No, it’s not my paranoia — it’s actually the suggestion of a supporter of women bishops which has been sympathetically received on the Women And The CHurch Facebook page.
The argument is simple: we don’t like the amended legislation, but vote it down and we won’t get any bishops. Vote it through, however, and we’ll have women bishops and then we can have more women bishops, and then we can deal with this issue finally and forever.
Well, it makes sense to me politically. But I do wish some of our milder mannered brethren out there would just take note of what’s going on here.
I now have it on good authority that the ommission of any qualifications other than ‘maleness’ for alternative bishops was indeed a ‘deliberate oversight’. Attempts were made in the revision stages to give more substance to their qualifications than this, but this was apparently resisted strongly.
In other words, people knew what they were doing.
Now call me naive, but I’m still a bit shocked by this. I expect us low-lifes to be doing skull-duggery. I genuinely thought that at the higher levels of church management there was a bit more openness and even-handedness.
It seems I may have been wrong.
Personally, I’m moving to the view that it would be better to kick the whole thing into touch (ie to vote ‘no’) and put up with having to try again. Better that, anyway, than Trojan Horses.
Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend: