Nicholas Kristof article prompts questions

[Nandarani]

nytimes.com/2010/04/18/opinion/18kristof.html?scp=1&sq=kristof%20junia&st=cse

If the link doesn’t work, the article was entitled something like, “A Church Mary Could Love.” You can find it doing a search using keywords Kristof, Junia, at www.nytimes.com

Please explain his references to Junia, and female deacons. I.e., please explain why they are erroneous assumptions.

I’m almost converted - only obtaining the proof of baptism remains. I’ve traveled far away from “gnostic” type attractions, but this article made me want more information from Catholic Answers.

Thank you.

 

[NotWorthy]

Wow, where do you start.

The author seems to imply that the Gospel of Philip and the Gospel of Mary were rejected by the Church simply because they put women on a pedestal?

Let me ask you, does not the Catholic Church honor and revere women? Aren’t we accused constantly of worshiping Mary? Who is the most famous Catholic of the 1990’s and 2000’s? Pope John Paul II and Mother Teresa!

The problem with this article is that the writer has no idea what the priesthood entails. The priest is acting in the person of Christ. Christ DID NOT make any of His women disciples Apostles. Just look at the article. If Mary Magdalene was the person Christ loved most, then why didn’t Christ make her an Apostle? That’s a glaring oversight by the author of that article.

Deaconesses were around in the 1st and 2nd century, but as best as we can tell, they were simply women who helped during the baptisms of other women, in order to respect their modesty.

The author of this article has no clue what he is talking about.

 

[rdscheirer]

As my 13 yr old son tells me when there’s a problem with the computer- its an ID ten T problem-IDIOT.

 

[Nandarani]

When NK gets outside of the area of his expertise into an area about which he knows nothing, he shows up badly. NK has done and reported on some remarkable things, many of them having to do with women in other countries the progress of whose lives he has documented. He hasn’t stayed distant in his reporting; he has intervened.

Does anyone know the reference to Romans? What is this Junia “thing?” ty.

 

[NotWorthy]

7 Greet Andronicus and Junia, my relatives and my fellow prisoners; they are prominent among the apostles and they were in Christ before me.What’s wrong with that statement? She was prominent among the early apostles. So were Aquila and Saphira (husband and wife)? So was Lydia?

 

[Cachonga]

I agree with NotWorthy. Some versions say that they were “of note among the apostles,”. This does not mean they WERE apostles themselves, but that they were known BY the apostles (and in a good way). I would think of this in the same way as a “Dean’s List” in college.

Why NK would cite from gnostic sources seems strange. In my mind, this would be the same as if someone 1,000 years from now quoted from a Watchtower from 1920 and wondered why the Catholic Church no longer teaches these things. 1 John 4:2-3 makes it clear that Jesus Christ came in the flesh, and to deny that is to have a spirit of anti-christ. Since the gnostics deny that Jesus Christ came in the flesh, it seems obvious that there writings would also be rejected by the Church.

As far as the “scandals” that are coming to light, an honest examination of Church history would reveal this is not the first time the Catholic Church has had to deal with scandals (there have even been popes who delighted in open sin of all sorts). Of course, scandals are nothing new (I suppose it could be considered scandalous that Adam ate the forbidden fruit, and Jesus being betrayed by one of his disciples, who later killed himself, what a scandal!), so I don’t think this is going to make any major difference in the way things are done.

 

[kepha1]

The New York Times is a cheap anti-Catholic rag that has declared war against the Church. It is my opinion their executives are masons.NYT gives a false view of the Church similar to the propaganda of the Ku Klux Klan of the 20’s. Don’t take anything the New York Times says about the Catholic Church seriously, what they say is evil.

Consider this from the Catholic League:
catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1839

catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1835

catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1818

catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1813

The New York Times writes evil articles attacking the Church.

 

[NotWorthy]

As far as the “scandals” that are coming to light, an honest examination of Church history would reveal this is not the first time the Catholic Church has had to deal with scandals (there have even been popes who delighted in open sin of all sorts). Of course, scandals are nothing new (I suppose it could be considered scandalous that Adam ate the forbidden fruit, and Jesus being betrayed by one of his disciples, who later killed himself, what a scandal!), so I don’t think this is going to make any major difference in the way things are done.

I recall a talk I heard recently, and I hope I don’t misquote somebody.

There was a Soviet Leader, Kruschev, I think in the 1960’s. He told a Bishop that he was going to destroy the Church. The Bishop said, “Sir, after the Church has survived so many attempts to destroy Her from within, how do you think you can destroy Her from without”. That thought is both sad and comforting at the same time.