Women Clergy

[Msterbeau]

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008803230609

Thoughts?

As a UU, this is a nonissue for me.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

I think it's up to the various religions to decide how they do things... who can and can not hold positions within a church system is up to that church.

[Steven]

As long as the doctrine is in order (as is the precurser for anybody I would endorse - male or female) then I beelive that women have a definitive purpose in the chruch. There are varying perspectives on that, based on what is beleived to be biblical mandates - but when you look into it there really are no mandates. Whats written there (Primarily by Paul) is much more deeply rooted in the culture of the times and the general subservient positiont hat women held. But that does not make a biblical tenant and certainly does not create a definitive Christian law.

On the contarary, the bible aslo elevates a handful of pretty amazing women and gives their stories in detail - which in the culture of the times the text was written, was not typical. Those stories illustrate the wisdom of Godly women, their value, and how they have served to not only save the entire nation of Israel but became powerful intercessors in their own right.

on a modern day practical level, Lola dn i are firends with Dr Sarah Sumner (and her husband Jim) - a professor at Azusa Pacific University. She holds doctorates in thigns like theology and comaprative religions, etc .... she also likes greasy chinese food. She is a part time teacher at New Song San Dimas, the church I belonged to in Cali before I moved here. She's had a very big influence on me over the years and I beleive that not only is she very gifted but that she has been called by God to teach and to lead. I'm thankful for her.

[Dollardave]

When I was getting off of marjiuana I read the bible the whole thing and it did say in there that women were not to preach the word of God. I'm not making it up but it was new testament Christ didn't say it tho it was Gods words.

$$

[Shade Everdark]

I think it's up to the various religions to decide how they do things... who can and can not hold positions within a church system is up to that church.

I have to agree with this. As much as I'd like to see women fully accepted as part of the clery in all religions and denominations, it's really up to each several church what they choose to do, how they choose to interpret their particular holy texts.

That said, UU and I think the Episcopalians deserve credit for leading the way with female clergy.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church." -- 1st Corinthians 14:34-35

This is just the light hearted bits. The really hardcore women-as-property, murdering, sexist rapist stuff I'll leave alone. The old testament is more graphic and the Koran equally so and more throughout.

Apologist types love to use long flowery wording to try and massage the really evil "sounding" parts of scripture into the modern world. Its not there, or rather it is there just without the flowers.

I have a grudging respect for "fundamentalists" that at least try to be true to what they say they are being true to and try to follow the traditional teachings that are actually written in scripture. The "progressive" versions of Christianity and Islam basically are subverting the actual teachings out of deference to modern ethics that have little to do with scripture.

Our modern ethics are not derived from scripture, we have developed them despite scripture and kept a scant few bits of the good stuff that is there.

Women generally if they have any feminist leanings and think they have scriptural grounds for it have to pick and choose carefully and just ignore whole swaths of the texts. Maybe twist the words around so as to make any need for an actual text pointless. Basically its an innate desire (non-religious) for a certain set of ethics and we just pick and choose what fits our non-religious ethics out of the "good parts" of scripture.

It is impossible in the west to follow scripture fully because some of the teachings are so horrific and would fill up the asylums rapidly. Not that they are nessisarly wrong, they just are untenable in modern society. If we want to throw them out, lets do it, and not pretend we are really following some bronze age text. We have modern ethics in the modern world that are not compatible with much of traditional religion.

Modern ethics are not based on scripture as much as we'd like to think. Scripture has been dragged kicking and screaming into modernity (or just ignored when necessary) century by century. a.k.a. "The progressive nature of revelation" a.k.a. "Making it up as we go along."

Having said that, i miss church. I miss the fellowship, i miss the ritual, i miss the instant social network, i miss the uniformity of thought and "clarity of vision" that i had when i was "sure" of the biblical truth. Unfortunately the underpinnings of it ruin it for me now that I've studied it with a clearer eye. Who knows maybe its just the devil that has ahold of me and i need to work on changing my ways.

[Destroit]

I try to follow the bible the best I can, even knowing that man undoubtedly tampered with it and changed it around to say what they want. Which is why I believe most of the woman bashing in the bible didn't come from the word of God but from the hand of man. Saying that "God said so" is such an easy way to convince women that the discrimination is necessary. Biggest scam ever, and we fell for it hook line and sinker.

It would contradict itself for God to love us and hate women so much, which is why I also don't buy Genesis, I think it's just a way to "start the story". The world was not created in seven days and man didn't appear instantly. It just didn't happen. It was a way for man to explain "the beginning" when they didn't know any better. What better way also to blame women for everything and make it so that "we owe men"? Oh Eve, feeding Adam that stupid fruit from the forbidden tree . So they got some oppression in there and a way to start the story, convenient, no?

I really only follow the New Testament, as any Christian is technically supposed to. Also, women should be Clergy.

If women are that worthless, why was Mary Magdalene so important to Jesus making the apostles hate her because he held her in much higher regard? Think about it.

[sass_in_the_pants]

Any catholic priest (okay, maybe not any, but all the ones I've met) will tell you how grateful they are for the women who work in the service of the church. They will also tell you that for far too long, the women of the church have not been given their proper dues.

I try to follow the bible the best I can, even knowing that man undoubtedly tampered with it and changed it around to say what they want. Which is why I believe most of the woman bashing in the bible didn't come from the word of God but from the hand of man. Saying that "God said so" is such an easy way to convince women that the discrimination is necessary. Biggest scam ever, and we fell for it hook line and sinker.

It would contradict itself for God to love us and hate women so much, which is why I also don't buy Genesis, I think it's just a way to "start the story". The world was not created in seven days and man didn't appear instantly. It just didn't happen. It was a way for man to explain "the beginning" when they didn't know any better. What better way also to blame women for everything and make it so that "we owe men"? Oh Eve, feeding Adam that stupid fruit from the forbidden tree . So they got some oppression in there and a way to start the story, convenient, no?

I really only follow the New Testament, as any Christian is technically supposed to. Also, women should be Clergy.

If women are that worthless, why was Mary Magdalene so important to Jesus making the apostles hate her because he held her in much higher regard? Think about it.

I was talking to a friend in seminary school about it and, these are his words, not mine:

'You think sin is Eve's fault? You think that's what Genesis says? Who's dumb ass let the snake into the garden in the first place? And you think God favors MEN? Who is MORE like the Creator, the half of the population that can create, or the half who can't?'

Now, what he says is not what all theologians agree on or anything like that, but still, he's a pretty smart cookie, and he tells no lies and I found his views on this very interesting. Also, it makes me giggle when someone who is going to be a priest says 'dumbass'.

[Steven]

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church." -- 1st Corinthians 14:34-35

This is just the light hearted bits. The really hardcore women-as-property, murdering, sexist rapist stuff I'll leave alone. The old testament is more graphic and the Koran equally so and more throughout.

Apologist types love to use long flowery wording to try and massage the really evil "sounding" parts of scripture into the modern world. Its not there, or rather it is there just without the flowers.

I have a grudging respect for "fundamentalists" that at least try to be true to what they say they are being true to and try to follow the traditional teachings that are actually written in scripture. The "progressive" versions of Christianity and Islam basically are subverting the actual teachings out of deference to modern ethics that have little to do with scripture.

Our modern ethics are not derived from scripture, we have developed them despite scripture and kept a scant few bits of the good stuff that is there.

Women generally if they have any feminist leanings and think they have scriptural grounds for it have to pick and choose carefully and just ignore whole swaths of the texts. Maybe twist the words around so as to make any need for an actual text pointless. Basically its an innate desire (non-religious) for a certain set of ethics and we just pick and choose what fits our non-religious ethics out of the "good parts" of scripture.

It is impossible in the west to follow scripture fully because some of the teachings are so horrific and would fill up the asylums rapidly. Not that they are nessisarly wrong, they just are untenable in modern society. If we want to throw them out, lets do it, and not pretend we are really following some bronze age text. We have modern ethics in the modern world that are not compatible with much of traditional religion.

Modern ethics are not based on scripture as much as we'd like to think. Scripture has been dragged kicking and screaming into modernity (or just ignored when necessary) century by century. a.k.a. "The progressive nature of revelation" a.k.a. "Making it up as we go along."

Having said that, i miss church. I miss the fellowship, i miss the ritual, i miss the instant social network, i miss the uniformity of thought and "clarity of vision" that i had when i was "sure" of the biblical truth. Unfortunately the underpinnings of it ruin it for me now that I've studied it with a clearer eye. Who knows maybe its just the devil that has ahold of me and i need to work on changing my ways.

I'm glad you miss it.

lets look at a couple fo things......such as concubines and multiple wives and circumcision.

they were very prevelant in old testament times, and radically reduced in new testament times. King David, the "man after God's own heart" have many wives and concubines (and all the headaches that go with it). Yet Paul is telling his version of the church to be faithful to the wife he is in covenent with......he also says circumcision is wothless

....so what does all of this mean?

I had a private converation recently with womeone where I said that I beleived that scripture was God ordained in much the way songwriters write songs or painters paint, etc......that it comes as the muse. And in teh process that writers (or painters...you get it) personal values and reflectiosn and definately the surrounding culture of the times gets in there as well. I have no probnlem with that.

I think there is plenty to counter the lowly place of women biblically as well. And that Pauls reflections were just that - his own personal reflections (thats nto a stretch at all given how Paul write) as he was trying to reach a goal of bringing order to the early church. Most of his letters to the chruches were addressing specific issues with each church.

By the way Dr. Sumner who I described earlier.....does not do any of that which you speak of - and shes a very togethor and indipendent woman. I think modern times calls for and allows for that provision.

[Steven]

I try to follow the bible the best I can, even knowing that man undoubtedly tampered with it and changed it around to say what they want. Which is why I believe most of the woman bashing in the bible didn't come from the word of God but from the hand of man. Saying that "God said so" is such an easy way to convince women that the discrimination is necessary. Biggest scam ever, and we fell for it hook line and sinker.

It would contradict itself for God to love us and hate women so much, which is why I also don't buy Genesis, I think it's just a way to "start the story". The world was not created in seven days and man didn't appear instantly. It just didn't happen. It was a way for man to explain "the beginning" when they didn't know any better. What better way also to blame women for everything and make it so that "we owe men"? Oh Eve, feeding Adam that stupid fruit from the forbidden tree . So they got some oppression in there and a way to start the story, convenient, no?

I really only follow the New Testament, as any Christian is technically supposed to. Also, women should be Clergy.

If women are that worthless, why was Mary Magdalene so important to Jesus making the apostles hate her because he held her in much higher regard? Think about it.

God doesent hate women in Genesis.

And Genesis actually paints Adam as a guitly party and one who is willing to stick his wife with teh balme.

if you watch the text they did not know they were naked until after ADAM ate - and Eve ate first.

God held that sin against Adam.

[Rev.Reverence]

When I was getting off of marjiuana I read the bible the whole thing and it did say in there that women were not to preach the word of God. I'm not making it up but it was new testament Christ didn't say it tho it was Gods words.

$$

"NO GOD I'VE EVER KNOWN WOULD HOLD ONE CREATION ABOVE ANOTHER."

Adelphos Malkalypse

THERE IS UNDENIABLE EVIDENCE THAT WOMEN WERE DEACONS (A LEADER/TEACHER POSITION) IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. THIS WAS BEFORE THE WHOLE NICEAN COUNCIL EDITED HOLY TEXTS TO KEEP POWER HUNGRY MEN'S INTERESTS MOVING.

SEVERAL PROTESTANT CHRISTIANS HAVE FEMALE PASTORS, WHICH IS THEIR POSITION CORRESPONDING TO PRIEST.

TO WHAT END ARE WE IGNORING WICCA AND THE OLD RELIGION THAT BIRTHED IT. THE FIRST PRIEST WAS IN FACT A PRIESTESS!!!

ON ANOTHER NOTE MALE PRIESTS USED TO BE ALLOWED TO BE MARRIED UNTIL AROUND THE MIDDLE CRUSADES.

Rev. Reverence C. R.

"FREE YOUR MIND; YOUR ASS WILL FOLLOW!"

G.CLINTON of P-FUNK

[Rev.Reverence]

Any catholic priest (okay, maybe not any, but all the ones I've met) will tell you how grateful they are for the women who work in the service of the church. They will also tell you that for far too long, the women of the church have not been given their proper dues.

I'VE HEARD THIS EXACT QUOTE SEVERAL TIMES.

Rev. Reverence C. R.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

"NO GOD I'VE EVER KNOWN WOULD HOLD ONE CREATION ABOVE ANOTHER."

Adelphos Malkalypse

THERE IS UNDENIABLE EVIDENCE THAT WOMEN WERE DEACONS (A LEADER/TEACHER POSITION) IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. THIS WAS BEFORE THE WHOLE NICEAN COUNCIL EDITED HOLY TEXTS TO KEEP POWER HUNGRY MEN'S INTERESTS MOVING.

SEVERAL PROTESTANT CHRISTIANS HAVE FEMALE PASTORS, WHICH IS THEIR POSITION CORRESPONDING TO PRIEST.

TO WHAT END ARE WE IGNORING WICCA AND THE OLD RELIGION THAT BIRTHED IT. THE FIRST PRIEST WAS IN FACT A PRIESTESS!!!

ON ANOTHER NOTE MALE PRIESTS USED TO BE ALLOWED TO BE MARRIED UNTIL AROUND THE MIDDLE CRUSADES.

Rev. Reverence C. R.

"FREE YOUR MIND; YOUR ASS WILL FOLLOW!"

G.CLINTON of P-FUNK

Um, question.. and it may lead to another thread... but are you one of those people that still believe that at one point in time all religions and governments were matriarchal? I only ask because it seems it.. and you may have missed that bit where the woman who spear headed that movement... was found to be a fraud and most of her "proof" turned out to be made up.

Next question... What old religion birthed Wicca? It bears almost no resemblance to any of the old religions I have studied.

[Steven]

"NO GOD I'VE EVER KNOWN WOULD HOLD ONE CREATION ABOVE ANOTHER."

Adelphos Malkalypse

THERE IS UNDENIABLE EVIDENCE THAT WOMEN WERE DEACONS (A LEADER/TEACHER POSITION) IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. THIS WAS BEFORE THE WHOLE NICEAN COUNCIL EDITED HOLY TEXTS TO KEEP POWER HUNGRY MEN'S INTERESTS MOVING.

SEVERAL PROTESTANT CHRISTIANS HAVE FEMALE PASTORS, WHICH IS THEIR POSITION CORRESPONDING TO PRIEST.

TO WHAT END ARE WE IGNORING WICCA AND THE OLD RELIGION THAT BIRTHED IT. THE FIRST PRIEST WAS IN FACT A PRIESTESS!!!

ON ANOTHER NOTE MALE PRIESTS USED TO BE ALLOWED TO BE MARRIED UNTIL AROUND THE MIDDLE CRUSADES.

Rev. Reverence C. R.

"FREE YOUR MIND; YOUR ASS WILL FOLLOW!"

G.CLINTON of P-FUNK

you know that little old council of Nicea sure has taken the blame for a whole lot of things these days....

male priests stopped being allowed to marry when "kin" started being able to claim property rights.....the church swept that little $$$ issue aside by making priests take vows of chastity that were neither biblical nor a part of the heritage that the whole Judeo Christian Catholic system sprang from. And that didint come from Nicea - it came from bean counters who recognized that it was all gettign expensive.

Also - I personally dont hold the Catholic church as "the" definitive source on church history as if all things center on Catholicism.....I think the best source for that hsitory comes from a study of "the way" as defined historically in early history after the death of Christ. I'd like to see some of that undeniable evidence your talking about - both within the catholic church and also from older sources if available.

another side note - that YHWH God that the Nicean council and all of Christianity seems to worship did INDEED elevate man above all other creation - the Nicean council did not change that either.

[Rev.Reverence]

Um, question.. and it may lead to another thread... but are you one of those people that still believe that at one point in time all religions and governments were matriarchal? What old religion birthed Wicca? It bears almost no resemblance to any of the old religions I have studied.

No; not ALL religions were matriarchal; but many were. In addition, several others were shared.

WICCA; to my understanding, is a bastard child of several regional tribal practices of the Indo-European peoples, that have their root in the mid- to late stone age. There's conjecture as to whether or not the 'Neanderthals' who are now proven to have cohabitated with said peoples. (off the top of my head)

[Rev.Reverence]

Oops, wasted space...

[Rev.Reverence]

you know that little old council of Nicea sure has taken the blame for a whole lot of things these days....

male priests stopped being allowed to marry when "kin" started being able to claim property rights.....the church swept that little $$$ issue aside by making priests take vows of chastity that were neither biblical nor a part of the heritage that the whole Judeo Christian Catholic system sprang from. And that didint come from Nicea - it came from bean counters who recognized that it was all gettign expensive.

Also - I personally dont hold the Catholic church as "the" definitive source on church history as if all things center on Catholicism.....I think the best source for that hsitory comes from a study of "the way" as defined historically in early history after the death of Christ. I'd like to see some of that undeniable evidence your talking about - both within the catholic church and also from older sources if available.

another side note - that YHWH God that the Nicean council and all of Christianity seems to worship did INDEED elevate man above all other creation - the Nicean council did not change that either.

I would never want to take ANY source, for the "best" source for that, (saying 'best way') is one of the ways a seeker of knowledge can fall off thier 'path'.

I have personaly known many Holy men& women:

Wiccan, Universal Unitarian, Church of Universal Life, Roman-Catholic, Buddhist, O.E.S., E.G.C.,

Eastern-Orthodox (and they can get married, and read the teachings of Buddha.)

I know that you barely know me so I'll tell you now, I am cynical first, and paranoid second. I read on at least 3 points of view before I go deciding on what I should 'BELIEVE' in; then meditate.

Y=God the Father =fire

H=God the Mother =water

V=God the Son =air

H=God the Daughter =earth

some old Hebrew 'QBL'

"the way"= the universal way

Catholic= Universal= of, belonging to, or done, etc., BY ALL

Rev.R.-Some Years=Adelphos Malkalypse

(Ap-py-poly-logies, if Quoting myselfs is Confusing.)

So clearly, MY STATEMENT,

"NO GOD I'VE EVER KNOWN WOULD HOLD ONE CREATION ABOVE ANOTHER"

can be held as true, since MY studies, lead me to this belief, and the semantical form clearly indicates, I am stating My beleif. It is quite acceptable if you do not agree with me, for whatever reasons, just realize when you do.

Thank You.

PEACE BE.

[Rayne]

Speaking of women clergy, I just went to my best-friend's mothers ordination today.

[Rev.Reverence]

Speaking of women clergy, I just went to my best-friend's mothers ordination today.

YAEY!!!!!

What denomination?

[Rayne]

YAEY!!!!!

What denomination?

Presbetyrian (not sure on the spelling).

I had never really been to any type of service before. My mother was raised southern Baptist and my Dad was raised Presbetryrian ... they decided the best thing was to let us chose our own paths when we got old enough. Which neither of us kids really have. My oldest sister was raised Catholic (I believe) by her mother's family (she is my Dad's from his second marriage, she grew up with my father having no custody, found us at 16 and entered back into our lives ... been there ever since. She's really active to this day in her church. She's 9 year older than me.).

It was a long and incredible road for my best-friends mom to get to where she was yesterday ... so I went. She and my best-friend were very grateful I did.

[Rev.Reverence]

Presbetyrian (not sure on the spelling).

I had never really been to any type of service before. My mother was raised southern Baptist and my Dad was raised Presbetryrian ... they decided the best thing was to let us chose our own paths when we got old enough. Which neither of us kids really have. My oldest sister was raised Catholic (I believe) by her mother's family (she is my Dad's from his second marriage, she grew up with my father having no custody, found us at 16 and entered back into our lives ... been there ever since. She's really active to this day in her church. She's 9 year older than me.).

It was a long and incredible road for my best-friends mom to get to where she was yesterday ... so I went. She and my best-friend were very grateful I did.

Cool, thing like that; you've got to gather your community around you.