SPLIT: Women priests possible?

[spectrm]

[from prior]

Faith has been the cornerstone of Jewish and Christian spirituality for over 4,000 years.

That doesn’t mean they have a monopoly on it. Faith predates even Judaism.

Don’t you think it’s a rational and good assumption to suppose that a good leader is somone who actually shares the same beliefs?

For one, I didn’t say I’d make a good catholic leader. For two, I certainly believe an atheist can be a good ‘spiritual’ leader

Why would anyone follow a person no one had any faith in and would accept choices that are not characteristic of the common belief?

Again with your orthodoxy. If you enjoy being a lemming…

Would you follow a homosexual’s lead in how to pick up “hot chicks” or a conservative’s ideas about how to be a liberal?

On the first one, absolutely. They hang out with all the “hot chicks” and know what all of them want. On the second one, anyone who labels themselves a ‘conservative’ or a ‘liberal’ isn’t really either…at least, not in the context they’re discussing.

If so be prepared to bend over to things you might not otherwise accept or be asked to go to hell.

You can ask all you like. I can’t go some place that doesn’t exist. And I take nothing without accepting…that also seems to be in your court…dogma and all…

So you admit you are no longer qualified to give advice in this matter? What you are best qualified for is what you are experience at.

Generally speaking, sure. And I’m pretty good at grinding your nonsense into a fine dust, so I might as well keep doing that, too.

And at this moment that is on advising one how to turn your back on what one used to believe in and run away from it. I suggest that is your only area of current competence that you have demonstrated thus far.

That’s a very educated assessment, and it has earned you an ignore from me. Good day. I hope your god sees fit to punish you for the fool you are.

…<more proselytizing on emotional grounds that you are apparently far to right-wing nutjob to realize are commonly accepted social norms, even in your own church>…

Not seperate by any means. We all come …… Would you call your college professor or your doctor your superior or would you call them your advisors and helpers?

Fair enough on the first part, and it depends on the circumstance, per the second part.

It was the militant feminists who associated “power” and dominance where there was none……

simply stated, your world-view is just to narrow for reality.

Have you ever met a male mother

yes

or tried to make one a mother?

No…but he did and he said it was a lot of fun.

Speaking of ubiquitous phenomena – false dichotomies and faux intellectualism abound these days.[/QUITE]
Tell me about it.
CentralFLJames;5154547:

You sound like a man very much in touch with his inner beitch or are you a woman hitting from the other direction?

Neither you presumptuous idiot.

Your error is imagining that the priesthood is a career path and a job just like other jobs.

Prove it.

Pardon me if all this fawning attention to the poor downtrodden females does not come across as the typical liberal-effeminate man trying to win the esteem and attention of a woman or else a woman who hates men trying to paint all men a bronze age brutes.

I need to do neither…and my wife would laugh at you for all your misconceptions of me. You should really try to get to know people before judging them…I think that’s a lessons somewhere in that book of yours too.

James

Well, fairwell, you nit. You just couldn’t keep your bigoted assumptions and falsehoods to yourself and talk to me on an even keel about justification. You didn’t assess a single point that I made, but instead sought to belittle my ideas and ridicule me every chance you got. There are other people in this thread willing to talk the points.

You’ll enjoy hell, there are plenty of people just as angry as you are, down there…plenty to shout about.

 

[CentralFLJames]

Who are you to claim the only answer that god has? There are thousands of religions and even millions more variations of thought like mine - all with an absolute truth. You ARE arrogant if you truly believe all other ideas should bow to yours.

Ahh, I am gaining ground. I got you now on defense using conditional ah-hominems rather than absolutes. I am taking that as a sign that you are learning and as a leading indicator that you are now about to concede that you are fallible.

For the record, I am not making personal opinions with regard to Catholic teachings. While I am not impeccable personally I believe I have a pretty good understanding of the faith. So what I am saying about Catholicism being the One True Faith while a personal belief is actually a belief I have ascended to from the examples of others who I found to be credible in very way and it is not a think of my own per say. So you did well in wrapping the conditionals around your pithy judgements and so you can now tuck it all away for another day.

The story was written by Jews for Jews…no big surprise he’s a Jew. It DOES take amazing strength (or blaring stupidity…but I don’t believe he was stupid) to die for something you believe in and to take responsibility for your crimes, real or imagined. His list of followers was rather diverse, however. And he claimed to speak for the masses, poor, sick, downtrodden, the dregs of society. Unless, of course, the entirety of my coursework at CCD was complete BS and didn’t reflect the churches teachings.

The actual historical events happened about 40 or so years before “the story” was ever written – and by men who had no idea what they were writing would be assembled into a book we now call the bible and be printed in every language around the world. The truth is the apostles all initially thought Jesus was returning to claim the planet for God in their life times. It was subsequent to the Jews rejecting the apostolic teachings that the message was extended to the Gentiles - who embraced it. Note the applicable principal here - universal teaching (a plurality of peoples) but a SINGLE MONOLITHIC teaching - ONE FAITH with universal appeal through the universal language of virtues everyone could understand (faith, hope, love, charity, sacrifice etc.).

I didn’t blame a thing on them. And the world has always been in utter social, moral, and economic chaos. There’s no such thing as a ‘golden era’. Your Bible is fraught with death, carnage, sadness, punishment - so is the world’s history in my eyes. The modern world IS a shining example of what the world has always been. It’s a wonder we’ve kept it under control even as well as we have, quite frankly.

Don’t you think you are being a tad bit pessimistic in imagining that the bible is fraught with all these negative things? What about the positive aspects of love and good conquering evil and eternal life that climaxes every negative thing and turning our tears of mourning into tears of rejoicing?

It’s very saddening to me to hear this kind of bigotry. I hope one day you’ll recognize that you’re not really the superior thing you think you are and you feel guilt for how you’ve treated others.

good idea.

I see you are back to slinging your ad-hominems again. How ironic that you can’t see the hypocrisy in all this gosh “name calling”. Sigh, and no conditional around it this time. Back to the woodshed…

Now how did I know you would not accept “simple” as a compliment? Occam’s razor is often associated with intelligence. Hmmm - perhaps you are showing some insecurity in this department?? BTW, did I ever state that I felt I was a superior “thing” – whatever that means? Pardon me for so saying but I think you have “a thing” for imagining what others think. Your entire basis for this OP is centered around a “superiority” theme that priests are superior to females and now you are extending the same thing to me. I think the problem is less about others feeling superior as it is you imagining yourself and others as victims. I won’t attempt the diagnosis here online…

But for the record who have I mistreated?

1. belief in god simply because of Pascal’s Wager will fail ‘god’s stress test’.
2. your arrogance is reflected in your presumption I’d have to read the proof - I’ve done this a few times before

1. Agree - but the axiomatic good-sense of the principal should motivate a person to look into the faith and find out how to pass God’ critera rather than assuming He let’s anyone escape an encounter with their creator and skip town so to speak into oblivion.
2. You imagine you know what I think? The God’s honest truth is I imagined you as a competent atheist who would have already read Pascal’s Wager. My comments perhaps could have been better expressed in terms of re-familiarization with the concept. Sorry it was along post and I was running out of text space to elaborate.

[continued]
James

 

[CentralFLJames]

[from prior]

1. see (1)
2. please dissuade yourself from attempts to proselytize me.

1. Check - see rejoinder. 4) Why? This is a Catholic Forum - that’s what we do here. If you don’t like it you can leave.

Hmm…don’t see how that’s directly christian…before the hebrews conquered the goddess cultures, there was a large amount of gender equality. The Jews put an end to that.

Bologna. There were a few cultures who had female priestess to pagan Gods but by and large the women were 2nd class citizens or even sub-human and considered chattel just like oxen, donkeys and sheep to be traded and sold. Female children were often sacrificed to the pagan gods (after being sexually abused) or strangled when their husbands died and buried with them (if royalty - otherwise sold into slavery). The old ways were pure brute domination.

I am sorry if the extent of your period knowledge is formed up on the gnostic fairy tales of Dan Brown (DaVinci Code or his Angels and Demons) where men covered up the spiritual superiority of females and Eve was blamed for Adam’s offenses and woman were intended to be the rulers of the universe. Are you sure you are not a closet Gnostic and not an atheist?

I haven’t asserted there is no god. I merely see no reason to believe there is one. I’ve said that numerous times, you might try reading. And, as explained before as well, ‘spiritual’ is no always ethereal in nature. We all have energies. ‘Spiritual’ training could be (and I practice it as such) is the harvesting of good energies from the self.

BS. If you did not absolutely believe that there was no God you would identify yourself as an agnostic. This neo-idea that atheists are using now to back-peddle against the tide of being called absolutist hippocrites is rather amusing. Give up the ghost and move up the food chain and become an agnostic if you want to admit to fallibility. Otherwise as an atheist you become a hippocrate with this position.

“Spiritual Energies is just a move up into the spectrum of spiritual belief”. Your problem is you don’t know what you are. But what’s clear to me is you are not an atheist. In any case this kind of spirituality has nothing to do with Christianity nor Catholicism and is off topic.

James

 

[CentralFLJames]

That doesn’t mean they have a monopoly on it. Faith predates even Judaism.

But it was the only sort of faith that God liked. Faith of the pagan variety was a brutish faith that metal cuts disobedient flesh and people always operate to reduce their own personal anxiety rather than operate to do what is morally right.

For one, I didn’t say I’d make a good catholic leader. For two, I certainly believe an atheist can be a good ‘spiritual’ leader

The latter sounds like misplaced faith to me. The prior is just double-talk to mean anyone can be a leader if we are willing to live with the least common denominator sort of thinking. Were you advocating the blind leading the blind?

You can ask all you like. I can’t go some place that doesn’t exist. And I take nothing without accepting…that also seems to be in your court…dogma and all…

So if you followed one of those homosexual leaders you admired to find that “hot date” and picked up HIV since she tried to convert him to a poly-faith (i.e. bi) you think you could simply decline to accept it and not go wherever it ultimately takes you.?

Generally speaking, sure. And I’m pretty good at grinding your nonsense into a fine dust, so I might as well keep doing that, too.

You brutish and mean mean man. Are you sure you are not a victim of your own pixie dust here and got some of me in your own eye by incompetently standing down wind of me as you applied your millstone to my neck? How long have you had these violent tendencies? :tsktsk:

That’s a very educated assessment, and it has earned you an ignore from me. Good day. I hope your god sees fit to punish you for the fool you are.

God tells us to call no man a fool or useless else you are at risk of gaining hell. And “earning an ignore” is exactly what hell is all about - none there gain God’s ear. And as Dante said “abandon all hope all ye who enter herein”. I think you would do better to hope for things on the other side of the divide my friend. If He does what you want you will be hearing me for eternity. Have I motivated you to re-consider the consequences of being on the wrong side of Pascal’s wager? I’d recommend that you hope for things that might benefit you not bring you greater personal torment.

Neither you presumptuous idiot.

That’s about the 5th title I have gotten from you. We still have not got to Nazi yet…

I need to do neither…and my wife would laugh at you for all your misconceptions of me. You should really try to get to know people before judging them…I think that’s a lessons somewhere in that book of yours too.

Get to know you? What do you think I have been doing here - I am almost done with my psychoanalyses. You might be surprised to know what you are not.

Well, fairwell, you nit. You just couldn’t keep your bigoted assumptions and falsehoods to yourself and talk to me on an even keel about justification. You didn’t assess a single point that I made, but instead sought to belittle my ideas and ridicule me every chance you got. There are other people in this thread willing to talk the points.

You’ll enjoy hell, there are plenty of people just as angry as you are, down there…plenty to shout about.

A nit? LOL - it’s going down hill now. Talk to you about Justification? This topic is about Women priests. Ahh, you are confessing to me that you are operating under an alias and I have encountered you before on a different OP on justification? No doubt you were banned. Hmm - so many banned these days. Which were you? Can you give me a hint?

Hell? hmmm - you just told us you don’t believe in it.

I am willing to engage you on a level playing field if you want to start a new OP on whatever it is you are really interested in. But you need to stop role playing an atheist - you are giving them all a bad name by showing too much faith that keeps slipping out from under your skirt bro.

James

 

[pickguard1]

Who are you to claim the only answer that god has? There are thousands of religions and even millions more variations of thought like mine - all with an absolute truth. You ARE arrogant if you truly believe all other ideas should bow to yours.

I’ll defend James here,

There ARE ostensibly millions of religions (or at least there have been throughout history, possibly). But there is no arrogance in claiming that one’s own faith supercedes all others, especially if that faith confesses that it is the only True Faith! How can one be a believing Catholic and not believe that his/her faith is superior? If one believes in what Christ taught, and believes the Church was established by Him, and that His Church’s teachings are just an extension of His Revelation or operations of the Holy Spirit (Who is God), it would be diametrically opposed, (and completely irrational), to concede that any other faith even approaches equality with it!

You can’t “believe” that two plus two equals four, and then say that someone who “believes” that two plus two equals eight might have a correct (but different), or even equal belief system.

Having faith in Christ necessitates believing that those who don’t are, in some way or another, “wrong” on certain points of their belief systems. Whether or not they are culpable for that lack of correct belief is entirely up to God alone. But we CAN objectively say that our faith is THE ONLY TRUE FAITH, without any arrogance whatsoever, simply because we believe it is so. Ultimately, to not believe that is so is to deny Christ.

 

[diggerdomer]

Again, with the exception of the sacraments, abbesses DID have authority equal to bishops. Please note the following quote:

**The Catholic Encyclopedia **by Charles George Herbermann, Charles Herbermann G., Edward A. Pace

"In medieval times the Abbesses of the larger and mre important houses were not uncommonly women of great power and distinction, whose authority and influence rivalled, at times, that of the most venerated bishops and abbots. In Saxon England ‘they had often the retinue and state of princessess. Especially when they came of royal blood. They treated with kings, bishops, and the greatest lords on terms of perfect equality; . . . they were present at all great religious and national solemnities, at the dedication of churches, and even, like the queens, took part in the deliberations of the national assemblies, and affixed their signatures to the charters therein granted.’ (Montalember, ‘The Monks of the West,’ Bk. IV.) They appeared also at Church councils in the midst of the bishops and abbots and priests, as did the Abbess Hilda at the Synod of Whitby in 664, and the Abbess Elfleda, who succeeded her, at that of the River Nith in 705. Five Abbesses were present at the Council of Becanfield in 694, where they signed the decrees before the presbyters.”

Ok I give up. The quote from a 1907 document says it all, and refutes all other historical and theological evidence. So I give in to your claim that “abbesses have the same authority as Bishops.” Which you originally made WITHOUT the above exception you note regarding sacraments…which might lead some to wonder what other exceptions there are you didn’t note.

But, of course, you’re right, with the exception of Sacraments, abbesses and Bishops are equal. As I am sure anyone here who has an Abbess for their local ordinary can tell you. Or any priest whose sacramental faculties are authorized by an abbess, and not a bishop, can also tell you. Or anyone whose parish property/finances is held by an abbess as opposed to a bishop can tell you.

Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.

I do think this has strayed a bit too far and too long from the original topic, and I really doubt further conversation on this particular topic is fruitful.

 

[Marsha_Adams]

Ok I give up. The quote from a 1907 document says it all, and refutes all other historical and theological evidence. So I give in to your claim that “abbesses have the same authority as Bishops.” Which you originally made WITHOUT the above exception you note regarding sacraments…which might lead some to wonder what other exceptions there are you didn’t note.

But, of course, you’re right, with the exception of Sacraments, abbesses and Bishops are equal. As I am sure anyone here who has an Abbess for their local ordinary can tell you. Or any priest whose sacramental faculties are authorized by an abbess, and not a bishop, can also tell you. Or anyone whose parish property/finances is held by an abbess as opposed to a bishop can tell you.

Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.

I do think this has strayed a bit too far and too long from the original topic, and I really doubt further conversation on this particular topic is fruitful.

The reason that I didn’t mention “with the exception of sacraments” in the first place was because naturally I assumed that was a given. Of course an abbess would not perform sacraments, women cannot do that. WHy would I even consider that in the discussion of abbesses? THe most lowly priest performs the sacraments, but the most powerful abbot (if only a monk) and abbess cannot. In terms of authority, secular and religious, however, abbesses had huge amounts of power.

The entire point of which, in case you forgot, was that women can achieve high ranking positions even in the church, but that is not enough for some. Instead they need to whine and moan because they cannot be priests.

And by the way, I find your sarcasm offensive.