The Three Wise Men who brought gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh to the infant Jesus may not have been particularly wise and could have been women, the Church of England has ruled.
A committee revising new short prayers, or "collects", for the Church's latest prayer book, Common Worship, said the term "magi" was a transliteration of the name of officials at the Persian court and the possibility that they were female could not be dismissed.
They dress it up by making a textual argument that supposedly Matthew really wanted to emphasize their exotic nature and that they're only trying to protect his emphasis. Matthew's intent in using a specific word is pure speculation which, in this instance, is only being used as a thin veil for their PCness.
Besides, if they really wanted to protect the original text, they could have taken time to point out that no where in scripture does it say there were three of them. That's merely an inference based on the number of gifts. It's not an unreasonable inference, but it's inference all the same. If Matthew's original intent was so important, why not include this little "correction" while they were at it?