on Wednesday, 18 November 2009 at 6.35 pm by Simon Sarmiento
categorised as Church of England
David Phillips, General Secretary of Church Society has written Women Bishops – what sort of provision?
Fulcrum has published a statement ‘Making way for Women Bishops’.
“The Committee announced that suggestions for the statutory transfer of authority have now been dropped. This means that arrangements for those unable to receive the Episcopal ministry of women will need to be made through delegation from the diocesan bishop” – Fulcrum web-site – This sounds quite ‘catholic’ and authentically Anglican – where the diocesan bishop is treated with the respect and dignity given to Anglican diocesan bishops. As someone has already said on this site: a bishop is a bishop, and none more so than a diocesan bishop, whose episcope is still his/her unique prerogative in the diocese. However,… Read more »
Ron stop being silly. You liberals cannot break something deliberately (and illegally in the first instance) and then claim the moral high ground for restoring it whilst claiming to be pure! Hence this post makes me cross. It lacks ANY sympathy for those being unchurched, it refuses to recognise our integrity and it has a ‘crowing’ feel to it. IF you really are now passionate about Catholic orders and theology then welcome on board. You will of course join with the other 98% of Catholics world wide in accepting the clear reasons why we promote an all male priesthood. That… Read more »
“But no I suspect you wickedly supported breaking Catholic orders in 1992” – Ed Tomlinson – Who’s being silly now? From what you have revealed to all of us on this site it is a fact that, when you were first priested into the Church of England, she had already decided to ordain women as priests into that Church. If you were then as ‘catholic’ as you claim, in the way you claim – regarding this as a break with true ‘catholicty’, what was it that allowed you to go ahead with your ordination, Ed? Did you thin it was… Read more »
Ed: This strikes me as a matter of individual conscience. Part of being a member of a church…and especially of being part of the clergy of that church…is accepting that the church has a process of discernment for making changes in its doctrines, in its teachings, in its ecclesiology. And then accepting those changes when made through that process. If you cannot, in good conscience, accept those changes, then there are two proper responses: 1. Work to reverse the changes through the same discernment process; or 2. Leave the church. What you and those who think like you want is… Read more »
“IF you really are now passionate about Catholic orders and theology then welcome on board. You will of course join with the other 98% of Catholics world wide in accepting the clear reasons why we promote an all male priesthood. That is the universal position of all true Catholics (the sort whose theology matches their vestments).” Absolute nonsense. Neither the RCC nor FiF have a monopoly Catholic identity. Ain’t no handle on the crucifix, Father (unless you’re talking about one of those Russian ones used for giving blessings). By the way, you still haven’t answered my question about why women… Read more »
BillyD, you asked “By the way, you still haven’t answered my question about why women are incapable of being ordained. What exactly is it about Christian women that makes them “unsuitable matter” for the sacrament of Orders? There’s no other group that’s supposedly incapable of being ordained, is there? So there must be something specifically about women themselves that makes this impossible. What is it, please?”
I can’t resist, perhaps Fr. Ed is wondering “Why can’t a woman be more like a man?”
I think we have arrived at a position where Oxford Movement Catholicism has broken from Gore Catholicism (that’s Charles not Al) in the Church of England.