Though the ordination of women has been hotly debated in a number of churches (and in particular in the world-wide Anglican Communion) there has been a strange silence on the subject from academic theologians. «They have left the debate,» says the author of this book, «for the most part, to the also-rans.» Without Precedent seeks to examine the arguments that, in the absence of serious academic contributions, have been advanced. In particular it looks at claims of ancient precedent for modern practice. What did Jesus think about women? Was Paul a misogynist or a feminist, a reactionary or a revolutionary? Does the role of Mary of Magdela, in scripture and tradition, offer any guidance (as many have claimed)? Were there female priests, and even bishops, in early Christianity? Extravagant claims have been made and repeated in all of these areas, and have crucially influenced decisions taken. This book provides, in the words of former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams: «a lucid and helpful survey, which quite rightly punctures some awful historical nonsense.»
Оглавление
Geoffrey Kirk. Without Precedent
Without Precedent
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
Introduction
1: Truth and Principle
2: What did Jesus Really Think about Women?
3: Gentiles, Slaves, and Women
4: Alas, Poor Andronicus!
5: Magdalena Apostola?
6: Mosaics, Catacombs and Concelebrations
7: Conclusions
Bibliography
Subject Index
Scripture Index
Отрывок из книги
Scripture, Tradition, and the Ordination of Women
Geoffrey Kirk
.....
[Jesus’s] attitude towards women was quite different from that of his milieu, and he deliberately and courageously broke with it. For example, to the great astonishment of his own disciples Jesus converses publicly with the Samaritan woman (cf. Jn 4:27); he takes no notice of the state of legal impurity of the woman who had suffered from haemorrhages (cf. Mt 9:20–22); he allows a sinful woman to approach him in the house of Simon the Pharisee (cf. Lk 7:37ff.); and by pardoning the woman taken in adultery, he means to show that one must not be more severe towards the fault of a woman than towards that of a man (cf. Jn 8:11). He does not hesitate to depart from the Mosaic Law in order to affirm the equality of the rights and duties of men and women with regard to the marriage bond (cf. Mk 10:2–11; Mt 19:3–9).45
These claims are the subject of the next chapter. They prove, as we shall see, insubstantial if not totally unfounded. But take the story of Jesus and the Samaritan woman as an example. It is not a story about Jesus’s attitude to women—indeed there are no stories in the Gospels “about” Jesus’s attitude to women. It is not even a story “about” Jesus’s relationship with a woman. It is hard to see what comfort a feminist might gain from it. The metaphorical association of Woman with marital and spiritual infidelity (“whoring after strange Gods” [cf. Hos 1:2]) looks suspiciously like misogyny, and the oblique references back to the meetings at wells of Isaac and Rebecca, Jacob and Rachel, have disturbing patriarchalist overtones. It is by no means certain, what is more, that the now famous ending to the tale (“. . . they [the disciples] marveled that he was talking with a woman”) can support the conclusion which has recently been drawn from it. The most natural inference, surely, is not that the disciples were amazed at what Jesus was in the habit of doing, but astounded that he had broken with the habits of a lifetime! If there is a lesson to be learned here it is about the difficulties inherent in seeking guidance from such texts on matters which they were never intended to address and which are strictly irrelevant to them. The fact that Christians have been dealing with texts in precisely that way for centuries is no excuse.
