That's a good idea, Nersen. Create a Trinitarian Church. Call it:

One Church of England: Evangelical Church non-geographical, Traditionalist Anglo Catholic Church non-geographical, Broad Church geographical with holes in it.

One Church: Evo, Cat and TradAngloCat serving

One God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit

For liturgical purposes it sort of scans and rhymes.

Pageantmaster,

You say 'no one can conceivably describe the spokespersons of WATCH as "invisible". Well they can actually. With all respect I wonder how you can possibly know what it has possibly been like for a such an organisation to find a voice in a church like ours.

But actually I said women were invisible in your last post - and you promptly do it again.

'The issue', you say, is solely about what is provided for those who cannot accept the decision of the church on this. But it is not just about them. It is about women too. It is about their honouring and reverencing within the ministry and leadership of the church and the partnership of men and women in the life of the Kingdom.

Legal discrimination will never be a way of achieving that and it is an approach that is very hard to defend from the New Testament in any case.

Indeed, he would not talk of "big tents"....but some do but also support a single clause option which pushes other Anglicans right outside of the CofE tent...... in the name of "inclusivity", of course

Ratzinger's offer is nothing to do with big tents. It's about keeping his own tent as small as possible. As well as being a message to Anglicans it's a message to Roman Catholics not to think there's any room for the women's ordination movement while he's Bishop of Rome. If he wants a big tent then let him approve the ordination of women and of those whom God has created LGBT.

If Rome can make space for some Anglicans, it would be ironic if those who sometimes talk of a "big tent" are not willing to make room for them.....and there is the matter of promises made in the past too....were they on a timer and no longer apply?    Also, while some may want to say, "Like it or lump it!" in presenting a single clause option to certain groups which will not change their views, do they get any credit for not leaving when others did years ago? People who have shown a real willingness to coexist are now being told to conform or ship out ...... and the promises made to them in the past have disappeared, it seems.....hard to see the honour in that.

Non-geographical dioceses could solve the problem-  let's move into this century..... no bishop needs to ride his donkey round his area any more. I realise this would be a big change for the CofE but it might just be a positive one and create greater unity of purpose and effective support - much more than we sometimes get in today's situations where people are forced to pretend fundamental disagreements do not exist and there is far too often no real unity.....  because they happen to be in whatever area. There could be a CofE diocese which included FiF and another one which would please WATCH...and another one for evangelicals (or maybe we need 2 or 3 just for us or maybe we could get our act together!)  Rather than being disunited, we may end up with more unity in such dioceses and a better way of different groups coexisting in the CofE.   Networks already effectively provide a kind of non-geographical support....perhaps the unity in those networks needs to be used to avoid greater division in the CofE.... by letting people be united with those with whome they are genuinely in agreement rather than forcing local engagement when there may be little unity of purpose.

Waterangel

May you find Peace.   God bless.

I have read the links of fif pageant master they do not seem much different to fulcrum apart from a few different names. I am sure pageantmaster that you have a life, if you are like me its just that it consist of fighting all the times for peoples rights health wealth and in my case sanity. But heh I am only a part time lunatic all the people at the top are certified and proud of it..Lol..

I just wish they would settle it. Not that it would do me any good now that hope like a lot of the others went out of the window a long time ago.

Waterangel

Hello David.

No one can conceivably describe the spokespersons of WATCH as "invisible".  

The issue is what, if any, provision is provided for those who up until now have had "flying bishops" in the Church of England in the legislation proposed for women bishops.

Have you read or listened to Bishop Nazir-Ali and Bishop John Hind's presentations?   They are well worth the read.

Pageantmaster,

You write about the speeches given to 'the recent FiF conference of the people who are being affected by this directly' ....

Actually there is another large group of ordained people in the church affected at least as directly but who are still rendered invisible by just that kind of comment - and who have, for example, to wait while the Church Times gives three whole pages coverage to the the FinF/Rome news.

It just isn't a level playing field out here fellas and the inability to recognise that for what it is remains a source of shame.

For anyone who might be interested, The Bishop of Chichester, Bishop of Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, Bishop of Fulham and Bishop Iker among others made some very thoughtful speeches to the recent FiF conference of the people who are being affected by this directly, and who may feel they have to leave our church.    I have posted some rough transcripts of their speeches [save for the pdf link to the Bishop of Chichester's] in the comments here:

http://www.kendallharmon.net/t19/index.php/t19/article/26247/

Pageantmaster [who must get a life one of these days]

I would hope that God woud release Rowan from his role earlier than 2020 he deserves better . He deserves not to be attacked by anyone who has a theological hangup.

I wonder whether and i wonder this about all clergy positions not just Rowans, whether the compromise is to open up the way for Team Ministry at Lambeth Palace with one female and one male archbishop, as well as the churches. Many of the churches have successful teams with two people at the helm.

Is there anything in the description of the word bishop that means it cannot be used for a female?

Why because i feel it would be more balanced, one thing about the royal family is that they work as a team, and they are successful at that.They may like all teams not agree on everything but they are good team players. I really feel that is the way forward. Five years time would seem to be a good time to start that. By 2020 Rowan will be ineffective as an Archbishop it is too long in one place

, Anyway i want him to come back to Wales now John Holdworth has gone and  David crocket We need Rowan back at St Davids, I think in the words of John Holdsworth "he has spent enough time in a strange land" and London is "the same but different". It also lessons the burden of responsibility on one shoulders, you may say that all bishops are there to support one another, but because they are the same in status but different in opinions it nearly always lays on one set of shoulders. In politics now we see that women have equal status too and they also work as a team, well almost! As the chorus says i wanna see Jesus lifted high, at the moment instead of bowing down ourselves we have Jesus with a Head bowed in shame, as his name is used to keep people  women in particular   oppressed.

In Peace

Waterangel