It seems that our cousins in the Church of England have voted in favour of bringing in legislation which will result in bishops being consecrated who happen to be female.
We debated and voted on this a few years ago. It was quite a good debate, I seem to remember. Charitable and thoughtful and followed by an very strong vote in favour of changing the legislation to allow both male and female candidates to stand in episcopal elections.
There seem to be more people in England who are unhappy with this potential change. Indeed, it is hard not to look across the border and see a rather unhappy church. The odd thing is seeing on blogs people described as catholics who are opposed to the ordination of women as priests and bishops. Most of the people I know best in the church have been formed within a catholic sensiblity and work in a church in which the catholic aspirations of the Oxford Movement were embraced with vigour. And yet, almost all the people I know are in favour of the ordination of women as priests and bishops.
Which goes to show that Scotland is not England. Which I think we knew already.
Well my take on it is because we have a clearly Catholic but non-Roman liturgy/tradition etc we are less likely to regard lace/Roamnist liturgical happenings as the only sign of authentic Catholicism. Once you realise catholic identity is not synonomous with dressing like, praying like and signing up to moral or theological statements by the Bishop of Rome (who is only one Patriarch amongst many, albeit one who is due special honour by virtue of the history of the See), then you are less likely to go all funny because Benny XVI says you can’t do it.