This is the straight forward, certain, and clear teaching of the Church down to the present moment. It is based not only on the Tradition of the Church as a conduit of revelation, and the settled practice of historical Catholic Christian bodies, but further and most importantly for Liberal Catholics, it is based on the interior vision and clairvoyant insights of our Founding Bishop. The entire reformulation of the Eucharist, its enlightened revision, and its claim to authenticity rests upon the insights of Bishop Leadbeater and other confirming seers in our tradition. To depart from the standards forthrightly set out in The Science of The Sacraments with reference to liturgical and priestly function and prerogative requires the exercise of prudence, spiritual insight, and perceptions beyond the ordinary senses of mankind.

The Priest and the Divine Liturgy are inseparable. Without a priest who is validly ordained by a Bishop in the Apostolic Succession, the Eucharist becomes a beautiful and uplifting communal prayer, but no more than that. Without such a priest, it does not effectuate what it symbolises. The predominate agency of Divine Grace by way of liturgical action is dependent not only on a liturgy of integrity, but as Bishop Leadbeater says, "a male channel."

Robert Morton in his history of The Liberal Catholic Church points to a truth sometimes forgotten in our modern world view: "...divine grace has to be communicated to a physical body on this physical plane through a physical intermediary...on the physical plane, we are conditioned by physical plane laws and conditions".

In the instance of the Liturgy, Bishop Leadbeater would add that this physical agency must be a male physical body. The empower-ment and utilisation of a male vehicle in the transactions of the Mass is integral to its efficacy. It is no evidence that men are superior to women, nor is it a function of some sociological notion of patrimony. It is rather a distinction in function between the male and female. Bishop Leadbeater in his work alludes to other types of energy which are arranged to function through the female organism but states these to be of a "different character" than those manifest in the Mass. It is simply a division of labour consistent with earth condition and consciousness in this stage of human development.

It should be noted that pre-Christian history evidences women priests anciently. In the early Christian Church there is little , if any, authority for more than an isolated and sporadic employment of women as priests, a practice -even if acknowledged-, soon decisively rejected by the Church. The future may provide opportunity and authority for women priests. Or perhaps liturgies may feature a shared priestly function. Parallel liturgies may arise giving further opportunity for feminine liturgical expression. Exactly what the future holds in these concerns is now not clearly known. But for now, the priest must be male. In the intervening years whether they be measured in decades, scores, or centuries, Liberal Catholics would do well to keep their balance, avoid divisive ideologies, and above all insure that the issue of ordination of women does not become a struggle of special or political interests or the occasion for the splintering of an already small communion. It would be well to keep particularly in mind three considerations.

I. Validation through Inner Vision
Any changes in the qualifications of priests involving gender must be consistent with the Inner Vision, tried and tested in the fulcrum of mystical and psychical insight, qualities possessed in abundance by our Founding Bishops, especially Bishop Leadbeater. Departing from the standards of priesthood set out in The Science of the Sacraments would require a scope of vision, spiritual understanding, wisdom, and clairvoyant capacity at least equal to that possessed by Bishop Leadbeater and the Founders. What is at stake is the efficacy of liturgical action. The ushering in of a new dispensation on this question is no light matter. Prudence and a certain enlightened conservatism must guide those who would overthrow standards and principles which have served so well for nearly a hundred years. In the larger view, the institution of women priests would depart from twenty centuries of consistent practice, a practice only seriously questioned in catholic circles in our own century. Whether female priests would dilute, diminish, or nullify sacramental action within the context of the Mass is no abstract question. The practical effect of the Liturgy is at stake. So long as reasonable and substantial doubts persist with respect to the question, the Church should prudently apply the same rule of scrupulous adherence to known and certain standards as it does in questions affecting the Apostolic Succession.

II. Comity with other Catholic Christian Churches
To ordain women as priests would undoubtedly cut away at the comity which exists between Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Liberal Catholic churches. A Liberal Catholic priesthood, negotiable and at least implicitly recognised by the two oldest Christian sacramental churches, is a treasure to be valued. Many Liberal Catholics, as this author, have come from one of those traditions, seeking a deeper life of sacrament, spirit, and freedom, all within the framework of a church which possesses the Apostolic Succession and a priesthood with undeniable credentials. Liberal Catholics would do well to preserve the concord and mutuality which now exists between themselves and the historic Christian churches and do nothing to create barriers to this comity. To respect the positions of the Roman and Eastern Christian sacramental churches is no act of slavish imitation; rather it is to give due respect to these bodies. Bishops Wedgwood and Leadbeater did no less when they followed the fundamental structure of the Mass as practised in the Roman church in their own revisions, when they insisted on a rigid adherence to form and function in carrying forward the Apostolic Succession, when they embraced an hierarchical and sacramental church rather than the church of the Reformers, and when they followed the Christian Church of the Ages in ordaining only men as priests.

III. Unity through Liturgy
The unity of the Liberal Catholic Church rests not on imposed dogmatic teachings, nor on the primacy of Pope , Council, conclaves, or individual personality or corporate gatherings. It is not bound together by nationalistic loyalties, worldly wealth, nor even by a common adherence to doctrine or discipline. Nor is it bound by the formality of membership, as sincere seekers of truth are welcome to its sacraments and altars without affiliation. The only requirement of membership outside of sincerity in searching for the Truth is the reverential acceptance of a common liturgy. This principle of unity was described well by Bishop James Wedgwood: "If our movement is to hold together there must be a common basis on which we unite, and since we agree in allowing to our people liberty of thought, it seems to me that this basis must be common use, without variation of an authorised Liturgy..." (Norton, Tempest, p.41)

It would be well for Liberal Catholics to note the fragility inherent in such a basis of unity. When the Church changes the liturgy (which is rare indeed, there having been only four such non-substantive changes in our history!), she does so cautiously, conservatively, and with the utmost care and prudence. Every change in the liturgy runs the risk of diluting the very basis of church unity. No other church must act with such care and caution, for no other Christian church bases its unity on the primacy of liturgy.

The priest and liturgy are inseparable. They are inextricably intertwined in an indissoluble functioning and effective unity. The Liturgy is but a shell without a validly ordained priest. If an element of doubt be admitted into the ordination of priests by admitting women to the priesthood, a thing unprecedented in the historic Catholic churches of antiquity, then the whole fabric of unity is challenged and threatened. Unlike the Roman Church, whose Pope enjoys a universal jurisdiction, unlike the Eastern Churches which rely largely on Tradition and Councils to insure unity, unlike some Christian bodies which rely on synodical or some other ecclesiastical authority or charismatic personality to enforce unity, The Liberal Catholic Church alone resorts to a common Liturgy for its unity along with a Priesthood officially enabled to draw upon the Reservoir of Power and Grace which makes of the Mass a living reality.

The integrity of the Liturgy, the mutuality and commonality which exists between Liberal Catholic, Roman, and Eastern Orthodox church bodies, and the sole basis of Liberal Catholic unity are at stake in the issue of ordaining women priests. The issue of ordination of women to the priesthood of the Liberal Catholic Church is trivialised when primarily thought of as an issue of gender. The question is not one of societal accommodation, equality of the sexes, political correctness, cultural integration, or being "in step with the times." The real question goes to the fundamental nature of the worship and service of Liberal Catholics.

It is incredible that some Liberal Catholics apparently believe that a liturgy devised by Bishops Wedgwood and Leadbeater with the assistance of Mrs. Annie Besant, a liturgy which requires a male priest for the efficient production of its effects, a liturgy so artfully, aesthetically , and efficiently designed, should less than a hundred years after its institution be subjected to an act which could or would render it ineffectual as a sacrificial and sacramental action! Was not the institution of new Liberal Catholic liturgical arrangements the very foundation and basis of future development, a development consistent with the insights and vision of the Founding Bishops?

It would seem that a departure from the clear norms established by the Founders would be justified -nay, required- only by a clear expression of the Lord. It should be remembered that every innovation is not by Divine Inspiration, and every proposed revision is not a result of Revelation.

As Liberal Catholics pass from the Piscean to the Aquarian Age, change is both inevitable and desirable. The challenge to the Church is to be open to the promptings of Spirit while preserving and protecting its own identity, its own character, and its own lineage and priesthood. The qualification for priesthood office and service is no tangential or peripheral issue. It is the issue, namely, whether The Liberal Catholic Church is to maintain its existence on the basis laid down by its Founders and to continue on the liturgical and ecclesiastical path which, we are assured by Bishop Leadbeater, has the approval of the Lord himself!

Would not Liberal Catholics better spend their energy, ingenuity, and creativity in positive proposals more consistent with the fundamental thought and vision of the Founders?

Perhaps it is time the Church further address dual concerns which are logically implicit in the originating principles upon which the Church is based:

First, let the Church further develop its theology of "the priesthood of the faithful", differentiating the role of priests, bishops, and lay people (with due regard to gender) and with an eye to how best incorporate this understanding into the practices of church and liturgy.

The beginnings of such a dialogue at the last Episcopal Synod was a hopeful sign of real renewal and mature corporate understanding. A clearer distinction between "the consecratory role of priest and bishop" and "the distributive role in relation to consecrated products" as proposed by the Very Reverend Ronald Rivett as well as Presiding Bishop Johannes would perhaps lay the basis of genuine and authentic liturgical dialogue and renewal. (The Liberal Catholic, Nov. ‘96).

Second, let the Church express again its firm determination to preserve and enhance its distinctive role and function among the Christian churches. Let it reaffirm its commitment to freedom of thought and interpretation of creed and scripture. Let it uncompromisingly affirm the esoteric basis of its teachings. Let it firmly adhere to a system of sacrament, liturgy, and priesthood validated by history, experience, and Inner Vision.

The future of The Liberal Catholic Church will not likely be found in mixing the gender of its priests but in its commitment to its founding principles. Future developments and change should have their origin in those foundation principles and only when clearly consistent with the will of our Lord. The future of The Liberal Catholic Church should be more a function of seeking the will of the Lord than conforming to some sociological, political, or popular practice. If it must, let the ‘battle of the sexes’ be fought on other fronts. Let it not fracture the unity and integrity of this Communion!