Forum menu
I don't regard Spain, Italy, Portugal, Tunisia, Morocco, Jordan, Turkmenistan or Uzbekistan as being tolerant.
How could you not regard Spain, Portugal and Italy as not being tolerant??? (no idea about the other countries...)
There are certain priests who do not want to "report" to a woman bishop
But the clergy at synod voted fairly overwhelmingly in favour.
rudebwoy - Member
one of the least tolerant places is the USA, especially if you are white [s]black[/s] and in the 'wrong' area.
But the clergy at synod voted fairly overwhelmingly in favour.
Which is irrelevant as you have to carry all houses, however I think I oversimplified the situation as under the proposals it would be up to the parish rather than the clergyman whether they accepted a woman bishop.
under the proposals it would be up to the parish rather than the clergyman whether they accepted a woman bishop
And the majority of parishes are in favour of women bishops. (Just think, one day they might just be called bishops.)
A minority of an increasingly irrelevant minority are against women bishops, yet this skews the demographic make up of our parliament, which affects all of us even if we don't believe in the same god or gods.
With this decision and opposing marriage equality, I think the CofE may just have started us on the road to disestablishment. That would just leave Iran with reserved seats for religious figures.
At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter.
Its not like C of E is a proper religion anyway, is it? For a start it only exists because some fat bloke really, really struggled to keep it in his pants.
Surely its just a large receptacle for people who don't give a monkeys about religion - in fact, they give the whole subject so little thought, they can't even be arsed defining themselves as atheists or agnostics, as if they did, they'd have to justify it with something more substantial than "do you know what? I really couldn't give a ****!"
And people who really dislike Catholics. Rangers fans perhaps?
Isn't it just a sort of 'none of the above' option, compared to a more shouty, beardy or Italian-based operations?
At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter.
The bishops help to decide our laws, so it matters. The rest of it is an irrelevance.
Internally I dont care what they do - it is hardly the only issue where they are somewhat out of touch.
Ignoring everything else i would refuse to worship a god who was a sexist
Berm Bandit - MemberThis and the fat twunt that got locked up for child abuse yesterday tell me everything that I need or want to know about organised religion.
The end.
Yes, because as we've learnt over the last number of weeks, sexual abuse is the special domain of organised religion.
When I was a kid, the perps were all involved in the scouting movement. And ice hockey. Tells me all I need or want to know about those two institutions.
The end.
Saxonrider: You seem to be quite exercised about all this, so for clarity I do appreciate that sodmising little boys or discriminating against large swathes of society, is not the exclusive province of organised religion. However, they do seem to also specialise in pontification and attempts to monopolise and manipulate the moral high ground while they are doing so. Thus my point that I really don't need to know anymore about them. If the truth be known I have little time for the scouts, and even less for Ice hockey, if that helps.
And the majority of parishes are in favour of women bishops. (Just think, one day they might just be called bishops.)
My in-laws have a part-time female priest in their parish. for some reason this particular combination (part-time, woman) really irks a vocal proportion of the congregation.
But then they didn't like the previous (temporary) incumbent on account of him being too evangelical for their tastes and for his wife being a core part of the services!
What this tells me is that women have nothing to do with this. It's all about resistance to change.
what's a church of england?