Secularists need to tread carefully on female bishops

When the Church of England’s General Synod vote on permitting female clergy to become bishops fell short of the necessary majority (as discussed ad nauseam in previous posts), a number of people asked why an apparently sexist and discriminatory organisation should hold a privileged place at the heart of our society, even being granted a substantial presence in the House of Lords.


Who honestly expects people like this to believe in absolute equality?

That’s a fair question, and a useful way of highlighting the constitutional peculiarities of having an established church, but it would be very easy to take that line of argument too far. There is a campaign at the moment to drum up further support for a petition calling for the removal of the CofE’s presence in the Lords on the basis of the church’s (current) position, in a push towards 100,000 signatures, but I think this is a mistake.

Naturally, it’s reasonable to expect that places in the upper house won’t be handed to members of a body which defies society’s basic principles of equality. At the very least, we should question a system where discrimination on the grounds of sex is prohibited, yet certain groups can not only freely discriminate but even have an unelected presence in the parliament that passed the prohibition. But raising the objection in this way is a risky move.

The phrasing of the petition implies that the Lords Spiritual are a problem solely because the CofE has a rather relaxed attitude to sexual equality, and that their position would otherwise be fine. So when the church finally gets around to permitting women to be promoted, as it surely will eventually, this will amount to an implicit endorsement of the establishment of the church and its right to speak and vote on legislation.


And since when has this place been free from unpleasant views?

If the cause of secularism is to be advanced, it’s important to ensure that the arguments against sectarian privilege in parliament are made on the broad principles, rather than the detail of specific positions. Otherwise, the argument for secularism runs the risk of being perceived as a moan about a particular policy, or even opportunistic exploitation of a group’s unpopularity. Above all, the case for a secular society would become dependent on the current views of certain groups.

Parliament is full of people with different views, including many who hold opinions at least as discriminatory as the church, but I don’t believe that should be sufficient to expel anyone from parliament. Of course, there are clear reasons why the Lords Spiritual are different, but they need to be stated. And those reasons are the important, enduring secular arguments, so why not start with them in the first place?

In attempting to point out (and possibly exploit) this bizarre situation, the petition inadvertently shores up the church’s claim to places in the Lords as long as they clean up their act. Using such an unpopular position in this way may be a clever short-term tactic, but it’s a poor long-term strategy.

Photos by Northfielder and ** Maurice **, used under Creative Commons Generic Attribution License 2.0

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

About Recovering Agnostic

I'm Christian by upbringing, agnostic by belief, cynical by temperament, broadly scientific in approach, and looking for answers. My main interest at the moment is in turning my current disengaged shrug into at least a working hypothesis.

6 responses to “Secularists need to tread carefully on female bishops”

  1. unklee says :

    The photo shows the Bishops might as well be women – they are wearing dresses and fancy hats! : )

    But a word of caution. When I was a young christian, I accepted the conventional teachings on the role of women because the two NT passages seem very clear. But I wasn’t entirely happy about it. (I have since changed my view.)

    But in calling the organisation “sexist and discriminatory”, you need to be careful. They are acting in a sexist and discriminatory way, but they may not be like that, they may simply be reluctantly following the convictions they feel forced on them. It may be like child-rearing experts who say we should never call a child a “naughty boy”, but rather label their behaviour as “naughty”. It’s a fine point, but worth keeping in mind.

    Of course, there will be people who enjoy putting women down, and you may know that is true in this case. Just a thought.

    • Recovering Agnostic says :

      I appreciate the distinction you’re making, and I’ve previously held similar positions for what I thought were good, Biblical reasons. But their intent is irrelevant to the description.

      It is discriminatory to restrict a job to a specific group, and it is sexist when that specific group is a sex. I don’t think it makes sense to tiptoe around those facts just because some people sincerely believe God wants them to be sexist.

  2. jonnyscaramanga says :

    I didn’t expect to agree with you on this, but you’re dead right, I think. And this has been niggling at me, without having articulated it. The NSS wouldn’t be in *favour* of Bishops in the House of Lords if there were some women in there, and to pretend otherwise is simply opportunistic.

    • Recovering Agnostic says :

      Agreement against expectations is all I can ask for!

      It’s not hard to articulate a secularist argument which avoids endorsing bishops in the Lords, either explicitly or implicitly. That’s why I say tread carefully, not shut up.

      You just emphasise that you oppose their existence, and this is the sort of thing that can happen when the church is given such a privileged position. I think that’s a much more honest approach, and a better strategy.

Love it? Hate it? Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: