Women bishops vote a 'grim day', says Justin Welby

Bishop of Durham, Justin Welby The Bishop of Durham, Justin Welby, urged a 'yes' vote at the general synod

The next Archbishop of Canterbury has called the rejection of women bishops a "very grim day", as bishops prepare for an emergency meeting on the issue.

The ordination of women bishops in the Church of England was narrowly rejected by its ruling general synod on Tuesday.

The Rt Rev Justin Welby, who takes over the Church's top role next year, said the lost vote was hard "most of all for women priests and supporters".

Critics had said the change would not bring unity to the Church.

The proposed legislation paving the way for women bishops needed to gain two-thirds majority support in each of the synod's three houses - bishops, clergy and laity - but fell short by six votes in the House of Laity.

The result was greeted with emotion, with some supporters seen crying.

Bishop Welby, the current Bishop of Durham and a supporter of women bishops, tweeted overnight: "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."

Rowan Williams: "I'm feeling very much for women in ministry in the Church of England"

The outgoing Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Reverend Rowan Williams, who will give his farewell address later, 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."

The House of Bishops will meet from 08:30 GMT to "consider the consequences of the vote", the Church's media office said.

The general synod's voting requirements meant that although 324 members voted to approve the proposed legislation and 122 voted to reject it, it was not passed.

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 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 first challenge for Church leaders will be how to deal with the fall-out 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.

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

Christina Rees, a synod member who has spent 20 years campaigning for women bishops, said: "It feels as if the House of Laity betrayed the entire Church of England last night.

"And I think basically that the people, the sort of extremes in our Church - the very conservative evangelicals and very traditionalist Anglo-Catholics - have no idea how this will be read by most people."

She said she thought that, to most people, "this just looks like blatant discrimination".

Equalities minister Maria Miller said the vote outcome was "very disappointing", and showed that the Church was "behind the times", sources said.

The Bishop of Norwich, the Right Reverend Graham James, said those Church members who were in favour of women bishops, but who had voted against the move because of concerns over the provisions for traditionalist parishes, were central to finding a solution.

"There's a very big challenge, I think, to those who voted against but actually pledged themselves to see in what way they could move forward so that women can be bishops in the Church of England," he said.

"There's a very big responsibility on them and upon the bishops in their leadership to bring this into effect as soon as possible."

The Catholic Group on the General Synod, which backed a "no" vote, 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."

It called on the House of Bishops to reconvene the talks started in the summer between representatives of different groups, chaired by Bishop Welby.

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

The Rev Prebendary Rod Thomas, chairman of the conservative evangelical grouping Reform, which also recommended a "no" vote, said: "My overall conclusion is that it is very good news for the Church of England.

"We have avoided what could have been a disastrous mistake for our unity and witness."

In New Zealand, where women have been ordained as bishops for decades, the Bishop of Christchurch, the Rt Rev Victoria Matthews, described the decision as a "product of fear".

"I have to admit I was gutted by the announcement. I would describe it as more than disappointing. As someone who is a woman in leadership and someone who dearly loves the Anglican communion, it was quite depressing."


More on This Story

Women bishops

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 148.

    What are you on???

  • rate this

    Comment number 147.

    146 - yet he is now head of the church... my guess he would be mighty peeved at what has happened now!

  • rate this

    Comment number 146.

    Oh, I get it. They don't like the way the vote went so they are going to change the system.
    Remember, according to the Bible, Jesus never held any position of authority.

  • rate this

    Comment number 145.

    As a member of the Anglican Church, this decision puts me in a difficult place. I do not wish to contribute to a church which discriminates. However my own local church is very much in favour on women bishops. I am shocked by this decision & am looking to move to another church to avoid contributing to the CoE through "parish share"

  • rate this

    Comment number 144.

    I am happy serving the Lord with the work He has given me, if He wanted me to be a Bishop, I would be a Bishop, for one with God is a majority. I serve Him in the capacity entrusted to me, a very small part it may be, but I am assured I am where He wants me to be, and that's all that matters. Why cannot we serve our flock as He asks and leave the details to Him? God's will or our own?

  • rate this

    Comment number 143.

    AH Goebbels! "Death for Apostrophe" Excellent, that gave me a good laugh. I'm off to set up a religion to put fruit and veg sellers to death for their "Apple's", "Bean's" etc etc....now that would be worth fighting over!

    (PS did you by any chance mean "apostacy"?)

  • rate this

    Comment number 142.

    I welcome the decision to resist this so called "modernisation" of religion. Christianity is supposed to believe in certain absolute truths and stick to them rather than be moulded by popular standings.

    Without religion, we must remember that we can not have fixed morals by definition as the morality falls onto the individual and who are we to tell them their morals are right or wrong.

  • rate this

    Comment number 141.

    131. Beterthanpokeintheeye
    It's a conceit that morality stems from monotheist religious belief.
    This implies that polytheism or atheism provides no moral framework, which is plainly nonsense.
    The argument about women's place in religion really turns on whether you view men and women as human beings of equal worth.
    The Christians decided in the 3rd century that women had souls, so were human.

  • rate this

    Comment number 140.

    Who cares! They have made their own bed so let them lie in it. They are quite an irrelevant band of people. Why give such a small minority of religeous zealots so much publicity? Their attendances are tumbling weekly. Could this be because their flock cannot identify with the leadership who cannot identify with the real world?

  • rate this

    Comment number 139.

    @pokeintheeye: you suggest that without religion there would be no morality. That's very clearly untrue. There are moral and immoral people both inside the church and outside it. It's not true that we need religion to set the moral tone for atheists. As this debate shows, it's just as often society that has to hold religion to account for its immoral behaviour.

  • Comment number 138.

    All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

  • rate this

    Comment number 137.

    131. Beterthanpokeintheeye
    For the 'most fundamental concepts of justice' most societies rely on the courts. Of course, religions are different because they would like to have (as they did in the past) the last word on all things moral and judicial.

    Societies would do very well without religions and their medieval notions of 'morality' and 'justice'.

  • rate this

    Comment number 136.

    102.Chris London

    I think the point they were making is that out of fear no one says anything about Islam as they do not want the grief associated.
    If people feel so strongly about this, as I have said feel free to protest outside Mosques!

  • rate this

    Comment number 135.

    CoE should be banned as it's a hate filled discriminating organisation that fails to fit in with society. They think they are above the law, they need to be shown they are not!

  • rate this

    Comment number 134.

    The CoE has been 'moving with the times' ever since it abandoned the Book of Common Prayer and the King James Bible in the 1960s. Since then it has embraced women priests and done much else to 'modernise' itself. The expectation was that the CoE would become 'relevant' and that the pews would soon be filled to overflowing. How wrong our leaders were then, and how wrong they are today.

  • rate this

    Comment number 133.

    I do think that the church ought to be consistent and follow the bible. By all means let it follow outdated and dismissive teaching- this is what it is meant to do. But it no longer deserves its privileged place in our legal and social system. Lets have just a few imams, bishops and other faith leaders in the house of Lords to remind us that faith matters to many people, and get rid of the rest.

  • rate this

    Comment number 132.

    @122 um..... that'll be a no. as a lapsed catholic (brainwashed to hell and back) and judging by the majority of wars in the world caused by religion i think this "news" isn't really important at present.

  • rate this

    Comment number 131.

    To the religion knockers out there - think hard before chucking the baby out with the bath water. You may feel that "as there is no God, why should these people have any power to inflict their arbitrary views on me". But religions give moral framework and justification for most fundamental concepts of justice and society on which we all rely - else eg. why not just euthenase the old/disabled?

  • rate this

    Comment number 130.

    An old institution that refuses to change, where people on the inside think they know what's best, which has a disproportionate impact on the life of the state, yet which a section of the population feel is worthy of worship and totally immune from any criticism.
    But enough of the........NHS!

  • rate this

    Comment number 129.

    Opponents of this measure say they can only accept the authority of male bishops. But why do they not accept the authority of the current male bishops - who almost unanimously voted in favour?


Page 1 of 8


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.