Women Priests
Last night I listened to George Noory's Coast to Coast AM show where he interviewed Neale Walsch, author of Conversations with God and other books. An interesting conversation, but what bothered me was one point. The absence of female priests in the Catholic Church is perceived by Walsch as evidence that that church "marginalizes" half the world's population, and that a religion that does that obviously has some things very wrong.
I'm not going to get into the Biblical debate about female clergy. There are three things at work here: Catholics would have to justify biblically the office of priesthood, and Protestants have to justify the existence of some sort of non-priestly clerical office. Only then can we bring into the conversation why women ought not hold the office.
But that said, how are women "marginalized?" The "authority" of spiritual leadership is one of servanthood, not command, and is not the only means of servanthood. Are women denied the honor of serving Christ because they are denied the clerical office? Certainly not! And who was more loved, and ultimately looked to as an even greater "authority" than John Paul or Billy Graham in our generation? Mother Theresa.
Women can't be fathers, and men can't be mothers. They have essentially different roles, but both are EQUALLY necessary. The Church may or may not recognize these gender distinctions, which is a matter of theology. If it is in the order of creation for feminine gifts to be used in a different form of servanthood, I don't see how that is an insult or marginalization of women. It would probably come as a relief.
Men are physically called to take the slings and arrows, to be the firefighters and the soldiers. Perhaps they are called too to take the spiritual slings and arrows, to defend the faith from attack, while women fill a nurturing role. And that's why men have the offices of religious authority. It is there actions that will be criticized and attacked.
Or maybe not. Maybe women are also called to be priests and pastors. I'm just saying that a faith where they are barred from the priesthood does not necessarily marginalize them.
I'm not going to get into the Biblical debate about female clergy. There are three things at work here: Catholics would have to justify biblically the office of priesthood, and Protestants have to justify the existence of some sort of non-priestly clerical office. Only then can we bring into the conversation why women ought not hold the office.
But that said, how are women "marginalized?" The "authority" of spiritual leadership is one of servanthood, not command, and is not the only means of servanthood. Are women denied the honor of serving Christ because they are denied the clerical office? Certainly not! And who was more loved, and ultimately looked to as an even greater "authority" than John Paul or Billy Graham in our generation? Mother Theresa.
Women can't be fathers, and men can't be mothers. They have essentially different roles, but both are EQUALLY necessary. The Church may or may not recognize these gender distinctions, which is a matter of theology. If it is in the order of creation for feminine gifts to be used in a different form of servanthood, I don't see how that is an insult or marginalization of women. It would probably come as a relief.
Men are physically called to take the slings and arrows, to be the firefighters and the soldiers. Perhaps they are called too to take the spiritual slings and arrows, to defend the faith from attack, while women fill a nurturing role. And that's why men have the offices of religious authority. It is there actions that will be criticized and attacked.
Or maybe not. Maybe women are also called to be priests and pastors. I'm just saying that a faith where they are barred from the priesthood does not necessarily marginalize them.
posted by Unknown at 10:11 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home