On another thread (The Narnian) Ijohn_patmos writes
"what I find hard to understand is Alan Jacob’s bold assertion that if Lewis were writing today he “would surely leave the subject alone (i.e. ordination of women) because “what has emerged since Lewis’ death is a large body of orthodox Christians who see no difficulty with the ordination of women” Yet, this is no novelty. "
This is the point that women's ordination advocacy usually glosses over. The same old arguments have been around as long as Christianity and, far from being the incisive insight of modernity, women's ordination has been an heretical view 'from the beginning'. The large body Jacob's refers to are those who share the views of the movement styling itself "Affirming Catholicism". This is a curious appelation because (apart from a certain enthusiasm -not always a knowledgable one- for vestments and other externals of catholicism) its hard to see what their catholicism consists of. Seemingly just those elements that appeal to them. In other words its nonsense.
The Christian Church has always placed prohibitions on ordination, and not just of women. For example, one must be male, beyond puberty and otherwise of maturity. I think the usual stipulation is over 25 years. Similarly, so I'm told, a eunuch cannot be ordained. Does anyone know if that is true?.
Sorry if I seem to rant and rave more incoherently than usual,
The Stranger
