Guardian sez: Clerics open long path to female Archbishop of Canterbury

The Guardian had as a front page headline today the above. They followed it immediately with the most qualification-ridden sentence I believe I have ever seen:

"The Church of England's bishops yesterday cautiously opened the door to the possibility that, at a future date, there may be a female archbishop of Canterbury."

cautiously
opened the door
possibility
at a future date
there may be a female archbishop of Canterbury.

We Anglicans can be accused of many things, but acting precipitously is not generally one of them.

Further evidence may be gathered down the column, where it is written:

"The synod first decided there were no theological objections to female ordination in 1975, appointed its first female deacons in 1987 and ordained its first women clergy in 1994."

So in 1975, it was decided that women's ordination was alright.
A dozen years later, the first women were made deacons,
only to wait a full 19 years to actually be made priests.
And now in 2006, another dozen years have passed
and a woman might be elevated to the episcopacy as soon as six years from now?

Nope. Not precipitous.

And to the women who will be consecrated bishops in the future:

Welcome. I'm glad you're (going to be) here.