Wishy-washy Liberals set to tear Church of England in two.

I LOL at Christians trying to justify their sexist bigotry by pointing to other examples of sexual bigotry like in sports .. like that is ok! Couldn't make it up. There is no proper reason for women to not become football managers apart from misogynistic stereotypes, however there is good reasons to stop mixed football teams as psyiological differences would make it ridiculous. Thus it is a stupid analogy, he still has not answered the question either, what inherent differences in Women stop them becoming Bishops? what is this special something in Men that makes them solely suitable to become Bishops? Why did Jesus justify his bigotry? I am glad to say our 21st century freedoms are on a plain higher then that of which Jesus preached.

Take away the God crap and most religious people would agree, it is ridiculous, like most would agree preventing Females into positions of authority in society is equally ridiculous, but spread over Religious Dogma and otherwise good people think stupid things are ok.

 

I don't want to sound apologetic, I only want to give my POV on why what you write is the way it is.

In the distant past, it was pretty much given that women were discriminated against. So it's no surprise that the same was true for the Christian church. However, unlike the rest of our lives, religion is not up for debate. It's the claim of every single religion to represent nothing but the truth.

So when social conditions change, religious conditions often don't follow suit. That's because it would imply that on this matter, the church has been wrong in the past and this would undermine its credibility. Either god said that only men can be priests or he didn't. There's no middle room. By allowing women to become priests, the church admits that it hasn't taught the truth in the past regarding this issue. So when that was fabricated, what else was?

The only chance of avoiding that dilemma would be to downplay the whole thing. Like saying that of course God never said anything about the role of women and that it was just an assumption by the church which has now been adjusted. However, while this would probably have little influence on the belief itself, it would still undermine the church.

That's why the best way of handling things for the church is to insist on its tradition.

 

But Churches have traditionally altered their traditions. Heck, Christians stole other traditions and made them their own. I don't think it would undermine the Church. People who are up in arms over it are either A: Going to accept it for what is and continue to go to Church or B: Not as faithful as they claim and leave the church. I'm sure the 1st group will be much larger. Failing that, the Church is in trouble anyways, as we(and by We I mean the Western world in General) move to a more "Post-Christian" society. The Roman Catholic church is the only Christian institution that I think will defintly survive the next 40 years, and I'm sure we will see a librealization there(watch for the next Pope). In America, all Churches except for "non-denominational" Mega-Churches(what some Theologians refer to as ChristianityLite) and the Catholic church are losing members every year. The Catholic Church is surviving in America because of immigration from Mexico, Central and South America(a recent poll by CNN showed their numbers remaining steady, but also a large number of "ex-Catholics"). The Church of England is going through what all Churches are going through in terms of membership, and it has nothing to do with "breaking tradition".