Church removes power from women bishops

[IndianaGreen]

Source: The Guardian

Church removes power from women bishops

• Congregations get option to insist on male clergy
• Evangelicals claim move will avoid Anglican split

The Guardian, Friday 9 October 2009

The unity of the Church of England is under threat once more after a key committee agreed to automatically remove certain powers from female bishops and give them to their male colleagues.

According to the amended law, this move would allow the male bishop to perform certain functions, such as communion and confirmation, in order to accommodate parishioners and clergy hostile to female bishops.

It follows heavy lobbying from those opposed to the concept of women bishops who have demanded special care in the event of their ordination, an event unlikely to occur before 2014.

A statement from the Church of England said the committee had "received nearly 300 submissions, including more than 100 from members of General Synod" – a quarter of its governing body – and that "many of these offered alternatives" to a code of practice.

The development is likely to further drive a wedge between liberals and conservatives, who are already at war over the issue, with the amended legislation clearly favouring one side.

Ruth McCurry, who chairs a group supporting the ordination of women bishops, accused the church of institutionalising schism. She said: "You will have a group of people who don't recognise each other as bishops. What kind of church do they think they're in when they are not in communion with each other? You are legislating this schism into existence and you are creating a two-tier church, a category of second-class bishops. People could refuse to receive communion from Rowan if he were to ever ordain a woman as a bishop.

"Unfortunately I have come to terms with the fact that you cannot have women bishops without discrimination, lots of men will be discriminated against too, and this poor committee is trying to find an elusive formula that will keep everyone happy. They can't."

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/09/church-removes-power-from-women

---

Goose stepping back into the Dark Ages just to appease the Anglican fundies.

[saltpoint]

1. There's just no rationale to deny women roles in the hierarchy of the Church,

including its very top positions.

[naaman fletcher]

5. Sure there is..

We are talking the realm of fantasy here. Some book may or may not have a few lines that support women in "the church". Various people build up fantasies around those differing interpretations, and/or sub-groups within those fantasies.

To suggest that there is some sort of logical right or wrong within the realm of fantasy is to lose the war in order to try to win the battle.

[saltpoint]

16. I understand the context you are referencing. I was hoping that by

this point in the History game that fairer hearts in the Church would prevail. Even Saul, one of my least favorite Biblical heavyweights, suggests that there is "neither male nor female," and that we are "all One," a kind of gender socialism blended to inadvertent but much-deserved equality.

The Church will have to administer its own political inequalities even as the hearts-and-minds debate appears to suggest that women can and should hold their own among its upper decision-makers.

[sakabatou]

25. I've heard a few lines in the Bible that deny women leadership roles

It's not unexpected though. But that's back then. This is now.

[saltpoint]

37. It would be so damn refreshing if women who were interested and

committed to service in the Church could be honored for their interest and involvement and commitment at all levels of same.

I really blame the all-male higher-ups for this.

[hughee99]

34. Isn't the Queen the head of the Church of England?

Although I imagine, much like in the monarchy, the title is essentially ceremonial.

[pennylane100]

2. It feels so good to be an agnostic.

If only christian women would stop allowing themselves to be treated like second class members, there would be no more christianity. However, before someone also mentions the plight of muslim women, my personal belief (or bias, if that is a more accurate description) is that being treated second class is a step up for many women in the muslim world

[defendandprotect]

12. Yes! Why in the heck do women support these patriarchal religions???

And feed their kids into this male supremacist system?

:eyes:

[Threedifferentones]

28. Largely because they are scared of what it will do to them if they resist.

That is if they recognize it as such. There are though an unfortunate (IMO) number of women in these patriarchies who seem to enjoy their role fine.

[sudopod]

30. Because they were told they'd go to Hell if they didn't..

Who wants to be tortured forever?

Who wants their children to be burned alive forever?

It's in the Bible, so it must be true.

[BrklynLiberal]

3. back into the Dark Ages is right!!!!!!

[DeSwiss]

4. Just one more nail....

...in the coffin.

- K&R

[niyad]

6. as an ex-com catholic, my question continues to be, "WHY do women remain part of

organizations that basically tell them they are worthless?"

[Iowa]

8. The same reasons others remain...

--Childhood indoctrination which can be very tough to overcome.
--Family. The churches' tentacles are deeply embedded in peoples' lives. They have inserted themselves into some of the most important events of life. It can be very tough to leave without damage/disruption to those relationships.
--Employment, community, and business relationships, and the desire to avoid discrimination in one of the most religious countries in the world.
--The need to believe that there is a magic wonderland where we'll go and reunite with those we love after we die and live happily - forever.

Now that I've seen the light (and I was in my 50s when that occurred), sometimes I can hardly believe that I ever bought into any of it. But then I consider the fact that I was indoctrinated since the day I was born by very good and well-meaning people who were indoctrinated themselves, and I was surrounded by people who believed it all my life. And then I think it's amazing that I was able to break away at all.

[niyad]

9. I left (and was also thrown out) when I was 18 for having the temerity to argue doctrine

with the archbishop. this, despite being brought up rc, going to catholic school, too. family essentially never forgave me

[CatholicEdHead]

20. Wow, that takes guts

Good for you to stand up for your convictions. You must have had one of the newer ones who like agreement. Most of the past generation of bishops an archbishops would not mind a civil debate on issues. The new ones will not even hear a question and refuse the debate and go back to quoting the CCC verbatim as it is infallible (which it is not).

[Iowa]

33. Damn. That's tough that your family never forgave you. That's one hold they have on people.

I suspect there are many people who are officially counted as Catholic but really aren't. And one of the biggest reasons they don't come out is the desire to avoid family rifts. I hope your family sees the light someday and realizes you were right all along.

[defendandprotect]

13. Excellent explanation . . ..sad, but excellent -- !!!

A funny thing happened to me in Catholic school -- 1st grade and 2nd grade --

I had the same nun both times. Sister Consolata. She made a point of teaching

us about freedom of conscience, freedom of thought. By the second grade she was

telling us that Separation of Church and State gave us our highest privilege in a

democracy -- i.e., the right to personal conscience and self-determination.

It also makes clear that if there is a Creator "god" that god is not a fascist.

We have been given free thought and personal conscience and we are expected to use them!

I also had an early aversion to fascism - authoritarianism, bullies.

You could find all of that in Catholicism!

:)

Glad you made it out!

[Iowa]

32. I, too, had some very good experiences with nuns...

In fact, I still go every year to visit one of my high school teachers who is in her 90s now. In visiting her I've come to know many others where she lives. They're all super-smart, humble, and highly educated (some with multiple PhDs - they won't tell you that, but I ask). And they all live very simply - they each have what is essentially a tiny dorm room for themselves. Everything else is shared. These women have lived lives of service to others. And they're all quite liberal (at least the ones I know are). I suspect they all have their doubts about their religion, but it's their life's work that really matters.

One thing really struck me when we were visiting the grave of one of my nun friends who had recently died... the nuns were all buried with tiny, tiny markers that were level with the ground - and they were buried two per grave. They were almost invisible. Yet nearby were a couple of recent Archbishops graves, each with a really massive monument (I saw where those guys lived too... in a fabulous mansion on priceless lake-front property). The contrast between the Archbishops and the nuns was stark, and I thought that summed up the situation beautifully. Nuns are OK.

[JerseygirlCT]

36. That does say something pretty loud and clear, doesn't it?

And those dioceses who are running short of money, because they're paying for the crimes of their priests, the same priests that the archbishops simply moved around instead of punishing... the people who are first turned out of their homes aren't those same archbishops or those same priests, but the nuns.

I had some terrific women as teachers - and some really, really nasty people. IOW, the nuns pretty much mirrored society at large.

But the RCC's official treatment of the nuns, simply mirrored their treatment of all women. Second class, either wombs or servants.

[defendandprotect]

39. Did you read that the money given to the RCC for their "faith based" charities . . .

is being investigated by the government because they think it has been used by the

Church to pay off lawsuits brought against pedophile priests?

Mostly we had nuns who were very uptight -- especially about human sexuality.

The female lay teachers were the nuttiest of the lot -- one would tell us stories of

martyrs -- with all the gruesome details -- every day ... hour after hour!!!

Who ever said religion was good for mental health?

:)

[defendandprotect]

38. Yes . .. I remember the contrast between the Parish priests' living conditions

and the nuns --

the nuns took care of cleaning, cooking, etal --

The priests had housekeepers, cooks, etal --

:)

[katkat]

11. niyad

Maybe the Log Cabin Republicans could speak to that.

[No Elephants]

23. You mean, like the entire planet prior to the 20th Century?

[Triana]

7. religion = politics ...

and in politics, there is always a Taliban.

[tomm2thumbs]

10. hopefully this will start to undermine their own cause and break 'em down

at some point people have to walk away from injustice and not participate in it.

[Union Yes]

14. Pure sexist Authoritarianism. With policies of conviction like this, religion should be able..

to present scientific evidence that any "god" exists.

Religion is trying to pass itself off as science when it is completely unproven or incapable of offering any proof.

Faith is NOT science.

[madrchsod]

15. going back to the old women are`t clean because they bleed bullshit...

[dembotoz]

17. what was the ratio used in pre civil war america?? Perhaps women are only 4/5 human???

[KamaAina]

21. So I guess an African American woman would be 12/25 of a person

4/5 (female) * 3/5 (black, as enshrined in our Constitution). Slightly less than half.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[xchrom]

18. the anti-gay hate we've read about from conservative episcopal/anglican churches

always had an anti-woman basis.

they've always been very angry at ordaining women priests.

this move may very well be the move that breaks the anglican communion -- and to my mind that is not a bad thing.

more -- american episcopalians won't have anything to do with this.

[damntexdem]

19. Oh, doing what's right might divide the church, so it's better to do what's wrong.

Isn't it great to see the decisions of the paragons of virtue? ;-)

[MaineDem]

22. This is what I dislike about the male-dominated organized religion

It's ridiculous. What are they afraid of?

[TrogL]

24. What about a region that only has one bishop

We have a female bishop. The next one over is 1000 miles away.

[JerseygirlCT]

26. Wow.

Just more to make me feel the time for the Episcopal church to move happily away from the mother ship is upon us.

This is total nonsense. And it seems that Williams is ready, once again, to bend to the bigots.

He really needs to get control of this and just say no.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

29. Unfortunately Archbishop Williams seems to suffer from the same "must please everyone even if

they're nuts" syndrome that afflicts Democrats who espouse "bipartisanship."

[JerseygirlCT]

35. Oh yes

right on the nose.

Frustrating as all get-out, isn't it?

I think they confuse making peace and seeking tolerance with aiding and abetting bullies.

[Honeycombe8]

27. Well, they shouldn't be bishops, anyway.

JUST KIDDING! (thought I'd get a few flame throwers angry for a sec.)

:sarcasm:

[regnaD kciN]

31. This story, as written, makes no sense...

If they're talking about "alternative episcopal oversight" (conservative congregations can get an alternate male bishop from an adjoining diocese to supervise them instead of their female diocesan), it has nothing to do with "automatically remov(ing) certain powers from female bishops and give them to their male colleagues."

And, while it is the jurisdiction of a bishop to preside at confirmations, "communion" has a priest as presider, not a bishop, so having a male or female bishop would make zero difference.

This story, like so many news stories about religion written by a reporter who knows little about the issues, is FUBAR from start to finish. I'd put very little weight in it.

:crazy:

[harry_pothead]

40. Again, thank god I'm an atheist.