mirrorshard: (Blue flower tea)
[personal profile] mirrorshard
From the BBC yet again - more moves towards schism in the Church of England.

One suggestion from the group working on a potential Covenant has been for churches departing from tradition to have "diminished status" within the Communion.

Oh, dear, they're at it again... normally, I'd immediately dismiss this as a Caesar's-truce, an apparent concession offered in order to provoke your enemy beyond endurance and get them to attack you or just to waste time.

However, this is the Church of England we're talking about. It's not at all outside the bounds of possibility that either

  1. the traditionalists really believe that they're in the majority and have enough RIGHT on their side that they can get this accepted, or
  2. the progressives are actually prepared to accept a stupid, insulting result like this in order to preserve their precious communion.

Said communion, of course, is growing more nominal and indeed risible by the day, and over what's effectively a non-issue that will probably end up resolved in the most traditional manner of all, by a handful of earth on a coffin lid.

The scriptural argument against women bishops rests on three legs. Take any one of them away, and the whole thing falls over.

  • The letter of Scripture is correct and immutable. Well, there's not really much to say on this one, except that if you believe it then you are under an absolute obligation to make it completely clear which version and/or translation you consider Correct, and which bits overrule which other bits. For instance, it's commonly accepted that a vision Paul had in Ephesus overrules what the Boss said, The Law is the Law - which really would seem to affirm in itself that Leviticus holds true for Christians.
  • Everything that is written in the Bible is the considered opinion of God, rather than an artifact of the time and culture in which it was written down and/or translated. So, yeah. Show me all the other first-century (CE or BCE, I don't mind which, and Jewish or any other religion or secular) texts that give equal positions to men and women, and which mention bisexuality or homosexuality without condemning them. If you can't produce credible evidence that these behaviours and mores were not pervasive, but instead were decreed by God, then it seems a reasonable assumption that Himself was content to let people get on with things their way till they decided otherwise.
  • There is a fundamental and unchangeable difference between men and women - they are incapable of nurturing and guiding in the same way, and women cannot perform episcopal duties. The episcopal duties in question seem basically to come in two parts; managerial and pastoral care of the priests in her diocese, and the transmission and exercise of apostolic magic. The first, really, is a no-brainer. The second would depend, pretty much, on the nature of apostolic magic, which of course I'm not qualified to pronounce on. And which NOBODY CARES ABOUT except a few theology-wonks.

Speaking of theology-wonks, I propose a brief suggested guide to finding and avoiding them. If you meet people who habitually say "Jesus" rather than "God", you're probably in the company of people who care more about shibboleths, magic words, and their own tight-knit community than about doing good in the world and actually doing what Himself recommended. Counterexamples and questions are welcome.
Anonymous (will be screened)
OpenID (will be screened if not validated)
Identity URL: 
Account name:
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.


If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org

Notice: This account is set to log the IP addresses of everyone who comments.
Links will be displayed as unclickable URLs to help prevent spam.

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags