Women bishops: Church of England general synod votes against


The Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, reads the results of the vote

The general synod of the Church of England has voted narrowly against the appointment of women as bishops.

The measure was passed by the synod's houses of bishops and clergy but was rejected by the House of Laity.

Supporters vowed to continue their campaign but it could be five years before a similar vote can be held.

Controversy had centred on the provisions for parishes opposed to women bishops to request supervision by a stand-in male bishop.

'Bigger consensus'

The outgoing Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Reverend Rowan Williams, spoke of his "deep personal sadness" after the vote.

He said: "Of course I hoped and prayed that this particular business would be at another stage before I left, and... it is a personal sadness, a deep personal sadness that that is not the case.

"I can only wish the synod and the archbishop all good things and every blessing with resolving this in the shortest possible time."


The first challenge for Church leaders will be how to deal with the fallout from this vote. Already some in the parishes are describing this as one of the Church's blackest days.

The damage will include a hammering in the media. The outside world will find the Church's continued inability to push this issue forward mystifying - especially as in so many other countries in the Anglican communion there are already many women bishops.

There will be many questions too about the Church's system of democracy where major change has to be agreed by two-thirds majorities amongst bishops, clergy and the laity.

The vote was only lost by a handful of votes amongst lay members, which means the vast majority of Anglicans are in favour and will feel deeply disappointed.

The next Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, will need all his legendary mediation skills to navigate a way forward and to find new legislation which accommodates more traditionalists without then alienating the liberal wing of the Church.

Both the archbishop and his successor, the Rt Rev Justin Welby, the current Bishop of Durham, were in favour of a "yes" vote.

Bishop Welby used his Twitter account to say: "Very grim day, most of all for women priests and supporters, need to surround all with prayer & love and co-operate with our healing God."

Canon Simon Killwick, vicar of Christ Church, Moss Side, and leader of the Catholic group in the synod, had spoken against the move and said the legislation was "flawed".

He said it would be possible for the issue to return before the next synod is elected in 2015 if there were "early talks held between the various parties and a real effort to build a bigger consensus".

Twenty years after the introduction of women priests, the issue has continued to divide traditionalists - among those on the Church's evangelical and Anglo-Catholic wings - from reformers.

Had the motion been backed by the synod, the proposed legislation would have made its way through Parliament before receiving royal assent.

It needed two-thirds majorities in each of the synod's three houses.

The votes were 44 for and three against with two abstentions in the House of Bishops, 148 for and 45 against in the House of Clergy, and 132 for and 74 against in the House of Laity.

The vote in the House of Laity, at 64%, was just short of the required majority - six more "yes" votes were needed.

The Archbishop of Canterbury after the vote on women bishops The outgoing Archbishop of Canterbury was in favour of allowing women bishops

The House of laity is the largest element of the General Synod and is made up of lay members of the church elected by its 44 dioceses.

The decision came at the end of a day of debate by supporters and opponents - and a 12-year legislative process.

The Bishop of Norwich, the Rt Rev Graham James, said: "It is very disappointing that the vote was lost so narrowly."

Campaign group Women and the Church (Watch) said the outcome was a "devastating blow for the Church of England and the country".

The Rev Rachel Weir, chairwoman of Watch, said "This is a tragic day for the Church of England after so many years of debate and after all our attempts at compromise.

"Despite this disappointing setback, Watch will continue to campaign for the full acceptance of women's gifts of leadership in the Church's life."

Watch said bishops would need to act promptly to offer pastoral support in the coming weeks to women clergy and others who felt devastated by the decision.

Writing in the Guardian, Lucy Winkett, who would have been in line to become a woman bishop, said the synod was "detonating its credibility with contemporary Britain".

The Right Reverend Graham James: "Obviously it is very disappointing that the vote was lost"

But synod member Susie Leafe said the outcome was because of faults in the legislation.

She said: "There were a lot of places along the way that we could have had a measure in front of us that wouldn't have been voted down, and it's very sad that this was able to go on without us facing the reality of the situation."

The Catholic Group in General Synod said "mediation and conciliation are needed so that new legislation can be framed to provide fairly for all members of the Church of England".

The group said in a statement: "We regret the synod was put in the position whereby draft legislation failed at final approval because it was unclear and unfair in its provision for those who, in conscience, are unable to accept the ministry of women as bishops or priests.

"The Catholic Group calls on the House of Bishops to reconvene the talks started in the summer between representatives of different groups, chaired by Bishop Justin Welby.

Zoe Ham, Church Society: "I am happy that the legislation in its form today has been rejected"

"The Catholic Group is committed to playing a full part in the process of achieving good legislation to enable us all to move forward together in mission and service to the nation."

Traditionalist campaign group Together 4ward said: "We are reflecting on and praying about the outcome of general synod, and will make a fuller statement in due course.

"We are, however, pleased that synod has chosen not to pass the Women Bishops Measure in its current form, which we believe would not have allowed the Church to go forward together."

The House of Bishops will hold an emergency meeting on Wednesday morning following the decision, a Church spokesman said.


More on This Story

Women Bishops Controversy

Related Stories

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 201.

    Amazed that "The Church" can be so totally out of touch with modern day thinking regarding 'equality' - AND get away with it!!

  • rate this

    Comment number 200.

    I am sure this comment will be unpopular. How can we possibly take the C of E seriously, when it was only set up by an ungodly, promiscuous King who wanted an illegal, and unjustifiable divorce, which is not permitted according to the Bible anyway. So, if members of the C of E want to quote the bible's view of things in this argument, they had better join the Catholics.

  • rate this

    Comment number 199.

    Truly awful decision by the Church of England.

  • rate this

    Comment number 198.

    So so foolish.

    The COE has just demonstrated that it is just as backward with regards to Womens rights as both catholisim and Islam.

  • rate this

    Comment number 197.

    ALSO very sad because it has opened the door to the christianity bashers. If this alienates a lot of people and especially young women then the days of the C of E may indeed be numbered with the closure and decay of many rural churches . A blot on the landscape of this green and pleasant land and to the cultural and social fabric of the country. Some have got a great deal to answer for !!!!!!

  • rate this

    Comment number 196.

    re 151:
    You refer to those enlightened men sitting in the House of Lords - they voted in favour of the motion. The Leadership of the Church and the Clergy are clearly very much in favour. It seems to me that the problem lies with those lay members who cannot see wood for the trees

  • rate this

    Comment number 195.

    89% bishops in favour, 77% clergy in favour and 64% laity in favour for change. However just because only 2% of the uneducated masses disapprove, it is not passed.

    That is neither logical or democratic.

  • rate this

    Comment number 194.

    HaHa a misogynistic invisible man who millions think is real !
    So tell me why does David Icke look so nuts ?

    waht year is this 1866 ?

  • rate this

    Comment number 193.

    Church of England? Not in my name! Go and join the Taliban back in the Stone Age.

  • rate this

    Comment number 192.

    I dont mind women Prists or Bishops,but would it make really a different?

  • rate this

    Comment number 191.

    That was a close vote - only four votes in the house of laity short of being passed. I imagine the vote will be back again.

  • rate this

    Comment number 190.

    ...so can somebody please give me a reasonable, logical, sensible reason why the general synod of the Church of England has voted against the appointment of women as bishops ?? what exactly goes on behind those synod doors - is there something they want to hide ?...

  • rate this

    Comment number 189.

    As disappointed as I am that this vote said no to women bishops, it is clear that some who comment here are not aware of the issues surrounding the debate. The Church of England and religion in general is about Belief in something, not about what is currently the trend in the secular world.

  • rate this

    Comment number 188.

    In this day and age of tolerance and equality, the church needs to move with the times, to some extent. Why the CofE won't appoint women bishops is beyond me! With this unable to go to the Synod till at least 2019, this is really going to destroy the CofE, and ultimately, the church as a whole's repuatation and credibilty!

  • rate this

    Comment number 187.

    Erm what century are we living in? The church complains that numbers are falling in the number of rope who regularly attend church. They really need a wake up call and see that in the rest of society there are equal opportunity policies in place.

  • rate this

    Comment number 186.

    Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar is believed to have said "God is man's greatest invention".

    Clearly men don't want to share the running of their invention.

  • rate this

    Comment number 185.

    The Bible is clear: the ministry of Word and Sacrament is open only to men. "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." (1 Timothy 2:12) See also 1 Corinthians 11:3. Women have wonderful gifts to use for God's glory but the order which Christ has set in His church requires that they do not exercise authority over men. And my wife agrees!

  • rate this

    Comment number 184.

    If this debate was "should women be ordained reverends or priests in the Church of England?" then whilst I believe that they should be, I still think it is a debate worth having. The fact that they are allowed to be ordained but NOT allowed to be bishops is totally illogical and nothing short of sexist.

  • rate this

    Comment number 183.

    I always find it interesting when a religion is forced to choose between ancient scripture and modern thinking. If they dismiss too much of the ancient scripture, then the religion begins to dissolve as the gospel is no longer an absolute truth, yet if they stay out of touch with modern thinking, they begin to alienate followers.
    Whatever they choose, it's always going to be a step backwards.

  • rate this

    Comment number 182.

    Pathetic! When will the church ever realise that men and women are equal? The church has just demonstrated how outdated and behind the times it really is. And how much this needs to change!


Page 88 of 98


More UK stories



BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.