Vatican makes attempted ordination of Women a grave crime

[catharina]

Was he speaking under the mantle of infallibility when he said that? Or just expressing an opinion?

It is a magesterial infallible teaching.

From [webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:MglIrnWNxTkJ:www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/SHAWINFA.TXT+pope+jp+ii,+female+ordination,+infallible+statement&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:MglIrnWNxTkJ:www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/SHAWINFA.TXT+pope+jp+ii,+female+ordination,+infallible+statement&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us) 

"As written in <Lumen Gentium>, that is so "when, even though  dispersed throughout 
the world but preserving for all that amongst themselves and with Peter's successor  
[the pope] the bond of communion, in their authoritative teaching concerning matters 
of faith  and morals, they [the bishops] are in agreement that a particular teaching is to 
be held  definitively and absolutely."

** The Second Vatican Council teaching states that four conditions must be met for an 
infallible exercise of the ordinary magisterium of bishops around the world. These  are:

 1. That the bishops be in communion with one another and with the pope.

 2. That they teach authoritatively on a matter of faith or morals.

 3. That they agree in one judgment.

 4. That they propose this as something to be held definitively by the  faithful.

Conditions met

In appealing to the infallibility of "the ordinary and universal  magisterium," in its Nov. 18 statement, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith implicitly was  saying these conditions are met in the case of the teaching that women cannot be ordained as priests. The statement cited <Lumen Gentium>."**

I suggest that you read the entire (and very brief) article.

 

[catharina]

From my elderly Catholic cousin again:

“In other denominations women are serving as priests. The Catholics will eventually come around as they have with many things. With the shortage of priests and bringing in married Episcopalians as priests they will be pressured into it or start losing parishes because of the lack of spiritual leaders. I still say it is not limited to the church. Men have always had a problem with women having a position of authority. If the Catholic Church doesn’t change many of its rules, such as celibate priests (already gone by the wayside with the Episcopal priests), birth control (not adhered to in the U.S. and other parts of the world), it will lose. The Pope sits in Rome and spouts off all the things people are supposed to do but more and more people do what they want and what seems practical. The woman priest is not too far in the future I think.”

Apparently your “elderly Catholic cousin” has not stayed current with Church teaching.

 

[catharina]

From my cousin, a Catholic woman in her 70s:

“Is that any different than not passing an amendment to the constitution that women are equal? I think some men get their feeling of masculinity by putting down women. It took time to realize that African Americans are people like you and me. It will take time for men to realize the talent and value of women.”

Perhaps your cosuin could learn from this encyclical:

“On the Dignity of Women”

Given in Rome, at Saint Peter’s, on 15 August, the Solemnity of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in the year 1988, the tenth of my Pontificate. Pope John Paul II

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_15081988_mulieris-dignitatem_en.html

 

[MariaTheresa]

Hello,
Just wanted to say a couple things,

Old age does not make someone automatically wise.

Whether of not women should be ordained, I don’t know. But I do know that disobedience is a tool of the devil. Anyone who would “reform” the Church must do it through obedience and ways that are not sinful and are in line with what is pleasing to God. I have not seen any of that in these women’s ordination movements. Look at the great saints, the reformers of the Church, down through the ages and you will see what I mean. They spoke out but were obedient to their superiors. They may have moved or changed their approach after much prayer but they were not self righteous, spiteful, angry and disobedient. If God wants this to come about it will be done His way not by disobeying His representative on earth. (The same as with anything else)

In other denominations women are serving as priests

Sorry, but this is not true. Only those with Apostolic succession are actually priests and you should know that. Catholic Church and all her sections under the Pope and the Eastern Orthodox (or other Orthodox that we recognize with true Sacrements) have true Apostolic succession. Now, what Rome says in particular about specific branches of Anglicans or Episcipalians(having Apostolic succession) I don’t know but that’s not the point. When you say *denominations *(plural) you are incorrect. They have not received the sacrement of Holy Orders and therefore have not been changed into Priests. They are ministers, possibly very good and holy ones but not Priests. They may were a collar of some kind and call themselves priests but that doesn’t make them priests. No Sacrament, No Apostolic Succession, No Priest.

Now I don’t know if there are churches with Apostolic succession who have decided to start ordaining women. This I have not heard. I know No orthodox do it, No Catholic and her branches do it , no SSPX do it, so my only question would again be are there any others Rome recognizes(with succession)who have officially done this? And does that mean the person (female) was truly ordained or is it by virtue of being Illicit mean it did not happen?

 

[catharina]

Hello,
Just wanted to say a couple things,

Old age does not make someone automatically wise.

Whether of not women should be ordained, I don’t know. But I do know that disobedience is a tool of the devil. Anyone who would “reform” the Church must do it through obedience and ways that are not sinful and are in line with what is pleasing to God. I have not seen any of that in these women’s ordination movements. Look at the great saints, the reformers of the Church, down through the ages and you will see what I mean. They spoke out but were obedient to their superiors. They may have moved or changed their approach after much prayer but they were not self righteous, spiteful, angry and disobedient. If God wants this to come about it will be done His way not by disobeying His representative on earth. (The same as with anything else)

Sorry, but this is not true. Only those with Apostolic succession are actually priests and you should know that. Catholic Church and all her sections under the Pope and the Eastern Orthodox (or other Orthodox that we recognize with true Sacrements) have true Apostolic succession. Now, what Rome says in particular about specific branches of Anglicans or Episcipalians(having Apostolic succession) I don’t know but that’s not the point. **When you say *denominations ***(plural) you are incorrect. They have not received the sacrement of Holy Orders and therefore have not been changed into Priests. They are ministers, possibly very good and holy ones but not Priests. They may were a collar of some kind and call themselves priests but that doesn’t make them priests. No Sacrament, No Apostolic Succession, No Priest.

Now I don’t know if there are churches with Apostolic succession who have decided to start ordaining women. This I have not heard. I know No orthodox do it, No Catholic and her branches do it , no SSPX do it, so my only question would again be are there any others Rome recognizes(with succession)who have officially done this? And does that mean the person (female) was truly ordained or is it by virtue of being Illicit mean it did not happen?

More specifically, the Catholic Church is NOT and never has been a denomination.
There are numerous Protestant churches that can be called denominations.

However, the Catholic Church is The Church.

 

[StAnastasia]

Apparently your “elderly Catholic cousin” has not stayed current with Church teaching.

She learns from her priests, a number of whom are generally in favor of opening the priesthood to women.

 

[Searching4God]

That seemed quite odd to me as well. The abuse of children is utterly abhorrent. On the other hand, I suspect that in future years there will be serious discussions about married priest as well as female priests. The church hierarchy may believe the ordination of women is a serious crime against the church now, but that stance might change in the future. However, there will never ever be any question that child abuse is repugnant and evil.

Very well said Christopher. It shows a complete lack of tact on the Vatican’s part, and all the reactionary crowing doesn’t change the fact that this will only alienate more people from a Church struggling to remain relevant in the 21st century.

Our Church is badly in need of reform, and this. is. not. it.

 

[rlg94086]

From my elderly Catholic cousin again:

“In other denominations women are serving as priests. The Catholics will eventually come around as they have with many things. With the shortage of priests and bringing in married Episcopalians as priests they will be pressured into it or start losing parishes because of the lack of spiritual leaders. I still say it is not limited to the church. Men have always had a problem with women having a position of authority. If the Catholic Church doesn’t change many of its rules, such as celibate priests (already gone by the wayside with the Episcopal priests), birth control (not adhered to in the U.S. and other parts of the world), it will lose. The Pope sits in Rome and spouts off all the things people are supposed to do but more and more people do what they want and what seems practical. The woman priest is not too far in the future I think.”

Actually, those who fall away as the Church holds fast to the truth “lose.” The only item in your cousin’s list that is changable is celibacy - that is a discipline which can be changed.

StAnastasia:

She learns from her priests, a number of whom are generally in favor of opening the priesthood to women.

Then, she is learning from ignorant and/or heretic priests. Any priest who teaches of the possibility of ordaining women is teaching heresy.

 

[catharina]

She learns from her priests, a number of whom are generally in favor of opening the priesthood to women.

Then she is “learning” from priests who already have moved away from Church teaching.

Please refer to Posts # 41, 43, and 45.

 

[JadeStarr]

It is a magesterial infallible teaching.

From [webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:MglIrnWNxTkJ:www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/SHAWINFA.TXT+pope+jp+ii,+female+ordination,+infallible+statement&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:MglIrnWNxTkJ:www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/SHAWINFA.TXT+pope+jp+ii,+female+ordination,+infallible+statement&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us) 

"As written in <Lumen Gentium>, that is so "when, even though  dispersed throughout 
the world but preserving for all that amongst themselves and with Peter's successor  
[the pope] the bond of communion, in their authoritative teaching concerning matters 
of faith  and morals, they [the bishops] are in agreement that a particular teaching is to 
be held  definitively and absolutely."

** The Second Vatican Council teaching states that four conditions must be met for an 
infallible exercise of the ordinary magisterium of bishops around the world. These  are:

 1. That the bishops be in communion with one another and with the pope.

 2. That they teach authoritatively on a matter of faith or morals.

 3. That they agree in one judgment.

 4. That they propose this as something to be held definitively by the  faithful.

Conditions met

In appealing to the infallibility of "the ordinary and universal  magisterium," in its Nov. 18 statement, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith implicitly was  saying these conditions are met in the case of the teaching that women cannot be ordained as priests. The statement cited <Lumen Gentium>."**

I suggest that you read the entire (and very brief) article.

Well, I heard that the time a Pope spoke under infallability was when the prounoncement
that Mary was assumed into Heaven body and soul was made.

 

[catharina]

Well, I heard that the time a Pope spoke under infallability was when the prounoncement
that Mary was assumed into Heaven body and soul was made.

Yes, that’s correct.
Ditto re the Pope’s declaration of the Immaculate Conception (as doctrine).

Yet neither of those proclamations limit this proclamation that women will not be priests.

 

[JadeStarr]

She learns from her priests, a number of whom are generally in favor of opening the priesthood to women.

That only makes sense. Of course, so few men are involved at all in any kind of religion perhaps the thinking is that as long as they give the highest powers ONLY to men that more men will be attracted to the faith.
Most churches are comprised of women, and it’s usually the women who do all the work in the parishes and congregations.

Since even St Paul, who I generally don’t like, was fine with women speaking in Church
I can’t understand how the Catholics are at ease with this one.

 

[jilly4ski]

Very well said Christopher. It shows a complete lack of tact on the Vatican’s part, and all the reactionary crowing doesn’t change the fact that this will only alienate more people from a Church struggling to remain relevant in the 21st century.

Our Church is badly in need of reform, and this. is. not. it.

:doh2: The Church is not equating child sexual abuse to woman’s ordination, all it is saying is that there are various crimes that can merit the defrocking of a priest and then gives the CDF the authority to investigate and defrock if it is necessary. Just like in the US’s penal system someone who commits rape and someone who commits a 'white collar" crime might spend the same amount of time in jail. They are not equating the crimes but only doling out punishment for those crimes.

 

[catharina]

That only makes sense. Of course, so few men are involved at all in any kind of religion perhaps the thinking is that as long as they give the highest powers ONLY to men that more men will be attracted to the faith. Most churches are comprised of women, and it’s usually the women who do all the work in the parishes and congregations.

Since even St Paul, who I generally don’t like, was fine with women speaking in Church
I can’t understand how the Catholics are at ease with this one.

As Catholics in the States have neeeded to be reminded (so often since the 1960s)
the Catholic Church does NOT function in a democratic manner. For Catholics,
teachings come from above according to graces granted to the hierarchy. While some
Catholics might choose to pretend otherwise, the facts are the facts.

For Catholics who totally accept the Faith,
every grace is provided then to accept the teachings.

St. Paul confirmed this too.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Typically BAD PR from the Vatican. They are dead to rights on Women’s Ordination. It’s folly, heresy, evil, and should never happen. But for goodness sakes it’s sloppy PR and common sense not to lump women’s ordination with child predators in one document? sheesh…

Oh, I agree it’s a grave sin to attempt to ordain women, but it’s NOT the same as child abuse. The Vatican shouldn’t even say things like that, (if they did) it makes them look uncaring.

 

[catharina]

Typically BAD PR from the Vatican. They are dead to rights on Women’s Ordination. It’s folly, heresy, evil, and should never happen. But for goodness sakes it’s sloppy PR and common sense not to lump women’s ordination with child predators in one document? sheesh…

In Revelations 3, we are told:

14 "To the angel of the church in Laodicea, write this: " 'The Amen, the faithful and true witness, the source of God’s creation, says this: 15 “I know your works; I know that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either cold or hot. 16 So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.”

Other translations say “vomit” rather than spit.
Either usage, really ‘terrible PR.’ No problem for me …

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Your ponit eludes me, catharina? I never said the Vatican is wrong, did I? Didn’t I put myself in agreement? I merely said the timing and the combining women’s issues with pedophile predators in the same document is LOUSY thinking. It’s lame. The Church is right in the stances but for God’s sake announce these proclaimations seperately at different times and don’t lump 'em up together? Right? I’m not sure what your disagreement is?

I just got over typhoid fever in the Philippines and a lot of carsick people driving through that country. Please don’t mention vomit anymore LOL

In Revelations 3, we are told:

14 "To the angel of the church in Laodicea, write this: " 'The Amen, the faithful and true witness, the source of God’s creation, says this: 15 “I know your works; I know that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either cold or hot. 16 So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.”

Other translations say “vomit” rather than spit.
Either usage, really ‘terrible PR.’ No problem for me …

 

[Melchior_1]

With technology there are often things called Patch Notes or Service Packs. Although all of the changes affect the program, not all the changes within the Patch Notes/Service Pack have the same severity.

Lets say the document just released by Rome is Service Pack 3. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is Windows XP.

*- Colors settings that you choose for text, background, and links are not used by Internet Explorer 6

• (MS05-004: ASP.NET path validation vulnerability could allow unauthorized access*

Both of these were found in the same patch notes (support.microsoft.com/kb/946480). The first one is a fix for a cosmetic issue with a really old web browser. The second one fixes a vulnerability which could allow unauthorized access (ie; computer rape).

These are obviously not at the same level of severity, as color settings is MUCH less severe than unauthorized access (computer rape). But because the fixes were released at the same time for the same program they were released with the same document.

People didn’t respond with “ZOMG, M$ is putting cosmetic changes ahead of IT security!!11!!eleven”. It makes logical sense that if you are making changes to a specific program, you compile all the changes into one document. We do that in IT, and other Nation States do this too (especially with budgets). And several changes that happen to judicial systems as well.

 

[catharina]

Your ponit eludes me, catharina? I never said the Vatican is wrong, did I? Didn’t I put myself in agreement? I merely said the timing and the combining women’s issues with pedophile predators in the same document is LOUSY thinking. It’s lame. The Church is right in the stances but for God’s sake announce these proclaimations seperately at different times and don’t lump 'em up together? Right? I’m not sure what your disagreement is?

I just got over typhoid fever in the Philippines and a lot of carsick people driving through that country. Please don’t mention vomit anymore LOL

My point? Relative merits of PR plus/minus? Who cares?

Sorry to hear about your typhoid-crash (horrible)
but it was God Who first mentioned vomit, not I.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Although I’m attending an Anglican parish, I wish to see Catholicism improve its PR personally. They have so much to offer and I do want them to resonate with the public and have a good relationship with the media if possible. Is PR the be-all, end-all? Not by a long shot. The truth comes first. I merely think it was bad timing and poor judgement.

LOL about the vomit! LOL All this talk of vomit puts me in the mood to go watch the Exorcist. Yeah, baby!

My point? Relative merits of PR plus/minus? Who cares?

Sorry to hear about your typhoid-crash (horrible)
but it was God Who first mentioned vomit, not I.