Church [of England] Votes For Women Bishops

sky ^ | 11:35pm UK, Monday July 07, 2008

[Grig]

The Church of England's ruling body has voted to go ahead with the ordination of women bishops.

But the Church was facing a damaging split after members of its General Synod threw out compromise proposals on females in senior ranks.

All safeguards demanded by traditionalists were rejected.

Sky News correspondent Mike McCarthy said: "It's a historic and very significant moment for the Church of England.

"The real test now is how many people will leave (the Church). There are certainly going to be many wrestling with their consciences."

The Synod members voted to approve work on a national statutory code to accommodate those within the Church who object to women bishops.

But the Synod rejected compromise plans for new "super bishops" to cater for objectors - and also their preferred option of creating new dioceses.

The decision to go ahead with work on the code came after more than six hours of debate by the General Synod, which saw extraordinary scenes, with one bishop in tears as he spoke of being "ashamed" of the Church of England.

The Rt Rev Stephen Venner, Bishop of Dover, who is in favour of women bishops said: "I have to say, Synod, for the first time in my life, I feel ashamed.

"We have talked for hours about wanting to give an honourable place to those who disagree.

"We have been given opportunities for both views to flourish. We have turned down every, almost realistic opportunity for those who are opposed to flourish."

[Boagenes]

So, they've voted to expand upon their apostasy. I wonder if we will now see the 1300 clergy members and 11 bishops who threatened to leave, finally do it.

The Church of Rome is looking at potentially millions of new members defecting from this dying, apostate body. And I say that as a Protestant, because I consider it good news.

[lastchance]

Ruth Gledhill has been live blogging the Synod. You can read her blog and the comments here

http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/2008/07/women-bishops-t.html#more

[PurpleMan]

“... they’ve voted to expand upon their apostasy.”

What apostasy would that be?

[Boagenes]

Women priests.

[PurpleMan]

Not being a theologian, why is women priests an apostasy?

[Boagenes]

1 Timothy.

[Boagenes]

And gay clergy is next. Mark my words. What the Episcopal Church has done in America is a foreshadowing of what the Church of England itself is going to do. First women priests, then women bishops, then openly gay clergy. That's the next step. Wait and see. Who pushed for and approved the gay bishop Gene Robinson in the Episcopal Church? Jefferts Schori, a woman "bishop".

The election of women to the priesthood always leads to increasing liberalism and ultimately the rejection of scripture in favor of false doctrine. Always. This is why Paul wrote what he did in 1 Timothy.

[workerbee]

If England’s church needed any more help in meeting total collapse, this ought to do it.

[luckystarmom]

My church split from the Vineyard fellowship because they started allowing women to be pastors.

My fear was exactly what you stated that when women become pastors, the churches become more liberal and do reject scripture. That’s what I’ve seen in the Methodist church and others that I have been involved in.

[Boagenes]

You can pretty much trace the rejection of scripture and the entrance of apostate teaching in any of the mainstream denominations to the ordination of women. It always introduces a "liberalism" that then begins to agitate for "reform" - this means, in liberalese, denial of the authority of scripture, denial of infallibility of scripture, and denial of inerrancy of scripture. From this, then flow all the following heresies and liberalism that enter the church body...ordination of homosexual clergy, support for gay marriage, refusal to condemn homosexuality, support for abortion (under "women's rights") and so forth.

Now if you asked me why, I would suggest (and I have no data to back it up, just personal observation and suspicion) that this all happens because the vast majority of women entering the clergy are lesbians (even if temporarily closeted ones). Therefore these once conservative denominations are destroyed by the admittance of a radical lesbian contingent into the clergy of the denomination. This out of some misguided notion of "fairness", and with utter disregard for God's Word (1 Timothy).

[hinckley buzzard]

And gay clergy is next. Mark my words.

Just so. Historically and empirically, aggressive feminist revisionists have served as a wedge to open the door for the militant homosexual lobby-- repeatedly observed and confirmed across the board.

[sockmonkey]

As my formerly Anglican, now a Catholic Priest said, “Sometimes the best journeys start with phrases like, “Let’s get the heck out of here!”

I think that some of these Anglicans have changed their bottom line so many times, that they can no longer see the time to leave was ages ago.

[Grig]

Within the next 10 years you will see widespread odinations of women and/or gays in many Protestant denominations.

[kaehurowing]

The first thing women clergy do is chase all the straight men and traditional families right out of the church, leaving it ripe for the gays and lesbians.

[Chewbacca]

I don’t care what the Anglican church does.
I quit going to church because all the churches I went to were getting too feminist in teachings.

[B Knotts]

It is a misunderstanding of the entire theology of Holy Orders, and represents a replacement of Christianity with Marxism (e.g., the priesthood and episcopacy are about “power”, thus women must be ordained, or they are excluded from said power...classic Marxist thought).

[Ransomed]

That was a pretty good account. God bless those priests that spoke up in the comment section who were frustrated and angry.

Freegards

[iowamark]

when women become pastors, the churches become more liberal and do reject scripture. That’s what I’ve seen in the Methodist church and others that I have been involved in.

I am not sure if the female leadership causes liberalism, or the liberalism causes feminist leadership.

Theological issues aside, I could tolerate women clergy if they were orthodox. But it never happens that way. Orthodox women do not want to be priests and bishops.

[kalee]

Anglican ping

[Huber]

Thanks to kalee for the ping.

Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams.

FReepmail Huber or sionnsar if you want on or off this moderately high-volume ping list (sometimes 3-9 pings/day).
This list is pinged by Huber and sionnsar.

Resource for Traditional Anglicans: http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com
Humor: The Anglican Blue

Speak the truth in love. Eph 4:15

[Huber]

There is a fundamental theological difference between women’s ordination as a “minister” vs. as a “priest”. The latter is sacramental its basis. There is another argument against ordination as a “minister” that is (I believe) based upon St. Paul and has to do with the minister’s role as a teacher. This rule is used in many conservative protestant churches including those of the PCA.

[PurpleMan]

“..the priesthood and episcopacy are about “power”, thus women must be ordained, or they are excluded from said power...classic Marxist thought”

Then you would disagree with those who quote Paul saying “You are a royal priesthood and a priestly kingdom,” (1 Peter 2:9)?

I dunno. Just asking.

[B Knotts]

Obviously, that does not refer to earthly power. The Marxist analysis does.

[B Knotts]

Also, in that case, what is being spoken of is the priesthood of all believers.

[Eepsy]

I think, if you look closely, that the rejection of scripture can be traced to the acceptance of birth control in the Thirties. Prior to this all mainstream denominations considered birth control contrary to scripture. This was modernism’s “foot in the door”.

[Barney Gumble]

It’s not like anyone goes to the Anglican Church anymore to see these women bishops. There a few people, all over 70.
The Church of England bought into the big lie that if you were less restrictive more people would come. People don’t need to go to church to hear “Believe what you want to be believe.”

I’m not sure why anyone who is practicing Anglican remains so. Do they really find spirtual leadership in the Queen? Will they still find it when Charles is King?

[Boagenes]

I belong the LCMS a (formerly) very conservative denomination. But things have changed greatly under the "guidance" of our new president. Not only are conservatives being sidelined in the denomination, but now there is tremendous agitation for women clergy. Groups have formed within the denomination dedicated to getting women clergy accepted.

Once they take this step, I'm going to be out of there like a rat out of an aqueduct. I don't know where to turn. I don't believe in the non-denominational, Pentecostal, charismatic brand of Christianity. I don't believe in Calvinism or the Baptist tradition. I love the liturgy and believe it is a reverent, timeless, devout form of worship and I adhere to it. Yet I disagree strongly with two or three major points of Catholic doctrine that I just can't get past.

So I fear I will be in the wilderness within 5 to 10 years, with no home. I don't believe in churches without liturgy, I won't accept the liberalism entering mainstream denominations, and I can't accept parts of Catholic doctrine that I consider, as a matter of conscience, to be "made up". Sucks to be me.

[xJones]

And gay clergy is next. Mark my words. What the Episcopal Church has done in America is a foreshadowing of what the Church of England itself is going to do. First women priests, then women bishops, then openly gay clergy. That's the next step. Wait and see.

Hey, it worked in TEC. Lay the groundwork, plant many liberal apostates in key positions for years, and then send in a female figure as a sort of Trojan horse. After the female figure goes through the gates, the gays jump out and take over.

Who pushed for and approved the gay bishop Gene Robinson in the Episcopal Church? Jefferts Schori, a woman "bishop".

Vicky Gene was approved, voted in, and ordained under Bishop Griswold. Not that there's any difference between Griswold's and JS's goals...

[luckystarmom]

I would imagine there are others like you, and you need to stand up for what you believe in.

I think that if the conservatives in these other denominations would have fought for what they believe is right, then maybe the liberals would not be destroying so many churches.

[Boagenes]

There are others like me. Unfortunately, at the last two synod conferences, the conservatives were outvoted by the liberals by a narrow margin. The liberals are good at this, they obtain delegate positions to the conventions, they attain power in the hierarchy of any organization. They infest any power structure they want to destroy.

And now the LCMS is in dire jeopardy of going the way of the ELCA under Kieschnik and his cohort of liberal cronies. I imagine my family and I won't be in the LCMS in five years, certainly ten years. After that, we may just have to worship at home, in a house church, or perhaps see if we can come to some accommodation with our views on the Catholic Church.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Dear Boagenes, I can see how desolate you must feel to have no church where you can know you are in His church and doing His will. It's a suffering I have seen "up close and personal," as some people very dear have gone through he same experience, and the pain can be major and long-lasting.

It seems that God's mightiest works --- including His creation of the human race, endowing us with reason and freedom, choosing to start over after the human-instigated catastrophe of the Flood, singling out a Mesopotamian man, Abram, as father of "Chosen People" who are apostate as often as they are faithful --- all this work of God's is always flawed by human sins.

So you have to just accept it in your mind that "there are always going to be sins..." and as you get old (perhaps you are as old as I am) you have to add "... and I have contributed to this sinful situation, either by deed or by omission."

It seems to me that the church founded by Christ could be recognized by certain continuities, and thus you would be able to find people in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, continuously up to the 21st century, who had a core of beliefs and practices which were essentially the same (or were developmentally related, as the "acorn" seems dramatically different from the "oak," and yet closer investigation shows that they are the same thing at different stages of development.)

And that led me by inference to the conclusion that it's either the Catholics or the Orthodox. Or perhaps in some way both.

I don't know where you are geographically, but if I were you I'd maybe look up an Eastern Catholic Church (Ukrainian, Maronite, or whoever you might have close at hand.) They make a living link between East and West and are very big on that continuity I was talking about. Their worship might at first strike you as awfully foreign and exotic -- but if you're from the LCMS, maybe it wont be too awfully foreign and exotic.

You might find that you're not crazy --- or if you ARE crazy, you're not alone :o)

Struggle is good. Search is good. Keep on struggling and searching. God bless you!

[Mrs. Don-o]

"Then you would disagree with those who quote Paul saying “You are a royal priesthood and a priestly kingdom,” (1 Peter 2:9)?"

Here's the quote from Peter:
But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people, that ye should show forth the praises of Him who hath called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.

But your conclusion doesn't necessarily follow. Being a "royal priesthood" doesn't mean that every person is, in an identical sense, either "royal" or a "priest." You could say that the USA is an elected representative democracy, but that does't mean that every person is an elected representative.

In I Corinthians, Paul explains,

"God has appointed in the church: first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracle workers, then those with gifts of healing, helpers, administrators, and those with diversity of tongues.... Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles?"

And Paul goes on at some length explaining that there is a diversity of gifts, a diversity of roles, but one Spirit.

This does not require that all people are priests, at least not all in the same way.

Anyway, the most significant people in the church are not the priests or bishops. The most significant people are the saints.

[Boagenes]

Bless you, and thank you for your kind words and thoughtful advice.

I am in a terrible place, spiritually. I see the church I grew up in, and have been a member of my whole life, slowly being devoured by forces I consider to be under the influence of the enemy. I see a creeping liberalism that is eating away at the guts of the denomination. There has already been much bitterness sown in our denomination over what these liberals have done to the church already. It's only going to get worse, I fear.

And when I look around for alternatives, I don't see them. I love 85% of the Catholic Church and agree with 85% of its teaching (including the Real Presence, if not exactly transubstantiation, though that's not a big point with me - real presence is real presence to me), but I disagree with some major points of doctrine in the church - big enough points that I can't honestly join the Catholic Church.

So I'm in this gray, twilight zone between the conservative Protestant tradition I grew up in, complete with liturgy, etc, and still not able to accept Catholic teaching completely.

Pray for me. It's a pretty bad place to be in spiritually. Each week I go to church I feel less and less like I belong there. Problem is, I don't know where I do belong.

[PurpleMan]

Not sure that I agree but it doesn’t affect me. However, explanation is better than the “It always introduces a “liberalism” that then begins to agitate for “reform” - this means, in liberalese, denial of the authority of scripture, denial of infallibility of scripture, and denial of inerrancy of scripture. From this, then flow all the following heresies and liberalism that enter the church body...ordination of homosexual clergy, support for gay marriage, refusal to condemn homosexuality, support for abortion (under “women’s rights”) and so forth” pablum

BTW: I believe it’s not Rum, Romanism and Rebellions, rather Rum, Sodomy and the Lash. Argh, argh, argh.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"BTW: I believe it’s not Rum, Romanism and Rebellions, rather Rum, Sodomy and the Lash. Argh, argh, argh."

As I recall, the former was a 19th century slogan against the Democratic Party, while the latter was the tradition of the British Navy, poor buggers.

[Barney Gumble]

I disagree with some major points of doctrine in the church - big enough points that I can't honestly join the Catholic Church.

What are those points and how do they differ?

[trisham]

I will pray for you, friend. May God bless and keep you.

[wardaddy]

I know one here in the US that is a primary mover behind this garbage

[Boagenes]

I disagree with the Marian traditions (prayers to her, the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption, as well as prayers to saints), the division of sin into mortal and venial sins, purgatory, and confession to priests. Those are the four major sticking points. I just can’t get past those four. I agree with just about everything else they teach.

[AnalogReigns]

There are likely as many openly homosexual clergy already in the UK Anglican Church as there are in the American Episcopal Church...including some (not so open) homosexual bishops. The rot in England is as severe if not worse as in America...they’re just, in the typical English way, more understated and subtle about it.

The timing of this for English Anglicanism is terrible though, as this will rile up the Anglo-Catholic types as much as sodomy has riled up the Evangelical wing. Also this comes right before Lambeth—already being boycotted by those representing the majority of the worldwide Anglican Communion, namely most of Global South.

I believe soon there will be 2 Anglican Communions, split right down the middle worldwide including in the UK.

Many Anglican evangelicals don’t object to women priests (though they should, just on biblical grounds—tradition aside) however of course exalting sexual perversion is a step (way) too far. I hope the traditionalists and the evangelicals can form a union—making for a living Church, contrasting to the one faked by the postmodernist revisionists.

Those who love Jesus’ Church should pray for the Anglican leaders, that the Holy Spirit would guide the godly ones, and....further blind the hard-hearted unrepentent....that the contrast between light and darkness will become increasingly clear—honoring our holy God.

[PurpleMan]

In my haste to correctly write, I incorrectly wrote. I meant to say, “For me it’s not Rum, Romanism and Rebellions, rather Rum, Sodomy and the Lash. Argh, argh, argh.”

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

I disagree with the Marian traditions (prayers to her, the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption, as well as prayers to saints)

I believe that most of this tradition is optional, i.e. you don't have to do most of this, although without the 'Hail Mary' you can't say the Rosary, also not required. I guess you know that the concept of venial sin and purgatory go together, perhaps you could read more of the theology of venial sins. Clearly the question of the Sacrament of Penance is a major one, and you need to consider strongly what is the basis for your objections to it.

It seems that all of the 'High' churches except for Orthodoxy and Catholicism are on the way to becoming sort of secular paganism, and you are in a difficult place and are in my prayers.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Clarifying (I hope) questions: Do you believe in intercessory prayer? And do you believe that we the believers are all members of the Body of Christ?

[AnalogReigns]

I met a family friend of Gene Robinson in ‘06 in a language class I took. She was originally from NH, and her father is an Episcopal priest there.

We were casually talking and I mentioned I was becoming Anglican, and how there was a lot of turmoil in the Episcopal Church these days. She agreed and went on and on about kind and capable and wonderful Robinson was, such a nice man she said, how could anyone object to him! She recollected of how her father came home excited to vote for Robinson (as he was elected in NH before being approved by the General Assembly), that “it was just the right thing to do.” She and her mother questioned the timing of it....and through all this clearly she assumed I had the same liberal perspective as she had. About that point I stopped her, and told her I was on the other side of this issue.

It made for an interesting discussion after that, as I explained (as gently as I could) how it wasn’t hate or prejudice that prevented folks from accepting the homosexual lifestyle, rather scripture itself—and fully consistent Church tradition itself. She was amazed that anyone could think that way, and said she’d never heard my views before....

I’ve since learned (from a traditionalist Episcopal priest) Robinson has been twice to an alcohol detox center and clearly has some serious emotional problems. What a sad world those who reject Christ in his Word live in!

[luckystarmom]

I grew up in the Methodist church and had to leave it.

Now, I’m in a conservative evangelical church. We meet in a school, and it has rock music. However, the people are solid good people, and our minister preaches from the Bible. I’m getting used to the contemporary style of worship. I even missed it when I went to my parent’s traditional service Methodist church.

There are great things happening in other countries in regards to the Christian faith, but I am very concerned about the Christian faith in our country.

Maybe we need to pray for a spiritual reawakening in our country.

[Boagenes]

The answer to your questions are yes and yes.

[Mrs. Don-o]

That's good! The only time Mary is ordinarily mentioned at a RC Mass (once, and very briefly) is precisely at a time of intercessory prayer: in the Confiteor, as follows:

I confess to Almighty God,
and to you,
my brothers and sisters,
that I have sinned through my own fault,
in my thoughts and in my words,
in what I have done,
and in what I have failed to do;
and I ask blessed Mary,ever virgin,
all the angels and saints,
and you,
my brothers and sisters,
to pray for me to the Lord our God.

This part of the Liturgy resembles the description of the saints in heaven in Revelation 5:8 where the four creatures and the 24 elders bring golden bowls of incense, which are the prayers of the saints, before the Lamb.

Of course the Lord already knows our prayers, but this shows that they are also presented to him by those in Heaven as part of the heavenly liturgy. This is the essence of Catholic teaching on the Communion of Saints (in this life and the next): we are part of the same living Body, the Body of Christ; we never stop loving each other and caring for each other in Christ, even death does not stop this love; and asking these loved ones in heaven for their intercessory prayer does not go against Scripture - because they bring our prayers to the Lord as described in Revelation.

Does this make sense? I am not trying to bother you :o) --- but just to show that the medium of communication is Christ himself--the vine between branches. We and the saints form one communion, one body of christ, being members of him and members of one another.

Heb 12:1 tells us that we are surrounded by "a cloud of witnesses". Those watching --- I'm thinking of my own depearter Mother and Father --- still love us, and can pray for us better now than when they were on earth, because they have been purified of all sin and are so close to Christ Our Lord that it passes all understanding.

[Mrs. Don-o]

depearter = departed. Fickle fingers!

[Boagenes]

I don't believe there is anything in scripture that even suggests one should confess ones sins to a priest. In fact, almost every Biblical reference to confession of sin (especially in relation to the story of David, and the Psalms) speaks of directly confessing ones sins to God.

Christ is our "great high priest" and putting a priesthood in between man and God, making the priest the arbiter of forgiveness, directly contradicts the meaning of the atoning sacrifice and intercession of Christ - it goes against what it says about Christ in Hebrews.

I believe that the whole Sacrament of Reconciliation is an invention of the church. I'm not saying it is invalid. I'm not saying that Catholics, in particular, might not feel more relieved going this route - that it gives them peace of mind to hear the words of absolution directly from a priest. But I am saying that I don't believe it is Biblical, necessary, required, or anything more than an invention of men.