<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Closing the gender gap in church leadership	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://anglicanjournal.com/closing-the-gender-gap-in-church-leadership/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://anglicanjournal.com/closing-the-gender-gap-in-church-leadership/</link>
	<description>National News from the Anglican Church of Canada</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2019 13:19:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Brian Johnson		</title>
		<link>https://anglicanjournal.com/closing-the-gender-gap-in-church-leadership/#comment-16251</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brian Johnson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2019 13:19:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://anglicanjournal.com/?p=158743#comment-16251</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Johnson identifies an unresolvable dilemma that is at the core of the underlying principle here. If a man is not illustrative of humanity to play the role of spiritual leader, then each faction of humanity must have their representative member in play. In the LGBT world we can see this taken to ridiculous lengths with their acronyms that are inclusive of (almost) everyone, and Johnson wants leadership of all kinds to to minister to all kinds. Having broken through the gender barrier through disobedience, what stands in the way of limiting this to any other consideration? All this stands over against scripture, which says that a bishop must be the husband of one wife, which is to say, a bishop must be male, and since any priest might be come a bishop, all priests must be male too. A serious error was made by Anglicans in 1975.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Johnson identifies an unresolvable dilemma that is at the core of the underlying principle here. If a man is not illustrative of humanity to play the role of spiritual leader, then each faction of humanity must have their representative member in play. In the LGBT world we can see this taken to ridiculous lengths with their acronyms that are inclusive of (almost) everyone, and Johnson wants leadership of all kinds to to minister to all kinds. Having broken through the gender barrier through disobedience, what stands in the way of limiting this to any other consideration? All this stands over against scripture, which says that a bishop must be the husband of one wife, which is to say, a bishop must be male, and since any priest might be come a bishop, all priests must be male too. A serious error was made by Anglicans in 1975.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
