IN this ongoing discussion of the role of women as priests (Letter, Vince Hodge, CL 28/9/10) it must be appropriate, in fact very necessary, to find out and agree with what God has set before us to follow.
It cannot rest, be decided from the fruit of our argument. A priest in his role as priest represents Jesus to us, with us, and in our humanity the gender of that representation.
We see Jesus choosing 12 men as disciples, future apostles, missionaries.
Are we to say he only chose men because it was a male-dominated society which he would have upset if he had chosen women? So why did he choose men?
One reason was the physical challenge of mountain pathways, stony roads, rivers to cross, the rain, carrying a spare tunic, whatever, and some food, etc on journeys, all on foot, with no shops in sight, evangelising in the towns through which they went.
Women would have not been listened to for it was the priests of the synagogues above all who needed to hear.
Women were absolutely essential to them, at each town supplying the food, a new tunic, etc, hearing the message and instructing their children.
It was a time when women truly fulfilled their gift to humanity, they had children, and the men came from households where there were children who needed a parent there with them.
Early Christianity saw the husband as the head of the home, his calling. St Paul writes at length concerning a principle about which we do not now hear, that the man is head of the home, head of his wife. (1 Cor 11: 3; Eph 5: 22-24; Coll 3: 18-21; 1 Peter 3: 1-7)
And as we men have so often failed to be loving in this headship it does not mean it no longer applies; God’s laws, his design does not depend on our obedience.
Women are honoured, loved by God, have their place in the Kingdom, led by one who was and is utterly holy, Mary, the sinless one, for she was born without stain, who intercedes for us weak ones here on this earth.
We need to understand that woman standing in the shoes of man will lead to a disaster.
RON PARKER
Oxley, Qld
