"The plan to create a new breed of souped-up "flying bishop" to protect Church of England traditionalists from women bishops is so wacky that it belongs in a children's cartoon rather than a body claiming to be a historic wing of the apostolic Church. It conjures up images of Superbishop gliding into the vestry of St Dorothy's, mitre in hand, and telling a group of terrified traddies: "Never fear! With my NEW MAGIC POWERS I can zap women bishops as well as women priests." And the traddies replying, in quavering voices: "Oh, thank you, Superbishop! Now we are now safe from Womanbishop and her evil minions!"
This Hanna-Barbera plan, revealed by my colleague Jonathan Wynne-Jones, gives off a strong whiff of desperation. And I'm not just referring to the feelings of the Archbishop of Canterbury..."
The immense damage done to the Archbishop of Canterbury during Monday night's debate on women priests is still sinking in. Dr Rowan Williams had not intended to speak, but he was so alarmed by the lack of provision for traditionalists in the code of practice that he appealed to Synod members to reject it. They ignored him.
It was as if a Prime Minister, having quietly supported a piece of legislation in the Commons, suddenly lost his nerve, appealed to the House to change its mind, and was then rebuffed. Even Gordon Brown has yet to chalk up that sort of disaster.
Rowan being Rowan, the meaning of his intervention was not immediately clear. But, as Ruth Gledhill noted, a cold chill swept across the chamber as it dawned on people that the Archbishop "now wants the whole thing blown out of the water". Which was not, of course, what happened.
And so Cantuar's leadership is further diminished, just before the start of the Lambeth Conference. Andrew Carey, son of Archbishop Carey, has produced a pretty devastating analysis of Monday night's "train wreck" on the American Anglican website Stand Firm:
"While Dr Williams has often given traditionalists hope that he would back a structural solution to their problems of conscience, he seems to have completely ruled out strong leadership on theological and ecclesial issues. Wearing permanently now, it seems, the persona of the mediator, Dr Williams was seen by Synod trying to have it both ways. 'I am deeply unhappy with any scheme... which ends up structurally humiliating women.' But he was equally unhappy about marginalising traditionalists. He therefore came 'not very comfortably to the conclusion', we needed a 'more rather than less robust form of structural provision'.
"The Archbishop by his thoughtfulness, gravity and seriousness carries great weight and affection in General Synod but he failed to use this credit on Monday night. And as for the House of Bishops in general, the one word you will never hear them using these days is 'collegiality'. The Bishops are pulling in all directions at once. It is no surprise then to see that the Church of England is now synodically led and governed."
If I was a member of the C of E, I'd be sick to death now of the Archbishop's haunted hand-wringing. The word that comes to mind is Amletico - "Hamlet-like", as Pope John XXIII described his tortured successor, Paul VI.
I don't think Rowan Williams wants to be Archbishop of Canterbury any more; indeed, I'm not even sure he wants to be in the Church of England.
Bishop Burnham, left, with Fr Raymond Bristow, centre, and Fr Neil Hibbons
So we are to have a code of practice. Traditional Anglo-Catholics must now decide whether to stay in the Church of England in what, for a while, will be a protected colony - where the sacramental ministry of women bishops and priests is neither acknowledged nor received - or to leave.
Leaving isn't quite so easy as it sounds. You don't become a Catholic, for instance, because of what is wrong with another denomination or faith. You become a Catholic because you accept that the Catholic Church is what she says she is and the Catholic faith is what it says it is. In short, some Anglo-Catholics will stay and others will go. It is quite easy to think of unworthy reasons for staying - and there are no doubt one or two unworthy reasons for leaving.
There are also honourable reasons for staying. Like the Anglican clergy who wouldn't swear allegiance to William and Mary at the end of the 17th century and the Catholic clergy who wouldn't swear allegiance to the French Revolutionary government a century later, the "non-jurors" of the present day will soldier on and die out but they will be faithful to what they have believed and history will honour them for their faithfulness.
Recent history teaches us that those who stay on - for instance, in similar circumstances in North American and Scandinavia - are not left alone for long. The pressure of secular culture bears down on them to ensure conformity with secular values.
As for those who choose to go, like in the early 1990s these will include some of the finest Anglican clergy.
Most of them are not motivated in the least by gender issues but by a keenness to pursue Catholic unity and truth.
For them, the decision of the Church of England to proceed to the ordination of women bishops without providing adequately for traditionalists renders the claims of the Church of England to be part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church shaky or simply untenable.
Codes of practice are shifting sands. The sacramental life of the Church must be built on rock.
How could we trust a code of practice to deliver a workable ecclesiology if every suggestion we have made for our inclusion has been turned down flat?
How could we trust a code of practice when those who are offering it include those who have done most to undermine and seek to revoke the code of practice in force for these last 14 years?
The synodical process for traditional Anglo-Catholics is over. Some will try to draw new lines in the sand. But what the General Synod of the Church of England demonstrated on 7/7 (2008) is that, as on 11/11 (1992), it has decided that it is unilaterally competent to alter Holy Order. At one stage in the late 1990s it even had a go at changing the Creed. Here at work is a democratic Magisterium which at York this week showed that it values the advice of archbishops and bishops' prolocutors less than it does the outcome of a show of hands.
What we must humbly ask for now is for magnanimous gestures from our Catholic friends, especially from the Holy Father, who well understands our longing for unity, and from the hierarchy of England and Wales. Most of all we ask for ways that allow us to bring our folk with us.
Meanwhile we retreat into the wilderness and watch and pray.
Andrew Burnham is Bishop of Ebbsfleet, Suffragan Bishop in the Diocese of Canterbury and Provincial Episcopal Visitor
They met senior advisers of the Pope in an attempt to build closer ties with the Roman Catholic Church, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt.
Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, was not told of the talks and the disclosure will be a fresh blow to his efforts to prevent a major split in the Church of England.
In highly confidential discussions, a group of conservative bishops expressed their dismay at the liberal direction of the Church of England and their fear for its future.
They met members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the most powerful of the Vatican's departments, the successor to the medieval Inquisition, which enforces doctrine and was headed by Pope Benedict XVI before his election.
The names of the bishops are known to The Sunday Telegraph, but they have asked for anonymity because the talks are of such a sensitive and potentially explosive nature.
The disclosure comes on the eve of a critical vote as members of the General Synod – the Church's parliament – prepare to decide whether to allow women to be bishops without giving concessions to staunch opponents.
Up to 600 clergy gave warning in a letter to Dr Williams that they may leave the Church unless they receive a legal right to havens within the Church free of women bishops.
In separate developments, three diocesan bishops wrote to the archbishop supporting the threat and two other bishops have said they are preparing to leave the Church. The letter from the Bishops of Chichester, Blackburn and Europe – seen by The Sunday Telegraph – argues that traditionalist clergy will not be able to "maintain an honoured place" in the Church without sufficient legislation.
"Clearly the ordination of women as bishops would divide the Church of England even more fundamentally than the ordination of women as priests," it says.
"This issue is one which touches all members of the Church of England and not just those with synodical voting rights. In the light of this we are convinced that some form of separate identities will be required to enable the holders of mutually incompatible convictions about the faith and order of the Church to remain in as high a degree of continuing fellowship as possible."
However, while the letter shows that there is deep disquiet in the most senior ranks of the Church, the meetings with Rome will be of far greater concern to Dr Williams.
One bishop involved in the talks, who wished to remain anonymous, said he was left with no option. "The Church of England is becoming more and more like the American Church. Those of us who hold to traditional orthodoxy are very concerned about the direction it seems to be moving in."
The Anglican communion has been arguing over homosexuality since the American Church made Gene Robinson the first openly gay bishop and issued rites for same-sex unions. Conservatives are concerned that gay blessing services are being conducted in Britain and last month this newspaper revealed that a “wedding” ceremony was held for two gay priests. The issue of homosexual priests is likely to feature strongly at this month’s Lambeth Conference of worldwide Anglican bishops.
Now the Church of England is poised to endorse women bishops — a move that will seriously damage its relations with the Roman Catholic Church and could force hundreds of clergy to defect to Rome.
"These are the presenting issues that have made talks necessary, but our concerns go much deeper than these rows to issues of basic doctrine," the bishop said. "I have to be loyal to the parishes in my diocese and to the Gospel and that’s why I felt I had to do something.W"
Another bishop said: "The internal pressure of the Anglican communion has pushed us apart and we’re committed to greater unity with Rome. There can be no future for Christianity in Europe without Rome."
The Pope’s enthusiasm for bringing traditional Anglicans into the fold was shown in 2003 when as Cardinal he sent greetings to a group of conservative churchmen meeting in Texas in protest at the election of Bishop Robinson. The Pope and Dr Williams enjoy a strong relationship, which they are keen to maintain.
However, a former aide to Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, said that the dialogue with the Anglican bishops only started after the crisis in the Anglican communion worsened. "It is obvious things are starting to fall apart and Rome wants to be able to help if it can," he said.
The Rt Rev Kieran Conry, the Bishop of Arundel and Brighton, said: "A number of Church of England bishops are looking at the options open to them should things go wrong at the Lambeth Conference. Some are hoping for accommodation with the Catholic Church, but yet maintaining their Anglican identity."
The Bishop of Beverley, the Rt Rev Martyn Jarrett said: “In the tragic circumstances that the Church of England takes decisions which make it impossible to walk with it anymore we would want to understand more where we are in relation to wider Catholic Christendom.
“Anglo-Catholics have always had a particular concern for re-union with the Holy See. No matter what might happen Anglo-Catholics will continue to be at the forefront of that dialogue and explanation.”
The Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, used his Synod address yesterday to attack members of the "breakaway" Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans — accusing them of "ungracious" behaviour.
Lambeth Palace declined to comment.
