Wimmin Priests

Wimmin Priests November 19, 2007

A friend has sent me the following.

“The website of the Young Women Clergy Project claims to be “powered by faith, verve, chocolate, and really great shoes.” At the Beauty Tips for Ministers blog, a telling phenomenon in its own right, one finds discussions of clergy eyeliner, lingerie, and lip gloss. At ECUSA‘s site, we find suggestions for Thirty Ways to Celebrate Thirty Years of Women’s Ordained Ministry.”

Make of it what you will…

I’m not going to comment in case someone calls me a curmudgeon again.

UPDATE: Carl Olson comments here on some attempts at wimmin priests in the Catholic Church. A brief skim through shows that these folks don’t just want equality. They want to re-write Christianity from the ground up.

"Catholicism has always defined the ideal but there are no limits on God's mercy and ..."

Tony Palmer: Is There Salvation Outside ..."
"With all due respect, Shaun, are you relegating the actual Faith to whatever the local ..."

Notes on Tony Palmer’s Funeral
"There are good parking valets and bad parking valets. There are good housesitters and bad ..."

The Case for Conversion to Catholicism
"did you vote for Bush Fr Longenecker? would you have?"

Understanding Iraq

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • I don’t like it–I don’t like it at all! Men and men only are Priests!

  • Wait . . . young women priests?

  • Anonymous

    You…Curmudgeon again! 🙂 This is quite a heresy in the Anglican world I must say.Timotheus

  • Ha, cross-dressing is always amusing.

  • Anonymous

    Women should stay out of the pulpit. This comes from one who would be in the pulpit had God made her a man.

  • Jennifer

    Well, it is a pleasure to find a place where “young” means “under 40”. My grandfather would heartily agree, and I’m more than willing to be convinced ;-). (As for the rest, well, not much other common ground. Except maybe the chocolate.)

  • i’m having problems with nuns here with boyish/manly haircuts & no veils..no-one will answer me why..even some of the more orthodox sisters have abandoned the veil..a shame..Miles Jesu young consecrated women look beautiful in theirs..

  • blarg

    There is a strong relationship, I think, between gay marriage and women priests. They both seek something good in the wrong way, but do so by duplicating the thing itself. Regardless how much progress they make, what they copy is never quite the original. Simply because it is the nature of a man to be a man and the nature of a woman to be a woman; the sacraments are not fooled by impostors no matter how cleverly disguised.

  • “They want to re-write Christianity from the ground up.”Well, shoot. If that’s what they want, God has given them the Episcopal Church.

  • “There is a strong relationship, I think, between gay marriage and women priests.”I would go one step further & say there is a strong relationship, I think, between contraception,gay marriage and women priests.

  • Women priest are not all gay. Remember some men priest are gay. To make a general comment about the sexual make-up of women that want to be priests is so general and wrong. A church law can and has been changed. I do believe that women should be priests and I belive God would want it also.

  • Templar

    Margaret & Butch said… I do believe that women should be priests and I belive God would want it also.Really? Then why do you suppose Jesus selected 12 men as his apostoles and not half a dozen each men and women?

  • If you want “no rules” then become an Episcopalian. If you have a map but cannot understand it because there are no directions, likely you are already an Episcopalian. This really is not about gender, it’s about being so selfish that you do anything to have your way. I cannot say that I have missed feminine priests since becoming a Catholic. I can say I have been ministered to by spiritual people of both genders in both churches.

  • Margaret & Butch,I don’t think the original comment was meant to suggest that all those who support women’s ordination have homosexual inclinations. I think what was meant was that the argument for ordaining women fails because it assumes an incorrect understanding (according to Scripture and Tradition) of what human sexuality is for, and that his is precisely the same reason that the argument for gay marriage and for contraception fails.

  • Anonymous

    In response to Templar’s response to Margaret & Butch:If you want to use the apostles’ PHYSICAL (rather than spiritual) natures as a basis for who should and should not become priests, perhaps no Gentiles need apply. After all, Jesus’ apostles were all Jews. There’s plenty of fear inherent in such widespread resistance to allowing devout people of both sexes becoming priests. One of my friends from high school and college is on the road to the priesthood in the Episcopal church. She’ll be a fine priest. No need to fear her or her peers. No need to assign the most base motives to people who wish to serve God (and are fully capable of serving God) in that capacity. The Catholic church will have women priests within the next 200 years, possibly within the next 50. And God will be served and honored through their ministry.Steve

  • tony

    I do not think it is a matter of whether women can handle the job per se, but rather the question is what is woman and what is man. There is a distinction between a person and their nature: a person is the doer, but the nature permits the doing. A man cannot breathe underwater because this belongs to the fish nature, nor can he fly because this belongs to the bird nature. God has one nature yet three persons. In the Nicene Creed Catholic’s say, “…He was born of the Virgin Mary and became man.” Part of Jesus’ dual nature is that He is God and man. For the same reason a man cannot conceive, a women cannot be a Catholic priest. This is an argument about natures rather than, as Fr. Longenecker put it, no skirts in the club.

  • tony

    Steve,This is Divine Revelation not public opinion, much less, public opinion about Divine Revelation. When the Church says woman cannot be priests, we listen because we are disciples. This is not the opportunity to petition the Church as if she’s casting around for ingredients on her theology.

  • Jeron

    All very good comments. Father, that picture you used for this post just creeps me out. There’s something so intrinsically wrong with it. “Identity theft” is right.

  • Anonymous

    I see nothing “young” and very little “womanly” about any of the subjects in this photo.

  • Templar

    Steve said:If you want to use the apostles’ PHYSICAL (rather than spiritual) natures as a basis for who should and should not become priests, perhaps no Gentiles need apply. After all, Jesus’ apostles were all Jews.Actually, they stopped being “Jewish” in the religious sense the second they accepted that Jesus was The Christ. The Catholic Church will have recognized (by the Vatican) woman ordinations in it when hell freezes over. If you think otherwise you must not be Catholic.

  • Templar: Good point, I think Steve really needs to bone up on his Pauline theology regarding Jewishness.

  • A Priest represents the person of Christ. When God formed Himself into human form–He made Himself into a man. Our Church has NEVER changed doctrine–because the Catholic Church has the Holy Spirit to always guide us to Truth! How steve thinks Holy Mother Church will now change to support his view–wrong! Truth is the same, yesterday, today, and forever!Sorry Steve–your not God.

  • God chose men to be priests from the time of Adam; to be Father and Bridegroom. Christ being the Second Adam made it clear He was the Bridegroom-so how do women or wymin for that matter become fathers and bridegrooms?No graphic replies please!

  • Anonymous

    Tara: I don’t think I’m God. I’m just making a prediction, that’s all — not pronouncing what God must do (which would be sacrilege, blasphemy, and just a plain old really BAD idea). Templar & Judge: You refer to the apostles losing their “‘Jewishness’ in a religious sense” once they recognized Christ as the savior. You’re refering to their spiritual, rather than physical, identity. In defending the ability of women to serve as priests, I’m questioning whether an individual’s PHYSICAL state (their biology) is more important than their spiritual state. So your reference to the apostles’ “religious” identity seems to acknowledge that the physical traits are not so important after all. I see this as a point for my argument.On a slightly different topic that you’ve raised, it’s arguable, at best, to envision the apostles’ religious or spiritual identity as changing (on a dime, as it were) from “Jewish” to “Christian” once they recognized Christ as the savior. Christianity is an outgrowth of Judaism; JP2, among others, have recognized this, as did St. Paul (who pointed to dozens of Old Testament verses to show that Jesus was the fulfillment of OT hopes). It’s easy for us to think of people converting from one faith to another today, but in Christ’s day, it’s much more likely that Christ’s followers understood that they were continuing along the road of God’s covenant that had first been set forth in what we today call the Old Testament. (The OT wasn’t the “OT” for them, obviously; they simply refered to that body of texts as Scripture. They were not rejecting Judaism outright, but taking it to what they saw as the next natural step: God’s mercy and love and grace triumphing over salvation through strict adherence to the law.)Peace.Steve

  • They get points for panache! Such stylish colors, I daresay they are well chosen to compliment lipsticks… But, Anglicans on the other side, do get used to it. But don’t take my word for it. For grins & giggles go to http://www.google.com type in “Episcopal priest” and do an image search. From there, report back how many photos are of men.Where orthodoxy is optional, it will eventually be outlawed. CofE behold thy future – a largely divorced, older, female, gay and lesbian clergy…