What would you do if the next Pope allowed the Ordination of Women?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jamesf
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Tietjen:
How naive of you. Apparently, you lack the insight into humor which was the original author’s intent. All humor aside, I find your posts to be the only sexist rantings within this forum:

Are you capable of posting without calling someone ELSE a sexist?
God bless.
Click to expand...
not when you people continue to make my arguments for me i cant. sexist jokes are still sexist and i might add not very funny.
 
40.png
Catholic2003:
Telling a joke about a women’s place being in the laundry, and then claiming that the restriction against women priests comes from divine law, lends about as much credibility to the topic as Garfield claiming he didn’t eat the lasagna.
Click to expand...
ditto
 
If the Church allowed the ordination of women, I most likely would convert to an Eastern Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox Church.

I would, however, seriously consider the RCC’s reasons for ordaining women before making the decision.

If the Catholic Church allows women to be ordained as priests, then I would imagine that a number of other radical feminist issues would also gradually become more or less accepted by the Catholic Church.
 
People whom make fun of women, or anyone for that matter has no say in such matters and their opinions are nil to me.

Women in the priesthood will not happen, it can’t.
 
Amens Rob’s wife and very well put
Click to expand...
Thanks.
Now, don’t you dames have laundry to do or something? We men have important issues to discuss
Click to expand...
😛 **A little light humor to lighten things is always appreciated. Especially when it’s so obviously a non-issue to begin with. Besides, I can do laundry and read the computer screen at the same time you know.😉 **
i think this says it all. anyone still disagree that this is sexism at its worst or that this is a mens only club?
Click to expand...
I’ve never argued that the priesthood is not a “mens only club”. Actually I think I’ve been saying that it certainly is and should remain so. Just like childbirth is a woman’s “club” and should remain so. Although using the term “club” doesn’t seem quite the right word for either job.
As for the use of the term “sexism” that you are so fond of bandishing about like some kind of epithet: We are not discussing neutered people, but the male sx verses the female sx. Therefore this is a “sexist” discussion by default. There’s nothing wrong with that. Gender is the very point of contention here. Ignoring it would be ignorant. Not ignoring that men and women are different doesn’t make them equal - it makes both worthless as men and women.
 
And besides…who’d wanna get near a girl priest anyway? You’d get all those girl priest cooties on you. Yuck. :nope:
 
40.png
Cherub:
Speaking of dreams, maybe the last 40 years have all been a bad one for the Church, and she will now wake up before it is too late, and get her Catholic Mass back and her traditions back in the forefront of Catholic culture where they belong.
Click to expand...
Just in case your real name is Rip van Winkle, I’ll let you in on a little secret. The Catholic Mass has been here since the start of the Church, and it is still here, in numerous rites, including the Roman or Latin rite, which is celebrated around the world according to the rite promulgated by Pope Paul VI. She hasn’t lost her Catholic Mass; it has been here all along. The rite is slightly different - and in truth, the differences are truly slight - between the rite as promulgated by Pope Paul VI and the rite prior to that in the Roman, or Latin rite. In fact, the Catholic Mass is still here in other rites, of which you appear to be non cognizant of, such as the Maronite rite, and the Byzantine rite, just to name two. In fact, the differences between those valid rites and either the Roman or Latin rite Mass, either before or after Pope Paul VI’s changes, are more different from the pre-Paul VI and post-Paul VI rites than they are from each other.
 
while i agree this is a silly question, i think in the hypothetical situation where the catholic church allowed women priests i wouldn’t be catholic anymore and neither would the church. for the church to fall into heresey is equivelent to it being two contradictory things in the same way and the same time. this is impossible.
 
40.png
otm:
Just in case your real name is Rip van Winkle, I’ll let you in on a little secret. The Catholic Mass has been here since the start of the Church, and it is still here, in numerous rites, including the Roman or Latin rite, which is celebrated around the world according to the rite promulgated by Pope Paul VI. She hasn’t lost her Catholic Mass; it has been here all along. The rite is slightly different - and in truth, the differences are truly slight - between the rite as promulgated by Pope Paul VI and the rite prior to that in the Roman, or Latin rite. In fact, the Catholic Mass is still here in other rites, of which you appear to be non cognizant of, such as the Maronite rite, and the Byzantine rite, just to name two. In fact, the differences between those valid rites and either the Roman or Latin rite Mass, either before or after Pope Paul VI’s changes, are more different from the pre-Paul VI and post-Paul VI rites than they are from each other.
Click to expand...
I am not talking about rites. What I am talking about is reverence, and the common sense to know what is from what is not reverent or appropriate during Mass. Arguably, some of the rites within the Catholic Church have managed to maintain this very basic understanding of the true nature of the Mass – and they don’t seem to abuse it and trivialize it. Here in the United States at this time in history, it is a rarity. This is what happens to people when they no longer remember what the Mass really is.
 
Dr. Bombay:
The limiting of ordination to men only is part of the deposit of Faith. It is the Pope’s job to guard that deposit of Faith…
The truths of our Faith don’t change based on stupid opinion polls or pressure from radical dissidents. Notwithstanding the clueless yammering from the ankle-biters in our American media, one man, even the Pope, cannot alter the truth.
Click to expand...
Nicely put. I liken this question to the oxymoronic(?) question, “Can God make a rock too big for Him to move?”

If the Holy Spirit had second thoughts on a matter of truth, it would disprove divinity.
 
40.png
cutecathchic:
i think this says it all. anyone still disagree that this is sexism at its worst or that this is a mens only club?
Click to expand...
“Dame” is traditionally a title of honor for a woman so I don’t see his remarks as “sexism.” Sometimes people are too sensitive about these things …
 
The Vatican response doesn’t say it was ex cathedra. It says that it was an infallible teaching of the ordinary and universal magisterium. Ex cathedra would be an exercise of the extraordinary magisterium.
 
40.png
Corinthians:
You can’t be like Jesus unless you can pee like Jesus!
Click to expand...
Jesus had a seamless robe without a fly. How do you suppose he managed that operation? 👍
 
40.png
rwoehmke:
Jesus had a seamless robe without a fly. How do you suppose he managed that operation? 👍
Click to expand...
Well, suffice to say, when He cursed the fig tree, He really cursed the fig tree :rolleyes:

(Mark 11:12-14)
 
tuopaolo said:
“Dame” is traditionally a title of honor for a woman so I don’t see his remarks as “sexism.” Sometimes people are too sensitive about these things …
Click to expand...

It’s French for ‘Noble Lady’ as in ‘Notre Dame’

It’s also used to refer to a female with the rank of Knight, so as a term of reference, it’s equvilant to ‘Sir’
 
By the way things are going it would appear that the men and only men as priest side has not be able to be argued against successfully?!:yup:
 
40.png
rwoehmke:
Jesus had a seamless robe without a fly. How do you suppose he managed that operation? 👍
Click to expand...
Are you sure there was no fly? I’m not sure whether the Bible is clear on this.

I agree with everyone here though who said that women will never be priests. It goes against 2,000 years of church teaching and besides–what if she menstruates on important church documents? I don’t think the church can give such a responsibility over to a woman.
 
40.png
cutecathchic:
not when you people continue to make my arguments for me i cant. sexist jokes are still sexist and i might add not very funny.
Click to expand...
I respect your opinion even though I don’t agree with it. As I see it, the author of the joke was not intending it to be taken seriously (hence the term “joke” can be applied). I suppose though that you do have a point in that not everyone will not be able to discern this as a light-hearted comment during a tense discussion. I’ll agree to no longer laugh at what you deem to be sexist jokes in this thread, if you’ll agree that the term “sexist” will never again be typed on your keyboard while you make replies in this thread. Compromise… agreed?
Now, back to the topic. Women will never become Priests (Priestesses - Political correctness in action) within the Catholic Church. See CCC para 1577.
God bless.
 
I would shout “Halleluliah!” and rejoice in the good news!!
 
40.png
jamesf:
What would you do if the next Pope allowed the Ordination of Women?
Click to expand...
Assuming you mean a doctrinal statement that such was in conformity with God’s will, I would trust that the decision was one made in conformity with the teaching authority of the Church given by Christ to Peter and passed by succession to the successor of JPII, and I would abide by the decision so I could remain a faithful Catholic, just as any professing member of the Church is obligated to do.

However, given the statements made by JPII, I find this action to be HIGHLY unlikely.

Peace and Charity,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top