Sr. Vassa: There's no ontological impediment to priestesses
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...
i do not see the albanians, ukrainians, and carpatho-russians --- are they not part of the body or just after thoughts?
ReplyDeleteThey have their own dioceses, and metropolia in the case of the UOCUSA. It would be inappropriate for them to be involved if they truly are self-governing structures.
DeleteBut it seems they are not,,,,a Greek bishop was foisted on the carpatho Russians for example,,,,
DeleteMy understanding is that a slate of Greek candidates were strongly suggested, particularly since there was no promising internal candidates but the ACROD committee made its choice. I think the Greeks actually like keeping the ethnic Diocese separate from the Greeks.
DeleteACROD was allowed to pick their own bishop. The administration threw a wide net and he was chosen, voted on, and enthroned with EP in attendance, but not running the show.
Delete