Is it not ironic to see all the atheist commentators whooping up the appointment of the first Anglican woman bishop?
And is it not a matter of shame for the Church of England that the decision to include women as bishops was the result of back-stairs dealing, highly convoluted "representation", and a sort of "go away and vote again until you agree with us" non-democracy?
Does this not undermine any moral authority that Libby Lane might claim?
And is it not a matter of shame for the Church of England that the decision to include women as bishops was the result of back-stairs dealing, highly convoluted "representation", and a sort of "go away and vote again until you agree with us" non-democracy?
Does this not undermine any moral authority that Libby Lane might claim?
No comments:
Post a Comment