The Church of Ireland got it right when the decision was taken by General Synod that women could be ordained to the priesthood, in that from the outset it was stated clearly that ordination also would open the way to consecration as a bishop. There was no mention of sexual equality. From the outset it was the equality of priesthood.
That the Church of England could not pursue a similar course is due to what was then two politically well organised principal major power blocs of Anglo Catholicism and Evangelicalism in their General Synod.
The Irish church due in part to its reaction to the triumphalism and ceremonialism of the Roman Catholic Church on this island never has had anything of the size, clout and influence of the C of E’s Biretta and Benediction Brigade. The C of I could hardly produce two parochial home guard units in that department. And likewise with the the other English power bloc. What is still presented by many who espouse the title of Evangelical in Ireland is nothing of the sort. In the C of I the term which would be more accurate is “low church”. The so-called evangelical camp in the C of I is fundamentally a grouping which does not really embrace ordered liturgy. Evangelicalism and established Anglican liturgical norms are not as mutually exclusive in the C of E and other parts of the Communion as they have come to be here. Indeed the time was and not so long ago, when the Irish Evangelicals steadfastly maintained what they promoted as BCP orthodoxy in rite, ritual and rationale.
To return to the current focus of women bishops. When the debate on women’s ordination came before the C of E synod, there was not a hope in heaven or earth, of it being accepted without compromise to the two somewhat extremist power blocs. That compromise included the development of so-called flying bishops, a species of bishop for the dissidents, which was a step too far and beyond any concept of episcopacy as practiced throughout history.
The parallel in Ireland of getting terrorists to give up the gun and try politics would be tempting to pursue. The recent result in the C of E synod is a demonstration of ecclesial dissidents who persist despite the scene moving on to what the majority believe to be the best way forward. The truth that ‘once you pay the Danegeld you never get rid of the Dane’ reared its head in this week’s C of E Synod vote. Irredentist groups, self-styled Anglo Catholics and Evangelicals, manned the barricades to progress despite the overwhelming wish of diocesan synods, bishops and clergy, to proceed with women bishops.
The major change on the C of E scene is the disappearance of the strong Anglo Catholic caucus of activists who formerly led that movement. Many of the leaders have swam the Tiber – put basically, they “poped” and became Roman Catholic clergy. Other clergy have joined the half-way house of Benedict’s ordinariate. Numerically, very few laity have made this journey to Rome. The transfer, such as it has been, has been principally clerical and not as massive numerically as at first expected. That this development may have affected the clerical voting pattern should be given little credence. The overall clergy vote rather surely indicates and supports an appreciation of the gifts which women have brought to ordained ministry over recent decades. The reasons why the House of Laity did not produce the required vote have not been sufficiently and accurately analysed, although a letter to the Times on November 22 by a son of the Church of Ireland, Archdeacon Norman Russell, goes some way towards this end.***
The evangelicals who object, and they do include women both lay and ordained, still seem to be hung up on a theological objection to so-called headship being other than male. For them leadership at episcopal level must be male even though ordained women already exercise forms of headship in parochial and in other ordained ministries. That other Anglican provinces are well down the road of female bishops and archbishops, and that there has been widespread acceptance of their efficacy, mattereth not to these who dare to call themselves evangelicals. That one group has the audacity to claim the title Reform merely adds to appreciation of their confusion. One is relieved to see that Fulcrum – another evangelical grouping – remains firmly committed to women as priests and bishops.
Several media commentators reacted in almost hysterical terms to what any fool knew would be a close run result. There were proclamations that Bishop Welby’s tenure at Canterbury was virtually over even before it started due to his advocacy in favour of the measure at Synod. There were MPs who wished to place legal impositions on the C of E due to what they perceived as sexual discrimination – and they may yet do so. And that despite the shortage of women in the coalition cabinet. And there were those who felt the decision would affect Parliament’s response to the church’s views on same sex marriage. David Cameron’s skilful side-stepping of parliamentary criticism was noteworthy. Well if such skills works with Eurosceptics, why not with Parliamentarians who displayed, perhaps for the first time, an interest in matters ecclesiastical?
There are many strengths in the Church of England. It has forms of ministry which are sadly absent in the Irish Church. In terms of Children’s Ministry, it has gone where the C of I (laity?) in General Synod refused, namely admitting children to communion and indeed at this current Synod it explored and moved towards administration of the same by children. It has leaders of the capability of Rowan Williams, who by far outstrips intellectually in breadth, and in leadership skills, many of the recent archbishops he succeeded. And in selecting his successor, the field for survey was greater by far both in number and in depth, than the choice available for consideration by the Irish House of Bishops for Armagh. That is not to criticise their appointee, but to state and stress a simple truth about the danger of anyone in the Church of Ireland having a sense of superiority over the C of E.
The major regret surrounding this Synod decision is that it removed the focus from many areas of mission and in-depth faithful service which the C of E does daily and does well. It also provided a ready stick for a public beating of the C of E by those who are indifferent to faith or simply wish to criticise the church of any denoination. Above all else, the esteem of those women who are already ordained, and the 50 percent of ordinands being trained who are women, needs to be recognised. They all are baptised. What other tests should they be subjected to simply because of their sex?
Houston McKelvey
*** From a letter to the Times November 22
The Ven Norman Russell
Archdeacon of Berkshire, Prolocutor of the Lower House of the Province of Canterbury & Alternating Chair of the House of Clergy (2005-10)