Are the Consecreations in Singapore Like the Ordinations in
Philadelphia?
Are the Consecreations in Singapore Like the Ordinations in
Philadelphia?
[written by a friend. -- Lutibelle/Louie]
It was inevitable that comparisons would be drawn between the Philadelphia
ordinations of women to the priesthood in 1974 and the 2000 Singapore
consecrations of American priests as "missionary bishops" to the American
church.
There are certain similarities. There are some contrasts too:
- The Philadelphia ordinations took place in the context of an era in
which "civil disobedience" was regarded as a legitimate method for
promoting social change: one broke the law, took the punishment, and thus
raised awareness of the need to change the law. The active participants at
Philadelphia were all disciplined by the church -- the women were inhibited
and several lost their deacon jobs as a direct result; the bishops were
censured by the House of Bishops; male clergy who invited Philadelphia
ordinands to celebrate were brought to trial and officially reprimanded.
In 1977, the women could only take up priestly duties in the church by
participating in a "regularisation" service. Some of the women have
continued to be outcast all these 25 years; only one is in full-time parish
ministry. They knew dire things would happen, as nuclear protestors knew
they were going to be arrested and put in prison. In fact, they thought
they would be excommunicated. The courage was great, and the willingness
to suffer the consequences. We will see how prepared the Singapore bishops
are to suffer the consequences.
- The Philadelphia ordinands were all regularly ordained deacons who had
gone through their diocesan ordination processes and would have been
ordained priest except for their gender. It's possible one or both of the
Singapore bishops went through search processes, were nominated in
episcopal elections here, and turned down. But they were were not victims
of an articulated official policy/rule requiring their exclusion. All but
one of the nominees in every diocesan election are turned down.
- The Philadelphia ordinations were about changing our interpretation of
one canon regarding ordination (did "men" mean "only men" or was it used in
the generic sense to include women as well?). The Singapore consecrations
turn our entire polity on its head. They challenge a multitude of canons,
as well as the constitution, which establish that we are organized into
dioceses, episcopal ministry is allocated on a geographical basis, and
bishops do not meddle in the affairs of other dioceses. We also require
the consents of the majority of standing committees and diocesan bishops
before a consecration can take place, which obviously were not solicited
for Rodgers and Murphy.
- The Philadelphia ordinations were about expanding the priesthood to
include a class of people previously excluded. The Singapore consecrations
are about asserting that most of us do not "believe that the authority of
Scripture and the historic Creeds are central to our Faith, conduct and
unity as Anglicans," so "the faithful" are to be rescued from among us.
The subtext is that preserving the church requires excluding gay and
lesbian people. The link between gender and sexuality is a strong one, and
plays an important role in these developments.
So no, Philadelphia and Singapore are not the same.
God will carry the church through this trouble, as through so many before.
Since we seem to be among God's instruments this time around, we need to
read history carefully so as to avoid facile comparisons which often
confuse the issues.
Please sign my guestbook and
view it.
My site has been accessed
times since February 14, 1996.
Statistics courtesy of
WebCounter.