Is Liberal Catholicism Dead?

[skyryder]

SKYRYDER,

I am sincerely curious as to your beliefs on the Trinity. This topic is one that we have not discussed yet. I am curious as to what you think or believe in regards to the nature of God and particularly to Jesus Christ. Do you believe that Jesus is the second Person of the Trinity, consubstantial to the Father? or do you believe this teaching to be a made up tradition?
I know you do not believe in the Real Presence, which is a common liberal theme, but I have not heard much if anything yet as to a response on the common liberal understanding of the nature of God and particularly an acceptance or rejection of the teachings on the Trinity. Again, I am just sincerely curious as to your personal or shared opinions on this matter. Please don’t think that I am trying to attack you here in any way.

The idea of the trinity is a curious one. Christianty is a bit like the Rambler American Car ie part Ford, Chevy, and Dodge with a lot of adapter parts. In the case of Catholicism, one took Jewish Religion and then started grafting on ideas from the Essenes, and Greek/Roman Mystery Cults & Philosopy. Ideas such as Logos, the Soul, Dying Rising God Man, Heaven and Hell, Gematria (*words meaning numbers with mystic properties) are all Pagan Additions to Jewish Scriptures. If one does a computer analysis on the New Testament, for quotes from other ancient text predating it…you get an avalanche of borrowings. Christ quotes Plato.Lukes Christmas Story paralles stories about Julius Ceaser etc. It is my guess that there was a basic outline about the life of Christ simlar to the Gospel of Thomas and then details were filled in with other accepted beliefs of the time. This was common practise in Alexandria where Mark appears to have been composed. There were many additions to the Jesus Story by a group of people called the Pythagorians who were followers a hierophant of the mysteries of Demeter. . The Trinity is a Pythagorian idea. The Gospels and Epistles were written by parties unknown and then fought over revised and edited for the next 300 years by parties unknown. The Gospels are not literal biographies, they are symbolic works and can only be understood as such per Joseph Campbell or Carl Jung analysis. Supposedly a church council reviewed competing versions of the Jesus Story and made the final cut from competing Gnostic Texts. Constantine’s Lawyers made the final edit with Rome paying for the first publication of Christian Books. Personally I don’t think it makes much difference if God is one person or three. Part of the appeal for 3 persons is that it paralles the Parent Child and Adult structure of the human mind so that God is more understandable to us mortals.

 

[catharina]

The idea of the trinity is a curious one. Christianty is a bit like the Rambler American Car ie part Ford, Chevy, and Dodge with a lot of adapter parts. In the case of Catholicism, one took Jewish Religion and then started grafting on ideas from the Essenes, and Greek/Roman Mystery Cults & Philosopy. Ideas such as Logos, the Soul, Dying Rising God Man, Heaven and Hell, Gematria (*words meaning numbers with mystic properties) are all Pagan Additions to Jewish Scriptures. If one does a computer analysis on the New Testament, for quotes from other ancient text predating it…you get an avalanche of borrowings. Christ quotes Plato.Lukes Christmas Story paralles stories about Julius Ceaser etc. It is my guess that there was a basic outline about the life of Christ simlar to the Gospel of Thomas and then details were filled in with other accepted beliefs of the time. This was common practise in Alexandria where Mark appears to have been composed. There were many additions to the Jesus Story by a group of people called the Pythagorians who were followers a hierophant of the mysteries of Demeter. . The Trinity is a Pythagorian idea. The Gospels and Epistles were written by parties unknown and then fought over revised and edited for the next 300 years by parties unknown. The Gospels are not literal biographies, they are symbolic works and can only be understood as such per Joseph Campbell or Carl Jung analysis. Supposedly a church council reviewed competing versions of the Jesus Story and made the final cut from competing Gnostic Texts. Constantine’s Lawyers made the final edit with Rome paying for the first publication of Christian Books. Personally I don’t think it makes much difference if God is one person or three. Part of the appeal for 3 persons is that it paralles the Parent Child and Adult structure of the human mind so that God is more understandable to us mortals.

So, reflecting on your previous posts (that you’re a “universal Christian”) I find that you’re now saying that you’re a Christian in the same way that a square is a circle. As to your final thought, there has never been a teaching that God is “one person.” God is God, One as the Supreme Being, never a person at all. There are three Divine Persons IN God - but God is not a person.

To hold Eric Berne’s view (parent-adult-child) as authoritative while dismissing the authority of Divinely inspired Sacred Scripture might be laughable if it weren’t so terribly tragic.

 

[estesbob]

Ed you are wrong. The Blessed Virgin was the person who made Christs body in her womb, nurtured him and became his first disciple. If that isn’t a priest what it?

Not all the men who recived the stigmata were priests.

In
Ireland they had women priests eg. St Bridget both a priest and bishop and contemporary of St. Patrick.

And your proof of thid is?

**There **

is no biological difference scientifically between men and women. Both have breasts. Both have nearly identical reproductive organs. A man’s penis and testicles is the same as a womens vagina and overies. Hormones express themselves differently due to genetics. It is possible to manipulate hormones and turn a male into a female and vica versa.

I see you are as knoweldgeable about biology as you are the Church

Protestant denominations have great women clergy. Catholics are wasting good talent. Give it up. The pope was not in his right mind due to Parkinson’s when he made his ban on women priests. This is teaching is historically, theologically, and scientically false. It is binding on on one.

Was Mother Threreas a waste of good talent? Edith Stein?

Does parknsoins dimnish mental capacity? Was the magetsrtium affliced with parkinisons for the last 2,000 years?

Given you beleive men and women are biologically the same why should we trust your opinion on theology or history?

[/QUOTE]

 

[Dixieland]

Their is only One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church.

 

[edwest2]

I think it appropriate to raise the issue at this point that people post here for various reasons. One reason that is clearly demonstrated again and again is to make proclamations that are not Church teaching and to make demands that contradict Church teaching. The last reason is the worst: to sow confusion among faithful Catholics. It would be my suggestion that the Moderators remove false and inaccurate staements immediately.

The internet allows total strangers to enter your home, shout blasphemies and then walk away, secure in the knowledge that they cannot be held accountable for what they just did.

Humbly,
Ed

 

[estesbob]

I think it appropriate to raise the issue at this point that people post here for various reasons. One reason that is clearly demonstrated again and again is to make proclamations that are not Church teaching and to make demands that contradict Church teaching. The last reason is the worst: to sow confusion among faithful Catholics. It would be my suggestion that the Moderators remove false and inaccurate staements immediately.

The internet allows total strangers to enter your home, shout blasphemies and then walk away, secure in the knowledge that they cannot be held accountable for what they just did.

Humbly,
Ed

I suggest they leave skyryder’s post where he claimed there is no biological differences between men and women lest somoen come alng in the future and taake any of his other comments seriosuly.

 

[skyryder]

Skyrider, you are not only saying that Ed is wrong; you are saying that the Church is wrong and that the Pope is wrong. These are serious accusations. In addition, your historical assertions require proof. When we study the priesthood in the Old Testament, this fact becomes abundantly clear. Catholic priests offer and make present the very same sacrifice at calvary at every Mass. Another role of the priesthood is to lead the people as a ministerial priesthood. As Pope John Paul II and the rest of the fathers throughout history have affirmed, Christ appointed 12 male apostles for a reason. We have no record of anyone else being present at the Last Supper other than them, and the Church has universally upheld that only men can be priests. If you have verifiable historical sources to support your claims, I would be interested in seeing them.

I will answer your concerns in somewhat random order. First, the Jewish Passover Meal has proscribed roles for men, women and children. A child always asks questions and the adults tell the story of the exodus. This is seen in the Gospels with the “Beloved Disciple”. The only person who’d cuddle up in an adults lap is a child. The only one who would run off naked in the night might be a child sleeping in his/her nighty and running away from soldiers in pursuit. THUS THE BIBLE SPECIFICALLY SHOWS CHILDRN PRESENT AT THE LAST SUPPER. & WHERE THERE IS A KID THERE IS A MOTHER. Leonardos Last Supper is wrong.People danced at Passover and ate meals around a low table. So there were more than 12 apostles with their wives and children. You need to read the Bible carefully.
There is no evidence we are to repeat the sacrifice of Calvary forever anywhere in the Scripture. In fact is says Christ died once and for all; that his passion is over. Yes we are to remember his sacrifice, but there is no mention anywhere in scripture of something called transubstanciation. This is an idea from Roman Mystery Cults. At best the Eucharist is a symbol of God’s Grace.
In the early church people in the congregation either elected their presider at the Eucharist or took turns reciting the words of dedication. You will notice in the Lauretanishen Litany that Mary is called Queen of the Apostles. The apostolic mission was to announce the Gospel not say Mass. As such Mary literally gave us Christ and thus is a priest like the other twelve. On this basis most Catholic Bishops support female ordination as they support optional celibacy for clergy. So do most American Laity.
Unlike the old testament where there were rigid distintions between men and women, These do not exist in the New Testament. The word “junger” or disciples in the Bible refers to both men and women. Further evidence of women being priests can be seen in the writings of Paul. The title of apostle is given to Banabas, Adronicus and Junia. (Romans 16 & 17) Junia is a woman. Other women are mentioned as assistants to apostles: Evodia, Syntyche, Phelimon Aphia, or deacons such as Phoebe, Maria, Tryphosa, Persis, Chloe. and Nympha. Both male and females lead the Love Feast or Early Eucharist. Women’s homes were often the first churches. Only after the Pastoral Epistles were written in the second century and falsely attributed to Paul were women put in their place. About this time is when women priests in the catacombs started having beards painted on them. Women priests however continued for some time and were discussed in local church coucils in the 500s. Holy Mino is praised by the Church as an Apostle, she was a slave who converted the King and Queen of modern Georgia to Christianity.Hilda of Whitby,Some of the famous women of history eg. St Blandina was crucified in the manner of Jesus.
St Bridget and others were women bishops. Most priests were married up until the second Lateran Council of 1139 before ti was finally banned in 1423 by the Council of Pavia . God is both mother and father. He doesn’t have a penis. So it is unreasonable that only men are priests.In fact, Scripture says quite the opposite: Whoever has been baptised, preaches the Gospel, founds missions, and leads community in prayer represents Christ. Galatians says it more strongly "In Christ there is neither Jew not Greek, slave or free, male nor female. We are all one in
Christ Jesus."Please read Hans Kungs excellent book called The History of the Catholic Church for a different look at history and theology. Lets pray for more women priests in the Catholic Church, an end to Abbiamo Bisogno 1970 Hope this helps explain my beliefs. Sorry I don’t agree with you or the pope.

 

[skyryder]

I think it appropriate to raise the issue at this point that people post here for various reasons. One reason that is clearly demonstrated again and again is to make proclamations that are not Church teaching and to make demands that contradict Church teaching. The last reason is the worst: to sow confusion among faithful Catholics. It would be my suggestion that the Moderators remove false and inaccurate staements immediately.

The internet allows total strangers to enter your home, shout blasphemies and then walk away, secure in the knowledge that they cannot be held accountable for what they just did.

Humbly,
Ed

Ed the point of this blog is to look seriously at the truth. Skyrider can make mistakes, so can others. Controversy where we find people with different points of view and debate them. It is how we appreciate differences, learn points of agreement or disagreement and really discover what is correct, logical, defendable, reasonable, etc. The conservatives basically say: If the heirachy says so…it’s God’s will. Liberals like myself say: Nonsense. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. The papacy has been totally wrong about evolution, the organization of the solar system, slavery etc. It is my belief they are wrong about other things and progress demands change. Followers of THE WAY need to act as Jesus acted. I see nothing that shows Jesus telling women they were second class citizens. In fact it is the opposite. Remember the controversy over altar girls? This is the same with women deacons and priests. Again if I offend, I apologize…but lets face it; it would be a really boring world if everyone saw things the same. In science progress comes from the mavericks who pioneer new thinking…same in theology. Pax

 

[Ender]

Controversy where we find people with different points of view and debate them. It is how we appreciate differences, learn points of agreement or disagreement and really discover what is correct, logical, defendable, reasonable, etc.

I have asked you to explain this concept: how are moral truths arrived at? Majority opinion? A consensus? Unanimity?

The conservatives basically say: If the heirachy says so…it’s God’s will.

The Church teaches that she is the exclusive source of the authentic interpretation of God’s laws. Rejection of a premise so central to the faith may leave one with a religion but not with one recognizable as Catholicism.

Liberals like myself say: Nonsense. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. The papacy has been totally wrong about evolution, the organization of the solar system, slavery etc.

Slavery is a more complicated issue but (1) evolution and the solar system are not moral questions - someone made a similar point to you before, (2) the Church never had a position on either topic (if you think Galileo was persecuted because of his heliocentric ideas you need to read more), and (3) the papacy is not the Church, various popes have said all sorts of silly things.

Ender

 

[skyryder]

So, reflecting on your previous posts (that you’re a “universal Christian”) I find that you’re now saying that you’re a Christian in the same way that a square is a circle. As to your final thought, there has never been a teaching that God is “one person.” God is God, One as the Supreme Being, never a person at all. There are three Divine Persons IN God - but God is not a person.

To hold Eric Berne’s view (parent-adult-child) as authoritative while dismissing the authority of Divinely inspired Sacred Scripture might be laughable if it weren’t so terribly tragic.

Hey: when you get an Uplink to the Divine…ask Him?Her? to make a definative statement about the question and clairfy the matter for all of us. Last I heard it was a mystery.

Suggest looking at a new novel in the fiction section called
THE SHACK by William P.Young . This is about a man who meets God in the Wilderness and is introduced to the Trinity. It is a fast read with lots of good ideas. It has been on the NY Times best sellers list for several weeks. We used it at a retreat. Understand there is a movie deal in discussion. Gotten lots of good reviews by clergy.

 

[skyryder]

I have asked you to explain this concept: how are moral truths arrived at? Majority opinion? A consensus? Unanimity?
The Church teaches that she is the exclusive source of the authentic interpretation of God’s laws. Rejection of a premise so central to the faith may leave one with a religion but not with one recognizable as Catholicism.
Slavery is a more complicated issue but (1) evolution and the solar system are not moral questions - someone made a similar point to you before, (2) the Church never had a position on either topic (if you think Galileo was persecuted because of his heliocentric ideas you need to read more), and (3) the papacy is not the Church, various popes have said all sorts of silly things.

Ender

Ender the use of debate to uncover the truth is the guiding pricipal of american jursiprudenec, the american election system, and the science academies world wide. There is no reason this can’t be applied to religion.As I understand it freedom of speech and inquiry is the foundation of all universities.

There was a skit one time on the J Leno Show on trickle down economics. They had a pyramid of wine glasses and a stunt man poured champaign from the top glass so it trickled down to the bottom glasses. (this was to represent money) Sad part…no body on the bottom got any wine or money. Needless to say this has been proven true by President Bush. The church uses the theory of trickle down theory of grace in its writings. God pours grace to the Pope, who sends it to the Cardinals who sends it to the Bishops, who sends it to Priests, who send it to Laity. This of course is nonsense. God gives grace to everyone and is not bound by an organization chart. Nor is God limited to denomination. I ain’t tellin God what he/she can or can’t do. Suggest you don’t either.

Yes the Popes wrote teachings legalizing slavery, sanctioning wars, and blessing wholesale theft of native lands by europens colonialists, etc. Recently Ratzinger got himself into trouble in Brazil on this one! Yes a Renaissance Pope threatened Galileo with both excommunication, and death. The Roman Inquisition were so sure of their errors they tortured Galileo in the Castile San Angelo and ruined his health. Because the Papacy has made so many serious mistakes and has been both a corrupt and immoral institution…I insist they prove all their claims and reserve the right of dissent. Being a Catholic is not being a zombie obeying an Ayatollah.

 

[una_fides]

Skyryder,

It would take too much time to refute your claims in depth and many of them, as I noted before, are lacking in historical evidence outside of speculation and historical revisions. I will deal with these as they arise. I will briefly reply to the claims you have asserted as time permits me. Let me say first, when dealing with history, we must take the evidence we have and not create or read into history new innovations that correlate with our personal opinions.

First, the Jewish Passover Meal has proscribed roles for men, women and children. … This is seen in the Gospels with the “Beloved Disciple”. The only person who’d cuddle up in an adults lap is a child. The only one who would run off naked in the night might be a child sleeping in his/her nighty and running away from soldiers in pursuit. THUS THE BIBLE SPECIFICALLY SHOWS CHILDRN PRESENT AT THE LAST SUPPER. & WHERE THERE IS A KID THERE IS A MOTHER. Leonardos Last Supper is wrong.People danced at Passover and ate meals around a low table. So there were more than 12 apostles with their wives and children. You need to read the Bible carefully.

I hope you can see that you are speculating that the apostle John was only a child at the last supper. He certainly was young, but you go beyond the realm of fact to speculation to say that just because he laid his head on Christ’s chest, therefore, he de facto was a child and therefore there had to be women also present at the last supper. **The Bible only specifically mentions 12 apostles present. ** To try to say that Christ appointed a child as an apostle seems a bit odd to me. And even if your speculation was correct, which you cannot possible prove, that would not at all demonstrate that Christ commissioned anyone else except the 12 whom Scripture specifically mentions were present. Scripture alone clearly communicates by only referencing the twelve that Christ only conferred the sacrament of orders on his twelve male apostles at the last supper.

For someone who disregards and throws out most of Scripture as “2nd century fabrications,” you seem to love to try to interpret your views into it and try to use Scripture to support you whenever you possibly can. Consistency is important when you are trying to create a new belief system, while claiming it to be the old one that was lost 2000 years ago.

 

[edwest2]

Ed the point of this blog is to look seriously at the truth. Skyrider can make mistakes, so can others. Controversy where we find people with different points of view and debate them. It is how we appreciate differences, learn points of agreement or disagreement and really discover what is correct, logical, defendable, reasonable, etc. The conservatives basically say: If the heirachy says so…it’s God’s will. Liberals like myself say: Nonsense. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. The papacy has been totally wrong about evolution, the organization of the solar system, slavery etc. It is my belief they are wrong about other things and progress demands change. Followers of THE WAY need to act as Jesus acted. I see nothing that shows Jesus telling women they were second class citizens. In fact it is the opposite. Remember the controversy over altar girls? This is the same with women deacons and priests. Again if I offend, I apologize…but lets face it; it would be a really boring world if everyone saw things the same. In science progress comes from the mavericks who pioneer new thinking…same in theology. Pax

Mavericks? How can you compare the mind of God to the mind of man? How can you compare the Word of God to the word of man? You need to understand that God gave man certain knowledge. These are things held by the Church as true forever.

Some men who do not have a sincere heart and a true spirit, do not examine Church teaching. They seek after novelty not knowing that a foundation has been already laid by Jesus Christ.

But the man not equipped with wisdom and knowledge of spiritual truths and who is unwary of those who knowingly and unknowingly speak in error, how will he find the truth?

In the letter, Humani Generis, written in 1950, the exact same thing was going on. You think just because they didn’t have the internet that people didn’t sit around and say: “You know, we’ve got these modern ideas and these modern philosophies and this modern knowledge, and if the Church doesn’t keep up, I’m outta here.”? The basis of your faith is spiritual. Those that hear the Gospel message of Christ and accept it will have eternal life and those who follow the commandments of Christ will have life in this world more abundantly.

But the world that doesn’t know God seeks after its own teachers, and human wisdom and human novelty. If nothing else, it helps pass the time. But even there, the Bible tells us to think on things that have virtue.

Going back to Humani Generis, the Church told its theologians to study the Bible, prayerfully and knowledgeably, knowing that certain aspects were sealed. Christ’s death and ressurection is sealed. No debate. No what ifs. No “who knows”?

If your only struggle in this life is against boredom, I encourage you to enter the service of the Church. There are many people that need someone, anyone: the sick, the dying, those in prison, the homeless… You won’t be bored.

God bless,
Ed

 

[una_fides]

There is no evidence we are to repeat the sacrifice of Calvary forever anywhere in the Scripture. In fact is says Christ died once and for all; that his passion is over. Yes we are to remember his sacrifice, but there is no mention anywhere in scripture of something called transubstanciation. This is an idea from Roman Mystery Cults. At best the Eucharist is a symbol of God’s Grace.

Again, you are trying to rely on Scripture in your support when you personally do not even believe it to be the inspired Word of God. I’m sure you know from history that Scripture was not canonized until the 4th century. Thus, it is only by the authority of the Church that we can rely on Scripture at all. Otherwise, we rely on our own personal opinions as to whether a book is or is not legitimate. Christ left us in confusion for 2000 years so that you can figure it all out now?

To deny the Eucharist is to deny the Catholic faith. The early Church fathers universally upheld the belief in the Real Presence. We also have no record of dissent whatsoever from this belief, while we do have a very large amount of records of early Church heresies such as Gnosticism, Arianism, and Pelagianism, and Apolonarianism. (Interestingly the liberal views that you have promoted deny some of the same tenants of the faith that these other groups denied, tenants which the Church of Christ condemned as heresy.)

You have just promulgated the almost universal Protestant argument against the Real Presence and as Protestants do you claim that by reading the Scriptures alone you cannot prove continuation of the sacrifice at calvary. Once again, a cursory study of Catholic theology would demonstrate the error in this thinking. First, Catholicism upholds that Christ’s sacrifice was once and for all accomplished at calvary.
CCC 1545 “The redemptive sacrifice of Christ is unique, accomplished once for all; yet it is made present in the Eucharistic sacrifice of the Church.”
Second, Scripture itself does demonstrate that Christ’s sacrifice was to be represented and that at the Last Supper, Jesus commissioned the apostles as priests to continue his sacrifice. We see clearly in Hebrews that Christ is a priest forever in the line of Melchisedech (Hebrews 5-7). Melchisedech offered BREAD and WINE as the sacrificial offering in Genesis 14:17-20. Christ also instituted a similar sacrifice at the Last Supper, when using bread and wine, he offered them to the Father and changed them to his Body and Blood. “This IS my body.” This IS the cup of my BLOOD." Before this all took place, Jesus repeatedly informed his disciples (as recorded in John 6) that his flesh was really food and his blood was really drink and that whoever eats his flesh and drinks his blood abides in him and he in them. The apostle Paul also warns that those who do not discern the Body and Blood of the Lord will be guilty of an offense against the Body and Blood of Christ. How could someone be guilty for offending the real thing if they only offended a mere symbol of that thing??? If someone were to deface a statue of Lincoln, he would not be guilty for defacing Lincoln himself. Same thing here.

Lastly, the early Church fathers are the best commentary on Scripture, and they also understood the Eucharist to truly be the sacrifice of Christ made present. Here is a link with quotes from the early fathers: catholic.com/library/Sacrifice_of_the_Mass.asp

 

[una_fides]

I have offered you proof of my claims, which do not even require proof as they are fairly commonly known historical facts and teachings of the Church. I now ask you, please provide me with proof for these claims. Otherwise, I do hope you will admit them to be hearsay at best. Please provide proof of the following assumptions you have made:

1. in the early Church, clergy were appointed by the congregation and recited the words of consecration
2. most Catholic bishops and most faithful Catholics support women’s ordination
3. That the book of Romans has a 17th chapter (I know type-o on your part )
4. That Junia referred to in Romans 16:7 can be proven to be a woman. (The RSV translates the passage that they were "men of note among the apostles.)
5. That your interpretation of the phrase “were of note among the apostles” cannot be interpreted to mean that they were notable people to the apostles and not that they themselves were apostles (which btw both Catholic and Protestant commentaries will affirm as the proper interpretation).
6. There were depictions of women priests in the catacombs and that they later had beards painted on them.
7. That the Trinity was a fabricated doctrine and that Christ was not the 2nd person of the Blessed Trinity and that this teaching was not handed down by Christ but that it was borrowed from other religions. (aka, Arianism)

Galatians says it more strongly “In Christ there is neither Jew not Greek, slave or free, male nor female. We are all one in Christ Jesus.” Please read Hans Kungs excellent book called The History of the Catholic Church for a different look at history and theology. Lets pray for more women priests in the Catholic Church, an end to Abbiamo Bisogno 1970 Hope this helps explain my beliefs. Sorry I don’t agree with you or the pope.

(Interesting again how you accept this passage in Galatians but reject other writings, which the fathers have attributed to St. Paul.)

Paul is not saying that men and women are the same here and in fact this passage is saying the exact opposite. Yes they are equal in Christ, but they also have different roles. How do we know this? Because the same passage St. Paul is saying that there is not slave or free. Is Paul calling for the abolition of slavery? Hardly when in his letter to Philemon he tells Onesimus, a slave, to continue in his subservient role. Are Jews the same race as the Greeks? Did the Father call the Gentiles as his chosen people before Christ? We know that the apostles were the first commissioned to bring the gospel to the Gentiles because they were not what inspired Scripture refers to as God’s chosen people since God had not revealed himself to them before that point in history. People have different roles, just as the laity have different roles from the clergy, so men have different roles than women. It does not mean that men are somehow superior to women (as the heretical gospel of Thomas asserts). What it means is that God has a different calling for men and for women. God loves us all the same and desires that we all be content in the role that he has placed us. God has established a hierarchal Church headed by Christ’s vicar the pope and led by the successors to the apostles, the bishops and their priests whom the bishops have appointed. Women play an essential role in Church, but that role, as the Church has affirmed for 2000 years is not that of a priest. Rather than pray for people to rebel against the Church and appoint priests, we should be praying for more people to be submissive to the authority that God has appointed.

Instead of fighting against the Church’s authority, why not humbly evaluate their claims to authority. Why not read Scripture and the Church Fathers in light of such authority and see what they have to say on the issue. In Romans, St. Paul tells us that every soul must be subject to the higher powers because they have been appointed and ordained of God. Christ also said to the apostles that whoever rejects them rejects him. Christ said to Peter that on him he would build his Church and he then gave to Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven along with the authority to bind and loose on earth as it is in heaven.

 

[9Choirs]

Ed you are wrong. The Blessed Virgin was the person who made Christs body in her womb

No, it was the Holy Spirit who conceived Christ. The Virgin Mary, born without sin, courageously **obeyed **Gods command and took on the task of carrying to full term Jesus despite not being married and risking death by stoning.

There is no biological difference scientifically between men and women.

Oh my, so men can conceive children, have uterus’s and can produce milk for a baby to suckle on?

Ave Maria

 

[una_fides]

The Catholic faith has been infallibly determined to either be wholly accepted or wholly rejected. One cannot be a “cafeteria Catholic” and still officially be a Catholic. This is the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church:

1. Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected: “This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly; he cannot be saved” (Athanas. Creed). There is no need of adding any qualifying terms to the profession of Catholicism: it is quite enough for each one to proclaim “Christian is my name and Catholic my surname,” only let him endeavour to be in reality what he calls himself.
   papalencyclicals.net/Ben15/b15adbea.htm
   Encyclical of Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, quoting from the Athanasian Creed, which has been officially upheld by the Church as infallible, as it had been given a place in her liturgy and was included in the pronouncements by the Ecumenical and Infallible Council of Florence: newadvent.org/cathen/02033b.htm ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/FLORENCE.HTM

As Pope Pius XI said in his encyclical Mortalium Animas, if we humbly beg for light from heaven, then there can be no doubt that we will be united with the Catholic Church in perfect charity.

 

[mangy_dog]

time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1737323,00.html?xid=rss-topstories

From your mouth to God’s ears.

We can only pray.

 

[skyryder]

Skyryder,

It would take too much time to refute your claims in depth and many of them, as I noted before, are lacking in historical evidence outside of speculation and historical revisions. I will deal with these as they arise. I will briefly reply to the claims you have asserted as time permits me. Let me say first, when dealing with history, we must take the evidence we have and not create or read into history new innovations that correlate with our personal opinions.

I hope you can see that you are speculating that the apostle John was only a child at the last supper. He certainly was young, but you go beyond the realm of fact to speculation to say that just because he laid his head on Christ’s chest, therefore, he de facto was a child and therefore there had to be women also present at the last supper. **The Bible only specifically mentions 12 apostles present. ** To try to say that Christ appointed a child as an apostle seems a bit odd to me. And even if your speculation was correct, which you cannot possible prove, that would not at all demonstrate that Christ commissioned anyone else except the 12 whom Scripture specifically mentions were present. Scripture alone clearly communicates by only referencing the twelve that Christ only conferred the sacrament of orders on his twelve male apostles at the last supper.

For someone who disregards and throws out most of Scripture as “2nd century fabrications,” you seem to love to try to interpret your views into it and try to use Scripture to support you whenever you possibly can. Consistency is important when you are trying to create a new belief system, while claiming it to be the old one that was lost 2000 years ago.

I think we need to read the Gospels on several levels. Certainly not everything is historical. There is lots of symbolism. Lots of allegory. Lots of contradiction. Have you ever noticed that the 4 Gospels can’t agree on the names of the apostles? All differ on the account of the Last Supper as well. All differ on their accounts of the passion. All differ on the resurrection.
My comments on the Sedar Meal come from Jewish Custom. There is always a child present at Passover because he/she asks questions and the adults explain the Passover as they eat the meal. Women have a special role at Passover as well.
Passover meals don’t magically appear by themselves. There are many hours of cooking, lots of set up and lots of clean up. I didn’t claim the child on Jesus lap was an apostle. The bible says “beloved disciple” but doen’t name this person. The Catholic Church has interpreted this as being John or Thomas…but scholars think this is wrong unless Jesus was gay. WAS HE?
Again there is lots of nonsense and muddled thinking from the Renaissance and Middle Ages. We need to update our thinking with modern discoveries from Archeology. Holy Orders was not confered at the Last Supper. It was conferred at Pentecost during which women were present and thus ordained.

 

[skyryder]

From your mouth to God’s ears.

We can only pray.

Thanks for the link to the Time Magazine News Article.

This magazine article is yellow journalism and spin doctoring at its worse. Fact: Liberals have always wanted optional celibacy, women priests, and restoration of the laity’s ancient right to elect bishops and audit internal workings of the Archdiocese. Fact:: Those who opposed them were the conservatives. Fact: Child Abuse has been going on for centuries. Fact: Many popes have tried to silence victims and witnesses under threat damnation & excommunication. This included Cardinal Ratzinger per documents revealed as evidence in Federal Lawsuits filed in US Courts!.Fact: Liberal Reforms would have prevented the Sex Abuse Scandals from ever occuring. Fact: The conservatives are at the root of the Sex Abuse Scandal…NOT THE LIBERALS.

To claim that Vatican 2 cause the decline of the Catholic Church is nonsense. The conservatives have derailed every attempt to carry it out. The traditionalists want to restore the Church of Constantine. The liberals want to restore the Church of the early church. Read Dr. Crossan’s book “God and Empire“. Christianity and Empire cannot co exist.God and the conservative agenda cannot coexist and are inherently opposite.