text: Equally, there is no obligation to receive from the hand of a priest that one finds utterly objectionable or immoral, but I make a point of doing precisely that in order to remind myself that my what matters is Christ in the Eucharist and not my personal assessment of the minister.
  
  May I ask whether you object to "permanent" deacons and to non-ordained Eucharistic Ministers, and whether you avoid receiving from their them?
  
  Your 2nd para, Trid, is far more interesting and challenging.
  
  First, I take it you don't accept the research, particularly by Gary Macy, that purports to show that for the first millennium (roughly) ordination meant appointment to an office, and it was only in the high middle ages, a time of MAJOR theological renewal/upheaval, that the notion of orders imprinting indelible characters first emerged?
  
  Second, why would that theology of indelible character be challenged by the ordination of women? Sorry, Trid, something is missing in your chain of thought here, no??