Are you offended/disturbed by female clergy in Protestantism?

[benidict]

I am conservative and probably ignorant to boot but this is not an oversimplification. Have a look at the women who are the driving force behind priestesses in the Church.

Madam, Marlene. I am a she.Yes, astounding isn’t it that a female should actually propose true feminism as opposed to the “masculinism” that underlie so called “feminist” ideology.

Yes, Marx and Engels. Did someone put a gun to the feminists head so that they have to swallow Marx and Engels rubbish?

No, but the feminists are hoping to emasculate them. Yes, they want to feminize the male that is why they are pro - gay as well.

Quite right. But just look at your “SNAGS” you Sensitive New Age Guys and your Metrosexuals.

Did they put a gun to the woman’s head to abort?

Sorry but it is a feminist issue. Priestesses in the Catholic Church is a feminist issue. It is another variant of the “anything you can do I can do better”.And this folks is what Catholicism needs…More strong women like Benedictus here, who are not afraid to make a stand for what is Good and True! God bless you Benedictus.

 

[benedictus2]

Well in that case what that poster said made even less sense:

MissMarlene

 :

A woman cannot be a priest, but she can be a protestant pastor according to protestant theology, which makes sense within its own system. Its an interpretation of Scripture in this area, where they utilize some scripture passages, with which the Catholic Church is not concerned…

Other Poster:
That is why we have nuns. We have nuns who teach, nuns who minister to the sick, nuns who are sent out to the poor.

Aah Marlene you misrepresent what I wrote. And yes, I do have a name other than Other Poster. You can call me B2 for short.

I responded to this longer post of yours

MissMarlene:

*A woman cannot be a priest, but she can be a protestant pastor according to protestant theology, which makes sense within its own system. Its an interpretation of Scripture in this area, where they utilize some scripture passages, with which the Catholic Church is not concerned. **One of them is: “In the end times, I will pour out My Spirit over ALL flesh”.
And women were standing at the first Alter/the Cross of Jesus, and Mary of Magdala went as the first to proclaim the resurrection to the Apostles. ***

The protestants don’t have the hierarchal thinking and ordination teaching that we have as Catholics, because they interpret the Bible in a different way. In my oppinion you ought to respect their ministers greatly, even if you don’t agree with protestant interpretation.
The “That is why we have nuns” address the “I will pour out My spirit over All flesh” and the reference to the women at the foot of the cross. The point of the response was to highlight the fact that these women at the foot of the cross were not called to be part of the 12th but they are nonetheless an integral part of Jesus’ s ministry.

What

is why? Its nonsense unless understood in the sense that this poster carries the Catholic nun-ministry over into where he personally thinks it should belong, namely in the place of what is now the female pastor-role. Nope. Only because you misunderstood what I wrote. The point of “that is why we have nuns” is that there are areas in the Church where women’s service is as valuable and have equal dignity.

To that my answer remains that these two things are very different and the statement is way too simplistic.’

Hope that clarifies things.

No it didn’t but I hope you get what I mean now.

 

[benedictus2]

Being a feminist or not is not the issue here but that some “ultra-feminist” types make the priesthood about some sort of hippie liberal college philosophy class nonsense regarding the “male power structure” or whatever BS, so they have to get in on it or else they’re not really equal in all ways to men. I also consider myself a feminist of a certain sort (suffrage, property rights, universal literacy, v
v
v
v

If I were a “female clergy” person or a supporter of the same, I would be scared reading these words. It is little wonder that those in support of this position convince themselves that all that matters is feeling called to be a servant. Indeed, God DOES call people, as surely as He called Israel out of her captivity and into the desert. But if you don’t respond to the call in the right way (in the case of women and unfit men, by being something other than a priest), if you do so grudgingly or only after trying to turn the tables on God, then in what sense are you following His will? In what sense are you serving Him? In what sense can you expect Him to bless you as He wants to bless you?
Simply Brilliant!

:clapping::clapping::clapping:

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Remain charitable in your posts please

 

[1234]

The only thing that disturbs and offends me about it is that by making female “clergy” these denominations are putting a massive obstacle in the way of ecumenism. A woman walking around in clerical dress is as if she were wearing a T shirt saying in huge letters “The Catholic Church (and all the Eastern Orthodox Churches) is totally wrong and our denomination will never ever unite with them, so there!”

I had really hoped that when the moderator terminated this thread that it was dead for good. I see that it got resurrected somehow.

Ecumenism for the RC means that other denominations join the RC church. I doesn’t mean finding common ground. Ecumenism for other denominations means finding common ground. Other protestant denominations are merging with each other and with the Anglicans, who, for example, just merged with the very protestant Moravian Church in the US–the Moravians were almost wiped out by the RC church, so it’s unlikely they will be talking to Rome anytime soon about finding ‘common ground’. Some disaffected Anglican clergy, and a relatively few laypeople, hundreds to thousands, are joining the RCC with a hope to enter the ordinariates, their protected little Anglo-RC shelters (when they appear); however, relatively few rank-and-file Episcopalians convert to the RCC.

Many Protestant and Anglican denominations fully accept female clergy–and they ARE clergy, not ‘clergy’–and do well by it. There is no reason for them not to dress as clergy since this is what they are. Women usually make very good clergy and are widely welcomed by their churches.

 

[MissMarlene]

benedictus2; The we did not refer to all. The “we” referred to Catholics because my “we” refers to Catholic not Christianity in general. I don’t know where you got the idea that I might be saying otherwise.

There is no use bickeing over words. The topic was about people’s feelings and thoughts about women in the Protestant pastor-ministry. In that context you said: ‘Thats why we have nuns’, to which I replied that this is no useful reply, because the fact that we have nuns has little to do with the fact that some Protestants have female pastors. I dont think we can boil more soup on that bone.

Which happens to be wrong. I understand their understanding of scripture and their understanding is wrong. Plain and simple.

So whenever you talk about the perspectives on different people’s faith you simply say: Your wrong, full stop?
So why discuss things at all? My focus was to put light on why Lutheranism has female ministers and how reducing that to a feminist powerstruggle is unfair and ignorant. I believe that my explanations helped some people to understand that the Lutherans are not just bad feminists but that they sincerely believe that they interpret the Scripture correctly, and they have certain passages which they put in the forefront. Thus to nuance an important post-modern topic on a thread where lots of people only come and state their gut-feeling and point fingers.

I know that. They are the equivalent of our priests. But the point is do we need women priests? And the answer is NO.

I never stated that we do. But its besides the point. You seem to be shadow boxing.

And here you are being a relativist. Is it just a matter of part of our faith or is it true? We can’t just fall back on the “I believe what I will believe” because that is total hogwash.

Your labeling me shows really much more about yourself. Please read my statement again, before you post such offensive rubbish.

Before they started ordaining women, women pastors and priests are not part of their faith either. It is a new invention.

You must talk to them about that. They will tell you in what ways they allow for developing doctrines in their church.

This is about truth. Not all faiths are equal.Either we have the truth or we don’t.

Again you are talking to yourself. And of course none of us have the Truth in a certain sense, because the Truth is God and His ways are above our ways and are bigger than our ways. In the new Testament the apostles come running to Jesus and tell Him: “Master we have seen a man who doesnt walk with us who is healing people in your name!” Jesus answers: “If he is not against Me he is with Me”.
If you look at our Portestant brothers and sisters with that understanding then I would be pleased.

** Either it is true that Christ freely willed to choose to men only to be his apostles or or that He bowed to the sexism of His time? The latter is just downright ridiculous.***

If you wanna debate with me, please stick to the points and conclusions I make instead of going off on a tangent.

The question is whether it is God’s will that they serve Him in such a capacity. Read the Bible and you will come to the only credble answer of NO.

In such a capacity? Dear sister, you forget even to clarify which capacities you are speaking of. I have been clear from the start that 1) I dont agree with women in the priesthood. 2) That protestant pastors are not priests 3) That God seems to be using women ministers who preach, heal and prophesy in other denominations and some of them bear good fruit 4) That I am for an expansion of the ministries within Catholic Church life where eg. prophets, healers and testimony-givers, as men and women /laity, would be allowed and encouraged to practice their God-given gifts in our Sunday gatherings just like what Paul says in his letter to the Corinthians.

Now I do not wish to speak to you anymore about this thread-topic. I find you rude and unwilling to enter into any discussion or learn anything.
Now if you, in the future seriously wish to hear about what ‘women in ministry’ looks like from inside their faith-system I will be happy to share about my experiences with Lutheranism once more.

As for you being a woman. In my very limited and perhaps flawed knowlege of Latin it seems the ending “us” is masculine, that is why I believed you to be a male.
But that is really irrelevant to the discussion.*

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Regular posters on the NCR forums know I tend not to like giving two warnings.
Stop the bickering.
Remain charitable.
Remain on topic.

 

[1234]

Protestant and Anglican clergy, male and female, have no desire to be Catholics or like Catholic priests, either in principle or in practice. They* are* ordained in their churches where they serve.

And Protestants and Anglicans really don’t *care *what Catholics think of their female clergy. That is why this thread is so irrelevant. It would make more sense to debate whether RCC should ordain women, which won’t happen, of course, but which many Catholics support. This topic has already been widely debated on CAF.

 

[benidict]

Protestant and Anglican clergy, male and female, have no desire to be Catholics or like Catholic priests, either in principle or in practice. They* are* ordained in their churches where they serve.

And Protestants and Anglicans really don’t *care *what Catholics think of their female clergy. That is why this thread is so irrelevant. It would make more sense to debate whether RCC should ordain women, which won’t happen, of course, but which many Catholics support. This topic has already been widely debated on CAF.

For Catholics to say they dont care about what the Protestants do, and vice versa, in a sense implys that we are Not seperated bretheren, but different religions altogether. I think we should care about what each side thinks. Either we are One Church by virtue of Christ death burial ressurection, and our baptism. Or we are not. If we are not, then I would agree with you. I then would not care one bit what protestants do. But since the Catholic Catachism teaches we are seperated bretheren. I do care. If the Holy see at some point determines this is not the case, but we truly are not related somehow, then I will cease to care. until then…Peace

 

[Roy5]

I think it’s fine that Protestants ordain women, and that Catholics don’t. One can argue that the Bible forbids forbids such ordination, but the Bible includes lots of injunctions and commandments that we don’t take seriously. Women don’t have to cover their heads at Mass anymore - just one example - even though Paul seems quote clear that they should. I always thought this was particularly interesting because, of course, in Judaism it wa sthe other way around. The Orthodox Jews (and many Conservative and even some Reform Jews) insist that men wear hats or yamukas when at temple/synogogue. Sometimes I’ve wondered why Paul reversed this tradition???

 Certainly I am not impressed by such verses as Ex. 22:18 and 20. I mean, can we really consider such instructions as part of the authnetic 'Word of God' for this time or for any time? See Ex. 21, Lev. 20, and Deut. 22-23 for many other wild 'commandments'.

 I know several women clergy, and I find them like men clergy. Some are better equipped for their calling than others. A few may hold on to some annoying aspects of militant feminism, but that is less true than 20-30 years ago. The fact that women have made such gains in the church and in society at large has blunted this militancy. 

 Among Episcopalians and Methodists, for example, there are numerous women Bishops. The major difference (as far as those two denominations are concerned) is that the Episcopalians ordain and have elected Bishops who are practicing gay/lesbians. The Methodists will not ordain practicing gays/lesbians. I would hazard a guess that the Catholic priesthood has a much higher percentage of gays, most of them celibate. Why? They hope being a priest will either cure them of their same-sex orientation, or at least keep them from acting it out. They also won't have to face questions by family and friends as to why they haven't marriied. 

 God bless all devout clergy of all faiths. And a happy St. Valentine's Day to one and all, too.

 

[Hiskid1973]

Ok, from searching various translations in Titus it seems the elder/priest are interchangeable with those being a husband of one wife…It then uses bishop/overseer and gives more qualifications. Then in 1Tim. 3 it uses bishop/overseer and gives the same qualifications…

Now I guess the next step would be the five fold ministries… and the qualifications with regards to Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; Eph 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ:

Now it seems obvious that bishop/overseer/elder/priest had some pretty strict qualifications but the next step would be to find the qualifications of five fold ministries in regards to qualifications…In our church we don’t use the priest but use bishop’ which are over Asia/India/Nepal, South/Latin America, USA ect and they are all males…I’m not sure there are any female pastors but I know we have many female teachers, missionaries and deaconesses…

 

[JonNC]

The only thing that disturbs and offends me about it is that by making female “clergy” these denominations are putting a massive obstacle in the way of ecumenism. A woman walking around in clerical dress is as if she were wearing a T shirt saying in huge letters “The Catholic Church (and all the Eastern Orthodox Churches) is totally wrong and our denomination will never ever unite with them, so there!”

While this is not the reason to not have female clergy (Christ’s example in scripture is), it is certainly frustrating when I see my Lutheran siblings in the ELCA, who frankly have done a better job of ecumenism than my LCMS, regularly place stumbling blocks for dialogue - female clergy and now openly active homosexuals in the clergy, as an example.

Jon

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I often wonder if evangelicals allow women because they don’t have a sacerdotal view of the priesthood/pastorate? It seems that if all a pastor is is a person who presents the Eucharist or leads a celebratory event of praise and didactic sermoning, then there is no one standing in persona christi to offer sacrifice and why limit it to men? The Catholic, Orthodox, and even Anglican (generally) understanding should preclude women completely.

While this is not the reason to not have female clergy (Christ’s example in scripture is), it is certainly frustrating when I see my Lutheran siblings in the ELCA, who frankly have done a better job of ecumenism than my LCMS, regularly place stumbling blocks for dialogue - female clergy and now openly active homosexuals in the clergy, as an example.

Jon

 

[benedictus2]

Ecumenism for the RC means that other denominations join the RC church. I doesn’t mean finding common ground.

Here’s an analogy for you.

A son leaves the family because the parents said no fornication, no drugs, no stealing and he wanted to do all these with impunity.

But the son thought I miss my family so says to his parents okay mom and dad I will come back and stealing is out but fornication and drugs well they’re still in. You think the parents should say ok?

Ecumenism for other denominations means finding common ground.

There are a lot of common ground but sadly there are wrong protestant doctrines that will continue to divide. There is no use burying our heads in the sand.

Other protestant denominations are merging with each other and with the Anglicans, who, for example, just merged with the very protestant Moravian Church in the US–the Moravians were almost wiped out by the RC church, so it’s unlikely they will be talking to Rome anytime soon about finding ‘common ground’. **Some disaffected Anglican clergy, and a relatively few laypeople, hundreds to thousands, are joining the RCC with a hope to enter the ordinariates, their protected little Anglo-RC shelters (when they appear); however, relatively few rank-and-file Episcopalians convert to the RCC. **

It is a fact that conversions to Catholicism come from those who have studied the Bible and are quite learned. You have the likes of Scott Hahn. Francis Beckwith, etc.

Most who convert to protestantism are those who through their own fault do not know much about the Bible and history. But once they start studying, the revert.

Many Protestant and Anglican denominations fully accept female clergy–

And they do so AGAINST CHRIST’S WILL.

and they ARE clergy, not ‘clergy’–

Only according to their definition of clergy. Not according to what Christ intended.

 

[benedictus2]

I think it’s fine that Protestants ordain women, and that Catholics don’t. One can argue that the Bible forbids forbids such ordination, but the Bible includes lots of injunctions and commandments that we don’t take seriously.

And who says what should and should not be taken seriously? You?

How do you know that Christ expressed will that there be only men priests not be taken seriously?

Maybe you can decide that murder and adultery are not to be taken seriously?

Women don’t have to cover their heads at Mass anymore - just one example -

That is only a disciplline. Discipliines change. Doctrines don’t. A male priesthood is doctrine.

Priestesses are an innovation that came about only recently in the history of Christianity. However, priestesses are not new, they go all the way back to pre-Christian times. They go right back to paganism.

 

[benedictus2]

I often wonder if evangelicals allow women because they don’t have a sacerdotal view of the priesthood/pastorate? It seems that if all a pastor is is a person who presents the Eucharist or leads a celebratory event of praise and didactic sermoning, then there is no one standing in persona christi to offer sacrifice and why limit it to men? The Catholic, Orthodox, and even Anglican (generally) understanding should preclude women completely.

I think that is correct. A priest I know who are very pro-priestesses in the Church view the priesthood as purely ministerial. He also does not believe in transubstantiation and confession.

As I told in an email, to think this way is to eviscerate Catholic theology.

 

[benedictus2]

Protestant and Anglican clergy, male and female, have no desire to be Catholics or like Catholic priests, either in principle or in practice.

You are quite wrong there. There are Anglican priests who want to be Catholic. I was reading an Anglican conversion story and this man said that his priest told him that he believe that the Catholic Church is the true Church and he himself would have converted as well. But he is a priest and that is all he knows and that is all he wants to do and he doesn’t want to lose that. I think that may have been prior to the granting of a special permission to Anglican priests to remain priests even after their conversion.

And Protestants and Anglicans really don’t *care *what Catholics think of their female clergy.

I think they do they just don’t voice it.

That is why this thread is so irrelevant. It would make more sense to debate whether RCC should ordain women, which won’t happen, of course, but which many Catholics support. This topic has already been widely debated on CAF.

You have a certain point there but it does not entirely invalidate this thread.

It is good to get what people’s musings are on the subject if for no other reason than to show how far down the wrong track protestant denominations have gone in contravention of Christ’s will.

 

[Bran_Stark]

As a protestant myself, I’m offended by female “priests”, but not female clergy in general. I’m by no means convinced that the sacramental understanding of ministry is true, but if it is I definitely would agree with the traditional understanding of in persona Christi and all.

So for Baptists, Presbyterians, UCC (where my own pastor is a woman) and so on, I’m all for gender equality. But something about the sight of a female decked out in gilded vestments - or worse yet in a bishop’s mitre - and celebrating the Holy Mysteries according to ancient liturgies makes me queasy. It seems… pagan.

 

[1234]

Here’s an analogy for you.

A son leaves the family because the parents said no fornication, no drugs, no stealing and he wanted to do all these with impunity.

But the son thought I miss my family so says to his parents okay mom and dad I will come back and stealing is out but fornication and drugs well they’re still in. You think the parents should say ok?

There are a lot of common ground but sadly there are wrong protestant doctrines that will continue to divide. There is no use burying our heads in the sand.

It is a fact that conversions to Catholicism come from those who have studied the Bible and are quite learned. You have the likes of Scott Hahn. Francis Beckwith, etc.

Most who convert to protestantism are those who through their own fault do not know much about the Bible and history. But once they start studying, the revert.

And they do so AGAINST CHRIST’S WILL.

Only according to their definition of clergy. Not according to what Christ intended.

All of this is only your opinion. There are so many converts from the RCC to the Protestant denominations and the AC, it is hard to generalize.

The point is that ecumenism to the RCC means converting to the RCC. To Protestants and Anglicans, it means finding common ground, which the Protestants and Anglicans are now doing. The ACC is now in communion with about 6 different denominations, including the Moravians and the Evangelical Lutherans, the largest Lutheran denomination in the US. Protestant mergers have been going on for some time. Still other denominations are in communion with each other, if not actually merged.

To say that theological differences is equivalent to stealing and fornication is very insulting to non-Catholic churches. I don’t think that Protestant denominations feel that they need the RCC, just as the AC and orthodoxy don’t need it. The all don’t endorse a celibate clergy either, especially now that they see the potential consequences.

Another poster has said that if women want to become priests they should become nuns…? They are not equivalent. Female non-Catholic clergy aren’t equivalent to religious sisters nor do they want to be. Most are married, for one thing. Most feel called to be pastors, for another.

 

[benedictus2]

As a protestant myself, I’m offended by female “priests”, but not female clergy in general. I’m by no means convinced that the sacramental understanding of ministry is true, but if it is I definitely would agree with the traditional understanding of in persona Christi and all.

So for Baptists, Presbyterians, UCC (where my own pastor is a woman) and so on, I’m all for gender equality. But something about the sight of a female decked out in gilded vestments - or worse yet in a bishop’s mitre - and celebrating the Holy Mysteries according to ancient liturgies makes me queasy.** It seems… pagan**.

Because it is pagan.

Judaism did not have priestesses and neither did Christianity. That we are starting to see the emergence of priestesses in Christian Churches signals a return to paganism. The women proponents of priestesses are also the ones who have incorporated pagan and new age thought into their theology.

In the Catholic Church the nuns who are very pro priestesses conduct pagan rituals.

**There was even a dutch nun ( I think Benedictine but can’t remember her name at the moment) who constructed a liturgy where they would read passages from the Bible and everyone present would respond “This is not the Word of God” and then they would bite into an apple in solidarity with Eve.
**
Reading that gave me the chills because that clearly showed how far down the path of the evil one they have gone.
I don’t know though how you can not believe the sacramental understanding of priesthood and yet believe that the priest stands “in persona Christi”.