Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Women Bishops: The Vote

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
The whole thing has a distinct whiff of the absurd about it, but I guess that's part of its appeal. It seems bizarre, to me at least, that in 2012 an establishment can be committed - in principle and in practice - to gender discrimination, yet the prevailing mood is still to mollycoddle and speak in couched terms about the church and just how backwards it is. All that being said, it is somewhat of a non-story: an antiquated institution votes to remain in antiquity.

After listening to a few of the post-vote interviews a snippet from a Christopher Hitchens' speech rather springs to mind: "if you hear the Pope saying he believes in God, you think, well, the Pope's just doing his job again today. But, if you hear the Pope saying he's begun to doubt the existence of God, you think he might be onto something".

People's thoughts?
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Actually, and in the interests of fairness.

    _64280597_women_bishops464x212.gif

    So those who got it thrown out, were a minority of NON ORDAINED members of the church leadership.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I was speaking to a friend in America last night, and they always thought the UK was at least a little bit more "normal" in terms of religious worship than America on average. They also mentioned that this vote and due to the reasons stated by Fiend, made my friend sad.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's weird, if you take them all together, 72% voted for the change, a two-thirds majority, which is what was required.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You've rather avoided the point about the absurdity of this vote occurring in the twenty-first century. And the fact that three out of ten of the General Synod are so committed to gender inequality that'll the put there names against it in a vote.

    I appreciate this is religion, and as such is afforded special dispensation, but seeing as people can work themselves frothy over an ASDA advert, the lack speen-prose being directed this way is rather telling.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's in the bible.
    7 And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle--I am telling the truth, I am not lying--and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles. 8 I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing. 9 I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God. 11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
    34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
    Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee
    Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

    Also, all of the 12 were men.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well I'm persuaded.
    Exodus 21:20-21 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

    I'm off to administer some rough justice to my slave - justice tempered enough so that he lives through the night, mind. God bless the biblical mandate.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Furthermore, seeing as you want to bring spleens into it. It's kind of hard to get annoyed when the majority of church leadership are actually in support of it and the passing of this fell short by six votes. In addition, the bishop are having an emergency meeting, and when even the archbishop of York, who is a raving anti-homo thinks that women bishops are inevitable in his lifetime, what more is there to be said?

    Everyone who has a brain thinks this is retarded, especially when as soon as your allowed the ordination of women, it was a matter of time. Once you've ordained someone, you've said they are magically holy, you can't then say they're holy enough to be a vicar but not a bishop, because then you'd have to stick in bonus holy lessons.

    Where this compares to Asda, and advertising in general is that this is overt horseshit, the most upsetting thing about it is how a minority have controlled it. Whereas behind every great christmas etc... is insidious, barely noticable and add to the HUGE range of barely noticible and insidious sexism that's fucking everywhere, before I was even born I was treated to sexist comments ("ooh, isn't your baby active, you must be having another boy").

    My problem with the CofE is that they and other religions have this bollocks religious getout clause to treat people like wank.


    And frankly, I don't know what you want from this. You ask why they think the way they do. I showed you, no-one gives a shit if you think the bible is a load of fucking wank, its irrelevant what anyone outside the laity think of the bible. The fact is, conservatives take it VERY seriously, especially the new testament.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If 30% of the Board of ASDA were voting to perpetuate the policy that women couldn't be management, the shit you'd be losing could propel back-flips. But your not. You're getting vexed with me for pointing it out.

    Folk use the Bible to justify and bolster their pre-existing biases and bigotries. It's the Big Book of Multiple Choice: people selectively pick and choose and the hypocrisy is thick and stinky. The Archbishop of York is a homophobe; he'd be a homophobe with or without the Bible. He just happens to have a few spurious verses to hide his bigotry behind.

    What do I want from 'this'? Some light and a little heat, I guess. I want to be part of the constant erosion-by-discourse that exposes people's cognitive dissonance when it comes to religion. And I want to be on the rope that's pulling any organisation, religiously motivated or otherwise, kicking and screaming into modernity.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's not "The Board", if you wanted an Asda equivalent, it would be 30% of customers on the "people who don't really like change committee", drawn from a group of people who are a bit stuck in their ways. The clergy, and the bishops (who would be management, senior management, and the board) do want women, overwhelmingly, and they have this shitting little "well we're a religion" excuse for being completely absurd.

    What heat do you want applying to an organisation who's leadership have publicly said that they're disappointed and also that women bishops are inevitable and people are saying maybe Westminster are going to get on the case? What light do you want applied when the EXACT voting statistics are available and have been reported widely?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The General Synod is made up of two divisions of the ordained and one of the elected. I'll give you the ordained are broadly in favour, although the House of Clergy are still almost 25% backwards and fusty. While the laity aren't the ordained, they certainly ain't the customer; they're elected officials, chairmen, vicars-general and members of the Archbishops' Council. They're store and regional managers whose votes count. They're not my mother, grabbed out of her aisle while buying milk and asked to vote on the direction ASDA should take as a business.

    Some of their leadership have said they're disappointed: seven out of ten presumably are; three out of ten are very pleased indeed. You seem to be choosing to ignore that a significant minority of the church is still ass-backwards. Enough of them are that way to stop the church updating. And while we can all be pleased 70% of The Board don't appear to be totally archaic, a fuck-load of them still are. And it's 2012. A hundred years ago we worked out women should have equal voting rights. The church is, as usual, fucking tardy.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yes, the church is fucking tardy, in other news water is wet, pope is catholic, shit smells bad. How much more angry do you think I could possibly be with an organisation who not only thinks I should not be allowed to marry my girlfriend but is actively campaigning to prevent me from doing so and if I were to admit my orientation in any given location of said organisation it would be a 50/50 shot on whether someone will scream in my face that I'm going to hell.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So your quasi-defence of the Church of England is what? The Church's transgressions are so numerous and egregious that is rather passé to continue to point it out?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The CofE is borderline irrelevant, no-one really pays any attention, and following the result everyone is saying, "this is sexism and it's not ok" apart from a small group of conservative christians. As opposed to Asda, for example, who's adverts are everywhere, seen by children, and apparently approved of by all, especially everyone who still shops at Asda and everyone who told me it didn't matter because that's how advertising works.

    The church can go and fuck itself for a large number of reasons, there's no defense for saying women can't be bishops, it's discrimination. The only shield they've got is the bible, a document so re-written is frankly laughable, not least of the examples of which is every time a new translation is copyrighted it's a requirement that a certain number of words are different from ALL the other translations in that language.

    Really, all you seem to be saying is "the church is a bit shit" and everyone else is saying "yes, we know". Furthermore, all that can be done is boycott the church (not that I've got a lot of choice), and demand Westminster shake that sack of shit up. Which they won't do. But I didn't vote for the bunch of cunts in charge, what now? Shall I go and burn down my local vicarage? Deface the parish church?

    What I was told, in the endlessly referenced Asda thread, is "Why don't you go and give a shit about something that matters?". The church doesn't matter to me, mainstream opinions matter to me. There's a big difference between a minority of an archaic institution that is more and more sidelined doing something retarded and predictable, and big shops like tesco, asda, sainsburys etc. perpetuating sexism in a manner that is as disturbing as it it subtle.

    Also, it's hilarious that you think there's any kind of defense, quasi or otherwise, being done by me here. If I could dissolve the CofE I would.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So you quasi-defence of the Church of England is what? The Church's transgressions are so numerous and egregious that is rather passé to continue to point it out?

    The point is that Synod is meant to be a representative sample of congregants, but as it is somewhat self-selecting its members do tend towards the anti-change agenda. And, let's not forget, many will have been elected simply in order to vote against women bishops.

    I'm furious, the public attitude towards gay people and women is a large part of the reason I'm not seeking ordination in the CofE. But the point remains that people can find a Biblical basis for their prejudice (as they can for absolutely anything up to and including genocide) and will therefore come to feel that their very faith is at stake. It's not. In fact, in worldly terms, it's not really an issue. You'll notice that it's hard to find a defence of institutional sexism in the gospels (rather, it's in the epistles and the OT).

    Maybe those of us who consider ourselves Christian should spend less time arguing about who is offering communion or having their ring kissed, and more time doing this,
    "I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.

    "Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'

    "He will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.'"
    Matt. 25:35-40
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Incidentally, this article from BBC news puts the graphic Fiend posted into the context of the real disappointment felt by many in church leadership.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Fiend_85 wrote: »
    Really, all you seem to be saying is "the church is a bit shit" and everyone else is saying "yes, we know". Furthermore, all that can be done is boycott the church (not that I've got a lot of choice), and demand Westminster shake that sack of shit up. Which they won't do. But I didn't vote for the bunch of cunts in charge, what now? Shall I go and burn down my local vicarage? Deface the parish church?

    Have you wound yourself up a bit? Because this is a strange exchange: you seem to be employing fairly extreme hyperbole to counter points I've either not made or strawmen you've erected. And unless I'm mistaken, 95% of this thread has been populated by the two of us, so I'm not sure how "everyone else" is saying anything. Moreover, I'm not quite sure where I've advocated burning or vandalism as a method of achieving anything.
    What I was told, in the endlessly referenced Asda thread, is "Why don't you go and give a shit about something that matters?". The church doesn't matter to me, mainstream opinions matter to me. There's a big difference between a minority of an archaic institution that is more and more sidelined doing something retarded and predictable, and big shops like tesco, asda, sainsburys etc. perpetuating sexism in a manner that is as disturbing as it it subtle.

    Who's endlessly referenced the ASDA thread? We're about fifteen posts in. Only four or five of which must contain the word "ASDA". And it's being used as an analogy. I'm happy to have the debate with you about why I think there are parallels to be drawn, but I shan't mention it again if talkin about the ASDA thread pushes your pissy button.
    Also, it's hilarious that you think there's any kind of defense, quasi or otherwise, being done by me here. If I could dissolve the CofE I would.

    Well trollololololol, then.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    piccolo wrote: »
    The point is that Synod is meant to be a representative sample of congregants, but as it is somewhat self-selecting its members do tend towards the anti-change agenda. And, let's not forget, many will have been elected simply in order to vote against women bishops.

    That's an interesting point and as someone who's not a church aficionado I have to admit I only know that basics about the General Synod and how it works.
    I'm furious, the public attitude towards gay people and women is a large part of the reason I'm not seeking ordination in the CofE. But the point remains that people can find a Biblical basis for their prejudice (as they can for absolutely anything up to and including genocide) and will therefore come to feel that their very faith is at stake. It's not. In fact, in worldly terms, it's not really an issue. You'll notice that it's hard to find a defence of institutional sexism in the gospels (rather, it's in the epistles and the OT).

    I'm glad we're both pissed off and frustrated with the CofE. Fiend seems to find being frustrated and vocal all rather passé. I'd be interested to hear why and how you think the vote turned out they way it did, and how the CofE should proceed from here if it wants to reclaim credibility?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'd be interested to hear why and how you think the vote turned out they way it did, and how the CofE should proceed from here if it wants to reclaim credibility?

    I think the vote went the way it did because people for some reason feel that women's vocation undermines their own faith. And some people will go to great lengths, therefore, to keep women out (and to persuade others to do the same). It was also the house of laity who prevented women being ordained at all for a long time; in all churches (including my own) it tends to be those who are ordained - and therefore forced to confront all sorts of issues theologically on a daily basis, as well as in the studies that got them to ordination - who are the most likely to be liberal and make these concessions. I can only repeat, too, what I said about the house of laity not necessarily being representative. It's like the houses of clergy and bishops are referenda of those groups whilst the house of laity is a vote of MPs.

    To move on, I don't know. I once heard Nick Holtam (former rector of St.-Martin-in-the-Fields and current bishop of Salisbury) say that unless the church becomes as liberal as the population it has no future. And yet, amongst young people at least, the largest growing churches are conservative and evangelical.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well trollololololol, then.

    Jesus wept. Are you shitting me?

    Fine, you're right, whatever point it was you're trying to make.


    Stick a fork in me. I'm done.
  • Annaarrr!!Annaarrr!! Posts: 876 Part of The Mix Family
    I don't like the idea of female bishops, nor female priest. I've been raised Catholic and I don't think the religion is sexist at all, women have their roles to play as men have theirs.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So why can't women be priests then?
  • Annaarrr!!Annaarrr!! Posts: 876 Part of The Mix Family
    Just don't think it's right. Men have their jobs/roles and women have theirs.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why though? Its like me telling you that you shouldn't be using the internet, why, because "it just doesn't feel right".

    The fact of the matter is that there was a majority in that vote who wanted to bring the matter into effect, the only reason women were not accepted was a relatively small amount of votes.
  • Annaarrr!!Annaarrr!! Posts: 876 Part of The Mix Family
    The vote was for CofE wasn't it? because Jesus clearly chose men as the people to carry on his work. Yes women played an important part in his life but it wasn't in the same way as the men. There were no women disciples in the sense of the 11 he had. It's my belief that women shouldn't be priests, you can argue against it as much as you can but the idea of it makes me cringe. I'm 16 with very traditional views on the role of women. I'm not naive before you think it, I just believe that men have roles for them and women have roles also. I wouldn't tell a man or woman they should do this and that if it's not something i would do personally but I have my own personal view on stuff like this
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Annaarrr!! wrote: »
    The vote was for CofE wasn't it? because Jesus clearly chose men as the people to carry on his work. Yes women played an important part in his life but it wasn't in the same way as the men.

    Have you thought that this might be because of the male dominated society that existed back then, and that the bible is around 2,000 years old, changed by rewrites and loss in translation etc?
  • Annaarrr!!Annaarrr!! Posts: 876 Part of The Mix Family
    existed back then? its only in the last few decades that it's changed, and it hasn't changed within the church much, women aren't stopped from having roles within the church, they do quite a lot actually, just not as part of the clergy. It was back then that Jesus was alive (that's my belief anyways) and that's when he made the decisions that he wanted the men to be the ones to directly carry on his work (or so it seems).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G-Raffe wrote: »
    Have you thought that this might be because of the male dominated society that existed back then, and that the bible is around 2,000 years old, changed by rewrites and loss in translation etc?

    I really struggle to get into a serious argument on this subject, once the Bible is used as a reference point. Sure I understand that people have faith and some find it a consolation but it can be interpreted in so many different way that people use it to support their prejudices IME
  • SkiveSkive Posts: 15,281 Skive's The Limit
    So women want to prove that they're just as good as men at playing make believe? Seems fair enough to me.
    Aren't there going to be problems when they all turn up to church and realise they're all wearing the same hat?
    Weekender Offender 
  • Annaarrr!!Annaarrr!! Posts: 876 Part of The Mix Family
    Hahahhahahhahaha :p
Sign In or Register to comment.