What sort of Province do Traditionalists in the CofE want?

[...] The Third Province Movement maintains that it is working in the same direction as Forward In Faith UK and that is undoubtedly true. It says that it has somewhat different emphases, for instance it states that it began among lay people, "many of whom have been unchurched by the new legislation" (i.e. the C. of E. Measure which permitted women to become priests). It says that it wants a solution for all shades of churchmanship (not unlike Forward In Faith UK). But it claims to be different in that its proposals "do not involve the Roman Catholic church or any unilateral action".

The Movement talks about the third province being divided into dioceses and deaneries. It is however somewhat premature to discuss the former as we do not really know what the take-up might be on "inauguration day". As for deaneries, the wide scattering of opting-in parishes across the country might well make the notion of a deanery unworkable (which is probably why deaneries are not mentioned in "Consecrated Women?"). The Movement also suggests that Provincial Synod clerical and lay members would also sit in the General Synod, a proposal at variance with the Forward In Faith UK blueprint. And then there is the method of appointing future bishops. The Movement wants the existing procedure of the Crown Nominations Commission to be used. Forward In Faith UK however is adamant that its proposed method of selection of orthodox bishops in the new province would be essential and therefore the NP would have to have the main say.

Most of this tells us that Forward In Faith UK and the Third Province Movement are "batting on the same side" in respect of advocating another province. And yet it is patently clear that there are a number of practical matters where they see things differently. Probably it all boils down to whether an additional province could be made to work within the existing Church of England or whether the new structures inevitably would take it outside the Church and even outside the Anglican Communion.

When the Rochester Report, "Women Bishops in the Church of England?" was published in November 2004 (about the same time as publication of "Consecrated Women?") it addressed the issue of a third province and raised a number of pertinent matters which still require answering, viz:-

 Would the NP be slanted towards Anglo-Catholics rather than Evangelicals?  If so, how could the two groups, essentially conservative, be made to work in harmony?  How could the NP province be streamlined administratively and stripped of baggage that it brought from the other two provinces?  How could the NP remain Anglican in any real sense if the ABC consecrated women to the episcopate and/or was a woman?  How could the NP be pared down financially to avoid putting additional expense on the other two provinces?  If the NP developed (as has now been suggested) its own canon law, how could it realistically still claim to be part of the C. of E?  If the parishes opting in to the NP which continued to be part of the C. of E. "by law established", how would a parish deal with people (not necessarily members of the C. of E.) living in it who wanted a say in the governance of those parishes, e.g. in election of churchwardens?

It must seem to some traditionalists whether in Forward In Faith UK or the Third Province Movement that any meaningful resolution of these issues to their satisfaction may well tip the balance and take the new province in the direction of independence. Read more
No comments will be posted without a full name and location, see the policy.