Women Bishops Vote

Discussion in 'Anglican and Christian News' started by Toma, Nov 20, 2012.

  1. Stalwart

    Stalwart Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    2,723
    Likes Received:
    2,563
    Country:
    America
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Isnt this accurate though? He only ever refers to her as 'woman', and generally he doesn't even refer to her at all. On this foundation Patrick tried to erect a structure of post-modern feminism in the Church. I wished old-time traditionalists like you would defend the classical and unshakable truth of the Church. It pains me that although you probably side against women bishops, in this whole discussion it's my one point about Mary that you chose to issue an objection against. It's through inaction like this that heresy had seeped into the church.
     
  2. Patrick Sticks

    Patrick Sticks Member

    Posts:
    59
    Likes Received:
    50
    Country:
    England
    Religion:
    Christian- Anglican
    Could I possibly see this post, the one referring to the Manners please?
    And Stalwart; wheat and the tares surely? Does any human really think they have the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Isn't that tantamount to denying the presence of sin (which leads to error) in our lives? Even if you're right about women, you can still be wrong about Mary. Especially since holding her in high esteem, even regarding her as immaculate
    Anyway, if he ignores her, he has a funny way of showing it as he is dying on the cross according to John. Besides, to suggest he is not interested in his mother is a bit of a dent to the incarnation- what human is disinterested or indifferent towards their parents?

    Which leads me on to your reply:
    This doesn't answer my question at all. There is no escaping the fact Mary asks Jesus to do something, and he complies, apparently against his initial desires. So I'll ask again- where is the hegemonic masculinity in this story?

    A prophetess is not a secular leader. The judges mediate with God on behalf of the nation- they're not secular leaders either. Miriam is ranked co-equally with Moses and Aaron in Micah 6.4. Neither Moses nor Aaron are secular leaders, it seems reasonable to assume that Miriam is not regarded as 'secular' (insofar as you can have this distinction in ancient Israel anyway) either. So you haven't answered anything. What do you do with these examples of religious women's headship? Should I also add Junia the apostle? You seem to have given up on that line of argument that separates apostleship from spiritual authority.

    Try Prov. 1-8 for size. Here's a taster:
    I also point out that the Early Church were happy to claim the feminine title hagia sophia for Christ the logos, as the Arian controversy over Proverbs 8.22 shows. This application of the divine feminine to the Son seems to play a bit of havoc with your ideas of an gender essentialist God and church, doesn't it?

    The Ghost of St. augustine is quite the ghost in the machine here, and that's one way of reading Paul that was rather unique in the ancient world, but for some reason has taken hold of the Western imagination. However as I've already pointed out- and indeed as it says quite explicitly in Rom 5.14 the use of Adam is Typological, symbolic. His maleness doesn't come into the equation because its about the fall from grace of all humans of which Adam stands as a representative. Trying to make this a gender issue is an active distortion of the text and its intended meaning.

    Did I not point out in my very last post that the Cappadocians said precisely this? God made man/male and female he made them: an androgynous 'first parent' who is only then differentiated by gender so that he can reproduce after losing immortality. Explain to me why this ancient reading is invalid, especially since you can't resort to feminism as an excuse there.

    Apart from that bit where he sends a messenger to ask a woman to carry him inside himself, to give birth and raise him, but you know, no big deal. And liberal feminists don't have an animus against men, in fact the problem with liberal feminism is that it tries to have compete on masculine terms rather than emphasising the differance of gender. But of course you knew that, because despite your references to a monolithic and general 'feminism' I'm sure you'd never discuss something you have no knowledge of. I've already pointed out above this that gender is not essential to God, and Christ can be and has been regarded as embracing both masculine and femine personas.

    If it's 'right there' why have I never seen another conservative critic of women resort to it? I think you've twisted a passage to try and cluth at some straws whilst oyur arguments are crumbling about your feet.

    Adam's use in Paul is symbolic, I keep telling you, it's not a gender issue. In truth, there's nothing rational, at all, about believing an obvious piece of aetiological mythology as historical fact, something not even the ancients did. But the truth of the story is neither here nor there in this discussion, whether Adam existed or not is not the point, the question is whether Adam's gender is of any significance when being portrayed as the progenitor of a fallen race, something Paul is utterly silent on in this passage.

    Also, you haven't really dealt with the rest of my points. In fact trying to pin the weight of your argument on this passage is a highly question-begging procedure, there are more explicit texts we could play with, you know (coincidentally you never answered my point about women being silent and being allowed to speak in church).

    I think you want to end this argument because you haven't got any counter arguments. In fact this post is mostly just a rehashed repetition of what you've already said, oblivious to my counter-arguments and examples, and without adding anything new at all to the debate. Should you wish to bow out now, I shall assume you have fallen on your own sword, and nothing but irrational prejudice is keeping you from accepting my arguments.
     
  3. Old Christendom

    Old Christendom Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    476
    Likes Received:
    571
    Religion:
    Reformed
    The historical and factual existence of Adam and Eve, directly created by God in a blessed state of innocence, as the parents of the whole human race is not an "obvious piece of aetiological mythology" but the very word of God.