Sally Barnes from the WATCH Commitee writes:
So many WATCH members, men and women, contacted us as a result of listening to the Radio 4 profile of Bishop John Broadhurst during the weekend I felt I had to respond to a couple of the comments made in the programme that people found so offensive. During his appreciation of Bishop Broadhurst, Bishop Edwin Barnes was heard to say, regarding the successful vote in Synod, that General Synod was "swamped by more and more part-time women clergy". He then went on to describe them as "Ladies with time on their hands". Apart from being deliberately offensive ("swamped" having very unfortunate connotations) his remarks are also highly inaccurate at every level. As one of our members commented in his email, "Bishop Barnes neglects to point out that the House of Clergy in General Synod is an elected house. Those who serve are those who are voted into office by their peers. This (his comment) is not just an insult against women (shameful as that is), but against the collective clergy of the Church of England and against the whole idea of Synodical Government".
However, Bishop Barnes comments also mask the underlying reasons why there are a number of "part-time" and frequently unpaid (euphemistically called non-stipendiary) women priests in the Church of England. He, equally, but unsurprisingly, fails to recognise the many ways in which they enrich the Church through their ministries.
Firstly it shows there are very many women whose vocations and gifts have been recognised by the Church and are being used as priests to its and our great benefit.
Secondly, part time workers, having other roles and/or jobs, bring the insights and experiences gained from them into their priestly roles in parishes, or, wherever else they are placed. Because of this they know from practical, first hand experiences what it is like to be sharing in the wide-ranging professions and areas of work in which their parishioners are involved. This can only be to the benefit of the faith community; knowing what life in society, education, industry, care etc is like and the issues they bring of which they have a deep understanding and a great deal of expertise.
Thirdly, being part-time does not mean that we become "part-time Christians" as our Christian faith is always with us. The number of women who work in industry, nursing, teaching, the caring professions etc, nurturing their growing families, who have told their stories about how their colleagues and neighbours, of no faith, a great deal, some, or of other faiths, come to them at moments of stress for help and advice, is legion. Their ministry is evident, accessible and welcomed.
Fourthly, the number of women who are non-stipendiary is largely down to the Church and the fact as an institution it gets experienced vocations and ministries on the cheap. Many women would prefer to have a stipendiary post but the Church does not place them as such. They are often married to a priest who is the one who has the paid job. They often work as non-stipendiary in parishes where no one else wants to go, and, as many part-time people know it usually ends up being virtually full-time. Only recently a friend who is a part-time non-stipendiary priest was telling me how she was asked to go to a parish that was on its knees (and I don't mean in prayer) to work three days a week. She did so; now the church is flourishing and more involved in the wider community too. She does this willingly and happily but does not deserve - along with many others - to be looked down on and commented on in the disrespectful way that Bishop Barnes clearly intended. I suppose the one thing that this programme succeeded in doing was to highlight publicly the kind of put downs and undermining ordained women have been experiencing for years.
My final point, and one worth remembering, is that the early Christians all had other roles in order to earn their keep; tent maker, fisherman and so on, while they were teaching, praying and worshipping together. Food for thought here I think!
However, Bishop Barnes comments also mask the underlying reasons why there are a number of "part-time" and frequently unpaid (euphemistically called non-stipendiary) women priests in the Church of England. He, equally, but unsurprisingly, fails to recognise the many ways in which they enrich the Church through their ministries.
Firstly it shows there are very many women whose vocations and gifts have been recognised by the Church and are being used as priests to its and our great benefit.
Secondly, part time workers, having other roles and/or jobs, bring the insights and experiences gained from them into their priestly roles in parishes, or, wherever else they are placed. Because of this they know from practical, first hand experiences what it is like to be sharing in the wide-ranging professions and areas of work in which their parishioners are involved. This can only be to the benefit of the faith community; knowing what life in society, education, industry, care etc is like and the issues they bring of which they have a deep understanding and a great deal of expertise.
Thirdly, being part-time does not mean that we become "part-time Christians" as our Christian faith is always with us. The number of women who work in industry, nursing, teaching, the caring professions etc, nurturing their growing families, who have told their stories about how their colleagues and neighbours, of no faith, a great deal, some, or of other faiths, come to them at moments of stress for help and advice, is legion. Their ministry is evident, accessible and welcomed.
Fourthly, the number of women who are non-stipendiary is largely down to the Church and the fact as an institution it gets experienced vocations and ministries on the cheap. Many women would prefer to have a stipendiary post but the Church does not place them as such. They are often married to a priest who is the one who has the paid job. They often work as non-stipendiary in parishes where no one else wants to go, and, as many part-time people know it usually ends up being virtually full-time. Only recently a friend who is a part-time non-stipendiary priest was telling me how she was asked to go to a parish that was on its knees (and I don't mean in prayer) to work three days a week. She did so; now the church is flourishing and more involved in the wider community too. She does this willingly and happily but does not deserve - along with many others - to be looked down on and commented on in the disrespectful way that Bishop Barnes clearly intended. I suppose the one thing that this programme succeeded in doing was to highlight publicly the kind of put downs and undermining ordained women have been experiencing for years.
My final point, and one worth remembering, is that the early Christians all had other roles in order to earn their keep; tent maker, fisherman and so on, while they were teaching, praying and worshipping together. Food for thought here I think!
0 comments:
Post a Comment