THE MINISTRY OF WOMEN.

Press, Volume LVII, Issue 17124, 20 April 1921, Page 8

THE MINISTRY OF WOMEN.

PREACHERS AND DEACONESSES.

FAVOUBABLE DECISION IN CONVOCATION.

(THOU OUB OWN COHRESPONDJCKT.) LONDON, February 24. At the Upper House of Convocation at Church House, yesterday, it was resolved that it should be permissible for women duly qualified to speak and pray in consecrated buildings at services or meetings for prayer or instruction. It was further decided, by seven votes to six, that such ministrations should be exercised not at £he regular and appointed services of the Oliurch, but at those normally for congregations of women and children. "If (says the "Chronicle") this restriction should be persisted in, there will be grave discontent among liberal churchmen and women, who have expected that the ministrations of women will be allowed in the ordinary services of the Church." At the outset, the Bishop of Peterborough presented the -report of the Joint Committee on tho Ministry of Women, which, he pointed out, had been in the main limited to the question of the service of women in a lay capacity. They repudiated tho idea of women being ordained to the priesthood as wholb contrary to tho immemorial ana consistent custom of the Catholic Church. TJie Bishop; moved a resolution declaring that, in view of the Apostolic teaching that women equally with men are .members of tho one Body of Christ, and partakers of the Holy Spirit, and, iu order that fuller use may be made in tJio Church's service of the gifts and cxj>crience of women, the House recommended that, under conditions laid down by tho Bishop of tlie- dioci'Se, it shoiiid_ be permissible for women duly qualified and approved by him to speak and pray in consecrated buildings at services or meetings for • prayer or instruction other than the regular and appointed services of the Church. As to the exercise of the Bishop's discretion, tho resolution further recommended: —"That nu woman should be permitted to speak or pray publicly in a consecrated building until she has produced evidence of Having been baptised and confirmed, and of being a Communicant, that ,no woman under the age of thirty should be permitted to address a mixed assembly in a consecrated building, that the Bishop should require written evidence of unblemished character from three competent . persons, one of whom must be I m Holy Orders; proof of ndequate knowledge and ability, and a declaration of assent to the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds, and to the teaching of the Book of Common Prayer; that some form of distinctive dress should be worn by women speaking or praying in a consecrated building. While the Bishop of Jsly supported the resolution, the Bishop of couthwell eniphasised the danger of allowing women, particularly those df emotional character, to preach in church to mixed congregation*. The Bishop of Chichestor urged that it was a question of expediency and should be decided, nob by the Bishop, but by the diocese.

The Bishop of London's Amendment. "Nine-tenths of the women of England object to be preached at in a mixed congregation by members of their own sex," said the Bishop of London. In order to meet the point raised, he moved an amendment, adding the words "primarily for their own sex," which he later altered.to "normally tor women, girls, and children." He waß very anxious, he said, to secure tho use of the gifts of women speakers and preachers, but he wished to limit the opposition, the depth of which many of the Bishops did not realise. The Bishop of Ely suggested the words "commonly to women and children," and this the. Bishop of Peterborough accepted. There was at present no widespread demand for women to speak to mixed gatherings in churches, but he would not agree to shutting the door against women addressing such mixed gatherings. The Bishop of Bristol trusted that the dead hand of tradition was not going to m mper them. He could not agree to rny limitation of women's liberty such as was proposed in the amendment. In reply to a remark about the danger of persuasiveness in women speakers, the Bishop of Chelmsford said the danger was not one whit greater than that attached to the licensing of men to preach. "The danger which we men are addicted to," he continued, "is the danger of deadly dullness and lack of efficiency and effectiveness in our speaking." ' ■ . . " . Several Bishops objected to the word "commonly,," and after further discussion the resolution as a whole was put to the House thus: "That in view of the Apostolio teaching' . that ,women equally with men are members'of one Body of Christ and partakers of the Holy Spirit, and in order that further use may be made in the Church's service of the gifts and experience of'women, this House makes the following recommendation: That under conditions laid down by the Bishop of the diocese it should be permissible for women duly qualified and approved by him to. speak and pray in consecrated buildings, and that such ministrations should be on occasions other than the regular and .appointed services of the Church, .and are intended normally for congregations of women or of children."

This was voted on in two parts. The first was carried nem. con., but the concluding words were carried by a ma-| jority of one. Six Bishops voted for them and six against, and the Archbishop gave his vote for the amended words proposed by the Bishop of London. Appreciation of Deaconesses. An interesting discussion took place in Convocation m connexion with the recognition of the Order of Deaconesses. The Bishop of Ely moved a resolution approving the resolution of the Lambeth Conference that the diaconate of women should be restored formally and canonically, and should be recognised by the Anglican communion, and requesting the president to appoint a sub-committee of the two Houses ta consider the-resolutions of the confeienco and draft rules and regulations for the restoration of the Order of Deaconesses, such committee having power.to confer with any similar committee appointed by the ¥ork Convocation or by the governing body of the Church in Woles. : The Bishop of Winchester seconded the motion.

The Bishop 'of London thought, it would be nothing short of a calamity that - after many years'' deliberation there was no recognition given of tho Order of Deaconesses. "He pointed out tli at a recent deputation had stated that it was not opposed to the revival of the Order, but was alarmed at the idea of a deaconess speaking to mixed congregations in church. The Bishop of Exeter maintained it should be perfectly lawful for women to address a mixed congregation. The Archbishop of Canterbury described himself as being pledged to the hilt in this matter, and he had been no for thirty years. There was no part if his work for which he felt profoundly thankful than his relationship with the devoted women working as deaconesses. The resolution was unanimously carried. Tn Convocation at York the Bishop of Chester moved and the Bishop of Liverpool seconded the acceptance of the Lambeth resolution on the diaconate of women and the request for the

appointment of ft joint committee of the two Houses to draft rules and regulations for the restored order of deaconess, and confer with the siraiku committee of Canterbury Convocation. The Bishop of Durham criticised th« proposal, suggesting that women would not be content-with a career in Holy Orders which limited their sphere to the functions of deacons. The niotiou was carried, tho Bishop of Durham I>eing tho only dissentient.