The protocols (above) doesn’t say anything explicitly about assistant bishops

Glenn Davies view is one opinion. I think you’d find some of the top lawyers in the Diocese take a different view. You would have to ask a panel of constitutional law experts to get a fair opinion.

Clearly no one in Sydney is challenging the legality of assistant bishops after losing on diocesan bishops. I take it that’s a political decision.

Thank you Jeremy,
The protocol is very interesting.

The protocols (above) doesn’t say anything explicitly about assistant bishops

It would also appear that the reality of female bishops has been accepted (whether with open arms or furrowed brow) by the bishops.

yes you are right about #6 (should have noticed that)… hence phrase ‘within a Diocese’.

Hi Jeremy

Thanks for posting the protocol re Women in the Episcopate - very helpful.  And apologies to all for my part in promoting a sidetrack (re ‘priests’), an interesting discussion, but not strictly on topic for this thread.  If anyone wants to continue that discussion perhaps they could promote a new thread.  I might even do it myself if it stays in my head long enough!

Bob

Does anyone understand what #8 is on about.. why in particular three male bishops???

This is my summation of the request for 3 male bishops.

It has to do with the validity of the consecration.

Traditionally in order for a consecration to be accepted as valid, it required the presence of a number of validly consecrated & orthodox bishops. For those who are very distressed about female bishops, they want to ensure that future consecrations are valid according to traditional Anglican & catholic (not Roman) tradition. So even though female bishops may be present, there will still be a legitimacy about the consecration because of the at least 3 male bishops.

Thanks Robert.

[
greetings,
what a great variety of postings on the matter of female bishops & the term priest,minister,avacado!!!,teacher,rector .
personally i have always been of the opinion that anyone ordained into holy orders in the anglican church was called priest,&certainly;not pastor or
associate minister etc.
then again i am an old bloke & things have changed in the sydney diocese so much in the last few years that i often wonder if we still are anglican or some
other branch of Christ’s church.
maybe i am sticking my neck out but i can see nothing in the bible or any
other anglican or catholic teaching which says only men can be priests
or bishops.
i bet someone will come up with umpteen quotes from scripture proving me
wrong.
i like that bob denham (priest,rector or just plain bob.)

colin sutherland

colin sutherland - 03 June 2008 05:57 PM

maybe i am sticking my neck out but i can see nothing in the bible or any other anglican or catholic teaching which says only men can be priests or bishops.  i bet someone will come up with umpteen quotes from scripture proving me wrong. colin sutherland

I wouldn’t be so sure, Colin.  If you can’t even be bothered looking up the word “bishop” in your concordance (where you might find at least one quote from scripture with some bearing on this question), I’d be surprised if anyone else here would waste his time pointing them out to you.

Surely courtesy in a debate requires at least the pretence of taking an interest in the arguments of one’s opponents.

maybe i am sticking my neck out but .....(bits omitted)… i like that bob denham (priest,rector or just plain bob.)

Hi Colin,
I fear you are sticking your neck out… I said call me “ROB”. Call Robert Cameron “Bob”, but call Robert Denham “Rob”. Please.

Jeremy (or anyone else who knows the answer)

Will deacons and priests ordained by female Bishops in Australia be recognised as such within Sydney Diocese?

Mark

Looking to Wikipedia, I found the following information re priests

Anglican or Episcopalian
The role of a priest in the Anglican Communion is largely the same as within the Roman Catholic Church and Eastern Christianity, save that Canon Law in almost every Province of Anglicanism restricts the administration of confirmation to the bishop, just as with ordination.
Whilst Anglican priests who are members of religious orders must remain celibate, the secular clergy (bishops, priests, and deacons who are not members of religious orders) are permitted to marry before or after ordination.
The Anglican Church, unlike the Roman Catholic or Eastern Christian traditions, has allowed the ordination of women as priests in some provinces since the late 20th Century. This practice remains controversial, however, and a number of provinces retain an all-male priesthood. As Anglicanism represents a broad range of theological opinion, its presbyterate includes priests who consider themselves no different in any respect from those of the Roman Catholic Church, and a minority who prefer to use the title presbyter in order to distance themselves from the more sacrificial theological implications which they associate with the word “priest”.
Whilst priest is the official title of a member of the presbyterate in every Anglican province worldwide, the ordination rite of certain provinces (including the Church of England) recognizes the breadth of opinion by adopting the title The Ordination of Priests (also called Presbyters).

Protestant
The general priesthood or the priesthood of all believers, is a Christian doctrine derived from several passages of the New Testament. It is a foundational concept of Protestantism. It is this doctrine that Martin Luther adduces in his 1520 To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation in order to dismiss the medieval Christian belief that Christians were to be divided into two classes: “spiritual” and “temporal” or non-spiritual.

Ordained Protestant clergy often have the title of pastor, minister, etc.

I guess I relate my beliefs more to being a (protestant) Christian, rather than being firstly an Anglican. Others go the other way I guess. But God doesn’t have an interest in denominations as I read scripture. Being Christian is good enough for Him, and so therefore for myself also.

Thanks Ken for the quote from Wikipedia 2:23-29. It’s good to have an ultimate authority. ;)

Robert, do you disagree with the summary from Wikipedia? Or do you see its truth?