‘I would welcome a female archbishop’

In her novel Archbishop (Hodder & Stoughton), published in 2014 and set in 2019, the Christian writer Michele Guinness portrays the election of the first female archbishop in the Church of England. Here’s the description of the book:

“Five years from now, the Church of England is on its knees. Yet one woman is making a difference, and when she is appointed Archbishop of Canterbury, anything could happen.

“Vicky Burnham-Woods is a master of diplomacy, and deeply committed to bringing the church back into the heart of community and cultural life – but not everyone wants a woman at the top, and behind the scenes dark forces are moving.

“Can the first ever female Archbishop of Canterbury last long enough to achieve her mission?”

I’ll leave you to find out the answer  – it’s a good read. As we now know, 2019 passed and there was no female archbishop, and the Church would soon have more immediate challenges to address. However, five more years have gone, and there is even more reason to think the Church of England is on its knees, with the unprecedented resignation of the Archbishop of Canterbury and, as I write, calls for the resignation of the Archbishop of York. Is it time to ‘think the unthinkable’ and let a woman take over?

Well, in the parish church I left three years ago, the leadership haven’t even accepted the idea of women priests yet. Even if I had done a lay reader’s course there, I wouldn’t have been allowed to preach. And there is an ordained woman on the staff who by choice is only ordained deacon, not priested, and who never preaches even though, having heard her give ‘talks’, I think she would be an excellent preacher.

In contrast, I remember the first time I went to a service in a non-conformist setting, led by a young single woman (as I was myself then) who happened to be a friend of mine. It was a huge joy to be ministered to, and given communion, by someone who was like myself. After all, the celebrant represents the congregation before God as well as representing Christ to the congregation. And if you argue that only a man can represent Christ because Christ was a man, well in my opinion Jesus is less defined by his maleness than he is by his Jewishness, and no one is arguing that all Christian priests should be Jewish (that would be hard to fulfil)! 

The Church needs our distinctive qualities

I have no problem with recognising that women and men are different – whether by nature or nurture is impossible to tell. What my feminism tells me is that no difference of value, status or opportunity should be based on those differences. On the contrary, since the sexes are different, and since the majority of Christians are women, shouldn’t their distinctive qualities be exercised more in Church, not less? Women are either naturally or brought up to be more nurturing, more inclined to reconciliation, with better communication and interpersonal skills. Isn’t that just what we need in a divided Church full of wounded people?

We who are mothers can also be quite forceful and, if we have more than one child, expert in dealing with sibling conflict. I was once walking home up our road with my husband and our male tenant, when we encountered a group of lads beating a man with a large wooden pole and trying to snatch his laptop. Neither of the men with me said a word. It was I, as a middle aged mother, who instinctively shouted out: “Oi, you lot, lay off!” The lads immediately threw away their weapon and ran off. They were likely all sons of single mothers who knew well how to tell them off!

“But what about the Bible?” I hear you say. Well for a little book I hope to write, I’ve identified at least ten women in the Bible who are specifically named as prophets. Jesus allowed the Samaritan woman at the well to be the first evangelist, and Mary Magdalen to be the first witness and proclaimer of the resurrection. We know from Romans 16 and elsewhere that Paul had many female co-workers, one of whom is called an apostle. The case against women’s ministry appears to be based on a single verse from 1 Timothy 2, which is often mistranslated. In the original Greek, Paul uses a tense that means “I am not currently permitting a woman to teach” (v12) but this immediately follows the only command in the passage: “A woman should learn…” (v11). What is she learning for if not to teach later?

A female archbishop could hardly divide the Church any more than it is already divided over several issues. I for one would welcome her.