Author Topic: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3  (Read 253545 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #735 on: August 09, 2010, 12:25:45 AM »
There is also no scriptural basis for the exclusiion of female clergy.  And we all know where the concept of clergy being chaste got us.

Offline Eric_Lowe

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 16999
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #736 on: August 09, 2010, 01:11:52 AM »
The actual arguement came from the Jewish tradition of Rabbis.There were no female Rabbis at the time of Jesus. However Jesus picked Mary Magdelaine as the first person to see him, that gives her special status, which is why the Catholic Church mislabeled her as a whore. The female disciple Junia was renamed Junian (that is a historical fact) to mask female involvement in the early church. but one must not blame the Queen for being a tradionalist. The very idea of a monarchy itself is a tradition.

Offline Adagietto

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #737 on: August 09, 2010, 05:23:13 AM »
'The female disciple Junia was renamed Junian (that is a historical fact) to mask female involvement in the early church.'  In fact in the original Greek, the name only appears in the accusative, so Paul could either have been referring to a man named Junia or a man named Junias; there is no way of telling for certain. The female name Junia is better attested for the period, and up until the 19th Century it was generally assumed that Paul was referring to a woman (thus 'Salute Andronicus and Junia' in the King James Bible). So evidently nobody considered that this was a matter of any significance with regard to the priesthood.  From Victorian times onward some translators give the male name, sometimes pointing out the possible alternative sometimes not, evidently on the basis of a casual assumption rather than as a deliberate attempt to downplay female involvement in the early church.

Offline Eric_Lowe

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 16999
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #738 on: August 09, 2010, 07:59:42 AM »
The passage from Paul's letter that stress that "women should not be preach and silent" is found NOT be written by Paul. The fact that it is constantly used against women attaining high position in the church is curious. It is now generally agreed that Junia is a woman. There is a book called "The lost disciple" that talks about about this issue. The fact that women is now ordained as priests and preachers is now reclaiming their "rightful" place since the time of Paul, when women were actively preaching and holding secret services in Rome. I think the Anglican Church in England is now having a woman bishop, I wonder what the Queen thinks of that ?

Offline Adagietto

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #739 on: August 09, 2010, 08:13:57 AM »
The question of woman bishops in the CofE has not yet been settled, but it is only a matter of time. Is there any reason to think that the Queen dislikes the idea of women priests or bishops? Even if she did, she would take good care not to reveal it.

Offline Eric_Lowe

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 16999
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #740 on: August 09, 2010, 08:41:50 AM »
Only on her reputation on being a traditionalist and seemed to dislike change (reputation acquired during the Diana years).

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #741 on: August 09, 2010, 09:01:20 AM »
Most of the royal family has left of centre sentiments but the Queen is also very discrete about her political views and works hard not to show her cards.  My feeling is that she is for female bishops but chooses not to influence the arguments for or against.

Offline Eric_Lowe

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 16999
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #742 on: August 09, 2010, 09:33:33 AM »
That could be true too. ;)

Offline Grace

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 3126
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #743 on: August 09, 2010, 05:24:33 PM »
Most of the royal family has left of centre sentiments but the Queen is also very discrete about her political views and works hard not to show her cards.  My feeling is that she is for female bishops but chooses not to influence the arguments for or against.

I would have said the majority of the royals have right of centre sentiments and I would be very, EXTREMELY surprised if the Queen personally favours female church heads.  It is pointless to get into a dispute on this as we will never her personal views anyway.

Offline Eric_Lowe

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 16999
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #744 on: August 09, 2010, 11:19:49 PM »
I think The Queen would support whatever the British people wants. That is safe to say...

Offline Grace

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 3126
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #745 on: August 09, 2010, 11:28:11 PM »
So, the British people all want the same thing, do they?  And whatever that is, the Queen supports it?

Offline Eric_Lowe

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 16999
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #746 on: August 09, 2010, 11:36:23 PM »
Indeed. They elected Margaret Thatcher as PM, so she accepts her even though it was well known she did not like her personally.

Offline Adagietto

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #747 on: August 10, 2010, 03:53:40 AM »
I suspect the truth of the matter is that members of the Royal family would tend favour consensus, and dislike any brand of politics that is seen as being unduly divisive; if it is true that the Queen felt uncomfortable about Mrs Thatcher's brand of politics, that would have been the reason, not because she is personally 'left of centre ' in her views. In so far as the 'right' in Britain is defined in terms of Thatcherism, I would agree with contantinople to the extent that they would probably feel little sympathy with that; but that is not the dominant force in Conservative politics at the moment, and I doubt they would prefer a Labour government to the present one. We know much about Prince Charles' personal views than those of the Queen, and they show a peculiar mixture of conservative and quite radical elements. He is certainly no right-winger in the Thatcherite sense, and he receives more mockery from the right than he does from the liberal intelligentsia, who would sympathize with the work that he has done through the Prince's Trust and on environmental issues.

Offline Grace

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 3126
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #748 on: August 10, 2010, 04:21:54 AM »
I did generalize a bit too much back there!  Members of the royal family no doubt have personal views that don't always concur with those of other members.  Perfectly agree with your summation of Charles too, Adagietto, he is a most curious mix of conserative and left-leaning ideals.

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #749 on: August 10, 2010, 05:13:15 AM »
Prince Charles is what is known as a red tory or a liberal minded conservative.