Did Jesus choose men because of the culture?

[Beth10]

Very insightful of you and I agree. It is unfortunate that we live in such a spirit numbing age that requires a great deal of courage to be authentic and true to our real selves.

I don’t agree that Gad gave women any of their traits, however.

Oops, that should have read “God” not “Gad” Sorry about that.

Beth10

 

[abucs]

Jesus understood the climate of the times. Couldn’t it be that Jesus called only men, not because they were men, but because of the situations women were living with at the time?

I have to wonder if any thought was given to this as the research was done to determine if a male-only priesthood was doctrine.

Jesus called fishermen from the Galilee, at least one Roman tax collector as well as later a man who was persecuting the Church. If he wanted to fit in with the times and was worried about being acceptable to the wider contemporary society would He have chosen as He did?

 

[Joy2day]

I think women are still held in low regard in today’s society, or maybe primarily in some areas. I even think that we are going backwards re. women’s liberation in society and it is due to the fact that society worships the almighty dollar and men are more set up to own and control it. Men are paid more than women for doing the same job and men have more opportunity to earn money than women. Once a woman has a child, employers don’t want you until you reach menopause and then you’re too old.
Money is power = men have the power in a society that worships $$. Women’s respect and freedom often depends on a man. If the man does not give this to a woman, there is often little help from society for her. They say that 1/3 of women have been in abusive situations, but some societies do not recognise domestic violence. Often other women will not support each other, rather letting their actions and alliances be dictated by a man, basically for financial reasons. They know where their bread is buttered. An older woman without a husband is considered problematic, especially if there is no obvious reason why she hasn’t got one. A woman with independence is also problematic especially if she has a ‘rebellious’ attitude. Society feels she should be humbled by a man.
How times have changed.

Maybe Jesus showed mercy to the woman who committed adultery, because she was doing that as the only way to remove herself from an abusive husband - ie. via another man.
Society creates its own problems.
My grumpy :twocents:

 

[ericc]

Had a wonderful time reading the above posts. Without resorting to what ifs, could haves, should haves and ought tos, the evidence is clear.

a) Jesus did not appoint any female apostles. The 72 disciples were all male. He could have, but he didn’t.
b) After Pentecost, the Holy Spirit did not appoint any female priests either. Paul mentioned deaconess in his letters though, and it is clear he held them in high regard. The Holy Spirit is still with us and He has yet to appoint a female priest.

I think it is moot to discuss female priests unless God allows it. A few thousand years of Biblical history and yet not a single priestess. Other religions do have priestesses but not this one. God must have his reasons. Reading the OT does not give optimistic hope for female priests. I can’t find the chapter and verse at the moment, but something about women’s menstruation defiling holy places and such. No reason given why that is so.

God doesn’t give in to societal norms or to popular vote does he?

Being not a woman, I am not able to fathom the need why a woman would want to be a priestess. There are so many ways that a woman can serve God (we do have many female saints). Perhaps there is some hidden need that can not be satisfied by the Church organization? And does that need extend beyond priesthood, i.e. to bishop-hood, to Cardinal-hood, to Pope-hood?