**** Note: This post has been edited 12 Feb 07 ******

An interesting question was posted in another place with respect of cultivating more unity within the indie community:

Assuming mutual respect, and a common acceptance of the basic tenets of the orthodox faith, could the issues of female clergy, and Marian doctrines be considered matters of liberty of faith (i.e. set aside between disagreeing synods for the sake of unity). The brother who posted the question observes that these two issues appear to him to be two of the most contentious points among indie synods, I am aware that the issue of ordination of women is, but I was not conscious of Marian doctrine being contentious – though that might simply be that I’ve not had the “conversation” or encountered others in the community for whom it is a matter of interest or importance.

First I’ll play with the Marian issue – being that it happens to be my academic speciality (grin). As a “good indie boy” of the “old school” I naturally reject the
Roman Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception – in part because I am also free from the. . . . “anomalous” thinking and subsequent interpretation of Augustine, I also reject the Roman Catholic doctrine of “Original Sin”.

(you may now throw your rocks). . . .

feel better? . . . . Good. . . now . . . onward. . .

I’m a big fan of Mary – theologically I think she has a unique value as an image of theosis (indeed it could be argued that she was the first paragon of theosis). Without her participation in the mechanics of the Incarnation – the economy would have needed a “phase two” so to speak – because the “fullness” of humanity was required and that naturally meant that the Second Adam (Christ), also had need of the Second Eve (Mary).

Personally, I do not resonate with the western portrayal of Mary – in visual media, liturgically, or in piety . . . to me personally, she comes across in these depictions as . . .”weak”

My preferred image of her is summed up best by a line from a hymn: “to you our queen, leader in battle” She is the philosopher queen, she is strong of mind, powerful, and at the risk of being stoned again . . . I’ve got this image of her not as a “femme fatal” of so many western paintings – where she raises her limpid eyes upward, surrounded by fat naked babies with the miraculous ability to fly, glowing in powder blue taffeta dresses and white silk chitons – but instead . . . . (and I’m now ducking for cover behind my computer screen) . . . . “lesbian biker chick with a PhD”!

****Mariology is not – I think a matter hugely effecting cooperation and unity within the movement – even in the fourth century the Fathers acknowledged that some emerging aspects of Marian thinking were NOT essential elements of “orthodoxy”, moreover, much of today’s “mariology” particularly in the indie community is about spirituality, style, and custom rather than substantive theology.*****

Moving swiftly on . . .

Ordination – I’m going to expand beyond the point of ordaining women, and just say “ordination”, here’s why:

My community’s logic goes like this.

1) You are baptised.

2) You are therefore a “full” Christian – a “full” citizen – a “whole” believer. Having been robed in Christ – you are properly called “christ” (St. Cyril of Jerusalem)

3) In Christ there is neither jew, nor greek, nor slave nor free etc. (St. Paul) there is therefore “full” equality and “full” membership in baptism . . .

4) in baptism we are all the living icons of the high priest himself (St. Paul). . .

5) it is therefore absolute bunk! of the highest order that a well trained, well qualified, faithful, engaged member of the community – who has committed him/herself to the life, vision and values of that community ought not be ordained.

You see – there is absolutely no need whatsoever to even talk about gender, marital status, or sexual orientation. Isn’t scripture great!

**** The issue of women’s ordination (in particular) is one that is largely grounded in Tradition, rather than substantive theology – we neen only point to Epiphanius of Salamis (writing in AD375) to see this point in action. As indie folk – we have the responsibility and the freedom to discern the value and challenge the propriety of “T”radition. Though I sometimes think we are not always well enough equipped, or empowered to do this well. ******

The idea, that there could be a substantive unity between synods where something this fundamental to the day to day ecclesiology of a community is “set aside” – where the gifts of grace we have as individuals and as communities cannot be fully shared between the synods in question, is simply ludicrous.

***Ordination then, is an issue that proves to be problematic between two or more communities. It is not merely a matter of “respecting” differences – it is a matter of on the ground, practical . . . trust. The community that does ordain women/lgbt folk is always going to be cautious, or even self censoring when engaged with the community that does not – and vise verse. This is not a “real” realtionship – rather it is to a large degree a forced conjunction for the sake of appearances.

****”Unity” is elusive – it is a strange term too, I think it means different things to different segments within the indie community. I think we need to work at a foundational level, building relationships among individuals, and individual communities, and allow that to gain an organic momentum, and to be free to “be” what it will be. Only these relationships will last, and prove to be the building blocks for future developments. Instant gratification is not spiritually sound, in short. ****