Is the Church a Patriarchy?

[0331]

Nowadays, the issue seems to be a little different. The real question seems to be - Is it poor treatment of woman to exclude them from all decision making? I think many people would say yes.

But this presupposes that the men who are making those really high decisions are making decisions unfair to women—and for that matter also making decisions unfair to men who are not ordained to Holy Orders.

Justice in the Church doesn’t depend on equal representation: it depends on our shepherds working for the common good and truly living out their orders to lead like Jesus would. And it depends on those ordained men to be truly guided by the Holy Spirit and not the ideological ways of the world.

 

[billsannie]

Exactly. Women can make suggestions, but only men can make the decisions.

 

[Aquinas11]

the vast majority of physically abuse is the male abusing the female

you’re conflating
(A) whether CHurch treats women abused by men different than men abused by women with
(B) whether majority of abuse victims are men or women

(A) determines whether Church is treating women poorly, since determines whether they’re treating women and men equally.

 

[Aquinas11]

Women can make suggestions, but only men can make the decisions.

The decisions are conditional on the women’s suggestions, hence women aren’t “excluded from all decision making” which was the point I responded to.

Unless Priests and Bishops are explicitly ignoring all women’s suggestions? Is there evidence of this? I’d love to see it.

 

[godisgood77]

I think you’ve got it wrong… send a woman back to an abusive husband is poor treatment. That is objective. If they treat a man the same way, that doesn’t make it less poor

 

[Aquinas11]

the point is that women are largely excluded from power and governance

not quite, the specific point I was responding to was “is it poor treatment of women to exclude them from all decision making” and I’m just pointing out that’s a false premise given that women are included in the decision making process.

 

[Aquinas11]

I think you’ve got it wrong… send a woman back to an abusive husband is poor treatment. That is objective. If they treat a man the same way, that doesn’t make it less poor

and there is no evidence they didn’t treat men the same way, hence no unfair treatment of women differently on basis of gender. Now if there was evidence that in the past priests commonly told men of abusive wives “leave her!” while simultaneously telling women of abusive husbands “stay with him!” then you’d have an argument. But there is no such evidence.

 

[0331]

Exactly. Women can make suggestions, but only men can make the decisions

What decisions (and at what level) are you talking about, though?

Defining doctrine and teachings? That’s up to the bishops and Pope. All male, yes, but not because they’re male, but because they serve in that capacity as part of their office—and the serve as shepherds keeping watch over their sheep.

And I add that I, a married man, will never have a chance to serve in that office or even make suggestions—nor do I want to!

 

[billsannie]

But this presupposes that the men who are making those really high decisions are making decisions unfair to women—and for that matter also making decisions unfair to men who are not ordained to Holy Orders.

Not necessarily. And the difference is that most men can potentially take Holy Orders and become a decision maker while no woman ever can.

Justice in the Church doesn’t depend on equal representation: it depends on our shepherds working for the common good and truly living out their orders to lead like Jesus would. And it depends on those ordained men to be truly guided by the Holy Spirit and not the ideological ways of the world.

In a perfect institution this would be the case. Bishops would not have the power and prestige that they do. Priests would be taught to listen to their people so they could better serve them. The system would encourage and enable justice. But if Christ created the Church to be perfect, what we have now is no longer so. Some women want to be a larger part of this imperfect institution, just as some men do.

 

[billsannie]

In the parish, the priest makes the decisions, so he has more power than any woman in it.(And in my experience at least many priest will listen much more readily to a male parishioner than to a female one.)
If your wife passed away you could become a priest. Any priest is eligible to become a bishop. If you hadn’t married you might be a bishop now. No woman has those opportunities.

 

[0331]

@billsannie

But why should a priest not make the ultimate decisions in the parish?

 

[billsannie]

The priest should. The problem is that under the present system no woman ever has this opportunity.

 

[Aquinas11]

But if Christ created the Church to be perfect, what we have now is no longer so. Some women want to be a larger part of this imperfect institution, just as some men do.

Christ hardly created a “perfect” Church given that one disciple betrayed him, another denied in 3 times and nine others ran away when he was crucified, leaving only one of the 12 with him at his death.

And since Priests and Clergy literally step into shoes of Jesus during the Mass, saying “this is my body” (not “this is Jesus’ body”) then they must be men since historically Jesus was a biological male.

Also in scripture, the word of God is referred to as a “seed” and Jesus delivers the seed/Word of God and the Church (feminine = remember our Church views Christ as the groom and Church as the bride) acts as the feminine that receives the seed/Word of God. Hence another reason why Priests, etc are men. Check out Catholic Answers youtube video on this “What’s the Deal with Female PRiests?”

 

[0331]

Are you suggesting female priests are the answer?

 

[billsannie]

You’re right. The Church was never perfect.

As for the Consecration. it depends on how far you wan’t to take the analogy. Are you emphasizing Christ’s humanity, or His maleness?

The analogy Christ used was farming, not sexual intercourse. A farmer may, of course, be either male or female. So this doesn’t really apply.

 

[billsannie]

To which question? It would not completely solve any problem, except that it would make the Church more just and probably considerably lower the incidence of sexual abuse.

 

[stpurl]

But the Church has no authority to ordain women.

It would be easier for a lot of people, especially children, celiacs, and people with alcohol problems if the priest could confect the Eucharist with grape juice and gluten-free hosts, even depending on the area rice balls or corn. . .but the Church has no authority for the valid matter of the Eucharist to be anything other than wheat (i.e. at least enough gluten to actually BE bread) bread and wine, at least enough (i.e. mustum) to contain the ingredients to actually be grape wine.

It would be so easy and popular for the Church to bless and allow ‘same sex’ unions, man/man, woman/woman. They’re legal in so many places, and it’s all about ‘love’, right?
But the Church has no authority to change the ‘validity’ of the sacrament of marriage which requires one man and one woman.

This isn’t about 'The Church" doing, or not doing, something which it COULD change (for example, the Church could allow priests to marry before they were ordained, and some men in some rites or through becoming Catholic as married Episcopal priests later in life are indeed 'married priests), so I think people think, “If the Church can change THIS, it can change and allow women priests”.

But it can’t. No authority to.

 

[Vouthon]

In what sense?

God the Father is not male but an immaterial, bodiless, pure spirit, while the most glorified human without a divine nature in the Church Triumphant is the Blessed Virgin, Queen of Heaven and Mother of God.

Strange patriarchy.

 

[stpurl]

Actually women abuse children (and also men, and other women) as well. The abuse in the Church is related to homosexual actions.

And as I mentioned before, it is not ‘more just’ to allow women priests. This is not something the Church has control over, any more than the Church has control over what is valid matter in the Eucharist, or in a marriage. St. John Paul II took the continued teaching and actually outlined it officially in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, and it was further confirmed by Pope Benedict, I quote, “The Church has no authority to ordain women.”

Roma locuta est, causa finita est.

 

[billsannie]

Come to that, the Church has no authority to ordain men, at least none directly given by Christ. (By this, I mean priests in the sense in which we now have them.) For that matter, the Church has changed many Biblical norms, even explicitly mentioned ones (married elders, for one example) So why are these so different?