Female Doctors of the Church: What should they be called?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Melchior_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Melchior_1

Guest
In another thread it was brought up that women should not be named Doctors of the Church. Perhaps a poll is in order!

So thus; should women be allowed to be considered Doctors of the Church?
 
I voted YES!

In regards to the statement that promted this new thread-
I will defer to the Holy Father’s and the magisterium on this one,
just like any “good Catholic” should!😉

Add another item to my list of reasons why I tend to shy away from the more “traditionally minded” Catholics. This is a perfect example of the “hypocrisy” I so often see. If it had been Pius X (or even the XII) who made this decision, that would have been just fine, but because it was done after VII, it is automatically wrong.

Sometimes I really do not understand people!! :confused:
 
As far as I know, a Church Doctor is one who makes a big contribution to the theology or doctrine of the Church. If this definition is correct, then I see no reason for why women could not be Doctors. They too are able to think and theologize, so why not?
 
I voted yes! I think they should, and will be.

It is a different situation than woman priests/bishops (where I say straight down NO, no exceptions, never never NEVER!), as Doctor of the Church is not a “vocation” per se.
 
Some women saints ARE Doctors of the Church.

St. Catherine of Siena.
St. Teresa of Avila.
St. Térèse of Lisieux.

What should THEY be called?
 
There are already female Doctors of the Church so your question is moot. As far as what to call them, how about “Saint N”?
 
Doctor merely means teacher.

Women can teach, just as Men can teach. St. Teresa of Ávila, St. Catherine of Siena, St. Thérèse de Lisieux have taucht us as much, if not more than some other Doctors of the church. They deserve as full recognition as the others.
 
JohnDamian said:
Doctor merely means teacher.

Women can teach, just as Men can teach. St. Teresa of Ávila, St. Catherine of Siena, St. Thérèse de Lisieux have taucht us as much, if not more than some other Doctors of the church. They deserve as full recognition as the others.
Click to expand...
Hello?

They DO have full recognition.
 
Oneofthewomen said:
I voted YES!

Add another item to my list of reasons why I tend to shy away from the more “traditionally minded” Catholics. This is a perfect example of the “hypocrisy” I so often see. If it had been Pius X (or even the XII) who made this decision, that would have been just fine, but because it was done after VII, it is automatically wrong.

Sometimes I really do not understand people!! :confused:
Click to expand...
I’m sorry for the ones who act that way :(. I am a traditionally minded Catholic but if you go over my posts you will find that I don’t think like a fundamentalist one. I have no problem with women being doctors of the Church. The three saints in question, St. Catherine of Siena, St. Theresa of Avila, and St. Therese of Liseux all have very important insights into the spiritual life and should be read. They have contributed a great deal to our understanding so of course they should be called doctors. I don’t understand such people either so we are in the same boat.
 
Melchior said:
In another thread it was brought up that women should not be named Doctors of the Church. Perhaps a poll is in order!

So thus; should women be allowed to be considered Doctors of the Church?
Click to expand...
Do these same Catholics address a female doctor as Ms. X?
 
This question has already been decided, by the Church. There are already female doctors including one of my favourite saints St. Catherine of Sienna, everyone would benefit from becoming familiar with her letters.
 
Yes certainly, women have always made significant contributions to the Church and since this isn’t something that would negatively affect the Church but only contribute to building it up, I see no problem with it. Many women are well versed in the faith and should be recognized for their contributions. One woman in particular is the most holy of all people in the Church and had perfect obedience to God.

Now Female Altar Servers are an issue which I can completely reject as should any Catholic but Women have always contributed to the Church in Holiness and bringing people to Christ. PM me if you disagree on female altar servers, we have had enough threads on this.

In Christ
Scylla
 
scylla said:
Yes certainly, women have always made significant contributions to the Church and since this isn’t something that would negatively affect the Church but only contribute to building it up, I see no problem with it. Many women are well versed in the faith and should be recognized for their contributions. One woman in particular is the most holy of all people in the Church and had perfect obedience to God.

Now Female Altar Servers are an issue which I can completely reject as should any Catholic but Women have always contributed to the Church in Holiness and bringing people to Christ. PM me if you disagree on female altar servers, we have had enough threads on this.

In Christ
Scylla
Click to expand...
Wrong. Rejecting what the Church allows is the very definition of cafeteria catholicism.
 
boatbearer said:
Wrong. Rejecting what the Church allows is the very definition of cafeteria catholicism.
Click to expand...
No it isn’t, doing or supporting what the Church forbids and not even caring is the definition of cafeteria Catholicism.
 
Advocatus_Fidei said:
No it isn’t, doing or supporting what the Church forbids and not even caring is the definition of cafeteria Catholicism.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Cafeteria Catholicism is rejecting anything which the Church teaches or allows. Rejecting CITH or the NO is just as much cafeteria style as rejecting contraceptive teaching.
 
momor said:
I disagree. Cafeteria Catholicism is rejecting anything which the Church teaches or allows. Rejecting CITH or the NO is just as much cafeteria style as rejecting contraceptive teaching.
Click to expand...
Your free to disagree however I think there is an important distinction between the two positions.
 
boatbearer said:
Wrong. Rejecting what the Church allows is the very definition of cafeteria catholicism.
Click to expand...
Not really, cafeteria Catholics reject Church Tradition, teaching, or even Dogma. To disagree or reject female altar servers, COTH, or hand holding during Our Father is fine and not agaisnt Church. But that’s completly off topic and I am sorry for that.

I voted YES! Of course women should be Doctors in the Church many have thought us many things, in face out Mother Mary teaches us to listen and do what Christs tells us to do 🙂 what better lesson can we receive.
 
If they reject Dogma they aren’t cafeteria Catholics they are heretics.
 
Advocatus_Fidei said:
Your free to disagree however I think there is an important distinction between the two positions.
Click to expand...
Cafeteria refers to picking and choosing that teaching and/or practice of the Church which one will accept or follow. Those traditionalists who not only reject but even denigrate the NO and it’s Liturgy EVEN ON THIS FORUM are in my opinion being sacrilegious with regard to the Mass. So no, I don’t see the distinction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top