tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5820278.post9198125245050164709..comments2023-09-23T15:05:48.320+00:00Comments on FaithInSociety: Simon Barrowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05366440538616508935noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5820278.post-63792127673681984712008-07-09T08:43:00.000+00:002008-07-09T08:43:00.000+00:00Not quite sure why it is wrong in 2008 to raise qu...Not quite sure why it is wrong in 2008 to raise questions about something established in 1919 on the wrong assumptions, Matt. There is also a tendency for groups within the C of E to rush to the media to try to get one over opponents. <BR/><BR/>More effective internal mechanisms for developing understanding and discernment (as the Quakers have it), might help shift things in a different direction. But there is resistance to such 'soft' approaches - as I know from time within the institution in education and training.<BR/><BR/>The answer to your question, Obadiahslope, is either in a church which has women bishops or one that does not. And it's up to them, at the end of the day.Simon Barrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05366440538616508935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5820278.post-58448000532235020792008-07-08T12:25:00.000+00:002008-07-08T12:25:00.000+00:00If those who 'cannot cannot recognise women in pos...If those who 'cannot cannot recognise women in positions of authority cannot expect (or be expected) to live in a permanent ecclesiastical "no fly zones"'<BR/>where should they be expected to live?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5820278.post-48890825631317632462008-07-08T11:45:00.000+00:002008-07-08T11:45:00.000+00:00>This is something the C of E has partly brought u...>This is something the C of E has partly brought upon itself by pompously setting up its central <BR/>body as a quasi-parliament. <BR/><BR/>That's a bit rough in 2008, Simon - they are living with the baggage of a structure pretty much set up (now sure how much by the CofE or by Parliament?) in 1919. And it *is* a quasi-Parliament - essentially a specialist 3rd Chamber.<BR/><BR/>>That means living in the blinking headlines of a constant media culture, so that moments of decision and emotion which might previously have been conducted with public eyes averted are now available for all to stare at -- often uncomprehendingly, since mere sight does not necessarily equal understanding of what is viewed.<BR/><BR/>I think it has always been in public, no? So the differences would be:<BR/><BR/>a) The constant attention and effective involvement of the (interested) wider public in the debate. Interested = mainly people wanting them to "do this" or "do that".<BR/><BR/>b) The lack of understanding. Suspect that this has always been the case, just now not so obviously and they are indifferent or hostile non-understanders rather than largely a sympathetic version.Matt Wardmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04326720801362744582noreply@blogger.com