How gender makes a difference

How does gender make a difference in Church leadership?

That was the question I was invited to address for the October issue of FutureFirst, a news digest for church leaders: 'providing facts for forward planning'. So how does gender make a difference?

 

 

Well, it does and it doesn't. I'm increasingly convinced that the 'men are from Mars' version of difference may have a few elements of truth - but that's all. Research suggests that women and men doing the same leadership task tend to do it in similar ways.

 

 

The differences are all about women's different experiences. For starters, it's still difficult for women to be seen as leaders in some contexts, even when the theology allows them to be. A double whammy, if you like.

 

 

The most obvious difference is that just being born female means you may not be able to be a Christian leader at all - depending on your theology or that of your church. So it's not surprising that there are fewer young women than young men in Christian leadership. So for young women, it can be a lonely place.

 

 

Then there are worrying patterns of deployment. Women are more likely to be leading rural or urban churches and less likely to be leading suburban ones. I wonder why...? OK, I do have a few ideas why that might be.

 

 

So it follows that they are less likely than men to be leading larger churches, especially evangelical ones. And also less likely to be in senior posts, though this is changing more quickly than the larger churches situation, where at my last count, there were only 4 women out of about 172 larger churches led by women.

 

 

I suppose one could also suggest that the experience of being a clergy husband is quite different from being a clergy wife. If you are anywhere near Durham on 24th Novemember, there is an event that evening on clergy spouses, led by Dr Sarah-Jane Page. See the Durham website for details: and you need to email in advance if you want to go. Sounds fascinating!

Transformations at Lambeth Palace

Well, Lambeth was not transformed on Monday!

But around 50 people attended a conference entitled Transformations: Theology and Experience of Women's Ministry.

It was a great day, with introductory addresses by Lucy Winkett, Sarah Coakley, and the Archbishop of Canterbury, time to reflect, group discussions, a keynote address by Bishop Mary Gray-Reeves (from California), and concluding comments by the Archbishop.

There were a number of highlights for me, including the address by Sarah Coakley (Norris-Hulse Professor of Divinity at Cambridge). She reminded us that in the 1970s it was argued that the church would be transformed when women were ordained, because women were different.

Yes, the church has been transformed, by the 'cosmological disturbance' of women at the altar.

No, in the way expected - and I was glad to hear her knock essentialism on the head; there is still too much of it around.

She also highlighted some remaining problems, including the theological inconsistency of considering women in the episcopate separately from priesthood, as if the two can be separated, and what she called 'bureacratization', the busyness which women have to take part in to prove they can do the job as well as men. It was good to have this challenged, again from a theological perspective. Where, she asked, is prayer, presence and rest?

Groups explored a whole variety of subjects, drawing on thoughts from ordained women which had been submitted in advance. Patterns of appointment, scripture, different patterns of ministry available to women, the ordinal, liturgy and language, issues for clergy couples...

I could go on. Watch out for the production of some of the materials from the conference in due course.

Yes, it's been a while since the last blog. I'm leaving CPAS as of tomorrow, but this blog will continue...

How Jesus developed women as leaders

I don't really like blowing my own trumpet. But I was quite chuffed when the post delivered a book which includes one chapter by me: 'How did Jesus develop women as leaders?'

Depending on your perspective, that might seem like a really odd question. Or it may be that you've already read my article on it on the web - in which case you might like to read the new, more full version here.

The book is called Apostolic Women, Apostolic Authority: Transfiguring Leadership in Today's Church, edited by Martyn Percy and Christina Rees, published by Canterbury Press in December last year. The book was designed to collect up papers from a pre-Lambeth conference held at Cuddesdon in 2008, but these were supplemented by a number of other papers written (or edited) for the book, and mine is one of those.

I've just finished reading the book and it will be reviewed soon; there's plenty of varied material in it and I found many of the chapters very valuable. There is lots throughout about 'power'; a great chapter on women in the Bible and church history; a perspective from the US on the deployment of women, which raises issues I've been contemplating, about lack of women called to larger churches; Jane Hedges' research findings on whether women are up for senior posts; 'size matters', a piece of research on the lack of women leading larger churches; a good chapter on spirituality; and an excellent piece by Lis Goddard on the need to transfigure episcopal ministry into something more collegial and collaborative, and how this might also benefit women who currently feel marginalised.

My article - well, you can read it! It might not appear at first that there is anything to write about how Jesus developed women as leaders. But read the biblical text more closely and there's lots going on. The women who were 'with Jesus'. Mary and Martha, the woman at the well, Mary Magdalene, the women leaders emerging as leaders in the early church. And how women were included alongside men - not in the 'twelve', but very close to them, and certainly included in both learning experiences and commissions to ministry.

It's very apparent to me in the current climate, where some women are facing a backlash (?) of teaching that says we should not be leading in the Church, that we need to read what the Bible is actually saying rather than reaching for those old 'proof' texts (without looking at translation, context and recent interpretaion), and lobbing them over the parapet at women.

Funny too how men can lob stuff at women (why do they make up the rules?), but if we respond we're being over-sensitive, ambitious or 'aggressive'!

Why so few younger women clergy?

Back in January I blogged about this question, but it's still there, and still needs an answer. There's a concern in the Church at the moment about the rising average age of clergy. We have been reaping the 'wisdom' of some years past, when young Christians who felt called by God to ordained ministry were told to go and 'get a life' first.

But now we're starting to see younger people coming forward, some of us have noted that there are distinctly fewer young women in training than young men. And looking round the church, there are not many young women in stipendiary ministry.

There are a whole variety of reason:

• women don't get as much encourament as men do
• there are fewer young women in churches
• some of these younger women belong to more conservative churches which don't allow women to take on preaching or leadership roles
• some women in their 20s and 30s have a young family and have chosen to keep their sense of call on hold.

But I was disturbed by a recent letter to the Church Times (13th August), which talked of the experience of one young woman at her first selection conference.

She was told when young, as many young men also used to be told, that she was 'inexperienced'. The subtext, according to the letter was 'go away, get a job, have babies, then come back.' This she did, and was finally accepted many years later.

The letter goes on to highlight other concerns which I've also noticed recently. When it came to a title parish, 'Ever present was the unspoken hint that a mature woman might be threatening to her training incumbent. And she had a family, all of whom had well-established ties to people and places,, which made things more "complicated" for the diocese. Would they have either of these concerns about a man?'

Some might, others would not. It is so hard to prove that anything like this is gender discrimination. The writer of the letter wonders why the Church seems so much more nervous about accepting inexperienced young women, when there are plenty of such men in training. A fair point. And then if those women return a few years later, they have other hurdles to overcome.

I believe that the discernment process is a good one, and that when the writer of the letter calls it 'secretive' and by implication, biassed, this is unfair. But that does not mean that it's not harder, often, for women than for men.

The Church of England needs more young women to offer themselves for a lifetime of ministry. I know some great young women who have been accepted for training at recent panels. But I think there is still more progress to be made in nurturing the vocations of women in their 20s.

And what is true for the Church of England is probably just as true in other denominations. I've read research which points to subtle or less subtle forms of discrimination in a variety of denominations. Where we are aware of barriers which make the selection process more difficult for women than for men, we need to keep raising concerns, until the process is truly equal for all.

Women bishops and all that

All eyes were on General Synod (of the Church of England) last weekend as they met in York to discuss women bishops.

As the dust begins to settle, arguments abound as to whether the archbishops' amendment should have been passed, or whether what was passed was the best possible outcome.

And while some are saying, 'full steam ahead for women bishops' - it only has to go to dioceses and parishes and come back to Synod, and go before Parliament! - some of those opposed are warning that by not producing legislation with the protection they desire, General Synod is heading for a train crash.

I have deep sympathies with those who feel marginalised, particularly those who are evangelicals. It's their church which is changing, just as it is also my church which, in my view, is moving in a particular direction. I really liked a sentence in the pastoral letter written on 14th July by the Bishops of Oxford, as he reflects on the fact that the Body of Christ is both hurting and rejoicing: women priests should not feel blame, 'women priests have borne their cross of ambivalence and prejudice very graciously for a long time'. I can still remember back in 1992 when we were not allowed to rejoice too much over the vote for women priests.

What I find really frustrating is the way those on the side of 'bible' or 'tradition' treat their 'opponents', people like me. Beyond Equal Rights is a recently published booklet from the Reform stable. Well, some people might argue that this debate is about 'equal rights', but many would not.

According to the author, egalitarians stress Galatians 3:28 'and largely ignore the other passages or write them off as cultural'. So why do my bookshelves groan with scholarly egalitarian books which seek to understand those passages often called 'difficult'; they conclude that the evangelical scholarly consensus is that the Bible endorses the equal participation of men and women in leadership. I would not be writing this if that were not the case!

Nor do I think this debate about 'innovation'. I was equally frustrated by someone I was in conversation with recently who claimed that having women bishops (and priests) was a complete novelty in the church, an innovation after 2000 years of male-only leaders.

Is this true? There are plenty who see current moves as an attempt to restore the Church of England to the position of the early church. I remember writing an essay at theological college about the decline of women leaders in the first centuries of the Church. The recent work of Dorothy Irvin and others has uncovered archaelogical material including frescoes and tomb inscriptions attesting to women as prophets, stewards, deacons, presbyters and overseers, and other research points in a similar direction.

Let's keep the lines of communication open, and be accurate in the way we represent those who disagree. Then, perhaps, the train won't crash, but will take us into a better future.

Of Deans and Dignitaries

I was very excited to hear a few days ago that a third woman has been appointed to the position of dean.

Canon Catherine Ogle has been appointed as the next Dean of Birmingham Cathedral. Catherine is currently vicar of Huddersfield, and has previously been vicar of three parishes outside Barnsley, and also religious affiars editor for BBC Radio Leeds.

This brings the number of women deans to three: the other two are Vivienne Faull, Dean of Leicester, and June Osborne, Dean of Salisbury.

It's not hard to count to three! It's not so hard to count to 15 (the number of women archdeacons). It is, however, difficult to keep track of how many women hold other posts which are regarded as 'dignitories', or as 'senior posts' in the Church of England.

This is a sad state of affairs. The statistics are hard to find; and there seem to be few people who are interested enough in the progress of women in the Church to keep up with noting who is appointed. The Revd Dr Sr Teresa CSA is a notable exception, but (in the very valuable Distinctive News of Women in Ministry) she notes appointments rather than numbers.

So let me recap on the latest stats I've got. in 2007, or a total of 359 dignitaries, 31 were women. The percentage of women who are stipendiary clergy has grown to 19%, and the percentage of women when NSM and OLM are included is 28%.

Going back to deans and other dignitaries, not all women (any more than all men) would want to be a dean or any other kind of dignitary. Most clergy are inevitably going to be in parish ministry, perhaps including some kind of specialist role as part of this. But in my view, the Church of England will only look like a whole church when the proportion of women and men in any particular kind of post looks much more equal.

One Hundred Awesome Women

I'm so excited that the number of members of Awesome has reached one hundred!

The name Awesome is an acronymn for 'Anglican Women Evangelicals: Supporting our Ordained Ministries'. We're a network of ordained Anglican women from across the evangelical spectrum, and aim to support each other and to equip each other for ministry in the Church.

The network was launched in January 2004, so almost six years on it's good that we have attracted good numbers of women, and a record number of 42 at our most recent conference in September. Click here for our website, where there's more information.

Membership has reached 100, and we know that there are more women who support our aims. Some 20+ have been members but are lapsed or no longer active, and many others agree with our aims but find support through other networks.

It can be tough an evangelical woman at this point in the life of the Church of England. Many of our ordained sisters come from a more liberal perspective, while some of our evangelical brothers don't believe that those of us who are priests should be ordained!

But there are always signs of hope around too. I'm excited about a couple of books I've just read. One is called Inspiring Women: discovering biblical role models, and it's about the significance of role models and how to preach some of the women in Scripture so that women find new roles models there. Click here for a review. It's a great little booklet, which deals with some of the tricky passages about women as well as encouraging preachers to look at some of the 'little people' in Scripture. Jehosheba, Sheerah, Shallum's daughters? I'd never heard of them either, but I have now!

What else is good news? Another woman appointed archdeacon: Christine Wilson, currently vicar of Goring by Sea has beeen appointed Archdeacon of Chesterfield, bringing the number of women archdeacons to 15. It's going to take a while to change the climate of the church when it comes to senior leadership, but there's slow progress being made.

I want to change the world, but I realise that progress usually only comes in very small steps.

It's all Greek to me!

A few weeks ago I was in Greece (sigh! - and apologies for the gap in blog posts).

Warm sunshine, blue skies (mostly), great food, great wine - and Orthodox churches.

We had a great tour guide on our second week, Thanos, who led us on our visits to villages on the island of Evia. He was an active member of the Orthodox Church, and we had some excellent explanations of the design and layout of churches.

What a great lesson in artistic communication, but which is probably sadly lost on most visitors. I am struck again and again by the images of Christ 'Pantocrator' high up in the dome.

But what most interested me was what Thanos said at the end about the Orthodox Church today. He commented on the fact that many clergy are older rather than younger, and the church is struggling to attract younger priests. I learnt some interesting things about the Orthodox vs Roman Catholics: Orthodox have no time for the Pope and infallibility, or for priestly celibacy (except for bishops).

One solution to the shortage of clergy, Thanos explained, is that Anglican clergy are allowed to lead worship in Orthodox churches. Then (not knowing I was a priest) he turned to the subject of women priests. How often I have heard that some sections of the Anglican church don't agree with the idea of women priests because the Orthodox and Catholic Churches don't.

Apparently there has been a vote in the Greek Orthodox Church in favour of women priests (why is this not more widely known? I ask myself). But the Greek Orthodox Church is part of, and smaller than the Russian Orthodox Church, and the Russian Church is not in favour of women priests, so the Greek Church could not proceed as it wished.

So nothing has yet changed in Greece, but to me this does put a rather different take on the 'tradition' perspective... When it comes to women bishops, does the 'tradition' arguement hold as much water as its supporters suggest it does? If at least part of the Orthodox Church supports a move to women being priests (and bishops), where does that leave the 'traditionalists'?

Out of Africa

Earlier this month, the Diocese of Accra voted to permit the ordination of women to the priesthood. According to the Church of England Newspaper, there are a number of women who have been trained for ordination, and are waiting and ready. The diocese has yet to determine what role they will play in the life of the diocese.

I'm really pleased to hear this, for a number of reasons. First, it's sheer good news that another diocese is recognising the value of women's ministry.

Then, it's significant that this is in Africa. It cuts across the growing sense of polarisation which says, to put it crudely, 'North America is liberal and pro-women; Africa is conservative - and thus does not support women in ministry?' It's just not as simple as that!

I recall that when I was at college I helped a fellow student with the writing up of his research thesis. I was fascinated by his subject, which was that Christianity brought liberation (in every sense) to women in his part of Africa. That's what I believe ought to have happened, if the gospel was recieved: women were no longer seen as second class, possessions of their husbands or fathers, but as equally children of God, equally called, equally saved, equally gifted.

So I was excited to hear of this news from Accra. Given the different cultural context, it's a much bigger step for women to be ordained in that context than it is in ours. But the gospel can challenge culture!

And just to keep up to date, here are the stats:
Of 38 provinces in the Anglican communion, only 8 do not ordain women. Two ordain women to the diaconate only, and 24 including the Church of England ordain women to the priesthood. Four provinces have consecrated women bishops.

Trinny and Susannah meet their match

Trinny and Susannah encounter clerical shirts!

It made for fascinating TV. Trinny and Susannah met a group of women, including a couple of women clergy, and selected a group of them for a make-over.

What made this programme different was that rather than just the usual make-over, first of all, some of the women 'met their match' in that they had to dress in the women's usual attire - clerical shirt and all!

I wonder what you made of it all? I'm one of those who before I was ordained vowed that I would not be seen dead wearing a clerical collar. But when I found myself in a context where that badge was really useful, I had to eat my words. Then the challenge was to find shirts which were decent and even remotely feminine.

The choice in 1994 was much more limited than it is now. I was disappointed that the looks Trinny and Susannah went for were not a great improvement on what the two women were wearing before. I was fascinated that one of the parishioners made the point that to wear a clerical shirt was important for many clergy women - a symbol of equality with men. Not to wear one was something of a cop out - and I think I would agree.

On the positive side, I felt that on this occasion the church came out well - Trinny and Susannah were clearly trying to understand what the women's lives were like, and it was a sympathetic picture of some aspects of parish life. But the fashion - for me, the challenge is still on.

I wonder what you think clergy women should wear?

Good news about numbers

I've just been doing my sums!

I never thought statistics could be exciting, but here are some good news numbers.

According to the latest C of E statistics (2006), women now make up 25% of the total number of clergy in Church of England. What is perhaps more surprising is that they now make up 22% of stipendiary clergy.

How does that compare to numbers of clergy leading the 540 churches where CPAS is involved in the appointment?

Four years ago, only 38 of those 540 clergy were women. The number now is up to 54 - that's 10%. What is even more encouraging is that in 74 appointments over the last 2 years where CPAS has been involved, 19 of the appointments have been women - that's 25%, which is slightly higher than the percentage of stipendiary women clergy!

So yes, there may be a long way to go - but women are being appointed to evangelical churches.

If you are looking for a post and want to find out more about CPAS and the Register we keep of clergy looking for moves, you can click here to go straight to that part ofour website.