POLL: Which is more likely: Women Deacons OR Women Cardinals?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And perhaps my sarcasm was a bit over the top… my point is, I think it is dangerous to “white wash” history. There has never been a true golden era. In your zeal to defend traditional gender roles, it would be a mistake to ignore the many hardships and unjust limitations society has placed on women throughout much of history. Congregations of apostolic sisters who work in the parishes and with the people was quite a novelty at one point…should the Church have only cloistered nuns? I think the point some of us are making is that there can be legitimate development and exploration of these issues without going off the deep end and attempting to ordain women.
 
1Lord1Faith said:
from holding the highest positions in the Vaticans dicasteries
Click to expand...
They should be allowed to have the same positions in Vatican dicasteries. Is there anything that requires an ordained person to head a dicastery? If so, then there is nothing we can really do, if not then they should be allowed to
 
Last edited:
Sometimes it is important to point out heresy.
 
Last edited:
No, it’s not…(edit: did the post I’m replying to change? My response doesn’t fit it anymore…I do think it can be important to call out heresy. )

I couldn’t care less about being labeled a heretic on an Internet forum.

But IIRC it must have been serious enough for some people for it to be in the TOS
 
Last edited:
Nothing stated against allowing women to have decision making roles amounts to any more than “because.”
 
catholic1seeks said:
Where is the proof that THAT is all they did?
Click to expand...
They very well may have done more in regards to service to the community and to the poor.

But there wasn’t anything additional they they did that the average lay woman can’t do today.

My issue with the idea of being back the deaconess is that it smacks of pure clericalism to me.

If we restore the deaconess role, what would they do that lay woman can’t do today?

From what I understand- nothing.
 
The Church doesn’t need to get with the times, she is already for all times.
[/quote]

You win the internet today!
 
catholic1seeks said:
Catholics try to look for ways to have more lay involvement in the Church, which includes women involvement – perhaps more specifically.
Click to expand...
There are a huge amount of ways women can be involved in the Church without being deacons or cardinals or priests. This isn’t about being involved. It is about wanting leadership roles. It is about wanting roles that men have. It is about wanting to be in charge.

Women have always been involved in the Church.

Problem is, as women seek the roles that men have, in all walks of life, many of the things that women are good at and are badly needed that help the Church and community are left undone or given to the government.
 
Last edited:
theCardinalbird said:
Is there anything that requires an ordained person to head a dicastery?
Click to expand...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ca...iests-yes-to-women-in-curial-leadership-78750
Women in the Curia “are few, we need to put more,” he said, adding that it can be either a religious sister or a laywoman, “it doesn’t matter,” but there is a need to move forward with an eye for quality and competency in the job.
“I don’t have any problem naming a woman as the head of a dicastery, if the dicastery doesn’t have jurisdiction,” he said, referring to the fact that some Vatican departments have specific functions in Church governance that require a bishop to do the job.
Click to expand...
But sadly,
women do need to be given more opportunities for leadership in the Roman Curia – a view he said has at times been met with resistance. “I had to fight to put a woman as the vice-director of the press office,” he said,
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
1Lord1Faith said:
Women in the Curia “are few, we need to put more,” he said, adding that it can be either a religious sister or a laywoman, “it doesn’t matter,” but there is a need to move forward with an eye for quality and competency in the job.
“I don’t have any problem naming a woman as the head of a dicastery, if the dicastery doesn’t have jurisdiction,” he said, referring to the fact that some Vatican departments have specific functions in Church governance that require a bishop to do the job.
Click to expand...
Would you have a problem with what the Pope said in the quoted text?
 
1Lord1Faith said:
women do need to be given more opportunities for leadership in the Roman Curia – a view he said has at times been met with resistance. “I had to fight to put a woman as the vice-director of the press office,” he said,
Click to expand...
Well that’s sad
 
1Lord1Faith said:
No, it sounds good to me
Click to expand...
Then I hardly see an issue with putting women in places of power. So long as the role does not have jurisdiction that can only be filled by a bishop or other members who are ordained. If this can be agreed upon then I really hardly see an issue
 
Last edited:
SeriousQuestion said:
Sometimes it is important to point out heresy.
Click to expand...
Who are the people doing the pointing out? How do we know whether they’re rght or wrong? How do we know they aren’t heretics themselves?

If a priest accuses me of heresy, I will take him seriously. If an anonymous poster on a comments thread accuses me of heresy, I will regard that as a failed attempt at a teenage prank.
 
catholic1seeks said:
This is about women having a seat at the table. That’s all it is.
Click to expand...
No; that is categorically untrue, given the language that you’re using: “deacon” and “cardinal”.

Using these terms, you are inherently talking about ordination, not “having a seat at the table.”
catholic1seeks said:
That’s fine. Are you against ecclesial institutions for the sake of lay leadership, service, and liturgical involvement?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what you mean by “against ecclesial institutions”; but nothing I have written, whether here or elsewhere, is in opposition to lay leadership roles. But much as you protest otherwise, that has nothing to do with the question you asked.
catholic1seeks said:
In other words, if both Cardinal and the “deaconess” are ecclesial institutions, then why not have other institutions for lay people to fill, so that they can have other/more opportunities to serve and lead the Church?
Click to expand...
Neither I nor, afaik, anyone else here has suggested otherwise.

Fort hat matter, I know of no non-clerical roles, leadership or otherwise, that are not open to women (other than the obvious example of professed brothers, who already have a female equivalent).

hawk
 
dochawk said:
Neither I nor, afaik, anyone else here has suggested otherwise.

Fort hat matter, I know of no non-clerical roles, leadership or otherwise, that are not open to women (other than the obvious example of professed brothers, who already have a female equivalent).

hawk
Click to expand...
There are several posts up-thread that don’t want women to be in decision making roles because decision making roles are supposedly reserved for men.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top