E
Edward_H
Guest
How is this thread that you started here substantially different from the thread you started here:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=763375
- Status
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=763375
M
minkymurph
Guest
Sowinski ja -
I looked up this link and this poster has a point here.
As such, I am going to ask you a direct question to clarify.
What is your position? Do you think women should be able to be priests, do you think they should not, or are you not sure?
In asking you this question, it is only fair I should state my position. Personally, I don’t buy the ‘Jesus only chose men’ answer because it is too readily refuted. If Jesus chose only men, he had a reason other than purely gender. The fact that people are asking why is an indication this answer, rightly or wrongly, is inadequate and we need to do better in order to satisfy the spiritual needs, refuted, tacitly conceded or otherwise. If those who ask this question don’t genuinely want to know why only men can be priests, no answer would suffice.
Personally speaking, I don’t believe God picks men simply because they are men. There must be some other reason. That is what prompted my route of inquiry into this question which I have posted that here - in that it has a sacrificial meaning. I am not saying I am right, and what I say is not something I dreamed up. Respected Catholic theologians have proposed such reasoning.
I have difficulty with the position God chooses men because He has a different purpose for men and women. That answer does not tell me why He created two genders - He didn’t have to - and doesn’t tell me why He has different roles for men and women. As Creator, He was not under any compulsion. As such it was chosen - why? Is no choice in the matter purely as a consequence of gender? It does not explain why God tolerated different cultural traditions in the past such as slavery, having more than one wife etc? The answer 'We know more not is does not suffice as in 1 000, 5 000 or 10 000 years time we will know even more? What will the position be them? Will we look back at the 21st century and say yes, that’s what we thought then but we know better now?
I don’t pose these questions to be antagonistic, I pose them because I don’t know the answers and find ‘text book’ answers to these questions inadequate - prompting me to look for something else in a search for deeper understanding.
E
Edward_H
Guest
As is the case with women only bearing children - someone unable to know the physiology - may conclude incorrectly - so too it may be that we can’t see or understand the differences between a male soul and a female soul.
Seeing matters with only temporal eyes rather than supernatural eyes can lead us off the track.
God chose a woman to bear His Son, giving woman unimaginable dignity. He chose men to serve as priests. God holds neither man nor woman in higher esteem…he gave them different jobs, probably to maintain peace! It’s the love we put into our vocation that God cares about…and our obedience to the order and plan He put in place,
I think one problem or assumption that should not be dismissed too quickly is that people who want women as priests suffer the same error as clericalism, placing priests on a plane that God unlikely meant. Priests are servants…the great ones are suffering servants. It is an error of ‘clericalism’ to elevate them to the point where human desires take over, seeking a mere “earthy equality” and “status”. Sure, some priests and bishops and cardinals may get swept up in status…as we do in our lay world. But this is an error…sometimes a sin…but it’s forgiveable.
Priests as servants, mothers as servants, fathers as servants. Each a role, and a pathway to holiness if the vocation is lived heroically, humbly, selflessly.
Seeing matters with only temporal eyes rather than supernatural eyes can lead us off the track.
God chose a woman to bear His Son, giving woman unimaginable dignity. He chose men to serve as priests. God holds neither man nor woman in higher esteem…he gave them different jobs, probably to maintain peace! It’s the love we put into our vocation that God cares about…and our obedience to the order and plan He put in place,
I think one problem or assumption that should not be dismissed too quickly is that people who want women as priests suffer the same error as clericalism, placing priests on a plane that God unlikely meant. Priests are servants…the great ones are suffering servants. It is an error of ‘clericalism’ to elevate them to the point where human desires take over, seeking a mere “earthy equality” and “status”. Sure, some priests and bishops and cardinals may get swept up in status…as we do in our lay world. But this is an error…sometimes a sin…but it’s forgiveable.
Priests as servants, mothers as servants, fathers as servants. Each a role, and a pathway to holiness if the vocation is lived heroically, humbly, selflessly.
N
Nan_S
Guest
Ok, you’ve got my interest. What evidence do you have which supports the assertion that women were part of Jesus’ priesthood?
I’ve seen evidence that women were selected to be Deaconesses, specifically because baptisms were done in the nude and modesty required that women baptise women. I’ve also seen the writings of the Early Church Fathers which say that Deaconesses were subordinate to Deacons, and Deacons were subordinate to Priests. But I’ve never seen any evidence that women were ever chosen to be priests or bishops, either by Jesus Himself or His apostles.
I don’t have the answer why God made two genders either, but I’m glad that He did. Frankly, there’s only so much you can pack into a human body, and combining a pregnant womb with testosterone-enhanced arm and chest muscles is a non-player.
Overall I have seen that society in general operates more efficiently when people are allowed to specialize in roles that maximize the benefit they bring. This specialization is more than technical training; it includes the mental, emotional, and physical aspects which make us unique.
Keep searching, but be prepared to accept that you might not find the answer you seek. Later, when the maturity of years has grown upon you, you may come to accept that the differences in gender roles provide benefits that a non-differentiated genders would lack.
Isaiah 55:8-9 “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways, says the LORD. As high as the heavens are above the earth, so high are my ways above your ways and my thoughts above your thoughts.”
S
sowinskija
Guest
I believe only men should be Priests, even if i have to hold to Church teaching by faith.Sowinski ja -
I looked up this link and this poster has a point here.
As such, I am going to ask you a direct question to clarify.
What is your position? Do you think women should be able to be priests, do you think they should not, or are you not sure?
In asking you this question, it is only fair I should state my position. Personally, I don’t buy the ‘Jesus only chose men’ answer because it is too readily refuted. If Jesus chose only men, he had a reason other than purely gender. The fact that people are asking why is an indication this answer, rightly or wrongly, is inadequate and we need to do better in order to satisfy the spiritual needs, refuted, tacitly conceded or otherwise. If those who ask this question don’t genuinely want to know why only men can be priests, no answer would suffice.
Personally speaking, I don’t believe God picks men simply because they are men. There must be some other reason. That is what prompted my route of inquiry into this question which I have posted that here - in that it has a sacrificial meaning. I am not saying I am right, and what I say is not something I dreamed up. Respected Catholic theologians have proposed such reasoning.
I have difficulty with the position God chooses men because He has a different purpose for men and women. That answer does not tell me why He created two genders - He didn’t have to - and doesn’t tell me why He has different roles for men and women. As Creator, He was not under any compulsion. As such it was chosen - why? Is no choice in the matter purely as a consequence of gender? It does not explain why God tolerated different cultural traditions in the past such as slavery, having more than one wife etc? The answer 'We know more not is does not suffice as in 1 000, 5 000 or 10 000 years time we will know even more? What will the position be them? Will we look back at the 21st century and say yes, that’s what we thought then but we know better now?
I don’t pose these questions to be antagonistic, I pose them because I don’t know the answers and find ‘text book’ answers to these questions inadequate - prompting me to look for something else in a search for deeper understanding.
S
sowinskija
Guest
This is an ongoing debate and i needed further clarification.
C
Catolico65
Guest
I think the real problem lies in that in today’s day and age the world would try to convince us there is real little difference between men and women. This has manifested in many different ways, even to the point were sexuality is turned upside down and supposedly redefined.
Since I belief God to be the Supremely logical being that He is I expect that He made women the weaker sex and men stronger, oh wait that’s in the Bible too.
In most marriages (not all) the man has the role of authority while the women has the role of nurturing. This nurturing role is great in it’s place but in leadership role it has it’s limitations. To wit, in many if not most protestant denominations that have allowed women priests/pastors in a matter of a short period of time they also accept child sacrifice to the god of financial progress and homosexual relations, both of which He abhors.
Regarding abortion, it should go without saying that this is murder and has it’s consequences and regarding homosexual it destroys the very fabric of society, and always has and always will.
Since I belief God to be the Supremely logical being that He is I expect that He made women the weaker sex and men stronger, oh wait that’s in the Bible too.
In most marriages (not all) the man has the role of authority while the women has the role of nurturing. This nurturing role is great in it’s place but in leadership role it has it’s limitations. To wit, in many if not most protestant denominations that have allowed women priests/pastors in a matter of a short period of time they also accept child sacrifice to the god of financial progress and homosexual relations, both of which He abhors.
Regarding abortion, it should go without saying that this is murder and has it’s consequences and regarding homosexual it destroys the very fabric of society, and always has and always will.
E
Edward_H
Guest
Ok, sure…I just couldn’t see any difference between the 2 threads you started.
M
minkymurph
Guest
None - and I’m a little surprised at your question as to my knowledge, nothing I wrote in my posts suggested I did. Neither was it my intention to suggest women were part of Jesus priesthood. Certainly someone else could interpret my words to mean I hold that opinion, but I did not in fact say that is what I thought.
Nor have I, but it is also fair to say as Catholics we believe many there is no ‘evidence’ as for? Just because there is no evidence for something does not mean it is not true. I have used this line of reasoning many times in relation to the existence of God. The reason I say this is because in the first instance I would be of the opinion all evidence is refutable - no matter what it is or what it relates to.
In the second instance, as far as I understand it, the OP’s difficulty is putting forth an argument that does not sound sexist, and it would appear the arguments he or she has put forward to date have not been accepted. As such, I am attempting to engage with the OP in formulating a valid theological argument that would not be considered sexist, and one those that he or she is engaged in discussion with may accept. That does not mean changing what we believe to be true to accommodate others who don’t think it’s fashionable. It means finding other explanations for the same thing.
Nor do I - and I am also quite happy about it. However, the very fact that I don’t know is what put me onto this avenue of theological inquiry. I stress ‘inquiry.’ It is not an assertion of anything. More thinking out loud so to speak.
I would also like to say it would appear the purpose of the thread is not discuss whether or not women should be priests, but, for want of a better word, arguments that could be put forward in support of view they should not. I am happy to engage with that irrespective of any personal opinion I may or may not hold. Further to this, as I wasn’t asked whether or not women should be priests I’m happy to keep any personal opinions I may or may not hold to myself until such times as I am.
I don’t think that is what is in dispute. It would appear the dispute the OP is having with others - not me incidentally - is why women cannot specialize in being priests simply on the basis they are women? My point was - to clarify - if God chose only men to be priests then He had a reason for doing it. The ‘God chose men and that’s the end of it’ line of reasoning is one people in contemporary society, rightly or wrongly, struggle with. As such, in order to meet the spiritual needs of others - not our own - we have to come up with something more convincing.
What makes you think I don’t accept differences in men and women, and what makes you think the maturity of years has not grown upon me?
For all you know, I could be older than you.
M
minkymurph
Guest
Thank you for clarifying your position.
S
sowinskija
Guest
Yes, but if i try to say that, ill sound sexist.I think the real problem lies in that in today’s day and age the world would try to convince us there is real little difference between men and women. This has manifested in many different ways, even to the point were sexuality is turned upside down and supposedly redefined.
Since I belief God to be the Supremely logical being that He is I expect that He made women the weaker sex and men stronger, oh wait that’s in the Bible too.
In most marriages (not all) the man has the role of authority while the women has the role of nurturing. This nurturing role is great in it’s place but in leadership role it has it’s limitations. To wit, in many if not most protestant denominations that have allowed women priests/pastors in a matter of a short period of time they also accept child sacrifice to the god of financial progress and homosexual relations, both of which He abhors.
Regarding abortion, it should go without saying that this is murder and has it’s consequences and regarding homosexual it destroys the very fabric of society, and always has and always will.
S
sowinskija
Guest
I think I will try to argue that men are in fact spiritually different and that God created us for complimentary roles. Men can be Priests, yet women can bring life into the world. Both great and wonderful vocations, yet different. Women and men are different mentally, physically, emotionally, how can they not be different, but equal, spiritually. Please help reinforce my argument with Scripture and logic or propose a better one that will appeal to someone who has this view. I think that if i can win the argument that men and women are different spiritually, that provides justification for the male only Priesthood. I will most likely be asked for specific spiritual differences that make men better, and do not yet have any examples. Help would be appreciated. Also, since i am arguing against a woman, i am going to be extremely careful not to be sexist.
M
minkymurph
Guest
Wise move.
You are spot on when you say you will be asked for specific spiritual differences that make men better. Unfortunately I can’t help you on that one.
You may also be presented with the argument as women can’t be priests, on what is the argument ‘men are better’ based on?’ Personally I would recommend avoidance of use of the word ‘better’ if your intention is not to be sexist.
C
Catolico65
Guest
That would infer then that God would have to be sexist.
In fact, in the world’s eye God is sexist, homophobic and violent. My recommendation is to quit worrying what the world will think of you but to do the correct thing. You should be comforted though as Jesus predicted the world would hate us.
M
minkymurph
Guest
This is true. But then we are left with the problem of explaining why choosing only men is non sexist.
M
minkymurph
Guest
It could be argued if God chooses men because they are spiritually ‘better’ then God in fact is sexist, as it infers He not only thinks they are better at the job but created them to be so. Further to this, it also raises the question as to why God would have bestowed spiritual talents and abilities on Adam and not Eve - and men and women in general, and infers men are more spiritually adept in relation to priesthood which warrants explanation. St. Augustine had some interesting views in that regard, in that women did not equally share the imaging of God with men. However, I don’t think the OP would find Augustine’s theological reasoning very helpful in his/her current debate.
Certainly we could reassure ourselves through thinking it does not matter whether the world thinks God is sexist or not and be comforted by the fact we are doing the right thing and as such be hated, and it may well be the case the no matter what the OP says others who want to think that will irrespective of what arguments are proposed. However, it would appear the OP is searching for something more insightful.
Paul offers some insight into the sacrificial/sacramental meaning in terms of the necessity of the maleness of Christ. At Romans Chpt. 5 he reasons that sin is passed through the male, not the female. The reasons for this are further developed in 1 Timothy 2. He draws a distinction between the original sin of Adam and the original sin of Eve, in that the sin of Eve was not death dealing as she was deceived. The sin of Adam was the death dealing one as he was not deceived, and therefore more reprehensible.
This thoughts are not of my own orientation. Writings of respected Catholic theologians can be sourced on this topic. This line of reasoning gives us deeper insight into the sacrificial/sacramental meaning in terms of the need for Christ to be male and as Catholics believe the Mass is a sacrifice and a sacrament, the need for the person standing in the place of Christ to be male. Paul adds an interesting comment in Timothy in that women are saved through child-bearing. In the past I’ve attempted to open a discussion on the avenue of theological thought on the forums but no one seemed keen to engage.
I stress what I have outlined above are theological opinions and not teachings. However, in my view they are more insightful than the theological line of reasoning St. Augustine pursued in relation to the roles of men and women in the Church.
C
Catolico65
Guest
Sometimes I’m certain that we humans overthink anything and everything which at the end of the day does very little.
My approach is pure and simple, God has a plan and a purpose for everything he creates, just like any good architect.
Does this mean that because God chose men to be stronger and thus the leaders that they have an inherent advantage in getting to heaven? Not possible because God is completely unable from being unjust.
My approach is pure and simple, God has a plan and a purpose for everything he creates, just like any good architect.
Does this mean that because God chose men to be stronger and thus the leaders that they have an inherent advantage in getting to heaven? Not possible because God is completely unable from being unjust.
R
RubyT
Guest
I am female and believe that we should trust the teachings of the church. My response to the above question would be; that women are not Spritually different , yet they are different.
It was a female, Eve who first took a bite from the apple. God decides the females fate, not man. It is impossible for us to know why He choses only men for the clergy. If He is powerful, omnipotent and all knowing, than surely, if He had wanted women in the Priesthood, it would be so by now.
My point would be to explain that perhaps Gods reasons (which we cannot know) may be to prevent sin among the opposite sex if they were to serve together…imagine how such sexual tension would detract from God’s business.
IMHO: Such questioning, although it is highly admirable for women to take such a passionate stance, it is conversely just as lacking in humility. Is it pride which gives them the desire toward Priesthood or Love of God? If for love of God would they not find humility a more reasonable response to such Love.
A very controversial reply, I apologize for a lack of charity and hope that no ill will is taken by anyone - I know no other way to get my point across.
C
Catolico65
Guest
I am female and believe that we should trust the teachings of the church. My response to the above question would be; that women are not Spritually different , yet they are different.
It was a female, Eve who first took a bite from the apple. God decides the females fate, not man. It is impossible for us to know why He choses only men for the clergy. If He is powerful, omnipotent and all knowing, than surely, if He had wanted women in the Priesthood, it would be so by now.
My point would be to explain that perhaps Gods reasons (which we cannot know) may be to prevent sin among the opposite sex if they were to serve together…imagine how such sexual tension would detract from God’s business.
IMHO: Such questioning, although it is highly admirable for women to take such a passionate stance, it is conversely just as lacking in humility. Is it pride which gives them the desire toward Priesthood or Love of God? If for love of God would they not find humility a more reasonable response to such Love.
A very controversial reply, I apologize for a lack of charity and hope that no ill will is taken by anyone - I know no other way to get my point across.
O
otjm
Guest
People who either are so poorly catechized that they do not understand what doctrine is, and those who will not accpet it are not going to be convinced of anything. You might recall the prayer of St Francis, and move on. You are wasting your time. There is authentic feminism, and there is inauthentic feminism. Authentic feminism should have no fight with the Church. Inauthentic feminism puts all man/woman issues in the context of power; and amusingly (or not) seeks to do just exactly what it accuses men of doing.
- Status