IF we had a female Pope, what would her title be?

[PetraG]

Aunty pope

I regret I can only “like” this one once.

 

[rose321]

Your questions have been asked and answered:

Respectfully opinion only. Fully agree trust in him, yes indeed ask and it shall be given, Not what one reads is it within Jesus teaching, but what one hears? Silence is golden. Let your ears hear what the Holy Spirit says… Peace

 

[dochawk]

If a woman were purportedly installed as "bishop’ of Rome, the term would be “Heretic in Chief.”



hawk

 

[Thom18]

Okay, now that we all agree that a woman can at least hypothetically be elected pope, the question arises of who that woman should be.

Too bad Hillary is a Methodist, but there’s always Nancy Pelosi!

We did? I don’t think we did.

 

[BoyGenius]

Interesting question. But let’s take a look further. Has anyone taken the place and title of Mary, the Mother of God? And answer is…No. Why? Because, Mary is the Mother of God. No one else is. That is why the title of Pope is reserved for men. We have had many popes. But we have only one Mother of God. Mary most Holy. She is the mother of all the living. The Church is the Bride as we see in Revelation. And hence, there is only one bride, the Church.

Now, if we look at Revelation, not just symbolism, but the representative whole of humanity that is seen through the centuries of the history of Salvation. The Harlot, is effeminate sin of man. A woman who represents sin. The rejection of Christ. Then consider the Beast. It’s heathen brutality, a monster. All representative forms and presentations of humanity before God, because of sin. The city, the Harlot, is the city of the world. Whereas the New Jerusalem seen in Heaven, is the departure from this. You can see imagery of the evil one, the dragon, who is a seven headed hydra, spewing out water to swallow Mary. But do not forget this was foretold when God said He would put enmity between the devil’s seed, and Eve’s. Which in conjunction determines Mary.

We see the Beast that bows before God (the Church accounts this as the Cherubim and Seraphim.) Whereas the beast on earth is a demon, a monster. This beast was it’s pagan construct of man even in the book of Daniel. That beast is also representative of the pagan sacrifices made. And many human sacrifices made to them. But this is the whole history of Salvation, fighting the evil one. For from the book of Daniel, and the Angel in Revelation seen fighting the seven hydra and his fallen. The battle ensures since the time of temptation in the Garden.

Mary is the right role as Mother of God. The Church is the Bride of Christ. Nun’s symbolize and live as representative bridalship of the Church. The priest’s live in symbolic representative manner and presentation as the Bridegroom, Christ Himself. Thus, Persona Christi.

The Church does not sponsor nor does she allow, nor does she follow with the sliding landscape of the world which encourages gay and homosexual temperaments of character. Placing a woman as Bishop would dethrone Christ from the Sacraments. it would be a departure from Salvation. The place of a woman take upon the Apostleship of men would be unseating Christ from the Church. It would be abuse no less as one man, King Henry VIII wanted to be the head of the Church have control over Apostolic succession. Woman are also prone to abuse of power. They are not freed from the battle of sexes, either. Which would otherwise dissolute Christendom. Salvation would be lost.

 

[LilyM]

LilyM:

I see nothing in Canon and Magisterial teaching, however, to support the idea that a woman can validly be elected Pope.

Canon 332: The Roman Pontiff obtains full and supreme power in the Church by his acceptance of legitimate election together with episcopal consecration. Therefore, a person elected to the supreme pontificate who is marked with episcopal character obtains this power from the moment of acceptance.

A non ordained person can clearly be elected “Roman Pontiff” and is called such before ordination.
However power cannot be transferred until ordination .

And, for.about the hundredth time, it is impossible for that power ever be transferred to a woman, even if the whole world were to vote for one. Again for the hundredth time, per Magisterial teaching, it is impossible for a woman to be ordained priest or bishop.

It’s as nonsensical as saying that that ficus plant was legitimately/validly elected to congress. A majority of people physically wrote its name on the paper, to be sure. And I highly doubt there’s any law that actually specifies that a Congressional representative has to be a human being. But a plant is clearly unable to assume the power or fulfil the functions of the office, so no-one, even Michael Moore who engineered the stunt, claimed that it was validly or legitimately elected.

 

[BlackFriar]

And, for.about the hundredth time, it is impossible for that power ever be transferred to a woman,

Noone disagrees.
The topic is “if we had a female pope”.
As Popes can be elected without ordination it is a logically acceptable question .

In fact Canon laywers even admit a married man could be elected.

 

[LilyM]

LilyM:

And, for.about the hundredth time, it is impossible for that power ever be transferred to a woman,

Noone disagrees.
The topic is “if we had a female pope”.
As Popes can be elected without ordination it is a logically acceptable question .

In fact Canon laywers even admit a married man could be elected.

You’re comparing apples.and oranges.

Of course married men can be elected. We already have married men ordained to the priesthood. So marriage, unlike being female, is not an insurmountable obstacle to ordination.

It is therefore; unlike being female, also not an insurmountable obstacle to holding, and therefore being validly/legitimately elected to, the office of Pope.

 

[BlackFriar]

It is therefore; unlike being female, also not an insurmountable obstacle to holding, and therefore being validly/legitimately elected to, the office of Pope.

Ordination is only a legal requirement for acquiring Papal power, not being validly Papally elected Lily .
See Canon 332.

 

[LilyM]

LilyM:

It is therefore; unlike being female, also not an insurmountable obstacle to holding, and therefore being validly/legitimately elected to, the office of Pope.

Ordination is only a legal requirement for acquiring Papal power, not being validly Papally elected Lily .
See Canon 332.

Actually the Canon only ever uses the pronoun ‘he’. In doing so it excludes even the possibility that the ‘person elected’ could be a ‘she’ .

 

[BlackFriar]

Yes that’s a far better logical argument - though I am not sure how much weight can be put on a single pronoun if this is the only barrier in all the rules re papal elections. Additionally the Latin text (gendered words like French) needs to be considered and whether that makes a difference.

 

[PetraG]

Respectfully opinion only. Fully agree trust in him, yes indeed ask and it shall be given, Not what one reads is it within Jesus teaching, but what one hears? Silence is golden. Let your ears hear what the Holy Spirit says… Peace

I’m not quite sure what you’re saying? Could you be a bit more specific? I was saying specifically that the saint of our times examined the question and in his duty as the Successor of Peter he concluded that the ordination of women was impossible.

Pope St. John Paul II did not simply conclude that he had the authority to forbid the ordination of women. He found upon examination of the issue that he did not have the authority to permit it, that it is not just illicit but impossible.

 

[LilyM]

Yes that’s a far better logical argument - though I am not sure how much weight can be put on a single pronoun if this is the only barrier in all the rules re papal elections. Additionally the Latin text (gendered words like French) needs to be considered and whether that makes a difference.

The text of Canon Law, as well as the official translations thereof, have all been pored over by experts. While, of course, errors are possible, and indeed some aspects of some languages are incapable of translation into others, both Latin and English are familiar enough, and gender a familiar enough concept to users of both languages, that the chances of a mistranslation are extremely remote.

 

[BlackFriar]

The issue is not mistranslation. The issue is the huge weight you attempt to give to a single pronoun. If women are not even eligible candidates for election let alone assuming power then, given the Magisterial effort that went into allegedly denying ordination, one would expect the Magisterium be consistently s explicit here instead of relying on a single Latin pronoun in all Conclave law.

That is a significant dissonance and inconsistency for most academics in other areas of law. I do not see why this Canon should be exempt. it is in fact a question that has never been pored over from what I can see.

But don’t worry Lily - this is a fantasy topic anyways .

 

[LilyM]

The issue is not mistranslation. The issue is the huge weight you attempt to give to a single pronoun. If women are not even eligible candidates for election let alone assuming power then, given the Magisterial effort that went into allegedly denying ordination, one would expect the Magisterium be consistently s explicit here instead of relying on a single Latin pronoun in all Conclave law.

That is a significant dissonance and inconsistency for most academics in other areas of law. I do not see why this Canon should be exempt. it is in fact a question that has never been pored over from what I can see.

But don’t worry Lily - this is a fantasy topic anyways .

“Allegedly”? There is no “allegedly” about it. Pope St John Paul 2 was clear. So has consistent Magisterial teaching on the issue.

And why are you referring to a single use? Canon 331, which I take it you have read as I specifically pointed you to it, describes in detail the role of the Pontiff and at least a dozen times uses “he” and “his”.

We’re not talking about a single use of the male pronoun, we are talking about repeated uses, including in the very passage of Canon Law that defines what a Pope is. It is not an error to be brushed aside by those advocating for women’s ordination, it is a quite deliberate and specific and repeated choice of words.

 

[IWantGod]

IF we had a female Pope, what would her title be?

Feminist

The term “Pope” comes from Papa/Father, so IF we had a female Pope, would she still be a “Pope” or would she be called something else

Yes.

She would be called the queen of Feminism…

 

[BlackFriar]

“Allegedly”? There is no “allegedly” about it. Pope St John Paul 2 was clear. So has consistent Magisterial teaching on the issue.

You are not a theologian as far I know lily so excuse me if I don’t take your word for it that it is clear. I have seen respected debate on what you, as a biased lay person, regard as “clear” sorry.
hence the word “alleged”. By all means debate that on another thread if you wish.

And why are you referring to a single use? Canon 331, which I take it you have read as I specifically pointed you to it, describes in detail the role of the Pontiff and at least a dozen times uses “he” and “his”.

Indeed, this is about a Pope who has assumed power. 331 does not refer to a Pope-elect.

It is not an error to be brushed aside by those advocating for women’s ordination

Please quote where I said there was an “error”?
As an academic I noted a “dissonance” and an “inconsistency” which robs the pronoun of the weight you, a clear opponent of female ordination, wish to place upon it. There is more discussion to be had.

It is a quite deliberate and specific and repeated choice of words.

Well produce commentary from theologians and academics on it then. Excuse me if I don’t take your unsubstantiated personal views seriously.
It appears more likely, like Geocentrism, a long assumed cultural usage not seriously reflected upon. Especially as women are not specifically excluded in the Conclave rules JPII himself drew up in 1992.

 

[LilyM]

LilyM:

“Allegedly”? There is no “allegedly” about it. Pope St John Paul 2 was clear. So has consistent Magisterial teaching on the issue.

You are not a theologian as far I know lily so excuse me if I don’t take your word for it that it is clear. I have seen respected debate on what you, as a biased lay person, regard as “clear” sorry.
hence the word “alleged”. By all means debate that on another thread if you wish.

With all possible respect brother - neither, as far as I know, are you. You are an “academic”, but in what? And well-respected? I have referred to JP2 who was indeed a very well-respected theologian and was crystal clear against women’s ordination. You have produced - who exactly? No-one apart from yourself and equally anonymous posters here.

Indeed, this is about a Pope who has assumed power. 331 does not refer to a Pope-elect.

Interesting again - the OP did not refer to a Pope-elect either, since you are so very keen to make something of the difference between the two.

Please quote where I said there was an “error”?
As an academic I noted a “dissonance” and an “inconsistency” which robs the pronoun of the weight you, a clear opponent of female ordination, wish to place upon it. There is more discussion to be had.

What dissonance and inconsistency? “He” and “him” are used numerous times, “she” and “her” are not used at all. I don’t see any genuine dissonance or inconsistency here, and no further discussion on the issue worth having.

It is a quite deliberate and specific and repeated choice of words.

Well produce commentary from theologians and academics on it then. Excuse me if I don’t take your unsubstantiated personal views seriously.
It appears more likely, like Geocentrism, a long assumed cultural usage not seriously reflected upon. Especially as women are not specifically excluded in the Conclave rules JPII himself drew up in 1992.

Really? You think theologians have nothing better to do than waste time pointing out the very obvious fact that the relevant legislation never uses the female pronoun, and where it is gendered, which it is numerous times, is exclusively male? Forgive me, but you are starting to sound like Bill Clinton quibbling about the word “is”.

JP2 wrote extensively and authoritatively on the role of women in the Church, and specifically excluded them from priesthood, and by necessary extension the papacy. He clearly didn’t take it to be a mere “long assumed cultural usage” capable of change, nor did he fail to seriously reflect upon it before reaching his conclusions. Like all legislation, his Conclave rules need to be read in the context of the views and likely intent of him who wrote them, and not in isolation.

 

[BlackFriar]

When you produce authority other than your own lay musings perhaps we can take this further.

 

[rose321]

I’m not quite sure what you’re saying? Could you be a bit more specific? I was saying specifically that the saint of our times examined the question and in his duty as the Successor of Peter he concluded that the ordination of women was impossible.

Pope St. John Paul II did not simply conclude that he had the authority to forbid the ordination of women. He found upon examination of the issue that he did not have the authority to permit it, that it is not just illicit but impossible.

Respectfully opinion only. Pondering on
Question does our Heavenly Father permit it?

Question Does Scripture support mans traditions over our Heavenly Creator of all?

Why does Jesus then call out to all men/woman he is our Bridegroom even to his own Apostles, disciples etc?

Question Within His Spoken Word there is so many biblical verses from the front of the book to the back of the book Our Heavenly Father warns, beware of mans traditions over His, does he not? >To many Biblical verses to list is there not?

Is it not interesting that Our Heavenly Father with him it is>>> not about gender>> is it? Our Holy One, >>seeks out hearts, souls and minds in all walks in life, 1st Commandment tells us this does he not?

Is it not interesting that our Heavenly Creator, his most Treasured> Sacred Blessing and Graces, he has chosen and >>ordained >>>to come through the womb of a Woman> a child?

Does the Ten Commandments its laws make us both men and woman as equals? Is there one commandment that says this Commandment only applies, has to be obeyed by woman only not men? Honor Father and Mother, both equally?

You shall love your neighbor as yourself?
Interesting is it not Jesus had more woman following him then men in serving him, that would be quiet a stir in Jesus time would it not?

Interesting also the Hebrew Bible is a book primarily written by men for men and about men and men experiences, is it not? 90%?

10% names woman but not referred to example by name rather being the daughter of Jephthan in Judges 11:21-40 interesting is it not?

Then we have Jeremiah 8:8 surely Jesus being the author was fully aware of?

In pondering when reading Matthew 23 Jesus is boldly, harshly, strongly, rebuking the scribes, the teachers, the elders? the highly learned men? even his own Temple priest why? Not the majority his sheep but he defended them instead?

Lots of questions just pondering on and told make Wisdom your friend, Wisdom refers to a her right? Unity Oneness no divisions in His house or Kingdom right? Woman also even till this day were the ones who prepared the food to nourish the family, served those at her table, family etc would this not be true and even more so in Jesus time?

Mary Magdalene was known as the Apostle among the Apostles. She was there at Jesus lowest and highest moments and it was Woman who drew ever so personally near him>>who anointed Jesus head, feet and prepared the anointing oils to anoint Jesus for his burial, a role only priest would do, especially in Jesus time 2,000 yrs ago?

Peace blessings to!