tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post8548315297656220965..comments2023-12-17T16:13:06.670-05:00Comments on In a Godward direction: Monstruous Regiment RedivivusTobias Stanislas Haller BSGhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08047429477181560685noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-68993546554181963672012-01-27T10:08:34.324-05:002012-01-27T10:08:34.324-05:00The Archbishops seem unable to distinguish between...The Archbishops seem unable to distinguish between compromise and abdication; also that you cannot compromise on basic structures of authority itself: one part of the body cannot say to another, I have no need of you -- or I don't recognize you as part of the body. It's the same problem with the Ang Cov. You can't have a double standard on elements essential to the very being of the institution -- which the episcopate is in an episcopal church.Tobias Stanislas Haller BSGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08047429477181560685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-66808933629158164082012-01-26T21:22:34.051-05:002012-01-26T21:22:34.051-05:00When I read Andrew Brown's article and the for...When I read Andrew Brown's article and the foreword to 'The Illustrative Daft Code of Practice' (Oops!) by the two archbishops, Canterbury and York, I thought of a house divided, too. Their scheme makes no sense. They'll twist themselves like pretzels and still not achieve the desired results.June Butlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01723016934182800437noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-53896531420464982302012-01-25T14:49:42.892-05:002012-01-25T14:49:42.892-05:00Thanks again. I look forward to listening to the t...Thanks again. I look forward to listening to the talk. I took a look at the "handout" and found the final quotes from Maximus most interesting along those lines...Tobias Stanislas Haller BSGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08047429477181560685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-4859347656074918732012-01-25T14:35:10.841-05:002012-01-25T14:35:10.841-05:00In a word, yes. And that's exactly what Behr g...In a word, yes. And that's exactly what Behr gets at. (I had to limit my summary...) For him, the relationship between the sexes is a kind of "educational provision" leading to the true humanity, which is accomplished in Christ's <i>fiat</i> in Gethsemane.Jessehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17809446580681184264noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-56010566317415457982012-01-25T14:02:57.886-05:002012-01-25T14:02:57.886-05:00Thanks, Jesse, for pointing me to this. I look for...Thanks, Jesse, for pointing me to this. I look forward to listening to it later this week. <br /><br />One issue that strikes me, however, is the extent to which the Incarnation effectively "undoes" (rather than recapitulating or completing) the Genesis beginning. Thus, Mary's "fiat" is not made to a male person -- a human husband -- but to the Divine who is beyond such categories. And Jesus' self-offering is similarly not to a "woman" but to the Church -- which while it may be personified as female, is not female in any bodily sense. This all begins to sound a bit too much like <i>hieros gamos</i> rather than Christian anthropology, which must, I think, take its starting point in Christ as "True Man" in his individuality-in-relationship with all others, not just those of a surmised "opposite" sex!Tobias Stanislas Haller BSGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08047429477181560685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-71672965285263894852012-01-25T13:54:25.884-05:002012-01-25T13:54:25.884-05:00I think you're quite right, Tobias, that the q...I think you're quite right, Tobias, that the question of women's ordination is fundamentally about anthropology. I've just listened to a fascinating lecture by the Eastern Orthodox priest and theologian John Behr (audiio here: http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/svsvoices/women_disciples_of_the_lord_part_one handout here: http://www.svots.edu/sites/default/files/male_and_female_quotes_2011.pdf) in which he says that just as Christology was the defining question for the early Church, anthropology is the defining question for the 21st-century Church (and as he observes, the two questions are intimately linked). <br /><br />His conclusions are very interesting indeed. He argues that sexual difference functions as a kind of "education" for humanity: our sexual attraction to, and desire for, another leads us to the sacrificial self-offering without which it is impossible to become a true human being, i.e. reaching a point of being able to say "Be it unto me according to thy word" (completing the divine <i>fiat</i> that is conspicuously absent from the creation of human beings in Genesis). <br /><br />Lecturing, as he was, to an Orthodox seminary audience, he didn't make explicit the obvious corollary that could be drawn from his remarks, namely that human sexual differentiation, while not "merely biological", is primarily a pointer to the true nature of human existence and relationships, not a divinely instituted <i>limitation</i> on existence and relationships.<br /><br />I see that some have attacked this lecture for sounding like it was given by an Episcopalian :)Jessehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17809446580681184264noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-63273043435848698732012-01-25T09:57:07.286-05:002012-01-25T09:57:07.286-05:00Thanks all. Christopher, Mr Knox had to contend wi...Thanks all. Christopher, Mr Knox had to contend with the first Elizabeth, and doubt he'd fare any better under the second...<br /><br />David, naughty. But, yes.<br /><br />JCF, I have no problem with those who wish to maintain a view that women cannot be ordained, though I think their position rests on fundamentally shakey premises and a defective anthropology. The problem is one of church polity, though -- once a church makes a decision concerning who may be ordained, which is in part a decision about specific office and authority (or at the least, faculty), it becomes a sort of autoimmune ailment to continue to maintain opposition to a central element of the structure <i>within the structure.</i> It is more, not less, problematical than holding diverging opinions on the nature of the Eucharist, in part because it isn't at a high theological level, but about the day to day working of the church. Imagine a business where employees were free to disregard their supervisors. (supervisor = episkopos, literally...). If it is impossible for one to accept the discipline of a body to which one belongs, then by all means one should sever ones relationship with it. Worst case: what would happen if the Archbishop of Canterbury or York were a woman? And how do they reconcile all of this with the incumbent Supreme Governor, as Christopher so helpfully notes?Tobias Stanislas Haller BSGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08047429477181560685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-29465204851541501262012-01-25T02:33:23.799-05:002012-01-25T02:33:23.799-05:00simultaneously arguing on one hand that gays can&#...<i>simultaneously arguing on one hand that gays can't be bishops because they can not serve as a focus for unity, and on the other hand that a scheme should be enforced whereby women ought to serve in precisely</i><br /><br />Touche', Tobias!<br /><br />Of course, the Romanizing view would avoid the above hypocrisy, by denying the latter clause's possibility to exist. [If only those demanding bishops-who-are-women-not-be-bishops <i>would</i> Romanize. There's the door to the Ordinariate. <i>Vaya con Dios!</i>]JCFnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-77794175060777018242012-01-24T23:44:00.870-05:002012-01-24T23:44:00.870-05:00There are just so many folks in the whole realm of...There are just so many folks in the whole realm of creation who suffer cranial rectal inversions! It is sad.<br /><br />http://edge.ebaumsworld.com/picture/blacksheep101/headupass.jpgBrother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-19262355601112882912012-01-24T22:34:51.681-05:002012-01-24T22:34:51.681-05:00And not just any female monarch but the Supreme Go...And not just any female monarch but the Supreme Governor of th Church of England.Christopherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17176482447120453890noreply@blogger.com