Tuesday, 20 November 2012

Women Bishops

Apparently no, we're not.

The Rev Rachel Weir, chairwoman of Watch, said tonight: 
"This is a tragic day for the Church of England after so many years of debate and after all our attempts at compromise."

That's as maybe, but it is because of the years of compromise that we still insist on penis episcopii.

If the 1992 measure which embodied discrimination against women  ( "allowing" them to be priests but not bishops) had been defeated, a new measure, that did not discriminate, would have been passed within a decade and Rowan's successor might well have been a woman.

Jesus didn't compromise and it's about bloody time the Church of England stopped doing so. The victorious opponents of today's measure learnt that lesson a long time ago.

1 comment:

  1. with respect, this is an emotive, rather than rational post. The fact of the matter is that the radfem liberal purists were so absolutist and doctrinaire in their refusal even to listen to the principled theological views of those who though differently to themselves, and voted down their own Archbishop's amendments in 2008. How they can argue for this on 'catholic' grounds after giving a 'V-sign' to their Most Revd Fathers in God is utterly incomprehensible. They got what they deserved. Now I think there should be women bishops, but also that trad anglicans should be allowed to flourish. back to the drawing board for General Synod.