Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laudate Dominum:
The priest "mediates" between us and God--Christ was/is that Mediator, therefore the priest represents Christ.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Some good questions originally posted by Laudate Dominum:
How do you define the differences between the ministerial priesthood and the common priesthood of the baptized?

---

In my mind (and I must emphasise that this is a personal reflection, and not any claim to making a definitive theological statement, especially as I have something like 1,800 of practice to contend with) the use of the word "priesthood" in the former case leads to both confusion and a distortion of the baptised's roles and responsibilities.

Now, this is not to deny or diminish in any way the reality that persons are called (and are recognised as being called) to certain liturgical, pastoral and sacramental roles. That calling is real and should not be depracated. The problem arises in assigning the term "priesthood" to this group of activities.

The designation of all the baptized as "a royal priesthood", drawing on the self-understaning of Israel in the OT, is clearly attested to in the NT. It is part of the polemic, if you will, of establishing who is the true Israel, and is linked to ideas of being "in Christ" and being his body. The collective priesthood of the baptized is dependent upon Christ's priestly role and activities. Christ is the mediator between God and humanity, the baptized are the body of Christ, and are therefore (corporately) acting in Christ.

However, the application of this designation tp a sub-set of the baptized (firstly to the bishops and then, as their delegates, the presbyters) comes later, for a variety of reasons (the symbolic interpretation of Leviticus, the change polemical situation, etc). Personally, I think to use "priestly" language for these roles is problematic, because it goes against already established ideas in the Tradition about completion of the cultic regulatin in Christ, but also stores up trouble for the future, where the "priesthood" of the baptized is seen to vest in two of the clerical orders whereas it actually exists in the whole body. "Priesthood" is the word we have for certain ordained roles, but a gathered worshipping community is not less "priestly" if they are comprised solely of deacons and "laity".

So, I suppose the answer to the question is that "priesthood" is the wrong word for work of presbyters/pastors. I don't know what the righjt word is, but using that word simply causes confusion and the diminishing of the body of Christ.

If Christ's masculinity or femininity was not an issue, why were all the 12 Apostles male?
Or is their masculinity also not an issue?

It is, I admit, problematic for anyone arguing for the ordination of women that Christ himself did not choose any for the apostolic activities that they undertook during his lifetime. At face value, this is probably the strongest (and only?) argument in favour of a male-only order.

But the issue is not so simple. One must bear in mind that the Church, apparently acting under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, has deviated form Christ's choice in significant ways already. Let me give you some examples:

1. None of the apostles were Gentiles. Now, you may well say, "Well, du-uh! Jesus was Jewish!" Of course he was, and was fulfilling the servant vocation of Israel. But this did not stop the Church, under the Spirit's care, concluding that the call to be "Israel" was not just an ethnic one and was soon appointing Gentile leaders.

2. At least one of the original twelve apostles was married, and the Pauline letters suggest that otherw were too - yet, again under the Spirit's guidance, part of the Church has upheld a discipline of celibacy on its clergy.

3. If the church order literature of the early centuries are anything to go by, admission to the sanctuarial offices of the Church were barred to anyone with any sort of physical impediment. This carried on the Jewish practice, and it is not recorded anywhere that any of the twelve had a physical deformity. This rule is no longer applied (and, if I may express a personal opinion as one with a disability, if it is practiced then it is evidence of a wicked and pernicious attitude in the Church.)

Underlying the assertion that "Jesus didn't appoint women apostles" is of course the assumption that the pre-Resurrection appointment is the same as post-Resurrection ones. The 12 were appointed to a very specific role within the earthly ministry of Jesus (and this hand pick team managed to deny, doubt, disown and dreadfully and dastardly deal with the Dessiah- um, the Messiah. Not exactly the best model for Church leadership ). After the Resurrection, the first witnesses were women, and there many women, including Jesus' mother, who wwere present when the Spirit was poured out at Pentecost, and there is NT evidence for female deacons and apostles. This, I believe, is the framework in which any discussion should take place, not the particularities of the initial choosing of the 12.

Why do you say that the priest is not a mediator? Is that not the traditional Old Testament role of a priest?
If the priest represents Christ to the people, and the people to Christ, is that not mediation?

I do not say that priests are not mediators - you are correct that they are. However, one fundamental that the NT writers (that part of Tradition that has been canonised for reading in Church) kept banging on about is that all the images of the OT priesthood, all the ideas of Wisdom and Messiah, all the hopes and aspiration of Israel, come to fruition in the man Jesus. Jesus is the priest, the Church (when regarded in the metaphor of his "body") is acting out his priesthood, not the priesthood of any individual within that community. The priest at the eucharist does not do any mediating at all, partly because s/he doesn't need to (the final mediation has taken place, in time and for all time, on Calvary) but also because this role is as the representative acting out of the worship of the whole gathered community, a community that is both male and female.

--------------------
"He was wrong in the long run, but then, who isn't?" - Tony Judt

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dyfrig:
the use of the word "priesthood" in the former case leads to both confusion and a distortion of the baptised's roles and responsibilities.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChastMastr:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dyfrig:
the use of the word "priesthood" in the former case leads to both confusion and a distortion of the baptised's roles and responsibilities.

---

it hasn't up till now as far as I can tell.

---

quote:

---

As for physical disabilities barring one from the priesthood, when did this rule change, has it changed for not only Anglican but Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic, and what were their reasons for doing so?

---

quote:

---

Also, re mediation at the end, are you saying that the priest is only representing the Church to God, and not God to the Church?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dyfrig:
Well, that depends on whether you accept that the Christians who happen (for historical and personal reasons) to be outside the institutions of the so-called "Catholic" churches (Orthodoxy, Roman Catholic and, on their own assertion only, Anglican) are "Church" and whether their sacramental activities are valid.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Peter Berresford Ellis has been a full-time writer since 1975. His output, under three different names, includes histories, literary biographies, historical novels, horror-fantasy novels, "whodunits," and adventure-thrillers. Best known in America under the pseudonym Peter Tremayne--the name under which his popular "Sister Fidelma" mysteries are published--Ellis is considered one of the foremost British experts on the ancient Celts. His books on Celtic history and lore have been printed in the United Kingdom and the United States, and it is from these that he draws the wealth of knowledge he puts to use in his popular "Sister Fidelma" mysteries.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

With seven other young women robed in white, she took her vows before Saint Mel, the abbot and bishop of Longford, and it is said that he mistakenly consecrated her a bishop.

---

quote:

---

The Book of Lismore bears this story: Brigid and certain virgins along with her went to take the veil from Bishop Mel in Telcha Mide. Blithe was he to see them. For humility Brigid stayed so that she might be the last to whom a veil should be given. A fiery pillar rose from her head to the roof ridge of the church. Then said Bishop Mel: "Come, O holy Brigid, that a veil may be sained on thy head before the other virgins." It came to pass then, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, that the form of ordaining a bishop was read out over Brigid. Macaille said that a bishop's order should not be confirmed on a woman. Said Bishop Mel: "No power have I in this matter. That dignity hath been given by God unto Brigid, beyond every (other) woman." Wherefore the men of Ireland from that time to this give episcopal honor to Brigid's successor.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dyfrig:
Of course, now that we've worked out that the Y is a failing, deformed X, it's becoming clearer that only women are truly human.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by RuthW:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dyfrig:
Of course, now that we've worked out that the Y is a failing, deformed X, it's becoming clearer that only women are truly human.

---

Which kind of messes with the doctrine of the Incarnation, since God chose to be incarnated as a man and thus wasn't truly human. Does this mean we're all going to hell after all?

---

Either that, or it's further evidence for the Incarnation as a sign of miraculous grace - it is in and through our imperfection that we are made perfect in Christ!

--------------------
Eschew obfuscation!

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by dyfrig:
There have been vaginas at the altar in England for nigh on 10 years

[...]

Should its organs (colleges, dioceses, deaneries, etc) be "pushing" one side or the other?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr. Gregory:
that bishops could do diamterically opposed things, (ordain women, not ordain women) and still maintain the notion of collegial episcopal unity.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Divine Outlaw-Dwarf:
The current set up makes no sense, abstractly, but is the least worse option, practically.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dyfrig:


Of course, now that we've worked out that the Y is a failing, deformed X, it's becoming clearer that only women are truly human.

---

Ah, so we're *too good* to be priests!

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Divine Outlaw-Dwarf:
The current situation in the CE makes no ecclesiological sense, I wholeheatedly agree. But, as regards the ordination of women, the alternatives, from my point of view are all worse. These seem to be :-

(1.) Stop ordaining women. Undesirable and not going to happen.

(2.) Third Province. Cul-de-sac.

(3.) Cull of the FinFers. Unjust and would create a sort of liberal hegemony that I really would not be comfortable with.

The current set up makes no sense, abstractly, but is the least worse option, practically.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by AdamPater:
RuthW, how is that approach in practice distinguishable from option 3 above?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
As far as I know no deadline has been set. There is a commission examining the possibility of consecrating women to the episcopate. If they recommend this, and if it is accepted and things start moving, then it will probably provoke a crisis of some kind.

---