Pope reaffirms ban on women priests

[fix]

Moreover, its makes sense that this new breed of women (who think that they are just as good as men and therefore have the right to do traditionally male things) would be hostile or at least indifferent to the Virgin Mary.
The Virgin Mary’s defining characteristic is that she gave to birth one very special boy (Jesus) and is completely and utterly loyal (to the point of not even having contradictory thoughts or feelings) to a masculine entity (God the Father).

To women who want to raise their status by doing traditionally male things (such as earning money and exercising authority) this is a not an attractive idea. In fact you could argue (as Feminists such as the late Mary Daly have) that the Virgin Mary ideal was used to oppress and demean women by teaching that all women should be like her.

I guess to confused people who view reality through the lens of gender/power they would feel excluded. Catholics accept that they must start with Truth being central. Others start as if there is no objective truth and see power as the ultimate goal.

 

[Tenofovir]

The main point about Christianity is that it’s not a made up faith. We can’t change certain things no matter how unpopular they are.

 

[Tenofovir]

Science actually proves that men and women are different. Hard science in various journals shows such differences as male children focusing less on faces after birth while female children more on faces. Male children, without being corrupted by culture, prefer to play with boy’s toys, while girls with girl’s toys. Women prefer generally jobs with people while men prefer jobs where they work alone. In repeated experiments, men who were under stress preferred to spend time alone, as opposed to women who preferred the company of others during episodes of stress. The reasons for this have to do with in utero exposure to male and female sex hormones. In fact girls exposed to more male hormones tend to behave more as boys as young children.

Norway has such a paradox, where despite gender equality (and even government drives to make more male nurses and more female computer programmers), women tend to become nurses and doctors and men tend to become engineers and computer programmers. Everyone who lives in Norway knows about this controversy because of a TV show presented by a sociologist several years ago who looked at it and met up with top scientists (people who have no issues with misogyny) who showed empirical proof of this. I was told that the Norwegian government cut funding to various gender studies programs as they had no empirical science backing them and were ridiculing the hard sciences from impeccable places like Oxford.

This goes to show that each has an optimal role. Recognizing these hard scientific facts is not chauvinism. It’s pure scientific inquiry. Recognising that sex A is better at something while sex B is better at something else, in general-- for exceptions always occur, that is not hatred of women.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I don’t see what being a “religion of the elite”, as in the elite chose it because some of them sought God with their heats while others were just copy-cats, has to do with anything.

Christianity was originally the religion of outcasts, the poor and the rejects and remained the religion of outcasts and the poor. Just because certain ruling classes adapted it with their tribesmen does not mean it suddenly became something else. Unless of course being a member of the elite classes is wrong per se. Not sure how one could argue that.

Yes, originally.
Then it became part of the system (with all that that implies).
If you cannot see how that makes a difference, that says more about you than anything else:shrug:

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Please tell me you don’t believe that Constantine was the official founder of Christianity/the Catholic Church. crosses fingers Please, please…

Why would that matter?
Its the Roman Catholic Church either way.

 

[PRmerger]

Wrong.
Jesus Christ was also a man (according to the Church) and the Virgin Mary is certainly not esteemed more than HIm.

And here it is, folks, the icon that I rarely use…but this comment is so much deserving of it:



Really? That’s your response? I will just gift you with this correction then: Mary is esteemed above all men, except, of course, her son Jesus.

That better?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Except feminists such as yourself, are not satisfied with equal status. You want more. You want to be treated better than the male. But under atheism, your religion, both men and women are machines and accidents. Our minds are accidents. There is no need to treat anyone anyway beyond what one considers fashionable but it’s all irrational at the end of the day for under atheism people don’t really exist. There are only collections of matter and energy in such and such configuration which we happen to call a man or a woman, and other collections of matter/energy which we call a stack of hay, a meteor or a tree.

A bit of advice, live and let live. People don’t have to be Catholics. People don’t have to believe in God. But don’t force your views on others and say what others must do. You have no moral right to do that. Your atheism does not grant you that, no matter how much serotonin pulses through your brain’s limbic system.

As usual Tenofovir, you assume too much.
I am a man, and I don’t want to be treated as lesser just because of my gender.

The radical feminists believe men are bad by defintion, saying things like all sex (with men) is rape. Their kind of like misogynists in reverse, except the misogynists (for the most part) just take it for granted that women are inferior. The radical feminists are angry, they think men (as a group) should pay for what we’ve done.
The most radical advocate reducing the male population to more manageable levels.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

The main point about Christianity is that it’s not a made up faith. We can’t change certain things no matter how unpopular they are.

Yes it is.
Unless you believe ALL the various denominations are right.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

And here it is, folks, the icon that I rarely use…but this comment is so much deserving of it:



Really? That’s your response? I will just gift you with this correction then: Mary is esteemed above all men, except, of course, her son Jesus.

That better?

Not really:shrug:

 

[Slaney]

And the big bad wolf huffed and puffed & puffed & huffed…but still the house built on a Rock he could not bring down, goodnight children…:knight2:

 

[George_Stegmeir]

No.
I think everyone (including the would-be female priests themselves) would be happier if the women just left the Church.

That is one of the most smart a**ed answers I have read on this forum. It gives new meaning to the yiddish word “Chutzpah”!!!

 

[nickybr38]

Yes it is.
Unless you believe ALL the various denominations are right.

They’re right in some areas and wrong in others.

The Catholic Church is not made up. Just because those who separated from it have problems doesn’t mean the Catholic Church is wrong.

 

[PRmerger]

Not really:shrug:

:crying:

 

[PRmerger]

I am familiar with Genesis, which seems to say that Woman (Eve) was created both at the same time and after Man (Adam).
I am also familiar with the Pauline verse that says that Man Is Created in the Image of God, but Woman is Created in the Image of Man (which is why Man is better leadership material according to Saint Paul).

Here, again, is where your Fundamentalist roots are gnawing at you, Angry.

Without a Church to guide you with Sacred Tradition it would indeed be difficult to reconcile what Paul says that appears to be misogynistic. That is indeed the problem with the Fundamentalist and Evangelical churches.

But remember that you are in a Catholic forum and, as such, we have the benefit of Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium to guide us into knowing what things St. Paul declared were dogma/doctrine, and what were disciplinary.

 

[PRmerger]

Wrong.
Jesus Christ was also a man (according to the Church) and the Virgin Mary is certainly not esteemed more than HIm. That’s the reason only men are considered fit to be priests after all.

Could you explain what you mean by the bolded, Angry? * What’s* the reason only men are considered to be “fit” for the priesthood?

 

[PRmerger]

To women who want to raise their status by doing traditionally male things (such as earning money and exercising authority) this is a not an attractive idea. In fact you could argue (as Feminists such as the late Mary Daly have) that the Virgin Mary ideal was used to oppress and demean women by teaching that all women should be like her.

How could it be a bad thing to be the Seat of Wisdom? To be a Queen? To be the Mother of the entire Church? To have courage, hope, intelligence, willpower, discipline, or fortitude?

 

[PRmerger]

As I mentioned elsewhere in the thread, in the past one of the best ways to put down a man was to call him womanly or to suggest that what he was doing was women’s work.

In the past? How about even today?

As the mother of 4 daughters I am quite sensitive to misogynistic comments. I hear quite frequently dads rebuking their sons with, “You’re acting like a girl!”

My favorite sport quote is, “You wish you could throw like a girl.”

Moreover, all Christianity would have to do to be attractive to women would be to treat them better than the reigning pagan religions. It wouldn’t necessarily have to treat them as equals (or even that well by modern standards).

Well, it’s heartening to see you acknowledge at least that one little point.

I’ll take it! :tiphat:

So now we’ve established that Christianity treated women better than pagans. And better than Jews.

So who else was around to treat women better than Christians did?

Hmmm…were there any atheists around in the 1st centuries that you could cite that declared women to be the equal of men? (Please cite your source. Thanks.)

 

[PRmerger]

Its also worth noting that Christianity has changed a great deal since the time of Jesus.
From when it became the official religion of the Roman Empire to the Reformation it was the religion of the power elite and status quo in Europe.

Not sure what your point is here.

Perhaps it’s a non-sequitur?

 

[PRmerger]

Why would that matter?
Its the Roman Catholic Church either way.

Actually, Angry, this is another remnant of fundamentalism.

The Church is not Roman. It is Catholic. There are 23 different rites in the Catholic Church, and the Latin (or Roman) rite is only one of the 23 loyal to the Bishop of Rome.

 

[PRmerger]

As usual Tenofovir, you assume too much.
I am a man, and I don’t want to be treated as lesser just because of my gender.

The radical feminists believe men are bad by defintion, saying things like all sex (with men) is rape. Their kind of like misogynists in reverse, except the misogynists (for the most part) just take it for granted that women are inferior. The radical feminists are angry, they think men (as a group) should pay for what we’ve done.
The most radical advocate reducing the male population to more manageable levels.

Just so you know, Angry, men can be feminists, too.

Jesus was a feminist. Pope JPII was a feminist and Pope B16 is a feminist.

Just feminists in the way that conforms to Truth.