Beware simplistic narratives on the CofE’s Synod vote

It’s been a week since the Church of England voted on the draft legislation which would have created female bishops, and in that time, two dominant narratives have emerged. On the one hand, the church (or at least those who voted against the measure) stand accused of backwardness and sexism. On the other, the claim is that this wasn’t a vote against women being bishops so much as a vote against the details of how it was being implemented.

Having written about it at length, I’d intended to leave this subject well alone, at least for now. But then the details of how people voted were published, and I just had to write a bit more, because the picture painted is a long way from the way it’s being presented by the two sides of the argument.

Do the CofE actually hate women?

That’s a pretty extraordinary question to be asking, but honestly, when the church’s General Synod votes to deny women the opportunity to be bishops, even 20 years after finally allowing them to be ordained, it’s also a natural one. There are reasons, though, to question the narrative that paints the church as a bunch of misogynists.

Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

First, it should be noted that to pass the draft legislation, Synod would have needed a two-thirds majority in each of three “houses” – among bishops, clergy and the laity. The bishops and clergy passed it overwhelmingly, with the bishops voting 44-3 in favour and the clergy voting 148-45. The majority of the laity also voted in favour, but fell just short of the two-thirds required, only winning 132-74. It’s intriguing that the laity appear to be the most conservative, and I wonder if this says something about the sort of people who take enough of an interest to be lay members of General Synod.