Friday, 2 May 2008

women as bishops: two opinion items

Theo Hobson wrote on Comment is free that

Church reformers must come to terms with the fact that it is a fundamentally reactionary institution…

Read O thou great irredeemable.

Andrew Brown wrote on helmintholog a piece unhelpfully titled Anglican Anorak post. It is in fact a discussion of the Manchester report including this:

The real story is that the ordination of women priests was bought on credit, and the church can’t ever pay down more than the interest on the bill. When women priests were ordained, the Church of England was only held together, to the extent that it was, by both sides making solemn promises that they didn’t believe they would ever be called on and had no real intention of delivering. In particular, the supporters of women priests solemnly promised that there would always be an honoured place for their opponents within the church, even though they thought of the arrangements as entirely transitional; in return the opponents solemnly declared that women priests were legally and validly priests, even though they did not believe this could possibly be true. They still don’t.

Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Friday, 2 May 2008 at 7:17pm BST | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: Church of England

It occurs to me how much the antis need to swim the Tiber where, as they have hardened on this subject the past several decades, they invented a "Theology of the (Human) Body" PRECISELY to assert that the penis was sacerdotally-essential.

Vaya con Dios!

Posted by: JCF on Friday, 2 May 2008 at 8:00pm BST

This is the same case exactly for TEC. Both sides thinking they got what they wanted and at the same time crossing their fingers when it came to their opponents.

Posted by: Davis d'Ambly on Saturday, 3 May 2008 at 6:13pm BST

I'm not so sure it was so much finger crossing as wishful thinking, of the Red Queen variety: believing six impossible things before breakfast and so on. Anglican Fudge grows stale with time, and crumbles.

Posted by: Tobias Haller on Sunday, 4 May 2008 at 8:15pm BST

Bishop Alan Wilson has posted on his blog some very interesting historical reflections preliminary to plunging into the reading of the current papers on the question of women bishops:

What I found particularly arresting were his thoughts on the British imperial tradition of "institutionalising schism" as they withdrew from the colonies, but there's much else of value as well.

Posted by: Mary Clara on Sunday, 4 May 2008 at 10:50pm BST

To be quite frank gentlemen and gentlewomen, those of British parliamentary tradition, most all in situ in former parts of the British Empire, handle these issues surrounding women in Holy Orders quite differently than USA Episcopalians. I think that difference in political ethos is the element History will record together with the Internet as the most salient forces in this 21st cen modern Anglican Crisis overall.

Mr. Hobson could cut the rant level a bit and tone down the rhetoric because anyone with half a brain knows what a screwed up thing is institutional religion. Disagree? Go hahead and enjoy your church fantasy and think that it is not not a fundmentally conservative or reactionary institution. That's when you become part of the problem.

Church dysfunction is legion: a very shallow but quite true and weary trueism.

Posted by: Robt. Zacher on Monday, 5 May 2008 at 8:17am BST
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.