P
Powdercoater
Guest
Yes, exactly my point.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
What do you think would be the best argument against female priesthood?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
M
MiserereMeiDei
Guest
I don’t think they have to be that radical by today’s standards.
L
LeonardDeNoblac
Guest
Unfortunately, that’s true. It’s incredible: what surprises people is not that I’m Catholic, but that I truly believe in Catholic dogmas.Nothing less than the Church mirroring secular society will be acceptable
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
Another reason a woman can not be a priest and only a male can stand in persona Christi is because Jesus as a male sacrifice fulfilled OT law.“Why the Catholic Church doesn’t allow women to be priests?”, how would you answer?
At the Exodus and then again at Passover celebrations only male lambs without blemish were sacrificed.
Jesus is the male lamb of God without blemish. When a priest stands in persona Christi he is fulfilling that role, which a female simply can not do.
L
LeonardDeNoblac
Guest
Excellent observation!Another reason a woman can not be a priest and only a male can stand in persona Christi is because Jesus as a male sacrifice fulfilled OT law.
At the Exodus and then again at Passover celebrations only male lambs without blemish were sacrificed.
Jesus is the male lamb of God without blemish. When a priest stands in persona Christi he is fulfilling that role, which a female simply can not do.
J
JerryZ
Guest
Except that GOD’s plan was for HIS son to be murdered in the most horrible way. Also for perspective the first man created this whole mess. Yes he heeded Eve’s words however HE was the man of the house and was responsible for what would happen for his actions.
He dissobeyed GOD’s command and GOD had told him he would have to die if he did so. GOD is not a liar. If GOD had a daughter instead of a son we would have the reverse discourse. “Why can’t men be priests?”
In the end it is simple, Jesus offers Himself in sacrifice to GOD to repay the damage caused by Adam. Can a woman do this? Nope because she is not a man. The priest is taking Jesus place in the flesh to re enact what happened that night in the upper room time and space are collapsed into that moment when Jesus saved us. HIS flesh and HIS blood are there when all the elements are there. Bread, wine and a man.
I know people today are confused about what gender they are, alas this does not concern us, until Jesus returns again the Church will perpetuate the sacrifice on the upper room using the proper elements for it. Bread, wine and a man.
He dissobeyed GOD’s command and GOD had told him he would have to die if he did so. GOD is not a liar. If GOD had a daughter instead of a son we would have the reverse discourse. “Why can’t men be priests?”
In the end it is simple, Jesus offers Himself in sacrifice to GOD to repay the damage caused by Adam. Can a woman do this? Nope because she is not a man. The priest is taking Jesus place in the flesh to re enact what happened that night in the upper room time and space are collapsed into that moment when Jesus saved us. HIS flesh and HIS blood are there when all the elements are there. Bread, wine and a man.
I know people today are confused about what gender they are, alas this does not concern us, until Jesus returns again the Church will perpetuate the sacrifice on the upper room using the proper elements for it. Bread, wine and a man.
S
stpurl
Guest
The best argument is God’s own, set forth most recently through St. John Paul II’.
“The Catholic Church does not have the authority to ordain women”.
Ordinatio Sacerdotalis.
Now for all we limited beings know, God created the priesthood specifically for men for a reason which is going to be not only so blindingly obvious but so incredibly fair, right, and just to both men and women, once we die and are enlightened enough to finally understand Him, that we’ll be palm-slapping our faces over why we didn’t ‘get it’ here-and-now. And at the same time we’ll probably realize that as with so much of the Catholic faith, which is paradoxical, that part of it was to ‘take God on faith’. To say, "wow, I just don’t get it but I trust you, Lord’. Remember, He told St. Thomas, “You see Me Thomas, and believe. Blest are those who have not seen Me, but still believe.”
“The Catholic Church does not have the authority to ordain women”.
Ordinatio Sacerdotalis.
Now for all we limited beings know, God created the priesthood specifically for men for a reason which is going to be not only so blindingly obvious but so incredibly fair, right, and just to both men and women, once we die and are enlightened enough to finally understand Him, that we’ll be palm-slapping our faces over why we didn’t ‘get it’ here-and-now. And at the same time we’ll probably realize that as with so much of the Catholic faith, which is paradoxical, that part of it was to ‘take God on faith’. To say, "wow, I just don’t get it but I trust you, Lord’. Remember, He told St. Thomas, “You see Me Thomas, and believe. Blest are those who have not seen Me, but still believe.”
D
Dougbro1
Guest
The Church is generally described as a “she” in Catholicism. The priests are, in a sense, “married to the Church” (related to how Christ is, and how the priests stand in persona Christi). Naturally, if the Church is depicted as a “she,” and if the Church does not condone homosexuality, then the only logical conclusion is that priests must be male.
J
JimG
Guest
No argument is needed. Women priests are not possible.
J
Jimbo
Guest
How so? It seems pretty conclusive.Christ chose only men as apostles” isn’t conclusive
S
stpurl
Guest
It does. The thing is, people over time come up with possible reasons, many of them quite plausible, some especially in ‘modern times’ seeming not so much. . .
But it all comes back to this:
The Church has no authority to ordain women.
Quite frankly, we don’t need to know WHY She has no authority to do so. It’s kind of like asking God, “why don’t You do things differently because we think You aren’t correct here.”
Sure, we can try to ‘let Him off the hook’ by assuming it’s all some big conspiracy theory by some they (evil men of course), who have come up with this plot to keep women out of ‘power’, and either Jesus just wasn’t enlightened enough to foresee it, or once He rose again He just decided to let us ‘figure it out’ when we finally managed to, etc. etc. But usually the story is that the God made Man who died for each and every living soul, who gave us His Flesh and Blood as living food, somehow wasn’t able to make His wishes known. Those awful ‘men’ of those unenlightened times until now were just too powerful for God. Sad, isn’t it?
But it all comes back to this:
The Church has no authority to ordain women.
Quite frankly, we don’t need to know WHY She has no authority to do so. It’s kind of like asking God, “why don’t You do things differently because we think You aren’t correct here.”
Sure, we can try to ‘let Him off the hook’ by assuming it’s all some big conspiracy theory by some they (evil men of course), who have come up with this plot to keep women out of ‘power’, and either Jesus just wasn’t enlightened enough to foresee it, or once He rose again He just decided to let us ‘figure it out’ when we finally managed to, etc. etc. But usually the story is that the God made Man who died for each and every living soul, who gave us His Flesh and Blood as living food, somehow wasn’t able to make His wishes known. Those awful ‘men’ of those unenlightened times until now were just too powerful for God. Sad, isn’t it?
B
Bernoulli
Guest
It requires interpretation whether the choice was prescriptive or accidental.
Last edited:
E
Edmundus1581
Guest
I agree with most of those observations, but there is much more to it than men have “abdicated” the roles. They have been also pushed out of them, and even the Catholic clergy have been complicit in this, both in their comments on families and society and also within parishes where they let women run the show. I’ve seen the inside of parishes, and those women can be quite ferocious. Nice little old ladies on the outside, but don’t try to stand up to them. As for why more men don’t volunteer, I really don’t know the reason or the answer, and I think it’s an important question. A large part of it is that women often have more time, but that’s not the whole story. More men should step up, but don’t imagine that with that comes any influence within the parish - the little old ladies won’t give an inch.As a Catholic, that was a surprise since I see at mass mostly women. I also see mostly women who volunteer for everything. Women appear to be running the place.
In this time we live in, when men seem to have abdicated the role of husband, father, good neighbor, I see a lot of wisdom in selecting men to the role of priesthood.
Still, men should neither “abdicate” or let themselves be pushed out of parish life (and the rest).
I just stumbled on this from Cardinal Raymond Burke, 2015, which supports my contention of clergy’s complicity in the “marginalisation” of men (his word).
https://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2...inism-is-assaulting-the-church-says-cardinal/Unfortunately, the radical feminist movement strongly influenced the Church, leading the Church to constantly address women’s issues at the expense of addressing critical issues important to men; the importance of the father, whether in the union of marriage or not; the importance of a father to children;…
Last edited:
C
CelticWarlord
Guest
I am much more comfortable, for whatever reason, listening to a man preach. But that’s just a personal preference and I have no issues with women in the priesthood if it should come to that. I’ve been to churches with female pastors and see no reason to keep them out of the profession. There are an awful lot of really bad male ones.What do you think?
Last edited:
C
CradleRC58
Guest
Confessions
Only male priests can keep quiet about it :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:
Only male priests can keep quiet about it :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:
M
Maximus1
Guest
I think you identify one reality of the tradition of male clergy that no longer exists as it formerly did.
Women in antiquity were in fact thought of as " lesser" in many ways. They would not have the same authority in the biased society that was. ( Perception of authority was important)
For example first century Jews required two women to testify as opposed to one man, to essentially be " competent" as a witness. That is hard to fathom today, but clearly a single woman clergy in that world lacked authority. Add to it the almost chattel like existence of women in history. When the Bible authors wrote, and when Jesus lived, reality of life made all male priesthood " the only" choice.
In history, change came gradual.
At the same time Mary Magdalene was the first seen by Jesus. The one trusted with first message from the Ressurected Christ. Historically we are told WOMEN financed the early ministry and money always gives a seat at the table in some regards. Recognising authenticity people require apparently did not translate to a bias shared by God.
As time progressed, saints like Hildergard, broke through and participated. My thinking is sheer brilliance as well as mystic gifts could not be held down, but even then limited by a societal bias and viewpoint.
Today women’s gravitas is appreciated and they have a very different equality in perception and reality. That " change" is material I think. Cannot be ignored. I also think the arguments that " Jesus" or authoritative men from the past " wanted it this way" is dubious. In considering it, I think you must consider men were the only viable choice then.
Then there is tradition. My thoughts are that whatever misconceptions of women that formed it, tradition itself forms an authenticity. Authenticity seems the initial consideration and is the overriding consideration. Authenticity and tradition is a complex consideration in this case when the underlying societal thinking has changed so dramatically about women’s equality. Again, I have no doubt Hildergard had the mental facility to challenge any mans abilities in Church hierarchy.
I do not think abrupt changes are wize here. Ironically, acceptance remains the predominant consideration. Even if women would be more acceptable now.
I think the legal concept, Res Judicata teases out and illustrates the considerations here.
Res Judicata conflicts and is in tension with the reality that matters may have been adjudged incorrectly. It is a policy of stability and authenticity when applied, and it decides which side of that tension is law. In doing so, the actual merits are to an extent, ignored.
Women in antiquity were in fact thought of as " lesser" in many ways. They would not have the same authority in the biased society that was. ( Perception of authority was important)
For example first century Jews required two women to testify as opposed to one man, to essentially be " competent" as a witness. That is hard to fathom today, but clearly a single woman clergy in that world lacked authority. Add to it the almost chattel like existence of women in history. When the Bible authors wrote, and when Jesus lived, reality of life made all male priesthood " the only" choice.
In history, change came gradual.
At the same time Mary Magdalene was the first seen by Jesus. The one trusted with first message from the Ressurected Christ. Historically we are told WOMEN financed the early ministry and money always gives a seat at the table in some regards. Recognising authenticity people require apparently did not translate to a bias shared by God.
As time progressed, saints like Hildergard, broke through and participated. My thinking is sheer brilliance as well as mystic gifts could not be held down, but even then limited by a societal bias and viewpoint.
Today women’s gravitas is appreciated and they have a very different equality in perception and reality. That " change" is material I think. Cannot be ignored. I also think the arguments that " Jesus" or authoritative men from the past " wanted it this way" is dubious. In considering it, I think you must consider men were the only viable choice then.
Then there is tradition. My thoughts are that whatever misconceptions of women that formed it, tradition itself forms an authenticity. Authenticity seems the initial consideration and is the overriding consideration. Authenticity and tradition is a complex consideration in this case when the underlying societal thinking has changed so dramatically about women’s equality. Again, I have no doubt Hildergard had the mental facility to challenge any mans abilities in Church hierarchy.
I do not think abrupt changes are wize here. Ironically, acceptance remains the predominant consideration. Even if women would be more acceptable now.
I think the legal concept, Res Judicata teases out and illustrates the considerations here.
Res Judicata conflicts and is in tension with the reality that matters may have been adjudged incorrectly. It is a policy of stability and authenticity when applied, and it decides which side of that tension is law. In doing so, the actual merits are to an extent, ignored.
Last edited:
V
Vico
Guest
Yes, for the most suited society, but that is not a reason unknown.If anyone asked you “Why the Catholic Church doesn’t allow women to be priests?”, how would you answer?
I’m not fully convinced by some of the traditional arguments (“Christ chose only men as apostles” isn’t conclusive, Aquinas’ argument that women are defective in reason - wich comes from Aristotle - is quite problematic ).
I wold argue that, even thought men and women are fundamentally equal in dignity before God, their general natural tendencies are different; God’s plan for the Church is to be a perfect society (even thought, unfortunately, some members of the clergy and of the laity don’t follow God’s plan ), so He has ordained every role in order that only the most suited categories of individuals would play them. So God, in His wisdom, sees men more fitting than women for ministry and spiritual authority, for reasons that only He fully knows.
I think this argument has the benefits of not requiring a natural inferiority of women (same dignity, different roles ) and avoiding implications in politics and society (the topic is spiritual authority, not authority in general ).
What do you think?
The priest must be a person who makes the symbolism visible of a spiritual and physical relationship of Christ and the Church as that between the groom and bride.
N
nearlycatholic
Guest
I wouldn’t waste time arguing it. It is what it is the same as a marriage is one man one woman and abortion is murder. The whole thing comes down to a rebellious spirit.
Last edited:
J
JoeShlabotnik
Guest
We are humans. Both men and women. I believe God loves us all. And that we ALL should be able to serve God through the priesthood.
M
MiserereMeiDei
Guest
Not even the pope can change it. You’ll just have to live with it.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.