Anglican church reforms and their social impact for atheism

[liam]

Given the development of the media-storm surrounding Anglican church reform (If you haven't seen it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20426123) I would just like to point out the implications of this struggle for the atheistic community within society.
The major point that I'd like to raise is that, either way this contention resolves, the irreligious community benefits massively. Let us take it that women are not allowed into bishophood; if this is how it turns out, the Church faces complete social alienation and rejection, and thus becomes a far less acceptable institution, eventually fading into nothingness.
Alternatively, if they allow for women to become bishops, the church opens the door to equality, meaning it isnt as loathsome and, by the virtue of the slippery slope, will eventually stop being an archaic shitstorm of ignorance.
Given this, I can only see good ramifications. What are your positions on this reform?

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Given the development of the media-storm surrounding Anglican church reform (If you haven't seen it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20426123) I would just like to point out the implications of this struggle for the atheistic community within society.
The major point that I'd like to raise is that, either way this contention resolves, the irreligious community benefits massively. Let us take it that women are not allowed into bishophood; if this is how it turns out, the Church faces complete social alienation and rejection, and thus becomes a far less acceptable institution, eventually fading into nothingness.
Alternatively, if they allow for women to become bishops, the church opens the door to equality, meaning it isnt as loathsome and, by the virtue of the slippery slope, will eventually stop being an archaic shitstorm of ignorance.
Given this, I can only see good ramifications. What are your positions on this reform?

My position on the reform is that is massively overdue, but ultimately futile (for the Anglican CofE. The Cof Wales and the Cof Scotland have much stronger membership than in England).

Membership of CofE churches is massively outstripped by membership of their schools (and that's only because they're state funded and perceived to be 'good'), which does tell you something about the dissemination of their message (ie, it's not working and people are not converting).

I can only agree with your stance, but will go one step further and hope that the disestablishmentarian movement gets a ground swell. It's embarrassing for England and the UK that an established institution is so archaic and backwards when we attempt to promote ourselves as a cosmopolitan and free thinking society. We've had one of the most recognizable female leaders in history (Maggie Thatcher), not to mention a number of queens who have had a reputation for not taking any shit (QE I, Victoria, maybe even QE II), but for some reason the CofE's laity aren't convinced that women can talk to folk about some odd and obscure spiritual matters?

The church is entirely irrelevent to the majority of people in the UK. The last census revealed it, various studies since then have revealed it, and the new 2011 census when published in 2013 will undoubtedly reveal the trend continuing.

[squitten]

I sincerely hope that the rejection of women bishops (as it turned out to be) is a step towards disestablishment. It was certainly hugely embarrasing for the Church but even more so for the laity, who went against the clergy and stopped it happening. It throws up all sorts of interesting ripples, by far the most important being that of political representation in the House of Lords. As if the HoL wasn't already a hideously archaic thing, now it contains the CoE clergy who are denying all of those seats to women. No other political party would be allowed to do that. Clashes like that between the Church and fundamental political life here should eventually mean that they have to seperate.

The church is entirely irrelevent to the majority of people in the UK. The last census revealed it, various studies since then have revealed it, and the new 2011 census when published in 2013 will undoubtedly reveal the trend continuing.

That's absolutely true but I think it still serves as a cover for conservatives who use it to keep the Government in check over issues such as abortion and gay marriage and they will fight to keep it. The gay marriage issue is one that particularly makes my blood boil. I cannot fathom how it is that civil partnerships have been given almost exactly the same rights as civil marriage, and yet they choke on using the word "marriage". I find it really disgusting that the state won't over-rule the objectors and just call it a marriage! But it illustrates the level of political fear that can still be generated by the conservatives and I don't know if the state will ever find the cohones to stick their fingers up at them and get rid of the Church.

The other problem is the Monarchy. The CoE is fundamentally tied to the Monarchy and I'm not sure that you can have one without the other. After all, if we reject the Church, can we still maintain as our Head of State a divinely-elected sovereign who is the Governor of the Church? People here may well be apathetic towards the CoE but most people are very sentimental about the royal family and would likely be hostile to any removal of the CoE that threatened Republicanism.

[ThomM]

Given this, I can only see good ramifications. What are your positions on this reform?


THe only reform I can see of any validity is to admit that all the claims they make about the existence of god - has NO provable basis - nor do they have any proven power to intercede with any "higher power" in anyone's behalf