Pope reaffirms ban on women priests

[Cristiano]

I am sure that the American Nuns currently under investigation would love to know that

But the fact of the matter is that you’re simply wrong.

Only priests (and therefore men) are considered part of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy. The Catholic Encyclopedia makes this clear (link to source: newadvent.org/cathen/07322c.html). Although Catholicism for Dummies (link to source: newadvent.org/cathen/07322c.html) does a better job summarizing the main points:

Practicing Catholics belong to a parish that supports the local church (where they attend Mass every week) and the clergy members who serve the congregation. The head of the parish is the pastor.

The local Catholic parish is often named after a title of the Lord Jesus Christ, such as Blessed Sacrament or Sacred Heart, or a title of the Blessed Virgin Mary, such as Our Lady of Good Counsel or Our Lady of Seven Sorrows, or after one of the saints, such as St. Ann, St. Bernadette, or St. Joseph. The parish is the heart of the diocese because it’s where most Catholics get baptized, go to confession, attend Mass, receive Holy Communion, are confirmed, get married, and are buried from.

The Catholic diocese

The pastor, and every parish priest, answers to the local bishop, who runs the diocese. The local diocese is composed of a collection of local parishes, just like a state is a collection of counties and cities. Many dioceses are comprised of several state counties, and in a few places, the entire state makes up one diocese.

You can think of a local parish like a town or city, and the local pastor is like the mayor. The diocese is like a state or province, and the bishop is like the governor. (The pope is like the prime minister, governing the entire nation, except that he governs the universal Church all over the world.)

The bishop who heads the diocese is not an ambassador of the pope but governs the local diocese as an authentic successor of the apostles, just as the pope governs the universal Church as the successor of St. Peter.

The Catholic archdiocese

An archbishop runs a really large diocese, known as an archdiocese. For example, an archbishop is given authority in each of the following archdioceses: Newark, San Francisco, Denver, Hartford, Miami, St. Louis, and Omaha. Sometimes, the archbishop is also a cardinal. Cardinals spend most of their time working in their archdioceses or in the Vatican.

The Catholic Church

The highest point in the Catholic hierarchy is, of course, the pope, who oversees the Catholic Church and its faithful from his home in the Vatican City, an independent nation situated in Rome.

This is further proof that you are confused about hierarchies in the Church. You are correct that only men are in the hierarchy of holy orders. However, now you are referring only to a specific one to make your point but that is simply using an unrepresentative sample to make a generalization.

The American nuns are not under investigation only the LCWR is. The other point that you must understand is that LWCR is being investigated several times by men and women. On top of that those bishops do not have any authority over the LCWR, they are an investigative body. It is like the police is investigating me for a crime, the police does not have any authority to sentence me to jail the authority comes from the code of criminal law through a judge that does not have to be my peer.
Finally you are confusing the Vatican, the Holy See with the Church of Rome. There are a lot of jurisdictional differences there.

 

[Cristiano]

Of course the Church does.
The Church writes the official Catholic Moral Law.

The Popes and the Bishops don’t have anything like a Constitution to limit and define their powers.

I just gave proof of my statement in my post and you choose to ignore it, you choose to still affirm to the contrary without proving that what I said is wrong. The Pope and the Bishop have something much more binding than a constitution, they are called the Bible and Sacred Tradition.

Your statement that the Church in its fullness writes to official moral law is correct as long as you understand that the Church is the mystical body of Christ and you cannot take them separately. What God says, Christ says and the Church says. When you have the separation of a church from Christ than such a church does not the authority to dictate moral laws any more.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I have absolutely no problem with this.

The Pope speaks for Christ and Christ is God. So why would I have a problem with this?

Last I checked countries that are predominantly Catholic are doing just fine so I’m not quite sure what you’re so worried about.

What?

Latin America has been a mess for decades, and most of the Catholic countries in Europe are broke.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
Yes, and I make the same assumption about the Church of England, or for that matter, the state religion in Saudi Arabia. Moreover I am guessing that you do too.

Why treat the Catholic Church any differently?
No good reason that I can see.

Not sure what you’re saying. Could you please explain?

I am saying that we both consider (I assume) the rules of most religions to be man-made.
The only difference is, I recognize the man-made nature of all religions, but you make an exception for your particular faith.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Could you cite some examples of what you mean here? And remember, in the context we’re discussing, the laws would have to apply to those in power in particular.

Well for one thing, high ranking members of the Communist Party were much more closely monitored than ordinary people (at least under Stalin). And anyone could be sent to the gulags if they engaged in activity deemed anti-Soviet.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

To be sure.

We’re talking here about Christian ethos vs pagan ethos. Which one would you prefer to be enveloped in?

Neither to be honest:shrug:

 

[nickybr38]

What?

Latin America has been a mess for decades, and most of the Catholic countries in Europe are broke.

So you equate a good country to a country that is rich in wealth?

We have different definitions of ‘just fine’. The Catholics I’ve met from Latin America are the holiest people I know. It seems to me they’re doing just fine.

PS: Spain? Predominantly Catholic. Doing just fine.
Italy? Predominantly Catholic. Doing just fine.
Poland? Same as above.
Ireland? Same as above.
France? Same as above…

I mean… .really. I could name just as many poor countries that from a worldly view aren’t doing just fine but I think the evidence shows being mostly Catholic does NOT mean ruin and destruction.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

This is further proof that you are confused about hierarchies in the Church. You are correct that only men are in the hierarchy of holy orders. However, now you are referring only to a specific one to make your point but that is simply using an unrepresentative sample to make a generalization.

The American nuns are not under investigation only the LCWR is. The other point that you must understand is that LWCR is being investigated several times by men and women. On top of that those bishops do not have any authority over the LCWR, they are an investigative body. It is like the police is investigating me for a crime, the police does not have any authority to sentence me to jail the authority comes from the code of criminal law through a judge that does not have to be my peer.
Finally you are confusing the Vatican, the Holy See with the Church of Rome. There are a lot of jurisdictional differences there.

It sounds like you’re splitting hairs.
Are the Bishops and the Pope in charge or not?

 

[PRmerger]

Well for one thing, high ranking members of the Communist Party were much more closely monitored than ordinary people (at least under Stalin). And anyone could be sent to the gulags if they engaged in activity deemed anti-Soviet.

Well, on this subject I’m just going to have to say that I don’t believe a single word of that.

And, as stuff like this makes my eyes glaze over, I’m just going to say that I’m an “atheist” when it comes to believing that the Communist party made rules that were extremely harsh for themselves.

That’s just contrary to reason *and *human nature.

I hope you’ll allow me to apply your paradigm and state: Nope. I just don’t believe it.

 

[PRmerger]

Neither to be honest:shrug:

Fair enough.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I just gave proof of my statement in my post and you choose to ignore it, you choose to still affirm to the contrary without proving that what I said is wrong. The Pope and the Bishop have something much more binding than a constitution, they are called the Bible and Sacred Tradition.

Your statement that the Church in its fullness writes to official moral law is correct as long as you understand that the Church is the mystical body of Christ and you cannot take them separately. What God says, Christ says and the Church says. When you have the separation of a church from Christ than such a church does not the authority to dictate moral laws any more.

And who established/interprets the Bible and Sacred Tradition…

Why its the Pope and Bishops of course

 

[Clare_G]

Lol…women priests?..seriously…tsk…tsk…ego has always been a problem for most of us No wonder Eve ruined it for Adam.
Interesting to know that even satan could gauge our weakness.
If the Catholic Church says no women priests , then so be it!

There’s wisdom in simple obedience sisters!

 

[Clare_G]

And let us not forget that men cannot be nuns.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

So you equate a good country to a country that is rich in wealth?

We have different definitions of ‘just fine’. The Catholics I’ve met from Latin America are the holiest people I know. It seems to me they’re doing just fine.

PS: Spain? Predominantly Catholic. Doing just fine.
Italy? Predominantly Catholic. Doing just fine.
Poland? Same as above.
Ireland? Same as above.
France? Same as above…

I mean… .really. I could name just as many poor countries that from a worldly view aren’t doing just fine but I think the evidence shows being mostly Catholic does NOT mean ruin and destruction.

Is this really meant as a serious post

All the countries you mention (and the EU as a whole) are not merely lacking in funds, but close to bankruptcy, and much of South America was controlled by strongmen and military juntas until recently.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Well, on this subject I’m just going to have to say that I don’t believe a single word of that.

And, as stuff like this makes my eyes glaze over, I’m just going to say that I’m an “atheist” when it comes to believing that the Communist party made rules that were extremely harsh for themselves.

That’s just contrary to reason *and *human nature.

I hope you’ll allow me to apply your paradigm and state: Nope. I just don’t believe it.

Well the rules never applied to Stalin or Lenin when they were in power:shrug:

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Lol…women priests?..seriously…tsk…tsk…ego has always been a problem for most of us No wonder Eve ruined it for Adam. Interesting to know that even satan could gauge our weakness. If the Catholic Church says no women priests , then so be it.
There’s wisdom in simple obedience sisters!

Was that post meant to be funny or merely condescending?
I’m actually a bit curious about that.

 

[PRmerger]

I am saying that we both consider (I assume) the rules of most religions to be man-made.
The only difference is, I recognize the man-made nature of all religions, but you make an exception for your particular faith.

Except that you cannot rule out the possibility that there is indeed one particular faith that is true.

It would be like your saying you went to a store and found all the flowers to be artificial. That may be true.

But that doesn’t mean that there’s no such thing as real flowers, right?

Now, we can get into a discussion about the evidence that exists for real flowers, but that’s not the point I’m making here.

I’m just saying that the fact that there’s lots of artificials doesn’t mean that there isn’t an actual.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

And who established/interprets the Bible and Sacred Tradition…

Why its the Pope and Bishops of course

Through the Holy Spirit.

You keep forgetting that.

Remember, the Bible and Sacred Tradition didn’t come from men.

They came from God.

God is a big guy. Don’t you think that if He really, really wanted to have ‘women priests’, ‘married clergy’, a symbolic Eucharist, etc. He could have done so?

Think back to the first disciples. They were even, at Pentecost, sitting there, in hiding.

Suddenly the Holy Spirit comes down to them and gives them the courage to go out among the people that 10 minutes before they were deathly afraid would kill them. Gives them the courage and the strength to do miracles.

Yet somehow these guys were strong enough to ‘overpower’ that Spirit who told them, according to the interpretations of the "vast conspiracy of men’ bozos, "Gentleman, gentlemen. Jesus would like you to stop judging humanity, build a giant happy land, give women equal rights in everything, stop getting uptight about sex, and basically live and let live. In fact, Jesus is telling you to do exactly what all the pagans have done and are doing. He’s telling you to go along with all that people in the 21st century call good, like sharing and women’s rights. . .but to ignore all the bad stuff like having male hierarchy and telling people that things are good or bad and making them all upset.’

So these disciples were full of confidence (given by the Holy Spirit) enough to go out and preach about Jesus. . .

But (according to the ‘conspiracy theorists’), they wouldn’t preach what Jesus actually said. Oh no, they went out and risked their lives to tell humanity that Christ was God and would save them. . .but they ignored, distorted, or outright mistaught Christ’s saving truth. And then they died, proclaiming Christ. . .but not the real Christ. And the MISTAUGHT man-made stuff is somehow still taught today while the real Christ who was nothing but a gentle proto-hippie good guy didn’t have the power to stop the people from ruining everything He had given His life to accomplish. Even though HE is God and they are not.

No wonder some people don’t believe in God. The god they have built from this kind of fantasizing. . .I mean, theorizing. . .is unbelievable. The whole edifice of this man-made Church is unbelievable.

Basically it’s the strawman. What they say the Church is and teaches is some giant man-made thing that is both unbelievable and even vile.

But what the Church really IS and teaches is quite different.

Until/unless the non believer actually comes, not to belief himself even, but to the kind of reasonable acknowledgement that according to what the believer says REGARDING HIS BELIEF, that what he believes is reasonable and just according to said beliefs, and not to the ‘strawman’ that the non-believer insists is what ‘is’, we’re just talking past each other.

 

[Lochias]

Counter question:

Would you accept direct insults like the ones you’re aiming my way right now with a smile, or would you be a hypocritical and complain?

I am not attempting to be snarky or sarcastic, this is a real question.

Stating the truth isn’t an insult. You are obtuse and arrogant. Those are qualities.

Do you have a point to make?

 

[Lochias]

I have.
It tells me that no women are *even allowed *to become part of the Church Hierarchy.

What are nuns, to you?

Also, what is your hang-up with the Church Hierarchy anyway? Priests, Bishops and the Pope are all people who have sacrificed much, have little in the way of actual power to make decisions, and are paid next to nothing and subsist on the charity of others for the service they provide. They are servants, not kings.

Are you saying that women in the church should be paid even less and worked even more? The 98 year-old nun at my church would find that endlessly fascinating. Maybe I should tell her that you’d like to take her stipend away, so that she can feel more like the priests, bishops and the Pope?