Women in the Priesthood

[Jason]

This is another question for the ACC regarding Women in the Diaconate and Priesthood. Is it allowed? Has it even been discussed? Do we have any idea whether the early Arian Bishops allowed it in their respective dioceses?

I am aware that women were prohibited from the Diaconate and Priesthood by the Council of Laodacia in 364. http://www.ccel.org/fathers/NPNF2-14/2ancyra/Laocn11.htm

And though there were sporadic women ordained after that period, it was greatly diminished thereafter. So where does the ACC stand today?

[David Kone]

If the standard of conduct of those women in the early church caused them to be removed from the consideration of appointment to office then considering the conduct of many men who were found in all positions, including the most high office of church Father, no one should ever be appointed to such positions. The Synod of Laodicea accuses them of “…using improperly that which was proper, either through their arrogancy or through their base self-seeking…” and states that they “…misused their office for purposes of pride, or money-making, bribery…” Compared to the murder, deception, and the false teaching that became prevalent in the church these lapses seem minor and in no manner warrant the baring of an entire class of church members on the misdeeds of a few.

It is hard to take any decision coming out of the Synod of Laodicea seriously. Among their other decisions they were forbidden to rest on the Sabbath least they become judaisers (Cannon XXIX). Cannon XXXVI forbids priests and clergy to be mathematicians. Cannon XXXVII forbids eating with Jews or food from their celebrations. The unleavened bread of the Jews is so scary it required a separate Cannon XXXVIII to make sure no one gets judaised.

The later Council in Trullo does clearly stated that women may be ordained deaconess at age forty. This is probably because they would be considered to be past child bearing age. Considering the harshness of ancient life they were probably also entering into menopause by that age. This was of serious concern to the ancients as the issuance of blood was considered as unclean. One might ponder that if a male could become a deacon at age twenty five then a priest by thirty then perhaps a woman could become a priestess by forty five.

Maybe considering the persecution of the members of the early church there was a reluctance to assign official duties to anyone, as it may have been a certain death sentence. We are left still with the stories of many courageous women of the early church who deserve our full respect and admiration. Women were certainly in the majority back then as they flocked to the church. The pius St.Arius had a great following of women. Our Lord and Savior was accompanied to the altar of extreme sacrifice by the women who loved him while his male followers hid themselves. It is very odd then that the Synod of Laodicea Canon XLIV forbids women to go to the altar. Among those women who followed him to the bitter crisis was the one to whom he showed himself to first after he rose again. Mary Magdalene was then given the mission by our risen Lord to inform the others. It was she who later was to be called the apostle to the apostles.

Just some thoughts,
David

[Jason]

Great thoughts there David.

[Dean]

Hi Jason,

There is an article on the Church's view on the ordination of women on the web site at:- http://arian-catholic.org/arian/sacramental_lore.html#ordination_women

I would be keen to join in a debate on the subject and I hope Katie will join in when she comes home from University for the Christmas break!!??

I am of the view that Mary Magdalene was a junior Apostle in the Apostles' eyes but Jesus afforded her a great honour and apostolic duty which she carried out, and it was only due to the cultural stigma against women at the time that she wasn't more senior and that the early Church did not write more about the role of women in their lives or ordain women any higher than Deaconesses (servants!)! :vbgrin:

God Bless.

[Danage]

Jesus/Yeshuah was very controversial for his time. As it is, the ordination of women caused a split within the Church of England (now the Church of England accepts ordination of women, while the break away sect, tyhe Anglican Catholic Church, says not to this radical rule). Personally I see nothing wrong with the ordination of women, for we live in a fair society. The Roman Catholics' ban on women priests is unfair and sexit, and so I do not agree with this.

[brotherkev]

Well I will take the Fundamentalist view then

<DIR>1Ti 2:9 In like maner also, that women adorne themselues in modest apparell, with shamefastnesse and sobrietie, not with broided haire, or gold, or pearles, or costly aray,
1Ti 2:10 But (which becommeth women professing godlines) with good works.
1Ti 2:11 Let the woman learne in silence with all subiection:
1Ti 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to vsurpe authoritie ouer the man, but to be in silence.
1Ti 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eue:
1Ti 2:14 And Adam was not deceiued, but the woman being deceiued was in the transgression:
1Ti 2:15 Notwithstanding she shall be saued in child-bearing, if they continue in faith and charitie, and holinesse, with sobrietie.

Chapter 3 deals with the Office of Bishop and Deacon.. both of which deal with ONLY MEN.

<DIR>1Ti 3:1 This is a true saying: If a man desire the office of a Bishop, he desireth a good worke.
1Ti 3:2 A Bishop then must be blamelesse, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behauiour, giuen to hospitalitie, apt to teach;
1Ti 3:3 Not giuen to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre, but patient, not a brawler, not couetous;
1Ti 3:4 One that ruleth well his owne house, hauing his children in subiection with all grauitie.
1Ti 3:5 (For if a man know not how to rule his owne house, how shall he take care of the Church of God?)
1Ti 3:6 Not a nouice, lest being lifted vp with pride, hee fall into the condemnation of the deuill.
1Ti 3:7 Moreouer, hee must haue a good report of them which are without, lest he fall into reproch, and the snare of the deuill.
1Ti 3:8 Likewise must the Deacons bee graue, not double tongued, not giuen to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre,
1Ti 3:9 Holding the mysterie of the faith in a pure conscience.
1Ti 3:10 And let these also first be proued; then let them vse the office of a Deacon, being found blamelesse.
1Ti 3:11 Euen so must their wiues be graue; not slanderers, sober, faithfull in all things.
1Ti 3:12 Let the Deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children, and their owne houses well.
1Ti 3:13 For they that haue vsed the office of a Deacon well, purchase to themselues a good degree, and great boldnesse in the faith, which is in Christ Iesus.

And here is the position of Elder and once again, Bishop.. And sure enough for MEN ONLY.

<DIR>Tit 1:5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordaine Elders in euery citie, as I had appointed thee.
Tit 1:6 If any be blamelesse, the husband of one wife, hauing faithfull children, not accused of riot, or vnruly.
Tit 1:7 For a Bishop must be blameles, as the steward of God: not selfewilled, not soone angry, not giuen to wine, no striker, not giuen to filthie lucre,
Tit 1:8 But a louer of hospitality, a louer of good men, sober, iust, holy, temperate,
Tit 1:9 Holding fast the faithfull word, as hee hath beene taught, that he may bee able by sound doctrine, both to exhort and to conuince the gainsayers.

Therefore, from what I see in Genesis 1-2, 1 Timothy 2, and Titus 1, the normal and proper person to hold the office of elder/pastor is to be a man. God's word clearly tells us that the elder is to be the husband of one wife. A woman cannot qualify for this position by virtue of her being female. Whether anyone likes it or not is irrelevant to the fact that this is what the Bible teaches.
</DIR></DIR></DIR>

[Matt2817]

Grace and peace be with you all!

I appreciate this thread and hope that my succint reply may revive it to some degree.

brotherkev,

My thanks to you for illustrating (with an original 1611?) wording the chapters and versus giving the patriarcal "traditional" understanding of who may be(come) a presbyter or episcopal overseer.

We are in agreement upon the foundations. Albeit, what I have struggled with over the years is the socio-progression of human rights.

Is there a difference today between owning slaves and not owning slaves?
Indeed! Slavery has been abolished...but remains a biblical option. How can this be? Are we more 'enlightened' than our first century brethren?

Again, discrimination based upon nationality, gender, age, military service status, religion, sexual orientation, and here in the US (Michigan) height and weight are declared illegal for those businesses seeking to hire job applicants.

If I may use Deborah, the Judge of Israel, as a precedent; did YHVH discriminate in regards to having a woman be god=elohim to His people? Simply stated, no.

Did the authors of those Wisdom Psalms, Proverbs, Job, and Isaiah all have in mind by inspiration something of the Sophia; the feminine? I answer in the affirmative.

Pehaps the most persuasive agrument from Sripture is this:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus (Gal. 3:28)

Where do we draw our doctrinal imperatives? I remain with as many questions on this topic as I have answers. You have provided Biblical support for the "traditional" view, and hopefully, I have provided Biblical support for the minority opinion. Our proof texts seemingly balance.

Yet, truth be told, I hold to your assertions. This is on account of my being male, or because of cultural impressions, or more readily, because throughout the NT women were never recorded as being elevated to the office of priest or bishop. These reasons alone are sufficient to me.

In blessing, bless

Wayne Matthew

[LeviathanNI]

This should be an interesting debate, and hopefully we can have a woman's imput.. a debate between men, regarding the role of women past and present (and future), seems a bit.. lopsided.

Personally I have no problem with a woman becoming ordained, but I do feel that ingrained sexism sometimes.. a victim of 70's and 80's society:D

I have a woman doctor, a woman lawyer, a woman 2IC.. all more capable (imo) than their predecessors.

Looking forward to this one.. :p

BTW, if we all agree in regards to a womans place in the church, I think I'll play devils advocate:twisted:

[Danage]

I agree that in some cases women can be better in their jobs than their male counterparts, including the ones that men traditionally did better. A lot of male chefs have cropped up in recent years, therefore women and men can take on may roles that were almost (if not completely) for their specific gender.

[Postulare42]

Men have been the finest head chefs for centuries. I think you must have meant that women have begun to fill that role, recently.

Grown men in almost every culture don't like taking orders from their mommies. I think it's hormonal/status/cultural ego, stuff.

Personally, I've known too many "ministers", "priests" so obviously NOT called by God, that it's obviously time to admit that it's just a job, like any other, secular, "profession". :reveek:

Anybody can be an elder . . . if they live long enough.;)

Now, a "prophet" has points in it's favor . . . You can stone them if they prove to be incompetants or liars. :jlol:

I enjoy Lapidary.

[LeviathanNI]

Men have been the finest head chefs for centuries. I think you must have meant that women have begun to fill that role, recently.

Grown men in almost every culture don't like taking orders from their mommies. I think it's hormonal/status/cultural ego, stuff.

Personally, I've known too many "ministers", "priests" so obviously NOT called by God, that it's obviously time to admit that it's just a job, like any other, secular, "profession". :reveek:

Anybody can be an elder . . . if they live long enough.;)

Now, a "prophet" has points in it's favor . . . You can stone them if they prove to be incompetants or liars. :jlol:

I enjoy Lapidary.


Ah.. you have discovered the weakness of the Ulsterman.. listening to his Ma too much, and alcohol. God obviously never wanted us to take over the world, just spread our seed :D

Seriously though, it is very much a recent thing that women have started to a)challenge, and b)do and c)become accepted. I see it in the military all the time, and the world is still very much a man's world. I used to try to think up excuses as to why a woman couldn't do a job, but have been proven wrong too many times, now I just want the best person for the job, and don't care what sex they are. Within reason.

Co incidently, I see the homosexual Bishop Gene Robinson has not been invited to Lambeth Conference.. not saying the two are exactly the same, but the two situations certinaly share a lot of the same traits in their situation.

[Postulare42]

What they share in common is their exclusion by reason of what they were born to be. In their favor, women have never been listed among those who "...shall never enter the kingdom..." for being women.

Exclusivity is among the first things we exercise when we begin to socialise in early childhood groups. It is a social extension of all sentient life's capacity to distinguish one thing from another, coupled with our ablity to choose rather than merely react.

Such choices, extended to the pack consciousness of the children involved, to the degree that they are choices rather than reactions to the pack, are characterologically self-defining in the individuals. One of the earliest social activities of the young is the formation of "clubs", whose sole claim to fame is usually that "we" are "in", and someone else isn't. All too frequently, adult associations fail to move beyond these early stages.

I think that we all might agree that we have received certain benefits from the fact that Alexander Graham Bell did NOT spend his days hanging around the pub with all the mates.

[Danage]

The idea of this world being a man's world and G-d being a g-d, not a goddess stems from the belief that Man (now Woman) was given dominion over Earth by G-d and that Man is the (imperfect) image of G-d. Angels as also seen as male, despite the fact that the Lord and his angels have no gender.

Another thing to note is that it is MAN, HuMAN, HuMANity, HuMANe. This just truly shows the world being male-orientated. I would wish to quote my mother on something: 'If men gave birth the Human race (despite the fact that she, like me, believes in two Human races) would have died out a long time ago'. This was referring to the pain of giving birth. Since I am not a woman I will never know just how painful it is to give birth, however women have had to put up with emotional and physical pain a great deal more than alot of men have, or ever will do.

If women can go through all that then surely they are at least equal, almost equal, or perhaps superior (at least in some respects) to their male counterparts. The glass ceiling should be smashed, equality achieved and there should be a return to Divine Law.

[David Kone]

I think that we all might agree that we have received certain benefits from the fact that Alexander Graham Bell did NOT spend his days hanging around the pub with all the mates.

It is very interesting that most of those men and women who have contributed to real technological and social advances to society have step outside of strictly assigned social roles. Would it not be better to see who God has called to service and then provide them with the authority and tools necessary to perform those sacred tasks than to arbitrarily grant such gifts based on gross classifications such as gender? There was a time when the clergy was made up almost entirely of the younger children of royalty who had neither inheritance nor military obligations. The royal arrogance of their presence still echoes in the opulent traditions of class distinction.

Woman, I believe is a shorten form of womb-man. The ability to carry and give birth to a child is truly miraculous. We should recognize that not even the title of pope is as exalted nor carries such natural divine authority as the title of mother. That being said, just being born a woman does not mean that one is automatically supposed to devote ones life to producing and caring for children. To assume such an obligation relegates a whole class of people to the status of chattel. We all benefit by the natural expression of the gifts that God has given us and we are reduced by man’s rules that restrict that which God gives to all without restriction.

[Danage]

It is very interesting that most of those men and women who have contributed to real technological and social advances to society have step outside of strictly assigned social roles. Would it nopt be better to see who God has called to service and then provide them with the authority and tools necessary to perform those sacred tasks than to arbitrarily grant such gifts based on gross classifications such as gender? There was a time when the clergy was made up almost entirely of the younger children of royalty who had neither inheritance nor military obligations. The royal arrogance of their presence still echoes in the opulent traditions of class distinction.

Woman, I believe is a shorten form of womb-man. The ability to carry and give birth to a child is truly miraculous. We should recognise that not even the title of pope is as exalted nor carries such natural divine authority as the title of mother. That being said, just being born a woman does not mean that one is automatically supposed to devote one's life to producing and caring for children. To assume such an obligation relegates a whole class of people to the status of chattel. We all benefit by the natural expression of the gifts that God has given us and we are reduced by man’s rules that restrict that which God gives to all without restriction.


I agree with this. Gender should never be an issue with jobs, roles and careers, as well as who is called to be a member of the clergy.

[Postulare42]

... Would it nopt be better to see who God has called to service and then provide them with the authority and tools necessary to perform those sacred tasks than to arbitrarily grant such gifts based on gross classifications such as gender? ... or education, or degrees, or honors, or desire, or or or...!

David, you've said it perfectly !

I guess we just have to beg God for the gift of Discernment, so we can tell when one shows up. :)

[Archbishop Michael-John]

or education, or degrees, or honors, or desire, or or or...!

David, you've said it perfectly !

I guess we just have to beg God for the gift of Discernment, so we can tell when one shows up. :)

As I have stated before, in line with the early Church, I am happy to ordain women as Deaconesses; I will also reserve the right to ordain a Deaconess as a Priestess if I am convinced that it is our Father's will that that should be the case, but such cases should remain exceptions to the rule.
:reveek:
Was Mary Magdalene (sometimes referred to as Mariamne) an Apostle as well as a disciple of Jesus? There is a suggestion of some rivalry between her and the other apostles when she anointed Jesus' feet. She is portrayed as a very close companion of Jesus and a leader of the apostles in the controversial Gnostic Gospel of Philip; and her ossuary is claimed to have been found in the same tomb as Jesus' ossuary suggesting a possible relationship by marriage and that she may have borne a son to him.

She is mentioned in the Gospels as being among the women of Galilee who followed Jesus and his disciples. She was present at his crucifixion and burial, and went to the tomb on Easter Sunday to anoint his body. She was the first to see Jesus (Immanuel) in his risen form and to announce his resurrection to the apostles. Accordingly, she is referred to in early Christian writings as "the Apostle to the Apostles." The Roman church appears to have tried its best to suppress her from history, but the fact still remains that she was an exceptional woman.

In the grace of our Father, through Immanuel,

[pre-nicean berean]

I would agree the scriptures seem to make clear that women are not to be in authority positions over the church. We must use scripture to define what is right in God's eyes. The Bible does however give cases of women speaking the word outside of the synogouge and being used as messengers. Their was even one woman appointed as a judge over Israel in the OT. So I believe women do have and should be a part of teaching the word and as messengers proclaiming the Gospel message. I do not feel they have the Biblical authority to sit as pastor of a Church but are to do their work under the authority of their pastor who is responsible for there proper vocation. The Bible speaks of them learning in silence and disturbing the meetings. But it does seem they took roles of teaching what they learned and possibly in some instances even as prominent leaders outside the synogogue. So I guess I would take the middle ground here. Biblical authority assigns the high priestly roles or pastoral role to a male that the women are to learn from. But they are nowhere restricted from serving as teachers etc.

[Danage]

My personal view, and Qaraism's view, is that men and women are equal in the eyes of God. We even have female hakhamim (wise men, our rabbis).

Nowhere in the Tanakh (Old Testament) did God ever say that men were superior to women. In my faith (and I agree completely) I believe that men and women are equal.

[Aurian333]

Though I do not know the official view of the Auian Catholic Church, I have my own.

The scriptures forbidding women to hold office or even speak in church were written by Paul or someone using his name. They were addressed to a specific group of the time in reguards to a specific problem. To take them as general comments that hold into our own time and culture, I believe is foolish.

I don't recall Jesus saying anything about women being ordained. But please forgive me if wrong, I do accept that I have a limited understanding and memory.

[Hermes]

Though I do not know the official view of the Auian Catholic Church, I have my own.

The scriptures forbidding women to hold office or even speak in church were written by Paul or someone using his name. They were addressed to a specific group of the time in reguards to a specific problem. To take them as general comments that hold into our own time and culture, I believe is foolish.

I don't recall Jesus saying anything about women being ordained. But please forgive me if wrong, I do accept that I have a limited understanding and memory.

The official view is, as far I understand from the archbishop's post, that deaconesses are ordained, priestesses are not.

[Archbishop Michael-John]

The Role of Women in the Early Church
The Arian Catholic Church is NOT opposed to the ordination of women although the role of women in the Church is quite specific. An explanation of the Arian Catholic Church's doctrine on the Ordination of Women can be found on the ACC website at: http://arian-catholic.org/arian/sacramental_lore.html#ordination_women , much of which I have brought into use here, although please note that I plan to release extensive updates to the web site soon.

The Early Church ordained women as Deaconesses with good reason, and there were occasional Priestesses although the latter were frowned upon. However I have always stipulated that a Bishop has the right to consecrate a woman as a Priestess if she is deemed exceptional and suitable for the role, i.e. the exception not the rule. I must be strict though, so as not to break away from the early church, although it is noted that the early Christians were in a male dominated environment where men enjoyed seniority and also in light of the dangers of Roman occupation, women were discouraged from taking prominent roles in society for fear of the consequences of Roman retribution. However Mary Magdalene does give us some contrast to this; the scriptures tell us that Mary Magdalene was not only a devoted disciple but also served a ministry as an Apostle to the Apostles (Mark 16:1-10). In addition, the writings of Origen and Epiphanus, and the non-canonical texts such as the Gospel of Philip, Pistis Sophia and the Gospel of Mary, along with the Arian Catholic broader canon Gospel of Thomas, speak of Mary Magdalene’s ministry in the Church.

I have cited two significant example texts in my 33 theses against Heresies and Apostasies (http://arian-catholic/downloads/33_theses.pdf), which clearly support and give testimony to the ordination of Deaconesses (I see no difference in definition between "Deaconess" and "Female Deacon", both terms are used along with "order"), thus:-

24.1
Epiphanius of Salamis (Against Heresies 78:13 [AD 377]) wrote: “It is true that in the Church there is an order of deaconesses, but not for being a priestess, nor for any kind of work of administration, but for the sake of the dignity of the female sex, either at the time of baptism or of examining the sick or suffering, so that the naked body of a female may not be seen by men administering sacred rites, but by the deaconess.”

24.2
The Apostolic Constitutions 3:16 [AD 400] tell us: “Appoint, [O Bishop], a deaconess, faithful and holy, for the ministering of women. For sometimes, it is not possible to send a deacon into certain houses of women, because of unbelievers. Send a deaconess, because of the thoughts of the petty. A deaconess is of use to us also in many other situations. First of all, in the baptizing of women, a deacon will touch only their forehead with the holy oil, and afterwards the female deacon herself anoints them.”

The very texts that the Roman church refers to on other matters are ignored when it comes to the ordination of women, period!

Doctrine on the Ordination of Women
The doctrine on the ordination of women has been well researched and published, women played extremely important roles in the Early Church, but nevertheless different to those of men; this is often misunderstood by most churches. However I have decided to research more deeply into the role of women in the Early Church and during the time of Christ to see if there is anything in poetic terms or hidden in the phraseology of the era that may have been overlooked. I have a gut feeling that there is something subtle though significant waiting to be found.

Although there were Priestesses, these were in sects that the early Church considered apostate, however the early Catholic Church (before it was merged with the Pagan Roman religion) did ordain women as Deaconesses and they had a very important role, not least to baptise women and administer the sacrament of anointing the sick to women. Deaconesses are also referred to in the Bible, see the stories of Phoebe (Romans 16:1-2, a deaconess of the church at Cenchreae), Priscilla and Aquila (Acts 18:26, Romans 16:3). Mary Magdalene is referred to in early Christian writings as “the apostle to the apostles.” In apocryphal texts, especially the Pistis Sophia and Gospels of Philip, Mary and Thomas (the Thomasine Gospel we recognise as Broader Canon), she is portrayed as a visionary and leader of the early movement. But there is no canonical text that points to any woman being an Elder (Presbyter/Priestess) or an Overseer (Episcopate/Bishopess)! Therefore the AC Church will ordain women to the Diaconate as deaconesses but not normally to the Presbyterate or the Episcopate.

A warning sign from the heavens???
I recall when the Anglican church decided to ordain women priests, York Minster was struck by lightning and caught fire, then soon after they began ordaining women Bishops, Windsor Castle (the home of the Queen, whom is the Head of the Church of England) caught fire; many people saw these as warning signs!!!

Paul's writings are hard to understand! [2 Peter 3:16]

Paul's comments in 1 Corinthians 34-37 appears to condemn women for speaking in churches, yet in the last chapter of Paul's letter to the Romans (ch. 16), ten out of the 29 church leaders whose favour he sought, were women; it would seem insulting and unlikely that he would expect a woman church leader to read out a letter to her congregation forbidding women to speak in church! The context here must be directed at the women in the congregation, which would make sense.

He also appears to forbid women to teach men in 1 Timothy 2:8-15, this doesn't necessarily forbid them from teaching other women or children, their silence too may be in the context of teaching in the presence of senior men in the Church and therefore wouldn't prohibit a woman from reading the Gospel then handing over the homily to the presbyter or episcopate! But in 1 Timothy 2:10 Paul acknowledges that there are women in the Church who "Profess Religion". This would make sense in the context of Paul's other writings in Galatians 3:28, Philippians 4:3 and especially 1 Corinthians 11:5 where Paul infers that women are allowed to pray and prophesy in church while they respect the Church's etiquette, when he says: "every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head."

Luke 10:38-42 shows a scenario where Martha was so busy organising and serving everyone that she was not listening to Yeshua's teaching as Mary was doing. I believe that Paul was alluding to this type of scenario where women were taking their socially accepted authority in the home and applying it in church. As Christian congregations grew, Christianity began to move from home-based communities and home-based churches, where the roles of women were extremely important, to more organised public-based communities and churches. There, men had to actively take back control as in a dominant Roman society any woman seen as a figurehead in the community would most certainly draw gravely unwelcome attention (ref: St Agatha).

God bless you.

[Danage]

A warning sign from the heavens???
I recall when the Anglican church decided to ordain women priests, York Minster was struck by lightning and caught fire, then soon after they began ordaining women Bishops, Windsor Castle (the home of the Queen, whom is the Head of the Church of England) caught fire; many people saw these as warning signs!!

I thought the monarch was regarded as the Governor, and not the Head, although they are used more or less interchangeably.

While I do see that the Christian Scriptures forbade women from certain roles, I do believe still very much like the Qara'i I was. Qaraism teaches that men and women are equal, in all ways and jobs, although each gender had a specific role and specific rules, boys are to be circumcised, for example; but otherwise, men and women are equal. I am sitting on the fence re. the ordination of women, for while it isn't scriptural above the role of deaconess, I still disagree with gender discrimination, although in this case it may not be discrimination, and is certainly Scriptural in the case of the Tehudah.

I do think, however, that more research is needed on my part, as I still think very much like a practising Jew.

[Postulare42]

Warning signs?

Yeah.

They need to get proper lightning rods.

:jlol:

[Danage]

Warning signs?

Yeah.

They need to get proper lightning rods.

:jlol:

Well, warnings can be misinterpreted, but I do suppose they could have been God showing his displeasure, but I'm not entirely sure of this.

[Archbishop Michael-John]

Warning signs?

Yeah.

They need to get proper lightning rods.

:jlol:

:jlol:

Spot on there Postulare42!

By the way things are going with the RC in Ire and the US too, they'll all need new lightning conductors!!!

:krolleyes:

[Postulare42]

Well, warnings can be misinterpreted, but I do suppose they could have been God showing his displeasure, but I'm not entirely sure of this.

Certainly. God's spirit is the Holy Spirit of Truth.

The truth is, we've known about lightning and lightning rods for centuries.

But Zeus and Thor throwing bolts sure makes for better listening around the fire and >:-Omead bowl, that's for certain.

[Danage]

Certainly. God's spirit is the Holy Spirit of Truth.

The truth is, we've known about lightning and lightning rods for centuries.

But Zeus and Thor throwing bolts sure makes for better listening around the fire and >:-Omead bowl, that's for certain.

Very true.

[Postulare42]

:jlol:

Spot on there Postulare42!

By the way things are going with the RC in Ire and the US too, they'll all need new lightning conductors!!!

:krolleyes:

Shipping most of their jobs, skills and trades overseas to feed the avaricious guts of money-hoarders, and thinking that an ecos is parasitically stealing money out of each others' pockets would indicate that they might have insufficient copper for such.

You haven't experienced the fullness of life until you've stood under midwest supercells and felt ground, and your bones and teeth, thrum with the explosions of raw energy in the clouds .... for hours.

While John Muir was living in a hollowed-out giant tree in Yosemite Valley, there was an earthquake that broke a massive section off the face of Halfdome. Running outside he exclaimed ecstatically "Glorious Father! Wonderful earthquake!"

I empathise completely.

:-)()

[Postulare42]

Oh. The RC !!

"Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted"