Vote confusion

AS a Christian who attends church, but also accepts you do not have to go to church to be one, I am confused at the reaction to the recent vote on women bishops.

My teachings were that God gave his only begotten son the job to preach His word, upon which he appointed 12 disciples to assist him, all males.

If this is true, how did women get involved in the first place?

I trust someone can enlighten me.

RS Pearson, Towthorpe Road, Haxby, York.

Comments (11)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:05pm Fri 30 Nov 12

Firedrake says...

The first person to see the risen Christ and tell others about it (which is essentially the meaning of the word "apostle") was Mary Magdalene. It can be argued, therefore, that SHE was indeed the first of the apostles. Logically, since the episcopates of the English, Latin and Greek churches all purport to fall within the "Apostolic Succession" there is no reason at all why a woman shouldn't be a priest, a bishop, a pope or even a patriarch (though I suppose, strictly, that would have to be matriarch!).
The first person to see the risen Christ and tell others about it (which is essentially the meaning of the word "apostle") was Mary Magdalene. It can be argued, therefore, that SHE was indeed the first of the apostles. Logically, since the episcopates of the English, Latin and Greek churches all purport to fall within the "Apostolic Succession" there is no reason at all why a woman shouldn't be a priest, a bishop, a pope or even a patriarch (though I suppose, strictly, that would have to be matriarch!). Firedrake

12:10pm Fri 30 Nov 12

The Great Buda says...

This letter is another reason why religion should be banned.
This letter is another reason why religion should be banned. The Great Buda

1:09pm Fri 30 Nov 12

PinzaC55 says...

I'd like to know how "god" disposed of his wife Asherah?
I'd like to know how "god" disposed of his wife Asherah? PinzaC55

1:18pm Fri 30 Nov 12

Buzz Light-year says...

"Religion is for people who've never had a spiritual experience"
"Religion is for people who've never had a spiritual experience" Buzz Light-year

1:54pm Fri 30 Nov 12

Firedrake says...

Buzz quotes an interesting observation: though I do wonder if some of us are perhaps not "programmed" for spiritual experiences of the kind he means, in which case religion might be a perfectly valid substitute.

If, on the other hand (as my Quaker Mother-in-Law would say) we all have something of the "Light Within" then perhaps we ARE all capable of such experiences ... but I suspect that "religion", for many, still serves as the cultural matrix into which such experiences are set ... or the flux which aids the adherence of the spiritual to the temporal, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Meanwhile, back to the letter: I wonder if anyone is going to answer RS Peason's entirely reasonable question from the "anti" camp? (In the interests of balance, of course!)

By the way Buzz - whose quote is it?
Buzz quotes an interesting observation: though I do wonder if some of us are perhaps not "programmed" for spiritual experiences of the kind he means, in which case religion might be a perfectly valid substitute. If, on the other hand (as my Quaker Mother-in-Law would say) we all have something of the "Light Within" then perhaps we ARE all capable of such experiences ... but I suspect that "religion", for many, still serves as the cultural matrix into which such experiences are set ... or the flux which aids the adherence of the spiritual to the temporal, and there's nothing wrong with that. Meanwhile, back to the letter: I wonder if anyone is going to answer RS Peason's entirely reasonable question from the "anti" camp? (In the interests of balance, of course!) By the way Buzz - whose quote is it? Firedrake

6:45pm Fri 30 Nov 12

Seadog says...

Firedrake: I assume you meant "adhesion" rather than "adherence"?
(There is a subtle distinction.)

Sorry - but I know we both share a passion for linguistic accuracy!
Firedrake: I assume you meant "adhesion" rather than "adherence"? (There is a subtle distinction.) Sorry - but I know we both share a passion for linguistic accuracy! Seadog

11:04pm Fri 30 Nov 12

Matt_S says...

I don't know how women got involved in the first place, but given that bishops get seats in the house of lords, the impact of the vote goes beyond the beliefs of the religious. It's essentially saying that a certain number of seats must be reserved for men.
I don't know how women got involved in the first place, but given that bishops get seats in the house of lords, the impact of the vote goes beyond the beliefs of the religious. It's essentially saying that a certain number of seats must be reserved for men. Matt_S

11:36pm Fri 30 Nov 12

anistasia says...

I can't see how the church decides it's own laws.if a woman wants to become a bishop why can't they they must do the same training they are just as qualified.what have the men got to fear.any other job a case of sexual discrimination.and more priests, vicars, father's etc more of them are getting done for child abuse all seem to be men.never heard of any woman church worker done for anything as above.rather the synod making the rules.ask by vote the church goers what they want.
I can't see how the church decides it's own laws.if a woman wants to become a bishop why can't they they must do the same training they are just as qualified.what have the men got to fear.any other job a case of sexual discrimination.and more priests, vicars, father's etc more of them are getting done for child abuse all seem to be men.never heard of any woman church worker done for anything as above.rather the synod making the rules.ask by vote the church goers what they want. anistasia

8:01am Sat 1 Dec 12

last of the mandms says...

The problem with theology is it based on one text book, which is immune from change and challenge it has no "Test" criteria and relies on "Belief" and "Faith" as "Proof". It is also the choice of weapon of misoginist morons like the letter writer. Of course this wouldn't be that important if it was the justification for a male only club but the special case of Anglican bishops and the House of Lords means they enjoy a level of influence way beyond their membership.
The problem with theology is it based on one text book, which is immune from change and challenge it has no "Test" criteria and relies on "Belief" and "Faith" as "Proof". It is also the choice of weapon of misoginist morons like the letter writer. Of course this wouldn't be that important if it was the justification for a male only club but the special case of Anglican bishops and the House of Lords means they enjoy a level of influence way beyond their membership. last of the mandms

9:13am Sat 1 Dec 12

Buzz Light-year says...

Firedrake asked:
By the way Buzz - whose quote is it?

Terence McKenna.
[quote]Firedrake asked: By the way Buzz - whose quote is it? [/quote] Terence McKenna. Buzz Light-year

8:45am Mon 3 Dec 12

Firedrake says...

Thanks, Buzz.
Thanks, Buzz. Firedrake

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree