Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston has said that were he to start a church he would “love to have women priests”

[Tomdstone]

It was never a doctrine of the Church.

It was a 2000 year old traditon, with support from Scripture, and it has been thrown out by the Roman Catholics.

 

[estesbob]

It was a 2000 year old traditon, with support from Scripture, and it has been thrown out by the Roman Catholics.

You need to learn difference between “Discipline” and Doctrine".

 

[ProVobis]

You need to learn difference between “Discipline” and Doctrine".

I find it interesting that someone who posts the readings for each and every day can so easily dismiss St Paul and his writings. Isn’t there a purpose for the Liturgy of the Word?

 

[estesbob]

I find it interesting that someone who posts the readings for each and every day can so easily dismiss St Paul and his writings. Isn’t there a purpose for the Liturgy of the Word?

I haven’t dismissed anything. Wearing a head covering was NEVER a doctrine of the Church-Never. The idea there is some kind of moral equivalence between women wearing a head covering and female ordination is specious.

It must be noted that these ordinances, probably inspired by the customs of the period, concern scarcely more than disciplinary practices of minor importance, such as the obligation imposed upon women to wear a veil on their head (1 Cor. 11:2-16); such requirements no longer have a normative value.

Inter Insigniores From the Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith Paragraph 4

Pauls admonition was based on the fact that the custom in Corinth was only prostitutes went with their heads uncovered.

BTW-thx for reading my daily readings post. I have been doing that for 14 years-starting as a ministry for my parish and sent out using a Listserv

 

[Tomdstone]

You need to learn difference between “Discipline” and Doctrine".

This is ad hominem, claiming that I need to learn something. It is also condescending and misleading. Basically, you are pompously putting yourself forward as someone who knows more than someone else, but I do not think that this is true in this particular case. The fact is that there are highly respected Roman Catholic theologians, in good standing in the Roman Catholic Church, who say that the restriction against women priests is not an infallible doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. They have cited the conditions required for infallibility and show that these conditions have not been met. The Anglicans, would I believe, agree with them, and so Anglicans would not say that they are throwing out a 2000 year old doctrine of the Church. They would say that they are throwing out a 2000 year old tradition of the Church, and possibly point to the fact that Roman Catholics have thrown out a 2000 year old tradition requiring women to wear headcovering in Church.

 

[TMC]

It was a 2000 year old traditon, with support from Scripture, and it has been thrown out by the Roman Catholics.

There is an old joke that every change in Church doctrine begins with the words "As the Church has always taught… ". In other words, as doctrine grows and changes the Church always finds ways to tie the new interpretations back to core Church teachings so that it can be said that no real change to the core of the Faith has been made.

Of course its true that Catholic teachings, both doctrines and disciplines, have continued to evolve and change for 2000 years. Christ told us that would happen. Scripture describes it happening even in the first generation of Christians. History and experience tell us it continued to happen. Common sense and experience tell us that growth and change will continue. As in the past, the Church will be able to show how the evolution of the faith is connected to Tradition. Will those changes eventually include women priests? No one can predict the future with confidence, and who would have predicted some of the changes made in the past? For my part, I think it will come, but it will take some time, (maybe not in my lifetime).

 

[JimR-OCDS]

It was a 2000 year old traditon, with support from Scripture, and it has been thrown out by the Roman Catholics.

Instruction for women to wear headcovery by St Paul had to do with culture.

Prostitutes did not cover their head and for Christian women to do the same would bring scandal to the Church of that time.

Not allowing women to become priest is theological.

When a priests celebrates Mass, he takes the place of Christ and Christ was a man.

Also, Jesus did not invite women to be with him and his apostles at the Last Supper, where he instituted the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist.

The Apostles followed suit and did not consecrate women, but only men, into having the power to consecrate the Eucharist

Jim

 

[Tomdstone]

Wearing a head covering was NEVER a doctrine of the Church-Never.

I never said it was. I said it was a 2000 year old tradition in the Church and that it is no longer observed in the USA and Europe. You asked the question: “One must ask what caused them to throw out 2,000 years of teachings and traditions?” This was your question, not mine. I attempted to give a serious and humble answer to your question. I never claimed in my answer that wearing a headcovering was a doctrine.

 

[boar2roar]

The catholic church already set an eyebrow raising precedent with girl alter serves. Alter serving is pretty much priest training for little kids, they act like little priests, its the closest thing we have to internship and recruiting for priesthood. How can you not see a natural progression between that and priesthood? This issue isn’t dead and with Pope Francis now, a lot of these bishops are speaking openly… It could only take one giant media storm/blitz with a rebellious or hurt woman to mount huge pressure against the church like the mormon situation not to long ago.

 

[JimG]

Women priests are a contradiction in terms. The issue has been decided and will not change. There will never be women priests.

 

[ProVobis]

NEVER a doctrine of the Church-Never.

Sometimes it is difficult to distinguish exactly what is doctrine and what is discipline. I’ll give you an example. The documents of Trent Session 22 are clearly marked as “Doctrina” but they list vestments, candles, incense, the submissa voce (low tones) used in Mass as “apostolica disciplina.” So yes, they are free to make the entire Mass as loud as possible, not use candles, etc. but at some point that would undermine the underlying doctrine behind those disciplines, I would think. So there is a relationship between the two. Disciplines do serve a purpose.

And I agree, there is no moral equivalence between women priests and lack of head coverings.

 

[gilliam]

Alter serving is not ‘priest training for little kids.’ Very, very, very, very, very few of the skills a priest needs to function in his pastoral duties are taught or demonstrated to an alter server. Sorry, that is simply not the case that it is some kind of apprenticeship for the priesthood.

 

[boar2roar]

Women priests are a contradiction in terms. The issue has been decided and will not change. There will never be women priests.

I hope your right

 

[boar2roar]

Alter serving is not ‘priest training for little kids.’ Very, very, very, very, very few of the skills a priest needs to function in his pastoral duties is taught or exposed to an alter server. Sorry, that is simply not the case that it is some kind of apprenticeship for the priesthood.

It is in all but name. Your up there at the front of mass, wearing a robe, carrying the wine back to the alter, its. Its the only real exposure or taste of priesthood that reaches a large amount of people. Maybe it wasn’t designed that way, I haven’t looked into the history of alter serving but that sticks in peoples minds when they see girls acting like priest assistants.

 

[JimG]

I hope your right but never is a long time.

Well, it’s at least until the end of the world. But there won’t be female priests in heaven either! The Church can’t just do anything it wants. It has no authority to ordain women to the priesthood. Even if a bishop tried to do so, it wouldn’t ‘take.’ Invalid matter makes a sacrament null.

 

[boar2roar]

Well, it’s at least until the end of the world. But there won’t be female priests in heaven either! The Church can’t just do anything it wants. It has no authority to ordain women to the priesthood. Even if a bishop tried to do so, it wouldn’t ‘take.’ Invalid matter makes a sacrament null.

Yes your correct I just wish bishops and clergy wouldn’t dance around the question and (that word again) confuse people.

 

[estesbob]

There is an old joke that every change in Church doctrine begins with the words "As the Church has always taught… ". In other words, as doctrine grows and changes the Church always finds ways to tie the new interpretations back to core Church teachings so that it can be said that no real change to the core of the Faith has been made.

Of course its true that Catholic teachings, both doctrines and disciplines, have continued to evolve and change for 2000 years. Christ told us that would happen. Scripture describes it happening even in the first generation of Christians. History and experience tell us it continued to happen. Common sense and experience tell us that growth and change will continue. As in the past, the Church will be able to show how the evolution of the faith is connected to Tradition. Will those changes eventually include women priests? No one can predict the future with confidence, and who would have predicted some of the changes made in the past? For my part, I think it will come, but it will take some time, (maybe not in my lifetime).

There is alsoan old joke about the Pope talking to God and asking him: "Lord when will Priests be allowed to marry? God replies "not in your lifetime "Then he asks “Lord when will women be allowed to be ordained”? God replies “not in my lifetime”

 

[bisco]

not mine, i have never percieved alter servers as priests in training, and i have never viewed female alter servers, as future priests. i do believe the lack of boys becoming alter servers may have played no small part in this change.

i have known quite a few alterboys in my life, and none of them ever became priests, including my own son. nor was he ever told it was priestly training.

 

[boar2roar]

not mine, i have never percieved alter servers as priests in training, and i have never viewed female alter servers, as future priests. i do believe the lack of boys becoming alter servers may have played no small part in this change.

i have known quite a few alterboys in my life, and none of them ever became priests, including my own son. nor was he ever told it was priestly training.

I don’t think that its exclusively priestly training either. I just don’t think this was a good precedent to set if they are serious about upholding this particular church teaching.

 

[bisco]

many people agree with you. i’m too new a catholic to form an opinion, but i believe i heard patrick madrid say the same thing.