Apparently-To: catholic@american.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 05:30:14 PST
From:         "John R. Covert 26-Jan-1993 0802" <covert@COVERT.ENET.DEC.COM>
Subject:      Re: The Real Presence

>John, despite your disagreement with your church's policy on ordaining
>women, would you go to a Mass celebrated by a women?

No; when travelling, if I cannot be assured that a priest whose orders
are certain to be valid will be the celebrant, I go to a Roman Catholic
Church and make a spiritual communion.

>Do you not believe in the real presence in a Host consecrated by a woman?

For the sake of the souls of my fellow Episcopalians who do believe in
the ordination of women, I hope the Real Presence is created on the altar
when a woman presides at the Mass.  For the sake of my own soul, and as an
expression of solidarity with Catholic tradition until the whole Church
decides that women may be ordained, I take no chances.

>I don't know if you have Confession as Roman Catholics, but would you not
>confess your sins to a priest simply because of their sex?

Yes, we do.  The Rite of the Reconciliation of a Penitent appears on pages
446-452 of the Book of Common Prayer.  "Simply because of their sex"
trivializes the possibility that the absolution that would be pronounced by
someone not in Holy Orders might not be effective.  One can make a confession
to any other person and ask God's forgiveness.  A lay person or deacon can
issue a "declaration of forgiveness" (a statement that Christ forgives the
sins of those who are penitent).  But _assurance_ of that forgiveness
(absolution) can only be granted by a priest whose orders are valid.  Again,
I hope that the women who claim to be priests are priests, and there is
certainly "salvific grace" (as the Vatican says) in rites practiced by those
without the fullness of Apostolic Orders, but I will hold out for agreement
from the whole Church on women's ordination.

For the past couple of weeks I've been wondering why I am being asked to
submit to the decision to ordain women, made by local councils in violation
of two millenia of tradition and in opposition to the majority of bishops
in the Whole Church, yet when I posted the rules adopted by that same
local council which require visitors wishing to receive Communion to do so
only if they hold a belief in The Real Presence (something which agrees
with two millenia of tradition and with the bishops of the Whole Church)
I am accused by readers of Anglican@American.Edu of being unkind and told
that not everyone believes the same as I do.  (I.E. believes the officially
adopted guidelines.)

I also wonder why the most recently consecrated woman bishop (there are
now three -- Barbara Harris, assistant in Boston, Penelope Jamieson,
diocesan bishop of Dunedin, New Zealand, and Jane Dixon, assistant in
Washington) immediately announced that she would disobey recent decisions
of the same council which authorized women's ordinations and ordain
practicing and unrepentent homosexuals to the priesthood.

If the women who were being ordained would agree with all the other aspects
of the historic Faith, I would be more convinced that their callings were
valid.  As it is, I see so many of them attempting to create a new religion
which feminist theologians call "post-Christian".  This is why so many
Episcopalians are concerned that their Church is not only no longer Catholic,
but will soon no longer be Christian.

/john
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU