A priest recently told me that its his belief that women will be eventually ordained into the priesthood

[on_the_hill]

People need to learn to use multi-quote when they’re replying.

Not to be too picky about it, but the analogy that a woman can’t become a priest anymore than a man can have a baby misses the mark. One is a matter of physical, systemic, biological impossibility. The other isn’t. You pick.

Anyway, I once asked a priest about it. He said we were more likely to have married priests before woman priests. A couple years later he left the priesthood, so FWIW.

That’s really all I can contribute. I disagree with the Vatican, and my disagreement doesn’t make me any less of a Roman Catholic.

 

[Lapey]

I’m not 100% sure that I buy that God is either masculine or feminine in relation to anyone or anything. Jesus is obviously masculine–but God in 3 persons is a spirit.We think of some things as a feminine noun and others as a masculine presence because our language is derived from the latin or romance languages.In Spanish or French, just to name two, all nouns are assigned a masculine or feminine identity. Thus, a ship is usually deemed feminine though it doesn’t have a vagina and some other nouns are considered masculine. God has a parental relationship with His church and His people which was first described in the Old Testament, in an ancient and and patriarchal society. Since He is an authoritative figure, He is deemed masculine. This still doesn’t mean that I believe or hope for female ordination, just for the record–that is NOT my point at all. It’s just that thinking of God as a male, sexual Being and deciding that for that reason alone, women can never be allowed to be deacons or priests is a stretch. God as a male is man’s idea–not necessarily God’s. Just sayin…

I agree with almost everything here, I stop on the last statement. The Spirit inspired the Scriptures, the Scriptures portray God the Father as a male figure, masculine. Jesus, a man, referred to Him as Father, male. Is God the Father a man as Jesus was/is? Not at all, He is God. But no where will you find anything in Scripture or historical documents where He is referred to anything but father and male.

 

[Lapey]

People need to learn to use multi-quote when they’re replying.

Not to be too picky about it, but the analogy that a woman can’t become a priest anymore than a man can have a baby misses the mark. One is a matter of physical, systemic, biological impossibility. The other isn’t. You pick.

Anyway, I once asked a priest about it. He said we were more likely to have married priests before woman priests. A couple years later he left the priesthood, so FWIW.

That’s really all I can contribute. I disagree with the Vatican, and my disagreement doesn’t make me any less of a Roman Catholic.

The analogy used by me here and others many other times goes along with this thought. If a priest uses potato chips and beer for the gifts to be consecrated at Mass, does transubstantiation take place? No. So those women who have been “ordained” by dissident and excommunicated duly ordained bishops are still just potato chips and beer; they are not ordained, it is not valid. That is the impossibility of ordaining women.

It is as impossible to ordain a woman as it is a man be pregnant.

Some want to have a discussion of the “when” of priestly ordination of women will happen. Then when people state the truth which has been infallibly proclaimed by the Church and Her leaders, it is ignored because “change can happen”. This is a problem, this is obstinance. To disagree with a stated truth of teh Vatican is not obstinate. I disagree with many things, but I don’t come here and preach things that cannot happen. The difference seems small, but the result is huge. To lead into heretical thinking is not good. Disagreement is healthy.

 

[Moonbug]

My friend,
You are heading down a slippery slope. In this thread, you have quoted Darwin, rejected the magisterium, ignored the Popes, and now are rejecting Hebrews as Sacred Canon Scripture!

Why are you even Catholic?

Lardy, Lardy!!! Looks like I’ve run into the self appointed “Temple Police,” here. I am standing on firm ground. It is you who has placed himself on a “slippery slope. I have quoted Darwin? Yes, but the Church has a high regard for Darwin, and has approved of his scientific discoveries, but not of some of the interpretations a few have tried to gleam from them. Rejected the magisterium? There are different levels of teaching in the magisterium. Some are infallible and some are not. Of late, there have been those who claim that every utterance from the mouth of a Pope is infallible. In the two thousand year history of the Church, that has not been true. Only in the last century has this error been forced on the Church. I ignored the Popes? Only a few of them. Their pontificate speaks for itself. Rejecting “Hebrews” as sacred Cannon Scripture? Not at all. I fully accept it as a viable document in the cannon. I was merely pointing out that “Hebrews” leans heavily in justifying the Christian priesthood. Some scholars believe that it was written to pacify the Christian Jews in Rome who were nostalgic for the priesthood under the Old Law. Biblical scholars think it makes far too much of the relationship between Abraham and the priesthood of Melchizedek. I’m not saying the Christian priesthood is not viable. I believe it is, but remember, Christ and the twelve apostles were not ordained priest. This concept came into the Church after 400 A.D. I recommend you read more church history. You seem to view life in black and white, when in reality it’s many shades of gray. Chow!

 

[L_Marshall]

Not to be too picky about it, but the analogy that a woman can’t become a priest anymore than a man can have a baby misses the mark. One is a matter of physical, systemic, biological impossibility. The other isn’t. You pick.

Analogy always falls short.

If we look at the fact of the matter, the Church teaches that it is ontologically impossible for a woman to be ordained.

To use an example (I’ll try to avoid analogy):
If a bishop, with full intent to ordain, validly lays on hands and prays the Prayer of Ordination on a woman, the woman would still not be ordained. The fact of the matter is that the Mark of Ordination cannot be placed on a woman’s soul.