SSPX and women in positions of authority

[GerardP]

I can understand the part about it being “un-feminine” to them. I know these SSPX people in St. Marys and they live a very “sheltered” life.

As opposed to a very “exposed” life?

Whenever they go out of KS it is sort of like Dorthy suddenly seeing in color, what she has always seen in black and white. Or like a turtle that pokes its head out of its shell only to see the face of a monster. The turtle shrinks back into its shell and does not come out again for years.

Those of us who have grown up in the modern world find that a good thing. Having been someone who did the club scene and regularly saw immodestly dressed women, when I went to a club a few years after starting to attend SSPX masses, I saw it all with new eyes. No thanks.

I mean if 98% of all women you saw had sleeves down to their elbow and skirts below their ankles, you would be scandalized to see a woman like this ref,
(wearing shorts and a T-shirt), too.
That is the way they are.

And if you’re not scandalized, you’ll want more. It’s not very difficult to go to a strip club where women sell themselves, as the songwriter Jaques Brel wrote: “they bargain their bodies, their virtue all gone for a few dirty coins, when he just can’t go on.”

I exaggerate a little when saying that they are equal to Muslims, but I am frustrated with the SSPX and I just wish they would join the rest of us in the fight to win back the Church from the Liberals.

You mean from the liberals and the liberalism that you personally don’t like. You’re frustrated because the SSPX fights the liberalism you do like.

 

[whatevergirl]

More likely, they are getting the message that radical feminism has invaded virtually every aspect of society.

Sex is recreational fun for most people. That doesn’t make it right to treat it that way and St. Mary’s makes it clear that the purpose of sports is about formation. Recreational fun can be in a pickup game on the kids’ own time.

Learning that something is wrong in the society when gender differences are considered non-existent is character building.
This is no different than the plethora of female “extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion.” The whole point of the feminist agenda is for people to actually see females in more and more male roles. This prepares the way for female priest in the case of EMHCs.

It was the coach and the school policy that determined that the female referee was not appropriate for the purpose that the boys were playing the game. Just as the school forfeited a game so they wouldn’t play against a team with a girl on it, they made the decision for the boys. The principal is more important than the game.

That’s simply not the case. The School doesn’t subject women to abandoning their femininity.

That’s a stretch. Honoring your Father and Mother would also require you to respect their individual roles. Giving creedence to gender blending would not be honorable.

Female coaches are considered radical feminists to you? That’s a rather harsh stance. I think that if we look back to how Jesus treated women–He didn’t seem to view women as unequal to men…Rather, He seemed to treat both women and men equally–and women worked out in the fields, often times, in addition to the duties they had at home. Jesus spoke to women quite a bit…and looked at them as hearers of the Word. I don’t foresee Christ looking at a woman helping out at a sports event in this way, as being irreverant, or feminist. Becoming a priest is a different ball game–no pun intended–but, this has nothing to do with matters of the Church.

I choose to look to Christ–and how He treated women.

 

[GerardP]

Are these people for real? God help them.

Are you for real? God help you.

One of the central messages of the Gospel to me, is the idea of love controlling our lives rather than arbitrary rules.

What does “to me” mean? Is it an objective central message of the Gospel or just your subjective decision that everyone should bow to?

What makes you think that the customs of the people following the traditional Catholic teachings are arbitrary?

It’s not about what rules you follow or exactly how many inches long your skirt is but what the attitude of your heart is towards God and your fellow man.

Yes it is about what rules you follow. That attitude of heart must affect your daily life. The fact that the SSPX people are way ahead of the curve and able to be more disciplined in their behavior than the average Novus Ordo crowds is to be commended.

Integrating your beliefs into your actions is why a person who succeeds in that is called “Integrity.”

If God wanted women to obey unquestioningly rather than participate with their partners in making intelligent decisions, He wouldn’t have bothered to give us a brain and He would have made men responsible for our sins (since we have to do whatever they say).

We are all bearing the penalty of the sin of Adam, not Eve. While Eve’s sin was greater, Adam bore the greater responsibility.

More to the point, how can sport or study be considered unfeminine?

Go watch female ultimate fighting or women’s bodybuilding, powerlifting or whatever other silliness is prominent.

For that matter, who decides what’s feminine; is it not a consensus of society?

Oh my the liberalism is so manifest in your posts. Does the consensus of society determine human nature? Is Motherhood feminine because of the consensus of society?

In some cultures men wear skirts, do the grocery shopping and even take charge of food preparation (all while lording it over the women in their lives); are such men being unfeminine by SSPX standards?

Kilts and male robes are not skirts. Those same cultures have different dress for the genders. Food shopping and preparation is the same as Hunting and providing. Watch the food network if you want to see the difference between masculine cooking and feminine cooking. (selectively though a couple of the guys are too feminine for the example) Good Eats starring Alton Brown is quite a different approach than Everyday Italian starring Giada DeLaurentis.

Call me dense, but I just don’t get how this level of control over individuals jives with the “freedom from the law” projected in the Gospel.

First, no one is free from God’s law. Second, you are completely bound by shackles that you can’t see because of the conditioning in the modern society.

The SSPX doesn’t demand that women weigh a certain amount.

The SSPX doesn’t demand that women must have a certain shape and encourage them to get surgery to look like a Barbie doll.

The SSPX doesn’t make women keep up with current fashion trends so the skirt length goes opposite of the previous year and force them to “keep up appearances” and spend way too much money.

The SSPX doesn’t push particular hairstyles on women through magazines and television.

The SSPX doesn’t encourage promiscuity by being coy about modesty and thinking women should look sexy at a funeral. “In that cute little black dress.” (“cute” is the word that women hide behind to give themselves a rationalization for railing against their better judgment)

The SSPX doesn’t hold up immoral, troubled celebrities as the standard bearers of beauty and success.

The “modern” woman is more enslaved than the Hebrews in ancient Egypt. They are stripped of their modesty, their virtue, their dignity and are “pornificated” by a society organized by the devil to crush the life out of the family that reflects the love of the Trinity.

 

[ProVobis]

Becoming a priest has everything to do with the Church. As Christ chose only men to become priests, it logically follows that He put them in charge of following Him and saving souls. Christ didn’t even ask His mother to go out and preach to the world. Those men who allow women to be put in any positions of spiritual authority over them are actually skirting their responsibilities and undermining the authority Christ bestowed on them.

 

[GerardP]

Female coaches are considered radical feminists to you? That’s a rather harsh stance.

Some are some aren’t. But they are all victims of radical feminism.

I think that if we look back to how Jesus treated women–He didn’t seem to view women as unequal to men…

Equal in dignity but not the same. That is the point.

Rather, He seemed to treat both women and men equally–and women worked out in the fields, often times, in addition to the duties they had at home.

And His Immaculate Mother was not his equal. She was his helpmate after the Wedding at Cana. And He did not choose her to do the same mission as the Apostles.

Jesus spoke to women quite a bit…and looked at them as hearers of the Word.

He looked at everyone as hearers of the Word.

I don’t foresee Christ looking at a woman helping out at a sports event in this way, as being irreverant, or feminist.

I’m sure He would recognize the errors at work and deal with them.

Becoming a priest is a different ball game–no pun intended–but, this has nothing to do with matters of the Church.

The very fact that there is a movement to ordain women who use your very own arguments is indicative that they are related issues.

I choose to look to Christ–and how He treated women.

I choose to look at Christ and how He created woman.

 

[latinmasslover]

Jesus spoke to women quite a bit…and looked at them as hearers of the Word. I don’t foresee Christ looking at a woman helping out at a sports event in this way, as being irreverant, or feminist. Becoming a priest is a different ball game–no pun intended–but, this has nothing to do with matters of the Church.

I choose to look to Christ–and how He treated women.

So why did He not ordain women? Jesus told, either St. Gertrude or St. Brigit, that aside from His Father and Blessed Mother, no one loved Him more than St. Mary Magdalene. She was not ordained. His mother was not ordained. Equal in dignity, but different. Unless God flubbed up in the beginning.

 

[whatevergirl]

Some are some aren’t. But they are all victims of radical feminism.

Equal in dignity but not the same. That is the point.

And His Immaculate Mother was not his equal. She was his helpmate after the Wedding at Cana. And He did not choose her to do the same mission as the Apostles.

He looked at everyone as hearers of the Word.

I’m sure He would recognize the errors at work and deal with them.

The very fact that there is a movement to ordain women who use your very own arguments is indicative that they are related issues.

I choose to look at Christ and how He created woman.

We are not far from agreeing with each other…I guess I’m not seeing how refereeing a boy’s basketball game, has anything to do with the Church, God, etc…? This has nothing to do with ordained priests–which I believe should solely be men…as I follow the Church’s stance on this…but, refereeing a game? The CCC says nothing about such activities, nor does it demean women in any way? I’m not understanding why some in this thread are weaving in ordination of priests with this subject–no one is saying that women should be priests in the Catholic Church. This has to do with a female refereeing a boys basketball game…I don’t see that as having anything to do with ordination of priests.

 

[whatevergirl]

So why did He not ordain women? Jesus told, either St. Gertrude or St. Brigit, that aside from His Father and Blessed Mother, no one loved Him more than St. Mary Magdalene. She was not ordained. His mother was not ordained. Equal in dignity, but different. Unless God flubbed up in the beginning.

Again–why are we leaping from a woman refereeing a basketball game, to oridnation of priests? The two are not related at all. I’m not sure how that even fits into this argument. I said nothing about the ordination of priests–and I firmly stand by the Church’s stance on that. This has nothing to do with priests remaining men…although, I know there are women in the world who would like to become priests…this topic isn’t about the ordination of women into the priesthood…it’s about a female refereeing a game…

If a person has a problem with that–making a claim that women want to become priests, really isn’t comparing apples to apples. Just my two cents.

 

[latinmasslover]

We are not far from agreeing with each other…I guess I’m not seeing how refereeing a boy’s basketball game, has anything to do with the Church, God, etc…? This has nothing to do with ordained priests–which I believe should solely be men…as I follow the Church’s stance on this…but, refereeing a game? The CCC says nothing about such activities, nor does it demean women in any way? I’m not understanding why some in this thread are weaving in ordination of priests with this subject–no one is saying that women should be priests in the Catholic Church. This has to do with a female refereeing a boys basketball game…I don’t see that as having anything to do with ordination of priests.

You have children, I’m sure you’re familiar with the phrase “give an inch and they take a mile.” Essentially that’s what this is, which is why women being ordained is brought up. Coaching boys may not seem like a big deal, but it feeds the feminist mentality. It’s not a religious matter per se, but if people become “cultural feminists” then they’ll bring it into the Church, and then the problems get worse. I just got off work, I hope this makes sense.

 

[whatevergirl]

You have children, I’m sure you’re familiar with the phrase “give an inch and they take a mile.” Essentially that’s what this is, which is why women being ordained is brought up. Coaching boys may not seem like a big deal, but it feeds the feminist mentality. It’s not a religious matter per se, but if people become “cultural feminists” then they’ll bring it into the Church, and then the problems get worse. I just got off work, I hope this makes sense.

Thank you for explaining this–so often, people say things…and never explain what they mean! Ok–I agree with this thought.

 

[whatevergirl]

I would like to add one thing–I might be naive–I’d like to think I’m optimistic, though, in that our beautiful Mother Church has been a rock all of these centuries–and thus, I don’t ever see it bending under the pressure of cultural feminism, or any other cultural/secular effects. It has always been a rock in the stormy sea of secularism, and has never waivered. What happens in the world–is part of the world…we are not of this world–and neither is our Church. The RCC was instituted by Christ–and thus, the rules that it follows and institutes, is from Christ. So, for me, I don’t worry myself with these such issues because our Church is strong and will remain strong–and will never buckle under secularism. This is why I don’t have a huge worry over this female refereeing a boys basketball game…I don’t see that aspect ever affecting the ordination of solely men for the priesthood. Probably more of what I have been trying to say–hope that makes sense.

 

[latinmasslover]

I would like to add one thing–I might be naive–I’d like to think I’m optimistic, though, in that our beautiful Mother Church has been a rock all of these centuries–and thus, I don’t ever see it bending under the pressure of cultural feminism, or any other cultural/secular effects. It has always been a rock in the stormy sea of secularism, and has never waivered. What happens in the world–is part of the world…we are not of this world–and neither is our Church. The RCC was instituted by Christ–and thus, the rules that it follows and institutes, is from Christ. So, for me, I don’t worry myself with these such issues because our Church is strong and will remain strong–and will never buckle under secularism. This is why I don’t have a huge worry over this female refereeing a boys basketball game…I don’t see that aspect ever affecting the ordination of solely men for the priesthood. Probably more of what I have been trying to say–hope that makes sense.

I get it, and your right: the world will never triumph over the Church. I mean really, if Jesus said that Hell couldn’t do it, how could human beings? The only thing I disagree with is your statement that the Church will never bend under politcal pressure. The fact is, she has, and (unfortunately:crying in more ways than one. The promise is that she will not break. We’ve had some popes that have been plain wicked, and that’s putting it nicely. I’m not saying the popes since V-II are wicked, but…misguided in a particular area(s). In not wanting to give the impression that the Church holds women down, She has permitted certain ideas to go (formally) uncondemned for the time being.

Like you, I know the Church will never fall, and so these issues don’t affect me personally. But I believe it to be a major stumbling block for many who lack the understanding of this truth (of the Church not falling, ever). Look at the Mormon community, and even some of the Protestant ones. They’re flourishing, and the women are VERY feminine. They don’t see it as holding women down, but celebrating and embracing the way God made them.

 

[whatevergirl]

I get it, and your right: the world will never triumph over the Church. I mean really, if Jesus said that Hell couldn’t do it, how could human beings? The only thing I disagree with is your statement that the Church will never bend under politcal pressure. The fact is, she has, and (unfortunately:crying in more ways than one. The promise is that she will not break. We’ve had some popes that have been plain wicked, and that’s putting it nicely. I’m not saying the popes since V-II are wicked, but…misguided in a particular area(s). In not wanting to give the impression that the Church holds women down, She has permitted certain ideas to go (formally) uncondemned for the time being.

Like you, I know the Church will never fall, and so these issues don’t affect me personally. But I believe it to be a major stumbling block for many who lack the understanding of this truth (of the Church not falling, ever). Look at the Mormon community, and even some of the Protestant ones. They’re flourishing, and the women are VERY feminine. They don’t see it as holding women down, but celebrating and embracing the way God made them.

Yes, agreed–there are a couple of things to think about though. First, when I hear say Joyce Meyers–or other women who are preaching the Gospel–it does not affront the Church. Here is why. In the Bible–Jesus spoke to women–taught them much–in some cases, the women were to go back, like the men, and share the ‘good news.’ (depending on if Jesus instructed it or not) So, much like those women of Biblical times–such are some of these ministries…HOWEVER–HERE’S THE BIG BUT LOL. These women are not in communion with our Church, nor are they preaching the full Truth–that is the real sticking point. The same holds true for male preachers of other denominations–they are preaching half truths…taking pot shots at ‘organized religion,’ which I just KNOW they are speaking of RCC when they say that. I do listen at times to Protestant radio–as currently, Relevant Radio doesn’t come in well anymore here in certain parts of Florida…and often times, the message of loving one’s neighbor, etc is pretty identical to ours. I tend to change the channel, when they seemingly take pot shots at our beloved Church. So, that is the case with both male and female of other denominations. I’m not sure if it is a gender issues, as much as it is that those denominations do not believe what we believe (papacy, priesthood, women’s roles in the Church, etc.) I am especially comforted when I know that women will never be ordained RCC priests–and will never be able to consecrate the host, etc…These were duties given by Jesus to His 12 Apostles who were men. If other denominations wish to ‘create something else’ that is what they are doing–creating something which is man made. That is where we should have great hope–that the FULL TRUTH is found in the RCC…and thus, these secular things such as a woman refereeing a boys game (I find it interesting that no men came forward for the job? ) should not cause us to worry.

The devil wants us worried…let’s hold fast to the Gospel–nothing will prevail against the Church Christ instituted. I do understand your points though–but take comfort in knowing that those faiths that appear to be flourishing, will not prevail over the one True Church.

(PS–Women working outside of the home–and having places of authority in the work place really is separate from the Church–and Jesus nor anywhere in the Bible do we see there being a problem with women holding places of ‘authority’ in public square) It is in the Church that we must hold true to Christ’s tradition of the Apostolic succession (being men)

 

[Margarite]

I am 18 and I consider myself very conservative, but also comfortable and not restrained.

I wear pants almost all the time, I don’t wear baggy masculine pants, but feminine pants. I know SSPX people consider this horrible. I wear shorts to dance practice and shorts during the summer. My shorts come about half way between my waist and my knees. I am not like the other girls in my dance class who wear shorts short enough to be underwear. I wear short sleeved shirts, I wear no-sleeved shirts, I always wear a high tank top if my shirt has a dive in it. My skirts usually come right around my knee, some slightly higher and some below my knees. My hair has been really short before (right now it is long, but that may soon change) my mom’s is really short about 4" long. I am the eldest of 6 children, 4 girls and 2 boys. I wear modest, comfortable, stylish clothing.
I don’t live a sheltered life, but I am not living an exposed life either. I went to a public highschool (the Catholic one in Vegas is worse than the public ones) and heard the cussing, saw the kissing, and heard about all the bad stuff the other kids did, but just because I was around them did not mean that I had to become one of them. No, I made people stop cussing when they were around me, I never wore immodest clothing, I refused to go on more than one date with a boy (I am not interested in marriage yet) and I would preface the date with, I am just going as your friend. (I only went on 2 dates and I went stag to prom because 3 boys had asked me and they were all too serious about me. I had more fun that way.)
I have missed only two Sunday masses, but that was because my family was snowed in (we were living in Colorado). We try to go to confession at least once a month. We pray the rosary each night.
I have played soccer, tennis, golf, I sail, ski, hike, bike, Irish Dance, and I have loved the experience of all of them. My favorites are golf and Irish dance.
I plan on going to Wyoming Catholic College to study Liberal Arts. After that I am trying to decide whether to be an architect or a CPA. I don’t know whether I want to be a nun or a mother, but I am sure that God will tell me, in the mean time I am getting the best education I can and I am going to get a degree that will help me in my future life.
I was an A-B student in school, but my two sisters who are in high school are both straight A students, and one of them got 100% on her mid-term. Now they don’t attend just any high school, they attend the best high school in Nevada. It is a technology school. One of my sisters is studying Engineering and the other Architecture.
So, we are not dumbys. My parents make sure we also know how to cook, clean, and make a home feel inviting.

I don’t see where men can say that we are less, I would say that we just have different gifts. I think men are inadiquite when it comes to dealing with children, and I think women have the natural desire to deal with children and not work. I think women are equally as smart, it is just that nurturing is not in most job descriptions, and women need to nurture.
My mom has to work. She is extremely good at her job, but she would much rather be home. My dad likes to work. If he is home too long he becomes bored. He likes to spend time with his kids and be home, but after a weekend at home he is bored. It is simply because he is a man.

I am not against men, I am not for women, I just think this bigotry should end.

And Yes, I do want the SSPX to help the Church, not by saying “Our way or the highway” but by becoming part of the community and by joining the fight against the people who are really against the Church. Just because I wear pants, does not mean that I am evil and just because I go to the NO mass (the most conservative in Vegas) does not mean that I am going to hell. I am in the Church, I am fighting against the liberals, and I am fighting against the traditionalists who have abandoned the Church in her hour of need.
You are like the apostles who could not stay with Christ during his agony in the garden. Sure the Church is in turmoil. Wouldn’t any organization that was presented with something new and people took it to the extreme and the only people who could help to bring it back to the middle left because they were too lazy to fight. It is just plain sad.

When I said that the SSPX people were shocked when they came out of St. Marys. I did not mean going to strip clubs. I meant my SSPX uncle coming to my house and seeing me in pants. Gee, I must be horrible. When I said they were shocked, I meant when I go to my grandmother’s house and wear jeans since she lives in the country and I don’t want to get my nice church skirts dirty, and then she won’t talk with my mom (her daughter) for months. This is what the SSPX does. Is this good? I say NO!

I am not a liberal. I am a person who is modest, stylish, conservative, and involved.

Yours Through Our Lady,

Margarite

PS: Sorry if there are misspelins, I wish this cite had spell check.

 

[Margarite]

smac.edu/?0208PressRelease

Press Release - February 19, 2008
It was falsely alleged and widely reported that the decision of St. Mary’s Academy not to allow a woman referee to officiate at a basketball game was based upon the idea that women can never have authority over men. This alleged reason was neither stated nor is it held by any official of St. Mary’s Academy, as evidenced by the fact that the faculty and staff of St. Mary’s includes many honorable ladies of talent and erudition. Logically, St. Mary’s Academy, a Catholic institution, adheres in spirit and discipline to Divine Law. The Fourth Commandment obliges due honor to father and mother, as well as to all authority.
St. Mary’s Academy follows the directives of the Catholic Church regarding co-education. The Church has always promoted the ideal of forming and educating boys and girls separately during the adolescent years, especially in physical education (Cf. Divini Illius Magistri - Encyclical on the Christian Education of Youth, by Pope Pius XI, 1929 and The Instruction of the Sacred Congregation of Religious on Co-Education, A.A.S., 25 (1958) pp. 99-103). This formation of adolescent boys is best accomplished by male role models, as the formation of girls is best accomplished by women. Hence in boys’ athletic competitions, it is important that the various role models (coaches and referees) be men.
In addition, our school aims to instill in our boys the proper respect for women and girls. Teaching our boys to treat ladies with deference, we cannot place them in an aggressive athletic competition where they are forced to play inhibited by their concern about running into a female referee.
Rev. Fr. Vicente A. Griego
Headmaster, St. Mary’s Academy

 

[Margarite]

smac.edu/?0208PressRelease

Press Release - February 19, 2008
St. Mary’s Academy follows the directives of the Catholic Church regarding co-education. The Church has always promoted the ideal of forming and educating boys and girls separately during the adolescent years, especially in physical education.

Well, public schools separate boys and girls in PE and in all sports. And I totally agree that boys and girls should be separated in school. It is a proven fact that both learn better in this situation. But here is a contradiction…

This formation of adolescent boys is best accomplished by male role models, as the formation of girls is best accomplished by women.

Well, if this is so then the boys should only have male teachers and the girls female. After all, don’t we want the best formation possible?

Teaching our boys to treat ladies with deference, we cannot place them in an aggressive athletic competition where they are forced to play inhibited by their concern about running into a female referee.
Rev. Fr. Vicente A. Griego
Headmaster, St. Mary’s Academy

My brothers play soccer and have been playing for about 7 years, and they have never bumped into a ref (male or female). Even if they did it would not be out of disrespect or lack of “deference.”
You cannot tell me that boys in the SSPX have never bumped into a girl. That is rediculous. All they have to say is sorry really quickly and then go on. That is what they would say if they bumped into a male ref, that is what they would say if they bumped into eachother, and that is what they should say if they bump into the woman.
I am not argueing against their right to do this. They should have that right, but since I have very strong ties with people in the SSPX, I want them to come back, and I revolt against anything that makes them stay away from the Church.

Yours Through Our Lady,
Margarite

 

[Nechasin]

PS: Sorry if there are misspelins, I wish this cite had spell check.

Off topic: Get Firefox and you will have a spell check on anything you type on the internet.

 

[SenorSalsa]

just a few comments as i read 9 pages of bigotry and misinformation…

What else do I need to know? Her chosen position for whatever her intentions contribute to the decay of society. Mild as it may be, it joins the flow that leads to the utter destruction of womanhood and malehood. It’s Adam and Eve all over again.
The degradation of woman leads to the downfall of man.

this appears to say its all Eve’s fault Adam sinned. That is not true. Adam sinned of his own accord.

This is simply not true. First women do have authority over young boys in most circumstances. However, in sports, boys are learning to be men. The point of sports is to toughen a boy up so he grows to be a strong man. Sports developed out of the need to prepare for battle.

The point of sports did not develop to prepare for battle, but quite the opposite. The Greeks created the Olympics as an alternative to fighting. Lets get together, party, compete, have fun, instead of trying to fight all the time

there are many other thing i could comment on, but i just dont have the time nor patience. However i will close in saying that are there roles women cant do? yes. Priesthood for example. Infallabely stated, women cannot be priests. Refs? havent seen a Papal statement against that one. Havent seen a bible verse against it. Not in the Catechism, Tradition, etc. I guess that means it isnt such a terrible sin. Surely Mortal Sins are mentioned by at least one of these groups. How do I know? well one must be aware of mortal sin to commit it. Thus, it has to be stated somewhere. Venial sins are often derived from the Ten Commandments. None of these could possibly be skewed as to say Women are intrinsicaly different than Men, and should lead seperate lives, Unable to do anything Co-ed. That is absurd. Woman was created to be a partner for man. To share, not to allocate between

 

[seekerz]

Are you for real? God help you.

What does “to me” mean? Is it an objective central message of the Gospel or just your subjective decision that everyone should bow to?

What makes you think that the customs of the people following the traditional Catholic teachings are arbitrary?

Yes it is about what rules you follow. That attitude of heart must affect your daily life. The fact that the SSPX people are way ahead of the curve and able to be more disciplined in their behavior than the average Novus Ordo crowds is to be commended.

Integrating your beliefs into your actions is why a person who succeeds in that is called “Integrity.”

We are all bearing the penalty of the sin of Adam, not Eve. While Eve’s sin was greater, Adam bore the greater responsibility.

Go watch female ultimate fighting or women’s bodybuilding, powerlifting or whatever other silliness is prominent.

Oh my the liberalism is so manifest in your posts. Does the consensus of society determine human nature? Is Motherhood feminine because of the consensus of society?

Kilts and male robes are not skirts. Those same cultures have different dress for the genders. Food shopping and preparation is the same as Hunting and providing. Watch the food network if you want to see the difference between masculine cooking and feminine cooking. (selectively though a couple of the guys are too feminine for the example) Good Eats starring Alton Brown is quite a different approach than Everyday Italian starring Giada DeLaurentis.

First, no one is free from God’s law. Second, you are completely bound by shackles that you can’t see because of the conditioning in the modern society.

The SSPX doesn’t demand that women weigh a certain amount.

The SSPX doesn’t demand that women must have a certain shape and encourage them to get surgery to look like a Barbie doll.

The SSPX doesn’t make women keep up with current fashion trends so the skirt length goes opposite of the previous year and force them to “keep up appearances” and spend way too much money.

The SSPX doesn’t push particular hairstyles on women through magazines and television.

The SSPX doesn’t encourage promiscuity by being coy about modesty and thinking women should look sexy at a funeral. “In that cute little black dress.” (“cute” is the word that women hide behind to give themselves a rationalization for railing against their better judgment)

The SSPX doesn’t hold up immoral, troubled celebrities as the standard bearers of beauty and success.

The “modern” woman is more enslaved than the Hebrews in ancient Egypt. They are stripped of their modesty, their virtue, their dignity and are “pornificated” by a society organized by the devil to crush the life out of the family that reflects the love of the Trinity.

So now I’m a liberal? Funny, Jesus Himself may have been called that if He walked here today. He was not bound by empty customs imposed on people from without but taught us to let our behavior be guided from within.

That is why He ignored the social customs of the day with regard to women and actually spoke to them (a no-no in the society of His day). In addition to indicating His regard for women He was teaching us to let our actions be guided by not by arbitrary rules and customs but by His principles (not man’s) the protection of which is bequeathed to our Church.

Until all these rules and regulations, do’s and don’ts you’ve posted here become official Church teaching, I’ll follow my conscience and God-given free will, thank you.

 

[GerardP]

just a few comments as i read 9 pages of bigotry and misinformation…

Oh go sing Melissa Etheridge songs about it. “Bigotry and misinformation” are just buzz words used by those who drink the Kool-aid poured out by the modern, pagan, dehumanized world.

this appears to say its all Eve’s fault Adam sinned. That is not true. Adam sinned of his own accord.

No. That’s an exaggeration. It’s not “all” of Eve’s fault. But the fact is that she was instrumental in his downfall.

The point of sports did not develop to prepare for battle, but quite the opposite. The Greeks created the Olympics as an alternative to fighting. Lets get together, party, compete, have fun, instead of trying to fight all the time

That’s a rather lousy argument and some false modern reasoning. The Marathon as one example developed out of the legend of Phillippides needing to deliver messages of military import across great distances. Marathon to Athens and Athens to Sparta. Just look at the sports themselves. Wrestling, Javelin throwing and later we have jousting, fencing and a whole host of other military inspired sports. In modern times it was believed that increasing the vigor of the young would prevent war by making each country a fiercer competitors.

there are many other thing i could comment on, but i just dont have the time nor patience.

Not having time means it’s not that important to you. Not having the patience means that you don’t have the arguments to be persuasive.

However i will close in saying that are there roles women cant do? yes. Priesthood for example. Infallabely stated, women cannot be priests.

Catholic dogma is not opposed to reason. There is a nature in females that is incompatible with the priesthood and it is compatible with males. Avoiding that issue and hiding behind a papal command means that you can’t take what is implicit in the teaching and find it’s corollary in God’s created order. So, you can’t argue that women who engage in “ultimate fighting” are abandoning their femininity.

Refs? havent seen a Papal statement against that one. Havent seen a bible verse against it. Not in the Catechism, Tradition, etc.

Ah…yes. the babysitter Pope argument. Arguments from silence aren’t arguments in favor of something. Do you want to do something wrong until a Pope issues a statement or would you rather stay on the side of right? Popes aren’t watchdogs that give people the right to behave in any way they feel until corrected.

I guess that means it isnt such a terrible sin.

Another exaggeration. No one has called it a sin. It’s been called an error. I guess debating the substance of the argument is too much so you have to set up straw men to rail against.

Surely Mortal Sins are mentioned by at least one of these groups. How do I know? well one must be aware of mortal sin to commit it. Thus, it has to be stated somewhere.

Pius XII gave many allocutions on fashion. He especially condemned the idea that objectively inappropriate and immodest fashions were determined by cultural relativity. He called it an “absurd sophism.”

Venial sins are often derived from the Ten Commandments. None of these could possibly be skewed as to say Women are intrinsicaly different than Men, and should lead seperate lives,

Honor thy Father and thy Mother.

(not honor thy parents as equals, there is a separate way to honor the Mother different from the Father.)

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife.

(there is an implication of inequality here–a warning to men that certain women are under the protection of other men )

Thou shalt not bear false witness… (men pretending to be women, women acting like men.)

Unable to do anything Co-ed. That is absurd.

What is a absured is that anyone is arguing that women and men are unable to anything in mixed company. The argument is about sports and the inappropriateness of women intruding on a man’s sporting event in the name of a false and deceptive “equality.”

Woman was created to be a partner for man. To share, not to allocate between

Woman was created to be the helpmate of the man. Not a co-equal partnership. After the Fall God delivers two separate punishments, one for the man, one for the woman.