DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Love God Only
HTML https://lovegodonly.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Philosophical Questions
*****************************************************
#Post#: 2061--------------------------------------------------
Women Bishops in the Anglican Church
By: Kerry Date: November 23, 2012, 11:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure what forum to put this in. . . .
There is something I don't understand about the current debate
about having women as Bishops. They already have allowed women
to be priests in the Anglican Church in the UK, haven't they?
What's the difference? If someone believes the Bible teaches
against having female Bishops, why wouldn't the same Scriptures
mean that there shouldn't be female priests?
I also do not understand the statement of the new Archbishop of
Canterbury:
"It seems as if we are willfully blind to some of the trends and
priorities of ... wider society," Archbishop Rowan Williams said
in a speech to the Synod still meeting after the vote.
"We have some explaining to do. We have as a result of yesterday
undoubtedly lost a measure of credibility in our society."
Read more at
HTML http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/21/us-britain-religion-women-idUSBRE8AK0XE20121121
What does that mean? That the Church of England does not see
itself as a leader in society, teaching people what is good and
proper? That its role is to discern the currents of change in
society and follow them?
It looks to me as the Archbishop is more interested in catering
to the passing whims of changing culture than in trying to
determine the issue based on its merits. He looks like the
politician who hires pollsters to find out what is popular with
the public so he can say popular things. If so, it the Church
of England looks doomed to me. Why not debate this on its
merits? Why not try to discuss it coolly and rationally and
then try to convince people of the rightness of their decision?
Why not try to be a leader in society instead of trying to curry
favor by following?
#Post#: 2070--------------------------------------------------
Re: Women Bishops in the Anglican Church
By: Runner Date: November 23, 2012, 1:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]
It looks to me as the Archbishop is more interested in catering
to the passing whims of changing culture than in trying to
determine the issue based on its merits. He looks like the
politician who hires pollsters to find out what is popular with
the public so he can say popular things. If so, it the Church
of England looks doomed to me. Why not debate this on its
merits? Why not try to discuss it coolly and rationally and
then try to convince people of the rightness of their decision?
Why not try to be a leader in society instead of trying to curry
favor by following? [/quote]
For myself I hate church polotics..it is all ungodly, as He is
not in it at all.
And this has taken them more than 10 years!!
It is all man made...nothing "of the Spirit".
I am in the camp of Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free,
there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ
Jesus.
A man can get up on his hind legs behind the pulpit and spout a
sermonette and be " in the woman"... a female can get up and
speak under the anointing of the Holy Spirit and be speaking "
in the man" ( Christ) But who am I , no one asked me LOL
They are all "foolish women" to me ::)
#Post#: 2073--------------------------------------------------
Re: Women Bishops in the Anglican Church
By: Kerry Date: November 23, 2012, 1:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
^ The words used do imply that what God thinks has little to do
with anything. . . .
The previous Archbishop, Rowan Williams, also confused me when
he said he thought the job was too big for one man and said
wanted to divide the post into a spiritual leader and then have
another person acting more as an administrator. How would that
solve the disagreements over women Bishops or gay Bishops? Who
would make decisions then? The spiritual leader who understood
deep spiritual matters and could make sound conclusions, or the
administrator?
HTML http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/07/archbishop-of-canterbury-role_n_1866344.html
Some of the news I read or hear on the BBC flies through my head
without sinking in too since how the British Parliament works is
a bit of a mystery to me. How does the Anglican Church have a
representative in the House of Commons? Why is it a political
matter? Yet that's what I heard and read.
Maria Miller, the culture secretary and minister for equalities,
has called on the Church of England to "act quickly" over its
botched attempt to allow women to become bishops, as the next
archbishop of Canterbury signalled his willingness to meet
parliamentarians to discuss the crisis.
In her first official comments on the issue, which has plunged
the established church into turmoil, Miller told the Guardian it
was "extraordinary" and "very disappointing" that a vote on
long-awaited legislation had failed despite the overwhelming
approval of grassroots members.
Amid calls from some MPs for parliament to intervene in the
crisis, the bishop of Gloucester, Michael Perham, on Friday
added his voice to those openly questioning whether the church
should retain its exemption from equalities legislation.
The "culture secretary" is involved? And of course, what the
twenty six Bishops who sit in the House of Lords are probably
involved. Who's in charge? Anyone?
It does appear as a crisis to me, signaling that they're more a
secular group than a religious one. While I am sure there are
sincere Bishops and priests in the Anglican Church, are there
enough for the Church to survive?
*****************************************************