M
Melchior
Guest
What’s your point? That if you can cast doubt on his authority you can make a case for priestesses?
Mel
- Status
Mel
M
mikew262
Guest
Thanks for being a thread killer. We are all well aware of the official Church position on this.
E
Eddy
Guest
I think Julianna’s point (without wanting to put words into her mouth) is that Paul was a human being, operating within his own humanity, and speaking into a local church context. Therefore his words may well be understood as speaking God’s words into that location and context, rather than universally.
It is not as if we do not take account of context in other situations. For example, Paul’s call ‘slaves, submit to your masters’ in Ephesians. Paul was writing into a context where slavery was an ingrained part of culture. However, today, I do not think we would want to use those words to condone slavery as it continues to exist in some parts of the world. Contexts change, so our interpretation changes.
The command of women keeping silent was written when Christianity was blowing the gender relations of surrounding culture to bits. Also, surrounding culture meant that women did not have the education, or only had the education from other non-Christian sects, to draw upon. In effect, then, Paul is saying ‘don’t try to run before you can walk’. As for ‘I do not permit a woman to teach’ - note the ‘I’ at the beginning. Paul himself doesn’t appear to be making it a universal command.
And Judaism was ingrained in Paul, with all it’s notions of uncleanliness due to the blood of periods. Paul was not perfect - he acknowledged that himself - and I sometimes wonder how he’d feel if he thought, 2000 years on, we were still attempting to argue that every word of his correspondance should be followed to the letter
But that, of course, is speculation.
It is not as if we do not take account of context in other situations. For example, Paul’s call ‘slaves, submit to your masters’ in Ephesians. Paul was writing into a context where slavery was an ingrained part of culture. However, today, I do not think we would want to use those words to condone slavery as it continues to exist in some parts of the world. Contexts change, so our interpretation changes.
The command of women keeping silent was written when Christianity was blowing the gender relations of surrounding culture to bits. Also, surrounding culture meant that women did not have the education, or only had the education from other non-Christian sects, to draw upon. In effect, then, Paul is saying ‘don’t try to run before you can walk’. As for ‘I do not permit a woman to teach’ - note the ‘I’ at the beginning. Paul himself doesn’t appear to be making it a universal command.
And Judaism was ingrained in Paul, with all it’s notions of uncleanliness due to the blood of periods. Paul was not perfect - he acknowledged that himself - and I sometimes wonder how he’d feel if he thought, 2000 years on, we were still attempting to argue that every word of his correspondance should be followed to the letter
But that, of course, is speculation.
F
fix
Guest
But that official position is the position of Jesus Christ. Who wants to overrule Him?Thanks for being a thread killer. We are all well aware of the official Church position on this.
M
mikew262
Guest
Reason for the poll? Discussion maybe? This is a forum after all. True, the Church will most likely never change on this issue, but obviously many people have an opinion on it and this is a avenue to vent it.For what purpose is this poll?
The Church does change based upon opinion polls. The Church has said that women cannot be ordained to the priesthood. So I wonder why the poll, as there are many threads that discuss the ‘womans ordination’ issue [the pros & cons, the wants & desires and the why nots]?
Is there a purpose like humor [sadistic, bad taste, other], statistics [how many catholics on the forum are for it - against it - did not vote?] Perhaps you just want to get a certain segment fired up…This poll will be forward to the Vatican…or your local ordinary [bishop] for your heresy trial…
Just a questionI wonder sometimes what prompts the threads and especially the polls…
Geez! :nope:
F
fix
Guest
We have heard from Him. He speaks through His vicar on these matters.
F
fix
Guest
L
lizaanne
Guest
I can’t believe that no one has pointed out the defining fact that seals it — priests are acting in the place of Christ, Christ was a man. End of debate. A woman can not be a man. Period. It’s all so simple, I don’t see why it’s this big debate over scripture, context, history, blah blah blah.
~Liza
~Liza
M
MilesXpisti
Guest
Very diplomatic, but inherently incorrect choice of words, Mike. The correct statement can be had by removing the “most likely”. The Church will not, and more importantly, cannot change in regard to this doctrine.
Actually, Christ gave a pretty clear message on the doctrinal authority of the Church for any matter…
F
fix
Guest
I pointed out a fact, not my opinion. A Catholic that thinks the Church is wrong should correct that error in reasoning.
T
Tomster
Guest
Two conditions are required for valid ordination, the male sex and baptism. That women cannot be validly ordained is clear from St. Paul’s Epistles, 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, and 1Timothy 2:11-12, from Apostolic tradition and from the constant practice of the Church. St. Epiphanius remarks that if it were lawful for women to be priests, Mary, the Mother of God, would certainly have been the first.
M
m134e5
Guest
In all kinds of social situations where the women are in control and the men just follow, I have seen nothing but trouble. Why should I think the Church would be any different? I have seen what happens when domineering women are married to husbands with no backbone. It is a disaster (sometimes the marriage falls apart, sometimes the kids hate their dad for never standing up for anything unless their mother tells them to, they discourage masculinity because the wife has trained the husband to discourage it). While there are exceptions, men tend to be more logical, whereas women tend to be more emotional. Those qualities work together for good if there is proper social structure in the group. That is how God made them- and that is why he appointed men as the heads of the household, and to be the leaders in the Church.
The women who truly understand masculinity and femininity will have no problem with the all-male clergy. Those who don’t are the kind who shouldn’t be in leadership positions anyway.
The women who truly understand masculinity and femininity will have no problem with the all-male clergy. Those who don’t are the kind who shouldn’t be in leadership positions anyway.
S
Stylteralmaldo
Guest
I voted no. Women should not become ordained priests.
I liked Pope John Paul II’s response to this question. He essencially said that it isn’t in his power to allow the ordination of women to the priesthood.
Even if he had wanted to ordain women (which in my opinion isn’t clear one way or the other), he made it clear that women were never meant to be ordained as priests which is in the Apostolic Tradition (which as Pope he has a duty to uphold).
I liked Pope John Paul II’s response to this question. He essencially said that it isn’t in his power to allow the ordination of women to the priesthood.
Even if he had wanted to ordain women (which in my opinion isn’t clear one way or the other), he made it clear that women were never meant to be ordained as priests which is in the Apostolic Tradition (which as Pope he has a duty to uphold).
P
puzzleannie
Guest
yet another useless poll taking up space on the already slow overburdened forums.
there is no such think as personal opinion that is relevant on a matter of defined doctrine.
there is no such think as personal opinion that is relevant on a matter of defined doctrine.
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
You are Catholic, right?
I would’ve thought that being Catholic you should understand the Church’s position - or at least understand the authority given her by Christ and guided by the Holy Spirit - so that when the Church says that the priesthood is male-only, well…in the words of St. Augustine, “Roma locuta est, causa finita est.”
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
So then your position appears to be the modernist one that the word of God (Scripture) as well as the Word of God (Christ) must bow down before what society at any given time chooses to believe.
The gospel then becomes not eternal and unchanging, but rather mutable and subject to change based not upon what God says, but upon what ‘we’ say.
The Christ who gave us the radical words and teaching which transcend all time was somehow ‘constricted’ in His own doings (i.e., ‘unable to ordain women given the customs of the times’) or either knowingly or unknowingly ‘sabotaged’ by His disciples who likewise were ‘hampered by a culture which did not value women as much as it should have?’
Strange how for centuries both men and women not only were totally able to accept God’s words as given, and to abide by them with no difficulties, but only since the modern times has this rush to so-called equality permeated and poisoned our lives. When people are supposed to be interchangeable ‘pegs’ with every difference, be it race, gender, emotion, biology, even soul, reduced to a ‘lowest common denominator’ lest someone, somewhere, be ‘offended’ by being perceived of as ‘not equal’ to any other individual–yet that ‘lowest common denominator’ is placed simultaneously as being somehow ‘superior’ to any and every being that ever existed, including God himself–we have these spectacles of people so caught up with ‘getting my RIGHT’ that they ignore their responsibilities as created beings to follow the plan of their Creator, trying to make themselves into their own Creator.
P
Potato1
Guest
You should be a moderator, or a playgound supervisor.
It is ironic that if someone offers an popinion backed with fact or a factual statemnet you attack them as not letting others air thier opinions. But as the saying goes, don’t let the facts get in the way. Yes these are forums and it is important to note that they are CATHOLIC forums so some opinions are overriden by the Truth of the Church. Bottom line, stop picking on people and add something inteligent.
M
mikew262
Guest
I have no problem with people defending their position, but do it in a respectful and mature way. Do you have a problem with that?? I attack people when they come across as jerks, not because of their position on a subject. Part of being respectful and mature, is while you may disagree with what the other person is saying, you still have respect for their opinion. Many here on this forum lack these skills.You should be a moderator, or a playgound supervisor.
It is ironic that if someone offers an popinion backed with fact or a factual statemnet you attack them as not letting others air thier opinions. But as the saying goes, don’t let the facts get in the way. Yes these are forums and it is important to note that they are CATHOLIC forums so some opinions are overriden by the Truth of the Church. Bottom line, stop picking on people and add something inteligent.
A forum is place to exchange ideas in a respectful and mature manner. BTW, you wouldn’t want me as a moderator. There would be some major house cleaning done.
P
prodigal-sun
Guest
So what you are saying is the bible is wrong. Oh I know lets just rewrite that book or better take that book right out of the bible. It is after all wrong.
and to answer your other silly remarks… no!
Peace!
- Status