Pope reaffirms ban on women priests

[AngryAtheist8]

Then that’s very Christian of you, Angry.

Hey…

No need to be insulting

 

[AngryAtheist8]

The Church is not simply a secular institution.

As a Catholic, I believe that the Church was instituted and given authority by God Himself.

I do NOT believe, as you apparently do, that the Church is simply a ‘made by men’ group with ‘made by men’ rules.

You’re right in the sense that no purely ‘secular’ group would be an equal comparison.

:

You are right about one thing.
I do acknewledge the Catholic Church as a man-made institution.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

But say, AA. You know, Catholics are NOT the only people who believe that their Church was founded by God and who believe that the role of the priest or leader is, as given by God, for men only.

There is: The Orthodox Church.

There is: Orthodox Judaism (which of course came from classical Judaism and retains its teachings on male-only priesthood.

There are: ‘The Muslims.
The Amish.
Many fundamental, AKA "Bible believing churches’.

Historically speaking until the very recent times (within the last 40 years or so) we would have seen virtually all Protestant and Jewish groups as well.

.

Slavery has been an accepted part of human societies for about as long.
Does that give the institution of slavery moral weight?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

What makes you think that those in Heaven are separate from those on Earth?

And yes, you do not seem to understand what a hierarchy is.

Priests are servants.

Our hierarchy is more like a lower-archy.

The more one rises in responsibility–from priest to bishop to cardinal to Pope --the more of a servant, and a servant to more and more–that one is.

LOL

You make me laugh Ergo.

You truly do.

Lets add an actual definition to your subjective analysis:

Hierarchy:

1. any system of persons or things ranked one above another.
2. government by ecclesiastical rulers.
3. the power or dominion of a hierarch.
4. an organized body of ecclesiastical officials in successive ranks or orders: the Roman Catholic hierarchy.
5. one of the three divisions of the angels, each made up of three orders, conceived as constituting a graded body.

Source:
dictionary.reference.com/browse/hierarchy

 

[AngryAtheist8]

You know, you’ve misjudged this more than once.

The Church does not go around defining anything.

The Church goes around proclaiming what GOD has taught and is teaching now.

**None of what the Church says is based on the Church reaching out and saying, “Hey, we have DECIDED that X is wrong.”

All of what the Church says (regarding right and wrong, ie. faith and morals) is what God has said. **

Power? What power?

The Church has been patiently REMINDING people of what GOD HAS SAID for 2000 years. But every individual who hears has the POWER to accept or deny that teaching of God.

Some times enough individuals listen, and follow what God says. Then YOU say, “The Church is out for power and wants people to do what IT says.” (I repeat, the Church ONLY says what GOD has already said. It doesn’t make up things on its own.)

And some times enough individuals refuse to listen and follow what God says. Then YOU say, “See, the Church is losing people and power because it is trying to force people to do what it says.”

(This way, no matter what, you have judged it’s always the Church and power struggle. But it’s not. It is the Church teaching what GOD has said, and whether people listen or not.)

And who decides just what God has said?

Why its high ranking members of the Catholic Church (basically the Pope and the other Bishops)

Its really that simple

 

[PRmerger]

And who decides just what God has said?

Why its high ranking members of the Catholic Church (basically the Pope and the other Bishops)

Its really that simple

Let’s just examine this concept you’re proposing for a minute.

You’re claiming that the Catholic Church just makes up the rules as it sees fit.

Like a 5 year old deciding to make his own rules. He can eat all the candy he wants. He can go to bed when he wants. He doesn’t have to pick up any of his toys. Those are the rules that a 5 year old would make, if he were king of the world.

Imagine a 5 year old making up rules like: you can’t eat everything you want. You can’t go to bed whenever you want. You can’t do everything you want.

No 5 year old would ever make those kinds of self-imposed limitations, would he?

Similarly, if it’s as you truly are positing, and the Church is just making it up, why would she proclaim disciplines like a celibate clergy? Or doctrines like divorce and re-marriage is adultery?

Don’t you think a Church that’s just making it up as she goes along would be, well, a bit more self-indulgent? If we’re going to follow your logic, the Church ought to be proclaiming things like, “The pope and bishops can have as much sex, and with anyone they like!” and “The laity can do that as well!”

Now, please don’t get all “I can’t believe you’re comparing the Church to a 5 year old” on me and demonstrate your inability to understand how things can be alike as analogs only, 'kay?

 

[PRmerger]

I have.
For that matter I have defended Christians *on this *forum

Then that’s very Christian of you, Angry.

Hey…

No need to be insulting

I guess I’d rather be insulting than propose a lie, like “Defending victims is part of the atheistic ethos.”

Bottom line: if you have defended Christians it’s only because the Christian gospel has been spread to you. If you followed the pagan world view you would have left the perceived weaklings out in the cold to die.

 

[RobbyS]

Slavery has been an accepted part of human societies for about as long.
Does that give the institution of slavery moral weight?

A snide remark. The Church , as a human society, has institutions comparable to a nation.

 

[Irishgal49]

While there is a large body of scripture and tradition that points to the will of God being opposed to the ordination of women priests. The opposite is true when it comes to women deacons. The early church was full of such women. At what point was this expression of godly work taken from them?

When power and money became involved.

 

[Irishgal49]

And who decides just what God has said?

Why its high ranking members of the Catholic Church (basically the Pope and the other Bishops)

Its really that simple

I want to say that you put together the most convincing, logical, and articulate arguments and I’m totally impressed. I go back and forth from atheist to Catholic and back. It’s a real struggle for me but many of my atheist friends were great people, but often just yelling and insulting. You really put out some questions that really leave little room for argument, sadly they are lost in here…wherever I end up, I appreciate it when someone is intelligent and presents their ideas in a mature manner, I am learning a lot reading these posts from both sides. You won on several key points. “The end justifying the means” is probably the most convincing.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Let’s just examine this concept you’re proposing for a minute.

You’re claiming that the Catholic Church just makes up the rules as it sees fit.

Like a 5 year old deciding to make his own rules. He can eat all the candy he wants. He can go to bed when he wants. He doesn’t have to pick up any of his toys. Those are the rules that a 5 year old would make, if he were king of the world.

Imagine a 5 year old making up rules like: you can’t eat everything you want. You can’t go to bed whenever you want. You can’t do everything you want.

No 5 year old would ever make those kinds of self-imposed limitations, would he?

Similarly, if it’s as you truly are positing, and the Church is just making it up, why would she proclaim disciplines like a celibate clergy? Or doctrines like divorce and re-marriage is adultery?

Don’t you think a Church that’s just making it up as she goes along would be, well, a bit more self-indulgent? If we’re going to follow your logic, the Church ought to be proclaiming things like, “The pope and bishops can have as much sex, and with anyone they like!” and “The laity can do that as well!”

Now, please don’t get all “I can’t believe you’re comparing the Church to a 5 year old” on me and demonstrate your inability to understand how things can be alike as analogs only, 'kay?

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.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Let’s just examine this concept you’re proposing for a minute.

You’re claiming that the Catholic Church just makes up the rules as it sees fit.

Like a 5 year old deciding to make his own rules. He can eat all the candy he wants. He can go to bed when he wants. He doesn’t have to pick up any of his toys. Those are the rules that a 5 year old would make, if he were king of the world.

Imagine a 5 year old making up rules like: you can’t eat everything you want. You can’t go to bed whenever you want. You can’t do everything you want.

No 5 year old would ever make those kinds of self-imposed limitations, would he?

Similarly, if it’s as you truly are positing, and the Church is just making it up, why would she proclaim disciplines like a celibate clergy? Or doctrines like divorce and re-marriage is adultery?

Don’t you think a Church that’s just making it up as she goes along would be, well, a bit more self-indulgent? If we’re going to follow your logic, the Church ought to be proclaiming things like, “The pope and bishops can have as much sex, and with anyone they like!” and “The laity can do that as well!”

Now, please don’t get all “I can’t believe you’re comparing the Church to a 5 year old” on me and demonstrate your inability to understand how things can be alike as analogs only, 'kay?

Not necessarily.
Remember that the Soviets (who were definitely not relying on any sort of divine guidance or plan to rule) made some very harsh laws to govern themselves.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I guess I’d rather be insulting than propose a lie, like “Defending victims is part of the atheistic ethos.”

Bottom line: if you have defended Christians it’s only because the Christian gospel has been spread to you. If you followed the pagan world view you would have left the perceived weaklings out in the cold to die.

You’re not accounting for the individuality factor.
Not all pagans were monsters (or even unkind) and its obvious that not all Christians are nice (or even good).

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
Slavery has been an accepted part of human societies for about as long.
Does that give the institution of slavery moral weight?

A snide remark. The Church , as a human society, has institutions comparable to a nation.

Ergo and I were talking about patriarchy, specifically the long traditional of excluding women from positions of leadership and prestige in Western religions. And I was pointing out that slavery has a pedigree that’s almost as good.

What are* you* talking about?

 

[AamahJones]

plus.google.com/?utm_source=embedded&utm_medium=googleabout&utm_campaign=link

Good article.

 

[nickybr38]

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.

Bishops don’t define moral law. The Pope can sit down and formally declare something but the Bishops cannot.

 

[nickybr38]

Exactly.
The Church reserves for itself the right to define what is right and wrong.
If most people shared that view (which is what the Church thinks would be proper) then the Catholic Church would have virtually unlimited power.

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.

 

[PRmerger]

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?

 

[PRmerger]

Not necessarily.
Remember that the Soviets (who were definitely not relying on any sort of divine guidance or plan to rule) made some very harsh laws to govern themselves.

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.

 

[PRmerger]

You’re not accounting for the individuality factor.
Not all pagans were monsters (or even unkind) and its obvious that not all Christians are nice (or even good).

To be sure.

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