The ordination of women as priests

[Spirithound]

I guess for me, being a non-Catholic (or should I say Apostate), there is a lot I don’t understand about the Church(I know a lot, but I don’t understand) Your explanation from a faith standpoint makes sense, for your faith, with the Biblical evidence as proof, but I am still just wondering why, when Jesus did include women in such a bigger way than most other faiths.

You could always ask Him…

Especially in regards to the Resurrection, where women played a pivotal role in bringing the news of Christ’s Resurrection to the other followers. But then again, this is all pretty much coming from an outsider looking in, so to speak. So I appreciate you answering to the fullest extent.

This is a very key point: Women have always played a key role in the Church. We know about the early deaconesses, they helped with the baptism of women. Nuns, religious sisters, and consecrated virgins have shouldered so much of the Church’s praying power, we would not be where we are without them. Women have been martyrs, teachers, nurses, and spreaders of the Good News. They simply do not receive Holy Orders.

For me, gender hasn’t really played a big part in my life. I’ve never really seen myself as a “Girl” or a “Boy”. I always identified more with being “Me”. I was and still am a tomboy, and being a “Girl” really didn’t mean much to me. I guess I’m jsut weird

I think this is part of my point, that gender permeates our entire self, and if you perhaps didn’t play with Barbies, then maybe that shows that Barbies are not a necessary ingredient to a female being.

 

[Rence]

With respect, the reason this is ‘hard to believe’ is that it didn’t happen.
The Popes did not keep ‘changing their minds about abortion’ in the very early Church.
What you have apparently received is a mixed up ‘version’ of the truth in which theologians like St. Augustine (late 4th century) and Thomas Aquinas (not 'the very early Church BTW but the 12th century or so), who spoke of the infant ‘quickening’ at the age of say 6 months in utero have their words presented as a Church teaching which (supposedly) indicated that abortion was ‘all right’ until then.
But that is not the case.

The thing is, one side sites their proof of their “version” and the other does the same thing. There are references on both sides. I’m sure you can imagine how confusing that can be. However I think my last post might have been too vague because I never said the church indicated that it was “all right”. I never said that. I said their position regarding it changed - which it did, with regards to when a soul entered into the equation, which is the bone of contention for Catholics regarding abortion.

A. Though St. Thomas spoke of ‘quickening’, he did not and never did attempt to state that quickening was the ‘cut off’ point for abortion.

That’s true, I know that part. But the teaching regarding when the soul entered has changed. Now try explaining that to someone who is staunchly pro-choice. It’s very difficult to do so.

Depending on circumstances, an abortion in such early times might be viewed as lesser than a later abortion because of such situations as the above,

**That was my point, thank you for making it more clear. Then to clarify the correlation I was trying to make: with regards to when a soul is actually involved in a pregnancy, the Church based it’s decision on previous information, and then revisited the teaching later, and modified it with better knowledge and understanding. There really is no reason to not believe that if they can change their understanding of an issue in the past, they can do so in the future. It really doesn’t matter if one likes the decision, while the other hates it. Just like there are supporters and proponents of Vatican II, there will be supporters and proponents of other issues that come up. Just as their are supporters of current issues, and proponents as well. Frankly, I don’t think anyone will ever be on the same page while here on Earth. If the Pope’s decision doesn’t please someone, he is demon-spawn. If the Pope’s decision pleases someone, then he’s right all along and all is well.

It’s just a shame that people get so angry about these things when in the end, everyone is entitled to their opinion, and neither your nor I will be making these decisions. And while you have been quite civil and quite understanding, and so far that I have seen, go out of your way to educate (unless I have missed it or fogotten such a cantankerous post from you) – others are borderline abusive and insultive. Which for me, flushes their credibility down the toilet. Don’t be surprised then, that if I have a question about something, I might just come to you **

 

[Eddie_Mac]

Basically, because there are times that I want it -that- badly. I’m not really sure why, just that it’s practically an obsession…I’d add more, give some intellectual argument, but I’m having a rather difficult time putting my thoughts into words…explaining myself…

Thought I ought to throw in…

One of my close friends is an Episcopalian priest, and I see nothing different in him than in any of my Catholic priests. They both love God and do everything they can to serve and worship him. If God is all loving and good, would he really abandon and reject others (spiritually, as in ability to consecrate the Eucharist) on the basis of which particular ‘club’ they are a member of?

michaeldaniels, you might want to take a step back for a moment. Your posts are coming off as heated and angry…and doesn’t God teach us patience? Relax, nothing anyone says on here really matters, except when it personally offends you, and wouldn’t it look better, be more priestly even, to take things calmly and peacefully?

I wont argue women’s ordination. It’s something I dream of occasinally, being a priest. And something I’d love to do beyond all reason. But the Chuch has very obviously put its foot down for the moment. I’m sad because I know its a dream I’ll never get to live, but there’s no point in arguing with the brick wall I’ve come up against.

You dream of becoming a priest.

The Church cannot ordain women. The Church is guided by the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit will not ever call a woman to be a priest.

If women feel called to be priests, it isn’t the Holy Spirit.

Time to ground yourself in -]reality/-] Church teaching, form your right conscience and thought in line with the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church.

Eddie Mac

 

[stuart12]

‘‘I’m sad because I know its a dream I’ll never get to live, but there’s no point in arguing with the brick wall I’ve come up against.’’ (Guardian_Wolf)

If you wish for ‘strict justice’ in religion, you would have been thrown into hell a long time ago. Christ did not need to die for us. He did not need to justify us. He could have just left us in our sorry state. We certainly wouldn’t be going to heaven that’s for sure.

Faith is a gift, and so is the priesthood. I would love it if sola fide were true. If there were no purgatory. If all I had to do was sign a little form and I automatically get to enter heaven. How wonderful that would be…however it’s false.

 

[Guardian_Wolf]

You`ll never learn, will you!

I’m NOT ARGUING!!! DEAR GOD!!! What am I, getting attacked just for agreeing with another member?!

Look, I HAVE NOT tried to argue for women priests, OKAY? I know that it will NEVER HAPPEN.

In fact, if you READ any of my earlier posts, instead of just assuming that I’m trying to make an argument, you’d realize that I’m not really arguing for it. I undestand it will never happen. Sure, I’d like to see it, mainly because I’ve always wanted to be a priest, and i saddens me that I can’t.

But I’m not gonna fight it. As I stated earlier.

You dream of becoming a priest.

The Church cannot ordain women. The Church is guided by the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit will not ever call a woman to be a priest.

If women feel called to be priests, it isn’t the Holy Spirit.

Time to ground yourself in reality Church teaching, form your right conscience and thought in line with the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church.

I NEVE claimed it was the Holy Spirit that wanted me to be a priest. NEVER.

and how is it that, just because I’d like to do something I can’t, I’m not grounded in reality?

I’m not saying that I think it’ll actually happen, but God, what’s wrong with wishing?

Kids can wish to fly can’t they? But its pretty obvious it’ll never happen without the aid of machines. Is there something wrong with them for still wishing to be able to?

I’m not pursuing this for crying out loud. It was just somethng I always wanted to do, and recgonize that I -can’t-. Okay, like maybe some kid always wanted to be in the air force, but can’t because he’s color blind. Is he wrong for being sad? Is he wrong to wish his eyes were fine? Even if he goes on after some other calling, does it not still make sense for him to be sad, if the air force was a life long dream?

 

[Toni]

Finally, yes! Women were the first to be shown the Resurrection! *But…*so what? It seems to me, actually despite the women’s role as premiere witnesses to the Resurrection, they were not chosen as priests.

Don’t you think if Christ wanted women priests that he would have appointed the women that were closest to him.
He gave them the gift of taking care of the priests and vocations.

 

[michaeldaniels]

I hear the Anglicans are looking for new heretics

While I already said my part…

I full-heartedly agree Rence.

 

[michaeldaniels]

Yeah…and The Holy Grail was not a chalice either…it was really a royal bloodline descending from Jesus and Mary Magdalene …We must worship the Sacred Feminine!!! --Satire definitely intended

With the male priests disappearing, the closing of seminaries due to lack of admissions, with no one to replace the old, with general dissatisfaction among the clergy and potential-clergy, it’s like all other things that are NON ISSUES FOR SOME PEOPLE: As with all things, it’ll only take time. Only time will tell. And things will keep getting worse until something is done to make it better. I’d like to see a jump in seminary admissions, but sadly, I just don’t see that happening.

I find it hard to believe that if the Holy Fathers kept changing their minds about abortion in the very early Church, that this too won’t change. Maybe I’ll see it, maybe I won’t, but I’m sure it’ll happen. There are some people that believe that women had a much bigger role in the Church at one time. A prime example is of ancient artwork depicting women in liturgical roles. Though they were dismissed as ‘heretical’ by some, there’s no proof of it, and it made others think about those roles and ask questions. And the questions were answered with claims that we had no right to ask the questions. Though, notice we accuse other denominations of denying their members the right to question and seek out answers, and frown upon it. A lot of reasons cited by those against the orination of women priests are interpreted with contrasting meaning by those who are not against it. So who’s right? I guess time will tell.

 

[michaeldaniels]

You might be entitled to an opinion, but when you blatantly and openly spread heresy and your words may lead an uninformed Catholic astray…then it is OUR duty to correct you promptly…that is one of the works of mercy. Your point is flawed, your argument is flawed…and your cancerous talk doesn’t need to spread. That is all there is to it…

Rence:

 

[Rence]

Yeah…and The Holy Grail was not a chalice either…it was really a royal bloodline descending from Jesus and Mary Magdalene …We must worship the Sacred Feminine!!! --Satire definitely intended

Yeah, um, that TOTALLY convinced me. Thanks What would I do without people like you? Thank goodness I have you to set me straight and save me from myself! Poor you, if only you could burn me at the stake instead of run off at your keyboard like a spoiled child. But…too bad. You have no such power over me or anyone else who disagrees with you.

 

[michaeldaniels]

Yeah…but I have the comfort of knowing I believe in what the Church teaches and I am in line with those teachings…and no matter how cooky you libs and modernists get with your arguments, you will never be on the right side…wish you could say the same?

Yeah, um, that TOTALLY convinced me. Thanks What would I do without people like you? Thank goodness I have you to set me straight and save me from myself! Poor you, if only you could burn me at the stake instead of run off at your keyboard like a spoiled child. But…too bad. You have no such power over me or anyone else who disagrees with you.

 

[Rence]

Yeah…but I have the comfort of knowing I believe in what the Church teaches and I am in line with those teachings…and no matter how cooky you libs and modernists get with your arguments, you will never be on the right side…wish you could say the same?

I don’t know too many people who are both comfortable and hostile. If you’re so convinced your’e right and I’m wrong, and further so convinced that my opinions will never be allowed in the Church, why are you so upset about it? If you’re so right and I’m so wrong, why should it matter so much to you?

And oh, another thing: just because I disagree with a teaching does not mean I am not “in line” with those teachings. It’s means I disagree with them. While your approach is to belittle, mock and insult, my approach is to wait and see. Yeah…I can see the difference. You’re sooooooooooo much better than I am sarcasm. The perfect example of what Christ taught us. What a great student you are A shining example for Christianity

 

[michaeldaniels]

I personally have no problem with you holding your own opinions…the problem I have is when uninformed Catholics…or potential Catholics read things like you write on these forums and start to believe them…Your words and beliefs are a cancer…and if not cut out can spread infecting the entire body. The situation on women’s ordination WILL NEVER CHANGE, therefore it is ONLY counterproductive to try to argue in favor of it…and if your words misguide someone along their journey…their dissent into heresy is on you. Think about that. If you have heretical beliefs and desires…please keep them to yourself and don’t drag others down with you

I don’t know too many people who are both comfortable and hostile. If you’re so convinced your’e right and I’m wrong, and further so convinced that my opinions will never be allowed in the Church, why are you so upset about it? If you’re so right and I’m so wrong, why should it matter so much to you?

And oh, another thing: just because I disagree with a teaching does not mean I am not “in line” with those teachings. It’s means I disagree with them. While your approach is to belittle, mock and insult, my approach is to wait and see. Yeah…I can see the difference. You’re sooooooooooo much better than I am sarcasm. The perfect example of what Christ taught us. What a great student you are A shining example for Christianity

 

[JohnT58]

I hate quoting huge passages of other peoples quotes but just couldn’t resist it here.

The late Holy Father on several occasions gave a couple of reasons why the priesthood of Christ is not an option for women…
Now why don’t some find those reasons fitting?? There must be something missing or skewed in their considering this as a believer for them not to get it. IOW, they can’t think theologically very well. Probably because they have this attitude that if the arguments don’t make sense to them, they can’t be valid. Such an attitude is a failure to admit their limitations. A humble mind would say, “Gee, the Pope gave us a couple of leads on why the Tradition can not be reversed; maybe I should follow those leads and reflect on how they fit with ordination”.

I think that is true, people, and I have to admit I was once one of them, like to think that they can figure it all out on their own. Theologians spend a lifetime getting their head around these issues, and thousads of years cumulatively. Any arguments for female priests aren’t new, andit not as if they haven’t been heard and deliberated on before.
Trust in the judgements of the ‘experts’ who have come before.

Jesus Christ was (and still is) God. It is blasphemy to say that the one true God was blined was prejudice and sexism. All He did was according to the eternal will of His Father. Plus, before He appointed the Apostles, He spent the night in prayer to His Heavenly Father.

If Jesus was of a mind to, he would have made some of the women who followed him Apostles, the arguments about him adjusting to the society and time he lived in are disengenuous. THe Jews were Gods chosen people. Other religions of the time had priestess’. If this were the route God intended to take, this is the way it would have transpired.

I never said, nor would I ever say that our Lord and Saviour is prejudiced or sexist. Nothing you have stated answers where in scripture, in tradition, or in the ecumenical councils of the Church it is decreed that the female person cannot receive holy orders.

This is another example of thin arguments to disguise the fact that the answers are poor. Statements like the above, suggest that I am blasphemous for asking the question, and that I am defaming our Jesus Christ. It’s kind of like the lawyers’ adage that when the facts are with you, you argue facts, when the law is with you, you argue law, and when both are against you, you pound the table.

With respect Usbek, you are coming from a defacto position of ordained women in Episcopalian Churches. Rather than expecting a Catholic to argue the case for something he doesn’t believe in , put the shoe on the other foot. If you believe in women priests, show us the Biblical evidence to support it or early Church documents. You could be trouble there, as the early church documents tend to be Catholic, along with the Bible.

It seems that you are pounding the table as the outmoded, homophobic, sexist, patriarchal middle ages are infecting our enlightened modern age of great peace and fairness.

The fact that women can not receive holy orders is and has always been an infallible teaching of the ordinary magisterium. And if you don’t believe that His Holiness using His authority as the Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church binds this fact upon the faithful. This should close the discussion.

Saint Paul said that a woman can not have authority over men and that they should keep silent in church.

“Similarly, in regard to the deaconesses, as with all who are enrolled in the register, the same procedure is to be observed. We have made mention of the deaconesses, who have been enrolled in this position, although, not having been in any way ordained, they are certainly to be numbered among the laity” (Canon 19 of the First Council of Nicea [A.D. 325]).

“For it is not to teach that you women . . . are appointed. . . . For he, God the Lord, Jesus Christ our Teacher, sent us, the twelve [apostles], out to teach the [chosen] people and the pagans. But there were female disciples among us: Mary of Magdala, Mary the daughter of Jacob, and the other Mary; he did not, however, send them out with us to teach the people. For, if it had been necessary that women should teach, then our Teacher would have directed them to instruct along with us” (Didascalia 3:6:1–2 [A.D. 225]).

Now we are starting to get somewhere.

 

[JohnT58]

My ‘two cents worth’ part 2:

This doctrine has been taught at all times and everywhere. Christ only told the Apostles to confect the Eucharist. The Apostolic Fathers are of the same opinion regarding the priesthood and the episcopate. The other Fathers teach the same.

“[T]he so-called ‘presbyteresses’ or ‘presidentesses’ are not to be ordained in the Church” (Canon 11 of the Council of Laodicea [A.D. 360]).

“Certain women there in Arabia [the Collyridians] … In an unlawful and b.asphemous ceremony … ordain women, through whom they offer up the sacrifice in the name of Mary. This means that the entire proceeding is godless and sacrilegious, a perversion of the message of the Holy Spirit; in fact, the whole thing is diabolical and a teaching of the impure spirit” (Epiphanius of Salamis,Against Heresies 78:13 [A.D. 377]).

“From this bishop [James the Just] and the just-named apostles, the succession of bishops and presbyters [priests] in the house of God have been established. Never was a woman called to these. . . . According to the evidence of Scripture, there were, to be sure, the four daughters of the evangelist Philip, who engaged in prophecy, but they were not priestesses” (ibid.).

“[W]hen one is required to preside over the Church and to be entrusted with the care of so many souls, the whole female sex must retire before the magnitude of the task, and the majority of men also, and we must bring forward those who to a large extent surpass all others and soar as much above them in excellence of spirit as Saul overtopped the whole Hebrew nation in bodily stature” (Saint John DamasceneThe Priesthood 2:2 [A.D. 387]).

“A deaconess does not bless, but neither does she perform anything else that is done by presbyters [priests] and deacons, but she guards the doors and greatly assists the presbyters, for the sake of decorum, when they are baptizing women” (The Apostolic Constitutions 8:28).

“[The Quintillians are heretics who] give women predominance so that these, too, can be honored with the priesthood among them. They say, namely, that Christ revealed himself . . . to Quintilla and Priscilla [two Montanist prophetesses] in the form of a woman” (Saint Augustine of Hippo.Heresies 1:17 [A.D. 428]).

Oh and…

And in 1995 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in conjunction with the pope, ruled that this teaching “requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium (cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium 25:2)” (Response of Oct. 25, 1995). From Catholic.com

ROMA LOCUTA EST…CAUSA FINITA EST

Stuart, I hereby declare this to be the authoritive post answering the OP. Excellent work. Case closed!!!

I personally have no problem with you holding your own opinions…the problem I have is when uninformed Catholics…or potential Catholics read things like you write on these forums and start to believe them…Your words and beliefs are a cancer…and if not cut out can spread infecting the entire body. The situation on women’s ordination WILL NEVER CHANGE, therefore it is ONLY counterproductive to try to argue in favor of it…and if your words misguide someone along their journey…their dissent into heresy is on you. Think about that. If you have heretical beliefs and desires…please keep them to yourself and don’t drag others down with you

While many will sympathise with your position Michael, I think you miss the point of a forum, it is for discussion. Browbeating someone will not convert them, try to educate them calmly as to the reasoning and thinking behind the theology of the Church. People come here for answers. That it is just so, will not be a sufficient answer for most non-catholics.Look at what Stuart accomplished with a little assiduous research.

I can understand why people would question this, it seems to run counter to current secular thinking. But if someone were to get hung up on women priests, lets face it, there are bigger intellectual problems that they will stumbe upon. Like, why does God allow suffering? (I dont’t expect an answer to that!!) Theres no quick fix, lets change all thes chauvinistic, out-dated institutions, answer to that. Sarcasm intended, even though its the lowest form of wit.:shrug
While some may want women priests, and want an end to suffering, it won’t happen.
God may give us what we need, when prayed to, not necessarily what we want.
We may not understand why God has chosen it to be this way, but, it is enough to understand that this is the way he willed it.

 

[Young_Thinker]

The position of abbess is rather prestigious. It may be rather blunt, but why cannot a lady whom is devoted to the Church be contented with that? You should not change what “works” and is in line with His Word. For instance, Mary Magdalene was, indeed, a holy(through Christ’s grace) woman but certainly not one of the Apostles.

 

[Toni]

For instance, Mary Magdalene was, indeed, a holy(through Christ’s grace) woman but certainly not one of the Apostles.

Since when was the traditional Catholicism site filled with cafeteria Catholic’s?

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

I ask again: What about the female persona, gender, body, soul makes her unable to receive holy orders? The fact that she is female.

Interestingly, Pope JP2 said the Church has no authority, but he did not say that women could not receive holy orders if conferred. The only organization (body, if you will) that has the authority to confer Holy Orders is the Catholic Church. If the Church lacks the authority to do so, they cannot receive the sacrament. If you want to leave the Church because of this, we will mourn your passing (speaking in general, not directly to you) but you may choose to do so.

I have the impression that arguments against women’s ordination are very thin, and therfore, are repeated more and more vociferously. I heard a certain Fr. Corapi state very firmly that it couldn’t happen, as though he were trying to end an uncomfortable conversation by using the force of his personality.

He was simply emphatically repeating authoritative teachings in his own words. And you cant help but love his personality. And if you listen to him again, imagine him reading Dr. Seuss… it will make you chuckle.

Was JP2’s statement above ex cathedra?

IMHO YES

Is the Church more afraid of inconsistencies with previous supposedly “infallible” statements than it is willing to tackle the uncomfortable imperatives of theology?

What is the imperative here? It has always been held that women cannot be ordained… there is nothing new or imperative in this argument.

I ask these questions as someone who is otherwise interested in the possiblity of being Catholic, but I don’t think I can check my reasoning at the door.

‘‘I’m sad because I know its a dream I’ll never get to live, but there’s no point in arguing with the brick wall I’ve come up against.’’ (Guardian_Wolf)

If you wish for ‘strict justice’ in religion, you would have been thrown into hell a long time ago. Christ did not need to die for us. He did not need to justify us. He could have just left us in our sorry state. We certainly wouldn’t be going to heaven that’s for sure.

Faith is a gift, and so is the priesthood. I would love it if sola fide were true. If there were no purgatory. If all I had to do was sign a little form and I automatically get to enter heaven. How wonderful that would be…however it’s false.

Seriously. WAY too harsh… Time to cool off on Guardian Wolf…

I’m NOT ARGUING!!! DEAR GOD!!! What am I, getting attacked just for agreeing with another member?!

Look, I HAVE NOT tried to argue for women priests, OKAY? I know that it will NEVER HAPPEN.

In fact, if you READ any of my earlier posts, instead of just assuming that I’m trying to make an argument, you’d realize that I’m not really arguing for it. I undestand it will never happen. Sure, I’d like to see it, mainly because I’ve always wanted to be a priest, and i saddens me that I can’t.

But I’m not gonna fight it. As I stated earlier.

I NEVE claimed it was the Holy Spirit that wanted me to be a priest. NEVER.

and how is it that, just because I’d like to do something I can’t, I’m not grounded in reality?

I’m not saying that I think it’ll actually happen, but God, what’s wrong with wishing?

Kids can wish to fly can’t they? But its pretty obvious it’ll never happen without the aid of machines. Is there something wrong with them for still wishing to be able to?

I’m not pursuing this for crying out loud. It was just somethng I always wanted to do, and recgonize that I -can’t-. Okay, like maybe some kid always wanted to be in the air force, but can’t because he’s color blind. Is he wrong for being sad? Is he wrong to wish his eyes were fine? Even if he goes on after some other calling, does it not still make sense for him to be sad, if the air force was a life long dream?

I cannot stress enough that Guardian Wolf does not deserve this flaming. She stated the she had dreams of becoming a priest. And that she has wished to have been born a man so that she could have done so. She did not say she disagrees with only allowing men to be priests (since that is God’s decision) and in fact stated that she accepts it as truth. This is one point here that should be left alone.

As far as this conversation goes, my only (name removed by moderator)ut (since this has been spoken about ad nauseum) is to say what I said above. If you dont like the teachings of the Catholic Church… You know where the door is. We will all mourn your leaving, as Christ mourned his followers who left when he taught about the Eucharist, but we will respond like Christ did and allow you to leave. We will not change, the church CANNOT change, to suit your view of what the teachings of Christ should be.

 

[Guardian_Wolf]

I hear the Anglicans are looking for new heretics

Ouch. What did I ever do to you to deserve that comment? And here I thought we were getting along…

And you never answered my question…

3)Why not become a Nun? Or pursue some other type of ministry, vocation, or life of service in The Church?

3.) I don’t think I’d enjoy being a Nun. From what I’ve read/heard, it just doesn’t sound like the thing for me. What other types of ministry/vocation/life of service in the Chuch could I pursue? ^^ I’m technically a revert, so there’s somethings I’ve forgotten, and some things I’m just not familiar with.

I cannot stress enough that Guardian Wolf does not deserve this flaming. She stated the she had dreams of becoming a priest. And that she has wished to have been born a man so that she could have done so. She did not say she disagrees with only allowing men to be priests (since that is God’s decision) and in fact stated that she accepts it as truth. This is one point here that should be left alone.

THANK YOU. Finally someone gets what I’m saying only you’ve got better language skills and can phrase it better.

 

[SunnaB16]

Since when was the traditional Catholicism site filled with cafeteria Catholic’s?

The word “Catholics” seems inappropriate for some posters. Guardian Wolf: im not referring to you. One of the great 'Nun" saints felt the way that you do; so youre not alone. Forgotten her name.

If some of you other posters regard youselves as Catholics, then its obvious that youve no interest in the Truth which has already been posted here, almost ad nauseum, as well as on who knows how many other threads.

Have you been so brainwashed by the radical feminists that you`ve been blinded?
.
Or are some of you not even “Catholics”, but are simply here to bait us, to cause division, which would make a certain fallen spirit happy?