There are way too many bishops anyway I know very few people who should hold the position. I especially have known no women who should the position. My pastor is a woman so I am not bigoted but even she would not fit the role.

“There are way too many bishops anyway…I especially have known no women who should hold the position.”
That makes no sense. Even if there are too many bishops why should that bar women? Not to mention the fact that the Archbishop of Canterbury conceded that no female bishops would be elected until 2014 by when I’m sure others will have died. Also, just because you don’t know any women who you’d want as a bishop doesn’t mean you should discriminate against all women. How many men do you know that you think should be a bishop?

The Church of England has women priests now,(since 1994). There is no reason they shouldn’t go ahead and make some of them bishops. Isn’t that the natural next step in the church? Am glad they are actually looking into going for it.
Once again the RCC is steping beyond it’s bounds. Why do they find it necessary to WARN the Church of England against women bishops? The Church of England has already ordained women, and that’s against the rules in RCC land. Of course the RCC probably thinks that is wrong also. The RCC said making women bishops would not help heal the rift between the RCC and C of E. Somehow I don’t think the C of E is too worried about that!

“Once again the RCC is steping beyond it’s bounds.”
Funny how you don’t express the same sentiment when, say, other religious leaders try to tell Catholics how to manage their own internal affairs.

The RCC and the C of E split a long time ago (Henry VIII?)so since the C of E has pretty much been doing it’s own thing, I figure the RCC is wasting it’s time trying to tell them women shouldn’t be bishops. The same advice (if given) about ordaining women priests certainly didn’t do any good, did it?
What religious leaders have been messing with RCC ideas? They too should not try to tell Benny and friends what to do. Would be just as effective as the RCC and the C of E.

NateW: Oh, since I’m not a religious leader, I figure as a lay person I (and other lay folks) can still disagree with the RCC. They make it so easy. )

The RCC invalidated our orders in 1896. So anything they have had to say since then is completely irrelevant in the life of an Anglican.

“Such a decision signifies a breaking away from the apostolic tradition maintained by all of the churches since the first millennium, and therefore is a further obstacle for the reconciliation between the Catholic Church and the Church of England,”
I cannot imagine why anyone would want want to join their church to the RCC. And if they as individuals want to join it, they can. Unlike joining some religions, they don’t even have to be circumcised.
Now if they let some people have only men oversee them will other people be able to only have women oversee them and others have only homosexuals oversee them? Etc.?

Pagansister,
I wasn’t talking about you, I was talking about other religious leaders. When we get articles about Jewish leaders criticizing the Vatican for the way it runs its internal affairs, for instance, I don’t see you rushing in to ask what business they have trying to tell the Vaican what to do.

If we try to tell the Vatican what to do why should we criticize others who do so?
But in fact the Vatican has done some things the last few years that cry out for criticism. I don’t believe allowing women bishops cries out for any criticism. However criticizing them for allowing women bishops cries out for criticism.
And beware, criticizing ps for criticizing the Vatican for criticizing the COE is on the verge of crying out for criticism.

I truly wonder how long it will be before the RCC and CofE folks get together and decide Henry8 really was just a slobbering egomaniacal love machine and that the church ought to just reattach once more. Sure, some hateful things were said over the last 5 centuries and it may be painful to look past them. But over all the conservatives from both groups are so similar that they ought to just kiss – in a manly, not-so-gay way, and make up – but no cosmetics or frilly things will be worn under their vestments. And after all, neither of them thought much of Marty Luther and his insolent gang of upstarts. (Henry offered to off Luther, and the Pope said “thanks but no thanks. But here is a new title just for offering; ‘Defender of the Faith’” That title remains one of the British monarch’s)
Everyone wants to take so many steps backwards! Can they fracture this organizaton one more time and still expect it to maintain any credibility?

Generally, Nate W, when the RCC criticizes or condemns others its over issues that only effect its narrow dogmas. This is greatly contrasted from criticizers of the RCC who have humanitarian issues with it because it openly prays for the conversion of others while trying to promote ecumenism and refuses to condone the use of condoms in areas with heavy populations of HIV infected people.

Guess I jumped to the wrong conclusion, NateW. )

Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori is ripping the TEC apart pretty good so why not get more women. I know to many that sounds sexist but the truth of the many no matter how advanced we get “God” did design man and woman differently for His good purpose. Now this makes absolutely no sense to those who don’t believe in God and to those who adapt borderline on the fence notions about God the lukewarm bunch by people have pretty bad track records when it comes to following God’s design for us. As I said before there are way too many bishops now the caliber of leadership has fallen there are few men suited for the job and it is not a job for a woman, if God did raise up a woman then she would have to be exceptional and for God’s agenda, that’s no Schori.

If there are too many bishops, then lets take one of the title “Primate” literally, and elect an ape. Are mountain gorillas more appropriate than baboons or gibbons? Where do chimapnzees and spider monkeys fit in? I don’t know. But I know this, the apes at the National Zoo have this habit of throwing their poo at passing visitors. Now that certainly seems to describe the nature of most theological arguments (this one included) – and explains why people do not take the “Church” seriously.

cknuck, Women are just as able to run companies, schools, and CHURCHES as well as any male. In fact I have a feeling some women would do a lot better than some of the male religious leaders now or in the past. If women can run a house and raise kids then they can certainly run a church. Motherhood (for those who choose it) can call for more instant decisions than running many companies, or churches. OOPs, cknuck, you’re going to tell me that that is what God wanted women to do…be moms and raise kids. Fortunately we have many, many choices in the world now, that being one of them. Guess God expected women to remain subordinate to men. Guess again, My Friend. We have fought hard to get out from under the thumb of males, and IMO will never be there again. It’s called equality. Sorry if that isn’t what some Divine Being had in mind.

No, cknuck’s got an eye for bishopial qualities and that’s not what he sees when he looks at women. And cknuck is very certain he’s right.

Bishopial? Really, nnmns. I didn’t know that you were down wit dat With bzef and bishopial you’re really running up your street cred!

It amazes me that people who are so quick to scream racism at the drop of the hat have no problem disenfranchising half the human race.
Of course, since CK isn’t American (perhaps he comes from a society where women are looked on as trash.
He could rise above it.

Bishopic? Bishoply? Bishcous?

I opt for Episcopal.

cknuck: “I know to many that sounds sexist but the truth of the many no matter how advanced we get ‘God’ did design man and woman differently for His good purpose.”
You know why it sounds sexist? Because it is. Could you possibly explain to us why you think that having a Y-chromosome is required to lead something?
“As I said before there are way too many bishops now the caliber of leadership has fallen there are few men suited for the job and it is not a job for a woman”
Why. Not?

Without calling names or accusing anyone of being non-American or criticizing anyone’s grammar, I will say that to many folk outside of the church trying to govern the church and the church as a whole is starting to cave, (this is in Revelations) the whole bishop thing looks like just another secular job opportunity and many church folk also adopt the secular view of God’s house. If that is all it is than yes more bishops and more women. When we look to the Bible which to many of these so-called modern church folk who want to keep up with world standards we see a totally different call for the church. Now if you want a church without the bible then develop that and don’t pretend, just take the bible out of the pews.
jest I don’t disagree with you argument, I certainly wouldn’t put it like that but it does come close to my position.
I’ve got about 30 seconds to post and then get back to my job, so my grammar my prove to be incorrect at times but it has been proven that even with partial statements or words even one can still catch the meaning.

“I opt for Episcopal.”
Who knew?

Just trying to lighten the mood a little. You don’t seem to be your normal, happy-go-lucky atheistic self there budy. You know the one we’ve all come to know and love. Shouldn’t you be out at a big Darwinian Gala Bash or something? You know, chromosomal-shaped strobe lights and green amoeba-looking disco balls, getting your freak on? You’ve put in an awfully hard day’s work. For what it’s worth, I applaud you. Science is something you obviously feel passionate about and not everyone’s going to agree with your point of view. Still, there is still nature and vast landscapes to revere, whether they be created or evolved from who only knows what.
Onward and upward

Well thanks Tom. There are indeed vast and beautiful landscapes to enjoy and even revere. I’m glad we both do that. Happy Darwin Day.