Signatures 280 total
-
251
Name: Sue Joyner on Dec 1, 2012Comments: DisappointedFlag
-
252
Name: David Hodgson on Dec 1, 2012Comments:Flag
-
253
Name: Sheila Newbury on Dec 2, 2012Comments: St Mary's Barwell Leicester DioceseFlag
-
254
Name: Sandra Stafford on Dec 2, 2012Comments:Flag
-
255
Name: Paul Bagshaw on Dec 2, 2012Comments:Flag
-
256
Name: Rev'd Rosie Bates on Dec 2, 2012Comments: Fundamentally, could we also have a clear statement on tradition and reason and current obligations concerning the use of Scripture in The Church of England. Many of us find this now open wide to gross abuse and the cosequent damage to young minds is distressing beyond any supportable belief.Flag
-
257
Name: Sue Whitlock on Dec 3, 2012Comments: If a vote in General Synod can produce a result so at odds with general feeling within the Church, there has to be something wrong with it.Flag
-
258
Name: Tony Robson on Dec 3, 2012Comments: This is the 21st century.Flag
-
259
Name: Trevor James on Dec 3, 2012Comments: It is more a lack of confidence in the present process of producing representives to the General Synod which has manifested itself - but the General Synod should have anticiapted this problem from previous attempts to thwart its progress.Flag
-
260
Name: Colin Ball on Dec 3, 2012Comments: Unless the General Synod finds a way to very quickly change its recent decision on women Bishops, then it is very difficult to have any confidence in them!Flag
-
261
Name: Brenda Liptrot on Dec 4, 2012Comments: The General Synod needs urgent reform. On a matter as important as Woman Bishops surely it should be possible for everyone on electoral rolls to have an individual vote. That would be democratic and give an honest reflection of the laity's wishes.Flag
-
262
Name: George Hanna on Dec 4, 2012Comments: The synod seems to be overloaded with minority views.Flag
-
263
Name: Alice Stiven on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
264
Name: Philip L L Ingham on Dec 5, 2012Comments: I have nev er had confidence in synodical government. Ours is an Episcopal Church and should be gutded by its bishops.Flag
-
265
Name: NEIL WALTERS on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
266
Name: Ed Davis on Dec 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
267
Name: Angela Berners-Wilson on Dec 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
268
Name: Tracey Kitchen on Dec 6, 2012Comments: This decision makes our Church look anachronistic & undemocratic in the eyes of the wider community.Flag
-
269
Name: Andrew McCosh on Dec 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
270
Name: Penny Millichamp on Dec 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
271
Name: Rebecca Tinsley on Dec 7, 2012Comments: I attend St Matthew's, Bayswater, Westminster.Flag
-
272
Name: John Kaye on Dec 9, 2012Comments:Flag
-
273
Name: Jeff Dando on Dec 9, 2012Comments: This decision is a disgrace to all those who voted against. They all knew what the majority of the church members wanted yet they still voted against. It' s time the voting system was changed to reflect the will of the majority.Flag
-
274
Name: Jeyan Anketell on Dec 9, 2012Comments:Flag
-
275
Name: Laura Mizzi on Dec 9, 2012Comments:Flag
-
276
Name: Anonymous on Dec 10, 2012Comments: An absolute masterpiece of mis-drafting. Incompetent administration of General Synod.Flag
-
277
Name: John Polhill on Dec 12, 2012Comments: I think it should be made clear that Lay Members of Synod are expected to represent the view of their diocese, or to make ot clear to the diocese synod if they intend to vote against its wishesFlag
-
278
Name: Lynda Plumpton on Dec 14, 2012Comments:Flag
-
279
Name: Michael Elson on Dec 15, 2012Comments:Flag
-
280
Name: Amazing Site on Mar 3, 2013Comments: pE2nq5 I really liked your blog article.Really thank you! Awesome.Flag