- Mar 8, 2006
- Reaction score
- Portland, Oregon
I don't know. Maybe I just see Ozgeorge's arguments differently. I don't interpret his posts as advocating that Holy Tradition should change, but maybe you've seen some things to which I have been blind. To me, he appears to just be asking questions. If I take him at his word, he is trying to ride the fence and ask probing questions of both sides without taking up the advocacy for either side just yet. At times his questions will seem to indicate that he is advocating women's ordination, yet at other times they will seem to indicate an opposition to women's ordination. He appears to just be asking us questions so that he may know the truth more deeply. Maybe Ozgeorge can jump in and explain to us as best he can in this forum just exactly what he is trying to do--repeating earlier posts for the sake of a dense man like me would be more than welcome.montalban said:Post #123 I argued against this approach when he tried to show how ‘traditions’ have changed in order to argue that HOLY TRADITION should change (and I’ve quoted him earlier saying that all is up for change).
Again, I think George sees what appears to be a crass inconsistency in how we understand our traditional practices. He sees that the Church has actually changed its policy towards divorce and remarriage to a practice that appears at first to contradict the teaching of Christ on the very matter, yet at the same time we are so dogged in our determination to never ordain women to the priesthood. What gives us the authority to change our traditions in one area yet not in other areas? Without making a distinction between unchanging Tradition and temporal traditions, what authority do we have to change any traditional practice? If we can change one, why can't we change another? I don't think Ozgeorge necessarily wants to see change, nor do I think he opposes change. He just wants someone here to address his perception that the Church has been inconsistent in its adherence to Tradition.
modification to original post: Well, now that I have read Post #123 with your (montalban's) quote of Ozgeorge and your response to his quote, I can see some of what you're talking about regarding Ozgeorge's attitude toward change. Maybe I stand to be corrected.
As we've seen already with a thread that is now 54 pages long, the issue of women's ordination is a very complex issue with a lot of different facets. I see this debate motivating us to formulate a better understanding even of what Tradition, the very foundation of our Orthodox Faith, is. From what I've seen on this thread, we can't even agree on that! If we can't agree as to what constitutes Holy Tradition, HOW IN THE WORLD ARE WE GOING TO AGREE ON ANYTHING ELSE (e.g., women's ordination)? ???