B
bibleguy180
Guest
HMMMM… Fine, I concede. Not gonna argue with God 
- Status
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Oh I’d be the first to acknowledge that anything that I say which might contradict Church teaching would be wrong. Even when I defend her accurately, I could be guilty of typos, or bad grammar or syntax, that actually winds up saying something inaccurate.I’m a former Catholic, and I enjoy good discussion. That’s the reason I’m here. I know that I’m not going to convince you. If you don’t want discussions with non-Catholics, consider sending an email to the moderators and suggesting that they ban non-Catholics.
If my tone suggests that I’m ‘high-and-mighty’, then please pardon my tone! I get excitable! I am neither high nor mighty. I do not claim to be right on this issue: I would like a vigorous discussion on all the details, so that we all understand it better. I acknowledge that I may be wrong. Would you acknowledge the same?
But as far as being ‘wrong’ if I am absolutely accurately giving the authoritative teaching of the Catholic Church on faith and morals? Nope. Sorry. In that case, I won’t be wrong.
Look, we know the sun (a lovely star) exists. Therefore, if we have people saying, “The sun does not exist”, "the sun may possibly exist’ and “the sun does exist”. . .well, no way around it. The first person is wrong. The second person by acknowledging the possibility of the sun’s existence is trying to straddle the fence; he feels if it does exist, he’s allowed for it --if it doesn’t, he’s allowed for that too–but since he never comes out one way or the other, until he does, he can’t really be considered part of the argument because he won’t make a judgment one way or the other.
Now the last person is absolutely right.
The first person may WANT the third person to say, “Hey, I could be wrong.” But the third person can’t be wrong. (The second person, of course, can be wrong if he, told he MUST give an answer one way or the other, decides incorrectly and says, "it doesn’t exist!) But the third person is correct, and so he can’t say he ‘could’ be wrong, just as a ‘sop’ to the ‘feelings’ of the first person (who actually IS wrong!)
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
HMMMM… Fine, I concede. Not gonna argue with God
Good. As I said, it’s no good telling the Church to ‘do something’ which God didn’t give it the power to do!
C
curlycool89
Guest
The Church cannot be wrong in faith and morals. Christ Himself promised us that.If my tone suggests that I’m ‘high-and-mighty’, then please pardon my tone! I get excitable! I am neither high nor mighty. I do not claim to be right on this issue: I would like a vigorous discussion on all the details, so that we all understand it better. I acknowledge that I may be wrong. Would you acknowledge the same?
E
edwest2
Guest
I encourage my fellow Catholics to avoid observing opinions. Learn what the Church teaches, understand it and give that answer to others.
One of the things I really dislike about internet forums is that someone can go on and on about something as if he wants to educate you, but ends with “But I could be wrong!”
Wow. So why did you bother to do all that typing? That’s five minutes of my life that I’ll never get back.
God bless,
Ed
One of the things I really dislike about internet forums is that someone can go on and on about something as if he wants to educate you, but ends with “But I could be wrong!”
Wow. So why did you bother to do all that typing? That’s five minutes of my life that I’ll never get back.
God bless,
Ed
K
kateriann
Guest
I think both sides made some good points. Can we all try to remember this is a friendly discussion started by a guy who wanted some information? (Bibleguy). Tantum, I first read your handle as “Tantrum”, and my little slip wasn’t far off. Peace, everyone.
Peace, everyone.
V
Vince1022
Guest
Peter did not decide they had to be celibate.
V
Vince1022
Guest
Nonsense. There any plenty of passages in the Bible that anyone can pick and choose to support either side of this question. Care to share what verse you are specifically referring to?
V
Vince1022
Guest
Sure. So…males can’t be brides, right? Does that mean males can’t be united with Christ? I’m sorry, I have no idea what you are trying to say. Can you clarify? Thank you.
V
Vince1022
Guest
Completely correct.
P
Prophesy
Guest
What I think is much more magical is that these things become ‘doctrinal’ in attacks against the Church.
The Church teaches about faith and morals, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is not a science textbook for a reason. Think about this:
It is purported that Galileo was in trouble for believing in Copernican heliocentricity. Copernicus was also a Catholic who’s teachings were not rejected by the Church but Galileo’s were? What was the difference? Firstly, Galileo said that his theory disproved Scripture (using the reference that was purportedly used to defend geocentricity). He also made quite the slanderous dialogue between himself and a caricature of his funding patron (who also happened to be the Pope).
You should read Chesterton’s Orthodoxy, it’ll do you some good.
-Prophecy
S
Scoobyshme
Guest
Gray is Satan’s favorite color, actually. Gives him room to “operate!”
Remember the old black and white TV’s, where sometimes you got a channel and it was nothing but “snow?” It looked gray, didn’t it? But if you went up real close to it and looked at the pixels, you noticed that there was no gray at all. It was all black and white pixels. You just thought it was gray because you weren’t looking at it closely enough.
There is a parallel here. I’m sure you can figure it out. The gray is only in our ability to find the truth at times. Not in the truth itself. That’s clearly black and white.
E
edwest2
Guest
The Church has no authority to ordain women.
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html
God bless,
Ed
J
jmcrae
Guest
Well, the Pharisees thought so, but Jesus disagreed with them. He told the Pharisees that by introducing ambiguity into the law that tells us to honour our parents, they were committing sin.
That’s a difference in intent - and Jesus went on for three chapters about the importance of intent. (Matthew chapters 5 through 7.)
When killing in self-defense, you don’t actually intend to kill the person - it’s only that the sufficient force to stop the person from harming you results in the person’s death. (But if you exceed the amount of force required to stop the person from harming you, then you have passed over from self-defense to murder.)
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
God bless you Scooby–that is BRILLIANT. Bravo.Gray is Satan’s favorite color, actually. Gives him room to “operate!”
Remember the old black and white TV’s, where sometimes you got a channel and it was nothing but “snow?” It looked gray, didn’t it? But if you went up real close to it and looked at the pixels, you noticed that there was no gray at all. It was all black and white pixels. You just thought it was gray because you weren’t looking at it closely enough.
There is a parallel here. I’m sure you can figure it out. The gray is only in our ability to find the truth at times. Not in the truth itself. That’s clearly black and white.
D
dnar
Guest
It seems this should end the debate for any true Roman Catholic.
“I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful” (Ordinatio Sacerdotalis 4). John Paul II
“I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful” (Ordinatio Sacerdotalis 4). John Paul II
R
rtconstant
Guest
This was always my understanding. The priest stands in the place of Christ the second Adam. It was a man who brought sin into the world, and it was the son of Man who undid the damage. It is a man’s role to continue that work through the role of priesthood. Women are not incapable of the position, but its not their burden.My understanding is that the reason the Levitical priesthood was male was because Adam, who was the one who broke fellowship with God through sin (Eve’s sin did not, in and of itself, do this - it was not until Adam also partook with her in sin that the bond was broken) was male.
Because it was the male who broke the bond, it is the male who must restore it, by means of sacrifices for sins, and by means of the priesthood. Thus, only males could become priests (even Deborah, though she was a Judge and a warrior, was never a priest) - and thus, Jesus, being born a Son, became the second Adam, to undo what was done by the first Adam, and following that, the Christian priesthood is also males only.
Women have other, equally important work to do in God’s kingdom - not least, giving birth to new members of it, and training them up to worship God in holiness and in truth.
I think that people get bothered by this though because the priesthood has been largely de-mystified. So its seen more as just another “job” at which point denial of entrance becomes a denial of “rights”. This de-mystification has been adopted by both sides on this. Because often the arguments against women priests tend be based on ideas like “men are less emotional,” and such.
The Priesthood however is not just an occupation, its a mystical calling and responsibility. Its hard thankless job (especially these days), the pay is lousy, often benefits aren’t that good, and you pretty much have to set aside your life to deal with everyone else’s problems. The qualifications are based on gender roles, its based upon who has the responsibility to make these sacrifices.
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
Because the women were already more religious and more pius than the men. The men were more “still necked” so Jesus picked men to be able to get to convert the men more easily.
[me talking]
[me talking]
M
Major_Tom
Guest
He strongly advocated it, and, as you know, he was a major player in shaping doctrine in the early church days.
M
Major_Tom
Guest
I can also figure out another parallel. You know what else happens when you get that close? You miss the forest for the trees!Gray is Satan’s favorite color, actually. Gives him room to “operate!”
Remember the old black and white TV’s, where sometimes you got a channel and it was nothing but “snow?” It looked gray, didn’t it? But if you went up real close to it and looked at the pixels, you noticed that there was no gray at all. It was all black and white pixels. You just thought it was gray because you weren’t looking at it closely enough.
There is a parallel here. I’m sure you can figure it out. The gray is only in our ability to find the truth at times. Not in the truth itself. That’s clearly black and white.
- Status