Monday, July 08, 2013

God to CofE: You WILL have women bishops


The General Synod has voted to restart the legislative process to allow women to become bishops.

Yes, less than a year after the previous proposals were (narrowly) rejected, the Synod has reaffirmed its commitment to women bishops and called for new draft legislation to be introduced. It will be considered at the November Synod, with the aim of reaching final approval in July or November 2015.

So, the previous failure to reach the requisite majority in the House of Laity was clearly not in accordance with God's will: the proposal enjoyed the support of 73% of Synod members overall, and that clearly better reflects the Holy Spirit.

Satan entered the Laity, and caused a bit of a blip.

Not to worry: the holier House of Clergy and the even holier House of Bishops (especially +Pete) to the rescue.

Introducing the debate, the Rt Rev'd Nigel Stock, Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich, who chaired the Working Group set up by the House of Bishops to advise on new legislative proposals, said: “I believe that option one, together with a mandatory mediation process and including as it does a declaration or, possibly, Act of Synod deserves to be taken very seriously as a means to provide the basis for securing the necessary majorities in the lifetime of this Synod.”

The House of Bishops had recommended that draft legislation be prepared on that basis described as ‘option one’ in the report of the Working Group established by the House to consider possible ways forward. That involved:
- a measure and amending canon that made it lawful for women to become bishops;

- the repeal of the statutory rights to pass Resolutions A and B under the Priests (Ordination of Women) Measure 1993, plus the rescinding of the Episcopal Ministry Act of Synod 1993; and

- arrangements for those who, as a matter of theological conviction, are unable to receive the ministry of women bishops or priests, set out either in a declaration from the House of Bishops or in a new Act of Synod.
Accepting the proposal made by the House, the General Synod passed the motion, by 319 votes to 84, in the following form:
That this Synod:

(a) reaffirm its commitment to admitting women to the episcopate as a matter of urgency;

(b) instruct the Appointments Committee to appoint this month a Steering Committee to be in charge of the draft legislation required to that end;

(c) instruct the Business Committee to arrange for the First Consideration stage for that draft legislation to be taken at the November 2013 group of sessions, so that the subsequent stages can follow the timetable set out in paragraph 141 of the annex to GS 1886;

(d) instruct the Steering Committee to prepare the draft legislation on the basis described in paragraphs 79-88 of the annex to GS 1886 as ‘option one’ with the addition of a mandatory grievance procedure for parishes in which diocesan bishops are required to participate and invite the House of Bishops to bring to the Synod for consideration at the February 2014 group of sessions a draft Act of Synod or draft declaration to be made by the House to accompany the draft legislation; and

(e) urge that the process of facilitated conversations continue to be used at significant points in the formulation and consideration of the draft legislation.
The Report from the House of Bishops, Women In the Episcopate – New Legislative Proposals (GS1886) was the result of some nifty drafting and re-drafting following the receipt of 376 responses to the previous discussion document. Some 10 of these were from campaign groups or other organisations, and three from bishops. Of the rest, 154 were from members of the Synod and 209 from 'others'.

Let us hope and pray that God's will is done this time.

It is embarrassing to be a member of a church that is so deplorably and offensively out of sync with the Divine Will.

Or perhaps it's just the recalcitrant Laity.

66 Comments:

Blogger Murray Steward said...

I cannot work out if you're highly cynical or serious on this one.

What does the Bible say? Its our constant, unchanging and totally irrefutable reference.

! Timothy could not be clearer. "I do not permit a woman to teach£ - and the reasons why - and even the elders, of which the Bishop is the most senior - must be the husband of one wife etc.

I mean, seriously, what could be clearer?

8 July 2013 at 18:11  
Blogger David Waters said...

Instead of fussing about the gender of your bishop, why not campaign for him or her to be elected, with, say, five year terms? That would soon clear out some of the dross that's around at the moment.

Following last year's embarrassment when the House of Laity failed to understand the will of the Church, or of God, I'm sure the vote would be passed by the House of Bishops, some of whom have been banging on about the lack of democracy last November. Not.


8 July 2013 at 18:14  
Blogger Roy said...

Murray Steward said...

What does the Bible say? Its our constant, unchanging and totally irrefutable reference.

! Timothy could not be clearer. "I do not permit a woman to teach


Did you notice the word "I" in that sentence? Who do you think it refers to, God the father, Christ, or Paul?

Would you prefer a male who makes a poor job of preaching the gospel or teaching its message to a woman who understands it well and can communicate it properly?

8 July 2013 at 18:18  
Blogger J J Hutchings said...

I would be interested as to His Grace's thoughts as to why the House of Laity, rather than Clergy or Bishops, voted the measure down last time.

8 July 2013 at 18:25  
Blogger Lord Lavendon said...

Roy,

I quite agree- Lady Bishops, but whilst we are at it, why not gay Bishops all the way... after all, would you prefer a hetrosexual who makes a poor job of preaching the gospel or teaching its message to a gay who understands it well and can communicate it properly? In fact, why not add a couple of atheists to boot?

The perfect C of E Bishop -

The Rt Rev, My Lord Bishop of atheism Danjo, please step up here!

8 July 2013 at 18:41  
Blogger non mouse said...

Oh dear. Well, even the wrong-uns are God's instruments, whether they like it or not.

Me ... I can't stand all this missmanagement<Feminazism. Yes, a few women can be very good leaders and organisers (one always remembers Hilda of Whitby, as a great example; or even Mrs. T).

So can a few men -- but there seem to be few of those around either. Gender notwithstanding, why are they all so spineless?

8 July 2013 at 18:46  
Blogger Lord Lavendon said...

JJ Hutchings,

Because the laity are too busy trying to LIVE the Gospel; the Bishops and Clergy are too busy managing (pension) investment portfolios and moaning about 'too much work' & 'we must raise another £20,000 for the Parish Share'* (being social workers to all and sundry in the Parish) respectively...

* ie support the dying liberal churches. Not for me, I'm withholding my tithe (10%) for the time being...

8 July 2013 at 18:50  
Blogger Rasher Bacon said...

Which God to CofE? The creator of heaven & earth, or the god of this age? It matters.

I too can't work out how much His Grace is being tongue in cheek, but it's sad to see the C of E entering the end phase.

Roy - does it really matter? This isn't the only passage, and even if it is only Paul's opinion do you really want to exalt the synod above the Apostle Paul? Are you backing Chris Bryant's hermeneutic?

In answer to your question, I want to see the Gospel preached well and badly by women and men. That's not the point in issue here - it's authority, and that in a peculiarly Anglican structure. That's what the Bible teaches, and that's what the general twitter feed stumbles blindly past, and hates the sound of.

I blame the god of this age. He went through a PR exercise a while back as a zeitgeist, and he seems to have employed a few MPs.

8 July 2013 at 18:56  
Blogger Brother Ivo said...

Brother JJ

Do not ignore electoral organisation by those highly committed to a specific party line. Not all of the electorate knew this, and a significant number of Synod members ( 30%) did not vote at all and perhaps, even now do not appreciate the effects of their neglect of duty.

8 July 2013 at 19:02  
Blogger Mark In Mayenne said...

What winds me up is that some people think "democracy" is somehow "special".

8 July 2013 at 19:10  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

arrangements for those who, as a matter of theological conviction, are unable to receive the ministry of women bishops or priests, set out either in a declaration from the House of Bishops or in a new Act of Synod.

Eyewash. They aren't concerned about "those who, as a matter of theological conviction, are unable to receive the ministry of women bishops or priests." They are concerned about losses to the CoE. This plan is intended to carefully manage the transition with the intent of losing as few members of the laity as possible.

Traditional leadership will be attrited, and men who support women's ordination put in their place. The goal is to re-educate the laity before they can leave. That means they have to keep that laity within the church walls. There is no commitment in this legislation to preserve a place for traditional theology within the CoE. They simply want to pre-empt a seed for a Free Anglican alternative. The minority should oppose this plan to the bitter end. If there is no statuatory provision, then it is best the final terms should be as harsh as possible.

Oh, and the reason that only the House of Laity voted against the measure in November is because both the House of Bishiops and the House of Clergy have been stacked with proponents. There are a large number of women priests in the House of Clergy. You can hardly become a bishop anymore if you don't support WO. The laity is the only remaining avenue for traditionalists on this issue.

carl

8 July 2013 at 19:16  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Leaders of the church, or as we call them, bishops, need to be of great intellect so that they may best represent the church. Well, that rules women out then, what !

Sorry gals, but you’re just not up to it. Men's brains are larger for a reason...

8 July 2013 at 19:25  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Those commenters wishing to leave a memorial in remembrance of OIG may do so by contacting Brother Ivo directly. No viewing is anticipated at this time for reasons that should be obvious.

carl

8 July 2013 at 19:29  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Carl, any complaints about the intellectual lacking of our dear feminine types should be addressed to The Creator. And another thing. Men do principle (the chancer Cameron excepted), women do compromise...

It’s time to fight dirty !


8 July 2013 at 19:32  
Blogger ukFred said...

Queers, women, whatever. I suppose husband to one wife could allow for a butch dyke in a same-sex marriage. At least she should not have any children who disqualify her.

Frankly, the CofE is nothing but a washed up sub-Christian sect pretending to be a church. I'm thankful I have nothing to do with it, but I feel sorry for those who are conned by it.

8 July 2013 at 19:39  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Did you know, there are women chess grand masters ? Don’t worry, this man didn’t believe it either, and here’s the rub. Within the women's section there are. Put them in against real grand masters, to wit men, and...

8 July 2013 at 19:41  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

...tears, probably. That's another thing, they cry easy.

8 July 2013 at 19:41  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Remember the phrase, “a boy doing a man’s job”

Well guess what, the ladies want a go too...


8 July 2013 at 19:44  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Witnessed a ladies darts match once. I was almost killed...

8 July 2013 at 19:45  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Spoke to a woman at a bus stop last week. She told me all about her children. Longest ten minutes of my life...

8 July 2013 at 19:47  
Blogger Nick said...

The bottom line is that the woman bishop debate is driven ENTIRELY by the equality culture. It has zilch to do with Christianity. The Synod seems completely unable to separate religion and secularism. They are led by the world, not leading it. Then they wonder why the pews are empty. But why should anybody looking for spiritual guidance turn a church that has lost its moral and spiritual compass.

It is not an insult to women if you don't let them become Bishops. Despite popular trend towards genderlessness, men and women are, and always will be different. Hallelujah! That is a cause to celebrate, not whinge. I'm glad my wife is different from me and she's glad I'm different from her. Men will never be able to give birth. Are we going to complain about that too?

The more I see of the CofE, the more it seems feeble in its adherence to Christ's teachings. Even if the bishops don't understand the Bible, at least many of the Laity seem to read it and understand it.

8 July 2013 at 19:59  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


That’s the spirit Nick.

The Inspector is a ‘vive le difference’ man, and can tell margarine from butter.

However, as he observes from his lounge window, the young couples walking past, you have to look like a shirt lifter these days to get a decent date.

Men awake, and take back what is rightfully yours !


8 July 2013 at 20:10  
Blogger Peter D said...

"Let us hope and pray that God's will is done this time."

Well, if it is, you can bet those wanting women bishops will keep pushing for it.

8 July 2013 at 20:26  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

But what is HG up to with this article? Surely deep down he can't be in favour of women bishops????

There can be no such thing. Women clergy are a joke.

The synod are fiddling around with non important matters which they should let lie, the decision was made last year so move on and get down to some serious evangelising. They should be ignoring any pressure from the equality and diversity mobs.

No wonder people don't bother to atend church anymore there is no consistency in the cofe and they are not following the Bible so why bother. I think the cofe should disestablish itself and close it's doors and we should revert back to catholicism.

8 July 2013 at 20:44  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Your Grace,
Gods will is always done. The CofE is, as appraised by those above, in a mess.

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier [matters] of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.


The Ugly vicar has a great discussion on the subject of headship.

8 July 2013 at 21:09  
Blogger Martin said...

Roy

Perhaps you do not understand what Paul is saying in 1 Timothy 2:12. He is not saying that it is upon Pauls authority he says this but on the Creation ordinance which gave different roles to men and women in the same way that the Trinity have different roles.

With that in mind the fact that Jesus did not consider Himself to be reduced in rank by His obedience to the Father should cause those women who think it their right to be a minister of the gospel to think again.

It is certain that God has not given any woman a vocation to the ministry which means that there is only one other that could have done so.

8 July 2013 at 21:30  
Blogger bluedog said...

Excellent comment, Nick @ 19.59. My thoughts exactly. The ordination of women is leading inexorably to a female Archbishop of Canterbury. As Carl has often said, the CofE is drifting towards the fate of TEC in the US. Welby seems unable to stop this decline, indeed, shows no sign of recognising the danger. His currently policy is simply more liberalisation, and that hasn't worked yet. It's reminiscent of the EU, where each calamity is solved (aggravated) by the imposition of more EU. One suspects that we face a situation where a large cohort of bishops and clergy have succumbed to a certain group think and not one can admit the group is wrong. The future of the CofE is being determined by fear of ostracisation.

8 July 2013 at 21:58  
Blogger Albert said...

Carl,

Oh, and the reason that only the House of Laity voted against the measure in November is because both the House of Bishiops and the House of Clergy have been stacked with proponents.

Sorry, no. It's because those in favour were so complacent that they did not aggressively lobby the laity like they did last time (1992).

8 July 2013 at 21:58  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Patriarchal church, anybody ? Remember the patriarchal family, God’s intended order. Of course, wimmin go it alone these days and raise their bastards by themselves. Next step is to bastardise the church...

8 July 2013 at 22:35  
Blogger Flossie said...

OIG, how very dare you! Women are just as capable as men. That is not the issue, though - women cannot BE men, and cannot BE priests.

Preferment has for decades now been stacked in favour of proponents of women's ordination. Did anyone really imagine that the new Archbishop of Canterbury would be opposed? That is why the House of Clergy voted the way they did. The Laity are far more diverse.

8 July 2013 at 22:49  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Flossie, dear thing, the Inspector did give notice that the fight is to get dirty. For the sake of the church, no less...

8 July 2013 at 23:20  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Marie

I think the cofe should disestablish itself ...

Better to do it yourself then have it done to you. This is coming. It is inevitable.

and close it's doors ...

Well, the liberal portion anyways. Disestablishment means death to the liberal part of the CoE. Which is why it should be supported. The rest will be OK.

... and we should revert back to catholicism.

Out of the frying pan and into the seering hot coals? Not much of an improvement. Of course, this weblog's Papal Home Guard will not fail to notice this despairing assertion.

carl

8 July 2013 at 23:36  
Blogger Peter D said...

Carl

"Papal Home Guard"! Are you suggesting the Catholic visitors here are a modern day version of 'Dad's Army'?

Besides, there is a strong Catholic tradition in the Church of England - alongside Calvinism. You know, things like Apostolic succession, a Priesthood (male) and Sacraments as channels of Grace. Maybe Flossie was referring to this.

8 July 2013 at 23:49  
Blogger Youthpasta said...

Not going to get into the theology around women in leadership, as it would get too long and ultimately silly, given the track record of some here.
Couple of things I will bite on:
- This ridiculous assertion by OIG that women are intellectually inferior. I happen to know a woman who could take on every single contributor to this blogs (commenters and contributors alike) at he same time, both theologically and intellectually, and wipe the floor with them. Goes by the name of Amy Orr-Ewing and a better Christian apologist you couldn't hope to find, irrespective of gender.
- God's intended order? What a load of faecal matter! Try going back to Genesis 2 for the intended order. The patriarchal society came after the fall!

9 July 2013 at 00:45  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Carl
One certainly despairs at the cofe.

I thought it was a positive move that the CofE was doing a deal with Michael Gove's Education Dept to increase Church schools, even though with minimal influence but I thought it could be the start of something to reintroduce morals and Christian culture back into more of the mainstream schools. Then I read about Archbishop Welby inviting Stonewall into schools to advise on homophobic bulling and saying we have to change with the times.

http://www.christian.org.uk/news/welby-invites-stonewall-into-church-schools/

Now I realise the government wants it's hands on the Church coffers to be able to implement their plans and Archbishop Welby is yet another weak and feeble liberal.

Let the Swiss Guards out.

9 July 2013 at 00:52  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Are you suggesting the Catholic visitors here are a modern day version of 'Dad's Army'?

Well, yes, but only for effect. ;)

Peter D in the side pocket.

carl

9 July 2013 at 00:59  
Blogger Peter D said...

Carl

Bad man. Glad you know the show. Absolutely top notch British comedy.

Just call me Captain Mainwaring:
"pompous, brave and unerringly patriotic ..."

Now who could possibly be Sergeant Wilson: "diffident, upper-class .... who would question Mainwaring's judgement"?

9 July 2013 at 01:50  
Blogger Peter D said...

No comparison with any organisation, past or present, is intended by the following.

Frazer: Captain Mainwaring. Did I ever tell you the story about the old, empty barn.

Mainwaring: Um. No.

Frazer: Would you like to hear the story about the old, empty barn?

Mainwaring: Um. Yes. Listen everybody. Frazer's going to tell us the story about the old empty barn.

Frazer: Right. The story of the old empty barn. Well. There was nothing in it.

9 July 2013 at 02:19  
Blogger Ivan said...


The patriarchal society came after the fall!

Precisely, the patriachy is intended to restore the Garden of Eden.

The matriachy is the order of nature,...the patriachy the order of civilisation
- Lawrence Auster

9 July 2013 at 03:42  
Blogger Pete said...

I don't usually comment, just follow on Twitter, but was intrigued by this post. I'm just not sure whether it is written tongue in cheek or not! Forgetting about the theological arguments for and against women leaders in the church, does his_grace assume that the majority of the Synod is always seeking God's will just because they're in a majority? Church history must tell us that the majority are often wrong! For God's will, surely people from every side must be going back to the Bible and submitting ourselves humbly before it (in every area, not just women bishops).

9 July 2013 at 07:30  
Blogger Youthpasta said...

@Ivan - No, it came about while man had no relationship with God. It was in place before God spoke to Abraham, a creation of the world, not a diktat from God.

9 July 2013 at 07:39  
Blogger Flossie said...

Anyone who is seriously interested in the Christian apologetic for an all-male priesthood can do no better than to read this from the late Dr Peter Toon, who covers every angle very thoroughly.

http://www.anglicanbooksrevitalized.us/Peter_Toons_Books_Online/Issues/womenord.htm

I find that most people are not interested, being seduced by modern notions of equality and fairness. But this issue will not go away, because it is there, in scripture, and there will always be people who will reach the same conclusion as Dr Toon (and millions of others).

9 July 2013 at 08:26  
Blogger Mrs Proudie of Barchester said...

Goodness, but isn't democracy an interesting thing? 'Vote again and again until you get it right' seems to be the Creed of the EU now fully adopted by the Bishops and Clergy in Synod. Well, my Lord will not be voting, I've made sure of that. Can't trust him when he is out on his own, so Archdeacon Grantly has taken him off to Gatherum Castle for lunch with the duke. Meanwhile, my Lord's chaplain, Mr. Slope, has got himself in a lather at the very prospect of bishopesses and has donned make up and an expansive rainbow crinoline in the hope of getting noticed. I'd say that was a dead cert. One would cross the Tiber if one wasn't accustomed to living in The Palace...but then I've been de facto Bishop of Barchester for years...

9 July 2013 at 08:36  
Blogger Albert said...

Carl,

this weblog's Papal Home Guard

You say the sweetest things!

9 July 2013 at 09:01  
Blogger Drastic Plastic said...

Never heard the state called "God" before.

But as far as the state-appointed bishops, and the gerrymandered lay representatives, and the clergy interested in politics rather than in serving God in the parishes ... it might as well be.

Their god has spoken. Let us all bow down.

I predict that the bishopesses will turn out to be the haughty wives of merchant bankers and the like.

I predict that the bishopesses will carry themselves with the utmost arrogance, smelling out any clergyman who dares still object to what the state has demanded, and harrassing and insulting him. That they will do their best to break up any parish which dares to disapprove of these revolting people. And they will do so in a "Tory woman" hectoring manner.

I predict that all the anglo-Catholics will disappear, soon followed by the evangelicals. The latter will create a new form of dissent.

I predict that the liberal state will introduce legal disadvantages or financial penalties for those congregations who fail to conform to its religious demands, and will abuse them heartily through the mass media, and recreate the concept of "dissenters".

In other words; as it was in the times of Charles II, when whoring bishops ran persecutions, and half of England was pushed into the margin, by a state that mocked at all religion, so it will be today.

9 July 2013 at 09:13  
Blogger Albert said...

Drastic Plastic,

I predict that all the anglo-Catholics will disappear, soon followed by the evangelicals. The latter will create a new form of dissent.

Possibly. Most of the serious Anglo-catholics have gone already. Those who remain already know their position is untenable. When I was converting an Anglo-catholic clergyman told me "I always knew the CofE was rubbish, so I'm not really affected by these things." The people who leave are often not the most catholic of Anglicans - they are people who previously had believed in the CofE. There are now of course many liberal Anglo-catholics. They will stay.

As for the Evangelicals, as a group, they seem more bothered by homosexuality than women bishops - and this of course is their weakness. They are visibly inconsistent on these matters. The long term result is that Evangelicals start becoming liberal on both matters - as we have seen recently. Moreover, it is easier for the Evangelicals to stay within the CofE than for Anglo-catholics because they don't have the same emphasis on sacramental structure.

by a state that mocked at all religion

I think I'd want to defend restoration Anglicanism against that charge!

9 July 2013 at 09:35  
Blogger Richard Watterson said...

OIG your comments about woman chess players are codswallop. There are women who have just the same Grandmaster title as men and are very strong players. There are simply far fewer female players.

9 July 2013 at 09:41  
Blogger The Explorer said...

It's like an EU referendum.

If the result accords with the will of whichever elite, then the poeple have spoken.

If the elctorate gets it wrong, then there must be a re-run - or a series of re-runs - until the electorate delivers the correct result, and the will of the people coincides with the pre-determined will of the Elite.

9 July 2013 at 10:06  
Blogger Peter D said...

Carl "...this weblog's Papal Home Guard"

Albert "You say the sweetest things!"

On reflection, I quite like the notion of Papa's Army. Aren't all Christians called to be members of Abba's Army?

9 July 2013 at 10:18  
Blogger Rasher Bacon said...

Albert

As for the Evangelicals, as a group, they seem more bothered by homosexuality than women bishops - and this of course is their weakness. They are visibly inconsistent on these matters.

- you're right, they're chain linked. Chris Bryant in the Westminster Hall debate on 28 February followed exactly the same path as the C of E - dismissing the Apostle Paul's clear words as merely cultural, and substituting current popular views. Once you start doing that, it's God in your Pocket time.

I do think the traditions of men aren't helpful here - in the form of church structures that centre on a one-man ministry in a parish system. Women are meant to be able to teach, but haven't been able to respond to that biblical imperative in the Anglican church because so many functions, gifts are tied to the service structure of the liturgy and the authority (such as it is) of the vicar and the hierarchy above. That's an inheritance of the priestly Roman Catholic function, and although it's meant to ensure safety and consistency, this is where it leads.

If Welby wants a revolution, he can start there - throw out the traditions that get in the way of obedience to God's word. Finish the job the Reformation started, and see a large number of people connected to their Head in heaven. That's the job of a true shepherd.

This evangelical won't be going to Rome or becoming liberal.

"Let us therefore go out to him without the camp, bearing his reproach."

9 July 2013 at 11:38  
Blogger Steropes said...

Surely all this stems from the fact that the younger generation have been schooled for years and those from universities even more so that they are much, much cleverer than preceding generations and certainly wiser than all in previous centuries. Which of course includes the First Century.

9 July 2013 at 11:55  
Blogger LEN said...

'The Papal Home Guard.' LOL



9 July 2013 at 12:21  
Blogger Albert said...

Rasher,

Women are meant to be able to teach, but haven't been able to respond to that biblical imperative in the Anglican church because so many functions

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. The CofE has had women teachers for a long time. Indeed, there have been women preaching through the office of reader - and at that level, a strict interpreter of 1 Tim might have difficulties. So how exactly would you change things (without ordaining women)?

9 July 2013 at 12:25  
Blogger The Explorer said...

Steropes

Does more education make you cleverer, or better educated?

It also does depend on the nature of the education. Ever read Allan Blooom's 'The Closing of the American Mind': how the system is producing "the most sensitive illiterates in history"?

"All in previous centuries." ALL? Are you saying the typical modern student is wiser than Plato? If so, dream on.

9 July 2013 at 12:29  
Blogger richardhj said...

This is rather like the European Referends that have taken place in Ireland amongst others.

Decide some rules, and give the people a vote. If they vote the right way, then great. If they vote the wrong way, then no problem.

They can vote again, and again, and again until they vote the right way. And they will.

Use all the pressure of the Government and Parliamentr (eg Cameron and Bryant), the state owned Propaganda Machine (eg Pravda, BBC). Brainwash the police and restrict state jobs to those who will comply.

Then you can have a vote.

"Democracy" in the state, "democracy" in the CofE. What is democracy?

I read an article recently that started off with "Some People think that the world is heading towards 1984. They are wrong. We are headed towards Brave New World".

Psychological Manipulation. That's where it is.

You will have Women Bishops soon.

9 July 2013 at 13:44  
Blogger Rasher Bacon said...

Albert - Titus 2:3-5. Got to dash, but read that out loud in a Synod and I'd almost fear for your personal safety.

If there isn't an 'office' or an 'ordination' that fits that situation, why not? What has prevented it? Why shoehorn women into a vicar's role, then reason from that error to make them bishops- a compound error?

For the record, I would like to see men being men and leading and teaching in contexts where men are being taught, and women keen on getting to grips with advanced biblical concepts with each other. Women should not be in authority over men - we should find ways to implement that in our contexts, not ways to ignore it.

As a kid, I sat through some abominable presentations of the Gospel from some men, when I knew that there were women present who could have been clearer, shorter and more interesting, but the moral impact of those men's words in that context, weak as they were, and the women's obedience communicated their respect for God in a way that made me feel He was present, real and had authority. I can't communicate how far that is from a modern theology club, where Christ is a subject not our object, and our response to the words on the page is so obviously detached.

Of course that doesn't justify poor presentation, or wasting God given gifts, but we do have a way of discerning what God gives and how He would have us use it.

Now I really must dash.

9 July 2013 at 14:36  
Blogger The Explorer said...

I remember the comment of a colleague of mine (atheist/Marxist) when the issue of women bishops was first raised. "They're a bunch of women now; what difference will a few more make?"

Probably a pretty fair indication - then and now - of how the C of E is regarded by the irreligious outside it.

9 July 2013 at 15:03  
Blogger Albert said...

Rasher,

If there isn't an 'office' or an 'ordination' that fits that situation, why not? What has prevented it?

I don't think that what is being described here needs an office or ordination. So it comes down to whether "the older women" πρεσβύτιδας designates such an office. Personally, and judging only from the context, I would say not.

Why shoehorn women into a vicar's role, then reason from that error to make them bishops- a compound error?

Yes, that's an important point. One of the arguments around at the moment says "It's contradictory to allow women to be priests but not bishops, so therefore, since they are priests they should be bishops." But given that the legislation to permit women priests created that contradiction, the rational thing would be to say the legislation is absurd, can therefore serve as foundation to absolutely nothing, and should therefore be scrapped. The fact that all the levels of "reception" which were supposed to be found have failed, and the fact that 20 years on we are still further from finding a way to have women bishops and opponents in the same CofE, ought to strengthen that conclusion: By the standards of the debate of 1992 women cannot be made bishops, and should no longer be made priests.

9 July 2013 at 15:14  
Blogger Albert said...

Rasher,

read that out loud in a Synod and I'd almost fear for your personal safety.

There would be no danger if one read that passage in a Catholic Synod!

9 July 2013 at 15:15  
Blogger Rasher Bacon said...

Albert

I'm sure I can find a list of other passages that would get me burnt to a crispy rasher in a Catholic Synod. ;o]

9 July 2013 at 15:34  
Blogger richardhj said...

Following up my comment on the unreality of the "democracy" that we have I have stolen this quote from today's Telegraph.

"However, Downing Street privately believes that the prospect of a junior ministerial reshuffle next week may help persuade some MPs, hopeful of being promoted, not to rebel"

9 July 2013 at 15:54  
Blogger Albert said...

Rasher,

There would be no passage of scripture that would get you burnt!

9 July 2013 at 15:59  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Richard Watterson. Granted, there is always the exception…

“The world's highest rated female player, Judit Polgár, has never participated in the Women's World Chess Championship, instead preferring to compete with the leading men and maintaining a ranking among the top male players.[83]”

By far the strongest female chess player in history, Judit Polgár is currently (May 2013) ranked 52nd in the world FIDE ratings list with an Elo rating of 2696, the only[update] woman on FIDE's Top 100 Players list, and has been ranked as high as eighth (in 2005).

What a gal !

9 July 2013 at 17:24  
Blogger ardenjm said...

Why did the laity vote against women bishops?

Because the lay people are always more conservative than the paternalists who always claim to know what's best for them and - as we see here - require the lay people to vote the "right" answer.

We see a similar paternalism at work in the EU.

Thinking of my own Church, one of the supreme ironies of Vatican II was the call for lay participation - but no-one actually consulted the laity about changing the Liturgy and all the other changes brought in by the Council.
If they had done (if they had been true to the principle they enunciated) they would have seen a conservatism at work that almost certainly wouldn't have seen the changes we subsequently saw....

Nothing new in this, of course. The people of England didn't really want Henry's Reform: Queen Catherine had the sympathy of the people. The imposition of Protestantism was top down, not bottom up. The only reason the Bible in English was taken up by most parishes, for example, was because a law was brought in to fine parishes if they weren't in possession of a copy! That's how slow the uptake was - and most parishes waited until the fines were about to be issued before complying!

And the Pilgrimage of Grace showed what ordinary folk felt about the destruction of their traditions to which they were deeply wedded.
But, for reasons of political expediency which were cleverly exploited by a few ideological protestants -such as Cranmer - the conservatism of the laity was ignored and the paternalists had their way.

Over time, of course - as with Cranmer's prayer book - the people of God get used to things and, by familiarity, get attached to them and resist, in turn, innovation and change. But that doesn't stop the paternalists down the ages. So let's be clear about this: those who are imposing women bishops on the laity now are the spiritual descendants of those who imposed Protestantism on the laity 500 years ago.

This is why the pastors will be judged far more harshly than the sheep for their dereliction of duty...

10 July 2013 at 02:10  
Blogger Mr. Mcgranor said...

No way, once again you impose such perverse secular concerns as spiritual fruit. The Church of England and the institutionally whole Western Anglican Communion would do good to purge its own socialist measures of the past 60 years, in order to catch-up with the rest of the Anglican Communion. Being mostly Western fanfare, does not disguise that such attempts and action do no good for the church, its growth, nor maintenance. I suppose the rising and supreme Eastern Protestants will do the Lord's work and eventually hinder to purge this as well.

10 July 2013 at 02:44  
Blogger Mrs Proudie of Barchester said...

@Ardenjm
Goodness! You have hit the nail on the head - an excellent post sir, excellent!

10 July 2013 at 09:42  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older