Church of England will have women bis...

Church of England will have women bishops

There are 21 comments on the Seattle Post-Intelligencer story from Jul 14, 2014, titled Church of England will have women bishops. In it, Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports that:

The venerable Church of England, officially headed by Queen Elizabeth II, has decided to begin consecrating women as bishops in the church.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#1 Jul 15, 2014
An excellent development.

Jesus approves.
Dan

United States

#2 Jul 15, 2014
RevKen wrote:
An excellent development.
Jesus approves.
If the church's great founder, King Henry VIII, would have wanted the Church of England to have female bishops, he would have married (then executed) one.
Listen to the Word

Lake Havasu City, AZ

#3 Jul 15, 2014
I see RevKev says that Jesus approves. Of course, he doesn't offer one bit of evidence that Jesus approves. The only reliable evidence is the Bible. One is hard pressed to find one female bishop mentioned in the Bible. One is also hard pressed to find one command by anyone in the Bible to have female bishops. But maybe Rev Ken now claims a papal kind of authority to speak directly for Jesus. Possibly when he is writing on this forum, RevKen is speaking ex cathedra.

If this is an excellent development, the Anglican community can expect more Katherine Jefferts-Schoris and therefore can expect the Anglican community to scare off more of the faithful and decline as rapidly as TEC is - except maybe in the southern hemisphere where most Anglicans remain closer to the Bible and historic Anglican teachings. Possibly the faithful south of the Equator will start leaving the Anglican community, which will allow the legal seizure of more land, money and endowment to feel the sacred cows - and bulls - of liberalism in the Anglican church north of the Equator.
Dan

United States

#4 Jul 15, 2014
Interesting take on this (written prior to the Synod, I believe-7/10-from a former Anglican priest, now a Catholic priest.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead...

Apparently this was determined to pass the Synod come hell or high water, and nothing as banal as standing Synod rules of procedure were going to get in the way.

The English government threatened loss of tax exempt status if it didn't pass, so the fix was in.

Henry VIII approves.

While Nero fiddles in York, one awaits anything of substance from the gathering or its branches like TEC (i.e. the impending war in Israel, the crisis in Syria, the humanitarian crisis on the US border, the religious liberty matters at the feet of the SCOTUS, etc.); anything besides an apparent fixation on having Bishops who sit while they pee.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#5 Jul 15, 2014
Dan wrote:
Interesting take on this (written prior to the Synod, I believe-7/10-from a former Anglican priest, now a Catholic priest.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead...
Apparently this was determined to pass the Synod come hell or high water, and nothing as banal as standing Synod rules of procedure were going to get in the way.
The English government threatened loss of tax exempt status if it didn't pass, so the fix was in.
Henry VIII approves.
While Nero fiddles in York, one awaits anything of substance from the gathering or its branches like TEC (i.e. the impending war in Israel, the crisis in Syria, the humanitarian crisis on the US border, the religious liberty matters at the feet of the SCOTUS, etc.); anything besides an apparent fixation on having Bishops who sit while they pee.
What !!!.... LOL!!.... Can you not sit and pee at the same time?

You are such a JERK!

Henry VIII died 500 years ago. Elizabeth I, his daughter by Anne Boleyn, established the English Protestant Church which later became the Anglican Church.

The Episcopal Church was founded during the American Revolution. Starting July 4, 1776, Congress and several states passed laws making prayers for the king and British Parliament acts of treason. Apostolic Succession within its priesthood came through bishop Seabury who sought and received consecration through the Scottish Church. Seabury was consecrated bishop by Robert Kilgour, Bishop of Aberdeen and Primus of Scotland; Arthur Petrie, Bishop of Ross and Moray; and John Skinner, Coadjutor Bishop of Aberdeen.- Wiki and others.

*****

"The walls of the Roman catacombs bear pictures showing women in authoritative stances, with their hands raised in the posture of a bishop. The Ecclesiastical Canons of the Apostles specifically forbade women to stand in prayer (24:1-8). But here we see them standing in prayer, exercising a ministry of intercession and benediction, and dominating the scene. To this day, their steadfast faith and ministry still bless us." - Dr. Catherine Kroeger

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#6 Jul 15, 2014
Dan wrote:
Interesting take on this (written prior to the Synod, I believe-7/10-from a former Anglican priest, now a Catholic priest.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead...
From this former Anglican-now Roman Catholic:

(Speaking of the Anglican Church) "The head of state created the church in the first place. What else should one expect of an Erastian body?"

That could also be said of the Roman and Eastern Orthodox Church, under the Roman Emperor Constantine the Great, having formed the state church of the Roman Empire, as declared by edict in 380 CE.

Apparently, acceptance and conversion into the Roman Church does not require a refreshment course to be taken on Church History.
Dan

United States

#7 Jul 15, 2014
RevKen wrote:
<quoted text>
From this former Anglican-now Roman Catholic:
(Speaking of the Anglican Church) "The head of state created the church in the first place. What else should one expect of an Erastian body?"
That could also be said of the Roman and Eastern Orthodox Church, under the Roman Emperor Constantine the Great, having formed the state church of the Roman Empire, as declared by edict in 380 CE.
Apparently, acceptance and conversion into the Roman Church does not require a refreshment course to be taken on Church History.
Um, the Catholic Church predates Constantine.

Thanks. No charge for the history lesson.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#8 Jul 16, 2014
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Um, the Catholic Church predates Constantine.
Thanks. No charge for the history lesson.
Yeah, well,.... the Church in Jerusalem predates the Roman Catholic Church.

So does the Church in Brittany at Glastonbury.

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#9 Jul 16, 2014
RevKen wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, well,.... the Church in Jerusalem predates the Roman Catholic Church ...
The church in Jerusalem held fast to a tradition of all-male overseers, e.g., the Twelve Apostles, but now that link to the C of E is severed.
Dan

United States

#10 Jul 16, 2014
RevKen wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, well,.... the Church in Jerusalem predates the Roman Catholic Church.
So does the Church in Brittany at Glastonbury.
I said "Catholic".
Dan

United States

#11 Jul 16, 2014
RevKen wrote:
<quoted text>
What !!!.... LOL!!.... Can you not sit and pee at the same time?
You are such a JERK!
Henry VIII died 500 years ago. Elizabeth I, his daughter by Anne Boleyn, established the English Protestant Church which later became the Anglican Church.
The Episcopal Church was founded during the American Revolution. Starting July 4, 1776, Congress and several states passed laws making prayers for the king and British Parliament acts of treason. Apostolic Succession within its priesthood came through bishop Seabury who sought and received consecration through the Scottish Church. Seabury was consecrated bishop by Robert Kilgour, Bishop of Aberdeen and Primus of Scotland; Arthur Petrie, Bishop of Ross and Moray; and John Skinner, Coadjutor Bishop of Aberdeen.- Wiki and others.
*****
"The walls of the Roman catacombs bear pictures showing women in authoritative stances, with their hands raised in the posture of a bishop. The Ecclesiastical Canons of the Apostles specifically forbade women to stand in prayer (24:1-8). But here we see them standing in prayer, exercising a ministry of intercession and benediction, and dominating the scene. To this day, their steadfast faith and ministry still bless us." - Dr. Catherine Kroeger
Henry VIII split with Rome and took the position of Supreme Head of the Church of England.

Of course Kroger would describe the scene as you paste here. She was a leading figure within the biblical egalitarian movement. Surprise.

I don't care if the Anglican Community names female bishops all day, all night and twice on Sunday.

It simply looks to those outside your club as if you have no regard for or comprehension of any other issue, anywhere at all, other than your endless social experiments in service to gender matters. It's as if you are feverishly working on how globally irrelevant you can be in the fastest manner. So far, so good.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#12 Jul 16, 2014
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Henry VIII split with Rome and took the position of Supreme Head of the Church of England.
Of course Kroger would describe the scene as you paste here. She was a leading figure within the biblical egalitarian movement. Surprise.
I don't care if the Anglican Community names female bishops all day, all night and twice on Sunday.
It simply looks to those outside your club as if you have no regard for or comprehension of any other issue, anywhere at all, other than your endless social experiments in service to gender matters. It's as if you are feverishly working on how globally irrelevant you can be in the fastest manner. So far, so good.
LOL!!!!... A Roman Catholic feeling the squeeze.

And now the pope continues to hint at allowing priests to be married. Soon enough, they'll be permitted to do so.

After that comes women in the Roman Church priesthood. And then Roman bishops who know how to sit and pee at the same time.

In the meantime, send your homosexual priests to TEC on sabbatical. We'll marry them to each other, put them in charge of a parish for a while and then send them back - if they want to go.

Inevitable.

Jesus approves.
Dan

United States

#13 Jul 16, 2014
RevKen wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL!!!!... A Roman Catholic feeling the squeeze.
And now the pope continues to hint at allowing priests to be married. Soon enough, they'll be permitted to do so.
After that comes women in the Roman Church priesthood. And then Roman bishops who know how to sit and pee at the same time.
In the meantime, send your homosexual priests to TEC on sabbatical. We'll marry them to each other, put them in charge of a parish for a while and then send them back - if they want to go.
Inevitable.
Jesus approves.
Women will not be ordained. The Church doesn't have the authority. See"Ordinatio Sacerdotalis" for the details.

Priest could be allowed to marry. Thats' not doctrinal. It's a discipline.

The rest of your TEC sabbatical fantasy can stand alone.

Telling that your response outlines the very fixation I alluded to in my previous post. Nothing comes out of the Anglican Communion or TEC save for intramural, navel-gazing, social experimentation concerning your clergy and the consequences of same (the court battles).

Not sure how much Jesus would approve of you all wasting all that time incessantly looking inward and fighting amongst yourselves, but I'm sure you have it all in hand.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#14 Jul 16, 2014
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Women will not be ordained. The Church doesn't have the authority. See"Ordinatio Sacerdotalis" for the details.
Priest could be allowed to marry. Thats' not doctrinal. It's a discipline.
The rest of your TEC sabbatical fantasy can stand alone.

.... Telling that your response outlines the very fixation I alluded to in my previous post. Nothing comes out of the Anglican Communion or TEC save for intramural, navel-gazing, social experimentation concerning your clergy and the consequences of same (the court battles).
Not sure how much Jesus would approve of you all wasting all that time incessantly looking inward and fighting amongst yourselves, but I'm sure you have it all in hand.
No sense of humor.

On the other hand, the true telling is that the same fixations, often in reverse, have led the Roman Church into its present, twisted state of affairs.

And as for the cues your pope is taking from us, more power to him.

Also, of course women will be ordained. The Church DOES have the authority.

John 14:1-12

"Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also."
"And where I go you know, and the way you know." Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way?" Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him."
Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us." Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say,'Show us the Father'? Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves."
"Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father.

Women are included.
Dan

United States

#15 Jul 16, 2014
RevKen wrote:
<quoted text>
No sense of humor.
On the other hand, the true telling is that the same fixations, often in reverse, have led the Roman Church into its present, twisted state of affairs.
And as for the cues your pope is taking from us, more power to him.
Also, of course women will be ordained. The Church DOES have the authority.
John 14:1-12
"Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also."
"And where I go you know, and the way you know." Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way?" Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him."
Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us." Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say,'Show us the Father'? Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves."
"Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father.
Women are included.
The Catholic Church does not believe it has the authority to ordain women.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#16 Jul 16, 2014
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
The Catholic Church does not believe it has the authority to ordain women.
That is not true, Dan.

The historically recent pronouncement that the Church has no authority to ordain women to the priesthood is an incredibly obvious example of the Church's historical hypocrisy.

The papal hierarchy uses the authority that it says it has received, by and from Jesus, through Peter, to declare that it does not have the authority.

The priesthood has an interesting credit to its existence. It is very, very old and its true power and authority, lodged with the Holy Spirit, is conferred in Ordination. The author of Hebrews in the New Testament alluded to this designation.

Are priests without error? Heavens no! In fact, the focus of the Holy Spirit in an individual often leads to the making of egregious errors.

But, the truth is that women make fine priests and every bit as capable and responsible with the office as any man can be.

Tradition will change to permit them to hold the office. It has to.

Rev. Ken
Dan

United States

#17 Jul 16, 2014
RevKen wrote:
<quoted text>
That is not true, Dan.
The historically recent pronouncement that the Church has no authority to ordain women to the priesthood is an incredibly obvious example of the Church's historical hypocrisy.
The papal hierarchy uses the authority that it says it has received, by and from Jesus, through Peter, to declare that it does not have the authority.
The priesthood has an interesting credit to its existence. It is very, very old and its true power and authority, lodged with the Holy Spirit, is conferred in Ordination. The author of Hebrews in the New Testament alluded to this designation.
Are priests without error? Heavens no! In fact, the focus of the Holy Spirit in an individual often leads to the making of egregious errors.
But, the truth is that women make fine priests and every bit as capable and responsible with the office as any man can be.
Tradition will change to permit them to hold the office. It has to.
Rev. Ken
"The papal hierarchy uses the authority that it says it has received, by and from Jesus, through Peter, to declare that it does not have the authority."

Precisely. Jesus, who was divine and who could do as He wished, did not name women as Apostles.

You may ascribe error, claim Him somehow a slave to social mores or assign a random nature to His acts and seek to correct Him if you see fit. I'll pass.

"Tradition will change to permit them to hold the office. It has to"

? Why now, after 2,000 years, does it "have to"?

So they can keep up with and be as relevant as..........TEC? ELCA? PCUSA?

Not sure that holds up, Ken.
Dan

United States

#18 Jul 16, 2014
RevKen wrote:
<quoted text>
That is not true, Dan.
The historically recent pronouncement that the Church has no authority to ordain women to the priesthood is an incredibly obvious example of the Church's historical hypocrisy.
The papal hierarchy uses the authority that it says it has received, by and from Jesus, through Peter, to declare that it does not have the authority.
The priesthood has an interesting credit to its existence. It is very, very old and its true power and authority, lodged with the Holy Spirit, is conferred in Ordination. The author of Hebrews in the New Testament alluded to this designation.
Are priests without error? Heavens no! In fact, the focus of the Holy Spirit in an individual often leads to the making of egregious errors.
But, the truth is that women make fine priests and every bit as capable and responsible with the office as any man can be.
Tradition will change to permit them to hold the office. It has to.
Rev. Ken
"That is not true, Dan."

Um, yes it IS true that the Church does not believe they have the authority to ordain women.

"Why does Dan say this?", you may ask?

Well, because the Church actually said so.

"Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful."

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_i...

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#19 Jul 17, 2014
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
"That is not true, Dan."
Um, yes it IS true that the Church does not believe they have the authority to ordain women.
"Why does Dan say this?", you may ask?
Well, because the Church actually said so.
"Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful."
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_i...
He declares?

Is he a human being?

Is he a priest?

Is his successor also qualified to declare?

Is his successor also a human being?

Whose problem is it?

It is interesting to read your statement that the ' "Church" doesn't believe' or that ' "they" have the authority' when, in fact, the "Church" and "they" are actually YOU.

That you understand that the exercising of authority to declare that the exerciser has no authority is a good thing. In so doing, you recognize the inconsistency of the act.

That you defend the act of exercising that authority to escape responsibility in order to preserve a bastion of self-promulgating rule at the expense of others is typical of religious hypocrisy.

You make excuses for Jesus, saying He must have been a slave to culture when exactly the opposite is true. He spoke through that culture in terms that the culture could understand in order to free it from itself. They crucified Him for exposing them to themselves.

You are only faithful to your own hypocrisy.
Dan

United States

#20 Jul 17, 2014
RevKen wrote:
<quoted text>
He declares?
Is he a human being?
Is he a priest?
Is his successor also qualified to declare?
Is his successor also a human being?
Whose problem is it?
It is interesting to read your statement that the ' "Church" doesn't believe' or that ' "they" have the authority' when, in fact, the "Church" and "they" are actually YOU.
That you understand that the exercising of authority to declare that the exerciser has no authority is a good thing. In so doing, you recognize the inconsistency of the act.
That you defend the act of exercising that authority to escape responsibility in order to preserve a bastion of self-promulgating rule at the expense of others is typical of religious hypocrisy.
You make excuses for Jesus, saying He must have been a slave to culture when exactly the opposite is true. He spoke through that culture in terms that the culture could understand in order to free it from itself. They crucified Him for exposing them to themselves.
You are only faithful to your own hypocrisy.
"That you defend the act of exercising that authority to escape responsibility in order to preserve a bastion of self-promulgating rule at the expense of others......."

Ah ah ah, Ken-you don't get to project motives unto people's actions simply in order to produce an argument. "self-promulgating rule at the expense of others". LOL.

.....and I don't make excuses for Christ. You obviously misread my post.....and then you declare Him a slave to culture (lol). "....spoke through that culture in terms that the culture could understand...".

....and don't use the word "hyposcrisy" if you don't know what it means. I haven't said one thiong and done another, so you're doing what dopes do, which is throwing the word around in some display of faux oiutrage.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Orcas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Moving to Seattle area (Dec '11) 4 hr Buster 35
president wire tapped, bugged, disrespected? 22 hr Repubs Are Traitors 5
500 Illegal Aliens to be Arrested This Wk End Mar 23 truth 5
Getting their guys: Seahawks 2017 Draft Mar 22 SEATTLESPORTSCAST... 1
Seahawks 2017 Draft: First two rounds re-look Mar 21 SEATTLESPORTSCAST... 1
David Rockefeller - New World Order ? (Apr '09) Mar 20 Anonymous 4
News Could Washington succeed by seceding? Mar 18 ghostwriter88 17

Orcas Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Orcas Mortgages