tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-253865779660854699.post4093114481087758643..comments2023-10-15T09:36:12.013+01:00Comments on Countercultural Father: On Women Priests (the impossibility thereof)Ben Trovatohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15299230935468606845noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-253865779660854699.post-2705229469789893912012-12-02T10:28:41.867+00:002012-12-02T10:28:41.867+00:00Yes, male and female He created them.
Note not on...Yes, male and female He created them.<br /><br />Note not only the 'male' and 'female, but also the 'He.'<br /><br />There is something about masculinity that reflects the Godhead (Father, Son and Holy Ghost - all referred to as masculine overwhelmingly in Sacred Scripture).<br /><br />This is a deep mystery, but that doesn't mean that we should be afraid to acknowledge it, nor to try to discern meaning in it.Ben Trovatohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15299230935468606845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-253865779660854699.post-65138489519318265102012-12-02T04:18:51.401+00:002012-12-02T04:18:51.401+00:00Why is bread and wine the only possible matter for...Why is bread and wine the only possible matter for the Eucharist? Or water for baptism? <br /><br />There is an intrinsic meaning in the creation that the sacramental order completes.<br /><br />Same with Holy Orders. There must be a natural meaning to the male sex, to masculinity, that makes it the only right matter for priesthood.<br /><br />The Church, IMHO, seems unwilling to articulate this because the revolution of feminism has made the notion of male and female equality so sacrosanct that it may not be questioned. For the same reason, the notion of male headship in marriage has been reduced to silence except among Evangelicals.<br /><br />The Chruch cant articulate the why of male-only priesthood because it has bought the culture's very recent fad.OreamnosAmericanushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15602268350813211243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-253865779660854699.post-27536042891628195292012-11-20T08:05:00.338+00:002012-11-20T08:05:00.338+00:00I agree with Towards the Tiber.
The issue the Cof...I agree with Towards the Tiber.<br /><br />The issue the CofE has is that it regards the priesthood as a job. For them the elevation to the episcopate is a promotion the same as anyone working in "business"<br /><br />Unfortunately the CofE has lost sight of what it should be focusing on. The Catholic Church is concerned with the salvation of souls - the CofE doesn't know what it should be doing. This was summed up perfectly for me in a recent sermon from ++Canterbury when he said his primary concern was for "the joy of his flock"<br /><br />Pétrushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17539025631125425710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-253865779660854699.post-71818838733797667762012-11-19T20:26:31.415+00:002012-11-19T20:26:31.415+00:00(And I should point out, it's not MY list of p...(And I should point out, it's not MY list of people who don;t have real priests... I wouldn't presume! I merely pass on the teaching I have received...)Ben Trovatohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15299230935468606845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-253865779660854699.post-12665178143693251872012-11-19T20:24:58.268+00:002012-11-19T20:24:58.268+00:00T the T
You are wrong on one point - your suggest...T the T<br /><br />You are wrong on one point - your suggestion that you should not be commenting. You are very welcome, and have added something very useful to the discussion.<br /><br />I think you are quite right in your analysis of the cultural problem (incidentally, it is one of the reasons why I don't think priests or bishops should retire -= anymore than I could retire from being the father of a family).<br /><br />One of the traditional titles of the Pope, of course, is servus servorum Dei - the Servant of the Servants of God.<br /><br />But modern discourse is too often about power and rights, rather than service and calling.Ben Trovatohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15299230935468606845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-253865779660854699.post-91906932441049953592012-11-19T20:12:40.804+00:002012-11-19T20:12:40.804+00:00Ok, so I probably shouldn’t be commenting – I’m cu...Ok, so I probably shouldn’t be commenting – I’m currently an Anglo-Catholic so come under Ben’s list of people who don’t actually have real Priests but… ;-P<br /><br />I occasionally find myself trying to explain the impossibility of a female priesthood, and the biggest barrier I come across is Point 3: the belief that not being ‘allowed’ to be a Priest somehow relegates women to second-class members of the Church. At the root of this is the misconception that because the Priest does things the laity don’t (can’t) do, he is in some way ‘better’ than those who aren’t allowed to ‘run’ the Mass. In this scenario the Church resembles a large corporation with the laity at the bottom, Priests in middle management roles, going all the way up to the Pope as CEO. In that case, having half of your workforce automatically barred from seeking ‘promotion’ is obviously completely unfair.<br /><br />But of course (and this is the bit which is almost impossible to explain to people who don’t already understand) that’s not how the Church works, and ordination is not promotion. The ‘job’ of a Priest isn’t any such thing, but a vocation given to him by God – in fact, it has always struck me as a crushing responsibility and I am in awe of those people who have the courage to follow that call. Others – including the majority of men – will not be given that vocation, but this does not mean that the vocations they are given are any less worthy in His eyes. But how do you explain that to people who don’t work within the same frame of reference? Trying to explain vocations to people who view the Priesthood as a career is a very difficult task. Culturally, I feel as if we speak a different language.Towards the Tiberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03490912692850188123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-253865779660854699.post-39517110135753438222012-11-18T19:36:06.493+00:002012-11-18T19:36:06.493+00:00Mark, Yes, proof-texting, sola scriptura and the z...Mark, Yes, proof-texting, sola scriptura and the zeitgeist make for a tricky combination!<br /><br />Mary, I know what you are getting at, but think that one cannot categorise Protestants so neatly. Some certainly think as you describe, but others do not. I think the function of a priest is to offer sacrifice: if they are merely having memorial meals, surely they are led by ministers. Language and meaning are important, and the term women priests is used quite deliberately, I think.<br /><br />Of course, I don't believe Anglicans have priests at all, male or female: Apostolicae Curae and all that...Ben Trovatohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15299230935468606845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-253865779660854699.post-39325427928920135962012-11-18T18:09:35.252+00:002012-11-18T18:09:35.252+00:00I think women priests are more of an issue for Cat...I think women priests are more of an issue for Catholics because we believe that the priest is acting in the person of Christ during the Eucharist whereas Protestants see the Eucharist as a memorial meal. This means that we can legitimately say that it's OK for them to have women priests but that Catholics simply cannot.<br /><br />The danger of the obsession with women priests is that it leads to clericalism and often downgrades the role of other believers, ignoring the fact that all are called to a life of holiness.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03023938443004529960noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-253865779660854699.post-45051303414706669172012-11-18T17:07:07.957+00:002012-11-18T17:07:07.957+00:00Trying to understand this, I was chatting to Richa...Trying to understand this, I was chatting to Richard Coles on Twitter the other day. he is always good natured and obliging. He basically seemed to me to be saying that it all comes down to Gal 3:28. I had a serious think about what he said and read through the passage in context, as well as various commentaries on it and it really left me with the feeling that it was completely out of context. How bizarre the whole justification seems to be. In Galatians, Paul is not talking about Orders in the Church. Paul is also pretty well known for speaking of women as subservient. Strange then that they would choose this as a proof text. We all know you can prove any point from the Bible if you just pluck bits out of it!Sitsiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12410440649485944766noreply@blogger.com