Leading Articles

Rain (AM and PM) 15° London Hi 18°C / Lo 14°C

Leading article: The Church would do well to learn from Elizabeth I

Monday, 7 July 2008

Powerful centrifugal forces are tearing at the body of the global Anglican Communion. Bishops in Africa are still up in arms over the consecration five years ago of the openly homosexual Gene Robinson as a bishop by the American Episcopal church. Many are boycotting this month's Lambeth conference over the perceived failure of the head of the Communion, the Archbishop of Canterbury, to discipline the American church. Instead, these disgruntled bishops attended an alternative gathering of conservatives in Jerusalem last month. Talk of a breakaway is growing louder.

There is discord within the mother church of Anglicanism, too. The Church of England has already voted to permit the ordination of female bishops. At this weekend's General Synod, some 1,300 clergy threatened to leave the Church unless guaranteed the oversight of male bishops alone. Many hardliners are scandalised by the recent celebration in a London church of a civil union between two gay clergymen – an event many interpreted as a traditional marriage ceremony.

This liberal-conservative split reflects larger tensions about the mission of Anglicanism. One traditionalist tried to put forward a motion at the Synod calling for an explicit policy of converting people of other faiths. This won the support of a quarter of the delegates, although it was quashed by the leadership.

It might well be impossible to prevent a break-up of the Church's traditional governing structure. The opposing forces within Anglicanism might prove too strong. And it would certainly be a mistake for the liberal leadership of the Church to jettison the principle of equality for women and homosexuals in a desperate pursuit of a deal. Yet the Archbishop, Dr Rowan Williams, is surely right at least to attempt to hold the ring. Unity is preferable to a schism. If a deal acceptable to all sides can be achieved, it should be energetically and tirelessly pursued. And it is by no means an impossible task. The Church of England's leadership is attempting to hammer out a deal on special arrangements for those Anglicans who feel that their consciences would be offended by being preached to by female bishops.

Appeasing the hardliners will be difficult. And a rival grouping, headed by female clergy, is also warning that it will not back any deal that proposes discriminatory laws. Yet there would seem to be a way through. Those who have a problem with the authority of women bishops should be encouraged to attend churches under the control of male bishops. This kind of discreet, ad hoc "parish-swapping" already takes place in areas where there are women priests.

The issue of African objections to homosexuality in the American church is more problematic. The ideological chasm between these two wings of Anglicanism will be very difficult to bridge. The church leadership would seem to have no option but to float the idea of a looser association that permits doctrinal differences on the ordination of female and gay bishops.

The prize of unity is worth fighting for. The Anglican Communion can still be a force for good in a volatile world. And if this major Christian denomination manages to accommodate such differences of opinion, it could provide a stimulating example to other religions experiencing similar tensions.

Perhaps we should remember history. The Church of England was reformed in the 16th century with an extraordinary amount of doctrinal compromise. The task of reconciling England's former Catholics with its hardline Protestants makes today's disagreement look trivial in comparison. Elizabeth I said she did not desire to "make windows into men's souls". Global Anglicanism needs that kind of humane pragmatism today.

Interesting? Click here to explore further

Comments

27 Comments

Dear "God", perhaps the delusioned will be you. If I am supposed to believe in "truth" - which by your saying is enshrined in the Bible - this "truth" should prove itself to be true all along. Alas, the 'proof' book is anything but consistent and coherent with itself. On the other hand, it's packed with ridiculous lies debunked a million times by Science findings and, moreover, plain and simple contradictions between its many provisions. Very very bad news for a 'book of laws' to be believed with no discussion in order to be 'saved'. Or perhaps you are suggesting that only the illeterate will be 'saved', because they will pose no questions to the bigwigs who are in charge to 'interpret' the famous book? But who's going to save the bigwigs? Anne Marie is absolutely right: hypocrisy at its best.

Posted by Toptone | 10.07.08, 14:58 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Some 'religious' people have been quoting the bible left, right and centre about how Jesus only had male disciples, citing that as the reason why women should not be ordained as bishops. They’ve also conveniently forgotten that Jesus lived around at a time when it would have been sacrilegious for a woman to be with a group of men preaching controversial messages. Refer to Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus". Decipher that, all you 'proper' Christians who take the bible word for word and also take in mind that the largest audience in churches is a female one. This isn't about what the bible says anymore, it's about people picking and choosing who they are comfortable with enough to let into their church, and finding the right bible verse to push out those who dont fit the profile. Shrouded hypocrisy at it's best.

Posted by Anne Marie | 10.07.08, 02:03 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

You "chaps" on the other side of the pond as you so call it might want to rethink what you are fighting over. In researching the date of the establishment of the "Church of England" we find that it started around the 2nd century and if you are looking to be a part of the Church that Christ established, then you should look for that which is located in the Bible. And when he started the "Church" also is stated in the Bible, please make the attempt to find it, he said if you knock he will open and he also says he is a rewarder of those who diligently seeks him out. So that means any other established "church" would be a heresy (Damdable opinion)..And as far as "Toptone" goes, God said he chose the simple things of the world to confound the "wise" and the way you are talking it sounds like you are very "wise", he also said if you refuse to believe the truth and refuse to be saved, he will send you a strong delusion to believe your lies.

Posted by God | 09.07.08, 22:32 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

I have never considered myself to be a "hardliner" but one who has agreed to disagree with the idea of women in the priesthood. I disagree not for any misogynistic reason but as a matter of personal faith and conscience. It is sad that many of the "comments" on this article are by those who it does not affect. The many of us in faithful catholic parishes who have enjoyed the episcopal oversight are to be disenfranchised by a church we have supported and loved. We are told in a matter of fact way to get over it. Why by keeping the provision of the "Flying Bishops" should women feel slighted, are they to be more sensitive than their male colleagues now?
The solution to diversity is not going to be achieved by insults and threats. However in its attempt to be all things to all people the CofE is in danger of becoming nothing to no one.

Posted by AB | 08.07.08, 21:41 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

As Ivan said, Christianity has nothing to do with egualitarianism, sexual minorities, women's rights, scientific research and all the goodies we are used to enjoy since we separated State from Church and put an end to the ghastly habits of theocracies. Good to know. That's why we should teach AND COMPARE the biblical "facts" with Science findings at school and let the huge bulk of lies fall to pieces bit by bit, by itself. I'm sorry Mr. Ivan, but your religious hogwash, written by some "God" some 5000 years ago, is in total antithesis with democracy and equality principles which - thank Illuminism - are currently enjoyed by millions of people (including you) and, as such, are unlikely to be overthrown any soon.

A religion which advocates submission or murdering of a particular group of citizens it despises because of its "God teachings" is totally worthless and should be left well alone to cater for itself. With no public money nor publicity, that is.

Posted by Toptone | 08.07.08, 14:35 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Well, let me keep this simple. 1st off, I did not see any statements in this article based on what God has said about these issues ( Woman remain silent in the Church and Homosexuals will not see the Kingdom rom 13) and that makes it just an opinion or a heresy. 2nd off, if this is what these people are calling the Church they should again read scripture on the Church, if they did they would realize that they are just an acting group of people outside what they think they are a part of for Christ has already set the rules in place for us and anyone not following the rules is just someone living in a strong delusion like the Bible says they are in.
Remember, God said that all men are liars unless reproved. He was not talking gender there.

God

Posted by troy Austin | 08.07.08, 13:38 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

The Church--salt--is diluted if the world and politics are invited to join. Ideology is political. Elizabeth I was a political leader. The Church to keep itself from sin and remain salt can't compromise with the rights and ideas of the world.

All you Anglicans don't get the sanctity of the Church. You're trying to sanctify the world with the sacraments, which betrays the faith of those who have repaired to the Church for safety FROM sin and a refuge from the world.

Posted by MC | 07.07.08, 21:05 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

I hope that women bishops and gays are approved. It will lead to a schism within an already impure and heretical so called excuse of a church, which is drowning in a sea of filth and sin. It will be good for us Catholic's, to welcome the clergy who will leave the C of E. Women within the church have no true interest in Christianity, they just want to do what men do. They will soon want a penis at this rate. They are nothing but a bunch of loony lesbian feminists, full stop!!!

Posted by Barry Abbott | 07.07.08, 17:11 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

As an American Episcopalian, I hesitate to intrude but I do recall that the Supreme head of the Church of England on several occaisions has been a woman--Elizabeth I, Anne, Victoria and Elizabeth II. I gather in these situations the woman has had supremacy over the bishops. Can someone enlighten me why there cannot be female bishops when--in Elizabeth I's instance, at least, the woman held complete dominance over all bishops in the Church? I seem to recall the Church did very well while she reigned.

Posted by Clifton | 07.07.08, 16:55 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

"Religion should have no place in politics or in any part of the public arena" - If an individual is an adherent to a certain set of religious beliefs, he/she can not just "leave 'em parked at home". Such "religiousness" is a FARSICAL NONSENSE. If one believes, for example, the 10 Commandments to be THE true commandments formulated by a Divine Entity, he/she can not abide by them only at home. That person's entire life philosophy will be determined/shaped by what he/she does or does not believe. What You've just suggested, that "religion should be left in the closet at home" is an utter nonsense from someone who doesn't have a clue about religiousness. And that's the depressing fact of our time: most people have absolutely no clue about religions - because the INTRUSIVE LEFTIST TYRANTS have been brainwashing them via the mainstream media that "all religions are pretty much identical to one another"... "They all discriminate against women and queers, for no real reason whatsoever."

Posted by Ivan | 07.07.08, 15:49 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

27 Comments

Columnist Comments

matthew_norman

Matthew Norman: Anyone would be better than Brown

Miliband, Johnson, Straw, Jon Cruddas ... or even Kerry Katona

dominic_lawson

Dominic Lawson: How to squeeze the Russians

A public inquest held into the assassination of Mr Litvinenko

terence_blacker

Terence Blacker: Forget fuzzy togetherness...

... ruthless individualism should be our Olympic legacy


Most popular in Opinion