Women Bishops... why all the fuss?

[Chil1234]

Once again, the Anglican church seems to be tying itself up in knots about something and nothing. Women OK as priests, it seems, but not suitable bishop material and therefore elaborate exemptions are being discussed for 'traditionalists'. (Don't get them started on gay people...) The ABofC is allegedly on the verge of packing it all in. When it's a total eye-roller & a turn-off for most of us, it's a mystery why it is so important for some Anglicans to keep pouring oil on this fire. Bad PR. Bad for recruitment. Anyone got the inside track? Any CofE people out there who would be genuinely upset to have a woman as a bishop?

We currently have 26 bishops in The House of Lords who interfere with the politics of this country. These are unelected positions of power and as a humanist, I find it incredible that such a system exists. Believe what you like but don't foist it on me...as for women bishops, bout time there was some power-sharing in the church. Surely all the credentials a person needs is a love of their god not whether their male or female. The bible is a book of stories and interpretations written by men over a long period many moons ago. It was aimed at controlling the uneducated masses to keep them in their place. I think it has worked for the christian SAHMs. Freedom of choice?

There are 25 Bishops in the Lords, out of a total of 768 Peers, and 650 elected MPs in the Commons. 25, out of a legislature made up of 1418 people.

You can hardly argue that the Church of England are holding the legislature to ransom, can you?

Oh good grief. All this 'only men can be priests' business was made up in v.early Christianity to suit the political climate at the time. It's pure nonsense. Most of the churches teachings are based on a lot of hogwash from those times. This I became enlightened on when I studied RE A-level. We just need to treat others as we would wish to be treated and the world/church would be a finer place.

"You can hardly argue that the Church of England are holding the legislature to ransom, can you?"

It was the votes of the Bishops that managed to get an amendment to the Equality Bill dropped.

That amendment would have allowed some Jews, Unitarians and Quakers to register marriages on their properties.

The Bishops however decided that they knew best what those other religions should get and denied them this.

Wrong, wrong, wrong...

"to registter marriages on their properties" - I am not totally familiar with all the details of the legislation but I thought that part of the amendment was to allow 'civil partnerships' to be registered on religious properties, not 'marriages'. So far a civil partnership is not technically the same thing as a marriage.

The fact that I'm making this point has nothing to do with my personal views on the issue. I would have no problem with gay partnerships being conducted and acknowledged by churches of various denominations, but not all churches have reached a point of agreement on this yet.

"I thought that part of the amendment was to allow 'civil partnerships' to be registered on religious properties"

You're right, sorry for that.

However I don't want to turn this into a debate on the rights or wrongs of the issue.

What I wanted to do is to show an instance of the influence and weight that the Bishops in the House of Lords do have.

Basically a number of other faiths decided, after presumably much deliberation, that they wanted to do something and the Bishops decided that they were right to stop them.

There were also a number of other instances over that bill where the votes of the Bishops were enough to sway the vote.

various religious places are now allowed for marriages

• CofE, Quaker, Jewish
• RC, non-conformist, Sikh, Hindu Muslim

CofE, Quaker and Jewish are allowed to use their own forms of words.

The rest have to incorporate certain requirements, same as a civil marriage.

Effectively it means that the religious marriages are not recognised, but the temples mosques and so on have automatic license to perform civil marriage, with religious content added. If that makes sense.

It's obvious why the CofE is privileged, but goodness knows how the quakers and jews were granted their special treatment.

Note that other religions - eg Buddhists, Jains, Scientologists, Jedi Knights are completely unroecognised: their adherents have to toggle off to a licensed venue for a cvil ceremony - where no religious content is allowed.

www.weddingguideuk.com/articles/legal/englandwales.asp

I think some clarity is needed here.

First the NT was not written by Jesus of Nazareth, second Paul's opinions in his letters were never intended to be Holy Writ - just Paul's ideas expressed to his congregations and thirdly, only 5 of Paul's letters are regarded as authentic (i.e. written by Paul) the others are pseudepigraphic.

Early Judaism was also polytheistic as can be evinced from the various texts and archaeological evidence has found dozens of small female figures in domestic sites. An eighth century BCE grave near Hebron has the inscription "blessed may he be by Yahweh and his Asherah." It is clear that the early Hebrews had a female Mother Goddess as Yahweh's partner. This is confirmed in 2 Kings 23.

It's that slightly eccentric man with the bushy eyebrows isn't it?!
I'm sure people have said 'female politicians/businesswomen/scientists just look ridiculous.'
People are equal, therefore they should be treated equally.

Someone else has mantioned here that the early Christian church had many female priests. Some also say that Mary Magdelene was seen as a feminine equal to Jesus, until the Catholica decided to brand her a prostitute. A tiny appology was written in the Catholic Times about 60 years ago for this "mistake".

I blame organised religion (mainly but not only the Catholics) for the degradation of women in the Church and the home, unless anyone can convince me otherwise.

All I can say is bring on the women Bishops, I know a few women cofE vicars who are doing a much better job than the men. Equality in modern religion has someway way to go, but there has to be change.

Oh sorry I'm a bit out of touch as I'm a beginner here, read the first page and posted the mesage, should have read the end!

I think some of you may have been reading too much Dan Brown

The Vatican yesterday declared female ordination a crime.

attendance at a service purporting to ordinate a woman is to dealt with using the same procedures as child abuse.

sigh... and in Sept women will be on the streets cheering the pope.

a link I forgot

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/15/vatican-declares-womens-ordination-grave-crime

"attendance at a service purporting to ordinate a woman is to dealt with using the same procedures as child abuse."

Same procedure?

So that will be covering it up, threatening the witnesses and letting the accused to unpunished?

Women Priests ahoy for the RC Church then!

Its not the first time the Pope has made such a statement on the ordination of women. But words fail me when I see how he has got his priorities SO wrong on this. How CAN he compare this to child abuse?

It blows any pretence of ecumenical relations out of the water!

badgersPaws he! he!

no - reporting the person to Rome to be dealt with centrally, as this crime is too hot to be dealt with by local bishops.

join stubbornhubby Protesting-the-Pope at Strawberry Hill on Fri 17th Sept

I'm not interested in bishops of any gender

We have a fantastic female vicar at my CofE church.
She speaks good clear understandable sermons with a common sense approach.
She is infinitely better at the pastoral care of the congregation than our other vicar.
She has an active role with young mums and toddlers as well as other members of the congregation.

I don't think GOd would make her so good at her job if she wasn't meant to be doing it IMO.
to top it all we have a thriving church with aprox 1000 on the electoral role with regularly 200 people at the service I attend (and there are three other services held on a normal sunday)
being a woman can't be so unpopular!!

It all makes the CofE look ridiculous, but there is one good by-product: many young women wrongly believe that the battle of the sexes has been won (so feminists are old hat). The wrangles in the CofE are a good object-lesson in how deep-rooted sexism is.