Is it possible for the US gov to mandate Catholic church to ordain woman?

[PumpkinSeed]

The Church holds that each soul is made to fit that specific body, therefore there is no -one “having the wrong body.”. Such feelings are an adjustment issue. ICXC NIKA

That’s weird. I have even seen people on these forums saying homosexuality isn’t wrong, but that its only wrong when you act on it.

You are one of the first on here I’ve heard saying its a problem. I guess I’m unsure if it really is or not.

And @sed, I agree. I often wondered why a woman would want to be a priest? I understand some women might be good at it, but its more than that. Its a total lifestyle. Its not easy and takes much compassion. I respect those who have the patience to be one.

 

[GEddie]

Same-sex attraction and transgender are not the same issue. One can have SSA without “feeling that they have the wrong (sex) body”, and one can have crossed-gendered feelings while being attracted sexually to those of the opposite sex to his/her body.

I have not studied sexual issues. The problem with transgenderism is not those, it is the nature of our souls and our bodies. The human soul is formed in the human body, grows with the body, and lives life in the body. In fact, the 2 are meant to be inseparable, although the whole death thing bollixed us up.

The human soul is the soul OF THE BODY!!!

There is just no way that they can become mismatched.

ICXC NIKA

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Same-sex attraction and transgender are not the same issue. One can have SSA without “feeling that they have the wrong (sex) body”, and one can have crossed-gendered feelings while being attracted sexually to those of the opposite sex to his/her body.

I have not studied sexual issues. The problem with transgenderism is not those, it is the nature of our souls and our bodies. The human soul is formed in the human body, grows with the body, and lives life in the body. In fact, the 2 are meant to be inseparable, although the whole death thing bollixed us up.

The human soul is the soul OF THE BODY!!!

There is just no way that they can become mismatched.

ICXC NIKA

Incorrect, the soul is there at conception; at conception the person is only a cell which is hardly a body

 

[Rhuarc]

ABSOLUTELY NOT. 1st amendment

 

[Corki]

Incorrect, the soul is there at conception; at conception the person is only a cell which is hardly a body

I think you are missing the point. The soul and the body are two parts of the human person. The soul exists for the body and the body for the soul. It doesn’t matter how many cells are yet present.

 

[Corki]

You know this might sound weird, but it is just a question…

Since men only are allowed to be priests, what would be the case of a transgender individual? A person born a woman, but later becomes a man. Would they be able to be a priest?

The Church teaches that a person cannot change his/her gender. The person you describe is still a woman. She is a woman that has had surgery to look like a man but she is still a woman.

And no, a transgendered woman cannot be ordained.

 

[sedonaman]

ABSOLUTELY NOT. 1st amendment

, LMAO! In case you haven’t noticed, the 1st Amendment is under attack by the current administration.

 

[ACCT]

Where does this “Rule of Law” originate and derive its power?

Have you read the Declaration of Independence? It is not just a historical document. It is an unchanging document that holds the key to our freedom. We have lost sight of this document and have put our freedom into the precarious hands of the so-called “majority.”

I compare the Declaration of Independence to the articles of incorporation of a company, and the Constitution to the by-laws of a company. The moral laws of right and wrong are contained in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

The source of the “rule of law” goes back to Divine Law. The Declaration of Independence uses the words, the “equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them.” What do these words really mean?

The ideas of the source of legitimate law were being formulated by the Catholic Church before the Magna Carta. Truth always goes back to the source of truth, which is public revelation, commonly known as the Holy Scriptures.

ANY CIVIL LAW IN TRANSGRESSION OF DIVINE LAW IS INVALID! An unjust law is no law at all! Such laws are to be defied because they do not exist. There is no basis for them. A recent example is Spain’s “laws” on marriages and adoptions. Pope Benedict has ordered citizens of Spain who work in adoption agencies to defy Spain’s new laws of illicit marriages and adoptions. Workers in adoption agencies are to refuse to fill out any paperwork or grant adoption of children to illicit and unnatural marriage unions. Spain’s new law disobeys natural law. NO HUMAN LAW AGAINST NATURAL LAW IS VALID!

I repeat myself again. There is Divine Law, Natural Law and Civil Law, in that order. Man only has control over civil law. Each type of law is separate and you cannot substitute one type of law for another type of law.

 

[Corki]

, LMAO! In case you haven’t noticed, the 1st Amendment is under attack by the current administration.

I think this is the crux of the question. Could the Administration require that the Catholic Church adopt a policy of gender equality for all positions in the Church, including clergy? Yes, they could. Do I think this **would **happen? I pray not and I doubt it would survive a court challenge. Would the Church comply? ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Here’s how I think it could play out (again, I don’t think it will ever happen).

Just as the Administration has decided that Catholics who contracept are more “authentically Catholic” than the Bishops, the Adminstration could decide that groups like Catholic Woman Priests are more authentically Catholic than the rest of the Church. As long as there are Catholics who support women’s ordination and in fact participate in “ordination” ceremonies, the Administration could declare that an all male clergy is not an essential tenent of the Catholic religion and therefore not protected by the First Ammendment. The Administration could decide to only recognize the “churches” that ordain women and not the real Church. They could decide to no longer give tax exemptions to Churches that do not ordain women or to grant such privaleges as clergy visas to individuals who belong to the real Church. They could break off ties to the Vatican. They could mandate that only clergy from the compliant churches (those ordaining women) be allowed to serve as chaplains for the military.

I do not believe any of this, by the way. I am just playing devil’s advocate as to how it could be proposed.

 

[sedonaman]

…Here’s how I think it could play out (again, I don’t think it will ever happen).

Just as the Administration has decided that Catholics who contracept are more “authentically Catholic” than the Bishops, the Adminstration could decide that groups like Catholic Woman Priests are more authentically Catholic than the rest of the Church. As long as there are Catholics who support women’s ordination and in fact participate in “ordination” ceremonies, the Administration could declare that an all male clergy is not an essential tenent of the Catholic religion and therefore not protected by the First Ammendment. The Administration could decide to only recognize the “churches” that ordain women and not the real Church. They could decide to no longer give tax exemptions to Churches that do not ordain women or to grant such privaleges as clergy visas to individuals who belong to the real Church. They could break off ties to the Vatican. They could mandate that only clergy from the compliant churches (those ordaining women) be allowed to serve as chaplains for the military.

I do not believe any of this, by the way. I am just playing devil’s advocate as to how it could be proposed.

Given time, they have a better than even chance of happening. Forty-five years ago, homosexuals were asking only to be left alone, and anyone talking about same-sex marriage would have been laughed out of town.

 

[coachkfan1]

Just as the HHS mandate’s premises are illegal, so too would trying to mandate female ordinations within the Catholic Church. The Constitution sets up a separation of Church and state. Therefore, the Church cannot tell the government how they should be doing their job, and the government cannot tell the Church how they should be doing their job. Period.

Even if the government did try to do something like that, nothing would happen. The Church has already declared that women cannot receive the sacrament of Holy Orders. It’s similar to the Church’s refusal to grant the sacrament of Matrimony to homosexual couples; homosexual marriages are impossible in the eyes of the Church, as is the ordination of women as deacons, priests, or bishops. The Catholic Church would openly and wholeheartedly oppose such a thing (should it ever happen), refusing to comply.

Besides, I have never heard of any case in the history of the U. S. where a woman went against the Church on the grounds that the Church refused to ordain her.

You’re right in that a church cannot tell the government how to conduct its business; unless of course it’s a black protestant church and then all bets are off.

 

[GEddie]

Given time, they have a better than even chance of happening. Forty-five years ago, homosexuals were asking only to be left alone, and anyone talking about same-sex marriage would have been laughed out of town.

Still, the Church will never marry gay couples, and it has absorbed pressure far exceeding anything the USA is at all likely to apply. I wouldn’t bet on the US administration having it’s way with the longest-running human institution in history.

ICXC NIKA

 

[perro_sarnoso]

This HHS mandate has me thinking. Could the government claim that the Catholic church is discriminating against women and make them ordain woman priests?

I’m sure it’s crossed the minds of all those in league with Lucifer. However, the Catholic Church in the USA would not go for that and it would likely be the beginning of persecution, encarcerations and maybe even violence - in the style of the Roman Empire; the Nazi Regime or Communist Russia and China under Mao and Stalin and Lenin.

Having said that if ( God forbid) the Catholic Church in the USA were to aquiesce…and then label it as “good”…we would probably have a Western Schism.

God forbid.

 

[royal_archer]

I think it is only a matter of time before we see the government try to force female ordination claiming they are not trying to change the way we worship they are only forcing inclusion. The method of enforcement will likely be through the tax code by pulling the charitable tax status of any church that is not open and inclusive. they may even one day declare the church a hate group and attempt to label members of the church terrorist since they advocate a possition the left defines as hate (or in other words, dares to oppose the left). At that point you may see them using the patriot act or equivalent future legislation against us.

 

[PumpkinSeed]

I think it is only a matter of time before we see the government try to force female ordination claiming they are not trying to change the way we worship they are only forcing inclusion. The method of enforcement will likely be through the tax code by pulling the charitable tax status of any church that is not open and inclusive. they may even one day declare the church a hate group and attempt to label members of the church terrorist since they advocate a possition the left defines as hate (or in other words, dares to oppose the left). At that point you may see them using the patriot act or equivalent future legislation against us.

The government may one day try to change or harm the church, but I do not believe God would allow that. The true followers will do everything in their power to stop the government from intervening.

 

[royal_archer]

How has the US government exerted control over the Catholic sacrament of marriage?

When I hire someone and give out spousal bennefits I have to give the same bennefits to gay couples as truly married couples. This is the government forcing me to recognize that immoral union the same as a full Catholic sacramental marriage.

 

[royal_archer]

Read the arguments and opinions in the recent US Supreme Court case “Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission)”. If you don’t know about this case, you should, it’s very important and relevant. Although not the focus of the case, forcing Catholics to ordain female priests is brought up in the arguments. With that unanimous decision I feel I can safely say that I am not worried at all about the above with the current composition of the court, or with the retirement of 1 or 2 justices. In my young children’s lifetimes, though? I would not entirely rule it out.
Links to the arguments and opinions in the Hosanna-Tabor case can be found here.
It will give you some hope, I hope.

The Supreme court may not allow it but the current administration cares nothing about such things. They are even bypassing the legislature. They will slowly chip away at religious liberties with thousands of small rullings that would not in total stand up to judicial scrutiny but would be difficult to fight. Our resources would be depleated long before we could fight off (in the courts) all the attacks.

 

[Geist]

Where in the Constitution does it authorize the federal government to have jurisdiction over health issues?

Interstate commerce clause. My insurer is based in NC, yet I live in Virginia. Technically the Feds have a right to regulate it.

 

[Geist]

One might even ask if øbama is the result of these phenomena.

This is true. If previous administrations didnt consistently run massive deficits, he would not be able to run historic ones. If McCain had won I really don’t think the spending and government intrusions would have been avoided; they’d have just been different.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Interstate commerce clause. My insurer is based in NC, yet I live in Virginia. Technically the Feds have a right to regulate it.

Health insurance is a product and the federal government has the authority to ensure that all of the commerce applications between states are observed and are fair. There is nothing in the constitution that authorizes the federal government to establish WHAT is required, only that the products do not violate the Constitution.