Possibly one of the most foolish Early Day Motions Mouse has ever seen has been tabled by Frank Field MP, attracting six other signatories at the time of writing.
There is a little subtlety to the wording, but it essentially calls on the government to remove exemptions from equalities legislation to force the Church of England to accept women bishops in the event that it is accepted by the dioceses but fails at General Synod through a 'technicality'.
Mouse considers this misjudged, to say the least, and Mouse says that from the position that he supports the admission of women to the episcopate.
If this is supposed to be a great act of principle then why wait until 2012 and this particular scenario to remove the exemptions? Surely it would just be easier to remove the exemptions now. And why is the Church of England the only institution singled out for this treatment? If Parliament is to force religions to apply equality for ministers, then Mouse looks forward to Frank Field taking on Islam and the Catholic Church.
Now, some might say that the Church's established status makes it a special case, but then Mouse would ask why this call now, and why wait to see whether the measure is accepted by the dioceses before compelling them to comply with the will of Frank Field and his six Parliamentary colleagues.
Of course, Early Day Motions are the parliamentary equivalent of a car sticker, in that they are not intended to do anything other than to give MPs a structured process for publicising their opinions. So the Church of England really shouldn't worry itself about this one.
Bradford is British
14 minutes ago
So what "technicality" is Frank envisioning here, then? Seems to me he doesn't like the idea that the Church's own democratic processes (I know, but that's a different debate) might not deliver the result he wants.
ReplyDeleteThe 'established status' argument stacks up quite well, I'd say. If you don't like political interference - and I fully understand why you don't - then call for disestablishment and join the rest of us who are having to grapple with post-christendom.
ReplyDeleteHow appropriate after I had written a 'Barmen Declaration' as part of course homework against exactly such totalitarianism.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't sound like it is going to remain as just homework for much longer!
I don't agree with this EDM but I can see his point. The exemptions were granted to the church to take account of theological difficulties and freedom of religious belief.
ReplyDeleteBut it is abundantly clear that there are no theological difficulties for the CoE as a whole, there are only organisational problem and questions of how to accommodate those who still do have theological difficulties.
So to deny women priests the ability to become bishops is not based on the kind of reasons that the exemption was designed for but on plain old-fashioned political issues that every organisation implementing equality legislation had to face.
Erika - I think you make a very relevant point. There are of course people in the C. of E. who do think there are theological difficulties in women becoming bishops, but General Synod has already made a democratic decision on the theological issues. But it still leaves the minority who disagree to be catered for with compassion and respect.
ReplyDeleteBut the options are very complex. See http://www.psephizo.com/?p=883
ReplyDelete