The options propose to allow women to become bishops but not archbishops of Canterbury or York; to deny them the chance to have their own dioceses; or to require them to be part of a team with at least one male bishop to chaperone them.

Of the five other proposals, one would see the church retain the status quo where women are allowed to be ordained only as priests or deacons. Three others anticipate a split in the church or exodus of male priests, while only one would give women the full rights to be appointed to every post in the church.

The report by Nazir-Ali, who was a leading contender for Archbishop of Canterbury two years ago, is an attempt to appease both the supporters of equality in the church and the traditionalist opponents of women bishops. However, this weekend it appeared unlikely to satisfy either camp as it does not come down in favour of any of the eight options.

Christina Rees, a leading General Synod campaigner for women bishops, said: “This is insulting to women and to all members of the Church of England. Some of the options present an underlying attitude that can only be understood as coming from a patriarchal viewpoint and verging on misogyny. This is the theology of taint.”

The report will be presented to the General Synod and debated early next year, sparking what is likely to be a bitter battle similar to the 10-year dispute that preceded the ordination of the first women priests in 1994. They were excluded at that time from becoming bishops partly in an attempt to stave off a full schism in the church.

Nazir-Ali’s 15-strong working party began work in 2001 in the face of continuing pressure from pro-women factions to allow female bishops.

Nazir-Ali, 55, who was born in Karachi, is seen as an evangelical. A majority of the group is thought to be pro-women.

Of the three options that would entail a permanent junior role for women, one would allow women to be suffragan bishops but prevent them being a senior bishop in charge of one of the church’s 44 dioceses.

Another option would allow women to become diocesan bishops but not archbishops. This might satisfy the evangelical lobby who believe that within the church women should be under “male headship”. The report points out that this would “still entail the existence of a ‘glass ceiling’.”

Other possibilities could see the introduction of combined male-female teams of bishops in each diocese, or the division of the church to create a “male-only” province. This would provide a third, independent province, overlaying those of York and Canterbury and led by an archbishop catering for all who did not wish to be under a female prelate.

Nazir-Ali warns that if the church opts for straight equality for women bishops, this could mean traditionalists refusing to recognise them and leaving the church altogether. “This would be an extremely grave situation,” warns the report.

A final option would see priests opposed to women bishops being paid off to leave the church.

Prebendary Sam Philpott, a leading member of Forward In Faith, the main Anglo-Catholic grouping opposed to women bishops, said the proposals to restrict the role of women were “scandalous” because they would demean the office of bishop. “You cannot divide holy order,” he said. “This would be offensive to women and no woman worth her salt would contemplate it.”

So far America, Canada and New Zealand are the only Anglican provinces where women bishops have been elected and ordained. Carolyn Irish, ordained Bishop of Utah in 1996, condemned the agonising of the Church of England.

“The issue is so far gone I never even think about being a woman bishop any more. I don’t see how you can keep arguing against it,” she said.

There is already talk in the church of likely female candidates who will be eligible for bishoprics in 10 years’ time. Joanna Jepson, the Chester curate, is a front-runner after her high profile campaign to make the issue of abortion into a national debate.

Additional reporting: Sarah Keenlyside