to be totally perplexed by the Church of England's latest decision?

[KnockMeDown]

So they won't allow women bishops, but married gay male bishops are ok? Can someone please explain the reasoning behind this, if in fact there is any? And married, or in civil partnership, but celibate? How is that supposed to work?

God knows why. Sorry. I couldn't resist. I'm not a fan of any organised religions (I can just about get on board with the Buddhists). Aren't stupid, arbitrary, anachronistic rules all part of the fun?

Don't they have to renounce their past homosexual acts, stay celibate, not promote homosexuality etc

So basically gay men can be bishops if they are not in fact gay.... It wont work

I'm not surprised at this at all.

You can be gay, in a civil partnership (but not 'practising' I'm assuming not having any form of sexual relations), be a full member of communion and be elevated (promoted) to the rank of Bishop.

But no women thanks - we're CofE...

Actually, I think the wider Angican community is heading for a breakdown. Some of the evangelical/African/American churches won't take to this at all.

Some Christians don't believe that being gay (having gay feelings) is a problem as long as you don't act upon them. Oh, but the irony of allowing gay clergy who have gone through with a civil partnership to remain in the job and be promoted, but themselves may not be permitted (individual church permitting) to actually perform a civil ceremony is not lost on me.

So, so many reasons why traditional Angicanism is f*cked. Synod don't want women, the clergy that don't want them have been offered a deal by RC. Traditional Sunday service is dying a death. Evangelical movement is on the up.

Better stop now, feeling ranty.

YANBU!

You are being very reasonable indeed.

There is an argument though that because God is supposed to be in charge, churches shouldn't necessarily do things the way they are done in the rest of society: - aside from the topical examples, I can recall a church where instead of majority voting on any issue, they prayed and 'sought the will of God' and persevered until unanimity was achieved - supposedly because the Holy Spirit had led us. At least it kept us talking to one another and even praying.

The church was quite small and the Holy Spirit had to be very patient I think ......

Mind you they do say that "if you find the perfect church you shouldn't join it because you'll spoil it". I'm in the C of E at present, but not 'of' it.

So I suppose we just need to accept your laughter, bafflement and despair. It doesn't affect my 'personal relationship' with God though. That is 'church-independent'.

I'm uncomfortable about lady bishops because of my understanding to date of the Bible, but I'm going away to think about it again

The CofE is tying itself in knots, but I am not letting it worry me.

YANBU and I have to admit that I'm quite enjoying watching this latest debacle unfold. They are such a bunch of hypocrites and are really getting their knickers in a big twist. Corrupt, twisted and out-dated ideology which really belongs in the dim and distant past. What a bunch of self-righteous fools.

I was raised by a CofE vicar...he and some of his respected counterparts, behaved in a deplorable manner, and with warped ideas.

I am an atheist, he is no longer a vicar. The more I read about the CofE, the more I just think how outdated and daft they are, but to each to their own and all that jazz

YANBU. Don't you know that women are just not worthy! I'm not even fucking religious in the slightest but this has pissed me off no end. Patriarchy at it's misogynistic best.

Don't even get me started on this.

I find the whole thing so ridiculous as to be utterly hilarious and further evidence that the Church of England will eat itself.

The gay married bishops is fine, the no women bishops is the problem!

I think they are desperately trying to pretend they aren't homophobes, unsuccessfully.

Farrah - "Synod don't want women"

Totally not true, the vast majority of Synod voted in favour of women bishops, it's just that the particular spread of the nays (mostly in the laity, probably got themselves elected to Synod for just this vote) meant that it couldn't get through. V annoying and quite a shock for the rest of us!

The difference between gay male bishops and female bishops is that there's no official rule against the former that needs overturning it just requires an Archbishop with the nerve to go for it and take the verbal beating from certain quarters. The latter issue is explicitly verboten atm so needs Synod to approve it.

Oops, last point was for Kim147

Yes, it is absurd.

Women bishops should be allowed, so should marriages of gay people. This would solve many problems.

Yes, let's keep in mind that 93% of the church of England wants women bishops. It's not that the C of E is misogynistic, it's that there is a significant and vocal minority who are against women bishops. Sigh. If you're Anglican, and have a care for such things, get onto your Deanery Synod, please, folks...

Amen to that.

Ha ha what a joke. Glad I defected became a Catholic

Leggy - it didn't take a leap of faith to see the outcome of the vote. I agree, the majority of the Gen Synod voted in favour of w bishops, but the structure and weighting of the GS always skews a straight majority (1:1) vote. This should be changed.

As for "explicitly verboten" for w bishops, that's up to scholars to argue. There's no job description for a 'deacon' in the NT. Just a continuation of male dominated BCE/ACE religion and society.

I don't really get it. I just can't see who would want to be in a celibate civil partnership??? Is that something that really happens?

Over the past day or two I've suddenly twigged that the Church is, like quite a large section of society, obsessed with penises.

You know the kind of bloke - I'm sure we've all met them, some posters may have the misfortune to live with one - whose whole life seems to revolve round that one organ, defines himself by it, dedicates his whole leisure time (and his work time when no-one's watching) to its satisfaction? Blokes like that can never see women as equal because they don't have one of Those. Gays can't be equal either because they don't do with theirs what he does with his. Celibate or asexual men obviously aren't real men at all, and even faithful husbands are a bit wet. The church is like one of those men (and/or is run by a whole bunch of them). It is all about the penis; having one, doing the approved activities with it and refraining from any other uses of it. If you don't have the Mighty Organ you can't possibly be important. If you do have one you have to do what we think you should be doing with it. What is so holy about this bit of skin? Can we start a religion based on respecting earlobes next?

It doesn't surprise me in the least that they've effectively decided that misogyny is even more ok than homophobia.

My 11-year-old DS said, 'How would the Church make sure they weren't having sex? Sounds a bit perverted to me.'