The Church of England has given the go-ahead to women "bishops," and PIPs saying they are wrong to have done so is not acceptable, according to Justin Welby, the Abp. of Canterbury.
Or rather, he says they are wrong to disagree now.
Presumably they could have been right to agree before.
It is a vote that determines the validity of a truth promulgated by the Body of Christ, its truthiness.
Majority rule, doncha know.
But truly, I had no idea the Church of England was so doctrinaire, "not open" to dissent?
It's as if their leader is saying that they had, I dunno, some kind of unchanging theology, or something.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, (quite rightly, I suspect,) said that some aspects of their decision was or would be or had been or might have been "incomprehensible", but different medium organization spin the quote differently, so absent an actual, in context quotation, you know, with actual subject and contiguous, or at least nearby, predicate contained in the same set of quotation marks, not absolutely positive I agree with him.
What's the mood of the verb, the tense? indicative, subjunctive, perfect, historical present, future?
Every new outlet seems to have picked up the same adjective, while disagreeing on every other word in the thought the man expressed.
But yes, if women priest, why in the world not women bishops? If there's no ontological reason to keep 'em out of holy orders, it just looks like sulky male privilege.
Some of the rest of what is said is a bit more dubious.
"Theologically, the church has been wrong...."
Then it wasn't THE church, was it?
"We got caught up in the culture over the centuries, as churches do."
One of several.
Then again, clearly not THE Church, right?
God help them all.