Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
He has started his own church of “me.”
- Status
F
Fan_of_Francis
Guest
Amen
G
gerardw
Guest
But the Bible has to be interpreted and there are alternative interpretations of the quotations above.
The authority of interpretation of the Bible rests solely with the Church and the Magisterium. Does this mean we can not make a personal interpretation? No, but when we run counter to Church’s teaching and doctrine, then we must submit ourselves to Her authority.
See 2 Peter 3:16-18
S
sidbrown
Guest
A priest at our local Church has also called for women priests.
G
grace_singh
Guest
there may be many ways to interpret the Bible, but there is only one way to follow what the Bible asks us to do.
many Protestants “interpret” the Gospels as not teaching the Real Presence. does their interpretation make them right, or does the Bible speak clearly for itself on the matter?
as to slavery, Paul is not asking us to kidknap or misuse others. slaves were essentially people owned by other people for labour- masters are called to treat slaves kindly, as fellow human beings. salves are called to obey and respect their masters, and work as for God.
it’s the Christian principal at work within an already-existing social phenomenon. there are still slaves in the world today. and weird as that may sound, Paul’s writings to both salve owners and slaves would remain the same.
the horrors of the American slave trade and institution bore little to no resemblance to what Paul was talking about or reflecting on when he wrote. practically speaking, it is not that different from what we would now recognize as a master-servant relationship. the servant in this case is owned by the master, usually lives on his property, and is cared for by the master, in exchange for labour.
S
sidbrown
Guest
Catholic clergy defended the slave trade and owned slaves in the USA.
S
SunnaB16
Guest
What you accept or don`t accept affects nothing.
The Holy Spirit-giuded Church is the one who decides how Bible passages are to be interpreted.
The Church is the Bride of Christ. (i`m sick of saying this!)
Christ is the Bridegroom.
The priest takes the place of the Bridegroom.
Through the Mass and the Sacraments, Christ the Bridegroom gives Life to His Bride.
A woman CANNOT take the part of the Bridegroom!!!
Liturgical lesbianism!
Link to article by Johanna Bogle:
www.catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9710fea2.asp
PS
This argument, including the issue of slavery, occurred 3 or 4 weeks back.
Strange?..or is this constantly brought up?
T
Teelynn
Guest
Obedience is a hard virtue to practice in 2010. Society is proud, arrogant, and all about “ME”, and what “I” think is right and wrong; and how “I” interpret scripture and Church doctrine. Unfortunately this sin has permeated even the Church of Christ. As I recall, PRIDE, is what got Lucifer into trouble and got him thrown out of heaven. Hmmmmm.
OBEDIENCE IS A BIG DEAL!!
OBEDIENCE IS A BIG DEAL!!
J
Justin1982
Guest
I’m glad somebody said it. Also what would you call the woman priest? Mother? Is Mary already not the Mother of the Church? Sounds like a bunch of contradictions when you really start to think about it. It seems like there is really not a whole lot of thought put into this argument.
Well obedience and we need more humility, it’s in much of the priesthood and laity, but we could always use more.
J
Jennifer_J
Guest
Cardinal George has made him “correct” himself:
archdiocese-chgo.org/
archdiocese-chgo.org/
B
Brooklyn
Guest
If our Lord wanted us to have women priests, don’t you think He would have set the example? Certainly there would have never been a better candidate for priesthood than his own mother. Yet, she was not made one of the apostles. The first person he appeared to was Mary Magdelene. No one showed more faith than she did, yet she was not made a priest. Our Lord always elevated women in a way that his society of the time would never accept. Yet, he did not make them priests. He chose a weak man who had actually denied him to be the first pope. He chose another man who had actually been part of murdering Christians to be his greatest evangelist. Why do you think that he would do that, and not choose one of the strong, faith-filled women who followed him?
For those of you who insist on supporting Father Pfleger despite such heretical statements (and yes, I agree, those statements are definitely heretical), I have to ask, is there anything he could do or say that you would admit is wrong?
For those of you who insist on supporting Father Pfleger despite such heretical statements (and yes, I agree, those statements are definitely heretical), I have to ask, is there anything he could do or say that you would admit is wrong?
C
catharina
Guest
Cardinal George is on the case. We must pray for our bishops. They carry a heavy load.
"Statement of Rev. Michael Pfleger
Pastor, St. Sabina Parish
April 14, 2010
On Sunday, April 11, while preaching a sermon on the power of fear, I was referring to the fear that paralyzed the apostles, locking them in a room, leaving only John and the women at the foot of the cross. I stated that is why I believe women ought to be able to be ordained, as well as priests ought to be able to get married.
While this is my personal opinion, I do respect and follow the Catholic Church teachings and I am sorry I failed to do this.
Rev. Michael L. Pfleger"
Maybe he’ll learn not to share all of his “personal” opinions in the sanctuary.
B
Brooklyn
Guest
That is a half-a_ _ apology if I ever heard one. He is basically saying that even though he apologizes, he still thinks the church is wrong, so he I guess he has not learned not to share his personal opinions yet. The very least he could have said is that he misspoke and should have never said it.
Obviously, our Lord does not agree with Fr. Pfleger’s opinion since he did not make priests of any of the women. I wonder if Fr. P has ever thought of that.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
What a non-apologetic apology.
Let’s see if the Cardinal will check into Fr. Pfleger’s masses as well, now that he’s made them public.
If he had one bit the ounce of courage that Archbishop Burke has, it would never have come to this.
What a shame.
D
discomike2000
Guest
C
csuliman
Guest
This argument makes no sense whatsoever. Since the Church allows married priests in some instances (Anglican, Orthodox)- is the priest, who according to you takes the place of the Bridegroom and gives life to his bride, committing adultery when he doe the sacraments. Or is this a form of liturgical Polygamy?
And what about male priests? I thought “Father” was reserved for God, isn’t God the father of the Church?
The fact that Jesus did not appoint women as apostles means nothing. He did not appoint black people as apostles, does that mean we should not allow them to be priests? What about all the women that were disciples? But it is a logical fallacy to move from: “Jesus did not have women Apostles” to “Jesus did not want women Apostles”. It is a logical truth that “ought” cannot be deduced from “is” since a syllogism’s conclusion cannot contain what is not in its premises.
J
Joe_5859
Guest
That’s quite a charge there. I would be very hesitant to start accusing Cardinal George of lacking courage.
Archbishop Burke still had things like the problems with St. Stanislaus Kostka Church happen on his watch. Every bishop has issues to deal with.
Priests are individuals with their own thoughts and ideas. No matter how good a bishop is, he can’t control every action and spoken word of every priest in his diocese. I don’t think it would be good if he could do that.
The fact that we got any sort of apology from Fr. Pfleger is indicative that Cardinal George is taking this very seriously.
D
DawnInTexas
Guest
Christ didn’t make His Priests out of women. Women had/have their own place (in His Church).
I guess you’ll have to take this one up with Him when you meet Him-if you continue to “feel” this way.
His Way-the Priesthood was set up-His Way. The Church cannot change that.
God Bless.
+Peace In Christ Jesus.
Love, Dawn
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
The reason Burke had these problems is because he dealt with it swiftly and decisively. St Stan’s is in schism, and and some members of the original board are begging Arbshp Carlson to let them come back into the Archdiocese.
Maybe Cardinal George is afraid of a real confrontation. I don’t know.
M
manualman
Guest
Probably the toughest thing about being a bishop is to be constantly be receiving potshots from both the front and behind. It’s a miracle they can find anybody willing to accept the office.
- Status