Men of the church

National Post - Canada ^ | Saturday, February 24, 2007 | Barbara Kay

[Jim Noble]

Permission for all of these innovations was demanded of the Vatican virtually at gunpoint by American bishops, for reasons that escape me.

The more you learn about who those bishops are (or were), the easier it is to understand.

[GMMAC]

"... sissified liturgy, sissified paslms, and sissified hymns ... feminazi-inspired deletions of "he" and "Father"... feminazis of both sexes, "gays", lesbians, and those who don't know any better ..."

"jah, nein mit das uber-frau krap und ein
homosexueller und ein Nazis und
der zeolological dumphkophen!
C'mon over, das veligion's varm!"

[MHGinTN]

I taught Bible Study (like a Southern Baptist Bible-monger) in an Episcopal Church in the eighties ... the men filled the seats every Sunday. Our Priest was a God-fearing man who rode a motorcycle and prayed like he was speaking with his Boss. Things changed rapidly, didn't they!

[kellynch]

I am a woman who is a layreader at a rather traditional Anglican church. Why do you have a problem with women reading the lessons?

This does not mean I approve of the "feminization" of our society. As I mentioned in a post in another thread, the matriarchy is responsible for the increase in teen pregnancy, fatherless gang members run amok and the welfare state. I am perfectly content to live in a patriarchy, but I don't see anything wrong with women reading from Scripture.

[Nihil Obstat]

viva il papa! (that's great)

[Huber]

Very rapidly!

[Zippo44]

Hear, hear! My wife is a Lay Eucharistic Minister at our Episcopal Church, which is led by a female priest. I have no problem with female participation or leadership in the Eucharist at all.

However, I do have a deeply and sincerely held belief that consecrating an abomination as bishop and having a Presiding Bishop who questions Christ's divinity is not the proper approach to leading a Christian denomination. I don't understand why they have to screw up everyone's religion. If they want to be Hi Church Unitarians, well then, go buy vestments and incense and joint the nearest Unitarian coven and leave us Episcopalians to worship the Lord Christ.

[kellynch]

Excellent idea. The new Presiding Bishop is beyond a druid. She is a heretic, plain and simple. And it's not just women. Bishop Spong and men of his ilk are heretics also.

[redgolum]

What is funny, is that the same thing is happening in higher education. More and more boys are not going to a university to learn how evil and bad they are. Which, since women rarely marry below their educational level, means that there will be less marriages among college educated women.

As to the expulsion (and that is what it is) of men from the Church, that is something which has been happening for a long time. It isn't that believing in God is unmanly, but that it has become in most denominations strictly feminine.

[GMMAC]

"I am a woman who is a layreader at a rather traditional Anglican church. Why do you have a problem with women reading the lessons? "

With all due respect - especially since we've always enjoyed an exceptionally FRiendly relationship on FR - seemingly that's a somewhat disingenuous statement which at least borders on the sin of omission.

As a former Anglican covert to Catholicism, I'm more than a little familiar with both the routine practices of Lay Readers & the Canon Law governing same:
As one, you're licensed by the Bishop of your Diocese to both conduct non-Communuion Services (e.g. Matins) & to preach at same which is considerable a bit more than merely "reading the lessons".

Not in any way directed at you personally but, back in my Anglican days I saw more than one Parish hijacked by leftist apostates who literally stood in line to obtain such designations as the most effective means of imposing their personal agendas. There's a huge difference between just reading the Lessons & acting as a Priest in more or less all but name. Other than not being permitted to conduct funerals, Lay Readers are essentially Deacons.

[Tribemike]

I have a big problem with women taking the lead in worship...Paul says women should be silent in the church.

Get over it....

[wai-ming]

Paul says women should be silent in the church.

Easy for him to say. Paul wasn't married.

[beelzepug]

Sorry. Every dam that bursts starts to fail with one small leak. I'm a co-founder of a continuing Anglican parish who left the Episcopal church after 57 years - my whole life, in other words. From altar girls to women in the deaconate, from feminists as priests and bishops, to the disposal of our Prayer Book and the ordinations of who knows how many Gene Robinsons, you simply cannot say, this far and no further. Once it starts, you're doomed.
Women can be perfectly good lay readers, chalice bearers, maybe even priests. Never the less, those jobs were not given to them. Who are we to question? There are many important jobs in the church the women do that are vital. Accept the responsibilities God has given you and be grateful.

[Tribemike]

So what? and you were never an apostle either :-P

[kellynch]

But did Christ himself say that? He seems to have appreciated the talents of women more than Paul did.

Some men also take Paul's words to say that women should be silent everywhere. That we shouldn't be doctors or lawyers or professors or whatever. God gave us brains too, and it seems to me that we should not waste that gift.

[SamuraiScot]

Why do you have a problem with women reading the lessons? This does not mean I approve of the "feminization" of our society.

You obviously understand the problem. I'm suggesting what I think of as obvious: Women reading the lessons is an example of the feminization of our society. Not that I think there are bad intentions involved in the readers themselves. I also know many altar girls who are devout and good. They are just young girls who want to do something for God, and that's all they are offered—since no one asks them to visit the sick or make clothes for newborn babies at pregnancy centers, or a hundred other things, many of which the world despises, but which are more powerful and important than many more visible services.

These girls are being cheated. Sending them down the "priest" track of altar service not only leads to a dead end, it thwarts their understanding of the power of womanhood. (There is a whole world to be explored here.)

Why not have women read the Lesson or Epistle? Heck, why not the Gospel, too? It doesn't sound powerful, no matter how good a reader you are, and I'll bet you're good. It's intended to be the voice of God, and God is male, with no apologies. Our bodies are part of our faith, and when we hear a woman's voice, we don't hear "God." We might hear "saint," but not God.

The ancients understood this. The modernists understand it, too. Their goal is to cast down God, because they have a father problem. That's why they look for ways to de-throne patriarchy. Masculinity makes them afraid and resentful, and they try to undermine male authority and maleness itself, wherever they see or hear it.

Again, this has nothing to do with your personal actions, which I'm sure are good. The problem is that the liturgy belongs to God, and is not an equal-rights proposition. We listen with our bodies as well as our minds, and it's proper that Mass be magisterial and impressive. If it falters as a performance presented to all our senses, it eats away at the faith of the hearers, especially those whose faith is less strong than yours.

[kellynch]

One of the reasons that women converted to Christianity in those early days is that Christ treated women better than the Jews did. Paul didn't seem to like women very much, but Christ sure seemed to.

[SamuraiScot]

Paul didn't seem to like women very much, but Christ sure seemed to.

I'm not sure where you're going with that. Are you suggesting that St. Paul the Apostle's sections of the New Testament are not divinely inspired? You have some editing suggestions? Psychological advice? I don't want to be unfair, but if you have a problem with St. Paul, you have a problem with Christ.

I think it's a mistake to try to sit in judgement on the apostles, even the "least" of them. As far as wisdom and sanity go, they are our teachers; they had advantages, to put it mildly, that we lack.

[GourmetDan]

The reason that women are not to assume positions of leadership in the church is that the woman represents humanity and the man represents God.

Women are easier to deceive than men, they are more lenient and will approve things that men will not just as 'there is a way that seems right to a man, but leads only to death'.

Women in leadership is the natural manifestation of the spiritual reality of humanity taking control of worship and becoming its own God. Why does feminism, homosexuality, abortion, promiscuity, divorce, etc follow female leadership? Because women represent humanity sitting in judgment on the commandments of God and bringing humanism into the church.

What else does the woman on the beast in Revelation represent?

[polymuser]

Perhaps because many vocal bishops, without necessarily understanding what they're doing, hate and fear families headed by men.

Bullseye.