Protocols published: CEN 5.30.08 p 8. June 1, 2008
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Australia, Church of England Newspaper, Women Priests.trackback
Read it all in The Church of England Newspaper.
The Anglican Church of Australia has published the text of its protocol on women bishops, offering an informal guarantee to opponents of women clergy that they will not be marginalized or expelled from the Church.
During their meeting in Newcastle, NSW earlier this year, the bishops acknowledged they were not of one mind on the question of the validity of women clergy.
They affirmed that those who accepted, and those who rejected women clergy were acting in “good faith” and had a “valued and respected place in this Church.”
However, the 4-3 decision by the Church’s appellate tribunal, opening the way for women bishops, necessitated a protocol to maintain the “highest possible level of collegiality” among the bishops. The consecration of Perth suffragan Kay Goldsworthy last week and the forthcoming consecration of a women assistant bishop for chaplaincies in Melbourne will be the first test of the protocol.
Opponents of the women bishops have yet to be convinced the agreement will hold, pointing to the American church’s intolerance of those not sharing the views of its hierarchy and its repeal of protections for opponents of women clergy.
The protocol rejected pleas from those who said that as a matter of justice and inclusion opposition to women bishops could not be tolerated, stating that “every member of this Church, whatever their belief as to the acceptability of a woman holding office as a bishop” should be granted “pastorally sensitive and appropriate episcopal ministry.”
“We encourage all dioceses who desire to appoint or elect women as bishops to make provision for reasonable and appropriate episcopal ministry,” permitting alternate confirmation, ordination, oversight and pastoral support.
The bishops recommended altering the current practice of having the Primate or Metropolitan of the ecclesiastical province serve as chief consecrator when “necessary.” Sydney Archbishop Peter Jensen, the Metropolitan of New South Wales has announced he will not consecrate women bishops in his province.
At the same time, liberal archbishops were urged to recognize that some bishops and dioceses will require all of their consecrating bishops to be male, and to show “respect for one another in the ordering of services.”
While the protocol does not have the force of canon law, Australia’s tradition of decentralized authority, supporters of the protocol note, may allow it to avoid the recriminations and bickering that have plagued the American church on this issue.
I am a melbourne anglican who opposes female bishops. We had our first female bishop ordained on saturday. I know many people, including a number of clergy, who will refuse to recognise her episcopal authority over them, believing it is an error on grounds of the scriptures.
Several clergy have asked church authorities to provide “alternative episcopal oversight”, as these Protocols outline. They are still waiting for a response.
I assume “alternate” in the seventh paragraph is meant to be “alternative”!
I am an Adelaide Anglican, which is largely of the conservative catholic persuasion. Though we have long ago affirmed the ordination of women priests, and I think we will readily accept a woman bishop, these protocols are (it seems to me) a way of entrenching prejudice.
Our Bishop, Archbishop Jeffrey Driver is one of the key proponents of the protocols, and has said he will be bound by them.
They do nto provide for flying bishops, or necessarily for alternative oversight. They provide for sensitive pastoral care. Which is as it should be.
And it needs to be said that other than +Jeff’s moral commitment to them they have no force other than as a gentlemen’s agreement. (this force is of course not inconsiderable…..and they were written at a time when there were gentlemen to agree. There are now also two gentlewomen..Praise the Lord)
But the General Synod has not considered them; the Adelaide Diocesan Synod is, I suspect, not likely to adopt them.
On the whole there was considerable disquiet about them if they are the price to pay for Women Bishop’s. Not least from the enw Bishops themselves.