How do pro-women's ordination deal with the 12 male Apostles?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I would prefer that women get a say in matters too. Not necessarily ordination. I can’t remember who said this, but a Catholic writer said something along the lines of: treat women equally, and you won’t find that we are the ‘mysterious’ sex.

This was in response to the pope’s comment on how female theologians are the strawberry on the cake if I’m not wrong
 
I don’t understand why these neo-feminists want to join a religion and try and change it to their desires rather than just follow its rules… what’s the point?
 
Pope John Paul II gave the definitive statement.

"4. Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal Tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the Magisterium in its more recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the Church’s judgment that women are not to be admitted to ordination is considered to have a merely disciplinary force.

“Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.”
 
Some people worship an idol, a god called Change. They are compelled to ignore God and the Church and attempt to refashion it in their image and likeness. Our Lord guards His Bride, the Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Matthew 17 and 18.
 
Last edited:
Samarians and Jews were enemies so that’s why there were objections. The first one doesn’t look like an objection.
 
God is constant so He doesn’t change His mind like that.
 
Last edited:
But we’re talking about the Catholic Church. In our Catholic Church we have the Blessed Mother, the most important woman in all of Christianity, who we can look up to as a role model for women. She was always obedient and humble. We also have Catholic Nuns who are wonderful role models for girls and women. I’m really not concerned with what other Christian faiths do, I have no interest in them and there’s a lot of things they do differently, some even believe that abortion is a good thing. Why would we be impressed with that?
 
Last edited:
I think the point was that women became priests before liberal feminism was a thing.
 
Last edited:
Not in our Church. Am looking up, is this an “other religions” forum?
 
I only read the first 50 posts. But all these threads and posts all the time on this issue are puzzling. When traditionalists question the post Vatican II changes the retort is usually why are they so presumptuous to think they know more than the Vatican guided by the holy spirit. And here we have clear teaching by the Vatican that states it has no power to ordain women and that it will never happen, yet many of the same people who would call out the traditionalists for questioning the Vatican are doing the very same thing in this regard.
 
“Right, but I’m asking about how Christians who want women priests deal with Christ’s choice of 12 male Apostles. Any idea on that?”

If other “Christians” want woman ordained they have other Reformed “Christian” faiths to choose from.
In the history of the Church, the ordained has been understood as reflecting Christ, who chose only men to be his Apostles. Christ reserved the ordained for men is, therefore, bound up with the fact the priest receives a share in the priesthood of Christ and is called to act in the Person of Christ the bridegroom, which is the specifically male relation.
 
Last edited:
This is a weird thread. It’s not the only place where it’s happened on CAF, but I’m getting a vibe of, “SHUT UP!! THE CHURCH HAS SPOKEN!! YOU ARE NOT TO DISCUSS IT HERE!”

Really? In a forum full of debates on everything from ad-populum-vs.-ad-orientum to transgenderism and LGBT marriage?

I’m not sure why so many Catholics bristle in threatened defensiveness when tenets of the faith are questioned. It’s been happening for centuries and happens at least daily on CAF. I hate to break it to you, but our Church was built on the backs of scholars and intellectuals, leaving us no reason to cower in the face of disagreement.

Non-Catholics and confused Catholics with good intentions are to be welcomed into our conversations with open arms. Use your wisdom, eloquence, and civility and express your respectful disagreement and articulate Church teaching. Or close out of the thread and save your keystrokes. Either way, it’s really not a big deal.
 
Brendan_64 said:
40.png
catholic1seeks:
So how to Christians (who want women’s ordination) deal with Christ appointing 12 men as Apostles?
Click to expand...
I don’'t think that is the central reason women can’t be ordained; I believe the central reason women cannot be ordained is because to be in persona Christi they must be male (as Christ was). The Apostles couldn’t be female because then they couldn’t be in persona Christi and couldn’t consecrate the Eucharist or give absolution. Priests aren’t male only because the Apostles were male only, priests (like the Apsotles) are male only because Christ was a man.
Click to expand...
What does it mean to be “in persona Christi”? Does it mean that a priest must be the same height as Jesus or have the same color of eyes as Jesus? Obviously not. So why is maleness a requirement for being “in persona Christi” but other physical attributes of Jesus are not? In the past, a king was considered to be God’s representative on earth but a queen could also fill that role so maleness was not an absolute requirement.
 
Last edited:
phil19034 said:
40.png
catholic1seeks:
If Christ were using today’s standards of equality, wouldn’t he have opted for 6 male Apostles and 6 female Apostles? The reasoning I often see for women’s ordination basically goes like this: Unless women are equal in every way to men, with the exact same opportunities, then they are subject to injustice.

So how to Christians (who want women’s ordination) deal with Christ appointing 12 men as Apostles?

I know this is a Catholic forum, and so many of y’all will be answering from second-hand knowledge. But still, any familiarity with this?
Click to expand...
Most make the ridiculous claim that Jesus only picked men because he was following social norms of His day.

And a few make the even more ridiculous claim that it was the Apostles that prevented women from becoming ordained.
Click to expand...
Are all claims that are contrary to your beliefs “ridiculous”?
 
blackforest said:
our Church was built on the backs of scholars and intellectuals, leaving us no reason to cower in the face of disagreement.
Click to expand...
If anyone truly believes the Church does not have the authority to ordain women, they should engage the question in the original post. Why do some people not accept this teaching?

The assumption is that this teaching is correct. There is no point in reiterating what the Church teaches. Do you assume those who reject it are acting in bad faith? How can it be expressed so that the teaching is not rejected?

Some of the replies are downright awful, and that includes the catholic answers answer recently quoted in post 131. Talking about men and women as possible “matter” for the priesthood is ignorant. The matter in holy orders is the laying on of hands, the form is the prayer for the gift of the Holy Spirit to perform the priestly task. Rewriting the theology of ordination is not holding fast to the tradition. It is not the way to help the unconvinced to see the truth of this teaching.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top