Sunday, June 05, 2005

Female Chauvinist

This is probably going to get me more hate mail than anything I have said or written in a long while. I have , after much consideration, come to the conclusion that women should not be ordained as clergy. At least not without some serious checking into their plan of action regarding what they intend to do with their families. Older women …fine as long as they have the support of their significant other (same goes for men) and women with no children … fine , women whose children are older, teenagers perhaps, would be ok as long as the woman in question could prove that her pursuit of ordination is not going to affect her children and family in a negative way. This would be largely irrelevant for women who were ordained before they had children , because they would be in a normal state of affairs for a working woman. ( I don’t agree with that either tho’) Unless you are a single mother and MUST work to support your children, you need to be at home with those children teaching them right from wrong. Why bother having children if you are simply going to farm them off on some daycare provider , who in the end is really the one raising your children. I am beyond disgusted with my church at this point because they applaud and praise these women at every turn for what really boils down to abandoning their children. Do these women really think that their children will be any happier with their mothers choices a few years from now than they are now ? Do they think their kids are going to simply forget that feeling of abandonment ? Chances are they are going to be holding a grudge against the church and possibly God himself for giving their mother a “calling” that she see as more important than her kids. Even the kids pick up on this, we were having one of those family conversations on our way home from church not long ago . We were discussing what each of had decided to give up or what discipline to adopt for the season of Lent . The conversation covered ourselves and those we knew from our church as well as some of our Catholic friends who practice Lenten devotions as well. After deciding that BigDaddy was giving up all forms of sodas , I, instead of giving up something took on the task of keeping a prayer journal, SpazBoy gave up chocolate and GirlyChild like her dad , gave up sodas . We covered the fact that the priest was giving up buying books during Lent (a MUCH bigger challenge than you would think ) as the good father is a major bibliophile, and I had one friend who was determined to overcome her major gossip habit during lent. As we continued down along the list of friends and acquaintances GirlyChild brings up the case of our friend PostulantWoman . GirlyChild sounds off from the depths of the depths of the minivan with “ I know what Mrs.xxxx (PostulantWoman) is giving up for Lent” . We were somewhat confused as PostulantWoman had stoped going to church with her own children in order to do an internship with another group of churches for her ordination process, so none of us had seen her in quite a while and had no idea when GirlyChild may have spoken to her. But never the less we said “ well , what would that be ?” GirlyChild simply answers back “HER FAMILY” . What exactly do you say to a statement like that ? We were at a loss, neither one of us really agree with what PostulantWoman is doing , (BigDaddy is more supportive than I am ) but didn’t want to say anything really negative to GirlyChild about her friends mom. ( I personally lost any respect for her long ago) If our kids are noticing these things from the outside what must her own kids kids be going through. The longer I watch these things affect families the less inclined I am to agree with ordination for women with children who are young enough to be hurt by it. The church will be around when your kids are older , please realize that your children are your FIRST and MOST IMPORTANT “calling” from God !!
Let the hate mail begin !!!

3 comments:

DBW said...

I think your post raises valid points-- and it also shows that the demmands placed on clergy are significant. In some ways Rome may have the right idea-- make them choose marriage and family OR the priesthood, but not both. That way you can give yourself over completely to whichever is your passion. Spreading onesself to thin doesn't make you great at anything.

Andrew said...

This is something I am dealing with personally. On the one hand, being raised Protestant, I can't imagine any theological argument being coherently made from the evangelicals to not allow women into the ministry.

Also, I am a big fan of women taking the lead in the social arena and succeeding in life, so that is also in my mind.

However, have you considered the philosophical argument about this? This is the argument that Anglo-Catholics, Roman Catholics and the Orthodox base their theological viewpoint on about the priesthood being male-only.

Basically it goes like this: ontologically, women have certain criteria which are created within them that make them women (physical criteria is the most visible--bearing children, different hormonal makeup, etc). This also includes the emotional, mental and spiritual criteria within women and men, also. This, I think, is what you've noticed and is why you wrote this article.

But consider the spiritual ontological make-up of men from the perspective of the Bible. God constantly calls men to be the spiritual leader of the house and the church. A look at the Old Testement "church," (Israelite priesthood--which the Church today is the New Covenant version of) will reveal the ontological nature of who a priest is.

Granted, this was not a drawn out well defended argument, but it was only meant as an introduction.

If you read this article (http://catholica.pontifications.net/?page_id=898), it will make alot more sense.

As an Evangelical myself, I dont consider ordination a sacrament, yet the philosophical differences between men and women cannot be denied. It is something I am working through myself.

Anonymous said...

Ha ha... wow. They should just build a wall across the Mason-Dixon line, then we'd all be a lot safer.