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...
Whoop-dee-do. An uncanonical body defrocks an uncanonical bishop.
ReplyDeleteMore than that, an uncanonical body whose very legitimacy depends on the uncanonical bishop they just defrocked. As John says below: ecclesial comedy hour, indeed.
DeleteSadly, you are right. I refuse to use OCU, because the first word "Orthodox" conveys a legitimacy that they don't have
ReplyDeleteIt's starting to look like ecclesial comedy hour.
ReplyDeleteGood for them.
ReplyDeleteThe newly created schismatic group is coming apart at the seams. It looks like another of their so-called bishops just returned to Philaret.
ReplyDelete