Do you support women priests?

[Love365]

Do you support women priests?

Spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ

 

[Love365]

John the Baptist baptized Jesus.

Mary of Bethany anointed Jesus.

 

[Laureate]

Do you support women priests?

Spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ

No, but neither do I support men priests, I support instead saints spreading the Gospel, for there is neither Male nor Female in the Priesthood of H’meshiakh.

The Way is narrow, step to the left or right (pro or con) and one steps off the path.

 

[public hermit]

Do you support women priests?

Spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ

I'm not in a tradition with particular priests (we hold to the "priesthood of all believers"), but if I were, I would support any good priest, regardless. I take it priesthood is a spiritual function of humans, whereby, one serves both God and humanity. The good qualities of spiritual servants transcend that difference.

 

[The Liturgist]

I'm not in a tradition with particular priests (we hold to the "priesthood of all believers"), but if I were, I would support any good priest, regardless. I take it priesthood is a spiritual function of humans, whereby, one serves both God and humanity. The good qualities of spiritual servants transcend that difference.

You know there is a common misunderstanding about the word priest, in that for some reason the KJV and several other English bibles use the word to translate the Hebrew word Kohen, and the Greek word Hierus, which refer to the sacerdotal priests - however, to my knowledge every denomination, even the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics and the Anglicans believe in the priesthood, or rather I should say the hieratic quality of all believers.

Rather, the word priest is etymologically an early Anglization of the Greek word “Presbyter” which means elder. And this is how the Orthodox and Anglicans and as far as I am aware, the Roman Catholic church, understand the word Priest. So just because a denomination calls its clergy Priests, does not mean that it is denying the priesthood of all believers. Indeed in the Orthodox church, if one looks at the Greek Orthodox Church, the situation becomes more clear, in that the priests are literally referred to as Presbyters and their wives are called Presbyteras. John Wesley also sought to make things clearer, by referring to Priests as Elders (which is of course what the word Presbyter means) in his modified version of the Book of Common Prayer used by the Methodists in North America, and likewise he also rendered Bishop, which is an Anglicization of Episcopos, meaning Superintendent, as Superintendent.

Thus, nearly all denominations believe in the priesthood of all believers, but I don’t know of any that regard all believers as being elders, although some lack formally defined clergy, such as some Quaker meetings.

 

[The Liturgist]

No, but neither do I support men priests, I support instead saints spreading the Gospel, for there is neither Male nor Female in the Priesthood of H’meshiakh.

The Way is narrow, step to the left or right (pro or con) and one steps off the path.

The word priest is just an Anglicization of the Scriptural term Presbyter, which is one of three offices clearly defined in the New Testament, the others being Episcopos, meaning Superintendent, and Deacons, deacon roughly translating as “servant.” Traditionally the role of deacons is to help with the worship services and also assist through visitation of the sick, etc.

 

[tampasteve]

I prefer male ministers/priests, however, I think that when the archaeological and written evidence is examined with a critical eye it becomes clear that it was HIGHLY likely the first Christians had women in positions of "power", priests and certainly deacons.

 

[The Liturgist]

I prefer male ministers/priests, however, I think that when the archaeological and written evidence is examined with a critical eye it becomes clear that it was HIGHLY likely the first Christians had women in positions of "power", priests and certainly deacons.

We know they had deaconesses who were ministers of the font in much the same way that male deacons are ministers of the chalice, and we know this because we have surviving canon laws pertaining to eligibility for the female diaconate. We do not have any evidence of female presbyters or bishops.

However, we do have evidence of female missionaries who helped spread the Gospel, women such as St. Theclas, and especially St. Nino, who was an Armenian princess who, after the conversion of Armenia to Christianity, travelled to Georgia and was instrumental in the conversion of the largest and most important of the Georgian tribes to Christianity. Indeed Georgia is an interesting case in that it is, to my knowledge, the only country to be converted to Christianity primarily as the result of a female missionary. These women are venerated in the Eastern Orthodox Church as “Equal to the Apostles”, along with Saints Mary and Martha of Bethany and St. Mary Magdalene.

 

[9Rock9]

I don't, but I also don't think ordaining women into the clergy is as big of an error as ordaining gay clergy.

 

[Paidiske]

We do not have any evidence of female presbyters or bishops.

Well, we do, but there is a long tradition of explaining it away. (This is not a bad starting point for people wishing to read more: Ordained Women of the Patristic Era - CBE International )

It's probably self-evident that I support women priests.

 

[The Liturgist]

Well, we do, but there is a long tradition of explaining it away. (This is not a bad starting point for people wishing to read more: Ordained Women of the Patristic Era - CBE International )

It's probably self-evident that I support women priests.

I would note that the word Presbytera, which can be translated as Priestess, during the era in which that was found, the 5th and 6th centuries, was established as having the same meaning that it has today, specifically the wife of a presbyter, who have always traditionally in the Eastern churches (since historically the Western churches were dominated by Rome which was opposed to married clergy at least as far back as Nicaea, where their legates made an unpopular suggestion to mandate clerical celibacy in the canons promulgated by the council) are tasked with an enormous range of designated responsibilities as the spiritual mothers of the parish. This is also why the wife can veto her husband being ordained, and is consulted on the matter, since it results in her also being commissioned to do certain things.

Regarding the Episcopa mentioned, there have been, prior to Protestant churches, small numbers of married bishops, who are generally continent due to age, unless they are Chorepiscopi, or Choir Bishops, who lack the authority to ordain people to the major orders of subdeacon or higher, but who can do everything else a bishop can do such as consecrations, the ordination of readers and psaltis, and so on. It might also be possible for a chorepiscopi to serve as a co-ordainer in an episcopal ordination. Chorepiscopi can generally be married without limitations. The main difference between a chorepiscopi and the more commonly encountered suffragans or coadjutators is that the latter two categories have all the powers of a bishop but are not the archpastors of a diocese. But married bishops are known to have existed, and even today one pops up about once every one hundred fifty years or so in some churches, although curiously those that are devoid of any surviving monasteries tend to be more insistent on episcopal celibacy (for example, the Church of the East). If memory serves the most recent bishop in the elderly married and continent category was in one of the Mar Thoma churches in India.

I can only assume therefore that if the women referred to using the title “episcopa” were members of the same ancient church whose canon law and liturgies we have, they were equivalent to presbyteras.

However, we do know that female clergy of all ranks existed outside the ancient church.

I would also note that while there is no evidence when reading the ancient canons of women serving as presbyters and episcopi, there is also a lack of canons opposing it. Rather, the lack of compelling evidence is due to canons always assuming the clergy are male except in the case of deaconesses, and likewise the ordination liturgies.

However, because of a lack of canonical opposition, I have always supported women who have been ordained such as yourself, and have no opposition likewise to the ordination of women except in certain specific circumstances, which we have previously discussed, which did not apply to your church, for example. This support is an active support, for example, Rev. Bolton, the Presbyterian minister I mentioned to you, was rather misogynistically denied an MDiv only after completing the requires coursework and also having been ordained, in something of a collegial bait and switch, which is strange, because I can think of seminaries from churches who do not ordain women providing MDivs or MTheos and indeed DTheos and DDivs to women, which is good considering most of these churches have hegumenas in charge of convents who wield enormous authority. This denial of an MDiv to Rev. Bolton is something that I personally object to without equivocation, and indeed strikes me as actively immoral since she had been accepted as a student.

You can’t ethically have someone pass all the required coursework and then say “Whoops, we can’t give you the degree we promised you because of your gender, which we knew, but its hardly our fault we didn’t tell you.” Its a bit of immoral caveat emptor trickery.

 

[Paidiske]

Yes, the usual explaining-away. There is other evidence as well (such as artwork depicting women priests), that was just a starting point, but a useful one for someone unfamiliar with the ancient evidence.

 

[Tigran1245]

Coptic Pope Shenouda III wrote in his book about women priests:

Who Is The Head?
Then, who does the New Testament say is the head, man or woman? This is mentioned in Ephesus, chapter 5, and many times in the First Epistle to the Corinthians. "I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man. For man is not from woman, but woman from man. Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels" (1Cor. 11: 3, 8-10).

Man and woman co-operate together, but man is the head of woman. If woman is headed by man in the house, can she be the head of all the congregation in the church, among whom is her husband who is her head? Or may she say to him: `You are my head in the house, but I am your head in the church?' I do not know how to find a solution for this problem.
Also, the priest represents our Lord Jesus Christ.

The Virgin Mary And Priesthood
If women were called to priesthood, the first woman in the world would have been the Virgin Mary. No woman in the world is more holy than Saint Mary. And no woman in the whole world is more worthy- if it is a matter of worthiness- than the Virgin Mary. And Saint Mary the Virgin did not claim to be a priest. She was the spiritual mother of all the Apostles, but she did not claim to be a priest.

 

[Paidiske]

Of course, those arguments about what it means to be "head" need an awful lot of unpacking...

 

[Tigran1245]

Of course, those arguments about what it means to be "head" need an awful lot of unpacking...

But I want you to know: for every man the head is Christ, for a woman the head is her husband, for Christ the head is God. (1 Corinthians 11:3)

So, the husband is the head of the wife, just as Christ is the head of the husband, and God is the head of Christ. That is, the wife is called to submit to her husband, just as we are to submit to God, and as the Word of God follows the will of the Father.

 

[Paidiske]

To really get into that would take this thread right off topic, but I will just note that I (and many scholars) do not agree that the Scriptures so quoted preclude women from ministry or leadership in the church.

 

[honey badger]

But I want you to know: for every man the head is Christ, for a woman the head is her husband, for Christ the head is God. (1 Corinthians 11:3)

So, the husband is the head of the wife, just as Christ is the head of the husband, and God is the head of Christ. That is, the wife is called to submit to her husband, just as we are to submit to God, and as the Word of God follows the will of the Father.

But I want you to know: for every man the head is Christ, for a woman the head is her husband, for Christ the head is God.

the tell being that none who lead and are lead in the churches/temples can explain the why of this ...

 

[Tigran1245]

But I want you to know: for every man the head is Christ, for a woman the head is her husband, for Christ the head is God.

the tell being that none who lead and are lead in the churches/temples can explain the why of this ...

What exactly are they unable to explain?

 

[honey badger]

What exactly are they unable to explain?

why Paul would not suffer a women to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.

 

[Tigran1245]

why Paul would not suffer a women to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.

Because women and men are created different. Men are stronger, smarter and more rational. Therefore, they must make decisions and manage. This is especially important in spiritual matters, where the degree of responsibility is highest.

Women are more sensitive, more emotional and more beautiful than men. Accordingly, they have a completely different role both in life and in the Church. A woman was created to complement a man, to become his soul mate.

Of course, there are exceptions to the rules. All people are different. And there are women warriors, queens, and chess players. And when the Church was persecuted, there were deaconesses. But there were no women priests, because the priest has power over the soul of a person, and this is the greatest of all responsibilities.