His comments come as a working party prepares to publish a report this week outlining options for dealing with the question of women bishops. The issue threatens to open a division in the church as deep as the rift over gay bishops, which has almost caused the break-up of the worldwide Anglican communion.

Stancliffe said: “If this (ordaining women bishops) is the mind of the church, people will be faced with a choice whether to stay or leave. The present arrangements (of no-go areas for women priests) will no longer be able to hold.”

He believes that all the legislation to allow women bishops will be in place by 2008, with the first ordinations happening soon afterwards.

The Church of England working party chaired by Michael Nazir-Ali, Bishop of Rochester, outlines a number of options on women bishops to be considered by the General Synod. One is to maintain the status quo. Another would allow full equality of women with men, meaning they could become bishops and archbishops. The most controversial proposals fall in between. They would deny women full equality in the church but would give them some new rights. These include:

* Allowing women to become bishops but barring them from the archbishoprics of Canterbury or York.
* Letting them become suffragan or full-time assistant bishops but not giving them their own dioceses.
* Requiring them to be part of a team with at least one male bishop to chaperone them.

Another option would be to allow opponents of women bishops to form their own province within the church. This solution is condemned by Stancliffe, who is anxious that any reform should not result in a fragmented church.

He warned that if Anglicans fell out with one another over the issue: “The credibility of our gospel will continue to be seriously undermined and we will be accused of failing to practise what we preach.”

Nazir-Ali’s report will be presented to the synod and debated in February next year, sparking what is likely to be a bitter struggle similar to the 10-year dispute that preceded the ordination of the first women priests in 1994. At the time they were excluded from becoming bishops in an attempt to limit the number of traditionalist priests and parishioners leaving the church in protest.

The report has drawn accusations of misogyny from reform campaigners and traditionalists have accused it of “misunderstanding” the office of bishop.

Geoffrey Kirk, leader of Forward in Faith, the main Anglo-Catholic grouping in the Church of England, promised a tough battle. He promotes the idea of a third or “free” province that would accommodate only those opposed to female ordination.

“(Stancliffe) is certainly right about the timetable and he is perfectly fair to say this is crunch time,” Kirk said, adding: “The Church of England gave solemn and binding undertakings to those who could not accept women bishops or priests.

“There will be righteous indignation throughout the church if solemn promises are not kept and the legislation is pushed through with a steamroller. If they do not provide a free province, ecclesiastical chaos will result.”

END