|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Flipping Synod - especially the Lay People!
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Yes, really! St. Punk didn't have the balls to come back to the 2012 election thread after he'd predicted Obama would lose and Nate Silver was a liberal hack. But here he is, blaming this fiasco on feminists, not the idiots who think women should remain second-class members of the Church of England, so I'm taking the opportunity to call him on all of his bullshit.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Organ Builder
Shipmate
# 12478
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
(How did your dogging of Nate Silver go on election day, by the way?)
Um... Really?!
I don't think Ruth meant this.
Not safe for many workplaces, btw.
--------------------
How desperately difficult it is to be honest with oneself. It is much easier to be honest with other people.--E.F. Benson
Posts: 3337 | From: ...somewhere in between 40 and death... | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
Had it gone through you'd all be hailing it as a prophetic answer to prayer and evidence that the Holy Spirit is even able to guide synod to the glory of God. Not so the opposite. Funny that.
Is that what you say when the parishioners you'd been praying for die unhealed?
I have a friend in ministry who visited one of his parishioners who was dying of cancer in order to prepare him for his death and to help him die well. A small group of people in the parish later accused him of killing their friend because he prayed for the Father's will to be done, instead of rebuking the cancer and making him get better. In their case I said precisely that and without any shame whatsoever.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jigsaw
Shipmate
# 11433
|
Posted
I know little of the workings of the General Synod, so need to ask some questions. When can it be considered by General Synod again? Archbishop Sentamu at the end of the live audio feed didn't make it clear.
I listened to the whole audio and was so sad. Seemed to me that those against the motion were mostly just saying "give us time, we'll co-operate to get the right legislation". But how long, oh Lord, how long?
And - yes, as others have said, this majority requirement is not democratic. Does the House of Laity, if not the whole GS, need to be reformed, and if so, how can this be achieved?
--------------------
You are not alone in this.
Posts: 743 | From: Snorbens, UK | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Louise
Shipmate
# 30
|
Posted
Because tolerating heritage sexism in the state religion worked out so well for Irish and Israeli women...
Better to have a longer battle than to agree to setting up structures which will only replicate and nurture more of the same.
--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.
Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
(How did your dogging of Nate Silver go on election day, by the way?)
Um... Really?!
Context.
(I see now that St. Punk has responded at the bottom of the first page of this thread.)
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Organ Builder:
I don't think Ruth meant this.
Not safe for many workplaces, btw.
Such a relief... Er. Pond difference?
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jigsaw:
And - yes, as others have said, this majority requirement is not democratic. Does the House of Laity, if not the whole GS, need to be reformed, and if so, how can this be achieved?
By a two-thirds majority in all three houses. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Two thirds majority is the usual requirement for most constitutional changes on most charity governing documents. It's often required at two successive meetings.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
Ruth, "idiots who think women should remain second-class members of the Church of England" are few and far between. And I am certainly not one of them.
I know this is Hell, but you surely have a more erudite knowledge of the issues at hand than that. ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
RuthW may, but I'm not sure I do. It looks like that from here...
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Organ Builder
Shipmate
# 12478
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
Pond difference?
Precisely.
--------------------
How desperately difficult it is to be honest with oneself. It is much easier to be honest with other people.--E.F. Benson
Posts: 3337 | From: ...somewhere in between 40 and death... | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
I know it's easy for me to say this as a male, but there's always next time.
How long will that take? And how many people will have left the CofE in disgust by then? How much more irrelevant will the church be in English society by the time it decides to treat women as made in the image of God?
I'm led to believe that under synod rules this issue cannot be taken up with the current synod. It will be at least five years before it can be re-addressed.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
If this proportion of people had voted for the Police Commissioners last week (or even the government two years ago) everyone would be acclaiming a landslide victory.
I sat and listened (for as long as I could bear it) to the speeches from Synod and it was middle-class voice after middle-class voice. Call me an inverted snob if you like, but representative it wasn't.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DunkDuffel:
My arithmetic says that the overall votes were:
Yes 224
No 122
Abs 2
That's a two thirds majority, overall.
No, it's not. Of a total of 348 votes, 232 would be a two-thirds majority.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Would any other place have such a large 'yes' down as a 'no'?
Er, yes. Any voting body that required a two-thirds voting majority in three chambers/houses would have.
Assuming any such other body exists.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Louise:
Because tolerating heritage sexism in the state religion worked out so well for Irish and Israeli women...
Better to have a longer battle than to agree to setting up structures which will only replicate and nurture more of the same.
This.
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
If this proportion of people had voted for the Police Commissioners last week (or even the government two years ago) everyone would be acclaiming a landslide victory.
I sat and listened (for as long as I could bear it) to the speeches from Synod and it was middle-class voice after middle-class voice. Call me an inverted snob if you like, but representative it wasn't.
That's going to be pretty true of any meeting that relies on people being available for several days in the middle of an ordinary working week. You automatically exclude most of the working class and anyone who works in education, and most people in the healthcare sector. Those with time and money are bound to be overrepresented, just as they are in every political party and every charitable organisation.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Organ Builder:
Not safe for many workplaces, btw.
Perhaps not. But it's going on the Hell music appreciation thread when I set one up.
Oh, and can we have a BIT more vulgarity and general verbal spray please. This is Hell. We can provide you with a nice dead horse if you want to have a peaceable debate about the ordination of women. On this part of the Ship we prefer if you do things like... oh, I don't know... instead of flogging equines, try burning effigies.
Early on in the thread, someone explicitly held back from saying any more lest they got nasty. That's what we're here for, dearie. Getting nasty.
[ 20. November 2012, 21:17: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ophicleide16
Shipmate
# 16344
|
Posted
I was surpised when the result was announced, but not disappointed- I don't believe the proposed legislation would have proved satisfatory in the long run.
Incidentally, brilliant opening statement by +Manchester: "Your Grace, as I was saying..."
Posts: 79 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
glockenspiel
Shipmate
# 13645
|
Posted
This is all new to me - that two-thirds in every house thing - does it apply to all motions??
Posts: 1258 | From: Shropshire | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Standard committee and charity orders of incorporation usually require on two thirds majority for a change in constitution, not every vote. Often it is required two meetings in succession.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arvan
Shipmate
# 13608
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Would any other place have such a large 'yes' down as a 'no'?
Er, yes. Any voting body that required a two-thirds voting majority in three chambers/houses would have.
Assuming any such other body exists.
US constitutional amendments need 2/3 in each of senate and representatives and 3/4 of the states.
Posts: 59 | From: UK | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
Thank you. That seems relevantly analogous.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arvan:
US constitutional amendments need 2/3 in each of senate and representatives and 3/4 of the states.
And what did giving women the vote need? Was that a topic seen as so massively significant as to be constitutional?
THAT seems relevantly analogous as well.
[ 20. November 2012, 21:48: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Arvan:
US constitutional amendments need 2/3 in each of senate and representatives and 3/4 of the states.
And what did giving women the vote need? Was that a topic seen as so massively significant as to be constitutional?
That would be the fucking Nineteenth goddam Amendment, you prickless fuckweasel.
(profanity added per request)
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Fuckweasel I'll accept. But prickless? NEVER!
Anyway, a little bird called Wikipedia tells me the 19th amendment prohibited BANNING women from voting. It did not GIVE women the vote, it just stopped those horrible State thingies from discriminating against them.
For my naive Australian don't-pay-much-attention-to-Synods part, I would have thought that if 42 dioceses want women, 42 dioceses ought to be able to just go ahead and HAVE women.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
IF the CofE wants to continue its crass claims to be an genuinely all encompassing, inclusive, body, then it's got to get used to the idea that this inclusiveness has got to be for everyone, not just at the liberal end of the market. The gays want in - so let the opponents of women bishops stay and be accommodated. Because the alternative is to impose a doctrine test as viscus as the ones that the theological liberals used to complain about.
However the totally culpable failure was that they didn't even get the code of practice together so that Synod could see what they were signing the church up to. There's ZERO excuse for that. But in general - either we're inclusive, or we're not. You want inclusive - go gnaw on it. Me, I don't want inclusive - but at least I'm consistent about it.
Oh - and if you want to widen the area of blame, the rather unpleasant threats from a few MPs warning that the CofE might lose its privileges if it didn't do what they wanted might well have raised a few hackles. Such threats tend merely to wind people up...
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pyx_e
Quixotic Tilter
# 57
|
Posted
Bet the Bishops try something funny in the morning. GO POINTYHATS.
--------------------
It is better to be Kind than right.
Posts: 9778 | From: The Dark Tower | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
How anyone in a country that's had a queen for 50 years can believe that God has a fundamental problem with the symbolism of female leadership is beyond me.
The mental contortions involved must be exquisite.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Qoheleth.
Semi-Sagacious One
# 9265
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
Bet the Bishops try something funny in the morning. GO POINTYHATS.
Me too. There are some clever people in the HoB who will surely have been planning for this possibility.
--------------------
The Benedictine Community at Alton Abbey offers a friendly, personal service for the exclusive supply of Rosa Mystica incense.
Posts: 2532 | From: the radiator of life | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
Why wasn't it put to the opinion of everyone who is on the electoral roll of CofE churches? Why is a pretty unrepresentative group of the so called laity making the decision?
It can't be beyond the realms of the CofE's organisational ability to get a ballot paper in the hands of everyone on the roll.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
pete173
Shipmate
# 4622
|
Posted
Just back from the pub. Grr.
The Kingdom of God is bigger than the stupidity of 6 lay people. Onwards and upwards. But sorrowing with my sisters (and brothers) tonight.
--------------------
Pete
Posts: 1653 | From: Kilburn, London NW6 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Actually Pete those six voters seem to have scuppered the kingdom of God fairly effectively
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Traveller
Shipmate
# 1943
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
quote:
Originally posted by DunkDuffel:
My arithmetic says that the overall votes were:
Yes 224
No 122
Abs 2
That's a two thirds majority, overall.
No, it's not. Of a total of 348 votes, 232 would be a two-thirds majority.
DunkDuffel's anger got in the way of his calculator fingers. My numbers work out at:
Yes 324
No 123
Abstain 2
Total 449
Proportion in favour - 72.2%
I am so mad I am tempted to work towards standing for the next General Synod on a single issue - a single clause measure.
As soon as Synod starts saying that they respect a position and it must be given special relevance, it can never be given enough relevance in the opinion of those holding it.
Those still objecting to women priests trample all over the sensibilities of those (men and women) who see no distinction in the ability of women become ordained - priest or bishop.
--------------------
I will sing unto the Lord as long as I live:
I will praise my God while I have my being.
Psalm 104 v.33
Posts: 1037 | From: Wherever the car has stopped at the moment! | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
Goodness. People have been saying to me that liberals in the Church were just as bad as the conservatives. To be honest I never really believed it, but seeing the reactions on the Ship over a mere postponement of the inevitable is sure opening my eyes.
[ 20. November 2012, 23:14: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Traveller:
I am so mad I am tempted to work towards standing for the next General Synod on a single issue - a single clause measure.
As long as you don't mind my standing on a 'practising gays out' platform. And someone else standing on a 'only baptise adults' platform. Oh, and someone else standing on the issue of Vestments / Eucharistic Doctrine / outlawing Penal Substitution etc etc.
Either we are a broad church or we're not. You raise a lynch mob on the women issue, and I'll raise it on something else...
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emendator Liturgia
Shipmate
# 17245
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
For my naive Australian don't-pay-much-attention-to-Synods part, I would have thought that if 42 dioceses want women, 42 dioceses ought to be able to just go ahead and HAVE women.
Oi mate, I'm with you there. Just need some bishops and their dioceses to show have the balls (figuratively speaking), that is, the strength of their convictions, and appoint/elect a woman to fill to a vacancy as assistant bishop and see where that leads. Was done here in Australia, I'm sure you remember Orfeo, when Peter Carnley went ahead with the ordination of women (then Melbourne and Canberra) to the priesthood without the necessary legislatioon in place.
--------------------
Don't judge all Anglicans in Sydney by prevailing Diocesan standards!
Posts: 401 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Goodness. People have been saying to me that liberals in the Church were just as bad as the conservatives. To be honest I never really believed it, but seeing the reactions on the Ship over a mere postponement of the inevitable is sure opening my eyes.
Pity it's not opening your mind. That empty vessel has needed filling for awhile.
As I said to a mate on FB, this all seems very strange from down here. We consecrated our first female bishop, Kay Goldsworthy, in 2008. Frankly, that was way overdue.
![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif) with all you British mob as you figure out where to go from here.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
St. Punk the Pious
Biblical™ Punk
# 683
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
Just back from the pub. Grr.
The Kingdom of God is bigger than the stupidity of 6 lay people. Onwards and upwards. But sorrowing with my sisters (and brothers) tonight.
No, sir. The stupid ones are those who just could not abide adequate provision for those who cannot accept the ministry of women bishops. If they had exhibited that minimum of grace, women bishops would be on the way already.
I'm disappointed at your attitude toward the no voters.
--------------------
The Society of St. Pius *
Wannabe Anglican, Reader
My reely gud book.
Posts: 4161 | From: Choral Evensong | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
Pity it's not opening your mind. That empty vessel has needed filling for awhile.
As I said to a mate on FB, this all seems very strange from down here. We consecrated our first female bishop, Kay Goldsworthy, in 2008. Frankly, that was way overdue.
with all you British mob as you figure out where to go from here.
It's clear you are trying to insult me, but it's not clear for what. You know I actually support women bishops, right?
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
Just back from the pub. Grr.
The Kingdom of God is bigger than the stupidity of 6 lay people. Onwards and upwards. But sorrowing with my sisters (and brothers) tonight.
No, sir. The stupid ones are those who just could not abide adequate provision for those who cannot accept the ministry of women bishops. If they had exhibited that minimum of grace, women bishops would be on the way already.
I'm disappointed at your attitude toward the no voters.
Isn't it too obvious to say - find a male bishop? It's not like the church is going to be swamped by women bishops (unless they are better qualified for that position).
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Isn't it too obvious to say - find a male bishop? It's not like the church is going to be swamped by women bishops (unless they are better qualified for that position).
Huh? Whatever Episcopal ministry means, it's got something to do with accepting the authority of those who end up set over you, not 'finding a bishop'. And a lot of the issue about the inadequacy of the provision for opponents is that there was perceived to be no guarantee that their concerns would really be respected. The unambiguous imposition of female priests on recalcitrant parishes and dioceses in the TEC despite many promises to the contrary when the legislation was being passed there means that the libruls have NO credibility when they line up saying the same nice things over here. Similarly the way that the provisions of the Act of Synod have been blatantly ignored (an advert for a vacancy in see that was honest enough to admit no opponents of women priests would be considered, for example) means the level of trust here is pretty low. Then the attempts by those nice men in pointy hats to put some teeth into the protections are shouted down - and today's catastrophe shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Trust the bishops? I'd rather trust a corrupt politician I'd just paid off; as Heinlein comments, a corrupt politician has to stay bought, once he's taken the money (that degree of credibility is all he's got to sell), whereas people with 'principles' have a remarkable ability to interpret those principles in accordance with the prevailing winds at the time. Now there's an interesting question as to whether I should continue in the CofE given that attitude, but I tend to go for the traditional conservative Evangelical attitude that it's the best available boat to fish from, even if it is taking in water wholesale, ignoring the bench entirely: “What’s the difference between Jurassic Park and the Church of England? Well, one’s a fantasy land populated by dinosaurs . . . and the other’s a blockbuster film.” Let them play in their fantasy land of synods and the House of Lords; and if we're lucky they'll keep their mouths shut.
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
The stupid ones are those who just could not abide adequate provision for those who cannot accept the ministry of women bishops.
Isn't that what schisms are for?
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Goodness. People have been saying to me that liberals in the Church were just as bad as the conservatives. To be honest I never really believed it, but seeing the reactions on the Ship over a mere postponement of the inevitable is sure opening my eyes.
Pity it's not opening your mind. That empty vessel has needed filling for awhile.
As I said to a mate on FB, this all seems very strange from down here. We consecrated our first female bishop, Kay Goldsworthy, in 2008. Frankly, that was way overdue.
with all you British mob as you figure out where to go from here.
2008?
Zach is from the Diocese of Indianapolis. By 2008, Cate Waynick had been Bishop of the Diocese of Indianapolis for 11 years. And, yes, Cate is a woman.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ender's Shadow:
Whatever Episcopal ministry means, it's got something to do with accepting the authority of those who end up set over you, not 'finding a bishop'.
It also has something to do with us being in communion with each other. Several provinces in the Anglican Communion have female bishops, and they are all in communion with the Church of England -- so the idea that you're going to keep some corner of your church free from the touch of female bishops is laughable. If women are bishops in one province, they are bishops in all of them.
So suck it up, buttercup -- you have female bishops. It's just that none of them are English. Yet.
And no, I don't give a shit about the feelings of people who don't like women's ordination, just like I don't give a shit about the feelings of people who want to insist that their racism isn't really racism. It was a mistake to make any provision at all for sexism in the church.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
St. Punk the Pious
Biblical™ Punk
# 683
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
And no, I don't give a shit about the feelings of people who don't like women's ordination, just like I don't give a shit about the feelings of people who want to insist that their racism isn't really racism. It was a mistake to make any provision at all for sexism in the church.
And that demonstrates precisely why adequate canonical/legal protection for traditionalists is necessary. Not all who claim the name of Christ act with discernment and grace. And that goes (double?) for those in authority.
--------------------
The Society of St. Pius *
Wannabe Anglican, Reader
My reely gud book.
Posts: 4161 | From: Choral Evensong | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Such protection is complete bullshit! There are female bishops in the Anglican Communion. Everyone in the communion is therefore in communion with female bishops. The idea of a separate little enclave makes no sense whatsoever. People who don't like female bishops should become Catholics or join up with one of the neo-retro-continuing-sorta-kinda-not-really Anglican groups. Like the one you belong to. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
ETA: You realize that you've just argued in favor of separate protection for racists within the church, I hope.
[ 21. November 2012, 01:14: Message edited by: RuthW ]
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
And no, I don't give a shit about the feelings of people who don't like women's ordination, just like I don't give a shit about the feelings of people who want to insist that their racism isn't really racism. It was a mistake to make any provision at all for sexism in the church.
And that demonstrates precisely why adequate canonical/legal protection for traditionalists is necessary. Not all who claim the name of Christ act with discernment and grace. And that goes (double?) for those in authority.
It would be so freaking hilarious if anything besides churches tried to operate in this way. I mean, imagine trying this out:
Dear Citizens of the United States,
We have changed the rules to make it permissible for a black man to be President. However, should you personally object to this course of action (whether out of a sincere theological belief that white people, being descended from the correct son of Noah, are inherently superior, or whether just because your mind is so stuck in the rut of whites being in charge that your stress levels rise far too high at the prospect of change), we have made alternative arrangmenets so that you don't have to recognise that a black man did indeed win the vote. You can pretend that some white guy is in charge. We know it will make you feel better.
Nobody wins from this kind of attempt at negative accommodation. Either the rules apply or they don't. An organisation might have decisions to make about which LEVEL of unit makes the decisions about the rules, and makes the appointments/conducts the elections, but it is completely useless to have a situation which says "these our rules, except when they're not".
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
St. Punk the Pious
Biblical™ Punk
# 683
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Such protection is complete bullshit! There are female bishops in the Anglican Communion. Everyone in the communion is therefore in communion with female bishops. The idea of a separate little enclave makes no sense whatsoever. People who don't like female bishops should become Catholics or join up with one of the neo-retro-continuing-sorta-kinda-not-really Anglican groups. Like the one you belong to.
ETA: You realize that you've just argued in favor of separate protection for racists within the church, I hope.
You realize you have gotten silly now.
--------------------
The Society of St. Pius *
Wannabe Anglican, Reader
My reely gud book.
Posts: 4161 | From: Choral Evensong | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
