Women Bishops - synod rejects again

Done.
There should not be bishops in the H of L anyway, regardless of this silly decision.

Signed.

There is a petition if you are interested:
Get rid of the automatic seats in the H of Lords if they persist in their sexist policy
epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/42117

Thanks. I've made a note of that.

I was trying to do it by highlighting, copying and pasting for some reason.

Type the address beginning with www, not http://, inside a double set of square brackets www.xxxxxxxxxxx I got it wrong a couple of times before I finally managed to get it right.

Thank you absentgrana.

I wonder what I did wrong. Would you mind explaining how you did it?

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2012/nov/23/puritans-scuppered-female-bishops-revel

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2012/nov/23/puritans-scuppered-female-bishops-revel

Why hasn't this come up blue?

Roll on The Age of Reason! This farce brings it a bit nearer. Now let's see what a dog's dinner they make of gay marriage.

By its name the House of Laity must be for the laity, so those in it are not aiming to become non-laity so are not personally involved. Women in training to join the priesthood need a vote if a balance is to kept - and young male trainees too.

Nanaej, as I understand it, the women in the House of Laity who voted against women bishops were predominantly conservative evangelicals. They have misused their vote as they do not represent the views of the vast majority of members of the C of E. However, because they are conservative in mindset, they tend to be fairly comfortably off, stay at homes with the time to get involved in church meetings and thus have a disproportionate influence in Synod. That being said the vote was only six short of the necessary two thirds majority.

There will be ways out of this situation, Frank Field has tabled a motion in the House against exemption of the C of E from the Discrimination Act, and that, at least, will focus minds.

The bishops could decline to consecrate any more to their number until women were candidates, the ABC designate could decline to accept his position temporarily and so on.

I think it likely that a way will be found, but how sad that it has come to this.

Wonder how the Supreme Governor feels about this controversy. You there, your maj? Time to break cover and tell your fellow grans!

Maybe they have an equal vote on the decision and used it to vote against other women having equality.

If the Archbishop is the (male) head of the C/E and is to be revered as the father figure who has the last word....didn't he say women bishops were a sensible progression for C/E? Why did the lay women ignore his advice???
(sorry if someone said this already..been off line and not had time to read all posts)

So things haven't moved on much since Antony Trollope wrote about the intrigues and back-stabbing!

isthis I should be honoured.

Ok, maybe not.........

You think, *when?

Much respect ga

I'm not a church-goer, but the wrangles in the Church of England don't strike me as much different from those conducted in men's private clubs, golf clubs, and the Freemasons over the past few decades. At least the dissenters are being open about their reservations, and not cooking up deals behind closed doors!

That term - primates - has always amused me. In Scotland the head episcopal bishop is called the primus and I remember once when I happened to be at a meeting with the then primus, asking him whether he preferred being a stove to a monkey. (Luckily he was a guy with a good sense of humour, so he just laughed).

absentgrana admirably put. How are you placed to come and preach in Leicester one Sunday evening

I meant Jesus is the head of the Church of England; the Queen is the Supreme Governor and the Archbishops of Canterbury and York are primates.

When, this is a problem for the C of E, FIEC and R.C. churches. I meet with other believers once a week. (Sometimes atheists/agnostics/people of other faiths join us.) We don't have a hierarchical leadership and the women play an equal part with the men. I have many friends who attend church in the traditional way and I admire them, but I gave up trying to effect change from within some years ago and revel in the freedom I now have to work out my faith in the company of like-minded people. We argue things out, sometimes hold (agreeably) differences of opinion, share our doubts and difficulties - but the bottom line is a recognition that Jesus had/has no favourites.

Titular means in name only. Title, but no power. Says it all really. Ordinary women too in the church, even if ordained priests, have a title but no power. The Reverend Jo Bloggs but never Bishop Jo.

There is no valid reason. The arguments put forward by the ConEvos are the same ones that were put forward in the past to justify women not having the vote or being judges or doctors and so on.