L
Lochias
Guest
This. Dishonesty is never becoming.
- Status
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
As I have said before:
These would-be priestesses would be better off joining a religion that has more respect for the capabilities of women
As I have said before:
These would-be priestesses would be better off joining a religion that has more respect for the capabilities of women
It doesn’t think much of women’s abilities as spiritual leaders.Only if one buys into your bare assertion fallacy that the Catholic Church doesn’t respect those capabilities.
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_15081988_mulieris-dignitatem_en.html
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
So what?
As Catholicism makes clear, the Virgin Mother was a very special case.
In what tangible and/or meaningful way does Marian adoration increase the status of women?
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Originally Posted by vsedriver
What you should have said is that would-be priestesses would be better off joining a religion that allows priestesses.
It is a lie that the Catholic Church doesn’t respect the capabilities of women. Please don’t malign the Church because of your opinion.
What you should have said is that would-be priestesses would be better off joining a religion that allows priestesses.
It is a lie that the Catholic Church doesn’t respect the capabilities of women. Please don’t malign the Church because of your opinion.
How is it dishonest to say that the Catholic Church doesn’t think women are good enough to be priests?
A
adrift
Guest
Because it has nothing to do with “good enough”. That is an opinion you are expressing not the truth. It has nothing to do with the capabilities but what is designed by God. No where will you find a Church document that says the Church does not think women are “good enough” to be a priestess rather you find the Church saying we do not have the power. It is dishonest because it is not what the Church “thinks”.
P
PRmerger
Guest
And this is something that no Christian ought to do–find a church that agrees with her own ideas.
For if one is a believer in Christ, one would naturally acknowledged that everything that Christ proclaims is not going to be in agreement with one’s own ideology. That would be creating a god in one’s own image.
So any believer ought not be church shopping to find a church that matches all of her ideologies.
(NB: You need not point out, “Well, I’m an atheist anyway, so I don’t believe in God”. We got it. For the sake of this discussion, however, you have to stipulate, “If there were a God, it would make sense that not all of God’s revelation would be on concert with my own ideas”.)
T
TarkanAttila
Guest
Because that’s not how we see women. We see women as operating in a different capacity from men. They’re different. Distinct.
Man is not inferior to woman. Woman is not inferior to man. Man and woman are not equals. They are two distinct and different forms of homo sapiens which must be in concord with one another, for without the one, you cannot have the other.
There are some things a man is capable of doing that a woman is not. And there are some things a woman is capable of doing that a man cannot.
One of these sex-specific abilities is the ability of women to bear children. See, unless a man were to mutilate his own body to resemble that of a woman’s, he could not carry a developing child.
Another is the ability of the man to be validly ordained a priest. “Male and female He created them.” And that includes the soul, which is what is changed in ordination, not the body.
But you cannot mutilate the soul to make it resemble a man’s - for we do not even know what a soul looks like! It is a part of us, I think, we will never be able to change alone, no matter what else we can.
A
adrift
Guest
I guess different people reading the same thing will come away with different views. You may find it doesn’t think much of woman because that is what you expected to find?
M
mangy_dog
Guest
A lot of empty discussion about a matter that will not change.
It will remain the way it is because the gates of hell will not prevail against the Catholic Church.
Blah, blah, blah priestess…the answer to the question is NO.
Blah, blah, blah why not…wah, wah, wah…(stomping of feet)…because it is the decision of Jesus Christ for His church; the magisterium; Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture.
It would be an abomination that would cause desolation. God help us.
It will remain the way it is because the gates of hell will not prevail against the Catholic Church.
Blah, blah, blah priestess…the answer to the question is NO.
Blah, blah, blah why not…wah, wah, wah…(stomping of feet)…because it is the decision of Jesus Christ for His church; the magisterium; Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture.
It would be an abomination that would cause desolation. God help us.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
There’s more to it than that.
If I was a parent (female or otherwise) and I had a daughter I would not want her brought up in a religion that discriminates against women.
For that matter, if I had sons I wouldn’t want them brought up to think of women as inferior:shrug:
If these women really believe Catholicism regards them as lesser, there are all sorts of reasons that they should leave. Especially if their mothers.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Because it isn’t a question of being ‘good enough.’
Hey, beer and pretzels are good enough to eat. So are cookies and milk.
But the Eucharist may ONLY be confected with bread and wine.
Does that mean the Church thinks beer and pretzels and cookies and milk aren’t ‘good enough’ to be the Eucharist?
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Define ‘tangible and meaningful’.
Because we have answered you countless times and unfortunately you seem to have the relativist opinion that because it isn’t tangible or meaningful for you**** that it isn’t tangible or meaningful for anybody else.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Many of us are mothers, AA, and we know that the Church neither discriminates against women or teaches that women are inferior to men.
You know, I have often heard how ‘narrow minded’ religious people supposedly are. . .yet here YOU are having the narrowest view of what constitutes appropriate views toward men, women, religion, etc.
Where is your tolerance toward the views of others? Haven’t you said before that what ‘works’ for one should be given as much approval as what works for another?
I’m disappointed in you . .
P
PRmerger
Guest
And if they leave, then they are church shopping.
And church shopping for a church that proclaims everything that they happen to believe is, well, creating a god in one’s own image, right?
(Yes, you don’t believe in God, but if you did, and this God established church(es)–which you must stipulate for this discussion to be of any utility–then you must acknowledge that this God isn’t going to proclaim everything that you agree with. **There’s going to be SOME THINGS which are disagreeable to you. ** Are you in agreement with the bolded part, Angry? Or are you of the belief that God is always going to have the same beliefs as the believer?)
A
adrift
Guest
No need to add as you have expressed it well:thumbsup:Many of us are mothers, AA, and we know that the Church neither discriminates against women or teaches that women are inferior to men.
You know, I have often heard how ‘narrow minded’ religious people supposedly are. . .yet here YOU are having the narrowest view of what constitutes appropriate views toward men, women, religion, etc.
Where is your tolerance toward the views of others? Haven’t you said before that what ‘works’ for one should be given as much approval as what works for another?
I’m disappointed in you . .
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
I don’t claim to be completely unbiased:shrug:I guess different people reading the same thing will come away with different views. You may find it doesn’t think much of woman because that is what you expected to find?
Virtually everyone is biased to some extent.
Though I try to be objective.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
And as I have been saying, everyone would be happier if these wannabe priests left for a more welcoming church:shrug:
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
As you wish:
Tangible:
- capable of being touched; discernible by the touch; material or substantial.
- real or actual, rather than imaginary or visionary: the tangible benefits of sunshine.
- definite; not vague or elusive: no tangible grounds for suspicion.
- (of an asset) having actual physical existence, as real estate or chattels, and therefore capable of being assigned a value in monetary terms.
dictionary.reference.com/browse/tangible?s=t
Meaningful:
full of meaning, significance, purpose, or value; purposeful; significant: a meaningful wink; a meaningful choice.
Link to source:
dictionary.reference.com/browse/Meaningful?s=t
P.S. It seems pretty clear to me that Marian adoration doesn’t meet this standard when it comes to raising the status of women.
A
adrift
Guest
It is clear that the biase you admit to is showing. Providing a defintion proved what?
other than demonstrating Tantum ergo’s point.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
What does ‘happiness’ have to do with Truth?
Sure you can pursue Truth and find happiness in doing so. (As a Catholic Christian I have found Truth in Jesus and His Church, and I am ‘happy’.)
But you can also pursue Truth and not be all that happy about it. (Remember St. Augustine’s famous prayer, “Lord, make me chaste–but not yet”.) IOW, St Augustine thought that in following Truth he would lose the ‘earthly happiness’ of illicit sexual gratification.
But when St Augustine finally accepted Truth he found that TRUE happiness was more than the kind of fleeting carnal satisfaction that he thought (wrongly) was what happiness was all about.
If ALL that mattered in life was simply living for one’s ‘happiness on earth’, you’d have a valid argument AA. . .
but it isn’t.
We would be very POOR Christians if we would deny these women, or indeed anybody, even angry atheists, the chance to experience Truth (and ultimate eternal joy) because in the pursuit of truth they might be, for a period of time on earth, ‘unhappy.’
Do we want people to be unhappy? No. But let’s face it. Nobody on earth is every going to be 100% ‘happy’ from birth to death. Even the ‘happiest’ events have ‘thorns’ if you will.
I’ll bet that Jesus, in His walk to the Cross, was FAR from happy. In fact it would have appeared to everybody that far from succeeding in His mission, He had failed spectacularly. He had been beaten, mocked, insulted, and was now on His way to a painful death – a death He had prayed would be spared Him.
But instead of railing at the people (and heaven knows He could have), instead of taking the easy ‘satisfying’ way out, Jesus listened to His Father.
If these women ‘wannabes’ had a real understanding of Christ and His teachings, they would want to listen to Him and NOT to themselves. They would be trying to satisfy God and not themselves. They would understand that they were being tempted by the great ‘lie’ of ‘You shall be like god’. And so no, we don’t want them to go wandering off someplace where their errors will be accepted as truth. We want them to stay and to embrace that big-T Truth, to repudiate their errors and to accept the real Truth. That’s what we pray for.
- Status