Women bishops in Wales

[french frank]

Since precision is the order of your day, which one of those 'only' alternatives do you want to put in Scotty's mouth and then demolish?

I would refer you (if I may) to the implications of his Msg #46 and his insulting reference to "Welsh Wimmin" [sic]. If you can discern no 'implications', perhaps we could develop the discussion further?

[Flosshilde]

All of them, probably - Scotty adopts one view, & when that's demolished he takes another.

[Mr Pee]

I wouldn't mind the address of the charm school that you attended, just out of interest. Hobby-horses, refusal to apologise or to countenence views in opposition to your own, accusing a member of provocative behaviour solely by virtue of his referring to PTSD in the military, using what you perceive to be the vanishingly small minority of the population that give a toss about the Church in an attempt to undermine the importance of the thread topic which is in any case of interest to many who, like myself, are not members of any Church (and, for that matter, the diminishing membership of the British armed forces is substantially smaller than the diminishing membership of the Christian Church in Britain); the list doubtless goes on. Your remarks are gratuitous. I would nevertheless ask you the same question as I asked scotty; what is your view about the professional rôle of women in the Church and elsewhere?

I thought I had made it clear that I don't care about the professional role of women in the Church; as for elsewhere, if they are up to the job, then they should get that job. However I do have misgivings about women moving in to certain traditionally male environments, such as parts of the Military, where I believe their presence can potentially cause problems that could be prejudicial to the efficiency of the unit. And I am aware that any politician or business leader who has pronounced on the possible implications of employing women of child-bearing age will always be roundly castigated, but in the real world I think it is a factor that needs to be taken into account.

As for the thread about PTSD in the military, I had no objection to that subject being discussed. What I- and others- objected to was that Amateur was clearly trying to steer the discussion in another direction.

[amateur51]

Confused? About whether a breaking news story was a current affairs subject? Yeah, right. I can just imagine the opprobrium that you would have heaped on Scotty had the decision on women Bishops gone the other way and he had started a thread on the main board.

Second point:- No apology necessary. It's just that the thread didn't head off in the direction in which you tried to steer it.

I'm greatly amused by the time & trouble that you take trying to get inside my head - and failing lamentably too

[amateur51]

I thought I had made it clear that I don't care about the professional role of women in the Church; as for elsewhere, if they are up to the job, then they should get that job. However I do have misgivings about women moving in to certain traditionally male environments, such as parts of the Military, where I believe their presence can potentially cause problems that could be prejudicial to the efficiency of the unit. And I am aware that any politician or business leader who has pronounced on the possible implications of employing women of child-bearing age will always be roundly castigated, but in the real world I think it is a factor that needs to be taken into account.

As for the thread about PTSD in the military, I had no objection to that subject being discussed. What I- and others- objected to was that Amateur was clearly trying to steer the discussion in another direction.

We must remember that MrPee has personal experience of the military.

[amateur51]

The available evidence might tend to lend support to your admirably succinct and exemplarily concise verdict , Mr Grew.

According to Wiki:

<The Church of Ireland has permitted the ordination of women as bishops since 1990 but none have yet occurred.^[79] The Scottish Episcopal Church also permits the ordination of women as bishops since 2003, but none have yet been consecrated.>

The bitter experience of their Sister Celts must surely be a salutary warning to those throngs of Welsh Wimmin patiently waiting in the wings to be immediately summoned to serve at the very pinnacle of an Anglican See.

However as I earnestly endeavour to remain logical and consistent at all times, and not being a member of the Church of Wales, it's really none of my business.

The Church in Wales, like most religious organisations, is a charity. As such these organisations receive tax relief from the Treasury or to put it another way, a gift from everyone. Thus you do have an interest in what they do, but you can choose not to exercise that interest.

What did you mean by 'Welsh Wimmin'? It seems to me that once again you're angry about attention being paid to women as serious people and you're just seeking to demean them and the modest incremental achievements they make against the vested male interest.

We shall see.

[Flosshilde]

What Scotty is ignoring is that women have only relatively recently been admitted as priests/vicars/ministers etc. It will take a while for them to a) be present in enough numbers to provide a large enough pool of women who want to be bishops, and b) work their way up the ranks until they are at a level to be elected/appointed as a bishop.

[ahinton]

I thought I had made it clear that I don't care about the professional role of women in the Church

You had indeed, but that's just you; othes may well care about it even though, like me, they are not Church members.

as for elsewhere, if they are up to the job, then they should get that job.

That's good to hear.

However I do have misgivings about women moving in to certain traditionally male environments

But how do you rationalise this view, given that almost all professional rôles were at one time describable as part of "traditionally male environments" and that it's only been changes to that "tradition" that have enabled women to participate in wider professional activities than was once the case?

such as parts of the Military, where I believe their presence can potentially cause problems that could be prejudicial to the efficiency of the unit.

You say "such as", from which I assume you to mean the military and certain other as yet unspecified professions but not all of them; out of genuine interest, why do you single out the military, especially given the rôles that women took and were expected by some to take during WWII just because "there was a war on"?

And I am aware that any politician or business leader who has pronounced on the possible implications of employing women of child-bearing age will always be roundly castigated, but in the real world I think it is a factor that needs to be taken into account.

It should not be taken much more into account than responsibilities for which paternity allowances are now available and accepted in the way that, at one time, they were not (as though children were largely the responsibility of the women who bore them).

As for the thread about PTSD in the military, I had no objection to that subject being discussed. What I- and others- objected to was that Amateur was clearly trying to steer the discussion in another direction.

OK - understood (I think); at least I am pleased that you have no objection in principle to discussion of that topic.

Thanks for your clarifications.

[ahinton]

We must remember that MrPee has personal experience of the military.

I do remember that but what concerns me more is whether that experience has actually conferred upon him a particular authority to pronounce on the rôles of women within it that might be unavailable to him had he not had such experience...

[ahinton]

The Church in Wales, like most religious organisations, is a charity. As such these organisations receive tax relief from the Treasury or to put it another way, a gift from everyone. Thus you do have an interest in what they do, but you can choose not to exercise that interest.

That is indeed true.

What did you mean by 'Welsh Wimmin'? It seems to me that once again you're angry about attention being paid to women as serious people and you're just seeking to demean them and the modest incremental achievements they make against the vested male interest.

We shall see.

Shall we? Somehow I doubt it but would be pleased to be proved wrong. I would like to know what was meant by it too.

[ahinton]

What Scotty is ignoring is that women have only relatively recently been admitted as priests/vicars/ministers etc. It will take a while for them to a) be present in enough numbers to provide a large enough pool of women who want to be bishops, and b) work their way up the ranks until they are at a level to be elected/appointed as a bishop.

That is indeed a point - and a valid one - but, to me, the most important aspect of this is why it is that some people have thought - and some even still think - that women shouldn't assume such positions? - i.e. what's supposedly "wrong" with them in such a context?

[scottycelt]

I would refer you (if I may) to the implications of his Msg #46 and his insulting reference to "Welsh Wimmin" [sic]. If you can discern no 'implications', perhaps we could develop the discussion further?

In fact the now rather common term 'wimmin' was originally intended to be rather more 'insulting' to men it would appear ...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wimmin

It is also phonetically accurate, don't you think?

However, if any male (or female) member was genuinely offended by the term (which was not meant to be taken too seriously) I can only offer my sincere apologies.

[jean]

...why it is that some people have thought - and some even still think - that women shouldn't assume such positions? - i.e. what's supposedly "wrong" with them in such a context?

1. Jesus never ordained any women (some would argue that he never 'ordained' anyone.) We don't hear of any women disciples in the canonical gospels.

2. They menstruate.

Leviticus 15:19-30
And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the even. And every thing that she lieth upon in her separation shall be unclean: every thing also that she sitteth upon shall be unclean. And whosoever toucheth her bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even. And whosoever toucheth any thing that she sat upon shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even. And if it be on her bed, or on any thing whereon she sitteth, when he toucheth it, he shall be unclean until the even. And if any man lie with her at all, and her flowers be upon him, he shall be unclean seven days; and all the bed whereon he lieth shall be unclean. And if a woman have an issue of her blood many days out of the time of her separation, or if it run beyond the time of her separation; all the days of the issue of her uncleanness shall be as the days of her separation: she shall be unclean. Every bed whereon she lieth all the days of her issue shall be unto her as the bed of her separation: and whatsoever she sitteth upon shall be unclean, as the uncleanness of her separation. And whosoever toucheth those things shall be unclean, and shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even. But if she be cleansed of her issue, then she shall number to herself seven days, and after that she shall be clean. And on the eighth day she shall take unto her two turtles, or two young pigeons, and bring them unto the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And the priest shall offer the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for her before the LORD for the issue of her uncleanness.

[jean]

However, if any male (or female) member was genuinely offended by the term...

No scotty, they just thought you were being provocative. But they're not so easily provoked.

(I think, though, that we might stop talking about male members.)

[amateur51]

In fact the now rather common term 'wimmin' was originally intended to be rather more 'insulting' to men it would appear ...

Dictionaries to the rescue again - did you know this when you posted? I suspect not, you were just making a derogatory remark, as popularised by Private Eye