I’m not on strike
I went into Church on Saturday afternoon, and was greeted by two clergy colleagues who, with broad grins on their faces, said “Well, surprised to see you here – we thought you’d gone on strike.”
Apparently the Church Times had reported that I am calling women clergy to “go on strike”, but that Christina Rees was opposed to my suggestion. Neither of which are true. I still haven’t got my Church Times, because the posties really were on strike.
I had patiently explained to their reporter last week that there is no “strike” – that the point of the discussion on this blog last week concerned the fact that women should not have to work in an atmosphere where they are regularly subjected to discouragement and questioning as to the validity of their presence in the Church. I understand completely why changing the culture of an institution is slow and painstaking; I also know that some of those who are not in favour of women in the priesthood are kind and godly people, who express their disagreements with regret. I’ve met such people. But there are others – plenty of them – who vocally and maliciously stand in vestries, and out of the public eye, often in little groups, bullying and denigrating women with viscious remarks. I’ve met them too, and have sometimes stood in complete shock that they actually allow such things to come out of their mouths.
I do honestly think that to ordain women and then stand by while they are regularly treated like this is a disgrace.
One of the commenters here asked whether a real day of peaceful protest by supporters of women clergy would help the church to see how invaluable their women are (not at all the same thing as going on strike). And I’m not having an argument with Christina Rees, either – quite the reverse. She’s a tower of strength, and a tremendous encouragement to me and to many others.
Anyway, I’m enjoying a gentle day today, as far from being on strike, I’m catching up with myself after Sunday, which normally is an eleven-hour day. Or ten, if you treat the hour I spend hosting breakfast as “not work”.




Good for him, though of course the chances of God’s actual reality corresponding to our preferred specification in every detail are close to zero, and therefore the nettle must be grasped that there is almost certainly going to be a difference between God as God actually is (so far as one can tell) and God as any one given person would prefer God to be. I feel this point needs to be made as so often these 2 very different things are confused with each other.