That is in accord with seperation of church and state. If it becomes a court issue, regardless of outcome, than state will have to abide by church laws in return and hypocricy will be oozing in floods and drown all that oppose God.
She was not just a graduate but valedictorian.
To quote from a man who was an open socialist in a discussion of “equal rights” is comical. Given the nature of a socialist is a bridge to communism, complete totalitarianism (even though Animal Farm was against that, the man was an idiot not to see the connection between socialism and communism), but let alone it is the avocation of forcibly eliminating rights of some and push the rights of other of whom do not deserve the same authority as others.
To quote George Orwell in Animal Farm:* “All pigs are equal, but some pigs are more equal than others.”*
(note: I’m not comparing anyone to a pig)
No, L doesn’t think the woman makes valid points, since she disagrees with Church teaching (i.e. she read a Catholic book and somehow twisted the words to say something contradictory to what the book means; kind of suspicious); he was just asking for the best way to refute her.
This is exactly the point, women cannot fill the office of priesthood because it is a man’s position. They wouldn’t be “the same.” A female priest is not a male priest; a female priest is an abomination.
No. The early Church didn’t even have a bible for a quite a while so the “rulebook” didn’t even come from there. They knew what they were about. We can be certain that there have never been women priests (who weren’t also heretics) anywhere in the Church’s history. It has never been valid to ordain a woman. Plus, women have never been thrown out from Mass, don’t be ridiculous. Please say what you mean.
Based on Paul’s other letters and the context, he meant that they shouldn’t teach in an official capacity of a pastor or homilist while in church. He doesn’t prohibit women teaching absolutely. So, yes, we do listen to this one.
(Mark 9:43)
You will probably not like what you find if you dig deeper, since the origins of only men being priests goes back to the beginning. It is very saddening to see you bearing such suspicion towards the Church, when we are sincerely defending the priesthood not out of arrogance and hatred but out of love. Please consider that an all-male priesthood isn’t a sign of iniquity, but a fact of the life of the Body of Christ.
1 Corinthians 14: 34 thru 35
I imagine those are the verse’s they are speaking of, I can’t say though. As far as determining if women can become catholic priest’s, a serving catholic will have to answer that one for you.
How do you draw that conclusion? Not being confrontational, but I’ve never heard any good argumentative points or a good thesis for this belief, can you provide a link to a good website or an argument of your own?
DaddyGirl, what role do you think the priesthood serves?
Mary Magdeline was not the only one there.
) is that even God Himself (although we called God her) can’t tell ME what to do. I am the center of all things.If you read the passage from John I provided, John (the disciple Jesus loved) was there also.
Yes, 1 male disciple stayed. Such boldness and Love for God with those that boldly approached the cross. Also, it is written that the sheep would scatter. All in accordance with God.
Daddygirl, I appreciate your arguments and am so with you man. Pardoning the ex-feminist above, it isn’t about what I want or don’t want or in disregard to the teaching of the magisterium, or about me, me, me.
Many of the arguments Catholics and conservatives put forward on the issue of women’s ordination are insufficient. The most common argument offered against the practice is that Jesus never chose women. That is indeed true, and the argument is valid; however, it isn’t a particularly strong one. It is an argument that seems to be incomplete, as if there were some other critical factors which need to be explained.
First of all, it is important for everyone to understand that the feminist argument is predicated on the notion of human dignity and equality being based on utility and function. This underlying assumption is rarely discussed when the issue of women’s ordination and equality is raised. However, it is critical to appreciate and acknowledge this point so the debate can advance intelligently. Too often in these types of debates, obvious assumptions and presuppositions are not dealt with upfront which invariably means both sides waste too much time and effort talking past one another.
For the feminist, dignity and equality depends on allowing women to do the same things#/# as men. And only in doing the same things – or at least having the capability to do so – can the two genders be equal in dignity. To deny a women the same function, under this rubric, would necessarily mean denying them equality and dignity. The connection is indeed logical, but the foundation itself is erroneous.
Contrary to this, the Christian worldview does not attach dignity and equality with function or utility. A human person is not any less dignified or equal to another person based on what they can or cannot do. Performing a specific function does not make anyone more worthy or dignified than someone who cannot perform that function. That is why the Church values all human life equally, independent of the supposed value that society attaches to a particular function or “quality of life” assessment. The Church values all human life equally, including the disabled or those bedridden with a serious sickness.
The rise of euthanasia and related “quality of life” ethic is also predicated on this feminist principle. One person decides that the utility and function of the disabled person does not meet the “quality of life” standard, and then proceeds to pull the plug or dehydrate the person to death. Instead of treating the individual with dignity and respect because of the intrinsic dignity bestowed by God, the arbiters of “equality”, through their dark lenses of utility and function, objectify the human person for their own base aspirations. Usually, this means unburdening themselves with the suffering of another human being.
In light of these different foundations, therefore, it is important to point out to our opponents that their very conception of equality is fundamentally different than our own. There is a false assumption that both sides view equality in the same way. As we can see, however, that is not a valid assumption at all. It is no surprise, therefore, to find that there is a divergence of opinion on the issue of women’s ordination. Feminists believe they don’t have equality in the Church because they are denied a function, but this is a distortion of what true equality is. Catholics say women already have equality because of their intrinsic dignity as human persons. Women complement men but are not the same as them.
continued…
It’s not that the Church has no authority to change it, the Church has already declared no women in the priesthood, here’s a summary ewtn.com/library/curia/cdfrespo.htm if you’d like Vatican documents, I will post them. In the end all Catholics are called to assent to this, regardless if you disagree.
, it’s only when those attacks stop when we should worry.Scripture indicate’s that there were 12 disciple’s.
Is that your opinion, or do you have a source for that?
There was only one Jewish temple.