I find it fascinating to follow in-house disagreements among Christians, such as the disagreement about whether women can be ordained as priests. At First Things, David Mills blogs about a video entitled, “Ordain a Lady.” This led me to do a search on the topic, “Why won’t the Catholic church ordain women?” That led me to this Catholic blog, which seeks to answer Episcopal arguments for the ordination of women.

This statement caught me eye:

So while it’s true that “Male and female are created in God’s image,” and that “both men and women can image God’s love and beauty;” that equality doesn’t mean that both are called to the priesthood.

As an outsider, I recognize that insiders feel bound by the Bible, church tradition, or some combination of the two. At the same time, on the assumption that God exists and indeed has forbidden the ordination of women priests, He would have some reason for doing so. I wonder, though, what that reason could be.

If the ban on ordained priests is not relative to time or culture, then that suggests that the reason for the ban has something to do with the intrinsic differences between male and female. But what sort of intrinsic difference between male and female would be relevant to the ordination of priests? Chromosomal differences? Anatomical differences? Average height and weight? Clothing styles? None of these things even seem relevant to the issue. But then what could be relevant?