Boy Scouts now open to girls

[KingsGambit]

Yes they were - but I can tell you that a lot of Scoutmasters resented the strangling hold the Mormon group had on what we could and could not teach the scouts. I suspect all of this will indeed spell the end of the scouts. They have a reputation of being "too right" for the left, and now they will be "too left" for the right. I suspect that will spell their end. It's too bad. I know we did a lot of good for the scouts we served in our town - and the ones who made Life or Eagle prove to be some of the most innovative and self-starting of the group. Half of them gave up their Eagle Scout status status in protest of the Scout's position on homosexuals.

The Mormon troops wouldn't attend the summer camp I always went to because they couldn't accommodate their Sabbath preferences, and that didn't stop the camp from being wildly popular in the Midwest (this part of which has a fairly significant Mormon presence)

I knew a kid in high school who was both gay and an atheist. He wanted until the day after he passed his Eagle Board of Review to announce both.

[carpedm9587]

The Mormon troops wouldn't attend the summer camp I always went to because they couldn't accommodate their Sabbath preferences, and that didn't stop the camp from being wildly popular in the Midwest (this part of which has a fairly significant Mormon presence)

I knew a kid in high school who was both gay and an atheist. He wanted until the day after he passed his Eagle Board of Review to announce both.

Wanted, or waited?

[Sparko]

And is anyone surprised?

Source: CONDOMS REQUIRED AT SCOUTS' 24TH WORLD JAMBOREE

Rules demand distribution during coming 12-day 'camping' eventSource

© Copyright Original Source

Usually WND is not a reliable source for accurate info. But doing some searching, it appears they are in this instance:

"The Host Organisation must ensure that condoms are readily and easily accessible for all participants and IST at a number of locations on the site."
Page 11 of the WOSM WSJ Guidelines, here: https://issuu.com/worldscouting/docs...elines_en_2016

[Sparko]

Only within certain denominations.

ETA - well, lookie here....

A Roman Catholic church ordained a 70-year-old woman a priest in Louisville, Kentucky.

About 150 women from all over the world have been ordained by the Roman Catholic Church even though the church bans them from becoming priests.

Apparently not sanctioned by the RCC

Kentucky woman ordained as priest in defiance of Roman Catholic Church
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...93Q0EE20130428

[One Bad Pig]

Apparently not sanctioned by the RCC

Kentucky woman ordained as priest in defiance of Roman Catholic Church
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...93Q0EE20130428

Yeah. The writeup is inaccurate. Women have been ordained by rogue elements within the RCC. No idea why those who pull such stunts aren't defrocked.

[carpedm9587]

Yeah. The writeup is inaccurate. Women have been ordained by rogue elements within the RCC. No idea why those who pull such stunts aren't defrocked.

Actually they are. Rome takes a dim view and excommunicates these women, and defrocks any ordained priest who participates. However, if memory serves, it was a Catholic bishop who ordained the first women, creating a continuance in the "line of succession." Since then I believe almost 150 women have been ordained around the world and they continue to function as if they were completely catholic in their practices, simply rejecting the ban against female ordination. I think they have actually elevated some women as bishops.

It appears to be the beginning of a new sect in Catholicism, though they claim allegiance to Rome. Rome, however, rejects them as priests and bishops, putting these churches in an odd, disconnected state.

It's not as if Christian sects haven't pealed off before over a disagreement on theology or practice.

[EvoUK]

Is there some kind of biblical religious reason why wimmin can't be priests, or is it more of a traditional-and-therefore-sacred thing?

[carpedm9587]

Is there some kind of biblical religious reason why wimmin can't be priests, or is it more of a traditional-and-therefore-sacred thing?

The commonly cited reason is that Jesus only chose men to be one of his 12 apostles/disciples, who are considered to be the first "priests." Peter was considered to be the first "pope" or "bishop."

The women point of Magdalene's role and the presence of women as deacons, priests and bishops in the early church to make their case. And they point to the line in Paul's letter where he says, "I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae."

The response to the former is that these were heretical sects. I know of no response to Paul's mention of a female deacon.

[One Bad Pig]

Is there some kind of biblical religious reason why wimmin can't be priests, or is it more of a traditional-and-therefore-sacred thing?

Here's my take from an Eastern perspective. The church is pretty inherently patriarchal. A man is head of the family as Christ is of the church. As a priest is a stand-in for Christ in the local church, having a female priest turns that imagery on its head. Also, by long-standing tradition, only males are allowed in the altar area, so altar servers, deacons, etc. are all male.

There were female deacons in the early church, but their main task was to assist in the baptism of female converts (because everyone was baptized naked). In the Russian sobor held just before the October Revolution, they discussed bringing back female deacons, but it was never implemented. I've heard rumors of some churches using female altar servers, but it's pretty controversial and I don't know if they enter the altar area or stay outside in the nave. Women sometimes chant the epistle or old testament reading during a service, but that's the extent I've seen of female liturgical participation (outside of communal responses to prayers, in which everyone is included by participation).

[One Bad Pig]

Actually they are. Rome takes a dim view and excommunicates these women, and defrocks any ordained priest who participates. However, if memory serves, it was a Catholic bishop who ordained the first women, creating a continuance in the "line of succession."

Well, it would take a bishop to make it an official ordination, right? Wouldn't it take the ordination of a woman as bishop to create a continuance in the line of succession?

[carpedm9587]

Well, it would take a bishop to make it an official ordination, right? Wouldn't it take the ordination of a woman as bishop to create a continuance in the line of succession?

Yes, it would - and I am pretty sure this standard has been met. In 1917, the code of Canon Law was amended to give the Pope final decision authority over who would and would not be bishop. So, by modern canon law, any bishop not approved by the "holy see" is not a bishop, so any priest they consecrate is not an actual priest.

Of course, the women-friendly sects would probably disagree.

[KingsGambit]

Here's my take from an Eastern perspective. The church is pretty inherently patriarchal. A man is head of the family as Christ is of the church. As a priest is a stand-in for Christ in the local church, having a female priest turns that imagery on its head. Also, by long-standing tradition, only males are allowed in the altar area, so altar servers, deacons, etc. are all male.

There were female deacons in the early church, but their main task was to assist in the baptism of female converts (because everyone was baptized naked). In the Russian sobor held just before the October Revolution, they discussed bringing back female deacons, but it was never implemented. I've heard rumors of some churches using female altar servers, but it's pretty controversial and I don't know if they enter the altar area or stay outside in the nave. Women sometimes chant the epistle or old testament reading during a service, but that's the extent I've seen of female liturgical participation (outside of communal responses to prayers, in which everyone is included by participation).

Does this at all relate to why the RCC ended up excluding married men, out of curiosity?

[One Bad Pig]

Does this at all relate to why the RCC ended up excluding married men, out of curiosity?

I don't think so. The church in the West expressed the desire to exclude married men as far back as the 4th century Council of Evira, IIRC. It wasn't entirely successful until medieval times. It's for different reasons, too, relating to Paul's observation in 1 Cor 7 that the unmarried have more time to devote to the Lord. In the East, this was only applied to bishops (and uniformly so by the 4th or 5th century). If a married man is to be ordained bishop, he and his wife must agree to separate (though not divorce) and his wife must join a monastery (same term is used for male and female monasteries). It doesn't happen too often. The first bishop of my diocese was a widower.

[rogue06]

Yeah. The writeup is inaccurate. Women have been ordained by rogue elements within the RCC. No idea why those who pull such stunts aren't defrocked.

Really piggy?

[Cow Poke]

Really piggy?

At least it wasn't rouge elements!