Society of St Wilfrid and St Hilda gathering speed

[TomUK]

Thinking Anglicans: SSWSH: 12 bishops issue pastoral letter

If you haven't joined then you are able to do so (for free) via the website.

Society of Saint Wilfrid and Saint Hilda - Welcome

For those who don't know the society is for all those who seek to remain Anglian but hope for the Church of England to preserve its catholic heritage.

For the sake of the Church of England this society really needs to succeed so if you are sympathetic to its ambitions then I do implore you to join and spread the word.

 

[Naomi4Christ]

I walked past the church where this organisation is headquartered the other day and they were having an ordinariate meeting in the crypt. Have they switched from FiF to something else?

 

[TomUK]

Not quite. It is a new society which is resolved to remaining Anglican but doesn't want a lot of the baggage (both liturgical and theological) that comes with FiF.

There are many in the Church of the England, a majority in fact, who accept that the Church of England will one day have women bishops but want there to be adequate provision for those who can't accept that. This society is hopefully a way a cementing that middle and providing a degree of coherent structure. For example, I know of many 'middle of the road' parishes who seek alternative provision for traditionalists but for a whole host of reasons could never throw their weight behind FiF.

Hopefully this society will provide a voice to the ignored majority in the Church of England (though just to be clear it is not restricted to the CofE so any from the US etc are free to join.)

 

[Naomi4Christ]

Do you think evangelical parishes will join?

 

[TomUK]

I'm not sure. The aims of the society might have too much of a sacramental focus for evangelicals, and the fact that it is under the patronage of St Wilfrid and St Hilda could put more off. That's not say there is anything that would explicitly be offensive to evangelicals but i think they've geared it more towards the high church.

I'm not sure whether it was a wise move or not. I would have liked to have seen a society that could truly span the CofE but perhaps they concluded that such a breadth would be its undoing. Plus I think one of the aims when it was established was to offer a glimmer of hope to those considering the ordinariate and it might not have had the same appeal if it was broader.

 

[Naomi4Christ]

I'm not sure. The aims of the society might have too much of a sacramental focus for evangelicals, and the fact that it is under the patronage of St Wilfrid and St Hilda could put more off. That's not say there is anything that would explicitly be offensive to evangelicals but i think they've geared it more towards the high church.

I'm not sure whether it was a wise move or not. I would have liked to have seen a society that could truly span the CofE but perhaps they concluded that such a breadth would be its undoing. Plus I think one of the aims when it was established was to offer a glimmer of hope to those considering the ordinariate and it might not have had the same appeal if it was broader.

Looking at the aims of the society, they are all very worthy. It is hard to argue with them. Lively and innovative worship, commitment to mission in the community etc.

The organisation that spans all parts of the church is the Church of England itself.

I am not sure how resolution ABC evangelical parishes worry about women bishops. I have not heard of any insisting on alternative episcopal oversight. I think such churches would be happy to go 'congregational'.

 

[vespasia]

Does not this duplicating the work of the SSC [Society Holy Cross]?

 

[seeking_perfection]

I am not sure how resolution ABC evangelical parishes worry about women bishops. I have not heard of any insisting on alternative episcopal oversight. I think such churches would be happy to go 'congregational'.

Do you mean 'go congregational' informally, as in not take much notice of their bishop or formally, as in leave the Anglican Communion?

 

[TomUK]

Does not this duplicating the work of the SSC [Society Holy Cross]?

I don't think so, for similar reasons as I mentioned for Forward in Faith. SSC is firmly rooted in the Anglo-Catholic tradition whereas SSWSH is much broader. I think it's telling how they have structured to intentionally not compete with the traditional catholic fraternities. One could easily belong to SSWSH while also being a member of SSC, SCP or even something like fulcrum. It is intentionally complementary rather than competitive.

 

[ebia]

I pray they succeed in finding a way forward, but they don't seem to have a way of supporting their aim of adequate provision without saying one is against womens' ordination.

 

[TomUK]

I pray they succeed in finding a way forward, but they don't seem to have a way of supporting their aim of adequate provision without saying one is against womens' ordination.

But the CofE has guaranteed that as right. You don't have to agree with the theology, but we need to be fighting to preserve those things the Church has promised but has now reneged on. This isn't a group that says women can't or shouldn't be priests/bishops - merely that we need to honour the place of those who can't accept that.

 

[ebia]

But the CofE has guaranteed that as right. You don't have to agree with the theology, but we need to be fighting to preserve those things the Church has promised but has now reneged on. This isn't a group that says women can't or shouldn't be priests/bishops - merely that we need to honour the place of those who can't accept that.

As I read it, by joining one is asserting that the church does not have the authority to ordain women.

I don't think the CofE has guaranteed the right to alternative oversight either.

 

[MKJ]

But the CofE has guaranteed that as right. You don't have to agree with the theology, but we need to be fighting to preserve those things the Church has promised but has now reneged on. This isn't a group that says women can't or shouldn't be priests/bishops - merely that we need to honour the place of those who can't accept that.

So as far as i can see, they are trying too make it possible for those who continue to hold that position to remain in the CofE. That is I guess that it is an authentic and valid expression of Anglicanism. That's interesting - here in NA, it doesn't seem that there are really any qualms about saying that people who hold that position will simply have to leave.

 

[ebia]

So as far as i can see, they are trying too make it possible for those who continue to hold that position to remain in the CofE. That is I guess that it is an authentic and valid expression of Anglicanism. That's interesting - here in NA, it doesn't seem that there are really any qualms about saying that people who hold that position will simply have to leave.

England has tried to chart a course that allowed both positions to remain in the CofE and maintain their integrity - and probably the majority still wish to. The difficulty is how to square the circle of alternative oversight without denying the full integrity and equal value of female bishops.

 

[MKJ]

England has tried to chart a course that allowed both positions to remain in the CofE and maintain their integrity - and probably the majority still wish to. The difficulty is how to square the circle of alternative oversight without denying the full integrity and equal value of female bishops.

You'd essentially be saying that it is perfectly fine, as an Anglican, to think they are not Bishops at all. I suppose the question is does this deny their value and integrity?

Of course, but shutting out that position, are you denying the value and integrity of those who hold it?

 

[ebia]

You'd essentially be saying that it is perfectly fine, as an Anglican, to think they are not Bishops at all. I suppose the question is does this deny their value and integrity?

Of course, but shutting out that position, are you denying the value and integrity of those who hold it?

Thats the problem - is there a way forward that can adequately respect the integrity of both? Or have we got to the point where they are mutually exclusive?

 

[wpage]

If God bless it. It will thrive.

 

[TomUK]

Thats the problem - is there a way forward that can adequately respect the integrity of both? Or have we got to the point where they are mutually exclusive?

I think the ability to respect both integrities has firm precedent in the synods response to the ordination of women. The question is whether the desire is there or not.

However as we have seen a clear majority in the synod as a whole plus all the most senior bishops have gone for the inclusive option, so hopefully with the added weight of SSWSH all is not lost.

 

[ebia]

I think the ability to respect both integrities has firm precedent in the synods response to the ordination of women. The question is whether the desire is there or not.

The original intention to respect both integreties was for the period of discernment, not necessarily indefinitely. Most would probably contend that the consecration of bishops marks the end of that period of discernment. So, while I think that if a way can be found that does satisfactorily respect both integreties that should be followed, I don't think one can claim that the CofE has committed itself to something which may not be possible anyway.

 

[TomUK]

The original intention to respect both integreties was for the period of discernment, not necessarily indefinitely. Most would probably contend that the consecration of bishops marks the end of that period of discernment. So, while I think that if a way can be found that does satisfactorily respect both integreties that should be followed, I don't think one can claim that the CofE has committed itself to something which may not be possible anyway.

But synod had the option to place a time limit on alternative provision but they consciously chose not to. At that point it seems it was intended to be indefinite.