Are you offended/disturbed by female clergy in Protestantism?

[dzheremi]

With all due respect, I don’t think it’s much of an argument, honestly. Did God send His Only-Begotten Son to some possible world, or the actual world that we inhabit? Intellectual arguments for their own sake are no grounds to challenge what God Himself has instituted. The priesthood is as it is because God instituted it that way. Had He wanted it to be some other way, He would have made it that way… You yourself said you were playing devil’s advocate. Fair enough, but the devil has no say in how Christ was incarnate, or how the priesthood functions (or anything else about how God runs His house). We don’t either.

 

[PRmerger]

I wasn’t sure where to put this topic but it seemed to fit here I guess.

Anyway, I was walking through the shopping mall recently and saw a woman wearing a Roman collar and walking with a Bible and I remembered that my local Anglican church has a female Vicar (think thats what they call her, maybe Reverend). I must admit, I was taken aback and felt… odd. It made me feel odd because, well, the Priesthood is what it is and a woman attempting to fill that role is unnatural. I don’t know if that makes sense.

This is besides those female clergy who are openly lesbian and have partners. I remember watching an American show with 2 female vicars who were married lesbians and one shot of them had them up on the altar with bread and wine and it gave me the chills.

I don’t have a problem with it at all, as a non-Catholic minister is ontologically different from a priest.

To be sure, a woman can “do” all the things that a non-Catholic minister does–she can be a counselor. She can manage a parish. She can have some good things to say while preaching.

However, the ministerial priesthood is an ontological entity totally distinct from a Protestant minister.

The priesthood is not a job. It’s not what he does (for, to be sure, a woman can “do” all those things a priest does rather nicely!) It’s who he is. At his very essence.

I heard Fr. Vincent Serpa say, regarding Baptism (paraphrasing): if we could see the change that occurs in the soul of the newly baptized, nuclear fission would appear as child’s play. A sublime, profound change occurs, at our very essence, at the very moment we are baptized. An indelible (unchangeable, immortal) mark has been placed on our soul–more powerful than any mere nuclear fission!

Similarly, at the ordination of a priest a profound change occurs. What existed 30 seconds prior to his consecration does not exist anymore.

This ontological change does not occur with the ceremonies/anointing that ordain Protestant clergy.

Thus, a woman can certainly “do” the job. She just can’t “be” a priest.

 

[PRmerger]

I cannot see that the maleness of the Twelve is relevant to the question of whether women should be ordained, and the continual Catholic recourse to this weak argument does little to help me overcome my disagreements with the Catholic position.

I have never found this argument compelling either.

It’s not because Jesus chose 12 male apostles that women can’t be priests.

It’s because women can’t be fathers.

 

[PRmerger]

As Smugleaf has indicated, there is no obligation to have strong opinions about situations that you do not have to participate in, and which therefore do not affect you.

Well, in one sense, yes. What a church down the corner does essentially affects me not.

However, in another sense your paradigm above is completely false.

To wit: insert “slavery” as your “situation that you don’t have to participate in” and you see how the argument falls apart.

 

[hosemonkey]

Well, in one sense, yes. What a church down the corner does essentially affects me not.

However, in another sense your paradigm above is completely false.

I agree. Having said that, protestantism offends/disturbs me. It is in disobedience to the one Church founded by Christ Himself and exibits a spirit of rebellion. Women in clericals is interesting, but unnatural, like a dog walking on his hind legs. I am in agreement with the argument that women can only pretend to be priests/clergy, so are to no effect, particularly the dear, deluded ladies who have been “ordained” " priests by other deluded people who have claimed to “ordain” them.

 

[Jim_Dandy]

The Catholic Church is the Bride of Christ (Eph 5:25-33, 2 Cor 11:2, Rev 21:9-14, 22:17). The Church is feminine, according to Saints Paul and John.

Priests act in Persona Christi (in the person of Christ) when they celebrate Mass or dispense the Sacraments. A female priest and her Bride? Revolting thought. Fortunately, JP II the Great spoke with finality on the issue.

On July 01, 1998, Pope John Paul II amended Church law to declare that theologians and others in authority who continue to dissent on the issue of female priests risk a “just penalty.” IOW, he was sick of the arguments, since he had addressed the matter in 1994:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

Also on July 1, 1998, the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith – headed by then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI – issued a formal proclamation regarding the ban on female priests, the church’s prohibition of euthanasia, and the rules against sex outside of marriage and warning that those who dissent from Catholic doctrine could be declared “no longer . . . in full communion with the Catholic Church.”

Protestants can call women preachers or ministers or priests or whatever they wish in their thousands of competing and contradictory ecclesial communities. It’s irrelevant to me as a Catholic.

Jim Dandy
Ex-Protestant, ex-agnostic, ex-atheist, ecstatic to be Catholic!

 

[JohnnyReb]

With all due respect, I don’t think it’s much of an argument, honestly. Did God send His Only-Begotten Son to some possible world, or the actual world that we inhabit? Intellectual arguments for their own sake are no grounds to challenge what God Himself has instituted. The priesthood is as it is because God instituted it that way. Had He wanted it to be some other way, He would have made it that way… You yourself said you were playing devil’s advocate. Fair enough, but the devil has no say in how Christ was incarnate, or how the priesthood functions (or anything else about how God runs His house). We don’t either.

Fair enough. Its not like God was sitting in heaven with a coin to flip. Ok everyone, heads I go as a male, tails as a female…

 

[jay29]

Considering they have nothing to do with any sort of authentic Apostolic Church I couldn’t care less. Anybody can dress up any way they want…

 

[TimothyH]

Considering they have nothing to do with any sort of authentic Apostolic Church I couldn’t care less. Anybody can dress up any way they want…

Nevertheless, it is disturbing to see a woman wearing a sun dress and roman collar, no?

It gives me the heeby-jeebies.

-Tim-

 

[Lutheranteach]

Not at all. The best, and I mean the best, clergy person I’ve ever met of any religion/denomination was a woman. She was truly outstanding and was everything one could want in a holy person. She was also the most learned clergy person I’ve ever met. She was also stunningly good looking. Any church, including the Catholic Church, is poorer for not having women like her as Priest/Pastors. I am certainly a better person for having known her. And in talking to her for even a couple of moments it was always clear the hand of God was steering the ship.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[PRmerger]

Not at all. The best, and I mean the best, clergy person I’ve ever met of any religion/denomination was a woman. She was truly outstanding and was everything one could want in a holy person. She was also the most learned clergy person I’ve ever met. She was also stunningly good looking. Any church, including the Catholic Church, is poorer for not having women like her as Priest/Pastors. I am certainly a better person for having known her. And in talking to her for even a couple of moments it was always clear the hand of God was steering the ship.

Oh, there is no doubt that women can be holy. She sounds very Marian. Just not apostolic.

 

[benidict]

Not at all. The best, and I mean the best, clergy person I’ve ever met of any religion/denomination was a woman. She was truly outstanding and was everything one could want in a holy person. She was also the most learned clergy person I’ve ever met. She was also stunningly good looking. Any church, including the Catholic Church, is poorer for not having women like her as Priest/Pastors. I am certainly a better person for having known her. And in talking to her for even a couple of moments it was always clear the hand of God was steering the ship.

http://i398.photobucket.com/albums/pp63/kkuster1/2909542647_ab04c2dc45.jpg

you are correct. she does look stunning. even in a collar. so tell me, and be honest. how would I look in a dress?.. dont answer that. but either way, it would be un natural. and her wearing a collar and the uniform of a priest is un natural. I dont really care how good she looks. She is in violation of the Mosaic Law, which forbids women from wearing that which pertains to a man. But we are no longer under the Mosaic Law so she may get away with that. However, she also is holding a position of authority, which is clearly forbidden in the New Testament. Peace

 

[hartleymartin]

I am against women taking on a role as a “priest”.

1.) God created man and woman with “equal value and dignity”, but he did not make them “the same”. It is clear that God had a plan which meant that man and woman were created to have different, but complimentary roles on this earth. We even see it in the fact that only the sons of Levi were to be priests in the old covenant.

2.) Jesus Christ chose 12 male apostles. Now, if you go back long enough, you will find that John the Baptist was a Levite Priest, and the Baptism of Christ was a sign of the “common priesthood” that all Christians are members of, but he specifically selected 12 to be “ministerial priests” or in fact, they were the first Bishops (a Bishop is the fulfilment of priesthood).

3.) There were “Deacons”, but the term “Deacon” means “assistant” (specifically assistant to the Bishop). Female “Deacons” existed only for the purposes of baptism and confirmation when baptism was still carried out by full immersion, and the oil of Chrism was placed over many more areas of the body, and it was considered unseemly for a man to be touching a woman so. It stills stands that Bishops are the ordinary ministers for confirmation (chrismation) in the Catholic Church.

4.) There are multiple references to women being silent and submission when gathered in prayer. From what I understand of early church history, many of these women were former temple prostitutes or priestesses of various fertility cults and this had a lot to do with Paul’s writings.

5.) Women are capable of performing many different roles in “ministry” such as Catechises, administration, teaching, nursing, and other spiritual and corporeal works of mercy. You will find that the sacramental programs, catechises programs, Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults programs, etc. are run by women. Which also takes me back to point 1 - women doing work of equal importance and dignity, but not the same work as men.

6.) Protestant ministers/pastors play a significantly different role to priests. Protestant ministers’ primarily roles are a mixture of teacher and prayer leader. A priest’s primary role is to offer sacrifice. Most priests were not trained as theologians or preachers until after the reformation. Previously only Bishops and orders of preachers (whom would travel around to different churches and parishes) would preach at a Mass. (Think of the Dominicans - the Order of Preachers.)

7.) I do find women in clerical attire offensive. This is a personal opinion.

8.) The clerical collar has a two-fold origin:

i. In the protestant tradition it is an all-round white collar, symbolising that one is a slave of Christ. It differs from the Catholic clerical collar which should only show a white rectangular tab at the front of the top button of the shirt.

ii. In the Catholic tradition it developed from the cassock. The Cassock was originally a long shirt/tunic which would be thrown over a white night-shirt (pajamas), made of black cloth (black was cheapest cloth), and the white bit sticking through at the top. This was because priests would be on 24-hour call, and would often be called in the middle of the night for infant baptisms, anointing of the sick, etc. The normal cassock is ankle-length, but the no-longer worn “travelling cassock” was shorter - worn only down to the hip or knee and black trousers would be worn. This was developed for priests whom had to walk a long way and would otherwise dirty their garments, but was also used by priests riding horses and bicycles.

 

[Hiskid1973]

Here’s another verse to consider on this issue remembering it was not uncommon for a man to have multiple wives in this culture at the time…Also, is the bishop\priest title interchangeable in the CC ? Can you bring up verses for qualifications for pastor, deacon, teachers ect. ?

1 Timothy 3:1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

 

[benedictus2]

Not at all. The best, and I mean the best, clergy person I’ve ever met of any religion/denomination was a woman. She was truly outstanding and was everything one could want in a holy person. She was also the most learned clergy person I’ve ever met. She was also stunningly good looking. Any church, including the Catholic Church, is poorer for not having women like her as Priest/Pastors. I am certainly a better person for having known her. And in talking to her for even a couple of moments it was always clear the hand of God was steering the ship.

Nope the Catholic Church is not poorer. Your church is poorer for having gone against Christ’s wishes.

I would question the holiness factor as well considering that she is going against Christ’s wishes.

So on both counts, thank goodness for the Catholic Church.

This is where people get it so wrong. They somehow think that the priesthood is a right. It isn’t. It is God’s choice and it was God’s choice to call only men. To my mind this is nothing more than pride and disobedience.

The first time I saw a priestess I felt ill.

And another thing, what if all priestesses were big fat and grotesquely ugly? I wonder if you would you still think it wonderful to have priestesses in your church.

 

[benedictus2]

you are correct. she does look stunning. even in a collar. so tell me, and be honest. how would I look in a dress?.. dont answer that. but either way, it would be un natural. and her wearing a collar and the uniform of a priest is un natural. I dont really care how good she looks. She is in violation of the Mosaic Law, which forbids women from wearing that which pertains to a man. But we are no longer under the Mosaic Law so she may get away with that. However, she also is holding a position of authority, which is clearly forbidden in the New Testament. Peace

Okay maybe not a skirt. But perhaps one of those mumus will do. But then again, the Romans wore skirts and the Scotts continue to do so.

Those who have priestesses in their church just don’t get it.

In Old Testament times, the pagans had priestesses. Only the Jewish religion didn’t. So I suppose this is a return to paganism.

It is interesting that advocates of priestesses in the Catholic Church actually lean towards pagan religions. So now we know where the impetus is coming from.

 

[benidict]

Okay maybe not a skirt. But perhaps one of those mumus will do. But then again, the Romans wore skirts and the Scotts continue to do so.

Those who have priestesses in their church just don’t get it.

In Old Testament times, the pagans had priestesses. Only the Jewish religion didn’t. So I suppose this is a return to paganism.

It is interesting that advocates of priestesses in the Catholic Church actually lean towards pagan religions. So now we know where the impetus is coming from.

MuMU? I actually had to look that up. And I am stationed in Hawaii. LOL! Im of Irish descent, but I still cannot see myself in a kilt. My legs burn to easy. I agree though. This is a return to a more Pagan mindset, that seeks to be all inclusive. I believe the Lord will preserve His Church though, and we will never adopt such practices. Funny how Catholics are the ones who are accused of Paganism. Peace to you and yours

 

[Anthony_Peter]

What is even worse is that here in England we have an example of where a female Protestant minister is actually invited to give the homily during mass in a Catholic Church. It is a liturgical abuse for anyone other than a Catholic bishop, priest or deacon to preach the homily. If a Catholic nun is not allowed to give the homily, why should a non-Catholic female minister be allowed? Sadly this is what is occurring in England.

 

[PRmerger]

And another thing, what if all priestesses were big fat and grotesquely ugly? I wonder if you would you still think it wonderful to have priestesses in your church.

That, b2, elicited a snicker. Very funny. And insightful, too.

 

[PRmerger]

What is even worse is that here in England we have an example of where a female Protestant minister is actually invited to give the homily during mass in a Catholic Church. It is a liturgical abuse for anyone other than a Catholic bishop, priest or deacon to preach the homily. If a Catholic nun is not allowed to give the homily, why should a non-Catholic female minister be allowed? Sadly this is what is occurring in England.

All this in the name of tolerance I presume?

As GK Chesterton said, “Tolerance is the virtue of a man without convictions.”