| 08/10/08 04:30 PM |
#357
|
|
Elmer Dante
Hello all...
Bill and Faith:
What a fascinating issue you both brought up. Keep in mind that no contemporary theologian that wants to maintain any sort of respect in academic circles would support the postion that woman should not be ordained to the sacred order of priesthood.
However, the complexity of the issue is often been overlooked. Because the R.C. Church embraced the scholastic theology of St. Thomas Acquinas (one of the greatest theologicans who ever lived), the Church inherited the ideas of Aristotle (whose writings were synthecised with the teachings of the Church). Throughout his writings, St. Thomas refers to Aristotle as simply 'the Philosopher. Aristotle did not believe that woman were fully human. He thought that woman were deformed-men. Unfortunately, the reverberations of these historically-conditioned ideas are still felt today.
These Greek ideas mingled with Jewish ideas of ritual cleanliness. That is to say, in Orthodox Judaism, a menstrating woman is considered ritually unclean. Therefore, how could a woman preside at Holy Communion? Even today, many Eastern Orthodox women will not take Holy Communion when they are menstrating (this is not part of the great Tradition of the Church but has survived to this day as a folk practice).
In folk belief, this idea that women should not enter the altar area sometimes borders on the absurd. I remember as an altar boy in a Greek Orthodox Church (I was Orthodox before becoming an Episcopalian) that the priest brought an infact girl beyond the altar screen (when the mother was being churched) and the grandmother fainted. The priest felt is was acceptable; however, the grandmother knew better???
There is, however, hope. The former Pope, H.H. John Paul II, was not a Thomistic theologian. Despite the fact that he was a Phenomenologist, he was opposed to female ordination. Obviously, his arguments against female ordination were based upon the precedents of tradition and scripture (we Anglicans were able to move beyond this phase of the argument because our arguments are based equally upon the precedents of tradition, scripture and reason). In other words, reason prevailed because we were able to conclude that women are, indeed, human and that the fact that they were not previously ordained (at least not since the triumph of one form of Christianity) was a circumstance ordained by historical circumstances, not God.
Although I love a good mystery, Dan Brown has done nothing to clairfy the issue. Unfortunately, I often hear people referring to The DaVinci Code. The sad thing about Brown's book is that after having read it, I am certain that he hadn't read a so-called Gnostic Gospel and that he took great liberties with history.
I do believe, however, that St. Mary Magdallen was as important as the male disciples of Jesus. He really did have more that twelve disciples. The significance of the number twelve in the Gospels was to indicate that Jesus ushered in a new Isreal. In the Eastern Church she is still referred to as "the Equal to the Apostles." Undoubtedly she presided at the Eucharist.
Keep in mind that early Christianity was very diverse and my previous paragraphs really do justice to that diversity.
I think that the issue of female ordination can be favorably resolved when the official theologians of the Vatican consider other facets of the tradition: the significance of Our Lady in sacred tradition and the tradition of emergency baptisms (a sacramental action that can be perfomed by laymen as well as laywomen). In particular, the fact that an emergency baptism can be performed by a woman is the clearest indication that women can, indeed, administer sacraments (particulary since Holy Baptism is, with the Holy Eucharist, the most important of the sacraments).
Unfortunately (or fortunately) we are living in what might be termed an axial age. Old institutions are dying and new institutions are being created. Politicians and fundamentalists play upon the anxieties of this age. For example, during the last election, gay marriage was one of the hottly debated issues. Now that it (or civil union) has been legalized in several states (and heterosexual marriage has not come to a screeching halt, as a result), the focus is certain to be on some other, but similar, issue. Similarly, there are many within the Church who fear such change because they perceive it as a break with Holy Tradition.
Rich,
When I would stay at the Marx, I usually went to Armory Square for dinner. Pasquales was my bosses favorite--he and I spent a lot of time eating and, well, more time drinking there.
I also spent a week at Suburban's Courtland location performing a SOX audit.
The next time I'm up there I'll send you an e-mail.
Lisa,
I'm not going to Wales until September. I'll let you know how it goes. It's a small group (about 8 of us). We're staying in a haunted hotel. I'll let you know if I run into a ghost.
I'm really into ghost stories as a result of family vacations in Haiti (my father loved to gamble in the casinos) when I was young and because my brother and I inherited a house that had some strange occurances.
Glenda,
Mead is honey wine. You can usually get it here at Ethiopian Restaurants (I know. I've heard all the jokes; however, Ethiopian food is great.) It is also still produced in Cornwall in the U.K.
Kevin,
I certainly agree with you that people have strange attitudes toward the body.
One of my theology professors did a seminar on "hooking up" at Fordham (just before she was asked to leave as a result of being too post-modern). The consensus was that young people (dispite the New Age movement, etc.) feel disconnected from their bodies and that they view their bodies as "plastic parts."
I think that any text that attempts to disuss or advise on human sexuality must be regarded as suspect (including religious texts). Because sexuality is so psychologically charged, when we talk about it, we convey more about ourselves that about it (i.e., sexuality).
I think that ideas of the body have been impacted as much by religion as by science. In the modern era, we saw ourselves as minds inhabiting bodies. In popular culture this manifested itself in such television shows as 'Lost in Space' (a Robot with feelings) and in The 'Six Million Dollar Man' (what is the body?).
If often think back to the Medieval woman mystics who expressed their piety through their bodies (i.e., bodies that bled the wounds of the stigmata and bodies that lived on the host alone). To these woman, who had no power in either Church or society, their bodies became a source of power.
This particular society sends mixed messages regarding sexuality to children. Hooters and Playboy turn women into commodites. And, yes, I know these women are "consenting adults." But are they really? Is this informed consent? How many wealthy young women would work at Hooters or pose nude in Playboy? (Paris Hilton aside; I'm talking about young women with a modicum of intelligence.) Often, these "choices" are made because of economic inequities. In theology we call this the "economics of human frailty)."
There was a seminal feminist article written in the 1960s that indicated that as Christians we have no right to ask women to be humble. I agree with this, society has done enough to humiliate women (objectifying them and not providing equal pay for equal work). There is a difference between asking a corporate executive to be humble and asking a single mother on welfare to be humble--I'm not so certain that clergy are alway sensitive to this (which is one of the reasons I believe that clergy should have as much schooling in psychology as in theology).
At any rate, I certainly agree with your thoughts on the human body.
Warm regards to all,
Elmer
|
|
