Today’s newspaper had further reports on the matter of women bishops, and also some stories about what else will occur at the February synod meeting.
Earlier women bishops stories are here.
Stephen Bates in the Guardian had Clerics open long path to female Archbishop of Canterbury together with lots of pictures.
Jonathan Petre in the Telegraph said Female Archbishop of Canterbury ‘a possibility’ and also had Church told to apologise for its part in slave trade.
In The Times Ruth Gledhill also had two items: Ordination of women bishops a step closer and Churches facing ‘apocalypse soon’
Regarding women Bishops and Priests and the various ‘compromises’ and delays: If I were to invite some folks for dinner and, when it came to me serving the food, a couple of the guests said, ‘I’m sorry, we don’t believe men should be cooking and serving food to guests because it is clear to us that the Bible teaches it’s women’s work. Can we have one of the ladies of the house serve us please?” I would serve them the food and say, “Here you go, bon appetite!” and carry on serving the other guests. They would be welcome to… Read more »
Dear Augustus, Though I am not against women priests or bishops on theological grounds, I would like to point out that Jesus didn’t appoint 50% female apostles and tell the men “well you’ve just got to get use to it” ! If I were in GS I would be wanting to smack the HoB’s and Church House’s wrists for the CP debacle. The way some Bishops are now reacting suggests that the CP “pastoral statement” was worked up in some smoke filled room and sprung on the HoB too.. But I think that they were also out of order to… Read more »