Single Comment

'Equating colourbinding with celibacy does not work for me. Quite apart
from celibacy being rare among camels and elephants, after whom other
colourbound pieces are named, but usual among cardinals, after whom a
non-colourbound piece is named, being non-celibate is not a reliable
indicator of Anglican office.'

Celibacy is not the point. The key word is 'vow.' Your point about
animals is irrelevant. Different pieces could be colorbound for different
reasons. In the case of Bishops, it is because, within the context of this
game, they have taken vows to stay colorbound.

'Firstly, not only Anglicans have non-celibate bishops.'

Known and irrelevant. The Bishops are Anglican, because the game is
British Chess.

'The Orthodox clergy, which has a rank of bishop, is open to married
men.'

I'll bear that in mind if I ever invent Russian Chess. It just isn't
relevant to British Chess.

'Secondly, some Anglican clergy are celibate - genuinely celibate, not
merely saving themselves for the right woman.'

Bully for them.

'Thirdly, and this is the bombshell, Catholic priestly celibacy is not
quite universal.'

So what? The norm is still vows of celibacy for Catholic bishops and none
for Anglican bishops. Exceptions to the norm are still exceptions. The
analogy behind the Anglican Bishop piece is based on the norm and needn't
take exceptions into consideration.

'Incidentally Anglicans in Scotland and Northern Ireland, though indeed
counted as Protestants, are a minority on that side of the divide.
Presbyterians outnumber them considerably.'

Two points. First, the Anglican church is the official Church of England,
and the English monarch is the head of this church. Second, Presbyterians
don't have bishops; they just have ministers and elders. For these two
reasons, an Anglican Bishop is more appropriate for British Chess than a
Presbyterian Bishop would be.