Archbishop of Canterbury's Speech on the Ordination of Women to the Priesthood
Episcopal News Service. November 18, 1992 [92234]
[Delivered to the Church of England's General Synod, November 11, 1992]
The Church of England is no stranger to days of decision like these. At such times we are caught between faith and fear, between the excitement of a new experience and the fear of the risk involved. We are fearful for the church's unity, for we know God wills his church to be one. We may be fearful, too, that this decision could irretrievably fracture the tradition and character of the ordained priesthood as we have inherited it. But I believe that these fears -- which in various ways we all share -- are not well-grounded. God calls us to take the risk of faith. I believe God is also calling his church to ordain women to the priesthood.
We come to this debate well prepared. This is no precipitate measure foisted upon an unwilling church. It has been on the synod's agenda for nearly 20 years. We have experienced the ministry of well over a thousand women in the diaconate. Elsewhere in the Anglican Communion, women priests are making an increasingly important contribution. And at diocesan and deanery levels, the voting on this legislation clearly demonstrates that it is looked upon with favor by the majority of our people.
We have made haste slowly. That is because we want as broad a measure of unity as we can manage. Today, we look for a two-thirds majority of all those voting in each House. Few secular governing bodies set such a demanding threshold. But this is a sign of our care for unity.
Despite all this, some of you nimy still wonder whether this might be an unprecedented risk for the church to take.
Let us look back for guidance to one of the key moments of decision in the church's life. In the tenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, God challenges Peter's assumption that the Gospel is only for the Jews. You will recall the stages.
First, it begins with what is familiar. Peter repeatedly dreams about the food laws. He thinks he knows all about them. God challenges us to begin in the world we know. Today, we are looking at a familiar world -- of priests and vicars, church and society, gifts and leadership. We are being challenged to do something new, but it's in the context of what we already know so well, just as it was for Peter.
Secondly, messengers take Peter to Cornelius the centurion. Peter finds, to his astonishment, that the Spirit has already been given to the gentiles. God has been working outside the traditions and categories with which Peter is familiar. We, too, are being challenged to reconsider what God has been doing outside our familiar world in the light of our changed situation.
The final stage is reached as Peter interprets his vision in the light of his new experience. He sees that God does call the gentiles into the body of Christ. God has shown that what seems novel and risky is consonant with what has happened in the past. I believe the same dynamic is at work today.
The inclusion of the gentiles within the body of Christ was not as obvious at the time as it now appears. It seemed to be a major break with tradition. Today, we are considering what some believe to be another break with tradition. That is not the case. We are not departing from a traditional concept of ministry. We are talking about an extension of the same ministry to include women. Christianity is all about God liberating, renewing and drawing out what has been there implicitly from the beginning.
Some argue that we have no right to make such changes on our own. We know that the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox churches do not at present countenance this change. That, however, cannot be an obstacle to the Church of England determining its own mind. Article 20 makes it clear that the Church of England -- I quote -- "hath authority in controversies of faith."
I am well aware that there are those who are profoundly troubled by the ecumenical implications of a yes vote today. I recognize this, but this consideration is not completely overriding. I believe that constructive, loving relationships with our sister churches can and will continue whatever the outcome of our vote today. Significant parts of Christendom do not ordain women to the priesthood, but there are many traditions in which the experience of women in ministry is not a burden but a joy, not a handicap to mission but a strength. We must not look in one direction only.
Beyond all this there lies a wider issue. How do we find God's will in such a matter? My predecessor, Robert Runcie, who patiently guided us through the years of the most heated debate on this subject, comments in his book Authority in Crisis? that the Anglican way is essentially that of the "consensus fidelium." That is to say, it is the gathering together of a response from as many quarters of the church as possible. Part of that must be in the voting of our diocesan synods, which indicates that, for our church, most people believe that God's moment, God's kairos, has come for us on this issue today.
But discernment will not come through votes alone, but through the manifestation of gifts. Gifts are God's generosity. We have seen the marks of the Spirit increasingly manifest in the ministry of women as well as that of men. We must draw on all our available talents if we are to be a credible church engaged in mission to an increasingly confused and lost world. We are in danger of not being heard if women are exercising leadership in every area of our society's life, save the ordained priesthood.
I am well aware that whatever decision we make will bring pain. Indeed, the Anglican way of deciding such matters inevitably involves pain and conflict. The question of truth matters so much to us that as a church we do not hide our disagreements. We air them in public. We try to find our way through them in a spirit of love and respect for the views of others.
That is why our legislation today does not present us with a singleclause measure. It takes account of those who, in conscience, will have to dissent from it and yet do not wish to leave the Church of England. And the associated financial measure makes provision for those few, and I pray they may be very few, who feel duty bound to leave the ordained ministry, should we approve this legislation today.
I urge those who openly see the future only in terms of schism to recognize that disputes about the nature of ministry are not regarded in the New Testament as grounds for formal separation from one's fellow Christians. The step that I hope we shall take today is a development in the church's tradition. The ordination of women to the priesthood alters not a word in the creeds, the Scriptures or the faith of our church.
My final reflection is about the future. Ours is a church called to look outward in mission, to be confident in service and to be prophetic in preaching and teaching. We are also called to be a comprehensive church, in which those who believe on grounds of conscience that women should not be ordained still have an honorable place among us as bishops, clergy and people. I repeat: If the measure is passed today, I desire that those who still oppose the ordination of women on grounds of conscience should continue to play their full part in the life of our church.
This debate is not about excluding anybody, but enlarging the sympathies and generosity of our church in line with the generosity of God himself. I hope with all my heart that synod today will affirm the place of women in the priesthood of Christ's church as confidently as Peter affirmed the place of the gentiles long ago. Let us say with him: "God gave them no less a gift than he gave us when we put our trust in the Lord Jesus: How could I possibly stand in God's way?"