Updated 11:58 pm.EST, Sun November 22, 2009

World|Mon, Jul. 07 2008 08:28 AM EDT

Anglicans Eye Tense Debate on Women Bishops

By Jennifer Gold|Christian Post Correspondent

Anglicans are anticipating a tense debate on the consecration of women bishops at the Church of England’s General Synod on Monday.

Meeting in York, Synod members are due to debate a motion proposing a national code of practice to accommodate conservative parishes opposed to the oversight of a female bishop.

Synod members will also be asked to consider a motion put forward by the Bishop of Ripon and Leeds, the Rt. Rev. John Packer, on a compromise plan that includes the appointment of so-called “super bishops,” or “complementary bishops,” to accommodate traditionalists.

While liberals are calling for a blanket measure that would make no concessions for objectors, more than 1,300 clergy wrote to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York last week threatening to leave the church if suitable arrangements were not put in place for traditionalists.

Father Robert Fayers, one of the signatories of last week’s letter, said the church was not in the position to allow women bishops without alternative measures for objectors.

"The Church of England is part of the universal church – we call it one Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

"Unless the whole Church makes the change...then I don't think the Church of England... has got the competence or the right or the authority to make the change," Fayers said, according to BBC.

In his Sunday sermon, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, said that Jesus would feel the pain within all factions.

“He will be with those in very different parts of the landscape who feel that things are closing in, that their position is under threat and their liberties are being taken away by those anxious and eager to enforce new ideologies in the name of Christ,” he said.

“He will be with those who feel that their liberty of questioning is under threat, he will be with gay clergy who wonder what their future is in a Church so anxious and tormented about this issue.”

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
  • Mon Jul 14, 2008 3:31 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    God never condoned slavery. Quit listening to all those liberals. He believed in slavery in the idea that you owe your fellow man money and can not re-pay him, you should work your debt off until said payment is made. That still goes on today, but we don't call it slavery. You guys yourselves have probably done this. Your friend owes yu money he borrowed, can't repay you money, but you say hey I been needing some house repairs made I don't have time to get to, however if you know how to do them and will the debt will be considered paid.

  • Fri Jul 11, 2008 7:05 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    wb, thanks for the encouragement, right back at you and be blessed as your continue to serve Him faithfully, believer

  • Fri Jul 11, 2008 2:00 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Believer, stand firm on the word of God.

    While non-believers could not care, the Bible testifies to itself.
    In Matthew 5:17-18, Jesus claimed the Old Testament would remain until perfection comes.
    Jesus said in John 7:16-18 that His teaching was from God the Father.
    Jesus said the Holy Spirit would bring to remembrance the things He said (John 14:26).
    Jesus said in Luke 10:16 that those who listen to the apostles listen to Him.
    The Apostle John claimed his writings were accurate and true (John 22:24).
    Peter wrote in 2 Peter 1:20-21 that speaking for God (true prophecy) comes only from God.
    Peter equated Paul's writings with the Old Testament in 2 Peter 3:15-16, calling his writings scripture.
    Paul stated in 2 Timothy 3:16 that all scripture is breathed out by God.
    Paul claimed his teaching came from God (1 Corinthians 14:37; 2 Corinthians 2:12-14;2 Corinthians 12:19; Galatians 1:11-12; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Thessalonians 2:13-15).
    Paul quoted from the Pentateuch and the Gospels and stated he was quoting scripture (1 Timothy 5:18).

  • Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:07 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    hlerwin, I don't question your mom's relationship with God, but as I said once before, believe God's Word or believe your mom, with no disrespect to your mom I'll continue to believe God and His Word.

  • Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:09 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    My mother's comment was originally about people of other religions coming to the US to try to change our Christianity and about American Christian missionaries going to foreign countries to try to change those people's religions (as a few on the Web site may recall).

  • Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:06 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    believer, I am not being flippant when I again quote my almost 94-year-old Christian mother about "women in authority over men." Mother said, "The Bible is just wrong about that."

    And, please, anybody out there who wants to say my mother is "not a real Christian," won't you hold back this time? I know you feel that way. But I know the old lady too well. She is a Christian.

  • Thu Jul 10, 2008 10:22 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    blue, submission is not the issue here, the issue is that the Bible states that a woman should not be in a role that automatically gives her spiritual headship over a man in the home or the church. Submission of women is purely an issue between a woman and God, her decision to submit or not to submit is between her and God. But at the same time the Bible teaches that all believers are to submit themselves to both God and God's will. These issues have nothing to do with the culture or the time they were given they are a part of God's plan for His Church and Christians.

  • Thu Jul 10, 2008 7:44 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    Many of us did not grow up in churches where women had roles of authority. So it can be unsettling. Below is a refreshing post from Chino Blanco (from another column), but the principle in it applies even to women bishops, I believe. We need to "get over" old resentments that eat us up and cause so many hard feelings. Our grandchildren will think it odd that we all argued about such topics. Here's the post:


    "You know, one person's "ewwww" or "ick" is another person's 'soulmate', 'partner', or (gasp) even 'spouse'.

    Go ahead and boycott McDonald's. While you're at it, why not boycott Hollywood? Because your "ewwwws" and your "icks" have more to do with what you've grown up seeing on the TV and in the movies than it does with anything that Jesus taught.

    Or, you could take a deep breath, decide to stop believing all the scare tactics, and allow the state to grant equality before the law to folks who never bothered you at all.

    Whatever "agenda" you fear is in the works, I can tell you I already don't like the current agenda where it's acceptable for folks to hold up their religious beliefs as reason for making my gay friends feel like second-class citizens. You don't have to make them welcome in your churches, you don't have to condone their choices, you can carry on with whatever you think is gonna make the world a better place, but by God, you oughta feel obliged, as Americans, to give them enough benefit of the doubt, when they say they feel they're being treated unfairly by our government, to get off your high horse for a second and consider whether there might not be some merit to their claims."

  • Thu Jul 10, 2008 7:17 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    i am sorry but if people wish to take the 'submissive woman' approach literally, heck you might as well take everything else literally too! slavery is fine and dandy too, huh? PLEASE. this is pure cultural confusion. the gospels were written in the context of their own social and historical time periods. They did not know better, but more importantly we are endowed with reason to know that.

  • Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:30 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Do you know the Bible proves that women won't make it into heaven?

  • Tue Jul 08, 2008 8:49 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I looked for a version of the Bible that spoke of women keeping silent in communities, but I could not find it. Which version did you use?

    1 Corinthians 14:33-35 (New International Version)
    33 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace. As in all the congregations of the saints, 34 women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

  • Tue Jul 08, 2008 12:46 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    UP!! Its nearly bed time here.....

  • Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:56 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Oh, stevo-

    You're up?!! Why you little rascal, since women aren't allowed to speak at church, don't you know that women more than make up for it at home! LOL!

  • Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:41 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    What! Women speaking at home! Those new testament lot sure had low standards....

  • Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:11 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    Does anyone here believe we ought to refer to Scripture for such matters?

    For God is NOT [the author] of CONFUSION, but of peace, as in all communities of the holy people. Let your women keep silence in the communities: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their man at home: for it is shameful for a woman to speak in assembly, 1 Corinthians 14:33-35

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 7:26 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Womanhood, Biblical
    http://polemos.net/Index%20of%20Subjects.html

    The Public Preaching of Women
    Robert Lewis Dabney
    http://polemos.net/Articles/The%20Public%20Preaching%20of%20Women.html

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:15 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Love ya -.....friend.

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:14 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Nighty night - stevo

    OOOoooo ......nan I got it!

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:13 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Respect roll4him......

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:13 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Its bed time in good old Brighty, night night everybody
    Steve
    P.s For Onan, try Genesis.....

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:11 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Oh, now Tallguy - loos'n up that necktie a bit, would ya!

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:08 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    Rolln4 and Steve, neither one of you is sounding very much like a Christian right about now. Makes us all look bad.....

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:05 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Uh, who's Onan????

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:03 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Now get your hiney back into the fold - you wuss!

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:02 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    LOL!

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:58 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    roll4him

    just what are you using that tissues for? Your not a relative of Onan are you?

    Kind regards

    Steve

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:48 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Oh, by the way stevo, there's another part of the Bible that talks about knowing the Truth, then walking away is worse than an unbeliever. But I'm sure you won't give us a commentary on that one either. Slither away.....

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:46 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    I think the Anglican Church has been tense about some
    things for hundreds of years. Maybe this contributes to their lack of growth.

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:46 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    OK Stevo- I'll play along for ya. I don't mind a little dance'n with my man a bit:

    Blacks, hispanics, Asia, or whatever you want to put into you tough question here. Let's see.... ummmmm . Let me put my tissue away first, but I think that the Bible didn't address race here, so I think I'm getting off pretty easy. There are race issue addressed in the Bible, but by golly gee, not here, sorry Steve, but nada.

    Pay?? Boy, for a guy who knows all about subtransitwhatever the word is, you sure are going deep here. Doesn't Jesus mention something to the effect of pay what is agreed upon and do it without complaint. I won't bother pulling up some scripture here for you, since you obviously don't believe in it anyway. So if a woman works for less than a man and she agrees to it, then viola! If it's the same as a man, viola! Go gett'm. If it's more than a man, then viola!

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:29 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Commentary? What are you talking about my friend? How you getting on with the "blacks"? No comment I notice, and what about the pay?

    Kind regards

    Steve

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:28 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Jesus and his followers are not of this world for this is Satan (prince of this world); you've fallen headlong into the devil's trap. Come on out and read the Word for what it is, don't bail because the devil's got you all confused.

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:25 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I'm still waiting your commentary. Or do you even have one?

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:24 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Oh, now Stevo is switching to a secular argument? Do you want the world's way of doing things or God's way of doing things? You can pick.

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:18 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I'm sorry you think that it is wrong to consider women are equal to men( I wonder if you think they should be paid the same rate?).

    I think the word is slytherin by the way.

    Kind regards

    Steve

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:09 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    That's OK stevo, because we're losing a lot of well-meaning Christian to the devil's scheme. Sorry to hear that he gottcha on this issue.

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:07 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    Nice! Now you slither away. Characteristic of most snakes. No commentary, no nothing, just slither'n.

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:29 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Your reaction is quite understandable, I have been there myself.

    To be polite, the referance to transubstantiation is to msnchris70 and not you, unless you are a fellow catholic of course.

    Kind regards

    Steve

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:23 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    Further reason for male only Priest and Bishops...
    From scripture, the Church is the Bride of Christ. Christ is male, the Church takes on a Female personality. Christ loves the church in the same way that a husband loves his wife. Having a female priest or bishop would be akin to same sex marriage and it would be wrong to mock God in this way.

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:17 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    yo stevo-

    If you're such a brianiac and a Christian, then why don't you lay out a nice little commentary on this passage for us. SNAKE!

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:13 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    Geez Steve;

    Hold it, just one second, let me grab my tissue... you just made me look at that verse in a whole new light - NOT! Nice try you weasle.

    If you think that you can use the term transubstantiation (oooooo, like you're a man), then play stupid you got another thing come'n. It's wolves like you that come on to sites like this and try to confuse the babes in Christ?

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:06 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Don't ignore the request, how does it make you feel?

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:05 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    steve-

    It's not for us to substitute anything of the Word of God. Have you read the Bible yourself?

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 2:57 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Thanks msnchris70 looking forward to how transubstantiation is delt with...

    rolln4him, re read your last post and change every ref to a woman etc..to "blacks" (you can deal with the tenses yourself)...

    Looking forward to the replies, good answers keep it up

    Steve

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 2:35 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    Additionally, if you don't mind me adding a bit of salt here! The Word says:

    "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety." 2 Timothy 2:11-15

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 2:30 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Msn-

    I like it! You did a fine job of explaining to steve. Amen- Brother!

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 2:27 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Jesus only called men to serve as ministers. Bishops, Priests and Deacons were always men because the Apostles only gave their powers to men.

    The Church cannot make a decision to make women Priests or Bishops because it is firstly not scriptural nor has any Apostolic origin from what has been passed down. We will not create something that Jesus did not explicitly or implicitly endorse. Women are called to be helpers and they are equally dignified in this role.

    Right now, High level orthodox and conservative Anglicans are discussing how to be reunited with the Catholic Church who they broke from in the 16th Century. Over 40 million orthodox conservative Anglican Christians may be coming home to Catholic Church very soon. Laus Deo! Praise God! Eastern Orthodox are also discussing being reunited with the Catholic Church. This is a great sign of the times because God is strengthening His Church, to fight the devil and all his secular values that bring death.

    I pray all Protestants from especially the mainline divisions also come home, so we can all celebrate the body and blood of Christ and be unified in the one Lord Jesus Christ. "One faith, one baptism, one Lord" = One Church.

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 2:07 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    So then, lets cut to the chase, what is the real reason that women cannot be bishops etc...It can't be that it was eve who was first mislead by satan or women are "unclean" for part of the month, so what is it? Lets have some good answers please.

    Steve

  • Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:41 am Agree: 5   Disagree: 5

    If Schori is an example of women in church leadership, then this would simply affirm that the Word of God is Truth all the more since it state that women shall not be in church leadership roles.

    The article claims: "While liberals are calling for a blanket measure that would make no concessions for objectors" - isn't this the theme for liberal - they go around shouting the need for tolerance, they shout down anyone opposed to their wickedness.

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Also on CP
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Gifts
  • Church
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Baker Publishing Group

This full-text Bible is perfect for children who have outgrown Bible storybooks, but who would struggle to read the small type of most Bibles. The large, easy-to-read 12.5 point ty

Featured Advertiser Links