How to defend the belief only men should be ordained?

Discussion in 'Sacraments, Sacred Rites, and Holy Orders' started by Anglican04, Dec 17, 2017.

  1. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,093
    Likes Received:
    1,072
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    It’s this kind of talk that turns people away from Christianity altogether. :(
     
    Lowly Layman likes this.
  2. Tiffy

    Tiffy Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,645
    Likes Received:
    1,206
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
    I had not intended to imply what you inferred. Come to think of it though if there had been anything clearly written by a woman, no matter how Godly, let's say the Mary that listened at the feet of Jesus, her testimony and possible contribution to Holy Scripture would have been roundly rejected by the selectors, editors and compilers of The Bible. It is almost certain that no women were permitted to be involved in the compilation and selection of the canon. That would not have been by act of God though, it would almost certainly be by act of men. I'm not suggesting however that Holy Scripture is any less 'inspired' as a result of this, just that it is 'influenced' by the fact that men forbade women any hand whatever in its production and selection. Scripture is however as scripture is and being 'inspired' means that it is, as it is, fit for God's purposes, i.e. the education and salvation of mankind, and mankind is both men and women. Mankind is lacking without womankind and God has said as much. Nevertheless, in the Lord, woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God. 1 Cor.11:11.

    You fundamentally misunderstand the roll of priest in the Church of England.
    Your last sentence effectively runs a coach and horses through your first. Christ's take on headship clearly has nothing to do with rank and superiority over others in the church. It is the absolute opposite of that, leadership is in fact 'foot washing humility', not a program of hierarchy building, with men attaining a position at the top of the hierarchy.
    Same with men as with women though you seem to kick at the goads considering it far too humiliating for you, a man, to have a woman celerating the eucharist among God's people. That attitude betrays a certain amount of pride in position and gender. (Lord I thank you for not making me a woman :laugh: a Jewish prayer)
    You imply that you consider the role of a 'foot washing' priest, is to 'be a man, placed in a position of headship over other men'. Even male priests would be usurping the authority of Christ and abusing their divinely ordained function in the church if they have a desire for and seek after headship over other men or women with a desire to exercise 'authority' over them. To suggest that all women are seeking to control and dominate men by entering the priesthood, is suggestive that you suspect that many men must have entered it for the self same un-Christ-like reason, - i.e to gain power over others. Is that how you see your priest? Surely NOT! How else might the idea come so easily to mind though. It would be an attitude of mind that accepts authority only if it is weilded by a man and arrogantly and misogynistically rejects it if it is ever invested in a woman. That would truly be an arrogant attitude.

    Some
    women are often better at making wise moral judgments and teaching good ethical conduct to some men who wallow in the depths of immorality and ignorance. There is nothing about maleness per se, that makes it superior or more deserving of power and authority as far as Jesus Christ is concerned.
    .