Help me explain this please!

  • Thread starter Thread starter NewsTheMan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NewsTheMan

Guest
Hi guys 😦

In a continuing effort to represent our Mother Church online, I am once again having to argue with a lady who, even though she claims to be a card carrying sacrementally practicing Catholic, says she believes in contraception (argued with her for long about that) and now she is talking about women priests. She has very anti-Catholic views, and says our Church is full of problems, including the sexism, including anti-contraception, etc etc etc.

I need help in a simple matter. Explaining the difference between men and women. And why women can’t be priests in light of this. According to her…

"Aside from the obvious sexual differences, what are the differences that somehow prohibit me from assuming an equal role in the Church? Am I not also made in the image and likeness of God. Does owning a vagina somehow physically make me incapable of being a priest? Church is the “bride of Christ” …so that means that the male priests are married to Christ…in some homoerotic way. That doesn’t really work either. Does it? His spouse it the Catholic Church and since women are equal members of the Church, baptized with the same rite as men, we are included in the term “spouse.”

It scares me what this woman believes to be right. She has, a few times, refuted infallability, refuted that the Catholic Church has the fullness of Truth, refuted and claimed that it really doesnt matter what you believe, claimed that the Holy Spirit doesn’t guide the Church because humans naturally make mistakes.

Arg!
 
I was listening to a podcast of the Catholic Forum and the host was speaking about this subject. He said Pope John Paul II had said that even if he (the pope) wanted to ordain women- which he didn’t- he doesn’t have the authority.

That got me thinking… Women cannot be ordained priests. Period. Jesus chose men and that is just the way it is. Even if the Vatican changed the DOGMA of the church, which is an impossibility anyway, and said that women could be ordained, THEY WOULD STILL NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY GIVEN TO PRIESTS BY GOD. The consecration of the Eucharist would be invalid as would Confession and any other sacrament. I would NEVER go to a woman “priest.” And I would say that any woman who delved into the true meaning and understanding of the Church would opt not to become priests anyway.
 
“Only a baptized man vir] receives sacred ordination. The Lord Jesus chose men viri] to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.”
…
Catholic women have played a central role in the life of the Church, from Lydia in the Acts of the Apostles, through Margaret of Scotland and Jadwiga of Poland and other great queens and women of influence, to the Englishwomen at the Reformation who arranged secret places for Mass, down to Edith Stein, whose quest for intellectual and spiritual truth led her to convent life and did not spare her Auschwitz. In no sense is there any authentic tradition of “If you’re not a priest you simply don’t matter,” despite fashionable attempts to present this as a standard part of Catholicism.
Click to expand...
Source/More information here: catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9710fea2.as
Church is the “bride of Christ” …so that means that the male priests are married to Christ…in some homoerotic way. That doesn’t really work either. Does it? His spouse it the Catholic Church and since women are equal members of the Church, baptized with the same rite as men, we are included in the term “spouse.”
Click to expand...
Male priests are married to christ in a spiritual way, not a homoerotic way. That is a very strange idea, especially since homosexual acts are a sin. :rolleyes:

Men are spiritual fathers; women are physical mothers. There is no reason a man shouldn’t be able to carry a child and give birth. Is a man weaker than a woman? No. Is a woman better than a man? No. Women were chosen to carry children and give birth; Men were chosen to be Priests.

But that doesn’t mean that a man can’t take part in his child’s life, just as women aren’t prevented from being active members of a church, becoming nuns, etc. 👍
 
Without going to anything specific, you could just simply indicate thata as Catholics we must follow the insturctions of the Catechism. There are certain levels of belief: deposit of faith, dogma, doctrine, disciplie, and devotion. The first levels are not to be changed. Her objections seem to fall under those criteria. We can’t make the church what we want it to be. It is what it is. There are many roles she can fulfill in the church as it exists without being a a priest. There are innumerable saints and those considered “Doctors of the Church” who payed a significant role in the church without being a priest. If she can’t resign herself to that, and her true desire is just to be called a “priest” or a “minister” there are many protestant denomnations that allow for that.
 
Problem is, she sees them as up for debate, hence she created a facebook page to debate these things. I told her this was a bad idea, and wrong, and her reply, amongst other things…

many topics such as morality and ethics, the nature of authority, the role of the Church in politics and policy, etc, etc, are philosophical topics and perfect candidates for debate. It happens in philosophy classes around the world every day.

Maybe the difference is that you view all Church teachings as purely theological and I see many of them as philosophical, because there is reasoning behind them. And where there is logic and reason, there is room for debate.

She contends that all things are up for debate. When I said, thats incorrect. She claims that nothing is set in stone. Again, I say yes it is, especially considering the Holy Spirit guides. Her reply is that humans err. I say, Holy Spirit doesn’t. She then goes on to say that if nobody ever questionned the Church we would have a very bad Church. And that she sees the morality of contraception and non-ordination of women as actually the real evil.

:confused::mad::confused::mad:😦
 
I’ve been in this situation before. My best advice is: if all the best thinkers of the Church have not gotten through, then you won’t be able to either. Don’t get frustrated. It’s not up to you. It’s up to God.

Usually something like this means that the individual in question is more attached to their erroneous belief and what they think is to be gained by it, then they are to the idea of finding absolute truth in an unbiased sense.

Think of the enormity of what the person might have to give up in order to accept the true belief. (Whether it is imaginary or not, it is still enormous, and the person will still have to give it up). That is a wrenchingly difficult process that generally occurs very slowly.

All you can do is to provide an example of the joy and the good that following the Church brings- if the person can see the contrast, then the perceived, imaginary good that the erroneous belief brings starts to be dwarfed by the power of real good. However, the person will see this in their own time, and they have to be open to it.

Trust God.
 
A priest acts in the person of Christ, as his visible representative in the ministry of the sacraments. This imagery is best visualized by a male priest representing a male messiah.

The woman in question correctly identifies the Church as the “bride of Christ.” In biblical terminology, Christ is the groom. Likewise, as his representatives, priests are “grooms” (in a spiritual sense) for the “bride” (the Church). How this woman has worked in the idea of a homosexual image is unclear to me.

The exclusion of women from the priesthood has nothing to do with merit or capability. It does, however, have everything to do with how Jesus established the priesthood. If simply being made in the image and likeness of God and being an equal member of the Church was enough to qualify someone for ordination then why wasn’t the Blessed Virgin Mary made the first apostle? Why didn’t Jesus make her a priest? She certain would have qualified in terms of sanctity, more so than anybody else in the Church. And why didn’t Jesus make Mary Magdalene a priest? In terms of merit she certainly qualified, possibly more so than any of the actual apostles. And what about Martha and Mary, the sisters of Lazarus? Among Jesus’ disciples were holy women who followed him, listened to his teachings, financially supported his ministry and displayed courage after his arrest. But Jesus elevated none of them to the level of an apostle, and, consequently, none of them were priests.

The argument (which many people try to use) that Jesus was dwelling in a patriarchal society that would not tolerate women priests does not suffice for an answer. Jesus is God, and therefore Justice Itself. If keeping women out of the priesthood is a violation of justice, regardless of the times and social conditions, Jesus would not have acted in this way. Plus, God did many things among the ancient Jews in the Old Testament period to prepare them for the arrival of the messiah along with the new priesthood (we see this in terms of biblical typology concerning the priesthood, the Eucharist, etc.). God had centuries to change the Jewish notions in this regard if he wanted. For example, when God gave Moses instructions on the institution of the Levitical priesthood, he could have easily told him to ordain women at that time. After all, during their wandering in the desert God was doing many things to prepare the Hebrews for establishing their own future society in the Holy Land. A female priesthood could have easily been part of that. Having men and women Levitical priests would have easily prepared people for having men and women Christian priests.

Furthermore, in the era of the judges, Deborah was one of the judges, and therefore both the political and military ruler of Israel. So God did not care about the social norms of a patriarchal society when he appointed a woman to be a judge.

In his letter, “On Reserving Priestly Ministry to Men Alone”, Pope John Paul II basically said that because Jesus chose to only ordain men, the Church does not have the power to do otherwise.

I recommend the following documents from Pope John Paul II for future reading. They examine the Church’s official view on the ordination of men, and also examine the Church’s official view concerning the dignity of women.

On Reserving the Ordination to Men Alone:
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

On the Dignity and Vocation of Women:
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_15081988_mulieris-dignitatem_en.html

Letter to Women:
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_29061995_women_en.html
 
When you have a *personal *relationship with someone and can discuss these things in depth, pray with them, be an example for them, and work through these things over time-- there is a *chance *you can change an obstinate heretic’s mind.

On a facebook page or other forum on the internet-- you are rolling a boulder up a hill. Honestly, there isn’t anything you can say to this woman that is going to change her mind. She’s already made her mind up. Period.

It goes deep. It’s not just that she misunderstands Church teaching, or doesn’t understand why the Church teaches something. Her entire world view is that she can make her own religion. It’s called moral relativism, the heresy of Modernism, and she is infected with it in her entire way of being.

That’s why I think intellectual debate on the internet is ineffective with these people. They need an entire wolrdview change.
 
Thank you for the replies everybody!

I will certainly use that in my answer to her about the female priests.

Phooooie and 1ke… you are so totally right. It is beyond me now to help her - the only thing is that I constantly try and leave her to do her thing… but then I go back to the page and frankly she is promoting heretical anti-Catholic things and calling herself Catholic. And at this I have to get involved because I can’t stand by while she says these things in the name of the Church!

Heresy of the Conscience :mad: man, I prayed rosaries for her, but she needs serious help 🙂
 
Newest post from her: :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

The fact is that in every Catholic University I’ve ever heard of, philosophy and theology classes encourages debate about a variety of topics and that includes the teachings of the Church. There is nothing to be afraid of. Don’t worry, they church will not excommunicate you. You will be fine. I promise. There have been many priests over the years that have openly disagreed with the Church and the Church sill considers them to be Catholic. They have not be excommunicated.

And for pete’s sake, , if hundreds of priests can sexually abuse children and not be excommunicated from the church, (not to mention the bishops who knowingly moved them around) I can’t possibly see the harm in throwing around some debates on the teachings.

:mad::mad:

Unbelievable and sad!
 
1ke said:
When you have a *personal *relationship with someone and can discuss these things in depth, pray with them, be an example for them, and work through these things over time-- there is a *chance *you can change an obstinate heretic’s mind.

On a facebook page or other forum on the internet-- you are rolling a boulder up a hill. Honestly, there isn’t anything you can say to this woman that is going to change her mind. She’s already made her mind up. Period.

It goes deep. It’s not just that she misunderstands Church teaching, or doesn’t understand why the Church teaches something. Her entire world view is that she can make her own religion. It’s called moral relativism, the heresy of Modernism, and she is infected with it in her entire way of being.
Click to expand...
1ke has it correct. I have run into several of this type of woman in my life and you cannot tell them anything. They know! I thank the Lord that this type cannot be ordained; their personalities would prevent them from ever being an effective priest and pastor. The women I know who could make excellent pastors, have no interest in being priests.👍
 
Oh goodness. There is a nun at my Catholic University who truly believes that the Church will one day ordain women. She’s also the true definition of a “flower child”. :doh2:

Dont let this woman get under your skin. Just be happy knowing that she is wrong, and she’ll find out when she dies.

Sorry, didn’t mean to sound morbid 😊
 
EWTN did a wonderful series called “Good or Evil - Who Decides?” that was hosted by Dr. Raymond de Souza. The last episode was about the subject of women priests.

You can download each episode of the series for free from here.
 
NewsTheMan said:
Hi guys 😦

In a continuing effort to represent our Mother Church online, I am once again having to argue with a lady who, even though she claims to be a card carrying sacrementally practicing Catholic, says she believes in contraception (argued with her for long about that) and now she is talking about women priests. She has very anti-Catholic views, and says our Church is full of problems, including the sexism, including anti-contraception, etc etc etc.

I need help in a simple matter. Explaining the difference between men and women. And why women can’t be priests in light of this. According to her…

"Aside from the obvious sexual differences, what are the differences that somehow prohibit me from assuming an equal role in the Church? Am I not also made in the image and likeness of God. Does owning a vagina somehow physically make me incapable of being a priest? Church is the “bride of Christ” …so that means that the male priests are married to Christ…in some homoerotic way. That doesn’t really work either. Does it? His spouse it the Catholic Church and since women are equal members of the Church, baptized with the same rite as men, we are included in the term “spouse.”

It scares me what this woman believes to be right. She has, a few times, refuted infallability, refuted that the Catholic Church has the fullness of Truth, refuted and claimed that it really doesnt matter what you believe, claimed that the Holy Spirit doesn’t guide the Church because humans naturally make mistakes.

Arg!
Click to expand...
Sometimes this isn’t an intellectual problem that can be solved with even the most brilliant reasoning. This may have everyrthing to do with what is happening now, or did happen, in her life. And that might be driving her point of view. Not any of the issues you mention. Just thinking out loud.
 
I wish you guys could see the latest bunch of anti-Catholicism.

She has called Bishop Burke a ‘nut’ and a ‘self important’ man who does not resemble Jesus in any way. This after someone in a group posted an article of his saying how we need to stay true to the magisterium. She then said that nobody has the right to deny people of communion. And made jokes about wearing a nuns habit.

When someone quoted Canon Law about refusing communion, she said that she defies Cannon Law, because her conscience is clear and that is between her and God. Are you kidding me?!

If you are interested in reading the 20 + posts she makes you can PM me.
 
NewsTheMan said:
I wish you guys could see the latest bunch of anti-Catholicism.

She has called Bishop Burke a ‘nut’ and a ‘self important’ man who does not resemble Jesus in any way. This after someone in a group posted an article of his saying how we need to stay true to the magisterium. She then said that nobody has the right to deny people of communion. And made jokes about wearing a nuns habit.

When someone quoted Canon Law about refusing communion, she said that she defies Cannon Law, because her conscience is clear and that is between her and God. Are you kidding me?!

If you are interested in reading the 20 + posts she makes you can PM me.
Click to expand...
Sounds like one or more of the biggie sins is involved somehow in her life and it’s coming out as anger. She lashes out at the law, the Church, anyone who defends the Church and the laws.

Don’t let her take YOUR peace. Pray for her. It’s the best thing you can do for her.
 
interesting she says men make error. But if men are to follow the Holy Spirit, would she accuse the Holy Spirit of error? If that were the case, GOD would be in error. Once you start cherry picking on how you think the Church should teach or be, than you have made a church for yourself and not of the Catholic Church.

John Martignoni says it best:

If you want to call yourself Catholic, but you want to pick and choose for yourself which of the Church’s teachings to accept and which to reject, you give everyone else who calls themselves Catholic the right to do the same thing.

For example, you believe women should be priests…in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1577 states, “Only a baptized man validly receives ordination…For this reason the ordination of women is not possible!” You don’t believe that…well, that’s fine…[RIP] just tear that page out of your Catechism…you just made it a Catechism of your Catholic Church…not mine.

But remember, if you can throw doctrines out, so can everyone else who calls themselves Catholic. That gives Joe Parishioner over at St. Doubting Thomas Catholic Church the right to throw out the Church’s social justice teachings…he doesn’t feel like feeding the hungry, caring for the poor, and all that other “bleeding heart” stuff - Paragraphs 2401 -2463 [RIP]…he just made it a Catechism of his Catholic Church…not mine and not yours.

You believe contraception is okay? Paragraph 2370 says contraception is intrinsically evil! [RIP] Joe Parishioner doesn’t like what the Church teaches on the death penalty - Paragraphs 2266-2267[RIP]. You don’t like what it teaches on pages 55-60 [RIP]. He doesn’t like what it teaches on pages 128-140 [RIP]

Can you see what’s happening? I heard it said once that there is a shortage of vocations to the priesthood in the United States, but no shortage of vocations to the Papacy! If we don’t believe in all of it, if we each appoint ourselves Pope and throw out a doctrine here or a doctrine there, then our faith is no longer Catholic.
 
Abeyta85 said:
interesting she says men make error. But if men are to follow the Holy Spirit, would she accuse the Holy Spirit of error? If that were the case, GOD would be in error. Once you start cherry picking on how you think the Church should teach or be, than you have made a church for yourself and not of the Catholic Church.

John Martignoni says it best:

If you want to call yourself Catholic, but you want to pick and choose for yourself which of the Church’s teachings to accept and which to reject, you give everyone else who calls themselves Catholic the right to do the same thing.

For example, you believe women should be priests…in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1577 states, “Only a baptized man validly receives ordination…For this reason the ordination of women is not possible!” You don’t believe that…well, that’s fine…[RIP] just tear that page out of your Catechism…you just made it a Catechism of your Catholic Church…not mine.

But remember, if you can throw doctrines out, so can everyone else who calls themselves Catholic. That gives Joe Parishioner over at St. Doubting Thomas Catholic Church the right to throw out the Church’s social justice teachings…he doesn’t feel like feeding the hungry, caring for the poor, and all that other “bleeding heart” stuff - Paragraphs 2401 -2463 [RIP]…he just made it a Catechism of his Catholic Church…not mine and not yours.

You believe contraception is okay? Paragraph 2370 says contraception is intrinsically evil! [RIP] Joe Parishioner doesn’t like what the Church teaches on the death penalty - Paragraphs 2266-2267[RIP]. You don’t like what it teaches on pages 55-60 [RIP]. He doesn’t like what it teaches on pages 128-140 [RIP]

Can you see what’s happening? I heard it said once that there is a shortage of vocations to the priesthood in the United States, but no shortage of vocations to the Papacy! If we don’t believe in all of it, if we each appoint ourselves Pope and throw out a doctrine here or a doctrine there, then our faith is no longer Catholic.
Click to expand...
Thank you for pointing that out! And you know what - I basically said to her what you said to me verbatim about a week ago. And her response? Basically, she then tried to argue that there is a difference between things like feeding the poor, murder and female priests and contraception. What I just cannot comprehend is how she gets to that line of thought. When you start arguing about the intrinsic evil or good in something, you allow everything to be open to discussion!
 
NewsTheMan said:
Thank you for pointing that out! And you know what - I basically said to her what you said to me verbatim about a week ago. And her response? Basically, she then tried to argue that there is a difference between things like feeding the poor, murder and female priests and contraception. What I just cannot comprehend is how she gets to that line of thought. When you start arguing about the intrinsic evil or good in something, you allow everything to be open to discussion!
Click to expand...
Tell her, it really doesn’t matter what you “feel” is more important, what you “feel” should and should not be important. The church takes all these matters importantly. Ask her, if woman were permitted to be priests, why didn’t Christ set it up that way? Why did he give authority on earth to the apostles who are MEN? Why didn’t he ordain woman?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top