Posts tagged Women Bishops
From the ‘Why There Should Be No Women Bishops’ Files
Mar 2nd
There is a great post over at an interesting First Things blog called Evangel about the recent resignation of the Lutheran bishopette in Germany. One of the biggest reasons I find for why there should be no women in the episcopate can be found in the kind of women who seek what they see as a position of power (rather than servanthood and sacrifice) and what they do to revealed Word of God in the process. Here are some excerpts of a guest post by Rev. Dr. Holger Sonntag about the resignation of Dr. Margot Käßmann, who was the head of the EKiD and the bishop of the largest territorial Lutheran church in Germany recently. My bolds:
What caused her to resign? On February 20, at 11 p.m., the Saturday after Ash Wednesday, she had been caught running a red light while intoxicated. The police established her blood alcohol content as .154%. While her fellow council members assured her of their ongoing trust in her in a telephone conference on February 23, but left the final decision up to her, she resigned nonetheless on the following day. As she put it once, she wanted her “personal power to convince” to be “unhampered.” And this public moral failure was apparently seen by her as a major hindrance to such authenticity.
The reactions in Germany range from dismay (not so much about her drunk driving, but about her resignation) to respecting her integrity. Many saw her as a dynamic, honest leader who made the church credible again in the eyes of non-members. Others, however, saw her as a divisive figure who felt constrained to comment on any number of social and political issues, even without (or against) God’s clear Word, and who personalized her office as probably no one had done before in recent history.
What can be said about this major event? First of all, it was perhaps providential that she resigned from her offices on the day of St. Matthias, the man who was chosen to replace Judas.
-snip-
Perhaps it was because she did not hold her office legitimately, Dr. Käßmann made it all about herself: her views, her positions, her opinions, but also her integrity, her moral attitude. In a variation of Jesus’ saying, one could say: Those who live by authenticity will die by authenticity. Behind her Ego striving for societal stardom, the office and its actual tasks withered away. Since she did not allow the office to limit and focus her self, the office in turn then also offered her no support in times of need. Accordingly, the publicized media commentary asked only: with her moral stature and claim, can she still continue after such a public moral failure? The question was no longer asked, not even in the churches she led: does her teaching agree with God’s Word and the Lutheran confessions?
-snip-
Public opinion, fostered by the likes of Margot Käßmann, on the other hand, is naturally Donatist: moral credibility and authenticity is all it knows, both in political and ecclesiastical leaders (is this the hidden self-righteousness of the “little guy”?). And, of course, morality is here not measured by God’s Word, but by what everybody thinks is good, right, and salutary. Being for homosexual pastors, for divorce (Dr. Käßmann is divorced), and against war is then good, progressive, courageous, and loving. Being against women’s ordination, divorce, and for war, on the other hand, is bad, medieval, and discriminating against women. This type of moralism, that is actually a characteristic of unbelievers, should not hold sway in the church. Here the first question should be: what is a teacher’s teaching? Does it agree with God’s Word? Moralism, to be sure, spurred many a reform movement before Luther (just think of John Wycliffe, but also Erasmus of Rotterdam), but it typically missed the doctrinal boat entirely. The corrupt life of a minister or bishop became the focal point of popular outrage; no one cared about his teachings. Pastors experience this even today: deny baptismal regeneration, and no one even notices; move the baptismal font by one inch, and you’re in hell. On the contrary, Luther emphasized: life is earth; doctrine is heaven (cf. Am. Ed., vol. 27:41-42). This is to say: every Christian’s life is going to be messy because we are and remain sinners, although we strive by the power of the Holy Spirit to be more and more holy in our lives as well. Yet our doctrine comes from God. It is not only perfect; it makes us perfect because it is God’s light brining us the light of the world, Jesus Christ. Tolerance ought to be extended to a messy life, not to messy doctrine. Because with doctrine, heaven and hell are at stake.
No Alternative Oversight for Faithful Anglicans
Feb 7th
Update: Here is the audio. Evidently, the statement leaked by Ms. Gledhill was delivered on Monday word-for-word.
Ruth Gledhill has leaked the statement the Bishop of Manchester is set to deliver to the Church of England’s General Synod on Monday concerning women in the episcopate. In a nutshell, the Revision Committee’s recommendation will be that no statutory alternative oversight be provided for congregations unable to accept women bishops. At best, it seems that any accommodation would be totally at the discretion of the diocesan bishop.
There are some in FiF UK that insist that, before they go over to Rome, this process must be allowed to play out, that perhaps there is yet a future for faithful Anglo-Catholics in the Established Church. Personally, I fail to see how the decisions of the Church of England General Synod enter into the question at all: either Anglicanorum Coetibus is a movement of the Holy Ghost or it is not. Either we ought to be in communion with the Successor of St. Peter or not. But were one to take a less spiritual, more pragmatic approach to things, honestly, does ANYONE really think this is going to end with Catholic Anglicans being able to remain in the Church of England in good conscience?
10. Where have we got to? It was only at our tenth meeting on 26 November that the Revision Committee completed the first phase of its work, namely considering whether to substitute a significantly different approach for the one reflected in the initial draft of the Measure. What we had done in our earlier meetings was to adopt a ‘traffic light’ system of red and amber.
11. Having heard representations in favour of creating additional dioceses the Committee decided before the summer to give the idea the red light. But proposals for a recognised society, some sort of transfer or vesting, or for adopting the simplest possible legislative approach all got initial amber lights, that is to say, we agreed to consider them further.
12. We then did some serious work on these models, particularly to tease out the pros and cons of the society model and to understand exactly what it might mean in terms of who exercised what jurisdiction and on whose authority. After much discussion we came to the point of decision on 8 October. The Revision Committee voted by a clear majority to reject the society option but, by a similarly clear majority to go for the transfer or vesting route. This meant that, in relation to petitioning parishes, certain functions – though the Committee had not agreed which – would be exercised by bishops by virtue of the Measure rather than by way of delegation from the diocesan bishop.
13. We were then confronted with a dilemma over what if anything to say about such a significant decision. We had confirmed at the outset of this exercise that we would not offer a running commentary on progress. Nevertheless, we have no sanctions to enforce confidentiality. With 19 members we are a big Group and in addition there are usually several other Synod members present at our discussions. We were also conscious that people would be attending subsequent meetings and would need to know the changed context in which they were presenting their proposals.
14. So, it was clear that news of what we had decided would get out, not necessarily accurately. After discussion there was agreement across the Revision Committee that the least bad option was to put out a short factual press release.
15. Even with the benefit of hindsight I’m not sure that we could have done differently. But it did, in the event, create difficulty for us and necessitate a further statement when, on 13 November, further work resulted in all the specific proposals for the vesting of particular functions being defeated. The Revision Committee was simply unable to identify a basis for specifying particular functions for vesting which could command sufficient support both from those in favour of the ordination of women as bishops and those unable to support that development.
16. This meant that after more than six months work we had rejected all the options which would have involved conferring some measure of jurisdiction on someone other than the diocesan bishop. The legislation that the Revision Committee sends back to the Synod will, therefore, be on the basis that any arrangements that are made for parishes with conscientious difficulties about women’s ordination will be by way of delegation from the diocesan bishops. That much is already clear.
Read the entire statement below.
More Reaction to the Revision Committee’s Decision
Nov 17th
Fr. Edward Tomlinson, SSC reacts to the “shameful kick in the teeth” from the General Synod’s Revision Committee on women in the episcopate, noting the irony of those in the Church of England who now decry the horrors of papal infallibility.
And in the midst of all this confusion, doubt and fear I am also having to endure a tirade of people warning me about the horrors of Rome! (The only people seeking to offer me sanctuary and the fullness of Catholic truth.) I would not mind if these warnings were given in a reasonable manner to incite healthy debate. But they have come from many sources and are as illogical as they are poisonous! It seems anti-Catholic rhetoric runs deep in the English psyche and the successor of Peter is considered fair target for bigoted vitriol.
The chief moan, rather predictably, centres on papal infallibility. The belief that the Pope, when speaking to the whole church solemnly concerning a matter of faith or morals and under guidance of the Holy Spirit, is preserved from the possibility of error. In truth infallible teaching is almost never proclaimed, the last time was over 50 years ago when the Pope gave credence to the doctrine of the Assumption. It also only happens with teaching that fits the divine revelation and has the backing of Christian tradition. His infallibility is certainly never used to usher in innovation and trendy new ideas.
And that is where I find the irony! Those bashing the pope for his ability to speak infallibly are happy to accept that same gift of infallibility vested in General Synod- a confused and unqualified bunch of volunteers given free reign to decide what the Church of England believes! For make no mistake, by refusing traditionalists space in which to thrive, the revision committee has made infallible the innovation of women priests and bishops. No longer is the Catholic theology of priesthood allowed in our national church. And if you don’t like it- the message is simple- get out or live as soiled goods in the margins.
“A Great Piece of Wickedness”
Nov 16th
The Telegraph (UK) reports that the Revision Committee of the Church of England’s General Synod has failed to achieve a compromise which would have safeguarded faithful Anglican parishes from future women bishops.
Anglo catholics and evangelicals had hoped the church would appoint dedicated male bishops to oversee them. But yesterday the Church’s committee tasked with looking at the proposal failed to back the idea.
The move is likely to spark an exodus of clergy who have warned previously that they would leave the Church if they were not given safeguards to protect their beliefs.
Fr. David Houlding, a member of the Archbishops’ council and a leading traditionalist, notes that crossing the Tiber may be the only alternative.
This forces people out of the Church who otherwise would have stayed. We didn’t want to go to Rome, but now have been left with no choice.
But this is not just about people leaving, but about the destruction of the character and identity of the Church.
Of course, the character and identity of the Church of England was effectively destroyed seventeen years ago when the General Synod voted to permit the ordination of women priests! The decision to promote women to the episcopate is merely the logical outcome — and arguably the only equitable result — of this fateful departure from Apostolic order.
And while it is promising that many “traditionalists” now look to Rome for the preservation of their Anglican identity and catholic order, they should not simply default to this position because of (yet another) abominable deformation in the Church of England. Much soul-searching is yet required. Is the office of the Successor of St. Peter part of the divine constitution of the Church and intended by God as the focus of Christian unity? Or is the Holy Father’s offer in Anglicanorum Coetibus merely a the lesser of two evils?
The Church of England’s official press release is also online.
