Yes, yes, I know she's a 'Left-footer' but that's the whole point of these sophisticated, monotheistic religions, they appear to be rule-bound but when pushed to it they can be exceedingly subtle. So, on the basis of having written the only intelligent article I have seen on the subject of 'wimmin' priests - and that includes my own very wise words! - I propose that that rather wet-sounding bloke from Durham goes back 'ooop north' where he belongs and Ms. Melanie McDonagh takes over the Church of England. Apart from her obvious intelligence she's also rather attractive (he wrote whilst idly curling his manly moustachios!)
MDM,which now stands for My Darling Melanie, writes at The Coffee House. She begins by giving the likes of 'Squeaker' Bercow, Chris 'Y-fronts' Bryant, and Dave 'dim-dumb' Cameron a right good slap!
They, and others, have been opening their mouths and letting their bellies rumble on the subject of the vote in the House of Laity which stopped all those pushy 'wimmin' vicars from becoming bishops. The fact that the most vociferous of them were not actually Christians did not miss her attention. Nor did the rampant 'humbuggery', either:
The Church of England, by comparison [with the Church of Rome], is a democracy, with rather a fine balance between the interest groups within it. The bishops, clergy and laity each have a house or voting bloc and they are given due weight; a vote requires a working majority of two thirds within each of them. It gives due weight to the feelings of parishes as well as the top brass, which is, you might think, a good thing. Yet the entire secular world seems united in condemning the laity for its sheer cheek and impudence in voting the wrong way. There was an explosion of indignation across the press and broadcast media – the BBC didn’t even try for impartiality – notably among those organs which are in general most antipathetic towards Christianity and most indifferent to the CofE.
Well, we all know - do we not? - that anything the BBC supports is 'pants'! And even bigger 'pants' is the total ignorance of those who misreport for it. It took that big, black Archbishop of York, a man who resolutely refuses to comply with the Islington photo-fit image, to remind us of the exact and crucial details upon which the motion for 'wimmin' priests foundered:
As the Archbishop of York, John Sentanu, pointed out, the vote was not lost on the basis of the principle of the thing: it was about the provision that was made for those with conscientious objections [my emphasis]. They included Evangelicals, who object to women bishops on scriptural grounds, and Anglo-Catholics, who believe, inter alia, that women bishops would not represent Christ in his gender as well as his humanity – which is the case my own church advances. They are also concerned about the effects of reform on relations with Orthodox and Catholic churches. These are not negligible arguments. But opponents are being treated like heretics against the real contemporary orthodoxy of gender equality.
"Consciencious objections?" We can't be having those in the Church of England!
The critical issue was not so much the principle of women bishops as the provision that was made for those who can’t in conscience accept it. If opponents are allowed to seek the oversight of a male bishop, then the rest of the Church can go its own way and ordain the Rev Lucy Winkett as soon as it likes. If the CofE is meant to be a broad church, then presumably that includes those who take a line on this issue that isn’t approved by The Independent and The Guardian – whose chief critic of the vote, Andrew Brown, incidentally, isn’t a believer either. The would-be women bishops, in a spectacular display of intolerance, earlier this year opted not to give any such leeway to those who in conscience can’t accept their ministry. [My emphasis]
Thus, through a stench of hypocrisy, these 'wannabe' lady bishops demonstrated the truth of that old saying, "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned"! In her honest fashion as a Catholic herself, Ms. McDonough, admits that her church is a dictatorship not a democracy so she suggests that:
If the exercise of democracy in the Anglican Church really is that objectionable, then the more honest approach would be to scrap the three-tiered system in Synod, representing bishops, clergy and laity, and just have it run from the top like the Catholic Church. Anything must be better than having MPs – Catholics, unbelievers, the lot – running the show.
Anything run by the likes of Bercow and Bryant is bound to be a cock-up - and I wish had time to think of a more subtle expression!
