Sermon for a service at Liverpool Cathedral to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Ordination of women to the priesthood
9th October 2004
A little more than ten years ago a young couple came to me when I was vicar of Emmanuel Church South Croydon asking to book a time when their newly born child could be baptised. Family were coming from Australia and this narrowed the choice of date. As we booked a particular Sunday morning I said that the service would be conducted by Sara the newly ordained curate. The couple were expecting me to do it and were not happy with the alternative suggested. I sensed that their objection was based not on a preference for me as a person but on the grounds that the minister would be a woman.
I pointed out that if this were the only date that they could do then the minister would have to be Sara. They accepted this but were clearly not enthusiastic! Two years later the same couple returned for the baptism of their second baby. The father was clearly embarrassed. He said, summoning up courage, "I don't how to put this but is it possible that we could have Sara to do the baptism - because she does it so much better than you".
This little cameo says so much about the experience of women in priestly ministry. Time and again you find that objections have fallen as people have experienced the grace of God through the ministry of women priests. No one wishes to minimise the serious theological arguments that still surround the reception of the ordination of women to the priesthood but at the same time the place of women in priestly ministry especially in this Diocese is being affirmed time and again.
As I look back on my own life I can see a change in attitudes to women not just in the church but in society at large. Even twenty five years ago women were not allowed to read the news on national television. It was deemed that their voices were too high, they would be too emotional and nobody would take the news seriously! It is extraordinary to recall that such arguments were advanced in my own life time. I remember a correspondence in the Times reflecting all those points. I am in fact embarrassed to relate this. However, it is necessary to do so for ten years on the debate has been reignited as the Church of England wonders whether or not there is place for women in the leadership of the church, in the Episcopate. The measure of my embarrassment came home to me on Thursday. I was travelling back to Liverpool on the train from a meeting of the House of Bishops where this subject was again discussed. I have to confess that I was rather irritated by the man opposite me who sitting in the so called 'quiet coach' on Virgin trains used the whole journey to make very loud telephone calls. I was sorely tempted to get my own back, to take up my dictating machine and dictate this sermon! Loudly! Two things held me back. Firstly, a sense of sin! Secondly, an awareness that if I were to make public this sermon most of the carriage including several executive women would have experienced their jaws dropping to the floor as they listened to me in the 21st Century seeking to make a case for the leadership of women in the church! Perhaps I should have done! In the event I am afraid that I left my Dictaphone in the case.
Of course, embarrassment is not a good enough reason for persisting with or resisting a particular idea. It is truth that matters.
We must ask ourselves in this debate what we mean by Episcopate? What is this oversight to which I have been called and to which women might also be called by God. Episcopacy is simply oversight, apostolic oversight, that is the oversight that was exercised by the Apostles in the way they cared for the Body of Christ. The Book of Common Prayer contains a service entitled "The Consecration of Bishops". I have been reading it again. It is quite clear that those who are "persuaded" (that is the word which is used by the Archbishop and the intending Bishop) that they have been called to the Ministration of a Bishop are called "to government in the Church of Christ". The Bishop is called to be a shepherd "to the flock of Christ".
There are many dimensions to this Episcopal ministry. I point up three in particular.
Firstly, the Bishop leads the church in mission. Where? In the world, bringing again, as the Book of Common Prayer says, "the outcasts, seeking the lost".
Secondly, the Bishop protects the church in the world. How? By wrapping the church in the Word of God, as the Book of Common Prayer says by taking heed "to doctrine, and being diligent in doing them".
Thirdly, the Bishop presides over the church. To what end? Again as the Book of Common Prayer says that the Bishop "might feed them".
These three aspects of Episcopal ministry are underlined as the Archbishop delivers the Bible to the Bishop saying "giving heed unto reading, exultation and doctrine. Think about the things contained in this book".
The Bishop is to exercise a Godly care for Christ's Body on earth.
As we turn to the Word of God which is our authority for all matters of faith and conduct to find examples of this ministry where first in the New Testament do we encounter a person with such regard for the Body of Christ? Perhaps, surprisingly for you, I turn to a familiar Christmas text. In the Gospel of Luke, Chapter 2 verse 7 we read "And she gave birth to her first born son and wrapped him in bands of cloth and laid him in a manger".
Who first brought Christ's Body to the world? Who first protected Christ's Body in the world? Who first presided over and fed Christ's Body? It was Mary who first led the body of Christ into the world as she gave birth to her first born son. It was Mary who first exercised a ministry of care and protection as she wrapped the Body of Christ in bands of cloth. It was Mary who first presided over Christ's body as she laid him in a feeding trough almost as a sign that it was here that the world would find food on which to feed for life eternal. It was Mary who first fed the Body of Christ, both in the womb and in the manger.
I put this question with all seriousness. Was this ministry of Mary the mother of Jesus not a ministry of oversight, an Episcopal ministry? Is it too fanciful to imagine that the first bishop in the New Testament was in fact Mary the mother of Jesus the one who first tended to and ministered to the Body of Christ? It seems to me that in all the centuries of debate about the status of Mary the one truth that has been overlooked is that hers was a truly Episcopal ministry. It was she who brought Christ's Body to the world, she who protected Christ's Body in the world, she who presided with love over the Body of Christ and fed him for the sake of the world.
The Gospel of Luke is full of elegant touches which reveal a writer of as much subtlety as the author of John's Gospel. Luke chapter 2, verse 7 which I have just read is beautifully paralleled at the end of his Gospel. Paralleling the birth of Christ with the death of Christ, paralleling the bringing of Christ's Body into the world with the lowering of Christ's Body into the depths of the earth Luke writes not of Mary this time but of Joseph of Arimathea in chapter 23 verse 53.
"Then he took the body of Jesus down, wrapped it in a linen cloth and laid it in a rock hewn tomb where no one had ever laid". Mary's giving birth, wrapping and laying the Body of Christ in a manger is paralleled by Joseph taking down the Body of Jesus, wrapping it in a linen cloth and laying it in the earth.
Do you see the parallel? First a woman, then a man doing parallel things with the Body of Christ. First a woman, then a man. Joseph following the example of Mary. The ministry of Joseph was also Episcopal. He too cared for the Body of Christ in a way parallel to that of Mary. Mary brings the body into the world; Joseph takes the body out of the world. Man and woman both made in the image of God, both called to a holy ministry to the Body of Christ.
My friends I leave this pulpit therefore with a question. If a man and a woman can care for the body of Jesus in the flesh can they not equally care for the Body of Christ in the Spirit?