Monday, 26 November 2012
A "liberal" member of Synod explains his "no" vote on women bishops
Protections for conservatives were "insufficient"
ARTICLE | NOVEMBER 21, 2012 - 8:14AM | BY TOM SUTCLIFFE
My reasons for voting against the Women Bishops Measure
By Tom Sutcliffe
I voted for women priests in 1992 and I am in principle keen that we should have women bishops in the Church of England. But I voted against the Measure being proposed for final approval yesterday. I had two main reasons for voting no.
The Provision is not sufficient
It simply is not true that it made appropriate provisions for the two minorities of less than a third of Church members who cannot accept the ordination or consecration of women as being consistent with their understanding of scripture and tradition. It may well be that traditionalist Anglo-Catholics could have lived awkwardly with the Measure as proposed had it got...[read the rest here]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2012
(33)
-
▼
November
(15)
- Almost half the lay members who voted against fema...
- A "liberal" member of Synod explains his "no" vote...
- If the zealots truly cared about equality, they'd ...
- Measure of compromise
- Church Society Video about "The Women Bishops Meas...
- Mr Speaker 'guides' Labour MPs on Church of Englan...
- Fiona Gibson on the Women Bishops debate
- Conservative Evangelicals on the Rise in the Churc...
- Angus Macleay’s summing up speech in the women bis...
- Women Bishops: House of Laity says 'no' by 6 votes
- The Bishop of St Albans response to the women bish...
- The defeat of the Measure: preliminary reflections
- General Synod Rejects Draft Legislation on Women B...
- Forward in Faith reacts to the defeat of the draft...
- Statement from Chairman of Reform on Today’s Synod...
-
▼
November
(15)
No comments:
Post a Comment