Is it right to have women priests and bishops?
Should this be legislated for?
What provision should be made for those who do not consider it right?
What should opponents do if legislation goes ahead without adequate provision?
Is it right to have women priests and bishops?
Should this be legislated for?
What provision should be made for those who do not consider it right?
What should opponents do if legislation goes ahead without adequate provision?
Q. Is it right to have women priests and bishops?
A. No.
Q. Should this be legislated for?
A. Yes. It should be prohibited with an anathema & excommunication attached for those who violate it.
Q. What provision should be made for those who do not consider it right?
A. None. I think there is something in the Bible about people on fences and neither hot nor cold. Do it or don’t. It’s like I have said before. I have more respect for the Fr. Jakes and Susan Russells than I do for Rowan Williams.
Q. What should opponents do if legislation goes ahead without adequate provision?
A. There are essentially three options.
1. For those who are Protestant in their mindset there is no shortage of churches out there. Pick one.
For the catholic minded who seek [b]The Church [/b] and not a church you have basically two options. My recommendations are in order of preference…
2. [url=http://www.oca.org/OCorthfaith.asp?SID=2]Orthodoxy[/url].
[url=http://www.westernorthodox.com/ ]Check out the Western Rite[/url]
3. Or Rome. Check out [url=http://www.acahome.org/tac/index.htm]the TAC[/url] and their petition for a uniate Anglo-Catholic Church
ICXC NIKA
John
John, what does scripture say this? I know what you want it to say, but where does Scripture say “I want my church to be comprised of deacons, presbyters and bishops and they must be men (gentile or jew, it makes no difference) only!” Where does it say this?
Re # 2
Br. Michael,
1 Timothy 2:9-15 since you asked. However a point which too often ignored is that it is also the consistent teaching and practice of the apostolic church that has never until modern times been questioned. This modern heresy is absolutely contrary to the consensus patri. Those who advocate this seem resolved to ignore any history that does not support their particular agenda.
ICXC NIKA
John
It is rather telling that Br. Michael poses this question in such strident terms and seems to not know where the scriptural prohibition for this innovation might be found. If the C.of E. goes ahead with this, it will be the death knell of this body as we have known it heretofore.
Br. Michael, It’s right in the same part of the Gospel where Jesus explicitly condemns gay marriage and abortion on demand. By the way, I don’t think very many Anglicans object to either of these things, and wouldn’t if they *were* in the Gospels. The usual inertia will make women bishops a done deal very soon, which will bore Christendom nearly as much as KJS has.
Well lets see:
[blockquote] 1 Timothy 2:9-15 9 And I want women to be modest in their appearance. They should wear decent and appropriate clothing and not draw attention to themselves by the way they fix their hair or by wearing gold or pearls or expensive clothes. 10 For women who claim to be devoted to God should make themselves attractive by the good things they do. 11 Women should learn quietly and submissively. 12 I do not let women teach men or have authority over them. Let them listen quietly. 13 For God made Adam first, and afterward he made Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived by Satan. The woman was deceived, and sin was the result. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing, assuming they continue to live in faith, love, holiness, and modesty.[/blockquote]
I see, do we read between the lines to read: “And my church shall be made of of deacons, priests and bishops. The service shall last no more than one hour and the sermon not more than 15 minutes etc. Communion shall be of two kinds and baptism shall be by total immersion or it’s not valid.”
My point is that. I think that we are in danger of reading a lot into scripture that is not there.
You know that some denominations read the same scripture to preclude women from even teaching boys in Sunday school classes. They can only teach girls.
I just don’t think that scripture is as clear on this matter as you argue. After all Jesus taught women, had them as disciples and they spread the Gospel. I don’t deny that your argument has weight, but I think that the contrary argument is also valid.
Michael, you quote Paul in Timothy, but you offer no interpretation of the very relevant verses 11 on. Are you implying that you think the meaning here is unclear? Since we do have an interpretation that allows us to understand it, one that fits perfectly with ancient, medeival, Reformation and early modern church practice, logic should dictate that you defer to those who understand the passage until you can propose an alternative. When you have a reasonable alternative interpretation then we can argue about it.
Or are you proposing that when you don’t agree with an interpretation of Scripture you can simply claim that it isn’t clear? By that rule all Scripture can be nullified for whatever reason.
Br Michael,
I note you declined to address my point that W/O is a radical departure from consensus patri and the immemorial discipline of the The Church. With respect to 1 Timothy 2 the versus certainly are quite clear. You asked for a Biblical verse I supplied one. Now is it your contention that the Bible means only what you want it to mean in the here and now and that the Fathers may be ignored if their teachings are inconsistent with your current agenda?
If you intend to overthrow 2000 years of Christian teaching that has never until modern times been challenged the burden of proof is not on the orthodox to defend their position. It is on you to establish that what you do is not heresy. Good luck.
ICXC NIKA
John
The pasage may to some people be unclear. However, what is clear, and can be safely carved in stone is this : In the past 30 years the undeniable (UN deniable) fact is that every (without exception) christian group who has begun ordaining women has gone around the bend theologically and morally. Any disagreement? ANY??
Br. Michael,
It should be noted that the Anglican Church (worldwide) has NEVER been [i]’sola scriptura'[/i]. But rather we put Scripture as the primary source of revelation, but where it is silent, or ambiguous, we turn to spirit-led reason and historic Church teaching/Tradition.
The witness of all three is that women’s ordination is a modern innovation, which, although played with in various sects and denominations throughout church history, has never been given a ‘green light’ for the church universal.
Peace
Jim Elliott <><