From: 15942@brahms.udel.edu (Stephen Barr)
Subject: Re: Jesus and opinion polls
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 18:57:52 GMT

    Dear JJ, I am not really very courteous, at least I am not 
known for being so! Perhaps you are being courteous in saying
I am courteous! :-)  I agree that it is not obvious that the
priesthood being all male, or all female, or mixed, has any
direct bearing on whether we obey the commandments, love our
neighbor, love God, and conduct our spiritual lives. However, 
I believe that God not only has given us means of sanctification
but truths to enlighten us. The importance of some truths is
sometimes hidden. The danger of some errors is also sometimes
apparent only with the passage of time. Let me give you what
I regard as an interesting example. In the third century there
was a sharp dispute between the great St. Cyprian of Carthage
and the Pope (I forget whether it was Cornelius or Stephen)
over whether heretics should be rebaptized if they came over
to the Catholic Church. Cyprian had very logical arguments,
it seems to me. He argued that as heretics were outside of 
the Church, outside of the Body of Christ, they could not
have the Spirit and therefore could not confer the Spirit
in Baptism. The Bishop of Rome insisted that Baptism by
heretics is valid, and that Baptism can never be repeated. 
There was a big row, and of course, in the long run, the Pope's
view triumphed. I remember thinking, when I first read about
this, "what a useless controversy, what is so important about
whether Baptism can or cannot be repeated? So Baptize them again!
What difference would it make?" Much later it occurred to me
that not only was the Pope right in that case, but that the full
importance of his stand only has become apparent in the twentieth
century, in the age of ecumenism. In the early centuries of the
Church there was very little ecumenism indeed! Heretics were
regarded as being simply outside the Church, period. St. Cyprian  
was the one who formulated the expression "outside the Church there
is no salvation" (which is still a dogma, by the way). But in 
general the attitude toward heretical sects was very simple: 
it was impossible to be saved in them.  The Pope's position
must indeed have seemed very strange to Cyprian. If Baptism
makes one a member of Christ's Body, how can these heretics
confer it when they themselves are cutoff from that body? How 
can they save when they are not saved? But the Pope's position
can be understood better in the light of the teaching of Vatican II,
which tells us that even outside of the Catholic Church "elements
of sanctification" exist. That is, heretical or schismatic bodies,
while indeed not having the fullness of Catholic unity retain
something, a "partial unity" and "elements of sanctification."
The truth which the Pope upheld back in the 3rd Century did
not receive its full development and could not be seen its full
implications until much later. As in this example, unwelcome and
dissonant truths can act as correctives to tendencies that seem 
good at one time, but that contain hidden dangers. In my view,
the dangerous error involved in our current dispute, is the
view that outside of very narrow biological functions (childbearing,
and nursing--- though there is bottle feeding, so really just
chidbearing) the sexes are fungible. That is, there is no deeper
meaning to the sexual difference. Some corollaries that follow
from this view are (a) that it is a matter of indifference whether
a child has a male and a female parent, or two parents of the same sex
as in homosexual relationships, (b) that it is a matter of indif-      
whether small children are cared for by mother or father, (c) that
roles of mother and father or husband and wife must be completely
symmetrical, (d) that in interpersonal relationships no account
should be taken of gender, (e) that boys and girls must be treated
exactly alike, (f) that statistical disparities in the interests,
predelictions, activities, careers, etc. of males and females
are necessarily an undesirable thing, (g) that girls must be allowed
on boys softball teams, boys must be equally encouraged to play
with dolls, (h) ideas of femininity and masculinity are bad, 
(i) men should cry more and women less......
    I think there is some happy position between the extremes
of "sexism" on the one hand and denying sexual difference on
the other. If we have confused notions about gender it may 
not affect whether we are saved, but it may affect how healthy
and happy and in accordance with our natures our social
relationships are. 
     Incidently, I had had no intention of insinuating that
anyone is a Judas. My point was only that Jesus did not
seem to regard matters of belief, and doctrine as unimportant.
I apologize, and see now how liable to misinterpretation my
wordS Were. Steve.