In the Guardian's account of the debate and vote on women bishops in the Church of England, I found this:
...the Right Rev Stephen Venner, who was in tears after he made a speech, imploring the pro-women lobby to show some generosity.
"I feel ashamed. We have talked about wanting to give an honourable place for those who disagree, and we have turned down almost every realistic opportunity. We have not even been prepared to explore the possibility of fresh expressions of dioceses or bishops. And still we talk the talk of being inclusive."
The spectacle of a grown man crying because women will be playing the bishop game with him should awaken all to the danger of heading down this slippery slope. I'm ashamed, too. How many more men will cry before those who are pushing women bishops step away from this dangerous path? Where will it end?
And this:
Synod's decision infuriated the influential Anglo-Catholic wing, which wants protection from women bishops.
As well they should. Women are extremely threatening and dangerous, especially in positions of power. God created the black widow spider and the praying mantis as an on-going reminder of just how dangerous the female of the species can be.
One senior churchman, the Rev Prebendary David Houlding, said: "It's getting worse, it's going downhill very badly. It's quite clear there's a pincer movement and we're being squeezed out.
It's true. Women know the pincer move.
The Right Rev Tom Wright said: "There might be some things that we might eventually have to split over. This should not be one of them."
Indeed, it should not. I'm quite certain that the pro-women bishops faction will see the error of their ways and step back before a woman is actually placed in the position of bishop.
It all makes me very, very cranky. As if in 19 years women have taken over the episcopacy in the WWAC: we haven't even hit a grand total of 20 women bishops. (But does our Primada count as two???)
ReplyDeleteAnd the issue is their needing protection from us?
ReplyDeleteClearly, no one has read the World Council of Churches report (see my recent Episcopal Cafe column) on how violence against women is one of the top problems in the worldwide church.
It boggles the mind.
That, and the idea --still prevalent worldwide and not just in our Communion-- that women are somehow going to infect men.
Which in Christian terms boils down to the fact that not everyone believes that we are fully human, fully redeemed, fully in the image of God, and so on.
Getting cranky with you.
Protection from women? What on earth are we going to do to them that they need protection? Sheesh! Talk about drama queens!
ReplyDeleteTears? How many tears have women shed because they have denied so much over the years? Even now it is often an uphill battle for full acceptance. I just hate being patted on the head for being a "good little woman priest". Could explain why I go out of my way to make sure that no one would mistake me for conforming - purple hair, wild finger nails, and different clothing - no hiding that I am a woman and proud of it.
"A pincer movement" "squeezing them out"? No one is squeezing them out but themselves. I carry a lot of guilt because I have stopped being tolerant and accepting of such attitudes. They are based on false understandings from the writings of Plato etc. They do not follow the example of Jesus and God or even of Paul. I just can't handle such pig-headed blindness anymore.
I work with men who don't agree with the ordination of womem. I think we work together well because they don't make a huge deal about it. I can respect that they don't believe I should be ordained and don't let in interfere with the work we are doing. We can actully accomplish a lot. I do have understanding, empathy and patience with these men.
I was reading some comments by some who cannot face having women bishops on a newpaper link. I had to shut my computer off and leave the room for a while to calm down.
May God forgive me my lack of understanding, empathy and patience for these people.
Love and Prayers,
Ann Marie
Yo! to all y'all. When I read about Bp. Venner's tears, all I could think was, "Am I to join with you to shed tears that misogyny didn't win the day?" What are they on about? The irony here in the post helped reduce my anger.
ReplyDeleteAnne Marie, I love the thought of your purple hair and wild fingernails.
I agree with all the posters. And I'm too cranky to come up with anything worth adding except . . . damn mysogynists.
ReplyDeleteWell said, Mimi ...
ReplyDeleteFur shur I agree -- but I think I read that Venner supports WB (is that the appropriate abbrev for Women Bishops?) So perhaps it is not simple. Or Venner is not simple. Women being fully in the image of God is pretty simple.
ReplyDeleteSusanKay, you are indeed correct:
ReplyDeleteFrom the AP:
Right Rev. Stephen Venner, Bishop of Dover, who is in favour of women bishops, says church leaders talked for hours about wanting to give an honourable place to those who disagree, yet rejected every opportunity to do so.
Then, he's even more mystifying (or complicated) to me.
Dry those tears, Bishop Venner. Of course there's a place for misogynistic Anglo-Catholic closet sisters!
ReplyDeleteIt's called Rome!
Adios hermanas!
ReplyDeleteI wonder what Bp. Venner means by "fresh expressions of dioceses or bishops". I suppose he's speaking of Super bishops and Super dioceses free of fearsome female bishops.
Mimi, I think you misunderstand if you think this is about misogyny.
ReplyDeleteThough it's been long a-dying, this probably is the death-knell of Anglo-Catholicism, at least as understood by the spriritual progeny of Keeble and Pusey.
As someone who left Rome you would naturally have little sympathy with them. And, as a Catholic, I would, with Newman, judge the whole enterprise noble but ultimately futile. There has been no convergence with Rome and Constantinople, but increasing divergence. I understand that most of your regular posters will rejoice at such divergence. But it is surely wrong to see the end of that particular dream, and the emotion it has generated, as something worthy of sarcasm.
Rick, I'm sorry, but you and I inhabit different universes. I'm sitting here thinking what a bizarro world we live when more than one half the human beings in the church are not fit to have full rights and privileges of membership in the Body of Christ. Don't preach to me and lecture me about the death of Anglo-Catholicism. If keeping women from full membership is the core of Anglo-Catholicism, then let it die. Do you know what catholic means? It means universal. It does not mean privileged for men.
ReplyDeleteThe Anglo-Catholics want "protection from women bishops"? They write their own irony, sarcasm, parody, or whatever you'd like to call it. I'm sorry they feel bad, but they are just plain wrong, in my humble opinion.
Further, I'll write what I want on my own blog without any counsel from you. You don't seem to like much that I say, and that's fine, and if you want to come here to tell me, that's fine, too, but truly, I don't take my cues from you about how and what to write.
By the way, I thought what I was writing was irony rather than sarcasm, but of course, I could be wrong.
You and the Anglo-Catholics seem to live in a idealized fantasy world, where all would be sweetness and light if the pesky women and gays and lesbians would let you alone in your complacent authoritarian, male-dominated set-up.
You came from a Calvinist background and ran full speed ahead into authoritarian Roman Catholicism and embraced the whole package. No one could label you a cafeteria Catholic, that's for sure. An interesting combination, I'd say. You brought up my background first, so I feel free to address yours.
Peace, my brother in Christ.
Amen MImi! Preach it sister!
ReplyDeleteWell, Constantinople will just have to catch up. A lot of water passed under the bridge since 1054.
For one thing, they don't call it "Constantinople" anymore.
"Do you know what catholic means? It means universal."
ReplyDeleteI think it more properly means "according to the whole." And it is that regard for the whole, the engine that once made ecumenicism the touchstone of Christian liberalism, that has changed 180 degrees in my lifetime. I think that worthy of comment, and I don't mean to offend. But I hate to see this habitual attribution of the worst motives to fellow Christians. To see opponents in the best light possible was once an essential component of a liberal outlook.
"Istanbul" is an old nickname. Having once been the greatest city in the world, people would speak only of going "into the city," "eis ten polen"--hence Istanbul. But, ecclesiastically, I think the see remains "Constantinople."
I just this last month finished the third and last volume of Julian Norwich's history of Byzantium, which I would certainly recommend. The long history there of the love-hate relationship of the Greeks and the Latins, the distrust, the misunderstandings, the pacific initiatives, and the squabbling and intrigues while the enemy was assulting the very walls, may have some lessons for us.
Istanbul was the name given to the city by the Turkish Republic (a secular state) that replaced the Ottoman Empire (Among the Ottoman Sultan's titles were "Caliph" and "Caesar" claiming continuity with both the Prophet Muhammad and the Roman/Byzantine Emperors) after the First World War.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the Venetian Republic will repeat the 4th Crusade.
I've always understood "catholic" to mean universal as well. That's what we meant in the Methodist Church when we said the Apostle's Creed.
Apparently, the AntiRemonstrant Calvinists of Sydney want to remove the word "catholic" from the Creeds since they construe it as a reference to Rome. Remind me once again who the "innovators" are supposed to be.
I can't really see any good motive other than just basic atavism and hegemonism for shutting out half of humanity from full membership in the Church.
This is, is suppose, one of the assumptions of the debate that is rarely expressed. I am myself shut out from joining the clergy of my own communion, and the number of us so excluded well exceeds half. But I do not at all perceive that I am thereby shut out from full membership in the Church. I recognize that the clergy is both useful and necessary. But surely elegibility for orders has nothing to do with whether one is a Christian.
ReplyDeleteRick, no one has the RIGHT to be a priest, and no one has the RIGHT to be a bishop. ALL baptized members of the Body of Christ have the RIGHT to be considered on an equal basis as candidates for the priesthood and the episcopacy.
ReplyDeletecatholic (adj.)
1. Of broad or liberal scope; comprehensive: “The 100-odd pages of formulas and constants are surely the most catholic to be found” (Scientific American).
2. Including or concerning all humankind; universal: “what was of catholic rather than national interest” (J.A. Froude).
3. Catholic
1. Of or involving the Roman Catholic Church.
2. Of or relating to the universal Christian church.
3. Of or relating to the ancient undivided Christian church.
4. Of or relating to those churches that have claimed to be representatives of the ancient undivided church.
And now I'm done with this discussion.
Of course no one has a "right" to ecclesiastical office. People can and should be barred from seeking office because they lack a calling, they are incompetent, they do not have the support of their communities, or because their motives are less than pure. But that any baptized person should be summarily shut out of pursuing the process for ordination over something so arbitrary as lack of a Y chromosome is ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, that entirely arbitrary prohibition from pursuing a vocation makes half of the baptized less than fully baptized; and diminishes the God who made humanity in God's image male and female by one half.
At first I was marveled to see such a blog.Your blog is sparkling. It has a great appeal. How are U able to cope such a lot.
ReplyDeleteMeet me at
http://gwb-chinese.blogspot.com/
Waiting with curiosity. To know your innovation.
And if you want to learn chinese,please visit at
http://www.chinesepal.cn
or
http://www.chinesepal.cn/first/learn-chinese/index.htm
Thanks again and looking forward for more of your posting soon!