Father in God
The contents of the Bible are saturated with patriarchy or in other words, rule of the father or the eldest male. The great heroes of faith and of the covenant of grace in Genesis are patriarchs. Jesus chose only men to be his apostles; and the apostles ordained only men as presbyters and bishops in the churches they founded. Each bishop was called “a Father in/under God” to the flock. The Name of the God of the Lord Jesus Christ is the “Father” who becomes also the “Father” of the disciples of Jesus.
In “Mere Christianity”, C. S. Lewis saw the “headship” of the father in the family as part of basic Christian doctrine and ethics. Patriarchy assumes that God made man and woman as two related but different and equal creatures and that in this relation the man is the first in order in the family (thus not a matter of superiority and inferiority). There is a God-given “headship” for the male, and of course, there is with it a God-given responsibility to be a generous and gracious patriarch.
Many have claimed that Patriarchy is a socially constructed system of society and does not belong to anything that is truly a natural aspect or part of men and women. On the other hand, homosexuals claim that it is appropriate to have socially constructed exceptions to the rules of natural or “hard-wired” biology.
A recent symposium entitled “Consecrated Women?” quoted a variety of contributors describing the functioning of the male imagery of sacred Scripture in terms of a “gracious” or “kenotic” patriarchy. Male language about God as Father, Lord, Master and King (and the very maleness of the Incarnate Son himself) exists precisely, they suggest, not to exalt but to correct and soften those aspects of masculinity which, in a fallen and evil world, serve to oppress others, both women and men. That is, pure and sinless patriarchy is the will of the God of Jesus Christ, but it is only truly of God when it is genuine and gracious patriarchy. In a debased form it is not the presence of divine order but, as feminists have claimed, is oppressive because it is disordered.
By divine appointment, the calling of the father in the family and bishop/priest in the church is to image that generous and benevolent patriarchy that belongs to God as the One Lord. It also places before the Church the vocation of fathers and bishops/priests to mirror the divine patriarchy in their relations with the family and the people of God. Indeed, the restoration of genuine and gracious patriarchy makes possible the reflection of divine order in the human race and in the Church, to the glory of the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
The newly consecrated Bishop is charged to “be to the flock of Christ a shepherd and not a wolf” and to feed and not devour the flock. He is “to hold up the weak, heal the sick, bind up the broken, bring again the outcasts and seek the lost.” He is to teach wholesome and sound doctrine and drive away all strange and erroneous doctrine. He is to call his clergy and people to holiness and to be an example of such to them. His vocation is not to be a Chief Executive Officer running a diocese as a corporation, or a Chief Liturgical Officer ruling over the details of worship in congregations. Rather, he is the “Father in God” first to the clergy and then through and with them to all his people, the whole flock of Christ in the diocese. He is to provide a living example of generous and gracious patriarchy in the Name of God the Father in obedience to Jesus Christ, the Great Shepherd of the sheep. Priests are also “Father in God” to their local parish/ congregation. That is why Anglo-Catholics in the late nineteenth century began to address their priests as “Father”.
In 1985, Archbishop of
The problem with this argument is that it sets aside divine order in creation and the order reflected in language where “man” is an inclusive term, referring also to women and children, and all that follows from the one, the man/husband/father, who has the primacy in order. Jesus Christ as Incarnate Man represents all humanity and thus male bishops and presbyters in the ministerial priesthood and also represents all males and females in their congregation, flock, and diocese.
For Dr. Runcie, male and female are individual, exclusive terms, which are united in a common human quality that is neuter in gender. This confuses adjectives “male and female” with the noun “humanity”. It implies that humanity consists only of males and females. The response based on order uses the noun “man” and refers to a concrete historical reality. It insists that common humanity belongs to “persons” who are not simply individuals” but rather subsistent and substantial relations of order. It is relations that make up mankind and indeed all of humanity. We are not intended to be hermits socially or intellectually. We are meant to have relations or order with each other.
In the early church, pagans were being converted to Christianity. They were already familiar with female priests and precipitated a debate about the functions of females in the Christian faith. These debates resulted in “The Apostolic Constitutions”, a collection of church law made in the fourth century but with origins in the third century. “It was asserted that it is not advisable or permissible for a woman or one of the laity to perform any of the offices of the priesthood, not so much because they could not do the ministerial work, or even because God would not communicate his grace, nor simply that nothing would happen, but precisely because something might happen and that something would be “gravely disordered” and thus contrary to the principles of order given by God in creation, providence and salvation.” Although Gentiles do have women priests, that is not according to the “order and harmony” instituted by God through creation, providence and salvation. Women deaconesses assist in the baptism of women so that there is no necessity that the “women be seen by the men.”
The Apostolic Constitutions also state, “That women ought not to baptize, because it is impious, and contrary to the doctrine of Christ.” For if baptism were to be administered by women, certainly our Lord would have been baptized by His own mother, and not by John; or when He sent us to baptize, He would have sent along with us women also for this purpose.
The Apostolic Constitutions also state, “That a layman ought not to do any office of the priesthood; he ought neither to baptize, nor offer, nor lay on hands, nor give the blessing.” The laity is not permitted to perform any of the offices belonging to the priesthood; for “no one taketh this honour to himself, but he that is called of God.”
The Apostolic Constitutions also state, “That none but a bishop and presbyter, none even of the inferior ranks of the clergy, are permitted to do the offices of the priests; that ordination belongs wholly to the bishop and to nobody else.” Only bishops are permitted to ordain to any office as this is ecclesiastical order and harmony.
Many evangelical leaders accept only male ministers as conforming to Scriptural doctrine. They also accept the arguments offered today by Catholics and Orthodox that (1) Jesus chose only men as his apostles, and that they in turn appointed only men as bishops and presbyters; and (2) Jesus in his assumed manhood as the God-Man, the One Mediator between the Father and human beings, was really and truly male, and thus only male persons can be his icon and truly represent him in his High Priesthood on earth.
For more details, read “Episcopal Innovations 1960 – 2004” by The Rev. Dr. Peter Toon, M.A., D.Phil.
(Preservation Press of the Prayer Book Society of the USA 2006)