Christianity QA » Christian Faith » Church of England to consider women bishops….
Question:
It is certainly reasonable for the Church of England to continue the position it has always had, that female candidates for ordination to the episcopacy are not suitable at this time. Frankly, I can’t imagine how the timing could be worse. Why wouldn’t be a good idea? Can you explain that one to me? Explain what? Why the timing is bad? Has it escaped your attention that people in the Church of England and ECUSA are already at each other’s throats?
Some Charles, you have to do the right thing just because it’s the right thing—not because it fits in with some people’s idea of good timing. There will never be a "good time" as far as a lot of people are concerned, so why do it now when they’re even more upset about something else? By the way, you didn’t tell me whether I get 20% off my order. 
Is it going to be a big enough order to be worth the extra shipping costs? 
I don’t charge shipping, and if it were a small order I’d probably end up spending all of my profit on shipping between getting it to you and getting it from the company if you didn’t want enough stuff. I noticed that about a day before you pointed it out, but I hadn’t had time to get it changed in my setting or have all the "boo-boo" posts filter out. Pax Leslie
Response:
ACNS 3743 | ENGLAND | 16 JANUARY 2004 Church of England to consider women bishops; third non-geographical province unlikely
<snip Does this mean that one day we will be hearing about lesbian clergy abusing little girls?
Response:
ACNS 3743 | ENGLAND | 16 JANUARY 2004 Church of England to consider women bishops; third non-geographical province unlikely <snip Does this mean that one day we will be hearing about lesbian clergy abusing little girls?
Probably. What people like you don’t understand is that gay people are just like straight people, except for their orientation. They are neither better nor worse as a group, and include all the variations straight people do. Rat
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – ACNS 3743 | ENGLAND | 16 JANUARY 2004 Church of England to consider women bishops; third non-geographical province unlikely This will only further fracture the Church of England, and insinuate more feminists into its leadership. In the middle of the crisis over homosexuality, do they really want another crisis? Excuse me??? They should have fracking done this a long time ago…. and if you want to talk about good reasons to break communion with somebody, maybe we should be talking about the way women who want to enter the ranks of the clergy are being treated in other parts of this "Communion". You make it sound as if there were a _right_ to be ordained. But there is no such thing. Ordination is a _vocation_ manifested within the Church, with both personal and institutional aspects. The candidate for ordination gets to state his sense of being called to ministry; but the bishop and standing committee (or commission on ministry in the dioceses which have them) get to confirm whether a candidate is indeed suitable.
I never said anyone who wants to has an automatic right. I just find it hard to believe that there has never been a female in these churches who call wasn’t denied, not by God, but by their church. (Probably gave quite few "good ones’ away to other denominations that way.) It is certainly reasonable for the Church of England to continue the position it has always had, that female candidates for ordination to the episcopacy are not suitable at this time. Frankly, I can’t imagine how the timing could be worse.
Why wouldn’t be a good idea? Can you explain that one to me? snip Les
Response:
It is certainly reasonable for the Church of England to continue the position it has always had, that female candidates for ordination to the episcopacy are not suitable at this time. Frankly, I can’t imagine how the timing could be worse. Why wouldn’t be a good idea? Can you explain that one to me?
Explain what? Why the timing is bad? Has it escaped your attention that people in the Church of England and ECUSA are already at each other’s throats? By the way, you didn’t tell me whether I get 20% off my order. Charles Hohenstein "If there were any word of God beside the Scripture, we could never be certain of God’s Word; and if we be uncertain of God’s Word, the devil might bring in among us a new word, a new doctrine, a new faith, a new church, a new god, yea himself to be a god. If the Church and the Christian faith did not stay itself upon the Word of God certain, as upon a sure and strong foundation, no man could know whether he had a right faith, and whether he were in the true Church of Christ, or in the synagogue of Satan."– Archbishop Thomas Cranmer
Response:
Charles, WHY NOT? Would be nice to have the focus of this NG change to another subject even if it is just going to be the same old reharshing of answers to a different question. Let us pray for the SUPREME HEAD of the Anglican Church. God save our gracious Queen Long Live Our noble Queen God Save the Queen Send her Victorious Happy and Glorious Long to Reign over us! GOD SAVE THE QUEEN! Brian J Dawson
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – ACNS 3743 | ENGLAND | 16 JANUARY 2004 Church of England to consider women bishops; third non-geographical province unlikely This will only further fracture the Church of England, and insinuate more feminists into its leadership. In the middle of the crisis over homosexuality, do they really want another crisis? Charles Hohenstein "If there were any word of God beside the Scripture, we could never be certain of God’s Word; and if we be uncertain of God’s Word, the devil might bring in among us a new word, a new doctrine, a new faith, a new church, a new god, yea himself to be a god. If the Church and the Christian faith did not stay itself upon the Word of God certain, as upon a sure and strong foundation, no man could know whether he had a right faith, and whether he were in the true Church of Christ, or in the synagogue of Satan."– Archbishop Thomas Cranmer
Response:
ACNS 3743 | ENGLAND | 16 JANUARY 2004 Church of England to consider women bishops; third non-geographical province unlikely
This will only further fracture the Church of England, and insinuate more feminists into its leadership. In the middle of the crisis over homosexuality, do they really want another crisis? Charles Hohenstein "If there were any word of God beside the Scripture, we could never be certain of God’s Word; and if we be uncertain of God’s Word, the devil might bring in among us a new word, a new doctrine, a new faith, a new church, a new god, yea himself to be a god. If the Church and the Christian faith did not stay itself upon the Word of God certain, as upon a sure and strong foundation, no man could know whether he had a right faith, and whether he were in the true Church of Christ, or in the synagogue of Satan."– Archbishop Thomas Cranmer
Response:
ACNS 3743 | ENGLAND | 16 JANUARY 2004 Church of England to consider women bishops; third non-geographical province unlikely This will only further fracture the Church of England, and insinuate more feminists into its leadership. In the middle of the crisis over homosexuality, do they really want another crisis?
Excuse me??? They should have fracking done this a long time ago…. and if you want to talk about good reasons to break communion with somebody, maybe we should be talking about the way women who want to enter the ranks of the clergy are being treated in other parts of this "Communion". I for one am sick and tired of hearing a bunch of hypocrites rail on about the sins of the national church when the records of these other national churches who are doing the railing aren’t exactly clean. It’s infuriating when one thinks about it. The ECUSA doesn’t threaten to break up our little ecclesiastical UN over the other members failure in areas, why do they think they can tell us what to do? I like being a member of a communion of AUTOMOUS churches specifically because I don’t have do what some African primate or even Canterbury tells me what to do. I think it gives us a lot more lee way with each other. I don’t have to not like them because of the way they treat women, and they don’t actually have not like me because of the way I think homosexuals should be treated (which is, specifically, absolutely no differently than my straight white female self). <growl Les — marykay.com/lfterrell Any newsgroups contacts recieve 10% off their first order!
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – ACNS 3743 | ENGLAND | 16 JANUARY 2004 Church of England to consider women bishops; third non-geographical province unlikely This will only further fracture the Church of England, and insinuate more feminists into its leadership. In the middle of the crisis over homosexuality, do they really want another crisis? Excuse me??? They should have fracking done this a long time ago…. and if you want to talk about good reasons to break communion with somebody, maybe we should be talking about the way women who want to enter the ranks of the clergy are being treated in other parts of this "Communion".
You make it sound as if there were a _right_ to be ordained. But there is no such thing. Ordination is a _vocation_ manifested within the Church, with both personal and institutional aspects. The candidate for ordination gets to state his sense of being called to ministry; but the bishop and standing committee (or commission on ministry in the dioceses which have them) get to confirm whether a candidate is indeed suitable. It is certainly reasonable for the Church of England to continue the position it has always had, that female candidates for ordination to the episcopacy are not suitable at this time. Frankly, I can’t imagine how the timing could be worse. I for one am sick and tired of hearing a bunch of hypocrites rail on about the sins of the national church when the records of these other national churches who are doing the railing aren’t exactly clean.
Irrelevant to both the original post and my response. [snip] Any newsgroups contacts recieve 10% off their first order!
May I have 20% off, if I teach you how to spell receive? Charles Hohenstein "If there were any word of God beside the Scripture, we could never be certain of God’s Word; and if we be uncertain of God’s Word, the devil might bring in among us a new word, a new doctrine, a new faith, a new church, a new god, yea himself to be a god. If the Church and the Christian faith did not stay itself upon the Word of God certain, as upon a sure and strong foundation, no man could know whether he had a right faith, and whether he were in the true Church of Christ, or in the synagogue of Satan."– Archbishop Thomas Cranmer
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – ACNS 3743 | ENGLAND | 16 JANUARY 2004 Church of England to consider women bishops; third non-geographical province unlikely Hahh..! Another slip towards Biblical destiny. I love it. It was the WOMAN who was seduced by the devil! Not the man. This is because God made her seduceable because, as the woman, His plan for human courtship required it. Therefore, she represents a target of great opportunity to the devil. One that could and will come against His church. This is why Women should remain silent (as per God’s Word, in case you’ve forgotten). TNMM, I had determined never to respond to you directly again —
Yeah… Who knows what you’d find out.. at least until you had mended your crude and insulting ways — but THIS post is such a slam dunk indication of "where you’re coming from", right across the board, politically and socially (far more than religiously), that it deserves highlighting.
What’s the matter, Dana….? I’m not contemporarily-minded enough for you? Does what I quote from the Word stick in your throat? That is good, because those are Paul’s words! Not mine. Don’t you read the Scriptures..? Man changes but God doesn’t ever change, Dana. I follow not the morally pliable world that you live in, so I’m not afraid to call a goat a goat. Sorry. Especially that last sentence.
Yes, that’s the devil who lives inside of you. It’s his typical reaction when the truth is spoken. Satan always cringes at the Word of God. I’m no longer bothered by what you say about gay people,
It’s what GOD says about gay people, Dana! I am simply doing as I am told. Why aren’t you…? if this in fact happens to be your corresponding attitude toward (even heterosexual) women. I’ll let Priscilla and Lesley take it from there, if they have any stomach to do so.
Like I said in my previous posting, they don’t have the ballz. They weren’t designed that way. Which I doubt. My only lingering question is: do you actually BELIEVE this twisted stuff, or do you just "get off" on being a cruel and vicious human being?
I want an answer to that accusation right now. Define ‘twisted stuff’. In other words, in the domain of "trolldom", are you merely a sociopath, or are you a full-blown psychopath? Lord, have mercy on those who know not what they do…to themselves, as well as to others.
I am not a troll, as much as I know you would love to conveniently label me as such. That would make everything EASIER for you to ignore. But I’m not and you can’t. You still STINK of SIN. Repent! I swear, sometimes I think that you people are a lost cause. Don’t respond to my postings again. At least not until you come to realize that homosexuality is evil, sick and wrong before the eyes of almighty God. He did not make you gay and He doesn’t love your gayness. The world changes its attitudes towards certain behavious as the years go by, be He NEVER changes.
Response:
ACNS 3743 | ENGLAND | 16 JANUARY 2004 Church of England to consider women bishops; third non-geographical province unlikely Hahh..! Another slip towards Biblical destiny. I love it. It was the WOMAN who was seduced by the devil! Not the man. This is because God made her seduceable because, as the woman, His plan for human courtship required it. Therefore, she represents a target of great opportunity to the devil. One that could and will come against His church. This is why Women should remain silent (as per God’s Word, in case you’ve forgotten).
TNMM, I had determined never to respond to you directly again — at least until you had mended your crude and insulting ways — but THIS post is such a slam dunk indication of "where you’re coming from", right across the board, politically and socially (far more than religiously), that it deserves highlighting. Especially that last sentence. I’m no longer bothered by what you say about gay people, if this in fact happens to be your corresponding attitude toward (even heterosexual) women. I’ll let Priscilla and Lesley take it from there, if they have any stomach to do so. Which I doubt. My only lingering question is: do you actually BELIEVE this twisted stuff, or do you just "get off" on being a cruel and vicious human being? In other words, in the domain of "trolldom", are you merely a sociopath, or are you a full-blown psychopath? Lord, have mercy on those who know not what they do…to themselves, as well as to others.
Response:
TNMM, I had determined never to respond to you directly again — at least until you had mended your crude and insulting ways — but THIS post is such a slam dunk indication of "where you’re coming from", right across the board, politically and socially (far more than religiously), that it deserves highlighting. Especially that last sentence. I’m no longer bothered by what you say about gay people, if this in fact happens to be your corresponding attitude toward (even heterosexual) women. I’ll let Priscilla and Lesley take it from there, if they have any stomach to do so. Which I doubt. My only lingering question is: do you actually BELIEVE this twisted stuff, or do you just "get off" on being a cruel and vicious human being? In other words, in the domain of "trolldom", are you merely a sociopath, or are you a full-blown psychopath? Lord, have mercy on those who know not what they do…to themselves, as well as to others.
Of course he’s a troll, Dana. Why do you give him so much power over the use of your time? Priscilla
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – TNMM, I had determined never to respond to you directly again — at least until you had mended your crude and insulting ways — but THIS post is such a slam dunk indication of "where you’re coming from", right across the board, politically and socially (far more than religiously), that it deserves highlighting. Especially that last sentence. I’m no longer bothered by what you say about gay people, if this in fact happens to be your corresponding attitude toward (even heterosexual) women. I’ll let Priscilla and Lesley take it from there, if they have any stomach to do so. Which I doubt. My only lingering question is: do you actually BELIEVE this twisted stuff, or do you just "get off" on being a cruel and vicious human being? In other words, in the domain of "trolldom", are you merely a sociopath, or are you a full-blown psychopath? Lord, have mercy on those who know not what they do…to themselves, as well as to others. Of course he’s a troll, Dana. Why do you give him so much power over the use of your time?
And ours. L – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Priscilla
Response:
ACNS 3743 | ENGLAND | 16 JANUARY 2004 Church of England to consider women bishops; third non-geographical province unlikely
Hahh..! Another slip towards Biblical destiny. I love it. It was the WOMAN who was seduced by the devil! Not the man. This is because God made her seduceable because, as the woman, His plan for human courtship required it. Therefore, she represents a target of great opportunity to the devil. One that could and will come against His church. This is why Women should remain silent (as per God’s Word, in case you’ve forgotten).
Response:
ACNS 3743 | ENGLAND | 16 JANUARY 2004 Church of England to consider women bishops; third non-geographical province unlikely by Matthew Davies
Hahh..! Another slip towards Biblical destiny. I love it. It was the WOMAN who was seduced by the devil! Not the man. This is because God made her seduceable. As the woman, His plan for human courtship required it. Therefore, she represents a target of great opportunity to the devil. One that could and will come against His church. This is why Women should remain silent (as per God’s Word, in case you’ve forgotten).
Response:
ACNS 3743 | ENGLAND | 16 JANUARY 2004 Church of England to consider women bishops; third non-geographical province unlikely by Matthew Davies Several reports in the British press over the past two weeks have suggested the possibility of a third non-geographical province being introduced to the structure of the Church of England in response to the possible ordination of women bishops in the province. The Rt Revd Michael Nazir-Ali, Bishop of Rochester, England, has chaired the working party on the Theology of Women in the Episcopate since it was created in July 2000, and the culmination of its work has resulted in a report being drafted for consideration. The House of Bishops of the Church of England met this week in the lead up to the annual February gathering of the General Synod in London, and one of the items on their agenda was the discussion of this draft report. Head of Media Relations for the Church of England, Mr Steve Jenkins, said that the House of Bishops had been asked by the General Synod to produce a report on the theological issues, considering all possibilities, as a background document to any future debate. "At the end of the report there is a table that represents all possible pastoral arrangements," he said. "At one extreme there is the option of no episcopal oversight, and at the other extreme there is the possibility of a third non-geographical province." The likelihood of one of these extremes being adopted is improbable. Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali last reported to General Synod in 2002 saying that, in considering the place of women in the Church, the working party has had to reflect on women in society generally. "Here we have tried to come to an understanding of women and men in creation which respects both their difference and their common creation in the image of God, as well as their common mission in God’s World (Gen: 26-28)," he said. "Our views are likely to be rooted in whether we see the common mission of men and women as more fundamental or the distinction in role which comes from difference in gender." The primary task of the working party has been to identify and examine the theological issues involved in the ordination of women to the episcopate. "It may be…that arising out of this, the working party will also be able to make practical recommendations," said Bishop Michael. "It is, of course, for General Synod to consider the findings of the working party and to make appropriate decisions in the light of such findings." Christina Rees, a member of General Synod and Chair of WATCH (Women and the Church) – an organisation which works for an inclusive Church and wants to see women taking their place alongside men at every level in the Church – met with some of the bishops of the Church of England after the House met. "The report of the working party will most likely be discussed at General Synod in November 2004 or February 2005," she said. "In the meantime, the draft needs to be amended and then returned to the House of Bishops for their meeting in July this year." The working party, which includes people with vastly differing views, has taken four years to complete its work; a great deal longer than originally anticipated. "When people ask me – ‘is the Church of England ready to move forward?’ – my answer is unequivocally: absolutely!" she said. "When we look at the figures we find that at least 4 out of 5 laity and 3 out of 4 clergy are ready to accept women as bishops." She added that there are only a small number of bishops who would be averse to this. "The Church is more than ready!" The first female priest in the Anglican Communion, the Revd Florence Lei Tim Oi, was ordained in Hong Kong in 1944. During the 1960s and 70s there was a movement in many countries across the world towards the ordination of women as priests. In 1974 there was an irregular ordination of 11 women in the United States, and the Episcopal Church in the United States authorised women’s priestly ordination two years later. On 11 November 1992, the General Synod of the Church of England voted to open the priesthood to women, five years after women were first ordained to the diaconate. This vote came after 70 years of formal discussion and debate in the Anglican Communion, which began in 1920 when the Lambeth Conference first considered the issue. Currently, one in five Church of England priests is female. At present, only the Anglican/Episcopal Churches of the USA, Canada, New Zealand, Ireland and Southern Africa have approved legislation for the ordination of women as bishops. However, the General Synod of the Scottish Episcopal Church (SEC) ended centuries of tradition when they met in Edinburgh last year and made an historic decision by voting to accept women in the episcopate. In March 2003, Church leaders in the Diocese of Ripon and Leeds voted by a large majority to allow women to become bishops. This is just one of many diocesan synods that have put pressure on the Church of England to speed up the process. The Revd Dr Sr Teresa, Editor of Distinctive News of Women in Ministry and member of the Church of England General Synod 1995-2000, said, "Having women, as well as men as bishops, would enrich the church, especially in its pastoral work for both lay and ordained women."
no comment untill now