J
John_Higgins
Guest
Back to topic:
John
You left out a choice for neither.
John
- Status
R
rayne89
Guest
OOPS! I hit married priests instead of female priests.
H
hthrlu
Guest
I have been trying to make my peace with this issue for some time (I was baptized and confirmed at Easter Vigil, so I am a new Catholic). I have been researching Catholicism for 3 years, and having been a feminist studies major, I do have a pretty liberal background.
That being said, here is what I understand about female priests:
When Pope John Paul II said that the church had no authority to ordain women, he was simplifying the doctrine that says that a priest must be male. The church at this time can’t ordain women, because that’s what is doctrine NOW. If the cardinals all came together, and under the guide of the Holy Spirit, and were inspired to allow women to be ordained, then it would be possible.
The flip-side to this is that Pope John Paul II made it very hard for this to ever happen, because he said that anyone who didn’t feel that priests should be men were unfaithful to the church.
As an aside, why does everyone mock this view by saying that a woman couldn’t have the title “priest”, and we’d have to call them “priestesses”? The “-ess” suffix is a diminutive - meaning that it makes the word smaller and less important than the standard word. It’s no wonder that the feminists think that this is a sexist belief.
That being said, here is what I understand about female priests:
When Pope John Paul II said that the church had no authority to ordain women, he was simplifying the doctrine that says that a priest must be male. The church at this time can’t ordain women, because that’s what is doctrine NOW. If the cardinals all came together, and under the guide of the Holy Spirit, and were inspired to allow women to be ordained, then it would be possible.
The flip-side to this is that Pope John Paul II made it very hard for this to ever happen, because he said that anyone who didn’t feel that priests should be men were unfaithful to the church.
As an aside, why does everyone mock this view by saying that a woman couldn’t have the title “priest”, and we’d have to call them “priestesses”? The “-ess” suffix is a diminutive - meaning that it makes the word smaller and less important than the standard word. It’s no wonder that the feminists think that this is a sexist belief.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Actually you are incorrect in this statement.
Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (link to whole document) says (bold emphasis added)…
- Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal Tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the Magisterium in its more recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the Church’s judgment that women are not to be admitted to ordination is considered to have a merely disciplinary force.
It does not say that this can change. The wording here means that this is a dogma and dogma can not change.
The reason the word “priestess” is used is in light of the above doucment which says that women can not be priests. So if they are not priests then they must be something different, hence the use of the word “priestess”.
You, and others, can think it is sexist but it isn’t, its just the way it is.
H
hthrlu
Guest
- Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal Tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the Magisterium in its more recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the Church’s judgment that women are not to be admitted to ordination is considered to have a merely disciplinary force.
I understand the quote, and in my original post, I didn’t say that he said it could change. I said that he used those words to simplify the argument. The church IS the authority on earth, and she can do what she needs to do to take care of God’s people, even ordain women if it came to that.
H
hthrlu
Guest
I think that’s pretty presumptuous in a debate about whether or not women should be ordained. The fact that someone believes that they should be ordained would, in essence, make them PRIESTS, not priestesses. If those people who believed that won the debate, they wouldn’t need to “be something different”.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Thats just the issue, according to paragraph 4 of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis there is no more debate. The issue is closed, the Church can not ordain women and this is to be held by all faithful Catholics. Those who debate it then are not being faithful.
G
Gilbert_Keith
Guest
hthrlu
When Pope John Paul II said that the church had no authority to ordain women, he was simplifying the doctrine that says that a priest must be male. The church at this time can’t ordain women, because that’s what is doctrine NOW. If the cardinals all came together, and under the guide of the Holy Spirit, and were inspired to allow women to be ordained, then it would be possible.
When you entered the Catholic Church it should have been impressed upon you that doctrinal teachings do not change according to who is pope or who are the cardinals. And that should have been one of the things that attracted you to the Church.
It must be very difficult for Protestants and feminists to enter the Church and shed their many years of liberal convictions. Yet that is not impossible. Believe me, the Catholic Church cannot be changed by liberals inside the Church. That has been tried for thousands of years, and every time it has failed … in modern times starting with the monk Martin Luther and ending with the likes of the sociologist-priest Andrew Greeley. The Holy Spirit is ever vigilant in fending off these theological and spiritual dead-ends.
God bless.
When Pope John Paul II said that the church had no authority to ordain women, he was simplifying the doctrine that says that a priest must be male. The church at this time can’t ordain women, because that’s what is doctrine NOW. If the cardinals all came together, and under the guide of the Holy Spirit, and were inspired to allow women to be ordained, then it would be possible.
When you entered the Catholic Church it should have been impressed upon you that doctrinal teachings do not change according to who is pope or who are the cardinals. And that should have been one of the things that attracted you to the Church.
It must be very difficult for Protestants and feminists to enter the Church and shed their many years of liberal convictions. Yet that is not impossible. Believe me, the Catholic Church cannot be changed by liberals inside the Church. That has been tried for thousands of years, and every time it has failed … in modern times starting with the monk Martin Luther and ending with the likes of the sociologist-priest Andrew Greeley. The Holy Spirit is ever vigilant in fending off these theological and spiritual dead-ends.
God bless.
W
wcknight
Guest
I would say neither is impossible, as a former poster says, if the Magisterium and a future Pope decides married priests is okay and women priests is okay, it will be a done deal.
wc
wc
D
Donna_P
Guest
Hi!
Good to see you still seeking the Truth. Well, as far as married priests - There were and are married priests. There is one right now at another parish by me. He was a minister from another religion. He converted and felt he was called. He has three wonderful children too. However, he will not be used to run a parish. The call of a priest is different than a minister. The priest marries the church and you can’t have two spouses and treat them both with equal love and devotion. So the Catholic Church does not have married priests run any parishes. Could this change in the future? Yes. Will it? I don’t think so but I could be wrong.
Women priests will never be. That was started by Jesus and we don’t go against His teachings.
God Bless,
Donna
D
Donna_P
Guest
I recently wrote this on this column but I’ll repeat it anyway.
There will never be any women priests. It goes against Jesus teachings and we as Catholics do not go against Jesus teachings.
God Bless,
Donna
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Donna P:
While this might be true for some Roman Catholic Dioceses, I am not sure if it is that way with all of them.
Also, in the Byzantine Catholic Churches, our married priests are pastors and run parishes.
The pastor of Saint Josaphat in Rochester, NY, Fr Kiril, is married and runs the parish.
I also believe that at least one of the Anglican Use Parishes is run by a married convert who was ordained to the priesthood.
Donna,
While this might be true for some Roman Catholic Dioceses, I am not sure if it is that way with all of them.
Also, in the Byzantine Catholic Churches, our married priests are pastors and run parishes.
The pastor of Saint Josaphat in Rochester, NY, Fr Kiril, is married and runs the parish.
I also believe that at least one of the Anglican Use Parishes is run by a married convert who was ordained to the priesthood.
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
hthrlu,
I don’t think you understand. The pope says the Church HAS NO AUTHORITY to do what you say it can do.
hthrlu:
I don’t think you understand. The pope says the Church HAS NO AUTHORITY to do what you say it can do.
It is an infallible immutable article of the Catholic faith which the Church cannot later change. That’s what it means to be an infallible article of Catholic faith.
J
John_Higgins
Guest
Well, it’s certainly valid teaching, but it’s not infallible.
John
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
John Higgins:
This is a dogma and can never be changed as it has been held from the Church since the beginning. This is exactly what paragraph 4 of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis says.
So you do not believe that dogmas are infallible? Something that has been taught by the Church since the beginning is not infallible?
This is a dogma and can never be changed as it has been held from the Church since the beginning. This is exactly what paragraph 4 of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis says.
C
coeyannie
Guest
The church needs deacons also. However, I don’t see married men lining up at the chancery to get into the formation program. So, if priests were allowed to marry, I don’t think it would change the numbers very much. We have more priests (15) being ordained in our Archdiocese this June than deacons, who do most everything a priest does except celebrate Mass, hear confessions, and anoint the sick. Should it be that way, now that all of these hand wringing Catholics think we should allow married priests? Who is going to support two priests in a big parish with families. How much of a salary and health benefits for the priest and his family would the parish be able to sustain.
Marriage is NOT the answer. Orthodoxy and faithfulness to the majesterium of the Church and prayer, daily, for vocations is the answer.
Dominus Vobiscum.
Marriage is NOT the answer. Orthodoxy and faithfulness to the majesterium of the Church and prayer, daily, for vocations is the answer.
Dominus Vobiscum.
T
TobyLue
Guest
DonnaP
ByzCath
This is my parish. The pastor **is **married **runs the parish, **has five children, three of them married and has, I believe, 2 grandchildren. Check the links and you will find that he is not the only married pastor.
He is one of the greatest priests and defender of the Church that I have ever encountered. Great homilies, beautiful liturgy, met with the Pope when he had just been ordained a Catholic priest and has a great story concerning his meeting with the Holy Father and his conversion from Anglicanism. Has it been easy for him? No, but he trusts greatly in Divine Providence. Check it out and see how the parish has flourished. There were a total of 18 people that formed the original parish. The church is in the process of expansion from 200 to about 600 capacity. When many parishes are cutting back on the number of masses on Sunday, our parish has had to increase them from two to four and church is full at each mass with some SRO. So you see, many, many catholics have no problem with married pastors and I’m sure most of the parishoners still believe in the dicipline of not ordaining married men into the priesthood. I’m not advocating a change in the current dicipline, but there are exceptions. If John Paul the Great said it was OK, then it’s OK with me.
and
ByzCath
Please check this weblink www.atonementonline.com
This is my parish. The pastor **is **married **runs the parish, **has five children, three of them married and has, I believe, 2 grandchildren. Check the links and you will find that he is not the only married pastor.
He is one of the greatest priests and defender of the Church that I have ever encountered. Great homilies, beautiful liturgy, met with the Pope when he had just been ordained a Catholic priest and has a great story concerning his meeting with the Holy Father and his conversion from Anglicanism. Has it been easy for him? No, but he trusts greatly in Divine Providence. Check it out and see how the parish has flourished. There were a total of 18 people that formed the original parish. The church is in the process of expansion from 200 to about 600 capacity. When many parishes are cutting back on the number of masses on Sunday, our parish has had to increase them from two to four and church is full at each mass with some SRO. So you see, many, many catholics have no problem with married pastors and I’m sure most of the parishoners still believe in the dicipline of not ordaining married men into the priesthood. I’m not advocating a change in the current dicipline, but there are exceptions. If John Paul the Great said it was OK, then it’s OK with me.
J
junglesplash
Guest
you forget that you dont have to be a preis…a preist is for those who dont want to marry but want to give there entire life and time to God…for those who want to.(key point)…
and for those who want to be married and serve God let them do so as a deacon or as an active lay person.
a monk is a monk coz he wants to be …get it?
peace
and for those who want to be married and serve God let them do so as a deacon or as an active lay person.
a monk is a monk coz he wants to be …get it?
peace
C
cazayoux
Guest
I’m COMPLETELY with you in your experience and non-advocation. I’m in Allen, TX and our priest, Father Tim is a convert from the Epis. church. He is a husband, father, grandfather, and an incredibly gifted, and I think devinely guided priest. He had to ask the pope for special permission to not have to hold to a vow of celibacy. I’m not positive, but he waited a faithful 3 years for that approval. That’s how strong his Catholic faith and calling is.
As far as the Church teaching on priests, read your bible. Paul answers this question quite directly.
paraphrased:
“If you are married, stay married, if you are not, stay not”
1 Cor 7:32-33 gives explanation of WHY it’s better to be unmarried and devoted only to God. (attention undivided)
My 11th anniversary will be here this August. I have a WONDERFUL wife and four great little boys… and I’ve thought of joining the deaconate. (can’t believe I’m admitting it) I think I’ve still got some work to do on myself before I can seriously consider it. As many of us do, I’m still holding on to parts of my life that are not condusive to a life of faith service. Please, all of you, pray for me.
Cheers!
michel
J
John_Higgins
Guest
I believe what meets the conditions of infallibility is infallible.
Byz,
We’ve had this discussion before. The fact that we and very many theologians are still discussing this clearly answers this section of Canon Law which says:
CCL:
It simply hasn’t been manifestly demonstrated.
Papal infallibility was deliberately narrowly defined by Vatican I.
John
- Status