27 responses to “Taint”

1. 

   Ross Kennedy

   28/09/2013

   Erika,
   Do you actually agree with ‘most people’ that the opponents of women bishops are motivated by misogyny? I hope not! After all the vast majority of those opposed to women’s ordination are in fact women. Moreover a survey taken before the the vote indicated that approximately three quarters of the members of the C of E were in favour of women bishops. Given that the worshiping community in the C of E is around one million that leaves something in the region of nearly 250,000 who are either opposed or uneasy about the measure – hardly a tiny minority.

   The attitude seems to be – accept it, or lump it, or leave, and that I find sad.
   The fact is that women will be consecrated as bishops in the Church of England – even the opponents accept that. The Measure would certainly have been passed if the proponents had been but willing to assure those who are against female bishops that there is still a place for them in the C of E. After all do we not claim to be a broad church?

   Reply
2. 

   Rosemary Hannah

   28/09/2013

   For me, the problems to do with lay presidency are more practical than they are theoretic. The practical problem is this. Ordination is open to ANYBODY who is of suitable character, and prepared to learn enough about their faith. Do we REALLY want people leading the church who are NOT suitable?
   In one church I attended years ago, somebody would have been more than willing to become a leader. Popular in the church, and with a confident speaking voice, used to leading ceremonies he would have been a lay president if such things were allowed. Indeed, he was suggested for further training. He dropped out of this because they expected people to pray, and he could not see the point of that. Do we REALLY want people like that taking the Eucharist, because they can. and IF we limit it to people who ARE appropriate, and we vet them, and train them, why are we not ordaining them? Why can they not be ordained? What are they lacking?

   Reply
3. 

   Rosemary Hannah

   28/09/2013

   @ Ross – anybody who believes women CANNOT be ordained does, by their very belief, think they are in some way not enough like Christ. That is quite different from saying that an individual does not have the very special and particular abilities needed to run a church. It may not be a dislike of women, but it is certainly the belief they are not quite fully human. Such beliefs do make things more than a tad difficult.

   Reply
4. 

   Ross Kennedy

   28/09/2013

   Rosemary,
   The sad truth is that there are already individuals in leadership positions in the Church who are unsuitable for the work, either through a lack of personal faith, holding heretical views or an inability to relate to people – to name but three reasons. I have witnessed the serious damage they do to the Body of Christ. Of course, this is inevitable simply because the Church is made up of fallible human beings and too often makes the wrong choices.

   Conversely, I have known very well suited candidates for ministry who were rejected simply because they expressed too conservative views on theology or ethics.

   On the issue of lay presidency I recognize and accept that in the Anglican Church it is a matter of Order that determines who should preside at the Eucharist rather than theology.
   FinalIy I cannot accept your argument that ‘anybody who believes women CANNOT be ordained does, by their very belief, think they are in some way not enough like Christ’ or that they have a ‘ belief they are not quite fully human.’ To be honest I think you are being somewhat unfair to the other side.

   Reply
5. 

   Rosemary Hannah

   28/09/2013

   Well, Ross, what else? If no woman can stand in for Christ at the Eucharist, then what else?

   Review criteria for ordination? Always possible, probably good. Abandon selection due to some mistakes? probably a bad idea.

   Reply
6. 

   Kelvin

   28/09/2013

   I could cope with Lay Presidency if the church agreed that celebrants would be chosen by lot each Sunday and the worship would reflect their abilities and competence.

   If we can’t accept that and prefer any kind of selection criteria whatsoever other than a roll of the dice then I think the best thing to do is to stick to something like the present system. That isn’t to say I don’t think we might improve it, but Lay Presidency for its own sake seems to me to solve little and would invent a new clerical class of people who were not regarded as members of the laos – the people of God. That seems to me to be a lot to lose.

   Reply
7. 

   Erika Baker

   28/09/2013

   And we should not forget that that the one diocese experimenting with lay presidency, Sydney, has also firmly rejected women priests. Lay presidency does not automatically solve all your problems.

   Reply