Why are Anglicans worried?

[chakka35]

A number of bigoted priests and senior clergymen, who are against the idea of women bishops and are also homophobic, are leaving the Anglican church to join Roman Catholicism where such despicable attitudes are considered a virtue.

Why is the Anglican church worried about this? Shouldn't it be glad to be rid of such people?

[naomi24]

//There is not the slightest scriptural reason why women should not be priests and bishops in the Anglican church. //

Except this from that well know misogynist St Paul:

//But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.//

….. But then we all know he made it up as he went along.

I still can’t understand how a practising Christian can even consider converting to Islam.

[mibn2cweus]

It's kind of cute to watch little children debating over whose mud pie is better. But as an adult, responsible for their safety, I find it more than a little bit disturbing that so many 'grown-ups' seem unable to grasp the reality that it's all mud and no pie.

Doesn't anyone else here see that all of this is nothing more than splitting hairs of a unicorn?

[birdie1971]

It is sublimely absurd and slightly satisfying to see people wrestling with their own pious beliefs and contemplating switching religions because their exulted leaders are considering the possibility of giving women the same rights as men or entertaining the notion that homosexuals have a right to fulfil their own sexual destiny as they see fit.

Andyvon – You have the audacity to call someone a bigot who is against the subjugation of women and who doesn’t think that gays are an abomination. You are the bigot. I know this to be true because I understand the definition of a 'bigot'. You seem to think that it is someone who has a fixed opinion on a specific matter; this is only part of the description and does not fully explain the word.

To be a bigot must include a measure of intolerance and irrationality. You clearly do not like the idea of females occupying positions of power in religious organisations and certainly not within your own church. But why? Are women less pious than men? Are they less intelligent than men? Are they less capable of giving sound, ecclesiastical advice than men? Just what is it that leads you to believe that women are not equal to men in both intellect or leadership? Ahh... I forgot. It's because your religion tells you that men are more important than women. Your holy book says it, so it must be true.

[birdie1971]

Continued...


You are the bigot Andyvon. You're own religion has blinded you to the possibility that women are equal to men and that homosexuals are people just like you and I.

You are a small minded person in a very big world. You need to grow up.

[mike11111]

A bit harsh, I think. I know that you understand the meaning of 'bigot' but do you fully understand the meaning of 'religion' (that which binds)? I yield to no-one in my admiration for the sanctity of those holy matrons and virgins who brought so much life to the early church, nor to those of the homosexual persuasion who have ministered faithfully to their flocks without the need to satiate their carnal lusts. It is religion, and some people are brought up to believe in what they have been taught (rightly or wrongly). It is less than 50 years ago that lay people were given dispensation to administer the chalice at Holy Communion in the C of E, to relieve pressure on the parish priest. Some of the most vocal opposition came from traditional women; two of whom in my memory would receive the Host from the priest, but not the chalice if administered by a woman. After a lifetime of being told 'what can't be' suddenly becomes 'can be' may shake someone to their very foundations. The sight of an old lady in tears, because the young vicar had told her that making the sign of The Cross was old-fashioned haunts me still.

[naomi24]

//The sight of an old lady in tears, because the young vicar had told her that making the sign of The Cross was old-fashioned haunts me still.//

I find that incredibly sad. An old lady crying because she's told that carrying out a particular ritual is no longer necessary - when it was never necessary at all. How much unhappiness has been caused and how many futile tears shed in the name of religion?

[birdie1971]

Mike11111 - “A bit harsh, I think.”

I don't think so. In fact, I don't think I went far enough. Andyvon seems to think that fifty percent of all human beings should be subjugated by the other fifty percent simply by having the 'misfortune' to have been born without a pair of testicles.

As for your claim that, “... After a lifetime of being told 'what can't be' suddenly becomes 'can be' may shake someone to their very foundations...”. Oh deary me, what a shame. It must have also been terribly psychologically damaging for slave traders and slave owners to be told that it has become illegal for one person to 'own' another. My heart fails to bleed for those who are forced to change their world-view when that world-view involves the subjugation and oppression of another person based on their sex, sexual orientation or colour.

[birdie1971]

Continued....

As if anyone needed further proof that Andyvon is a male (heterosexual) supremacist, read this statement he made earlier, “... I have considered converting one day to Roman Catholicism - and even Islam!”

In nutshell, he's so sick and tired of the Anglican church finally accepting that women have equal rights to men and that homosexuals should be allowed to participate in 'his' religion, that he's considered abandoning his church in favour of two of the most intolerant, least progressive religions in the world – Islam and the Roman Catholic Church. These two religious institutions are stuck so far in the past and teach such questionable morals that I'm sure they'd both embrace Andyvon to their collective bosoms given the opportunity. Basically, he's a misogynist and latent homophobe who wants his 'church' to reflect his despicable views.

If I were you Andyvon, I'd become a Muslim – they pretty much hate everyone. You should fit right in.

[jake-the-peg]

I think the simple answer to the question is that they can't afford to lose any more.

Anglicanism is dying on it's feet. Churches are derelict or sold off, parishes are combined - where I live for example services alternate between villages.

The decline has slowed 1.1 Million now compared to 1.2 million in 2001

But a lot of that has come from immigrants and these are people who are tyically religious conservatives.

The long and the short of it is that Anglicans cannot afford another scism

[chakka35]

I think you're probably right, jake. I must remember that in many cases the congregations are planning to follow their priests. But still...although I recognise that much within organised religion is unprincipled, is the CofE really happy to keep these bigots purely for the sake of numbers? Perhaps so..

One of the many irationalities that makes me say "Thank God I'm an atheist!".

[mibn2cweus]

"Thank God I'm an atheist!"
Personally, I can't think of a better reason than 'God' to be an atheist . . .

[chakka35]

Well said, mib.