Issue with Ordaining Women

  • Thread starter Thread starter StJemma
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
John 15:16

New International Version
You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit–fruit that will last–and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you.

New Living Translation
You didn’t choose me. I chose you. I appointed you to go and produce lasting fruit, so that the Father will give you whatever you ask for, using my name.

English Standard Version
You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.
 
I am a life-long Catholic. I believe that women should be able to become priests. I also belief that priests should have the option of marriage.
We have a shortage of priests.
If women were allowed to become priests and if priests were allowed to marry, I believe the Church would be strengthened.
It is my opinion. And I know there are some on this forum who will attack my opinion.
 
We attack it because it’s not about theology, it’s about bending to the will of modern society and what they think. Women should not become priests. This isn’t a new discussion, it’s been beaten to death repeatedly.
 
JackMcCoy said:
I am a life-long Catholic. I believe that women should be able to become priests. I also belief that priests should have the option of marriage.
We have a shortage of priests.
If women were allowed to become priests and if priests were allowed to marry, I believe the Church would be strengthened.
It is my opinion. And I know there are some on this forum who will attack my opinion.
Click to expand...
I believe allowing Roman Catholic Priests to marry will probably be re-examined at some point. Other rites in communion with us allow for it. It is a discipline, so something the Pope could allow. A male only priesthood is not a matter of discipline. It is unbiblical to allow female priests, so it will never be. We must be careful not to allow modern society’s ideas of equality cloud our judgement of God’s will for gender roles within the Church.
 
JackMcCoy said:
I believe that women should be able to become priests. I also belief that priests should have the option of marriage.
Click to expand...
Women priests are an impossibility, the Church has made this very clear. This cannot be changed.

As for married priests, that is a very different matter. That is a matter of Church discipline and could be changed, but I reckon that is not likely any time soon.
 
The fact that we have a shortage of priests merits the discussion for change.
I will not debate the issue with you. I can read your tone (prude man) through the lines of your words. You believe you know what is correct. And are entitled to your thoughts. But do not tread on me.
 
Well, the early Church got started with only 12 and they did a remarkable job evangelizing. In comparison, we don’t seem to have much of a priest shortage.
 
The Church. Yes, the Church. Run by men. All men are human beings And humans are not infallible. Therefore, change always is possible.
Feel free to attack. I am done with this thread.
 
JackMcCoy said:
And humans are not infallible.
Click to expand...
It has been stated countless times by many with true moral authority that we cannot ordain women. I am sick and tired of people trying to get past this by calling it sexism. If you don’t like it, then that isn’t the Church’s problem, and I’d say that there’s underlying issues with how you see Church authority.
 
JackMcCoy said:
The Church. Yes, the Church. Run by men. All men are human beings And humans are not infallible. Therefore, change always is possible.
Feel free to attack. I am done with this thread.
Click to expand...
A tenant of our faith is that when it comes to matters of doctrine, the Church is infallible. The individual men may sin, but they are guided by God in matters of doctrine.
 
LateCatholic said:
The Church is simply fearful of what conservative Catholics would do if women became priests. The crutch of Jesus choosing only men is a red herring. Jesus NEVER said ONLY males can be priests. The fact is that historically women were considered inferior in Jewish, and picking males for anything wouldn’t have been considered. Now we know better, and many people want to change. But the fear is still too great.
Click to expand...
Oh good gravy. :roll_eyes: A woman became the Ark of the New Covenant and held God Himself in her womb, becoming Queen of all the Saints. A woman was the first person to see Christ resurrected and relayed that same information to His Apostles. A woman was credited for having greater faith than the rich braggarts at the Temple after she gave everything. Jesus was touched by the faith of a woman who bathed His feet in expensive perfume. And of another woman who did all she could to touch His cloak. He who dined with sinners, had the gall to admit His divinity to the man who sat in the Seat of Moses, told His Jewish followers who revile cannibalism to eat His flesh, and drink His blood, did not choose women to be among His Apostles, did not give any of them the ability to forgive sins, nor the keys to Heaven and Hell, after displaying a continuous disregard for the sensibilities of His people at that time. And His followers, who saw all this and more, did not ordain women or choose them as their episcopal successors. Yes, we Catholics who follow this same up-start from Nazareth are afraid of change and “progress”.

Yeah, that’s totally it.
JackMcCoy said:
All men are human beings And humans are not infallible.
Click to expand...
Women aren’t infallible either, so I guess that’s another reason not to ordain them?
 
Last edited:
JackMcCoy said:
Yes, the Church. Run by men. All men are human beings And humans are not infallible. Therefore, change always is possible.
Click to expand...
This is impossible to change. A woman cannot act in persona Christi because she cannot share in the male nature of Christ; she cannot be alter Christus and therefore cannot say Mass, consecrate the Eucharist, or give absolution in Confession. It is simply not possible.
 
All it is is lip-service of “we’re all equal but are given different roles” which is patronizing at best. The truly laughable rationale I saw once was, “because we value women so much we need to protect them from the burden of decision making.”

These are then followed by “if you really understood then you wouldn’t disagree,” or “you didn’t have proper formation,” which finally reduces to “because we know better than you do what God wants.”

meh

I mean, I’m not going to stop practicing my Catholic faith and fulfilling my obligations, but I cannot agree with the Church on this matter.
 
Last edited:
But if the Church was instituted by Christ to guide us, then shouldn’t it know better than we about this?
It seems to me that discounting this might be akin to writing one’s own catechism. On the other hand, your response in conforming to doctrine while questioning, does seem to be in line with Catholic teaching when one struggles with a doctrinal point.
I do appreciate your sharing your explanation with me. Thank you and may God bless you.
jt
 
I’ve been watching the attempts to manipulate reality in the case of leadership roles. Women are not less smarter than men but avoiding biology will not make it go away. Women are mothers. It’s not a role defined by the date on the calendar. If the human race continues, it will continue because of mothers, and in the West, hopefully, more fathers. Oh yes, men are still involved, but for various reasons, aren’t there for their children, or just partly there.

So I’m reading the business news and I’m finding some strange things. Women “add value” in leadership roles? How? That part is never explained. It’s stated like a fact, but with no support. In my work experience, I’ve experienced situations where women in leadership roles performed their jobs. In my business experience, I’ve experienced situations where women in leadership roles performed their jobs. And the boring truth is we all got along. Life went on. Our respective titles were useful but not all that important. Certainly not worth any drama. Like this issue.

1950 Secretary
2010 Secretary

From an article titled, “Why secretary is still the top job for women.”

But back to the business news. A certain US state is mandating that public companies must have one female on their board of directors or face penalties. Why? Are the potential candidates all qualified? That would be my only concern. Anyway, the number of required women on the board will increase by force of law. Make sense?

And in my state, the head of a women’s business organization was surprised that women still did not own more than half the businesses in the state. Over half? That’s not equality, that’s “Men are hogging all the businesses for themselves so we gotta push them out because… just because.” Equality? No. Musical chairs.

Of course, another social engineering experiment, after so many others have failed. In the end, reality goes back to reality on its own – because it works. Not because of some desire for change. Not because of some ideology.

This idea about ordaining women - the door is closed on that. Women can do a lot right now for the Church and have been doing a lot.
 
I take exception with your argument because Jesus was not afraid to challenge cultural norms.

If He wanted a female priest, He would have picked His Mother or Mary Magdalene.

God Bless, Merry Christmas & Happy New Year
 
Last edited:
That was Cardinal Willibrands opinion, Pope St John Paul’s understanding of the response was something different.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top