The General Convention has firmly closed the door on the theological debate that has dominated so much of the postWorld War 11 life of the Episcopal Church. It has declared that all dioceses must honor its canons, opening all three orders of ordained ministry to women.

By substantial majorities in both the House of Deputies and House of Bishops, Canon III.8.1 was amended to assure women the opportunity to be ordained or be called to serve in every diocese. A supporting resolution declares this legislation to be mandatory, superceding the socalled "conscience clause" drafted by the bishops in 1977 for those unable to affirm ordination of women. Four dioceses that do not currently ordain women to the priesthood have been given three years to come into full compliance.

Attempts to soften the force of the newly revised canon by "grandfathering" the four diocesan bishops failed, as the bishops hurried to put the matter behind them on the eve of the nomination and election of a new Presiding Bishop. The final vote came by roll call, requested by the Rt. Rev. Mary Adelia McLeod, Bishop of Vermont, with 140 for and 44 against, with 10 abstentions.

The deputies had earlier approved the new legislation by a vote by orders.

The drama was played out in the House of Bishops because the actions targeted four of their own - Bishops William Wantland (Eau Claire), Jack Iker (Fort Worth), Keith Ackerman (Quincy), and John-David Schofield (San Joaquin). They were each given opportunity to describe how they assist women in their own dioceses seeking to be ordained.

The Rt. Rev. Dorsey Henderson, Bishop of Upper South Carolina, proposed that the new canon come into effect in these dioceses only upon the retirement of their bishops. But Bishop McLeod protested that this could mean waiting 20 years for some women. The Rt. Rev. Thomas Ray, Bishop of Northern Michigan, argued that this would personalize an issue broader than a single individual. "It gives the picture that we are a club trying to protect our own," he said.

Bishop Henderson's amendment was turned aside by a 138 to 51 vote, with 10 abstaining.

The question that was never settled is "what next?"

Proponents of the new legislation frequently insisted that it was not their intention to force the holdouts from the church or bring them to trial. "I presume it means that no punitive measures will be brought against them for three years," said the Rt. Rev. Ted Jones, Bishop of Indianapolis.

"We will certainly support those bishops who are making a serious attempt to comply with the canons. But if there is duplicity, it will be brought to the light of day," said the Rt. Rev. William Swing, Bishop of California.

"What we want to see is the parties involved making a good faith effort to implement the canons," said Suffragan Bishop Catherine Roskam of New York. "Of course what's in the air is presentment, but we really don't want that. I hope that it will only be the fear of presentment that brings us to a place of good will."

Bishop Wantland already has announced he will step down at his diocesan convention in October. Bishop Ackerman, who only two days earlier had been elected to the Executive Council, said he will soon go on retreat to seek the Lord's will. And Bishop Iker expects that in his convention there will be "active resistance" to the General Convention ruling.

"I do not intend to send women aspirants to my commission on ministry, knowing full well that they will not be approved there," Bishop Iker said. He defended the arrangement he has with the Bishop of Dallas to transfer women applicants to that diocese [TLC, July 27].

He describes himself as no ardent opponent of the ordination of women but an unconvinced catholic. "If it were so clearly a matter of the Holy Spirit and so convincingly proved by scripture and tradition, why does such persistent opposition continue?"

The legislation also promises those with theological scruples against the ordination of women a place in the life and governance of the church.

"But who is going to hold them accountable to that promise?" Bishop Iker asked at a press conference following the debate.

"I don't think it will be much of an issue," Bishop Roskam replied. "I have a sense that we really do have the mind of the church on the ordination of women. There is a clear sense that this church needs to move on."

The four dissenting bishops will be looking for vindication at next year's Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops. "We feel marginalized and excluded today, but next summer when we go to Lambeth we will be in the majority and expect to be affirmed," Bishop Iker said.

According to the Rev. Canon Gay Jennings of the Diocese of Ohio, this action "makes very clear that the canons on ordination as applied to men or women are mandatory and not permissive. It brings closure to the debate which has been going on for 21 years on whether Canon III.8.1 is permissive or mandatory."

Will this lead to presentments of the four non-conforming bishops? "No one wants presentment," Canon Jennings said. "What we want is implementation of the canons. A053 provides some time (the triennium) for implementation and gives Executive Council responsibility for supervising the process."

Visiting the convention was the Rt. Rev. Edwin Barnes, former principal of St. Stephen's College, Oxford, and one of the Church of England's "flying bishops." As a suffragan to Canterbury, he visits 70 traditionalist parishes in 10 dioceses in southeast England. He said, "You are getting more and more out of step with the Eames report, whose key phrase is, 'there must be an open process of reception on the issue of the ordination of women.' Forcing the time for reception just isn't Anglican,"

(The Rev.) Jeffrey Steenson

(The Rev.) Bob Libby