R
Rau
Guest
So we operate in the light of the historical facts we know.
- Status
G
grannymh
Guest
God acts through the Catholic Sacraments. There are seven different Catholic Sacraments which must be considered individually. Therefore there is an issue…
However, in an obvious attempt to bring down the Catholic Church, the real issue of a Divine Jesus Christ as founder of the Catholic Church is hidden underneath all the sweet talking.
G
grannymh
Guest
Let’s get to the nitty gritty. Does Genesis 1: 27 refer only to men? Seriously, I am beginning to think that it is women, not men, who choose confusion.
G
grannymh
Guest
I think the problem may be that there is confusion about who invented the seven Catholic Sacraments.Yes this I know, any person who believes in Jesus Christ may baptise another in certain situations.
But a woman may never be a priestess of Christ, I can only see that this is down to the authority of some men.
Did those men create the Catholic Sacraments?
Is it time for women to rise up and change the individual male-made Catholic Sacraments?
Did God make a mistake when He created a Catholic Sacrament for males?
Common sense asks “What is the big deal?” Women are not excluded from sharing in God’s life which should be everyone’s ultimate goal.
G
grannymh
Guest
My sincere apology regarding the comment “Saying Jesus didn’t choose women among his apostles doesn’t hold much water.”
That sounds like we humans can tell Jesus how to choose His apostles. And since Jesus made the wrong choice, humans have to correct Him.
By the way,
this morning I got up on the wrong side of the bed.
V
Vico
Guest
Yes, the do not act in persona Christi. The Catechism makes the distinction with ordination, however this is being reviewed with regard to deaconate and the canon law was modified to be clear that deacons do not act in persona Christi.Yes this I know, any person who believes in Jesus Christ may baptise another in certain situations.
But a woman may never be a priestess of Christ, I can only see that this is down to the authority of some men.
1577 "Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination."66 The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry.67 The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.68
S
sudy
Guest
1538 Integration into one of these bodies in the Church was accomplished by a rite called ordinatio, a religious and liturgical act which was a consecration, a blessing or a sacrament. Today the word “ordination” is reserved for the sacramental act which integrates a man into the order of bishops, presbyters, or deacons, and goes beyond a simple election, designation, delegation, or institution by the community, for it confers a gift of the Holy Spirit that permits the exercise of a “sacred power” (sacra potestas)5 which can come only from Christ himself through his Church. Ordination is also called consecratio, for it is a setting apart and an investiture by Christ himself for his Church. The laying on of hands by the bishop, with the consecratory prayer, constitutes the visible sign of this ordination.
E
edwest2
Guest
Jesus Christ established things this way. True man and true God.Yes this I know, any person who believes in Jesus Christ may baptise another in certain situations.
But a woman may never be a priestess of Christ, I can only see that this is down to the authority of some men.
Ed
S
simpleas
Guest
We’re not talking about Gen 1 ;27.Let’s get to the nitty gritty. Does Genesis 1: 27 refer only to men? Seriously, I am beginning to think that it is women, not men, who choose confusion.
S
simpleas
Guest
It doesn’t hold much water because it sounds out dated to some people. Two thousand years ago in a Jewish community is far removed now in the 21st Christian community.
G
grannymh
Guest
G
grannymh
Guest
Genesis 1: 27 has some relevant information about the females in the topic.
The essential information is that females are in the image of God due to their spiritual souls. That is the truth we should be concerned about. Males can be priests or horse thieves, but that does not change the fact that both males and females can enter heaven. A man can be ordained a priest on earth, but that act per se is not superior over a woman’s joy eternal in the Presence of the Beatific Vision.
G
grannymh
Guest
And I understand what some public popular people are trying to do with the very old Catholic Church.
T
ThundersnowIV
Guest
I’d say you are correct.
R
Rau
Guest
I said in “light” of historical fact, not replicating all things. Eg. We feel no compulsion to baptise exclusively in rivers.
The Church observes the historical fact that the apostles, chosen by Jesus no less, were exclusively men and the collaborators chosen by the apostles were exclusively men and from this concludes that it is obligated to continue in that practice. Now you may think there is nothing in those choices. But the Church (in fact the successors of the apostles) - who have the right and duty to address the question - conclude they constrain them today. On what basis shall you demand otherwise?
The Church is not arguing some deficiency in women - it is only you who cast it in that light.
S
simpleas
Guest
Priesthood
Most Protestant sects do not believe in ordained clergy in the sense that Catholics do. **Catholics believe that clergy receive a special mark of the soul, an ontological bond that is unique to men who receive Holy Orders. ** This ontological bond separates the clergy from the rest of the faithful. The Church teaches that this bond:
Has ontological existence (it is based in metaphysical reality and not just moral or legal)
Comes into existence when the Sacrament of Holy Orders is conferred upon the man
Is restricted to baptized males
Is indissoluble (nothing can dissolve it; men can be priests in Hell)
Is essentially different from the common priesthood of the faithful
Have I missed somewhere on this thread that explains why/how the ontological bond is unique to men.
Where is it written that Jesus Christ said men shall be the only persons able to receive a mark on their souls which will separate them from the rest of the people?
Most Protestant sects do not believe in ordained clergy in the sense that Catholics do. **Catholics believe that clergy receive a special mark of the soul, an ontological bond that is unique to men who receive Holy Orders. ** This ontological bond separates the clergy from the rest of the faithful. The Church teaches that this bond:
Has ontological existence (it is based in metaphysical reality and not just moral or legal)
Comes into existence when the Sacrament of Holy Orders is conferred upon the man
Is restricted to baptized males
Is indissoluble (nothing can dissolve it; men can be priests in Hell)
Is essentially different from the common priesthood of the faithful
Have I missed somewhere on this thread that explains why/how the ontological bond is unique to men.
Where is it written that Jesus Christ said men shall be the only persons able to receive a mark on their souls which will separate them from the rest of the people?
S
simpleas
Guest
But it is superior while on earth.
Yes I know we all are responsible for our own souls.
R
Rau
Guest
You are posing the hypothetical question - “were a woman to be ordained - contrary to what the Church believes is its authority - would the bond arise.?” The question is academic don’t you think.
AFAIK, it is not written that Jesus Christ said that any person - man, woman or child - is able to receive a mark on their souls which will separate them from the rest of the people. Is it that you believe unless the Bible records Jesus as saying something, it is to be rejected?
S
simpleas
Guest
Not sure where in this thread I demanded anything…
Yes Jesus’ first chosen apostles were men, that seems to be historically correct, and it will remain that way I’m sure. That doesn’t mean that through the centuries of change that way of choosing should remain exclusively to men. The theological teachings are difficult to understand, at least for me.
- Status