• Is it a sin?

    Is it a sin, I find myself asking rhetorically, for men and women to be treated differently by institutions? Is it a sin for women and men to have unequal access to power and privilege.

    My own view is that it is not merely wrong for gender to be a determining factor in what someone can do or achieve but that it is a sin.

    Now, don’t start asking me to defend that from a biblical position. This blog tries to live in the land of common sense after all. If you want arguments that use biblical texts to try to “prove” an argument one way or another, I hope, if you’ve been reading along for a while, you know fine well to try someone else’s web page. We don’t do that round here.

    The thing is, the Church of England has a decision to make soon as to whether to adopt the legislation currently before its General Synod that would allow women to be selected to be bishops. It has been a long and drawn out affair getting to this point. What England has been debating is how to retain within one church people who say they cannot accept the authority of bishops who happen to be women whilst also accepting the full authority of those women as leaders within the organisation.

    It can’t be done, of course.

    What has been proposed is a process by which congregations will be able to opt not to recognise a women who happens to be leading the diocese in which they exist but that they might request oversight, in some way, from someone else. The means by which this might be done has been subject to intense scrutiny. What is currently proposed is commonly said to be the best legislation that might pass in their synod.

    Now, one does not comment on the business of another Anglican church’s synodical process lightly. No, really, one doesn’t. After all, one tends to find oneself arguing quite strongly for provincial autonomy within the Anglican Communion, for example by making the point that the American church was quite entitled to choose Gene Robinson as a bishop if it wanted to do so, thank you very much.

    Those who did pile into the Gene Robinson argument from outside America argued that his consecration damaged the whole. His being a bishop undermined the local episcopacy elsewhere – or so they said.

    Curiously, I feel much the same about the current legislation in England. If I were a member of the Church of England and a member of its Synod, I would be voting against it, even though I’m a great believer in women having exactly the same opportunities as men and women and an advocate for the cause of opening the Episcopate to men and women equally.

    The reason for me saying so out loud is because I think that decisions made in England long ago over questions about whether women could be priests in England were at the root of so much of the Anglican controversies of recent years. The C of E somehow came to the conclusion that you could have priests who were women but also be in the church and not accept that those women were priests. It was a move that baffled many both inside and outside. And it also gave rise to the so-called “Flying Bishops” and talk of there being two integrities within the one church – an absurd contradiction in terms. That flying bishop idea is far more the cause of the trouble the Anglican Communion faces than the election of Gene Robinson was. The idea that you had to agree with your bishop’s predilections and pecedillos was hitherto entirely alien. In the past, you might not agree with your bishop, but he still was your bishop. Now, you could opt out and chose someone more suited to your own prejudices.

    It was odd that there were those who could live with bishops they did not like or agree with in their own country who could not accept Gene Robinson being a bishop in another country.

    Anyway, having had that experience, Anglicans from outside England might well be cautious of the current legislation facing the English Synod. If it passes, as it looks as if it may, the unintended consequences might, as with flying bishops, be enormous. If you sow the wind of sexism, you may well reap the whirlwind.

    Because I believe in the equality of women and men, I find myself very reluctantly hoping that England says No!

8 responses to “Guides and God”

  1. Tim Avatar

    I like the change from `country’ to `community’ most of all.

  2. PamB Avatar
    PamB

    I still remember my Brownie and Guide promises, but think that the Chorister’s prayer takes a lot of beating.
    Bless O Lord us thy servants who minister in thy temple. Grant that what we sing with our lips we may believe in our hearts, and what we believe in our hearts we may show forth in our lives, through etc, etc.
    Don’t know why this isn’t an essential part of the Voice for life scheme, same as the Brownie/guide equivalents are to their development process.

  3. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    The only one of the above I could take (Pam’s chorister’s apart) without serious finger-crossing is the Rainbow pledge. I MIGHT want to serve my community, but it would usually be by challenging it, and that is, based on childhood experiences and why I never got to play Mary in the nativity play (despite being in every other way well qualified) that is NOT what people want from children, generally. Or adults, by and large.

  4. Robin Avatar
    Robin

    > To be true to myself and develop my beliefs,

    This is meaningless. Beliefs, in themselves, are neither good nor bad. Nor are all beliefs equally valid or moral – people can have horrible beliefs.

  5. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    Indeed Robin -and similarly, on occasion setting about me with a mace would have been being true to myself, and not a good thing to do, but THINKING about what one believes, and being kind and helpful … yes, let’s stick with the Rainbows.

  6. Robin Avatar
    Robin

    Agreed. I like the Rainbow pledge.

  7. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    Yup – promise less, deliver more. Way to go.

  8. Erp Avatar
    Erp

    Don’t forget these also go with the Brownie and Guide Laws (the Rainbows don’t have a separate law)

    Brownie law
    * A Brownie Guide thinks of others before herself and does a good turn every day.

    Guide law
    A Guide is honest, reliable and can be trusted.
    A Guide is helpful and uses her time and abilities wisely.
    A Guide faces challenges and learns from her experiences.
    A Guide is a good friend and a sister to all Guides.
    A Guide is polite and considerate.
    A Guide respects all living things and takes care of the world around her.

    What I like is the organization consulted with the Guides and even the Brownies when considering changes to the promises and not just those over 18.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • All Postal Elections

    Delighted to hear that the Electoral Commission has come down against all postal elections. It was just too open to fraud for my liking. The ability of those filling in the census form to ask for everyone in their household to have a postal vote is open to abuse too.

  • Flying Bishops coming home to roost

    There is a rather perplexing case going o­n in the USA at the moment. A couple of Anglican churches and their clergy have declared that they are no longer a part of the Episcopal Church of the USA but now belong to the Church of Uganda.  (They prefer the reactionary pronouncements of the Archbishop of Uganda…

  • Salsa

    I Salsad with the best of them yesterday evening in the hall. We learned the Mambo step. Side step. Back step. Open Step. And a turn. What a sight it is to see the experts do it. Mind you, as someone remarked, it is not something you would do in Tescos.

  • Caffeine free

    Have given up caffeine as part of new diet. Wholefoods, health foods etc. Have even eaten Tuna. No tea for a week. v v good. Fear I am turning into Bridget Jones. And yes, I am going to the Salsa evening in the church hall tonight.