|
If the legislation
goes ahead should any provision be made for opponents and if
so in what form?
Provision may be a
requirement before Parliament will pass the legislation since
this was a condition of the decision to ordain women in 1992.
Joint Submission to the Legislative Drafting Group (provisional) from teh Councils of Church Society, Reform and the Fellowship of Word and Spirit - April 2007
Text
of a submission made by Church Society to the Bishop of Guildford's
group which was set up to look at the shape of legislation and
in particular what provision should be made to opponents of women
bishops.
Joint
Submission from Church Society, Reform and Fellowship of Word
and Spirit. April
2006
The Rochester Commission
sets out the following possible courses
of action:
- No provision (often
called a 'single line measure')
- Code of Practice agreed
by the House of Bishops
- Extended Episcopal
Ministry (provision of a male Bishop in each Diocese - but
parishes would have to petition the Diocesan Bishop.)
- Extended Provincial
Episcopal Ministry (as above but with the petition going
to the archbishop)
To these can be added
the option of new Dioceses, fully part of the existing provinces
which consist of all the parishes within the existing Dioceses
who opt into them.
The final two options
for opponents are:
Principled irregularity
- seeking the oversight of orthodox male Bishops and all that
goes with that from different sources.
Leave
Guildford
Report (February
2005) on the shape of legislation and provision for opponents.
Church Society articles
A Way Forward after the Consecration of Women Bishops. A paper submitted to the Bishop of Guildford for consideration by his commission. Churchman article by Gerald Bray (2005).
Two articles from Cross†Way
96 Spring 2005:
• Rochester
- Providing for opponents David Phillips
• Rochester -
A new Province? David Phillips
Return to index and introduction
|
