You are here . on the pale blue dot

Blog notes

Anonymous comments for publication must include a pseudonym.

They should be 'on topic' and not involve third parties.
If pseudonyms are linked to commercial sites comments will be removed as spam.
The blog owner is unable to ‘unfollow’ Followers.

Wednesday, 12 February 2014

The Joker has it, the Joker has it

As expected, the Church of England has overwhelmingly approved a fast-track scheme which could see its first women bishops appointed this year after being told it has run out of male clerics who are "up to the task" - see Telegraph article here.

It came from a member of the Synod who was applauded as he warned bluntly that it “urgently” needs to ordain its first women bishops because it has effectively run out of male clerics who are up to the task. He said that, with a string of bishoprics already lying empty and a growing backlog of appointments to make, the “shallow pond” of suitable male candidates had already been "overfished".

I was horrified by the remarks but the comments were well received. A similar lack of charity had been displayed at the Governing Body of the Church in Wales last September after their bishops sold-out to an amendment to their own motion which would have offered some protection for traditionalists. That statutory provision was to be replaced by a voluntary code of practice 'in line with other provinces', not least the Church of England, was greeted with "wild delight". The mover of the amendment hoped that women in the Church of England would be encouraged by the result. "Sisters across Offa's Dyke, look to us," she said. More shame them if the Church of Wales is to be held as an example with the continuing prospect of no acceptable sacramental and pastoral oversight for traditionalists unless the Bench of Bishops significantly change their stance.

The Church of England has demonstrated that on the question of women's ordination, theology is as shallow as the pond they are left to fish in. Had they been able to see beyond politics they would understand that 'the pool' now consists of mainly like-minded people who have compromised their faith for personal advancement, claiming to see the work of the Lord even when all the evidence is against them.

This morning I read another disconcerting claim (here): How TEC funds Facilitated Conversations. Now that explains a lot!


  1. Interesting link regarding TEC funding. Hardly surprising, but at least it confirms what we always suspected.

    When you read the latest article here listing the law suits initiated by TEC, and against TEC, it is blatantly obvious that TEC would have spent their money rather better "facilitating" their own conversations.

    The principal problem with the whole "indaba" charade is that as usual the members of the Archbishop Alice in Wonderland school of theology only want words to mean what s/he wants them to mean. In the case of Anglican "Indaba", dialogue = monologue, and "facilitating" = gag, peer group pressure, and/or ignore.

  2. They had a similar dearth of suitable candidates for bishopricks in the 1690s in England since all the decent men had left.

    Perhaps a few sinnod folk will ponder why after all these years there should be such a dearth.

  3. A shallow pool only in the sense that they have excluded from consideration almost everyone who might make a good bishop.