The Church of England OK's female bishops

[nhylan]

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/10603968.stm

Today the Church of England said that female bishops can be created. This is a major blow to Anglo-Catholics and conservative evangelical Anglicans who were hoping for a compromise from the ABC and ABY. The compromise was mostly rejected and the priests pushed forward.

Personally,
I think this is a great thing. It seemed to me to be a little odd to allow female priests but not bishops. I’m glad the Church of England has followed any of the other large churches in the Anglican Communion in doing this. I think, and a lot of other people think that the biblical reasons for not having Female clergy are, at best, weak and are most certainly a relfection of the times in which it was written. I’m sure there are many people on this board, since it is by and large a conservative group of people, that will disagree but that how i see it.

 

[Nita]

Does that then mean that you personally do not accept the “bible alone” tenet?

 

[Ryu]

I’m a long-time Anglican (in America, not the UK), and it seems like all news is bad/controversial news on the Anglican front. Sometimes I wish the bishops and leadership could leave well enough alone and stay out of the news for awhile. In my opinion, change for its own sake hasn’t done us too many favors.

 

[nhylan]

Does that then mean that you personally do not accept the “bible alone” tenet?

Of course. None of the Anglican Churches are bible alone churches. And even if they were there are at least 2 examples of women leading congregations in the bible. Phoebe in Romans 16, Deborah in Judges amongst them.

 

[Nita]

Of course. None of the Anglican Churches are bible alone churches.

And even if they were there are at least 2 examples of women leading congregations in the bible. Phoebe in Romans 16, Deborah in Judges amongst them.

The priesthood is distinct from other roles in the Church – both Old and New Testament.

 

[GKC]

There are actually some more hoops to jump through before the next Synod sends the proposition to Parliament to be enacted into law.

GKC

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/10603968.stm

Today the Church of England said that female bishops can be created. This is a major blow to Anglo-Catholics and conservative evangelical Anglicans who were hoping for a compromise from the ABC and ABY. The compromise was mostly rejected and the priests pushed forward.

Personally,
I think this is a great thing. It seemed to me to be a little odd to allow female priests but not bishops. I’m glad the Church of England has followed any of the other large churches in the Anglican Communion in doing this. I think, and a lot of other people think that the biblical reasons for not having Female clergy are, at best, weak and are most certainly a relfection of the times in which it was written. I’m sure there are many people on this board, since it is by and large a conservative group of people, that will disagree but that how i see it.

 

[nhylan]

There are actually some more hoops to jump through before the next Synod sends the proposition to Parliament to be enacted into law.

GKC

Ah I’m sorry, you’re are correct. However it is my understanding that its largely a “Done deal.”

 

[GKC]

Ah I’m sorry, you’re are correct. However it is my understanding that its largely a “Done deal.”

Wouldn’t surprise me.

GKC

 

[CARV]

We knew this was coming. The conservatives didn’t even get thier male only-floating diocese concession even though that solution was backed by the Archbishop of Canterbury. The CofE is going to follow the path of TEC. It’s only a few decades behind IMO. I give the Global South Another 20 years in the Communion tops.

Don’t take me the wrong way. I’m not rejoicing in the breakup of the AC. I just think the writing is on the wall. The new liberal AC and the conservative GS will probably be more at peace to just walk apart like Catholics-Orthodox, ELCA-LCMS, PCUSA-PCiA, etc. This is just the way things are.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Ah I’m sorry, you’re are correct. However it is my understanding that its largely a “Done deal.”

Many of the clergy believe that: Hundreds of traditionalist clergy poised to leave Church of England

…Canon David Houlding, a prebendary at St Paul’s cathedral, estimated that as many as 200 traditionalist clergy could leave the Church, taking thousands of worshippers with them.
“People’s patience is running out and many will now be asking whether they should try and practice their Catholic faith in the Church of England,” he said.
“The vote was a severe blow to the archbishop [of Canterbury] and it has pushed us closer to the door.”
A group of 70 traditionalist clergy met with a Catholic bishop on Saturday to discuss plans to defect to the Roman Catholic Church. Earlier this year three bishops travelled to the Vatican to talk over an offer made by Pope Benedict XVI inviting disillusioned Anglicans to convert to Catholicism…

 

[MarkBrown]

Of course. None of the Anglican Churches are bible alone churches. And even if they were there are at least 2 examples of women leading congregations in the bible. Phoebe in Romans 16, Deborah in Judges amongst them.

:dts:

Scripture does not tell us Phoebe or Deborah lead congregations. Phoebe was a servant, her role not fully defined and Deborah was a Judge. A political leader. Not a priest. I believe Samuel was the only priest-Judge.

Mark+

 

[MarkBrown]

There are actually some more hoops to jump through before the next Synod sends the proposition to Parliament to be enacted into law.

GKC

From what I have read on the anglican sites and from some of the CoE clergy, it will be about 18 months before the first woman is presented after the Parliament rubber stamps it.

Mark+

 

[GKC]

From what I have read on the anglican sites and from some of the CoE clergy, it will be about 18 months before the first woman is presented after the Parliament rubber stamps it.

Mark+

That’s the time frame for when it theoretically could happen. But it will have to be passed, up or down vote, by a majority of the diocesan synods. And a new general synod will have to be elected and meet, and pass it by (I think) 2/3s majority in each of the 3 houses, before it goes to Parliament. Some of the die-hard orthodox traditionalists are hoping to win enough Synod votes to derail it. It passed this general synod by the margin of 5 votes, and only in the clergy, by virtue of the female component.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I heard Sinead O’Connor is going to be their first candidate LOL

From what I have read on the anglican sites and from some of the CoE clergy, it will be about 18 months before the first woman is presented after the Parliament rubber stamps it.

Mark+

 

[Nine_Two]

Of course. None of the Anglican Churches are bible alone churches. And even if they were there are at least 2 examples of women leading congregations in the bible. Phoebe in Romans 16, Deborah in Judges amongst them.

My parish has women in leadership roles, yet we only have male priests. The two are not one and the same.

 

[Netty1]

I’m a convert who made that swim across the Tiber, and I feel for those C of E traditionalists who may now think they have no spiritual home. I urge any Church of England member who is unhappy with this unholy mess to walk into a Roman Catholic Church and talk to a priest - what do you have to loose after these recents events? I did exactly that, and it was the best thing I ever did.

It’s just my opinion, but I think the problem is that the Church of England is “neither fish nor fowl” as the old saying goes. It is not “Catholic”, no matter how much the Church of England traditionalists try to protest that it is, because it came into being via the hands of an adulterous monarch rather than by the hands of God. But by equal measure, and because of that erroneous claim to “Catholicism”, neither is it fully Protestant.

Individual members, both clergy and laity, have to now make a decision: to become fully Catholic by joining the Roman Catholic Church, or to embrace a fully Protestant church with no claim to being Catholic in any way, or to remain within the Anglican fold and endure an ever-increasing departure from Scripture to satisfy liberals who, imho, put their own agenda and politics before the will of God.

I watched a debate on television about this a couple of weeks ago here in the UK and it served to remind rne why I could not even begin to contemplate life in the Church of England anymore. Two women “priests” were arguing for female ordination and for female bishops. Their arguments were totally secular and only touched on Scripture at points where they obviously felt secure enough to bend the interpretation to fit their needs.

While watching them, and also watching clips of women “priests” officiating in church, every fibre of my being was screaming inside, “this is not right”. It felt wrong on so many levels, not just Scriptural ones.

I’m a woman and can argue quite clearly for my rights when needed, but the “right” to be a priest is not in my hands. I think this issue was in the hands of Christ 2’000 years ago, and He made His choice. I think Scripture clearly shows that this was something He decided was not to be. He had His divine reasons, so who am I to question His decision?

It’s just my personal opinion, and I hope I don’t offend anyone, but either one follows Scripture, or one does not. There is no middle ground I feel. Christ did not give us the option to “pick and mix” what we wanted from His instructions.

The issues are not going to go away for the Church of England. In fact, it is clear to see the situation will get worse the further down the “liberal” road it gets, hampered by a weak Archbishop of Canterbury and a synod which allows itself to be dictated to by an increasingly secular “interest group” approach.

 

[PeaceSerenity]

I agree with Netty1. Jesus was the ultimate example of what a priest needs to be and what he needs to do for his flock, and … Jesus wasn’t a woman. There are so many other ways women can serve God, I know I have so many options that I can barely pick from them. I’m just not willing to risk it in order to add just one more option, being a priest, to my list.

 

[Izdaari]

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/10603968.stm

Today the Church of England said that female bishops can be created. This is a major blow to Anglo-Catholics and conservative evangelical Anglicans who were hoping for a compromise from the ABC and ABY. The compromise was mostly rejected and the priests pushed forward.

Personally,
I think this is a great thing. It seemed to me to be a little odd to allow female priests but not bishops. I’m glad the Church of England has followed any of the other large churches in the Anglican Communion in doing this. I think, and a lot of other people think that the biblical reasons for not having Female clergy are, at best, weak and are most certainly a relfection of the times in which it was written. I’m sure there are many people on this board, since it is by and large a conservative group of people, that will disagree but that how i see it.

Though I’m not Anglican (except at heart due to a love for the work of C.S. Lewis and N.T. Wright), I agree with the OP. My church (AG) ordains women, and I think the scriptural case for it is pretty good.

 

[wisdomseeker]

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/10603968.stm

Today the Church of England said that female bishops can be created. This is a major blow to Anglo-Catholics and conservative evangelical Anglicans who were hoping for a compromise from the ABC and ABY. The compromise was mostly rejected and the priests pushed forward.

Personally,
I think this is a great thing. It seemed to me to be a little odd to allow female priests but not bishops. I’m glad the Church of England has followed any of the other large churches in the Anglican Communion in doing this. I think, and a lot of other people think that the biblical reasons for not having Female clergy are, at best, weak and are most certainly a relfection of the times in which it was written. I’m sure there are many people on this board, since it is by and large a conservative group of people, that will disagree but that how i see it.

dont they do this through democratic vote? there you have it. the Truth being settled by the majority vote. many of these liberals are trying to do the same in the CC. trying to democratize the Church.

 

[nhylan]

dont they do this through democratic vote? there you have it. the Truth being settled by the majority vote. many of these liberals are trying to do the same in the CC. trying to democratize the Church.

They do vote though its not a pure democracy there as 3 houses, bishops, preists, and laeity. And for the record the Catholic church also elects its Pope so there is an aspect of democriization in the CC already. One man shouldn’t be given the power of the Pope. I think the schism and the reformation are evidence of that.