Should women be ordained as bishops?

I UNDERSTAND the theological point held by some that as Christ came as a man only men can fulfil the calling as priest. But as with most theology, there is room for more than one interpretation. I would say that Christ came as a human being to represent all humanity more than first and foremost as a man.

Women and men are both made in the image of God, and if we exclude women from leadership then we are depriving them of fulfilling their God-given gifts and we are depriving the Christian church and the wider community of all they have to offer.

For me, it is not a question of saying that as a woman I have a unique contribution to make. It is rather that as a human being created in the image of God I have a unique contribution to make. If we exclude anybody - whether it is women or people who are from Yorkshire - we are excluding part of the gift of God.

The world that God created is a richly diverse and varied one and I believe the Church needs to reflect that through being inclusive. There are inevitable tensions about the pace of change. However, the Church of England is not noted for moving too fast.

We need to remember that there were many generations of women who never had the opportunity to exercise their vocation in the priesthood and there are those who would make excellent bishops who will never have that opportunity.

I think those who are opposed to the ordination of women bishops would say that it was accepting the ordination of women priests that was the big mistake. But that decision has been made by the rightful processes of the church and we cannot go back.

Our task is to go forward handling our differences as creatively as we can and with respect for each other.

I first became a deacon seven years ago, and was ordained priest in 1999.

Originally, I was a doctor, which was for a long time traditionally a male-dominated world. There was that same level of uncertainty about women as there is in parts of the church.

Standing still or going backwards is not an option. My own experience as a woman priest is that, even among people who were initially not used to the idea, an overwhelming majority have come to be most welcoming and appreciative.

I think that since women became priests, our lives, and the lives of our congregations and our communities, have been immeasurably enriched. It is vital that women priests are enabled to play their full part in the leadership of the church so that together we can better serve God's world in the future.

No... says the Ven George Austin, Archdeacon Emeritus of York

The only objection there can be to the ordination of women as bishops is a theological one. The justice of it I cannot argue with, but on theological grounds I believe it is wrong.

It is about the order of creation. Everybody is equal under God, men and women, but we have different functions.

To say that they are different does not mean to say that one is better than the other. It is the woman who brings life into the world by bearing a baby. It is the priest who brings new life through the Eucharist. Each brings God's life into the world and the two roles complement each other.

Women were highly regarded by Jesus and did all sorts of things within the early church, with different functions to those of his apostles but equally valuable and equally valued.

Our problem today is that we think in hierarchical terms.

But I have always regarded the church as not a ladder to be climbed, but as a flat table where we have all our own tasks equally valued in the sight of God.

So the whole question of whether women should be ordained should be a theological one. I was there at Synod for the whole debate on Monday, and it was sadly a very poor debate. Nobody would talk about the theology except those who were against the ordination of women bishops.

It was clear what was going to happen from the start, and while there was an expression of goodwill towards those who disagreed with the ordination of women, I felt that it was made because it had to be. It was almost a gesture. A friend who in fact supports women bishops nevertheless rang me up afterwards and said the General Synod had just voted for a woman as Captain of the Titanic.

I want a Church of England which will accept all sorts of different points of view - a family that works through its disagreements. But it seems to me that the feminists - and they are as fanatical as anybody - don't in fact now want that. I don't think there will be any provision for those who disagree, and I think there will be people who will go elsewhere.

When women priests first came in there was talk at the time of up to 3,000 priests leaving the Church of England. Because of the Act of Synod which provided for 'flying bishops' it was only about 500.

I think if the ordination of women bishops came in straight away, there would probably be about 800 to 1000 priests, fine men whom we cannot afford to lose, who would go. But it is going to be a long time, and in ten years, who knows?

Monday's decision may well put people off from becoming priests in the first place. But it is sad that this issue could not have been debated properly. Are we to be a church that accepts all sinners save those who do not fulfil the criteria set by feminist fundamentalists?

Updated: 09:16 Wednesday, July 13, 2005