This fudge on bishops must fail

How the Archbishops must dream of a "reset button" to return the Anglican fold to days of past glory when the Church of England was the spiritual arm of an Empire planting offshoots of charming eccentricity across the globe. Its membership might have been divided but the low and lazy, broad and hazy and high and crazy bumbled along together in a jolly sort of way. How British this hybrid church could be! Neither Protestant nor Catholic but glued together by Cramnerian prose , a desire to work together and village fetes and tea! Fast forward and this quirky institution is in a most frightful mess. Globally the Africans and Americans no longer bend the knee to Canterbury or give credence to one another. The result is an increasingly farcical communion in which no one works together. The "bonds of unity"'have snapped, spiritual warfare has erupted and it is a very sorry reflection on a faith that's based on love. At home the sands are shifting too where old manageable disputes of high, middle and low give way to a volatile schism between traditionalist and liberal. Famous Anglican fudge might placate a churchmanship niggle but proves altogether unpalatable in matters of belief. The presenting issue is "women and gays" but the real problem is a question of authority. Are Anglicans an autonomous body with authority to bring in innovation or part of a Universal church unable to act without backing of scripture and agreement from other Christians in this world? So the Archbishops must attempt the impossible. This weekend they put before the Synod a proposal to compromise on the ordination of women bishops; and they have announced that they will ask the Church of England to move under a global authority being created through new legislative and decision making bodies. Think; UN for Anglicanism! This second proposal is courageous but likely to prove too little, too late. How can Africans believing in a revealed faith reconcile with Americans thinking faith is still being revealed? One seeks obedience where the other demands innovation. And why would either listen to Canterbury having already ignored him in the past? It is a noble effort but we need clarity of teaching not a new body for everyone to rail against. The first proposal is equally audacious and likely to fail as the Archbishops seek to placate supporters of women bishops and those opposed on principled grounds. The problem is particularly embarrassing because traditionalists almost certainly face annihilation despite being promised a future of integrity when a deal for women priests was first struck! This proposal seeks to hide that embarrassment through a fudge akin to "the Emperor's new clothes." "Men only" bishops will be created who can only function when "normal" bishops agree. It represents an ecclesiology as ludicrous as it is sexist because anyone willing to write to a female bishop pleading spiritual oversight has already granted her the authority they claim she does not have! But then this is offered on grounds of expediency not cogency. Expect synod to grab it after a show of noisy indignation from both sides! For traditionalists it spells the end of long term hope but provides short term help. As the battle is over many will now leave, especially with a tantalising offer from Rome, but others will go nowhere being happy to live with congregational orthodoxy, (the ignoring of reality outside of the parish) or unable to move for practical reasons. It is this group the proposal addresses. In many ways it represents a losers' package. Gone is realistic hope of fostering vocations, theological colleges, preferment or unity with traditionalists left at the mercy of liberal opponents. But it does offer terminal care and beggars cannot be choosers. As to supporters of women bishops, expect them to go for no provision at all but to back this proposal as a last resort. They will understandably resent farming out difficult parishes but will also be wise enough to note that the power resides in their hands. As an Anglican priest likely to accept Rome's offer I urge Synod to think again. We reach a crossroads and clarity is vital if pain is to be kept to a minimum. Either the Church of England wants to profess the revealed faith or one being revealed through innovation. So set your course that your members might know where they stand. In truth the continuing desire to consecrate women is answer in itself. So I urge no provision at all but sincere commitment to release buildings and funds to those whose future lies elsewhere. Stop fudging, it no longer works, and what you are going to do, do quickly. Amiable separation is preferable to an abusive, damaging union.