Defining the Priesthood

Imagine that we live in a world that is dominated by a religion that worships a god who became female to bring forth new human life. Imagine this fictitious world religion worships this god through rituals that incorporate images of a pregnant woman. And like any religion, every ritual must be lead by an authorized individual who mediates between the worshiping faithful and their god. Such an individual would be ordained in the priesthood of this religion. Now imagine even further that some of the faithful are demanding that they be allowed to be ordained into this priesthood of this religion, which worships a god using images of a pregnant woman. The people in this group have caused a scandal. Those demanding to be part of the ordained priesthood are all men. Why would this be scandalous?

Well because this fictitious world religion has an order of priesthood that exclusively includes only women. And I would argue rightfully so. In this fictitious world religion that worships a god who became female to bring forth new human life, the ordained priesthood should only be made up of women, and men in the priesthood simply does not make sense. In this religion, a female-only priesthood is the only kind of ordained priesthood it could have. The tenets of its religion and the nature of being ordained into its priesthood simply could only allow priestesses.

This should shock few people if they clearly understood what priesthood truly is. So return to reality:

The priesthood is defined either by the faith of the religion or by the influence of the culture surrounding the faith lived. Culture defining religion is self-destructive for any religion, and makes the religion contradictory. Unfortunately today, culture defining religion is becoming too prevalent.

So we are left logically with the priesthood being properly defined by its religion only, not its surrounding culture. This is essential for not only the religion to survive, but for the ordination in its priesthood to be valid. Simply put priesthood is defined as the office, dignity, or character of the priest. A priest (or priestess) is the one authorized (through ordination within its religion) to perform the sacred rites (which are the ways in which the religion worships its specific god) of a religion, especially as a mediatory agent between humans (who are doing the worship) and God (who by nature influences the form and means of the faithful’s worship).

If the religion is polytheistic with gods imagined in both genders, then (male) priests and (female) priestesses would make complete sense, as long as the priests lead in the sacred rites of worshiping a male god and the priestesses lead in the sacred rites of worshiping a female god. A male priest meditating during the sacred rites of worshiping a female god should be cause for concern. Likewise a female priestess meditating during the sacred rites of worshiping a male god would just not be proper.

If the god is imagined without regards to gender, then the gender of the priest (or priestess) is irrelevant. In fact, religions that believe in such a god believe not in a deity per se, but a “higher power, influence or force” which humanity seeks to become consumed in or one with. And in these religions, the sacred rites are truly not acts of worship, but spiritual consummations with the universe. This historical reality is a fascinating anthropological phenomenon as well as intriguing theological insight.

So now consider a religion which professes in believing that God became Man. And this male person with human and divine natures was at the heart of worship. This incarnate God in truth actually makes the worship possible. In this religion, a male-only priesthood is the only kind of priesthood possible, by definition of what constitutes priesthood and according to the self-defining creedal construct of such a religion. Therefore any Christian religion that properly incorporates ritual worship by necessity should require an ordained priesthood. And any Christian priesthood should only include men, who of course are called by God to mediate between God and the worshipping faithful.

Thus in the Catholic Church the male-only ordained priesthood makes complete sense.

Being John Malkovich vs. Being Catholic

The psychological impact of authentic Catholic teaching should lead one to out-right reject any character formation based on improving a person’s self-esteem. Any self-esteem character formation will only lead people to narcissism  or nihilism. Either way you’re forming a god-complex amongst a pantheon of defeatists.

As a proud, educated Catholic, I abhor the whole notion of having a “healthy self-esteem.” And I am one who has been accused as having quite the healthy self-esteem. Of course, I retort, “How could this be, I surely do not abhor myself?”

Faith is very influential in a person’s perception on reality. And a person who holds dearly the teachings of the Catholic Church as fundamental to their faith understands that we are to align our subjective reality with that of objective reality. In other words, what I see as real, better in fact be real. If I honestly believe the sky is down and not up, then others will find me rightly “not right in the head.”

Same goes for the whole notion of self-esteem. If I honestly believe that I find myself in high regards, but in fact I am a lying, cheating, stealing, murdering, self-promoting evil-doer then honestly what good is “self-esteem?” The greatest imagery for the logical end result of a self-esteem character formation program can be found in the movie, Being John Malkovich. By the end of the movie, everyone is Malkovich, saying only one word, “Malkovich.”

If on the other hand, I “look myself in the mirror” and realize that I am a lying, cheating, stealing, murdering, self-promoting evil-doer then I am left facing reality—an objective reality in the person standing before the mirror and a subjective reality in the image of the person in the mirror.

So I argue that self-esteem leads one to never see the “True Self” but only the “Self-perpetuating Person.” Yet if I focus on a character formation that takes self-image seriously, then I am compelled to confront reality. The person in the mirror I see needs to be a person who sees beyond oneself to a higher authority.

Therefore when focusing on self-image, I must ask myself which image am I to be like? Being Catholic, I believe that I am created in the image and likeness of God. So I am in my self-image to be an image of God. What does God look like? Not John Malkovich.

BuzzNet Tags: Catholic,self-esteem,self-image,character formation,John Malkovich

Solution to the World’s Problems

Peace on Earth is impossible. Let this be known as the beginning of the solution to the world’s problems. Peace understood as “absence of hostility” or even “everlasting happiness” is simply not a reality of our human nature. Christianity has understood this from the beginning, or the Church would like to think so.

Modern Christianity has been split into two camps on this essential understanding and teaching of the Church. Both camps have good intentions; however, only one camp is properly aligned with Christ’s teaching. One would think that simply reading Matthew 13 would be sufficient, but not today.

One camp insists on the realization of one’s faith journey now. Let’s call this camp “The Builders.” The other camp relies on the hope of our eternal destination to heaven. Let’s call this camp “The Pavers.” Both camps focus on the faith journey, yet only The Pavers realize that the journey is not the destination. Because The Builders believe one’s journey is their destination, this camp is wrought with constant frustration.

Imagine that you are one of The Builders: just when you thought you’d finally arrived to your final destination, you realize there are still more stops to make. You had eagerly awaited your final stop, only to be tricked by life’s cruel joke: “Next Stop…” You invested so much energy into this one last stop, since you were certain that this was going to be that final great stop. Of course this camp would cause insanity, for one would likely feel caught in a vicious loop…a never-ending false stop.

The Builders intend to make peace on Earth. This illustrates how peace on Earth is impossible.  The Pavers hope to attain peace in Heaven. Peace is only possible in Heaven. Everlasting justice, happiness and love is a reality called eternal life with God. On Earth, we are on our faith journey, but we are paving our way to Heaven. We do not build the Kingdom of heaven. We eagerly anticipate our heavenly destination with God if we stay on the Christian path of righteousness and charity. To be a part of the Kingdom, we must accept God in our lives and Heaven as our promised destination.

So the solution to the world’s problems is not to build peace on Earth. The solution to the worlds problem simply put is God’s reign, which will be in Heaven, not on Earth. So let us not build the City of God. Instead let us pave the way to Heaven.

BuzzNet Tags: Catholic,Kingdom,Heaven,City of God,Peace,God's reign