It has nothing to do with theology, God, revealed truth, what the Holy Spirit is saying, justice, what the Bible says or what the rest of the Anglican Communion thinks.
It is very simple: the Church of England will have women bishops because it has caved in to the Spirit of the Age. What is more, it wants to make conspicuous its obeisance to the zeitgeist by observing the fashionable pieties of equality, inclusion and feminism with maniacal enthusiasm.
Whatever the theological rightness or otherwise of women bishops, the CofE has decided in favour of them for the wrong reason. Next, for the same wrong reason, will come openly same-sex partnered bishops, followed by redefining marriage to include same-sex couples, accelerated decline and final oblivion. RIP CofE.
Fly, fly! All is lost!
You are such a card that I am struggling to place your quote. I have narrowed it down to either Haffed the Persian or Northrup Fry -you sly devil!
Oh, come on. Read David’s post. Note the tone. My response is hardly unfair.
Vincent,
I am simply adopting your new meme.
Although I do miss the old Vincent who wrote sincere well argued posts.
Not sure I follow you, but in any case, nobody liked that Vincent. He died lonely in a ditch back in late 2012. 🙂
I liked you a lot. I just didn’t agree with you.
Ah c’mon. Can Vincent come out to play?
One thought does occur, however. The reasons behind this decision are in fact irrelevant. Either you agree with the decision, and you can furnish your own “right” reasons to celebrate it, or you don’t, and you’re just as ready with your own arguments to deplore it. On the ground, it does not matter very much why this decision was made, only that its consequences will now unfold.
The slippery slope argument that David invokes is not terribly compelling either — by that argument nothing would ever be done. As Sir Humphrey said, “Many things must be done, but nothing must be done for the first time.”
It will come as a suprise to no one that I am wholeheartedly in favour of this development. My own arguments are that there is no interdiction from Christ to have women as bishops (if there were I would very much suspect human editing!), and it’s not like men, as a class, have been doing such a stellar job of it throughout time.
I don’t think it can hurt, and I’ve a feeling it may do some measure of good.
I came back to church precisely because there are women in the clergy in the ACC.
Thanks for the post Vincent.
I find compelling arguments on both sides of the debate. It’s good to hear your take.
Peace brother
The future ordination of female bishops in England will no doubt have a negative impact on most of the Anglican Communion, including the ACNA.
It seems to me that David’s point is that it is quite possible to do the right thing for the wrong reason and it also seems to me that he is quite right. (Our present priest is a most gifted woman. We are delighted to have her lead us and we are grateful that there is so much objection to female clergy, otherwise she would be elsewhere.) Nevertheless, she should have been ordained – as, in fact she was – because she does a great job and was called to it, rather than, as could easily happen – and has happened – as a sop to the vagaries of the surrounding culture. The solution to all this would require an essay all by itself.
The issue is never one of gender but tragically many women coming into the minitstry do so for the wrong reason. What is needed in the Anglican Communion and indeed all orthodox churches is the absolute requirement of any person seeking ordination to affirm strongly the orthodox faith and make an oath to stand up for the Gospel. There are many so-called bishops and other ordained persons who have abandoned the Gospel for that deceptive phrase “political correctness”. Such persons have shown their deceit by taking action against orthodox Christians using the civil court system which cares nothing about theology or the true Gospel.