The guys at HolyTaco have come up with flowchart to help you choose your religion. Just in case you couldn’t decide!
HT: Human3rror
Archive - October, 2009
Bishop holds harvest in a supermarket
The BBC reported today about the Bishop of Reading, conducting a Harvest Festival service in a supermarket:
Supermarket hosts harvest service
I got the impression that the reporter wasn’t himself overly impressed making some sarcastic comments, and I loved the comment from the boy who said “this has never happened to me before” (in all his 6 or so years!)
+Stephen talks about the church getting out of its buildings and going to where the people are, and I think this is a brilliant way for the church to engage with the community. A few weeks ago, the Bishop commented how people perceive the Church of England to be the supermarket equivalent of Marks and Spencer, so great to see him frequenting Asda!
This may be more down to the BBC report, but it seemed to portray a “typical” view of church with traditional hymns. Of course, you can argue that people will recognise tunes like “We Plough the Fields and Scatter”, but I’m not sure if that is really the case. Whilst the older generations might, in this post-Christendom age where a significant proportion of people are “un-churched” rather than “de-churched”, this may have reinforced people’s stereotypes of the church.
Its encouraging to see a big national chain such as Asda up for involving the church. They must think it will be commercially viable for them to do it, and not going to upset their shoppers. Just a shame the BBC weren’t a bit more up-beat!
Thoughts anyone?
Thoughts about Women Bishops
Since reading about the Revision Committee’s press release this morning, I’ve been trying to work out what I think about women bishops.
In case you’ve missed the announcement, the Revision Committee (as I understand it) are suggesting that a category of “super-bishop” is created, who will have episcopal oversight for parishes that cannot accept a female diocesan, or a male bishop who is involved in the ordination of women. The main issue is that these “super-bishops” will have their authority from legislation, rather than by a female diocesan agreeing to delegate responsibility to another bishop. Essentially, this means that a female diocesan bishop will not be the recognised leader of her whole diocese. Dave Walker has given a round-up of thoughts on this news from various media and bloggers.
I can understand to a certain extent why the committee have come to this decision. Those from traditionalist/conservative backgrounds are concerned that if delegation of authority was voluntary, then the Bishop could decide not to delegate her authority, leaving conscientious objectors forced to either leave the C of E, or accept the episcopal ministry of women, creating a schism in the Church. By having the right to seek alternative episcopal oversight engrained in statute, that risk is mitigated.
This doesn’t leave a very nice taste in the mouth, and I don’t think is respectful of the women who will become bishops. It implies mistrust, and that women bishops (and male bishops who ordain women) are second-class ministers in the church who can ignore them if they wish. What will happen if a female diocesan makes decisions that are unpopular? Will churches be able to use this rule as a way of choosing which bishop’s authority they accept?
Summarising this policy in a secular context, what about those who have an objection to accepting the authority of a Conservative Prime Minister? Should David Cameron become PM next year, can they seek alternative rule from a separate Labour/Lib Dem/UKIP/Green government?
This is obviously a hot potato, and the Revision Committee and General Synod are caught between a rock and a hard place. There is no possible way of pleasing everybody. Which begs the question, is it worth it? The Church of England is built upon the foundations of scripture, reason and tradition. If trying to change tradition is going to cause so many difficulties, then why do it?
Surely it is only worth all the pain and anguish this will cause if those who are in leadership in the church believe under God that it is the right thing to do. And if they believe that to such a certain extent that it is worth pursuing, then it has to be right for everyone, without any opt-outs. Because you can’t believe God is calling the church to a particular course of action, but say that not everyone has to follow it.
If the legislation to appoint women bishops was passed without any opt-out options for objectors, of course, significant numbers of people would leave the C of E. But if that’s what the leadership of the church believe is right, then that’s the risk to take.
Nailing my colours to the mast, I don’t have any problem with the ordination of women to the priesthood or episcopate. My understanding of scripture is that there have consistently been women appointed by God to positions of leadership, from Deborah in Judges, through to Lydia and many others in the New Testament. But I don’t want this issue to divide the church. And I don’t want women to be appointed as bishops, but then have others in the church not recognise their authority. I would rather retain the status quo.
What would I do? Prepare the legislation to consecrate female bishops with no opt-outs, no concessions, and see if it passes a vote. If General Synod aren’t sufficiently confident that women should be bishops, the motion will fall. If they are, it will pass. This would mean the church has to trust those elected to General Synod, that they discern the will of God. Those that can’t accept the leadership of Synod in this situation may well go elsewhere (whatever the outcome were), but that’s a risk leaders should be willing to take if they believe strongly in something.
Photo by Scott Gunn