Priest stripped of his duties after performing Mass with a woman priest

  • Thread starter Thread starter austenbosten
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok, a womam can no more become a priest than a man can become a mother. It just isnt possible. If you try ordaining a woman, well, you cant. The sacrament doenst “take”. Kinda like trying to wed to members of the same sex. It just cannot happen. Not that the Church willnot allow it, its a matter of it being impossible.

On another note, this priest is 92. Not a great age to be screwing up. Let us pray for his full conversion before he sleeps for the last time.
 
DaddyGirl said:
It’s so difficult to see scripture as authority in this instance, since Jesus never said there can be no female priests.
Click to expand...
Actually there is definite scriptural authority.

Number of women in the Twelve: ZERO.
Number of women in the Seventy-Two: ZERO
Mary, his mother, who Jesus respected and revered, ordained? NO. (this screams out loud WHY she wasn’t ordained by her own son)
Number of women elders, bishops, apostles mentioned in the Bible: ZERO

The dog didn’t bark. Scripture is clear, Jesus Christ never intended to ordain any women.

The Church has no authority from Christ to ordain women. This is so obviously clear, that even a child knows only a man can be a father.
 
Lucky7 said:
I’ll ditto that. I’m fine with a smaller, obedient Church.
Click to expand...
I don’t like the idea of schism.

I admire the Church’s measured stance with people on this issue. They are in error and discipline is not the only answer. It seems that love and forgiveness are more in keeping with the methods of our Lord and his Church. Even people who vigorously disagree can recant and be brought back into the fold.

I supervise many younger adults and if I fired them every time they made an error, I’d be doing the job alone. I can even tolerate them challenging me and the rules without too much rancor. I learned this from people who handled me the same way and from the world’s most patient priest.
 
agapewolf said:
Because its degrading to women.

Other denominations get a lot of things wrong, that doesn’t mean the church should follow.
Click to expand...
In what way is it degrading to women?

The church does not ordain women as priests because it is not authorized to do so.
 
Sarcelle said:
In what way is it degrading to women?

The church does not ordain women as priests because it is not authorized to do so.
Click to expand...
That’s a nice “because I said so” answer. And for many of us, that’s good enough for us to follow the authority of the church. That isn’t the ONLY reason, though. There IS a reason God designed the church this way, and it most certainly isn’t “just because.” Why didn’t God authorize the church to do so? The exploration of that answer can be quite an adventure.

In my reversion days, learning the “Whys” behind the teaching surely helped me fall in love with the law, the church, and therefore Christ even more, because I became so in awe of how absolutely beautiful the teachings were, why they were, and the fact that each teaching is connected to another, and you can’t have one without the other. When you put the puzzle together, then all of them make sense. IN understanding THIS teaching, one might start to accept others, such as artificial birth control, confession, purpose of marriage, etc.

So “because the church said so” does not negate me saying “it’s degrading to women”.
Explanation:

People often view the church’s “hierarchy” as some sort of triangle top down power. THis is the opposite:

Picture an upside down triangle. The pope is at the bottom, IN SERVICE to the church. He has the weight of the world’s souls on his shoulders. Above the pope are the cardinals, then bishops, priests, then laity at the top, with women as the crown of creation. Women have the very special place of bearing children as mothers. This is their role. Men, in EPH 5 are called to love their wives as Christ loved the church, which is to die for her to get her to heaven. Men, in accepting the call to the priesthood, humble themselves in the service to the church, “decreasing” if you will (John of the Cross way). Thus, needing the sacramental grace to live out such a state. Priests are meant to “die” on the cross at the mass. Women are NOT called to die on the cross, they are called to be under the mission, to allow men to love them, to be actively and openly receptive. To have them try to be priests is dragging them to a “lower” state, not intended for them, degrading to their dignity as crown of creation. Motherhood is, in a way, for the purpose of this picture, a “higher” calling.

It’s basic chivalry really.
 
universityprof said:
It seems that the priest did not violate any biblical law, but rather the church’s controversial doctrine which has been receiving increasing scrutiny in the recent past. I think’s it’s time to consider ordaining women as priests. Most other religions do. Why not allow women to serve God in the same capacity that a male (priest) can?
Click to expand...
I suspect a troll may be lurking.
 
agapewolf said:
That’s a nice “because I said so” answer. And for many of us, that’s good enough for us to follow the authority of the church. That isn’t the ONLY reason, though. There IS a reason God designed the church this way, and it most certainly isn’t “just because.” Why didn’t God authorize the church to do so? The exploration of that answer can be quite an adventure.

In my reversion days, learning the “Whys” behind the teaching surely helped me fall in love with the law, the church, and therefore Christ even more, because I became so in awe of how absolutely beautiful the teachings were, why they were, and the fact that each teaching is connected to another, and you can’t have one without the other. When you put the puzzle together, then all of them make sense. IN understanding THIS teaching, one might start to accept others, such as artificial birth control, confession, purpose of marriage, etc.

So “because the church said so” does not negate me saying “it’s degrading to women”.
Explanation:

People often view the church’s “hierarchy” as some sort of triangle top down power. THis is the opposite:

Picture an upside down triangle. The pope is at the bottom, IN SERVICE to the church. He has the weight of the world’s souls on his shoulders. Above the pope are the cardinals, then bishops, priests, then laity at the top, with women as the crown of creation. Women have the very special place of bearing children as mothers. This is their role. Men, in EPH 5 are called to love their wives as Christ loved the church, which is to die for her to get her to heaven. Men, in accepting the call to the priesthood, humble themselves in the service to the church, “decreasing” if you will (John of the Cross way). Thus, needing the sacramental grace to live out such a state. Priests are meant to “die” on the cross at the mass. Women are NOT called to die on the cross, they are called to be under the mission, to allow men to love them, to be actively and openly receptive. To have them try to be priests is dragging them to a “lower” state, not intended for them, degrading to their dignity as crown of creation. Motherhood is, in a way, for the purpose of this picture, a “higher” calling.

It’s basic chivalry really.
Click to expand...
Wow. Thanks for sharing that. I have read a few theological explanations similar to yours, during my conversion. It is amazing how we humans twist things totally backwards and upside down, and then complain about our lot in life.
 
If I had went to this Mass I would have walked out the moment I realized that there was a “womyn priest” there. :mad:
 
Barish said:
I don’t like the idea of schism.

I admire the Church’s measured stance with people on this issue. They are in error and discipline is not the only answer. It seems that love and forgiveness are more in keeping with the methods of our Lord and his Church. Even people who vigorously disagree can recant and be brought back into the fold.

I supervise many younger adults and if I fired them every time they made an error, I’d be doing the job alone. I can even tolerate them challenging me and the rules without too much rancor. I learned this from people who handled me the same way and from the world’s most patient priest.
Click to expand...
But what about those who consider it their mission to change the very heart of the Church? They are not interested in love and forgiveness but rather converting us to their very subjective ideals. (Hint: the bigger picture includes elements of huge political overtones.)
 
3DOCTORS said:
The priest in question … seemed to act out of convictions formed in the context of their own experiences, despite the objective wrongness of their actions and words. 😦
Click to expand...
Blessed John Cardinal Newman wrote extensively about the role of one’s conscience and one’s obligations to follow any external source of authority. Note the word “blessed.”
 
1_with_God said:
There is no such thing as a woman priest…they can call themselves that but it does not make it so.
Click to expand...
The Church teaches that, because of out baptism, WE ARE ALL priest, prophet, and king (or queen). There is very strong evidence that women priests existed in the early church.
 
mdmpsyd said:
Blessed John Cardinal Newman wrote extensively about the role of one’s conscience and one’s obligations to follow any external source of authority. Note the word “blessed.”
Click to expand...
Which requires one to have their conscience properly formed. Cardinal Newman knew this and would have never taught otherwise.
 
mdmpsyd said:
The Church teaches that, because of out baptism, WE ARE ALL priest, prophet, and king (or queen). There is very strong evidence that women priests existed in the early church.
Click to expand...
The priesthood of the faithful is not even remotely the same thing as the sacramental priesthood. There is zero evidence that women priests were in existence in the early Church. Absolutely none.
 
mdmpsyd said:
The Church teaches that, because of out baptism, WE ARE ALL priest, prophet, and king (or queen). There is very strong evidence that women priests existed in the early church.
Click to expand...
Oh I’m just dying to see the primary sources for THAT one.

🍿
 
mdmpsyd said:
The Church teaches that, because of out baptism, WE ARE ALL priest, prophet, and king (or queen). There is very strong evidence that women priests existed in the early church.
Click to expand...
jwinch2 said:
The priesthood of the faithful is not even remotely the same thing as the sacramental priesthood. There is zero evidence that women priests were in existence in the early Church. Absolutely none.
Click to expand...
Tantum_ergo said:
Oh I’m just dying to see the primary sources for THAT one.

🍿
Click to expand...
🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿

I went back to the concession stand and bought enough popcorn for all who are waiting…
 
mdmpsyd said:
The Church teaches that, because of out baptism, WE ARE ALL priest, prophet, and king (or queen). There is very strong evidence that women priests existed in the early church.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry but your comment(s) only exemplify your lack of understanding between the common and ministerial priesthood.
 
mdmpsyd said:
The Church teaches that, because of out baptism, WE ARE ALL priest, prophet, and king (or queen). There is very strong evidence that women priests existed in the early church.
Click to expand...
There were **never **women priests. There were deaconesses, but they were used for helping with baptisms. They were NOT ordained.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top