I’d like to hear their reasons for being against female priests. Seems to me this has to be a pretty hard sell for a church.
Why a hard sell?
Maintaining orthodoxy is certainly in line with over two thousand years of biblical teaching.
St. Paul set up who could and could not be a bishop, per inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and the list did not include women.
It’s very explicit.
I don’t particularly care what the Anglican entity does in this instance, but the problem with female priesthood comes down to Christ not creating any female Apostles.
The ‘Priestly’ sacraments - the ones only Priests can perform, were reserved to the Apostles and their descendants by Christ. Christ could have had female Apostles, but He did not do so. Was this a mere happenstance, or is there a reason we may not be seeing?
Given that Jesus, the Second Person of the Trinity and God Almighty, created the very concepts of Male and Female, it’s not likely to be an accident. But it’s not obvious and self-evident that female Priesthood is incorrect.
It may be that a female Apostulate is like the gentile Apostulate. Gentiles were only introduced into the Church after St Peter’s vision of ritually unclean foods. My understanding is that it would take such an event - a vision, or perhaps other sign - for women to be admitted to the Priesthood within the Universal Church.
There’s the small issue of the NT.