Is the male-only priesthood a discipline or essential to the nature of being a priest? Sr. Vassa (again unflinchingly taking up a contentious topic by climbing up the ladder to the highest platform and then jumping into the deep end head first) dives right in and says there is no reason beyond personal preference to not have female clergy. You know, when people ask me about women in priesthood, they say, 'Sister, why can't women be priests?' And I say, 'Women CAN be priests. We don't WANT them to be priests.' Because you see, God can do anything, and the Church, by divine authority, uh, can do anything, but, the Church doesn't want to - and that's a legitimate reason. What I don't like is when we TRY to pretend that there are other reasons for this, because it's legitimate not to want something, and there are reasons not to want this - right? - but, we shouldn't pretent that there's some... reason, that, for example, the maleness...
That article is a joke….and very biased. I can’t believe the author implies that the conservative voices may lead to the same problems that were experienced at the second Vatican council. If the Vatican 2 had listened to the traditional voices within their communion, they would not have suffered the deterioration into Protestantism that they face today. The big give away here, was the reference to the arch-ecumenist George Demacoupolos.
ReplyDeleteThere is no need for this council.
Agree with bias and use of references. Disagree on the need for a council.
DeleteI know that I sound like a pessimist. But I am old enough to see what the second Vatican council did to the Latin Catholics (I was born and raised Catholic). Suddenly, a priest who was in exile and whose teachings were banned by Pope Pius XII, was embraced by Pope John XXIII and elevated as the most influential "theologian" on that council (Yves Congar). The rest is history.
DeleteForgive me if I am skeptical, but there are no pernicious heresies to confront at this time that would warrant a council in the Holy Orthodox Church.
Except perhaps the heresy of ecumenism.
There is indeed the heresy of ecumenism that ought to be confronted.
ReplyDeleteAnd perhaps also the attitude that parallel "jurisdictions" within the same territory separated on an ethnic basis is an acceptable and desirable way of organizing the Church -- I seem to recall that it was the Bulgarian desire to have a separate ethnic "jurisidiction" within the territory of the Ecumenical Patriarchate that was condemned as the heresy of ethnophylitism. "Jurisdictionalism" has always struck me as being ethnophylitism-lite rather as monothelitism was monophysitism-lite.