Newnan woman challenges Catholic church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Redbaron998
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why don’t these people just join the Episcopal Church? You know why? Because then they wouldn’t have the platform of “oppression” that they’ve created for themselves, from which to speak.

View attachment 9292
 
HCC said:
Why don’t these people just join the Episcopal Church?
Click to expand...
Because the problem with diSSenters is: a mind-boggling huge amount of egotistical pride.

Selecting another church is tantamount to admitting they were wrong for being in the Catholic Church in the first place, so they MUST transform the Catholic Church into their own image. And as we all know, diSSenters are “nevah wrong!”

Remember, Napoleon attacked the Russians for the same reason.
 
I agree that the best thing for dissenters to do is go where they are comfortable. This is exactly what most reasonable people do. That is why most change churches with little fanfare or public notice. The US offers a panoply of religious involvement that is mind boggling.
 
Redbaron998 said:
You hear about Heresy and occasionally see a liturgical abuse, but it still is a surprise when you find someone advocating out and out heresy in your own diocese. Woman wanting to be Deacon.

ajc.com/news/newnan-woman-challenges-catholic-741285.html

On the neat side Tim Staples was qouted in my local paper.
Click to expand...
I am in formation for the Diaconate. One of the hallmarks of a good deacon is humility.
Upon ordination, we must promise obedience to the bishop and his successors.

Forget about being a woman, she doesn’t have the temperament to be a deacon. I find this attitude to be about serving one’s self rather than God’s people.

One last thing, if you feel call to be or do something that is opposed to Church teaching, it’s not really a call…
 
HCC said:
Why don’t these people just join the Episcopal Church? You know why? Because then they wouldn’t have the platform of “oppression” that they’ve created for themselves, from which to speak.
Click to expand...
👍

It’s a cause, you see, and not about faith at all! They see themselves as trailblazers and martyrs which must somehow satisfy their hubris.
 
The whole story is a mess. First she’s intorduced as smiley and intellectual which is a waring that the reader should brace for a totally biased report.

Even if women Deacons were allowed she could not just declare herself a Deacon. “nearly 200 Catholic women have declared themselves deacons, priests and bishops”. see they also quote the Roman Catholic Women Preists which would be interesting except there is no such thing. “The church is mistaken, say members of Roman Catholic Womenpriests and more than 25 other groups formed over the years”.

Why do papers allow reporters with no clue to report these things? I think I may apply to be a reporter covering Austrlian rules football…I’ll wing it.
 
cargau said:
I am in formation for the Diaconate. One of the hallmarks of a good deacon is humility.
Upon ordination, we must promise obedience to the bishop and his successors.

Forget about being a woman, she doesn’t have the temperament to be a deacon. I find this attitude to be about serving one’s self rather than God’s people.

One last thing, if you feel call to be or do something that is opposed to Church teaching, it’s not really a call…
Click to expand...
Thank you for your post. This is something that needs to be better understood about Holy Orders. Vocations to receive Holy Orders are vocations of sacrifice of service. I’ve yet to hear of a woman who wants to be a priest (or deacon) because they want to sacrifice or serve. In every case I’ve heard, it’s all about power- it’s about being given some sort of “right” that they think they have. The priesthood is not a right; we don’t deserve to be priests- we don’t even deserve to *have *priests. I’m amazed that God has seen fit to give us such a wonderful gift in the priesthood. The priesthood is a vocation of total sacrifice and total service.

This reminds me of an incident I saw years ago in a Catholic Church- a religious sister was asked to preach the “homily” at Mass. I remember noticing how proud she seemed to be as she stood in front of everyone. I remember how pleased with herself she seemed to be because of the power she had been given. I was absolutely disgusted- and I didn’t know hardly any theology of the priesthood- I just instinctively knew it was *very *wrong. To make matters worse, my non-Catholic mother had gone to Mass with me that day- and I had to answer for the scandal the religious sister caused. Try convincing someone when you’ve only been Catholic for a few months that you are right, and this sister and the priest who invited her to speak are wrong. I love women, but I also love the priesthood and the Church. I’m very sad to see one misunderstand the other. Thank God our diocese is seeing MUCH better days. God bless Bishop Finn!
 
You know…the church used to ordain women to the diaconate until the year 500. lol
 
Tony9712262 said:
You know…the church used to ordain women to the diaconate until the year 500. lol
Click to expand...
My understanding is that deaconesses were either wives of deacons or women who were needed to help do things that required a woman (assisting other women, for instance). Anyone have more info on this?
 
Orchanian said:
My understanding is that deaconesses were either wives of deacons or women who were needed to help do things that required a woman (assisting other women, for instance). Anyone have more info on this?
Click to expand...
They did not recieve the sacrement of Holy Orders, which modern Deacons do (in a limited way)
 
Romans 16:1 NIV

I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae
 
Big_Dummy said:
Romans 16:1 NIV

I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae
Click to expand...
So, you popped in the thread and didn’t bother reading it, did you?
Orchanian said:
My understanding is that deaconesses were either wives of deacons or women who were needed to help do things that required a woman (assisting other women, for instance). Anyone have more info on this?
Click to expand...
This is what I’ve heard. There’s no proof that deaconesses were sacramentally ordained (ie, there was no laying on of hands).
 
Tony9712262 said:
You know…the church used to ordain women to the diaconate until the year 500. lol
Click to expand...
No the Church did not have female deacons. It had deaconesses which had a totally different role than the deacon and no liturgical function.

As well there is still an ongoing debate as to whether a deaconess was ordained or not.
 
Wow! Georgia is already a challenging place to be a Catholic. Now you have to contend with heretical Catholics as well as the general non-Catholic population. Very scary! St Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle. I am praying for your deliverance from the wannabe deaconess.
Cara
PS Just wondering about your sense of geography… If the devils had to come “down” to Georgia, doesn’t that put Georgia below hell??
 
Tigg said:
HCC;7271443:
Why don’t these people just join the Episcopal Church? You know why? Because then they wouldn’t have the platform of “oppression” that they’ve created for themselves,
Click to expand...
from which to speak.

View attachment 9292

👍

**It’s a cause, you see, and not about faith at all! ** They see themselves as trailblazers and martyrs which must somehow satisfy their hubris.
Click to expand...
I have to admit I had never thought of it like this, but it makes sense. I couldn’t see why those favouring female ordination (in any degree) would want to remain in the RCC.

But if it is to do with the idea of female oppression and a “cause”, then there are those whose pride will egg them on to try and change the RCC from within.

Something that I have struggled to get across to those around me who think the RCC holds down women or denies them their rights is that women have a very special place in the Catholic faith, as mentored by our Blessed Lady and the 2’000 history of female saints and martyrs.

The idea of pride being at the root of it adds another perspective. Thanks for the “food for thought”.
 
Well, this lady probably isn’t even Catholic, considering two of her statements from the article:

1.) “Forbidding [positions of authority to women] is sexism, and sexism is evil.”

2.) “Jesus,” she said, “didn’t ordain anyone.”

I say she’s probably not Catholic, because it appears she rejects the institution of at least one Sacrament, Holy Orders, by our Lord Jesus Christ, who established the Church itself. Just like Christ Himself instituted the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, He likewise instituted the others, including Holy Orders. For crying out loud, He even renamed Peter when He did it! She’s just obstinate to declare that “Jesus didn’t ordain anyone:” okay then, since it was just the Church then that must have thought up the whole Holy Orders thing, why don’t you just think up your own “church” like so many others? If the Church wasn’t instituted by God and the Sacrament therein placed by Jesus, then why bother?

Additionally, she is calling “forbidding positions of authority to women” sexist. Oh, brother: first of it all, it is no more “sexist” to forbid women from doing certain things than it is to forbid men from doing certain things when the Church is instructed by God to do so. And secondly, it was our Lord Himself who ordained only men, so by her logic, Jesus must have been “sexist” and then again by a continuation of her logic, He must have therefore been “evil” because “sexism is evil.” So, if He was “evil” then He couldn’t possibly have been God, and therefore there is no such thing as the Catholic Church. That’s where her very own logic leads her: a long trail of pride, right to the dead-end of contradiction! At least this perennial objection is easy to refute.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top