Comments: The motion on women bishops

You'll be consecrating gays next--oops forgot you already do--with the provio that they, and you, are dishonest about it.

Posted by The Revd. LJ Roberts at Sunday, 10 July 2005 at 8:04pm BST

Contrary to the helpful (?!) post above, I do not see that the homosexuality discussions and male/female discussions lead from one to the other. I am quite surprised that a theologically trained person would suggest this is the case, as I am assuming 'Revd LJ Roberts' is theologically trained. My understanding of the debate regarding male/female is that it is thoroughly based in our understandings of the creation order at Genesis, depending on how you understand the proper translation of the Hebrew together with a fresh and honest look at what the text actually says rather than what we read into it (ie because Eve was made from Adam does not necessarily advocate subordination of Eve - ref Gilbert Bilezikian - amongst lots of other refutations we could discuss regarding historical understanding of the text). It would be helpful for me as a lay Anglican to feel that there were more of our church leaders committed to an helpful open discussion about male/female image in God, rather than clergy who are unthinking enough to make a statement like the above.


Posted by jody at Saturday, 13 August 2005 at 7:55pm BST
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.