Well, the bishops have made changes, which appear to placate (up to a point) those who are not only opposed to the ordination of women as bishops, but want to be assured that they will have their own pocket bishop who is not only male, but also theologically of a particular position (or positions); and that any such bishop acting by delegation will not be understood to be deriving his (it will always be "his") power to act by the act of delegation but the fact of his episcopacy. (At least that's how I read the somewhat tortured language. Check it out for yourself at the link above, courtesy of Thinking Anglicans.)
It used to be said, "There'll always be an England." Now I'm not so sure. This drive to placate and comprehend logically (and theologically) contradictory positions within one ecclesiastical enterprise seems to be working in direct opposition to all of the talk about the bishop as "focus of unity" heard in recent days. How many contradictions can simultaneously be embraced in a single church? And what happens when a woman becomes Archbishop of York or Canterbury? Or is this just a waiting game, in the hopes that the opposition will end with this generation? But which will end first, the opposition or the Church?
Tobias Stanislas Haller BSG