Pope reaffirms ban on women priests

[AngryAtheist8]

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:

I wish I had a job where my day ended before 2pm

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
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”!!!

Thank you.

I do try

 

[AngryAtheist8]

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.

FYI-my parents were hippies and drifted from church to church when I was growing up.
Though my most profound (and negative) experience with religion was when my parents joined the apocalypse cult known as the Church Universal and Triumphant (led by a woman calling herself Elizabeth Claire Prophet) in the 1980s.
Fortunately, my parents saw the light when the world did not end in nuclear fire (as the C.U.T. foretold) and it became more and more apparent to me the way that religion is used to control people.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

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

I forget what the theological term is, but basically their acting in place of Christ.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

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?

Have you ever heard the phrase “Mother Mary meek and mild”?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

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.”

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.)

Not that I’m aware of.
People generally didn’t admit to being atheists when living under theistic governments had could easily have them killed.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
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?

My point is:
Just like so many other things about the Catholic Church (such as its status as the official religion in many countries) the way that it treats and regards women has probably changed a great deal over the centuries.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

FYI-my parents were hippies and drifted from church to church when I was growing up.
Though my most profound (and negative) experience with religion was when my parents joined the apocalypse cult known as the Church Universal and Triumphant (led by a woman calling herself Elizabeth Claire Prophet) in the 1980s.
Fortunately, my parents saw the light when the world did not end in nuclear fire (as the C.U.T. foretold) and it became more and more apparent to me the way that religion is used to control people.

Don’t you really mean that because of your personal experiences, you saw that some peopleused their interpretation of religionone possible tool to achieve some kind of power/control? Can you name anything which people cannot use to 'control people? IOW, is the religion the problem or is the person who is misusing it the problem?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

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.

Yes it is.
You’re practically admitting in it the text above.
Its led by the Bishop of Rome and its capital is in Rome (it would still be the Eternal City itself if the Italians hadn’t taken it from the Church at bayonet point).

The Catholic Church is in many ways all that remains of the Roman Empire.

 

[nickybr38]

Don’t you really mean that because of your personal experiences, you saw that some peopleused their interpretation of religionone possible tool to achieve some kind of power/control

? Can you name anything which people cannot use to 'control people? IOW, is the religion the problem or is the person who is misusing it the problem?

Also, is the religion the problem or are the people who are willingly acting contrary to their conscience the problem?

Not all religion is bad, just because some religions are. Just as not all governments are bad just because some are.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Don’t you really mean that because of your personal experiences, you saw that some peopleused their interpretation of religionone possible tool to achieve some kind of power/control

? Can you name anything which people cannot use to 'control people? IOW, is the religion the problem or is the person who is misusing it the problem?

Both.

Let you give an (extreme) example.

Are nuclear weapons the problem or are the people who build and and might use nukes the problem?

The answer of course is both. Because the people created the nukes (just like people create religions) and are all too likely to use them for bad ends.

 

[LilyM]

Have you ever heard the phrase “Mother Mary meek and mild”?

Have you never heard that Jesus called Himself ‘meek and humble of heart’ as well? And asked all His followers, male as well as female, to seek to be last rather than first? And Himself never claimed any earthly kingdom but instead took the form of a slave as Paul says?

 

[nickybr38]

Both.

Let you give an (extreme) example.

Are nuclear weapons the problem or are the people who build and and might use nukes the problem?

The answer of course is both. Because the people created the nukes (just like people create religions) and are all too likely to use them for bad ends.

… do you believe in absolute freedom or do you believe people should be controlled for their own good?

Because absolute freedom says there is nothing inherently wrong with man building a nuclear bomb… but it sounds like you don’t necessarily think bombs are good.

If you believe man should be free to create that bomb then shouldn’t man also be free to follow whatever religion he chooses?

 

[PRmerger]

FYI-my parents were hippies and drifted from church to church when I was growing up.
Though my most profound (and negative) experience with religion was when my parents joined the apocalypse cult known as the Church Universal and Triumphant (led by a woman calling herself Elizabeth Claire Prophet) in the 1980s.
Fortunately, my parents saw the light when the world did not end in nuclear fire (as the C.U.T. foretold) and it became more and more apparent to me the way that religion is used to control people.

Ah, I see, then. That explains a lot.

This is not to be understood in a snarky manner.

It just does put a little piece in the puzzle.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Have you never heard that Jesus called Himself ‘meek and humble of heart’ as well? And asked all His followers, male as well as female, to seek to be last rather than first? And Himself never claimed any earthly kingdom but instead took the form of a slave as Paul says?

Yes, but virtually all societies (including Christian ones) expect men to often lead and be aggressive. Whereas women are generally expected (an expectation that the Marian doctrines does nothing to disspell) to be deferential.

If I were a woman I would certainly not hold the Virgin Mary up as a positive role model.
For that matter, if I ever have daughters I would not want them to idealize Mary either.
I would want them to have role models that would encourage them to stand up for themselves.

 

[PRmerger]

Have you ever heard the phrase “Mother Mary meek and mild”?

Well, to borrow a phrase from some secularists, “If you don’t like it, don’t use it!”

Nothing wrong, IMHO, with being meek and mild–after all, Dr. Martin Luther King was meek and mild. And Gandhi. Do you think they were not someone to emulate? (Usually atheists like to cite them as heroes, but maybe you don’t. I dunno.)

And someone else was, too…

Was it…

Could it be…

<drum roll, please!>

JESUS CHRIST, our esteemed leader (esteemed even above the Blessed Mother, in case anyone missed that!)

At any rate, even if you don’t care for the Mary, meek and mild, reference. What about all the others? Don’t they speak to you of a model of womanhood you’d like to have in your life?

 

[PRmerger]

Not that I’m aware of.

I see.

So Christianity treated women better than pagans, jews, atheists…

Who else is left who treated women better than Christianity?

People generally didn’t admit to being atheists when living under theistic governments had could easily have them killed.

If you say so.

One would think that atheism would promote an altruism and heroic standard for proclaiming one’s ideals, but maybe that’s just the what the atheists on this forum like to think about themselves.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

… do you believe in absolute freedom or do you believe people should be controlled for their own good?

Because absolute freedom says there is nothing inherently wrong with man building a nuclear bomb… but it sounds like you don’t necessarily think bombs are good.

If you believe man should be free to create that bomb then shouldn’t man also be free to follow whatever religion he chooses?

Of course.
As I have argued extensively in another thread (here it is, in case your curious: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=659906&highlight=AngryAtheist8) people should have the right to do foolish things, not just what others think is wise.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Ah, I see, then. That explains a lot.

This is not to be understood in a snarky manner.

It just does put a little piece in the puzzle.

I admit I am somewhat biased.
Of course, so are Catholics:shrug:

 

[nickybr38]

Of course.
As I have argued extensively in another thread (here it is, in case your curious: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=659906&highlight=AngryAtheist8) people should have the right to do foolish things, not just what others think is wise.

Good.