Church of England General Synod votes to allow female bishops – as it happened

We are now closing the liveblog, thank you for reading. Here's a summary of today's developments:

The Church of England's General Synod has voted in favour of legislation to allow female bishops. The historic vote at York University means that the first women bishops could be appointed by the end of this year.

The legislation received the necessary two thirds majority in all three Houses of the General Synod. Some 37 bishops voted in favour with two against and one abstention, 162 clergy were in favour, 25 against and four abstentions. In the crucial lay votes there were 152 votes in favour, 45 against and five abstentions.

David Cameron hailed the result as a "great day for the Church and for equality". Deputy prime minister Nick Clegg said it was a step towards a more fair society in Britain.

The Archbishop of York, Dr. John Sentamu heralded as "momentous day" for the Church of England. After insisting that the results would be announced in silence, Sentamu led the three houses through a singalong of 'We are marching in the light of God'.

What happens after today's vote in favour of allowing the consecration of women as bishops?

The legislation will now move to the ecclesiastical committee of parliament where it will be considered.

Then, subject to parliamentary approval, the measure will return to the General Synod in November when it will come into force following its promulgation (a formal legal announcement).

That means the first women bishop could be appointed by the end of the year.

David Cameron, who was in favour of women bishops, has welcomed the result:

I warmly welcome today's vote formally approving women bishops - a great day for the Church and for equality.

Nick Clegg praised the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev Justin Welby, in achieving the result. He said:

This is a watershed moment for the Church of England and a huge step forward in making our society fairer. I would like to congratulate the strong leadership that Archbishop Welby has shown on this issue.

Allowing women to become bishops is another long overdue step towards gender equality in senior positions. I welcome the Church of England's decision which means that women can now play a full and equal role in the important work of the Church.

Labour leader Ed Miliband adds:

Here's a great Vine video capturing the mood inside York university following the vote to allow female bishops:

The Church of England says the 'yes' vote means the first woman bishop could be appointed by the end of the year.

The Archbishop of York, Dr. John Sentamu, says:

"This is a momentous day. Generations of women have served the Lord faithfully in the Church of England for centuries. It is a moment of joy today: the office of Bishop is open to them.

To those who ask "what took you so long?" my answer is that every decision has a cost and there will be those within our body who will be hurting as a result of this decision. Our answer to the hurting should not be "get over it" but rather "we will not let go until you have blessed us."

We move slowly because we move together. But in moving together we achieve not only what is just but also model what is right. As the African Proverb says: "Whoever walks fast, travels alone. Whoever walks far, walks in the company of others."

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, says he is "delighted" with the result:
"Today is the completion of what was begun over 20 years with the ordination of women as priests. I am delighted with today's result. Today marks the start of a great adventure of seeking mutual flourishing while still, in some cases disagreeing. The challenge for us will be for the church to model good disagreement and to continue to demonstrate love for those who disagree on theological grounds. Very few institutions achieve this, but if we manage this we will be living our more fully the call of Jesus Christ to love one another. As delighted as I am for the outcome of this vote I am also mindful of those within the Church for whom the result will be difficult and a cause of sorrow. My aim, and I believe the aim of the whole church, should be to be able to offer a place of welcome and growth for all. Today is a time of blessing and gift from God and thus of generosity. It is not winner take all, but in love a time for the family to move on together."

Archbishop John Sentamu, having earlier asked for restraint when the votes were being returned, is leading Synod through a singalong of 'We are marching in the light of God'.

Here is the first version of our story by my colleague Andrew Brown on the Church of England General Synod's historic vote to allow women bishops:

The Church of England has finally agreed that women may become bishops, ending 20 years of bitter compromises since women were allowed to become priests in 1994.

The synod had been threatened with parliamentary action if the measure had failed, and the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, had prepared contingency plans to dissolve it and call fresh elections if the vote had gone the wrong way.

But the crisis was averted by a change of mind, and vote, among lay members. A previous attempt in 2012 failed when 74 lay members voted against, preventing the required two-thirds majority among the laity.

Those who changed their minds,included Tom Sutcliffe, who said the measure would now bring "episcopal femininity" that would enrich the church.

Rev Kate Bottley, from Channel 4's Gogglebox, was in favour of women bishops. She has just tweeted:

Nicola Sullivan, the Archdeacon of Wells, Somerset, adds:

Here's how Synod voted to amend canon legislation on women bishops:

House of Bishops:
137 in favour
2 against
1 abstention

House of Clergy:
164 in favour
24 against
3 abstentions

House of Laity:
153 in favour
40 against

8 abstentions

Synod has also voted to amend canon legislation, meaning there will be no distinction between men and women in church law.

Synod is now voting on the first aspect of enabling the legislation for female bishops.

My colleague Josh Halliday is now taking the reins of this live blog for the remainder of the debate. Thanks for reading.

General Synod votes in favour in all three houses:

Bishops: 37 in favour, 2 against, 1 abstention.

Clergy: 162 in favour, 25 against, 4 abstentions

Laity: 152 in favour, against 45, 5 abstentions.

We will have the results shortly.

Those in favour need to press 1 on electronic handsets, those against press 2.

Voting ends in one minute.

The division bell is rung. Voting begins in two minutes.

Sentamu asks Synod to receive the result of the vote with "restraint and sensitivity".

Langstaff reminds Synod that the legislation will not pass unless it gets a two-thirds majority in each of the three houses: bishops, clergy and laity.

He commends the motion. Could we see voting begin now?

No: Sentamu first leads Synod in a moment of silent reflection.

Sentamu says he sees no one else standing to speak. He calls the bishop of Rochester, James Langstaff, who opened the debate, to close things.

Spence tells Synod a story about losing his sight. He says he knew he had to trust people to help make life possible, and to adapt.

He asks those thinking of voting no or abstaining to place their trust in the legislation. Promises will be delivered, he says. Both sides will have to adapt.

The stronger the vote we can give today, the greater the credibility we show to the outside world.

Canon John Spence is the next – final? – speaker. He's a lay member and archbishop's counsel.

Welby says that in the past the church has been overwhelmed by the "tortuous path" this legislation has taken.

The church is now in a position of "good and loving disagreement", he says.

Welby says he hopes and expects the vote to go through – "and I rejoice in that".

But he says he could not support it if he did not think it would be possible for opponents to continue to flourish in the church. You do not throw out family, he says.

Justin Welby says the speeches today have been "generous and helpful".

The five guiding principles are fundamental to how the church proceeds, he says.

The legislation allows everyone – "all as faithful Anglicans" – to move forwards.

It looks as though we are moving closer to a vote:

Welby will be next, Canon John Spence to follow him.

Sentamu says he'll now allow the Bishop of Chichester, Martin Warner, to speak for five minutes.

Warner says he is a traditionalist catholic. He says the church can show its good qualities with this legislation.

Jacob Vince, a lay member from Chichester – which has been well represented today – says the current uncertainty is putting off young ordinands. He says Synod should vote now.

The next speaker is another evangelical, Gavin Collins, an archdeacon from Portsmouth. He asks if the legislation has enough safeguards built in for those members who are evangelicals.

Next to speak is Jonathan Frais, a clergy member from Chichester, and a headship evangelical. He says the church should always be counter-cultural.

(PCCs are parochial church councils.)

Frais is followed by Mary Durlacher, a laity member from Chelmsford, who says she speaks for those who will need provision if they cannot accept a female bishop.

Hannah Cleugh, a clergy member from the universities of York, says that in Scotland the moves to allow women to become bishops was presented as a "campaign for whole ministry". She asks Synod to support this measure.

But here's an interesting tweet about Scotland:

Richard Burridge, a clergy member, says he is a conservative evangelical. He takes issue with the complementarianism argument, saying it was initiated by the Southern Baptists. "Headship" also does not convey the complexity of St Paul's arguments, he says. Let's avoid labels.

Next is Graham Parr, a supporter of the measure and a laity member from Chichester, which in 2011 was one of the dioceses that voted against female bishops. Chichester now backs the proposals.

Thomas Seville, a clergy member of the religious communities of York, says while this would be a step forward for Methodist-Anglican relations, with other denominations, such as Roman Catholic and Orthodox, this is a sad day. He doesn't want to slide back into a situation where saying "trust me" actually means "agree with me".

The next speaker, Judith Ayers, a member of the laity from Exeter and a teacher in a girls' school, says she finds it hard to explain to pupils why they could not grow up to be bishops in the Church of England.

Susie Leafe, a member of the laity from Truro, and a leading member of the Reform group that opposes female bishops.

She says she was told it was "ridiculous" to expect the concerns of conservative evangelicals to be taken into account in the facilitated discussions about the way forward.

The outcome was that the majority ended up telling the minority what was good for them.

We are told not to complain, not to risk the motion being defeated.

We are going to need a change of culture … There's a world out there that needs to hear the real gospel.

Angus MacLeay, a clergy member from Rochester, says he still has questions over the provisions that would be made under the legislation for those opposing women as bishops.

Sally Muggeridge, a member of the laity from Canterbury, says she has always been in favour of women in the episcopate. She reads a message from Archbishop Desmond Tutu:

I'm thrilled to hope that our mother church … will do the right thing today: to allow women to become bishops, as we have in Swaziland and in Cape Town.

Wow, you are in for a great surprise and a treat. You will ask yourselves: why were we so timid for so long?

God be praised. Yippee!

When the legislation passes, says next speaker Philip North, a clergy member from Camden, London, the church needs to think about how it lives together in peace.

Let's not fool ourselves that the mood in this chamber is going to trickle down to the wider church, he warns. Young people have turned their backs on the church and parishes are struggling to survive.

Our dialogue must no longer be primarily with ourselves, he adds.

Jane Bisson, a member of the laity from Winchester, says Mary Magdalene was a disciple of Jesus but she was not an apostle; he put her second to the men.

His direction should be the final direction we should take … Please vote against this.

Gerald O'Brien, a member of the laity from Rochester, speaks next. He says conservative evangelicals are under-represented at bishop level but nothing has been done to address that. There are now moves to appoint one, O'Brien says, but it may be too little, too late.

If there were a dozen conservative evangelical bishops, the constituency would still not be represented.

He says conservative evangelicals are being asked to give without being offered anything in return.

A yes voter next: Clare Herbert, a clergy member from London and a former rector of Soho. She talks about living with "daily degrading images of women … amid the fizz and the fun of living there". There is a persistent belief that women are inferior to men, or equal but fundamentally different, and meant for humbler roles.

By what we do as church we send out signs which are lived out in lives of others less fortunate.

Sarah Finch, a member of the laity from London, will be voting against:

The pattern for church life that we find in scripture points to a God-given male leadership.

She says there is a need for a conservative evangelical bishop, or bishops, who believes in male headship.

The next speaker, Robert Cotton, a clergyman from Guildford, praises the tone of this morning's debate. It's the "dignity of difference", he says.

David Kemp, a member of the laity from Canterbury, is telling a parable about God and an otter. I'm slightly lost, I'll be honest.

Jennifer Tomlinson, a clergy member from Chelmsford, is next. She talks about women in the bible. Female disciples have been rediscovered, she says.

The next speaker, Samuel Margrave, a member of the house of laity, is voting against. He says this could mean the end of the church. People are saying they've been bullied, he tells Synod.

Sentamu asks members who disagree with the speakers to not shout out but "keep it in your hearts".

This is not the House of Commons or the House of Lords, he admonishes.

Chik Kaw Tan, a member of the house of laity, says arguments in favour of allowing women to be bishops is about cultural mores rather than theological truth. He will vote against. He says the same arguments used to promote female bishops are the same as those used to redefine marriage (that is, the introduction of same-sex marriage). He is not happy about that, nor about the "stupidity of atheism".

Reverend Janet Appleby speaks now. In 2012 she proposed an amendment that said male bishops and priests appointed to look after parishes opposed to women bishops must act in line with the parishes' "theological convictions". Appleby says she is glad that amendment failed because the current motion is much better. She urges those who still oppose the move to abstain rather than vote no, "because the vote is still very close".

Next is Philip Rice, a member of the house of laity from London.

He says London has moved since 2012 and that affects how he will vote. (In 2011, London was one of only two dioceses that voted against draft legislation to introduce female bishops. This time around, the diocese supported the measure.) Rice says today he will vote yes.

Lorna Ashworth, a member of the house of laity from Chichester, comes next. She says the lack of women bishops has nothing to do with the suffering of women around the world. Those sufferings are caused by sin, she says. She will vote against.

Rod Thomas, a member of the house of clergy and leader of Reform, which remains opposed to female bishops, is speaking now. He's spending quite a portion of his three minutes on a rather confusing anecdote about turnip curry.

Moving on, Thomas says he won't be able to vote in favour of the measure – though he expects it to pass – but he has been impressed by the process of negotiation that has got Synod to this point. He has been a key figure on this, so his concession that the measure is likely to go through is significant.

Speakers are now limited to a maximum of three minutes.

First up is Jane Charman, a member of the house of clergy from Salisbury. She says she doesn't want to change anybody's vote but she wants the outcome not to be seen as a victory by one side over the other.

Douglas McKittrick, the archdeacon of Chichester, steps up. He says others have made many of his points (which means, technically, he is breaking one of Sentamu's rules).

Next is Cherry Vann, archdeacon of Rochdale. She says it's important not just to "grudgingly acknowledge" one another but to cooperate happily in ministry at every level.

Dr John Sentamu, archbishop of York, is still chairing. He says 24 of the 85 people who wanted to speak have spoken so far. He wants to know how many of the remainder still want to speak. There is evident keenness to get to the vote before too long.

Sentamu leads a prayer and then it's into the lunch break.

The debate will resume at 2.30pm.

Michael Perham, bishop of Gloucester, tells Synod: "A yes vote today is crucial and the opposite a disaster. We need to say yes in order that the Church of England may flourish."

My colleague Andrew Brown, who is at General Synod in York, has filed this report on this morning's debate so far. Here's an extract:

The Church of England's General Synod opened its debate on women bishops with a succession of former opponents announcing that they would accept the legislation even if they disagreed with it.

The early signs were that the historic legislation would be passed, although supporters remained nervous.

Two lay members whose resistance helped scupper an earlier move in 2012 said they would vote for the new legislation.

Philip Giddings, the conservative evangelical who chairs the house of laity, said that he was satisfied the new, simplified legislation would be tolerable for his side.

Tom Sutcliffe, a liberal who had nonetheless voted against women bishops, said that the new legislation was a huge improvement on the last.

But Jane Patterson, a conservative evangelical from Sheffield, told the Synod that she would continue to oppose the legislation. Her faction was being marginalised, she claimed; and opinion in the diocese of Sheffield was not 90% in favour of women bishops, as it appears to be in the rest of the church.

View image in fullscreen

The Bishop of Rochester, the Rt Rev James Langstaff, told Synod:

The Church of England has spoken very clearly through the voting of the diocesan synods and we today have, I believe, a responsibility to show that we have listened.

Wherever each of us stands on the spectrum of views, I want to suggest today that we have a responsibility to be guided, yes, by what we ourselves think, but also by what we assess to be the settled view of the great majority within the Church of England.

Keith Malcouronne, a member of the house of laity from Guildford, says he voted against in 2012 but will now happily support the measure.

Elaine Storkey – evangelical leader, widely respected in the church – speaks now. She says the unity of the church is crucial. The support of all the dioceses for this measure is proof of that.

She's followed by Joyce Jones, a member of the house of clergy, who urges Synod to vote in favour.

Up next is Rachel Treweek, a prominent member of the house of clergy as archdeacon of Hackney, and a likely candidate for a future bishopric, should the legislation pass.

She looks forward to a day when there will be both men and women as bishops.

Rosie Harper, a member of the house of clergy from Oxford, says Synod needs to think about how the rest of the world sees the church. She says the plight of women in Cairo, or those abducted in Nigeria, is often the fault of religion. The C of E should make a stand for those women by voting yes today, she says.

The bishop of Dorchester, Colin Fletcher, says he's pleased the previous attempts to pass legislation on female bishops failed. He favoured a "headship" view of the church, in which men were leaders. But he's changed his mind. He thinks his understanding of scripture is better than it was then. He wants those who continue to oppose the move to remain part of the church. But he's voting yes.

David Houlding, an Anglo-Catholic member of the house of clergy, is up next. He says he hopes it's the last time he and Rees speak together on this matter.

Christina Rees, of the house of laity, speaks now. She says the speech that took her by surprise today was Adrian Vincent's – he has made "a sacrificial decision for the sake of the church" in voting yes against his own conscience.

She says the long discussions between opposing sides has moved the legislation forward and towards reconciliation, she says. She hopes it will pass. She asks if some of those who are intending to abstain could vote yes: "It is not the time for no."

Tim Hind, vice chair of the house of laity, says Philip Giddings and John Hind were "signposts", helping the measure get to a better place through their opposition.

Dagmar Winter, a member of the house of clergy from Newcastle, says this legislation "is not the best of all possible worlds, but it's jolly good".

Adrian Vincent, of the house of laity, says he will be voting yes, even though it's not what he believes. He says his reading of the Bible is that the church does not have the right to make this change. But the majority who elected him want him to vote for women bishops.

Annette Cooper, a member of the house of clergy from Chelmsford, is speaking now.

The next speaker is Prudence Dailey, a member of the house of laity, who voted against the move in 2012. She says she'll abstain today.

It's hard for me to forget the amount of bile, vitriol and disapprobation heaped upon the heads of us who voted against …

What I did mind was the implication that we were somehow … not allowed to express [our opinions] through our votes.

She says those who voted against in 2012 have been vindicated, because the current motion is much improved. She expects it will pass.

Next is David Banting, a conservative member of the house of clergy.

He says the proposals would try to remove or disregard the significance of gender. He says the legalisation of same-sex marriage has already tried to do this.

He says this removes his "unique calling to be a man". What would be the implications for marriage, he asks. A woman can't be a husband or a father.

But he is pleased that the five guiding principles from the bishops acknowledge the "integrity" of opponents.

Emma Ineson, a member of the house of clergy and principal of Trinity College, Bristol, a theological college. She mentions several women who are currently training at the college.

These are women who could have chosen to do almost anything else with their lives … A clear vote in favour today would send a very clear message to [them] that the church to which they've offered themselves says yes to them, values them, sees their potential.

She says her college will continue to welcome ordinands who hold different views.

Julian Henderson, the bishop of Blackburn, says he is in favour of women as bishops but voted against in 2012. He'll be voting "enthusiastically" for the proposal today.

The bishops' five guiding principles, which make allowances for those who continue to reject the idea of women in the ministry, have swayed him, he says.

But church members need to stop talking about extremes, he says, "as if those against [the measure] are a bit odd".

Next is Andrew Godsall, a member of the house of clergy from Exeter. He used to work for the BBC, he says, and joined at a time when Angela Rippon had only recently become the first female newsreader. Joining the Church of England was a bit of a culture shock. He says in many ways the BBC was a far more Christian organisation than the CofE.

Vocation is not to be confined to 50% of the human race, he adds.

Jane Patterson, of the house of laity and a conservative evangelical, speaks now.

She says she cannot vote yes; she will vote against. The five guiding principles set out by the house of bishops offers some hope, she says, but she is not sure it's enough. It's clear to her that no bishops now believe in "complementarian headship" – that is, different but complimentary roles that effectively place men first.

Next to speak is John Goddard, the bishop of Burnley.

(The debate has been rather male-dominated so far.)

He says he is unable to vote yes. He will respect those who do and asks for the same in return.

He expects the measure will go through and says he will work with those who disagree with him. But he will vote no.

Goodard is the first Anglo-Catholic to speak. He is almost the last survivor of the tradition that once ran the church.

Thomas Sutcliffe, a member of the house of laity, points out that the two countries in the world cup final, as well as the host country, have women at their heads.

He voted against the proposal in 2012. But he too has changed his mind.

We cannot be certain that what we are doing is right … But we do believe that we must act on our conviction that the church now needs the special and different gifts of women.

He says the proposal does not say women are the same as men in the ministry, nor that there must be equal numbers.

It will very soon become "normal and routine … an unremarkable normality" to have female bishops. Sutcliffe says.

Stephen Conway, the bishop of Ely, speaks next.

Philip Giddings, of the house of laity, speaks next. He says this measure does not meet the needs of all in the church.

But he says this package is "adequate" because of the five guiding principles contained in the declaration made by the house of bishops in last November's vote.

He says he will vote for this legislation.

Giddings is a leading figure in Anglican Mainstream, an evangelical group of orthodox Christians and, as my colleague Andrew Brown tells me: "One of the major figures of the conservative Evangelical movement. Enemy of women clergy and gay bishops." His conversion to support the proposal could be key.

Gooder says she wants to talk about what law can't do: "it can't do anything about trust."

It can indicate intention, she says, but "trust and flourishing are down to us".

She will be voting in favour of women as bishops "and doing it joyfully".

Langstaff proposes the motion, to applause.

Item 503 is now open for general debate, Sentamu says. He warns against "tedious repetition".

Canon Paula Gooder, of the house of laity, is next up.

There will be those who cannot vote for this move, Langstaff says:

Some of these people will have no option in their conscience but to vote against and I respect that.

The Church of England has spoken very clearly … we have a responsibility to show that we are listening.

Voting against would be "frustrating the view and the will of our wider church community", he says.

Langstaff reminds Synod that there must be a two-thirds majority in each of the three houses: bishops, clergy and laity.

He talks in some detail about the talks and mediation that have shaped the process of this proposed legislation. It won't be absolutely perfect, he says, but it is much clearer than the measure that was voted down in 2012.

James Langstaff, bishop of Rochester, is first to speak. He proposes the motion.

We are here today to do what we believe under God to be right.

There is little before us today that we have not seen or discussed before … The measure very simply authorises the making of a canon to allow women as well as men to be consecrated as bishops.

Sentamu says if Synod has not begun to vote by 4.30pm, he will begin to get "fidgety". He will be limiting how long people will be allowed to speak for – 85 members have said they would like to speak, he says. But he hopes some will change their minds once they hear others make the same points.

This is item 503 on the Synod agenda.

John Sentamu, the archbishop of York, says – to laughter – that Synod ought to be getting the hang of this now, as the debate on female bishops begins for the third time.

Some updates from those at Synod:

The last attempt to secure Synod support for the consecration of women as bishops ended in closely-fought failure. The legislation had needed a two-thirds majority in each of the three houses of the General Synod to pass, but, despite comfortably managing that in both the houses of bishops and clergy, it was dealt a fatal blow in the laity, where lay members voted 132 votes in favour and 74 against. If just six members of the laity had voted for instead of against, the measure would have been passed.

Supporters of change now believe they will have secured enough votes to win the vote this time. But there is still strong opposition to the proposal from some groups within the Church.

The Reform group remains opposed to female bishops:

Reform believes it would be helpful to state unequivocally that its leadership remains committed to the Reform Covenant, which includes the words:


Our understanding of God's way of life for his people includes:
 The unique value of women's ministry in the local congregation but also the divine order of male headship, which makes the headship of women as priests in charge, incumbents, dignitaries and bishops inappropriate.


There are outstanding issues of jurisdiction and oaths of canonical obedience … which mean that the package fails to meet the conscientious needs of a significant number of our members. The process may also distract us from gospel ministry.

The Forward in Faith group remains opposed to women as bishops but says it is "grateful" for the concessions that have been made – which could give opponents the right to request male priests and bishops for their parishes.

Here is the measure Synod will be voting on today:

Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure

To make provision for the consecration of women as bishops and for the continuation of provision for the ordination of women as priests; to repeal the Priests (Ordination of Women) Measure 1993; and for connected purposes.

Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure

1 Provision for consecration of women as bishops and for continuation of provision for ordination of women as priests

(1) It shall be lawful for the General Synod to make provision by Canon for enabling women, as well as men, to be consecrated to the office of bishop if they otherwise satisfy the requirements of Canon Law as to the persons who 5 may be consecrated as bishops.

(2) It shall continue to be lawful for the General Synod to make provision by Canon for enabling women, as well as men, to be ordained to the office of priest if they otherwise satisfy the requirements of Canon Law as to the persons who may be ordained as priests.

(3) The Priests (Ordination of Women) Measure 1993 (No. 2) is repealed.

2 Amendment of Equality Act

In Schedule 6 to the Equality Act 2010 (c.15), there is added at the end—

“Bishops
4 The office of diocesan or suffragan bishop is not a public office.”

3 Repeals

The enactments mentioned in the Schedule are repealed to the extent specified in the second column of the Schedule.

4 Citation, commencement and extent

(1) This Measure may be cited as the Bishops and Priests (Consecration and 20 Ordination of Women) Measure 20--.

(2) This Measure comes into force on such day as the Archbishops of Canterbury and York may jointly appoint.

(3) Subject to subsections (4) and (5) this Measure extends to the whole of the Provinces of Canterbury and York except the Channel Islands and the Isle of 25 Man.

(4) This Measure may be applied to the Channel Islands, as defined in the Channel Islands (Church Legislation) Measures 1931 and 1957, or either of them, in accordance with those Measures.

(5) If an Act of Tynwald or an instrument made under an Act of Tynwald so 30 provides, this Measure extends to the Isle of Man, subject to such exceptions, adaptation or modifications as may be specified in the Act of Tynwald or instrument.

You can see the full paper (complete with footnotes) here.

My colleague Andrew Brown filed this report in advance of the vote:

The Church of England's General Synod looks almost certain to vote through the legislation for female bishops on Monday with even a leading opponent now saying he would "put good money on it".

Canon Simon Killwick, chair of the synod's Catholic group, which opposes the move, said: "I think it will go through. I'd put good money on it. There is a much greater sense of trust and mutual respect and goodwill than there was the last time the synod voted." Nonetheless, he said, he would again vote against the measure.

The archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, who has championed the proposals, said: "In my heart, I think we are OK."

Should the measure fail to get the two-thirds majority it needs among the synod's lay members – it is certain to pass the separate votes of bishops and clergy – Welby will consult with his fellow bishops as to what should be done and make an announcement as soon as possible.

Only six lay members need to have changed their minds since the last vote, in 2012, when proponents of female bishops failed by a small margin to gain the required majorities in all three voting sections of the synod. Soundings conducted by pressure groups and the Church Times suggest that this has happened, after simplified legislation was introduced that seemed to give both sides greater clarity.

A diocesan bishop, speaking on condition of anonymity, said: "Synod would be crackers not to vote for this. Bonkers is another word I would use. It will provoke such a crisis nationally if it fails to go through this time. It would do irreparable damage to the church. People will simply not think we're credible and we won't be."

But one senior supporter of women's ordination, who has a role in the selection of bishops, warned the vote would not solve the problems. "I'm very, very hopeful of the outcome," the source said, "but the hard work begins with the vote. A change of culture is extremely difficult. Institutions are by nature conservative."

Welby suggested on Sunday, in an interview on the Andrew Marr Show on BBC1, that the first woman bishop could be announced before Christmas. If the legislation goes through, that process will not be complete until parliament has approved it and returned the law to the synod's November meeting, when it will formally come into effect. As a result, it is quite likely that the first woman will be only an assistant bishop. For bureaucratic reasons it is unlikely that the process to choose a diocesan bishop will be completed between the middle of November and the end of the year.

View image in fullscreen

Good morning and welcome to live coverage as the Church of England General Synod considers – again – whether to allow women to be consecrated as bishops.

We have been here before, of course. In 1975, General Synod agreed there was "no fundamental objection" to the ordination of women to the priesthood. But efforts to legislate for this failed in 1978, and it wasn't until 1985 that Synod voted to allow women to become deacons. The first were ordained two years later.

The battle for women to join the priesthood – and the ongoing debate over their eligibility for the episcopate – has taken rather longer:

1992 General Synod votes to permit women to be ordained in the priesthood.

1994 1,500 women deacons ordained as priests. Here is a list of the first tranche.

2005 A motion to begin the process of removing the legal obstacles to women as bishops is approved by the General Synod.

2011 42 out of 44 dioceses approve draft legislation to introduce women bishops (London and Chichester voted against).

2012 The legislation fails narrowly at the General Synod by just six votes in the House of Laity.

2013 Synod votes in favour of new "guiding principles" to smooth the path towards female bishops. Mediation experts are called in to help opposing groups resolve their differences.

2014 General Synod asked for second time to give final approval to legislation introducing women bishops.

Today's debate starts at 11.15am. The timing of the votes is not yet clear and depends on the number of people who want to speak in the debate – likely to be a good number. But the latest the vote can take place is 6pm. We will have live coverage on the blog right through to the vote and its aftermath.

My colleague Andrew Brown is reporting from the General Synod in York today. You can follow us on Twitter for updates: @seatrout and @Claire_Phipps