Female priests push Catholic boundaries

[opus101]

I will never understand why Catholics who openly dissent from the Church continue to identify as Catholics…:thumbsup:But those such as the women in this group, or “Catholics” for Choice, or Dignity, I mean, come on, why do you choose to identify with a group that holds beliefs directly contrary to your own?

It’s all illogical. They “call” themselves Catholic, therefore they think they actually are. If I call myself a Hindu, even though I do not adhere to any Hindu beliefs, am I a Hindu? Quite frankly, I think there is an easily diagnosable mental disease operative here.

Since they insist on ignoring Christ’s teaching through the apostles while remaining in the Church (not), it will be interesting to see what happens when their own group splinters with different views on things. Will they try to “excommunicate” one another, or will those with certain views insist on “staying” with them?

Personally, I think the whole thing is grossly disrespectful. Even if they disagree with the Catholic faith on this (and other issues), they at least need to respect it, and allow others to carry on in this Faith which they find so disagreeable.

They need to call themselves what they are (Episcopalians?), and allow others the freedom to be authentically Catholic. If they have “rights”, so do we.

 

[jimrob]

During the communist regime is Czechoslovakia, a number of women and married men went through ordination ceremonies. The idea was that the women would be able to celebrate Mass inside women’s prisons and that married men would not arouse the suspicions of the authorities. The bishops who conducted these bogus ordinations did so without the approval of the Holy See and acted outside of their episcopal authority. There is no evidence that any women went through a ceremony of episcopal ordination.

When the regime relaxed its atheist stance and stopped persecuting the Catholic Church, normality returned. The Church simply denied that the women existed despite many of them claiming they had been ordained and had said Mass regularly. The married men were given the choice of returning to the laity or becoming priests in the Ukrainian Rite.

The women in the story may well claim to trace their bogus ordination to this rather shameful episode in the Church’s recent history. The position of the Catholic Church is that it lacks the authority to ordain women to the priesthood.

It is quite possible that the Church may change its position at some point in the future. For the time being, Pope John Paul II called for an end to all debate on the subject. If the Church ever changes its mind, it will be a ecumenical decision involving the Orthodox and Armenian Communions. At the moment, the Orthodox Church won’t even allow female chickens to enter Mount Athos - so I’m sorry girls, it’s not a career choice.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I am sorry but I do not agree. We are not talking about pagans, we are talking about Christianity. In the context of Christianity, it is the most elemental and essential role of the priest.

ad2000.com.au/articles/2001/feb2001p20_145.html

Either way I don’t want to derail this thread as what we are going on about is largely irrelevant to this discussion. These women are not priests and never will be. That is all that really matters.

Peace,

I read somewhere that priests weren’t called priests back in the day, and that presbyters doesn’t really translate to priests. I can’t verify it right now, but its something to think about.

 

[jwinch2]

It is quite possible that the Church may change its position at some point in the future.

I don’t see how, since it has been declared to be an infallibly defined part of the deposit of faith. Frankly, I don’t see that it is possible at all.

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19951028_dubium-ordinatio-sac_en.html

 

[markomalley]

During the communist regime is Czechoslovakia, a number of women and married men went through ordination ceremonies. The idea was that the women would be able to celebrate Mass inside women’s prisons and that married men would not arouse the suspicions of the authorities. **The bishops who conducted these bogus ordinations did so without the approval of the Holy See and acted outside of their episcopal authority. ** There is no evidence that any women went through a ceremony of episcopal ordination.

While I could see the married men, I have a hard time believing that a Catholic bishop would have allowed a woman to simulate ordination. To you have any ***credible ***proof of this?

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Not even IF they have ordination tambourines?

Tambourines? Yeah, then all bets are off.

 

[Colt]

During the communist regime is Czechoslovakia, a number of women and married men went through ordination ceremonies. The idea was that the women would be able to celebrate Mass inside women’s prisons and that married men would not arouse the suspicions of the authorities. The bishops who conducted these bogus ordinations did so without the approval of the Holy See and acted outside of their episcopal authority. There is no evidence that any women went through a ceremony of episcopal ordination.

It wouldn’t have mattered if women went through the “ordination ceremonies.” It’s ontologically impossible for woman to be ordained a Catholic priest. Like a priest trying to confect the Eucharist using a t-bone steak and a pitcher of Budweiser. Just ain’t gonna happen.

It is quite possible that the Church may change its position at some point in the future. For the time being, Pope John Paul II called for an end to all debate on the subject. If the Church ever changes its mind, it will be a ecumenical decision involving the Orthodox and Armenian Communions. At the moment, the Orthodox Church won’t even allow female chickens to enter Mount Athos - so I’m sorry girls, it’s not a career choice.

No it’s not possible that the Catholic Church might “change its position at some point in the future.” What you suggest is impossible. It cannot, the Church lacks the authority to ordain women. Save for another visit from God Incarnate here on Earth, it’s just not going to happen.

 

[Inquiringperson]

It is quite possible that the Church may change its position at some point in the future. For the time being, Pope John Paul II called for an end to all debate on the subject. If the Church ever changes its mind, it will be a ecumenical decision involving the Orthodox and Armenian Communions.

False. Pope John Paul II already infallibly declared this was impossible.
catholic.com/quickquestions/why-cant-women-be-ordained-priests-within-the-catholic-church

 

[anp1215]

They strike me as attention getters, or else they would indeed become clergy in the Episcopal Church. That way they would have achieved their goal. But this tells me otherwise. They choose not to be obedient servants of Christ. Rather, they worship the golden idol of vanity. Does my view of it sound extreme? Not to me. We all have our struggles but these ladies are out there.

I think you are right. A Catholic woman leaving the Church, converting to the Episcopal Church, and being ordained as a priest in that denomination wouldn’t make the news, would it?

 

[Milliardo]

It is quite possible that the Church may change its position at some point in the future. For the time being, Pope John Paul II called for an end to all debate on the subject. If the Church ever changes its mind, it will be a ecumenical decision involving the Orthodox and Armenian Communions. At the moment, the Orthodox Church won’t even allow female chickens to enter Mount Athos - so I’m sorry girls, it’s not a career choice.

The Orthodox Church will not change its position on this issue: no women are allowed into ordained clergy. Women are not even allowed to enter the sanctuary as it is.

 

[Warrenton]

If, however, they are telling the truth that three bishops ordained them, that is a major problem.

 

[pilots13]

I think the key thing to pull from this article is the 55% to 30% (or whatever the exact numbers were) of Catholics who support women becoming priests. I would imagine that number is common in dioceses across America. I feel it will be one of the main issues that will cause the American Catholic Church to split off sometime in my lifetime.

You can call it the work of satan, you can throw the infallibility comment out time and time again, but it doesn’t hide the fact that the Catholic Church as been very sexist in it’s history, and most Catholics (in the US at least) lump the inability for women to be priests with that sexism.

Between that, the lack of married priests, and the dwindling number of clergy (my parish just got clustered because of this), it’s tough for people to just accept this (fallible or infallible). It might start with a few nut jobs at a Methodist church, but it can get out of control really fast.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

I think the key thing to pull from this article is the 55% to 30% (or whatever the exact numbers were) of Catholics who support women becoming priests. I would imagine that number is common in dioceses across America. I feel it will be one of the main issues that will cause the American Catholic Church to split off sometime in my lifetime.

You can call it the work of satan, you can throw the infallibility comment out time and time again, but it doesn’t hide the fact that the Catholic Church as been very sexist in it’s history, and most Catholics (in the US at least) lump the inability for women to be priests with that sexism.

.

Sexist?

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry or ask you to read Triumph.

 

[jwinch2]

I think the key thing to pull from this article is the 55% to 30% (or whatever the exact numbers were) of Catholics who support women becoming priests. I would imagine that number is common in dioceses across America. I feel it will be one of the main issues that will cause the American Catholic Church to split off sometime in my lifetime.

You can call it the work of satan, you can throw the infallibility comment out time and time again, but it doesn’t hide the fact that the Catholic Church as been very sexist in it’s history, and most Catholics (in the US at least) lump the inability for women to be priests with that sexism.

Between that, the lack of married priests, and the dwindling number of clergy (my parish just got clustered because of this), it’s tough for people to just accept this (fallible or infallible). It might start with a few nut jobs at a Methodist church, but it can get out of control really fast.

I understand where you are coming from but I do not believe things to be as bad as you say. First, the percent of Catholics is a bit like the percent of Catholics who are pro-abortion. The numbers survey all people who consider themselves Catholic but do not distinguish between those who are attending Mass regularly and participating in parish life with those who haven’t been to Mass in years. If you were to survey only those actually attempting to live the faith, I believe the numbers would be much lower.

In addition, the numbers of clergy ought to be getting better in the next 10 years or so. By all accounts, those seminaries which have a reputation for orthodoxy in the Faith are bursting at the seams in terms of numbers. Many are having to build extra dormitories due to the numbers. Societies of Apostolic Life and Religious Orders who have a reputation for obedience and orthodoxy are seeing the same things. I am actually of the opinion that we are seeing a renewal in the Church, though it is going to take some time. The Holy Father has been appointing Bishops right and left who are more traditional and more obedient to the Pontiff and as that continues, things will keep moving in a better direction. There are many Cardinal positions open at the moment and I expect to see them filled soon with the same types of people. A more orthodox college of Cardinals = a more orthodox Pontiff after we lose Pope Benedict sometime down the road.

These so called “women priests” are remnants of the “spirit of Vatican II” crowd are actually becoming less and less relevant as time goes on. Frankly, I think the reason we are seeing more of them come out of the woodwork is directly related to the renewal I spoke of above. They are seeing things slip away and now Vatican II is beginning to be interpreted within all of the tradition of the Church, as it should be, and those women and their ilk, have noticed and are pissed. At the conference they had for “women priests” last summer if you read the news reports, you would think it was thousands of people in attendance of all ages. However, various Catholic persons in attendance such as Father Z, etc. shot video and took pictures as part of their coverage and reported the average age being about 65. In short, it was a group of aging hipsters who are trying to hold on to a dying fad.

The transition back will be slow, but I believe it will happen.

 

[opus101]

I understand where you are coming from but I do not believe things to be as bad as you say. First, the percent of Catholics is a bit like the percent of Catholics who are pro-abortion. The numbers survey all people who consider themselves Catholic but do not distinguish between those who are attending Mass regularly and participating in parish life with those who haven’t been to Mass in years. If you were to survey only those actually attempting to live the faith, I believe the numbers would be much lower.

In addition, the numbers of clergy ought to be getting better in the next 10 years or so. By all accounts, those seminaries which have a reputation for orthodoxy in the Faith are bursting at the seams in terms of numbers. Many are having to build extra dormitories due to the numbers. Societies of Apostolic Life and Religious Orders who have a reputation for obedience and orthodoxy are seeing the same things. I am actually of the opinion that we are seeing a renewal in the Church, though it is going to take some time. The Holy Father has been appointing Bishops right and left who are more traditional and more obedient to the Pontiff and as that continues, things will keep moving in a better direction. There are many Cardinal positions open at the moment and I expect to see them filled soon with the same types of people. A more orthodox college of Cardinals = a more orthodox Pontiff after we lose Pope Benedict sometime down the road.

These so called “women priests” are remnants of the “spirit of Vatican II” crowd are actually becoming less and less relevant as time goes on. Frankly, I think the reason we are seeing more of them come out of the woodwork is directly related to the renewal I spoke of above. They are seeing things slip away and now Vatican II is beginning to be interpreted within all of the tradition of the Church, as it should be, and those women and their ilk, have noticed and are pissed. At the conference they had for “women priests” last summer if you read the news reports, you would think it was thousands of people in attendance of all ages. However, various Catholic persons in attendance such as Father Z, etc. shot video and took pictures as part of their coverage and reported the average age being about 65. In short, it was a group of aging hipsters who are trying to hold on to a dying fad.

The transition back will be slow, but I believe it will happen.

 

[vsedriver]

If, however, they are telling the truth that three bishops ordained them, that is a major problem.

I seriously doubt those were Roman Catholic Bishops. More than likely they were either Episcopal or Old Catholic.

 

[pilots13]

I understand where you are coming from but I do not believe things to be as bad as you say. First, the percent of Catholics is a bit like the percent of Catholics who are pro-abortion. The numbers survey all people who consider themselves Catholic but do not distinguish between those who are attending Mass regularly and participating in parish life with those who haven’t been to Mass in years. If you were to survey only those actually attempting to live the faith, I believe the numbers would be much lower.

No, I agree the numbers are probably skewed with non practicing Catholics chiming in. But from another thread, I was told admittedly that once a Catholic, always a Catholic. So then, these Catholics are Catholic, but don’t count towards questions involving Catholics? Why, cause they skew numbers not your way?

In addition, the numbers of clergy ought to be getting better in the next 10 years or so. By all accounts, those seminaries which have a reputation for orthodoxy in the Faith are bursting at the seams in terms of numbers. Many are having to build extra dormitories due to the numbers. Societies of Apostolic Life and Religious Orders who have a reputation for obedience and orthodoxy are seeing the same things. I am actually of the opinion that we are seeing a renewal in the Church, though it is going to take some time. The Holy Father has been appointing Bishops right and left who are more traditional and more obedient to the Pontiff and as that continues, things will keep moving in a better direction. There are many Cardinal positions open at the moment and I expect to see them filled soon with the same types of people. A more orthodox college of Cardinals = a more orthodox Pontiff after we lose Pope Benedict sometime down the road.

I had a talk a while back about the seminary numbers. The seminary here in town (Twin Cities where this article came from in fact) is also seeing it’s highest numbers in years. But the side no one is reporting is that is caused more by smaller seminaries in the midwest closing and these priests in training having to go from South Dakota to the Twin Cities for school. Thus individual seminary enrollment numbers are booming, but the overall numbers aren’t. The other factor is for every new seminarian we pump out, 2 priests are reaching retirement age (and this is assuming all the priests stay in town vs going back to South Dakota). So I really doubt the clergy issue is anywhere near to being over.

And yes, these seminaries are turning out much more traditional and conservative priests, but it isn’t them you need to be worried about. You send a conservative priest to a more liberal suburban parish, you start driving people away, and turning more people away from the faith than educating them about the faith and helping them grow that way.

These so called “women priests” are remnants of the “spirit of Vatican II” crowd are actually becoming less and less relevant as time goes on. Frankly, I think the reason we are seeing more of them come out of the woodwork is directly related to the renewal I spoke of above. They are seeing things slip away and now Vatican II is beginning to be interpreted within all of the tradition of the Church, as it should be, and those women and their ilk, have noticed and are pissed. At the conference they had for “women priests” last summer if you read the news reports, you would think it was thousands of people in attendance of all ages. However, various Catholic persons in attendance such as Father Z, etc. shot video and took pictures as part of their coverage and reported the average age being about 65. In short, it was a group of aging hipsters who are trying to hold on to a dying fad.

The transition back will be slow, but I believe it will happen.

The problem isn’t with the aging, dying hipsters, but rather with the kids and grandkids of those hipsters. They pass their values, beliefs, and ideals on. I’m the child of a boomer (and my parents were far from hippies), and I tend to agree with the attitude (not necessarily all the points, but the spirit) of that crowd more than what I hear coming from Rome in recent years. I made the point here one other time that I went to Catholic high school and Undergrad and out of the 30-40ish friends I have from those circles, most were practicing Catholics going into college. By the time we got out, and to this day, only a handful still are. That’s where your worry should be, not just dismissing it as “Oh those crazy old hippies.”

 

[jwinch2]

Why, cause they skew numbers not your way?

No, because the vast majority of Catholics who are not active or making any effort to live the Gospel are not representative of what the Church’s position should, or will be. Its like a political poll that includes everyone instead of likely voters; or a national poll when the issue at hand is a state primary. The numbers are meaningless. It they are Christmas and Easter Catholics or haven’t been to Mass in years, who exactly do they really represent? Frankly, I am not sure but I know that it isn’t the Church. Show me a bunch of former Catholics who are holding onto a lack of females priests as the reason for their staying away from the faith, and perhaps I will buy in.

I watched an interview on EWTN last week with a Canadian Catholic who talked about all of the people who call themselves Catholic who object to certain parts of Church teaching. His statement was that those people should simply stop calling themselves Catholic because in truth they have not been for some time. I agree with this totally. Being Catholic is not an issue of heredity or nationality, its the explicit agreement to a creed of beliefs that we profess when we come into the faith and every week at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, even when those beliefs are hard.

At some point we have to get beyond the idea that speaking with charity means being nice and politically correct. Part of being charitable is speaking hard truths to those who need to hear them and in doing so, risk alienating them or coming across in the wrong way. Telling people falsehoods in order to spare their feelings is not charitable, it is sin, like any other lie.

There is a different between sinning because you reject truth, and sinning because you are weak and fallen, but are really trying to live what the Church teaches. The former are not Catholic, while the latter are. One only has to look to the Gospel to see this. Our Blessed Lord did not back off when His apostles told Him that his teachings were hard. He simply asked if they were leaving like everyone else. He was more concerned with professing the truth of the Gospel than in smoothing over hurt feelings or being politically correct. The Church, though made up of sinners, is called to do no less.

No one is holding a gun to anyone’s head and forcing them to submit to Christ’s yoke. This is often the cry of those who disagree with Church teaching on a particular topic “they are taking away our freedoms”… No they aren’t. Those people do not know what freedom is. Freedom is a gift from God but it comes with a price of becoming his servant. Only in trying to live the Gospel in their own lives, does one get to experience the freedom to be the person that God is calling us to be.

Being a disciple of Christ is a free choice which everyone can take or leave as they like. Either you believe that the Catholic Church is the Church Christ himself founded and that she contains the truth of salvation, or you do not. If you don’t, then you aren’t Catholic. One may think they are all they like, but they aren’t. These women think they are priests, they aren’t. People who show up on Christmas and Easter or to baptize their kids think they are Catholic, they aren’t. People who claim to be Catholic but dissent with infallibly defined Church teaching, are not Catholic regardless of what they may wish to think. When I was 23, I thought I was God’s gift to women, i’m not.

 

[ConstantineTG]

The Orthodox Church will not change its position on this issue: no women are allowed into ordained clergy. Women are not even allowed to enter the sanctuary as it is.

Today, but historically the Empress received Communion at the altar with the clergy.

 

[ConstantineTG]

If, however, they are telling the truth that three bishops ordained them, that is a major problem.

Why? They still are not ordained, the bishops are to be investigated and if proven, they will be disciplined (including excommunication and defrocking). I mean, the Roman Catholic Womenpriests have sympathizers, wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a bishop or two in there. There’s always a Judas among the Apostles.