seemed to them like a marginal, rather quaint conversation. They live in the real world, where most people go about their daily lives without reference to organised religion. Whether women are bishops is inconsequential to them, although on balance they thought women should be allowed.On Tuesday afternoon, while the General Synod was detonating its credibility with contemporary Britain, I was with a group of homeless people in central London. These men and women were frank, they brooked no faffing or dissembling. We talked about the debate about women bishops happening nearby; it seemed to them like a marginal, rather quaint conversation. They live in the real world, where most people go about their daily lives without reference to organised religion. Whether women are bishops is inconsequential to them, although on balance they thought women should be allowed.
Sadly, back in Westminster the debate raged on all day, the old lines being repeated yet again: for those in favour of women's ordination, intense impatience about the church losing credibility while this issue remains unresolved; for those against, a plea for a longer wait for consensus. For those in favour, an argument that the doctrine of creation insists that men and women are made equally in the image of God; and for those against, the mantra of equal but different. For both sides, a resistance to the notion that this is about power-sharing or politics (although of course it is too), and an appeal to theology, prayer, spirituality and the will of God or the movement of the Spirit, whichever language expresses most clearly the plea to a higher authority for the speaker's church tradition.Sadly, back in Westminster the debate raged on all day, the old lines being repeated yet again: for those in favour of women's ordination, intense impatience about the church losing credibility while this issue remains unresolved; for those against, a plea for a longer wait for consensus. For those in favour, an argument that the doctrine of creation insists that men and women are made equally in the image of God; and for those against, the mantra of equal but different. For both sides, a resistance to the notion that this is about power-sharing or politics (although of course it is too), and an appeal to theology, prayer, spirituality and the will of God or the movement of the Spirit, whichever language expresses most clearly the plea to a higher authority for the speaker's church tradition.
The fact that we look foolish in the eyes of society is for some in the church an embarrassment and for others a badge of honour. Foolishness for Christ was something St Paul encouraged, and so some argue that unpopularity is an indication of authentic spirituality, insisting that minorities should hold guiding principles for the whole, and that what seems wise now must be seen in the context of thousands of years, if not eternity.The fact that we look foolish in the eyes of society is for some in the church an embarrassment and for others a badge of honour. Foolishness for Christ was something St Paul encouraged, and so some argue that unpopularity is an indication of authentic spirituality, insisting that minorities should hold guiding principles for the whole, and that what seems wise now must be seen in the context of thousands of years, if not eternity.
For me, though, the issue is clear: from the very beginning of the church's existence, women should have been together with men in every area, every layer, every activity of the church's life. However, in the first century AD the church followed wider society, conforming to a societal structure that gave men the power.For me, though, the issue is clear: from the very beginning of the church's existence, women should have been together with men in every area, every layer, every activity of the church's life. However, in the first century AD the church followed wider society, conforming to a societal structure that gave men the power.
It has been a mistake that women and men haven't shared these authority roles from the beginning – not one that has suffocated the church or disabled it beyond recognition, but a mistake nonetheless. It is a matter of shame that millions of women have lived and died as practising Christians while being told from the pulpit that they, as the inheritors of Eve, were responsible for all the sin in the world. It is a matter of shame that in this country women were bridled at the time of the Reformation for daring to speak publicly about their faith. It is unutterably sad that women have lived and died nursing an unfulfilled vocation to serve as priests.It has been a mistake that women and men haven't shared these authority roles from the beginning – not one that has suffocated the church or disabled it beyond recognition, but a mistake nonetheless. It is a matter of shame that millions of women have lived and died as practising Christians while being told from the pulpit that they, as the inheritors of Eve, were responsible for all the sin in the world. It is a matter of shame that in this country women were bridled at the time of the Reformation for daring to speak publicly about their faith. It is unutterably sad that women have lived and died nursing an unfulfilled vocation to serve as priests.
We are now in for another period of uncertainty and argument, and an incoherence that is impossible to explain or defend. The fact that the vote rejected the legislation by such a small margin is a cause for reflection too; 42 of 44 dioceses voted in favour of the legislation as it was unamended.We are now in for another period of uncertainty and argument, and an incoherence that is impossible to explain or defend. The fact that the vote rejected the legislation by such a small margin is a cause for reflection too; 42 of 44 dioceses voted in favour of the legislation as it was unamended.
In its current form, there is a great degree of consensus, given that it is a compromise. But this vote has been a disaster for the Church of England, one we will undoubtedly recover from, but one that further perpetuates the commonly held view that our society is better off without the contribution of the Christian church. Many like me will stay, of course. Delivering ultimatums is a sorry way to go about a ministry, but we will hang on by our fingertips, sad and furious in equal measure, until the authority of women and men is accepted by the church we love but, at times like this, find impossible to defend.In its current form, there is a great degree of consensus, given that it is a compromise. But this vote has been a disaster for the Church of England, one we will undoubtedly recover from, but one that further perpetuates the commonly held view that our society is better off without the contribution of the Christian church. Many like me will stay, of course. Delivering ultimatums is a sorry way to go about a ministry, but we will hang on by our fingertips, sad and furious in equal measure, until the authority of women and men is accepted by the church we love but, at times like this, find impossible to defend.