Theos-Talk Archives (May 2005 Message tt00644)

Hi Greg, Bart and All,
Thanks Greg for the background on this.
In my opinion it's a great shame that the LCC has not embraced a more 
symbolic approach to the sacraments and feminine principle.
It seems it has got caught up in dogmas about "World Mothers" being 
literal beings or persons rather than purely symbols.

I've heard church members say myself how women's ordinations "don't 
stick" this all comes from Leadbeater's pronouncements on the subject 
as you pointed out.

Philosophically and theosophically this is to me not supportable as the 
ritual is from a esoteric perspective a symbolic enactment of Cosmic 
principals.

The indwelling Christ principal is sexless and exists in all beings 
from my understanding of the theosophia and Gnostic approaches no 
intermediary is necessary.

A priest or priestess may for the purpose of the ceremony act the 
symbolic role but to suggest they have special powers to bestow or 
mediate 'grace' seems to me to then turn the whole ritual into an act 
of disempowerment rather than Self empowerment.

The inner qualities of the energies that flow out of ceremonies come 
largely from the inner motivation of those who perform them.
If the motivation is to genuinely promote selfless Love and Self 
empowerment then the mass could be and can be a very beautiful ceremony.

It is my point of view that a Priest / Priestess only symbolically 
plays a role and simply acts out a part. (similar to an office bearer 
in Masonic ceremony)

Buddhi or Christ energies can only ever genuinely flow though 
individual realization and selfless action no one can mediate that.
At least for what its worth that is how I see the role of ritual.

Perry

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bartl@s...> wrote:
> gregory@z... wrote:
> > Leadbeater claimed, on the basis of his alleged clairvoyant 
research, that 
> > women could not be ordained to the Christian priesthood because of 
the nature 
> > of their psychic constructions: Christian ordination only "worked" 
on male 
> > bodies. The Liberal Catholic Church's General Episcopal Synod 
recently 
> > confirmed this view (and this led to Liberal Catholics who rejected 
this view 
> > breaking from the Church).
> 
> I've been looking for the original on this; you wouldn't happen 
to have 
> the reference handy, would you? If not, I still have other sources to 
> check, so don't knock yourself out. Thanks.
> 
> Bart