waterboy,
I concede that the term 'undifferentiated and united' to describe the situation before 1054 was clumsy. Nevertheless, when I said that Reformation was a blessing I implicitly agreed that “diversity expressed in differentiation and disputation is healthier than any sort of theological despotism“, and I certainly never advocated a reuniting of western Churches into a form that existed during the Middle Ages.

On the other hand, a situation is thinkable where e.g. the pope is regarded by all Christians as an authority to formally represent them to the world, to listen to, although not necessarily to follow his advise and guidelines, where for a Catholic the only excuse not to follow would be his/her personal conscience (with an emphasis on “personal” i.e. not as an openly proclaimed opposition), whereas for a member of another Church it would also be the “collective conscience” of that Church. Perhaps something like the Queen is seen by all Britons (or Australians for that matter) as their formal Head of State (with practically no political power), respected by monarchists and accepted by all. I said thinkable, but perhaps not (yet) feasible.

Diversity is one thing, Catholic identity is another. I am not sure what you mean by “theological despotism“ so let me just comment that you cannot become a Catholic theologian (a priest), or even an informed layman, without acquainting yourself with all sorts of theological approaches and interpretations, most of them non-Catholic. The Church does not object to that, it actually encourages such a widening of the Catholic horizon. What it objects to is a presentation of personal views/interpretations by zealous, often just speculative, theologians, as part of the official Catholic standpoint or teaching. I am aware that other Churches are not that anxious to preserve their identity that distinguishes them from others.

George

Without doubt there is great diversity within the Roman Catholic Church and it is to be commended for its sympathetic handling of diversity. As you say, however, the Church is particularly demanding with respect to theologians 'representing' her publicly.
To the Roman Catholic mind perhaps it is 'thinkable' that the Pope might achieve some sort of universal respect as a spiritual leader.
I suppose almost anything is 'thinkable', even things that are impossible. Perhaps you imagine the Pope in a similar role to the Dalai Lama. It seems to me a somewhat romantic notion given the strength of feeling that many people feel against the Roman Catholic Church in general and the Pope in particular! There are many even within the Roman Catholic Church who regard the Pope with ambivalence.
The Church's attitude to contraception, for instance, is widely ignored by intelligent, young Catholic women and regarded by them as evidence of the Church's failure to 'keep up with the times'.
I, for one, could not respect a Church which denies justice to women by denying them the right to serve as ordained priests.
Your idea is perhaps 'thinkable' if this ideal Pope were to be a woman. Until then, to most of us outside the Roman Church, She represents a Medieval Anachronism in today's 'Enlightened' world.

waterboy,
I can understand that you subscribe to the more or less standard criticism, not to say clichés, ignoring e.g. the Catholic teaching about the freedom of conscience (not of dissent) that I was trying to call your attention to. I can also respect that you “could not respect a Church which denies justice to women by denying them the right to serve as ordained priests”, without passing my judgement on who of us is a better Christian. Remember, what I was trying to defend was Catholic identity, and not what it means to be a good Christian. .

Part of that Catholic identity is that she sees the male-female relation as complementary not only on the biological but also on the mental and social levels, although I agree that the current trend is interchangeability on the social level, though not (yet?) on the biological. I am not a biologist but I was always wondering why in the Melbourne Cup mares and stallions compete (and win) on equal footing, whereas in athletics men and women need to compete separately. Is it not that on a higher level of evolution there is even less interchangeability of sexes? I needed both my parents to become a human being not only biologically, but also as a Christian (which includes my Catholic identity). On both levels their function was complementary, and I am sure my mother never thought of her “right” to take over my father’s function (both biologically or in my upbringing), or vice versa.

I agree that a spiritual unity within Christianity cannot be achieved with the present pope (among other things, he is over 80) and with people who express their opposition to unity in the way you did. But one can still dream about a different future.

George

You are right! It was a cliche and a silly generalisation.

At its best the RC Church has handled diversity wisely and sensitively. It wasn't particularly sensitive, however, to appoint as Pope one who served as the Church's chief inquisitor. It might make sense within the Church but it certainly wasnt calculated to impress the wider Church community. It was a statement about identity rather than an ecumenical gesture.

But the point is that being different we have reason for disagreement and the ordination of women issue serves well to illustrate the value of disputation. I would argue that the biological differentation of genders does not provide any sort of justification for discrimination against women. It is a simple matter of principle that denying women opportunites solely on the basis of gender is unjust. Furthermore, and it shouldnt even be necessary to say this, they have proved their ability to serve in the role of 'priests' in other Churches.

You said "Is it not that on a higher level of evolution there is even less interchangeability of sexes?" Your argument is not entirely clear to me but it seems that you are trying to say that differentiation in 'biological', reproductive roles should also be extended into differentiation in the workplace?, society and so on. This does not seem to me to be a logical argument.

The RC Church may feel that this is an important aspect of its identity. So be it. I regard it as a point of gross injustice and an offence to women. Clearly my identity lies elsewhere and I could never find spiritual leadership in an organisation that perpetrates such an injustice in these 'more enlightened' times.

waterboy,
I think we can agree on many things that unite all Christians and form the essential part of the raison d’etre of any Christian Church, leaving aside the RC Church’s claims of centrality. I think the things we share are more important than those we have to agree to disagree upon.

One of these things is apparently the question of female priests, or priestesses, the need for which has existed in many religions, including those preceding Christianity, although in no Christian Church until about half a century ago. I do not regard the Catholic emphasis on the complementarity of the role of genders in matters ecclesiastical a “gross injustice and an offence to women“, preserving these strong words for other situations that women in the third world (but not only there) have to suffer.

I am not a theologian to argue to what extent is this emphasis supported by scripture and tradition, and as a layman I have to admit that things might change in the future: what I know is only that in the RC Church changes work top-down, never bottom-up through rebellion, which already has its outlet in Protestantism. The RC Church is in a deep crisis, no question about that, so are, or even more, other traditional Churches, and female priests do not make a difference, rather the contrary.

Where our attitudes might not be reciprocal is that my version of Christian identity does not compel me to regard with disrespect other Churches just because they have suddenly developed a different view of this complementarity: I certainly do not feel any disrespect towards e.g. the Lutheran Church whose "bishopess" of Hanover appears often on German TV. I respect and try to understand her, although many a nun I have known in my life made it much easier for me to understand the female (yin, if you like) aspect of spirituality and pastoral functioning.

George

I do not reserve my 'disrespect' just for the RC Church. I share it equally around all the Churches. There is much that is good about the Churches but that is not sufficient reason to view them with any rose coloured glasses. They have the potential to great good but also to do great harm. Only in an atmosphere of healthy critique can we hope to minimise the harm that they do.
Im afraid the 'complementarity'argument does not ring true to me with regard to ordination of women. Certainly there is discrimination against women that is far worse than the Church's refusal to ordain them. I would argue that the Church's attitude to women 'endorses' much of this discrimination and that it is therefore all the more important for the Church to demonstrate true justice and lead the way in the protest against discrimination.
As for the Biblical and Theological justification for ordaining women. Firstly one needs to remember that the Bible is conditioned by the culture in which it was written. We are by no means required to mimic ancient near eastern attitudes to women simply because they found there way into the Bible. It is better by far to consider the fact, for example, that Paul's attitude to women, while still reflecting conetmporary attitudes to some extent, does represent a positive, and for the times even radical, shift away from those attitudes. Similarly one ought to consider the positive roles women have in many Bible stories. The women, for example, are the first witnesses to the resurrection.
I do not resile from my criticism of the RC Church's attitude to women either from the content or from the force of language used.
I can, however, respect the RC Church for the great good it does in many areas. Nor is my respect for you diminished by your worthy defense of your Church.
Peace be with you!