Why Do Women Even Want To Be Priests?

[BlueShadow123]

Interesting. You’re presuming to judge other posters–and indeed the entire hierarchy of the Catholic Church–as being chauvinist pigs who ‘deny’ woman something to which she is ‘entitled’ --and you also seem to think that those same piggies have a power to do something which God Himself will not do.

Now you may say that God ‘can’ do all things. But you would be incorrect. God ‘cannot’ do an ‘impossible’ thing. . .for example, the tired old "can God make a rock too heavy for Him to lift’ blather. No, He cannot–not because He is not ‘omnipotent’ but because He does not arbitrarily establish laws (like physics) merely to ‘shatter’ them for no reason. (He won’t make ‘square circles’ either).

Now a person, once dead. . .really and truly dead, beginning to ‘rot’ if you will days later. . .is not, possibly, going to ‘rise again’. . .BUT a person who had once lived is certainly living still in soul even if his body has died. AND we know that all persons, even after death, will one day receive a ‘new’ body. Therefore, for God to allow a ‘dead’ person to come ‘back to life’, while it is certainly an act which is ‘impossible’ for man, is not impossible for God, particularly since He is most certainly going to do it for that man (and for all) after death anyway. So miracles like raising people from the dead are not ‘impossibilities’ for God (who gives us life and death to begin with, and can do it as ‘much’ as He pleases), unlike something like a 'rock too heavy for His ‘all powerful arms’ to lift, which is something nonsensical.

G. K. Chesterton wrote about this, better than I have, but it’s a reasonable point.

God (and we) CAN do some things because they are ‘possible’ things, and we cannot do other things because they are ‘non sensical’ things.

Now, women priests might ‘sound’ like they are ‘possible’ because MEN can be priests so why ‘not’ women. But God has already said, “The Church has no AUTHORITY to ordain women.” That lets us know that, like the oh-so tempting sounding ‘square circle’, squares and circles both being perfectly well known ‘things’ in existence, the idea of women pirests is a SQUARE CIRCLE–something that just doesn’t work even though theoretically one could speculate that if you have squares and you have circles why CAN"T an all powerful God make something that is both? But it is NON sensical. Not because squares and circles aren’t perfectly good useful things or that one is better than another. A square and a circle are NOT the same thing even though they are both plane figures or some such and share a lot of the same characteristics.

Thats what I said all along. I don’t know how on earth you could have missed it, but look in my past posts. I said that the woman are not allowed to. The bible says that.

And you just keep going on posting verses. I have already said what you were trying to say. How did you not get that? But okay then, moving on please.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

BTW, Blue Shadow, in case you’ve forgotten it, you haven’t answered my question.

If Pope Benedict himself stood up in Mass with a stein full of beer and a big baked Bavarian pretzel and spoke the words of consecration. . .Would the beer and pretzel become the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ?

Still waiting. . .:compcoff:

 

[BlueShadow123]

Still waiting. . .:compcoff:

We both already know the answer to that.
But it had nothingto do with my future posts either. Now drop it please. I am not going to keep responding to something that is settled. Moving on…

 

[Iron_Donkey]

Thats what I said all along. I don’t know how on earth you could have missed it, but look in my past posts. I said that the woman are not allowed to. The bible says that.

And you just keep going on posting verses. I have already said what you were trying to say. How did you not get that? But okay then, moving on please.

What you seem to have said is that they aren’t allowed to because the pope/ Church hierarchy randomly decided so. At times you seemed to have been referencing Paul’s letter - I forget which - that talks about authority. I’m fairly certain that part of scripture has very little, if anything to do with why Catholics don’t have women priests. The reasons we do use are those said (most recently) by jimcrae.

If you are saying now that we think it’s just an arbitrary rule of God - well kind of, in the sense that everything about how creation works is one of God’s rules. But it would be a rule more similar to “protons have positive charge and electrons negative” than “don’t eat pork” from the old testament.

 

[BlueShadow123]

What you seem to have said is that they aren’t allowed to because the pope/ Church hierarchy randomly decided so. At times you seemed to have been referencing Paul’s letter - I forget which - that talks about authority. I’m fairly certain that part of scripture has very little, if anything to do with why Catholics don’t have women priests. The reasons we do use are those said (most recently) by jimcrae.

If you are saying now that we think it’s just an arbitrary rule of God - well kind of, in the sense that everything about how creation works is one of God’s rules. But it would be a rule more similar to “protons have positive charge and electrons negative” than “don’t eat pork” from the old testament.

Yeah this has already been settled.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Yeah this has already been settled.

It was?

This was your last post on the subject:
*What does womanhood have to do with priest hood?
You are talking about leading. Women are not supposed to lead or so the bible says.

So if you are talking about that, then I understand. Thats not my point though. **I’m saying the church would easily let a woman become a priest. Many people might not listen to her, but she could be one. I don’t see why not.

The reason she cant is because women are not supposed to have that type of leadership and you know it.***

So you’re saying that the Bible says no women priests, but that according to YOU The Church COULD let them be priests and you don’t know why not, but ‘they aren’t supposed to have that leadership.’

You also said, “What’s wrong with her nature that disallows her to be a priest?”

You have to admit that these posts don’t exactly scream, “Wow, I totally agree with you all on the Church’s teachings on women priests”, you know??

 

[BlueShadow123]

It was?

This was your last post on the subject:
*What does womanhood have to do with priest hood?
You are talking about leading. Women are not supposed to lead or so the bible says.

So if you are talking about that, then I understand. Thats not my point though. **I’m saying the church would easily let a woman become a priest. Many people might not listen to her, but she could be one. I don’t see why not.

The reason she cant is because women are not supposed to have that type of leadership and you know it.***

So you’re saying that the Bible says no women priests, but that according to YOU The Church COULD let them be priests and you don’t know why not, but ‘they aren’t supposed to have that leadership.’

You also said, “What’s wrong with her nature that disallows her to be a priest?”

You have to admit that these posts don’t exactly scream, “Wow, I totally agree with you all on the Church’s teachings on women priests”, you know??

Yes it was settled because I told you that the reason women cannot be priests is BECAUSE they are women. If they were men they could be priests. It has to do with the fact that since shes a ‘woman’ her nature is different. Yeah whatever. This was settled. drop it.

 

[Miserys_Fence]

I am not asking about the theological/official reasons that women cannot be priests. I have already heard them and am frankly not that interested in discussing it anymore.

I am asking why some Catholic women WANT to be priests.

As an outsider it honestly doesn’t look like its worth the effort to me. That in order to remove the patriarchal aspect of Catholicism you would have to change Catholicism so much that it would no longer BE Catholicism.

But some Catholic women obviously feel differently.

So what are the reasons and justifications for women’s ordination?
Why do so many people think that its worth the all this trouble?

Maybe (at least for some women) it isn’t a matter of “wanting” to be. Maybe it’s a matter of “being called” to be.

I certainly didn’t “want” to be a Sister. When I first felt the calling, I wasn’t even Catholic (and had no desire to be), had 2 young children to raise, a boyfriend, etc. Finally I decided it was time to let God call the shots, and did what I had to do to make this calling happen. So I joined the Church and began looking into convents that accept older women.

Raising my children and supporting them financially is my calling for now, and becoming a Sister is my calling for later. If I did what I wanted to instead of what I’m called to, I’d be sucking down Red Stripes on a beach in Jamaica instead of working every day to support my family and researching orders.

Again, I can’t speak for anyone…just throwing this out there as food for thought.

Miz

 

[glencora]

Women cannot be priests because (1) The priest acts “in Persona Christi”. He offers the sacrifice to God. Jesus is that sacrifice; Male, unblemished, and unbroken. (2) Jesus selected 12 men/males to be his apostles. They were the priests in a line called “Apostolic Secession”. (3) The Pope has no authority to ordain women. Ultimate authority comes from God.

If a Pope were to EVER ORDAIN WOMEN; the FAITHFUL would worship UNDERGROUND. He would be an ANTI-POPE; heralding the imminent return of OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST!

 

[BlueShadow123]

Women cannot be priests because (1) The priest acts “in Persona Christi”. He offers the sacrifice to God. Jesus is that sacrifice; Male, unblemished, and unbroken. (2) Jesus selected 12 men/males to be his apostles. They were the priests in a line called “Apostolic Secession”. (3) The Pope has no authority to ordain women. Ultimate authority comes from God.

If a Pope were to EVER ORDAIN WOMEN; the FAITHFUL would worship UNDERGROUND. He would be an ANTI-POPE; heralding the imminent return of OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST!

Tis been settled.

 

[Christopher68]

I think most of the Catholics here at CAF will agree with you on this one. I don’t think most of us understand their motivation either.

I recently came across Fr. Greely’s article Why I’m Still a Catholic. Greely dissents from Church teaching on a number of points and seems to have written this article in response to the perennial questions “Why are you still Catholic? Why don’t you just leave?” It doesn’t address this topic specifically, but I think it might help give you a general idea. I found the article to be quite helpful in this regard.

If you peruse some websites, like romancatholicwomenpriests.org, you can see that they really, truly believe that they are in the right and that history and theology are on their side.

If I had to hypothesize in a general way, I might say that some of them were raised Catholic, cannot imagine being anything other than Catholic, and yet they feel that women not being allowed to be priests is a great injustice. They would probably also agree with you that it is a lot of trouble and a lot of effort, but they might say that it was also a lot of trouble and a lot of effort to get rid of slavery and to obtain equal rights for all races. Just because it is difficult doesn’t remove one’s obligation to fight for what is right.

For the record, I firmly believe in and support the Catholic Church’s teaching on the matter. I simply enjoy trying to see things from others’ perspectives. So, while I disagree with advocates of women’s ordination on many, many things, I like to try to place myself in their shoes and understand why they think what they think. So you can take this post for what it’s worth: the musings of an outsider trying to come to an understanding of this issue as you are.

Peace.

Thank you for posting the link to the article by Father Greely. I found it to be an interesting read.

 

[Roy5]

This idea that the Church can’t ordain a woman.

I am old enough to remember when women had to cover their heads in church (as St. Paul called for), women could not read from the altar (also according to St. Paul), and women and perhaps other laity (I forget the precise rule) could not go beyond the old altar rails that used to be up front. I even think the rule related more to women than to men - when, for example, no girls could become altar girls.

These are only some of the changes I have witnessed, not to mention the liturgy in English, changes in the liturgy, radically different music at mass, most statues removed from the front of most churches, worshiping in Protestant churches no longer a grave sin, mixed weddings now permitted at the altar, non-Catholic no longer has to sign promise to bring up children as Catholic, etc., etc. 

 If the church wanted to ordain women, they would find a reason and a way. The church can give Mary such titles as Queen of the Universe and a hundred or more Our Lady of.... If that is okay, and if we can pray to numerous female saints for assistance, they can ordain women - at least as Deacons. I suspect that will happen eventually. But I don't claim the gift or prophecy - or of exorcism. Frankly, I wish I could exorcize (sp) some of the traditionalists who are determined to resist change and maintain practices and customs suited to medievalism but not to the world of today.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

This idea that the Church can’t ordain a woman.

I am old enough to remember when women had to cover their heads in church (as St. Paul called for), women could not read from the altar (also according to St. Paul), and women and perhaps other laity (I forget the precise rule) could not go beyond the old altar rails that used to be up front. I even think the rule related more to women than to men - when, for example, no girls could become altar girls.

These are only some of the changes I have witnessed, not to mention the liturgy in English, changes in the liturgy, radically different music at mass, most statues removed from the front of most churches, worshiping in Protestant churches no longer a grave sin, mixed weddings now permitted at the altar, non-Catholic no longer has to sign promise to bring up children as Catholic, etc., etc.

If the church wanted to ordain women, they would find a reason and a way. The church can give Mary such titles as Queen of the Universe and a hundred or more Our Lady of… If that is okay, and if we can pray to numerous female saints for assistance, they can ordain women - at least as Deacons. I suspect that will happen eventually. But I don’t claim the gift or prophecy - or of exorcism. Frankly, I wish I could exorcize (sp) some of the traditionalists who are determined to resist change and maintain practices and customs suited to medievalism but not to the world of today.

Um, no. Funny how some ‘practices and customs’ are sneeringly called ‘medieval’ (even though they predate that era by hundreds of years), and other customs, you know, like celebrating the Lord’s Supper and listening to teachings even OLDER than those pesky so-called medieval ones are considered praiseworthy.

So you think that The Church can go around like some (not all) Protestants and decide that the Eucharist is no longer really Christ (a teaching that goes back to the apostles), or that marriage is no longer between one man and one woman (Jesus’ own words in Scripture) but can between two men or between two women, because those things aren’t really 'God’s teachings, eh? Luckily for you, the Church is not going to be a victim of muddle-headed wrongitude and sappy ‘contemporary’ thinking. It will stick quite firmly with God’s teachings and won’t confuse them with a different and man-made ‘gospel.’

 

[PetersKeys]

I don’t think we’ll ever be rid of this issue until everyone understands that ordination to the sacrificial priesthood is not a right. These “Womenpriests” have somehow got it in their heads that they are being left out of the club and they want to smash the door in and have things run their way, and the want it now.

They’re acting like spoiled children; they need a spanking, and the male bishop who first “ordained” a woman should be hauled before an Inquisition, defrocked, and publicly excommunicated.

because that is how most modern western women are in their marriages and thus they bring it into other parts of life. Many westernized “modern” women are demanding, bold, loud, and want instant gratification. It comes from the whole feminist mindset of a rebellious anti-authoritarian attitude… They want to lead their homes, usurp their husbands headship, lead politics, and now they want the Church. They want to grab onto an authority…

but I do not suffer a woman to teach nor to exercise authority over man, but to be in quietness; - 1 Timothy 2:13

The pulpit is an office of authority and never was made for a woman because it is an office of authority.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

The fact is, many women feel that they are called to the priesthood by God. They experience a desire to serve God in that particular way, they test that desire through prayer, spiritual direction, etc., and they come to the conclusion that God is calling them to be priests in the Catholic Church. I’ve known women who became Episcopalian so that they could be ordained priests or who remained as Catholics and ignored what they felt was their vocation. I’ve also known Catholic spiritual directors who spoke of women who were discerning a call to Catholic priesthood, despite their knowledge of the Church’s position on the matter.

Now, the Church would say that the discernment of such women is wrongheaded, that God would not call them to Catholic priesthood because there is no such thing as priesthood for Catholic women. But the experience of call or vocation among women seems no different than that of men – except for the response of the Church.

You really have your finger on the nub of the problem. The feeling of being called to a vocation certainly would be the same, whether its in a man or in a woman.

BUT, as you say at the end, “except for the response of the Church.” What most people do not understand, is that the reason we have priests, is NOT because those men had the “feeling” of having a vocation and then acted upon it. NO. The reason is, that the Church herself, discerned in these men the vocation, and ordained them. No one has a vocation because he/she “feels” there is one. NO no no no no no. A vocation to the priesthood is only discerned by the Church in those individuals that already had the “feeling.” Most people do not understand that the overwhelming majority of seminarians that had the feeling they might have a vocation did not, and left. Only a small remnant of the original crowd that studies for the priesthood, is actually ordained, as discerned by the Church.

But does the modern liberated woman want to hear talk of submitting with humility to the Church? I don’t think so. Yet that is the very woman that feels God is calling her to serve in humility His Church!

 

[Rocinante]

but I do not suffer a woman to teach nor to exercise authority over man, but to be in quietness; - 1 Timothy 2:13

women can’t teach men?

i have been to a lot of catholic churches where the women did not remain silent. they sang, responded, read texts, led songs and prayers, etc. were they sinning?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

because that is how most modern western women are in their marriages and thus they bring it into other parts of life. Many westernized “modern” women are demanding, bold, loud, and want instant gratification. It comes from the whole feminist mindset of a rebellious anti-authoritarian attitude… They want to lead their homes, usurp their husbands headship, lead politics, and now they want the Church. They want to grab onto an authority…

but I do not suffer a woman to teach nor to exercise authority over man, but to be in quietness; - 1 Timothy 2:13

The pulpit is an office of authority and never was made for a woman because it is an office of authority.

The idea that the only legitimate role for women is wife and mother is an old one with a lot of history and tradition behind it (not just in the West, but everywhere in the world). But any group that has no power or influence will inevitably be abused, this was true of Blacks in the United States until the Civil Rights Movement, and it is true of women in places like Iran and Saudi Arabia today.

However, in modern times even the Catholic Church rejects the idea that women should have no power or influence in the Church and society. It even claims that it is making efforts to give women more of a voice in the Church.

So if conservatives try to keep women utterly submissive and dependent, it is THEY who are rebelling against the Church. This is obvious even to an outsider like me (who is certainly no fan of the Catholic Church) and is supported by the Vatican’s own documents:
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_29061995_women_en.html

In the words of Pope John Paul II:
Thank you, women who work! You are present and active in every area of life-social, economic, cultural, artistic and political. In this way you make an indispensable contribution to the growth of a culture which unites reason and feeling, to a model of life ever open to the sense of “mystery”, to the establishment of economic and political structures ever more worthy of humanity.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

The pulpit is an office of authority and never was made for a woman because it is an office of authority.

I should have mentioned this when I first responded to your post.

But the gravity of what your saying here didn’t hit me until later.

The Catholic Church claims that Catholic women don’t need to be part of the priesthood to be equal with men because being a priest is about service, not power. Yet here you are, admitting that you think that women should not enter the priesthood because it would give them authority (power).

 

[Tantum_ergo]

The pulpit is an office of authority and never was made for a woman because it is an office of authority.

I should have mentioned this when I first responded to your post.

But the gravity of what your saying here didn’t hit me until later.

The Catholic Church claims that Catholic women don’t need to be part of the priesthood to be equal with men because being a priest is about service, not power. Yet here you are, admitting that you think that women should not enter the priesthood because it would give them authority (power).

I think you’re making a stretch here.

First of all, “The Catholic Church” is not ‘saying’ that women don’t need to be priests because priesthood is service, not power.

Some posters mention that priests are about service (which is true) and that women mistakenly think that priesthood is **all about **about having power, and you have turned those remarks into “The Catholic Church claims”. That is not true.

Priests have spiritual authority over their flock.

But women have spiritual authority as well. So do lay men (fathers, teachers, leaders, etc.) --the lay here being both men and women in positions like teaching etc.

Women have spiritual authority over their children. And a lay teacher has a spiritual authority over her (or his) students.

Of course, some can abuse this authority by teaching falsehoods for example. Or by ‘neglecting’ the spiritual duty of teaching the young, being lazy, etc.

The point here is that unlike your assertions of “The Catholic Church claims” (which is your own personal ‘opinion’ based upon the remarks of posters, and is not at all based on authentic teaching of the Church itself the way you have ‘twisted’ those remarks):

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAS NO AUTHORITY TO ORDAIN WOMEN.

IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER A WOMAN SHOULD HAVE “AUTHORITY” OR “POWER” OR WHETHER SHE IS “INFERIOR” OR “SUPERIOR”. IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH OBEDIENCE TO GOD’S TEACHINGS> FOR THIS IS GOD’S TEACHING, NOT THAT OF MEN.

 

[Rocinante]

This idea that the Church can’t ordain a woman.

I am old enough to remember when women had to cover their heads in church (as St. Paul called for), women could not read from the altar (also according to St. Paul), and women and perhaps other laity (I forget the precise rule) could not go beyond the old altar rails that used to be up front. I even think the rule related more to women than to men - when, for example, no girls could become altar girls.

These are only some of the changes I have witnessed, not to mention the liturgy in English, changes in the liturgy, radically different music at mass, most statues removed from the front of most churches, worshiping in Protestant churches no longer a grave sin, mixed weddings now permitted at the altar, non-Catholic no longer has to sign promise to bring up children as Catholic, etc., etc. 

 If the church wanted to ordain women, they would find a reason and a way. The church can give Mary such titles as Queen of the Universe and a hundred or more Our Lady of.... If that is okay, and if we can pray to numerous female saints for assistance, they can ordain women - at least as Deacons. I suspect that will happen eventually. But I don't claim the gift or prophecy - or of exorcism. Frankly, I wish I could exorcize (sp) some of the traditionalists who are determined to resist change and maintain practices and customs suited to medievalism but not to the world of today.

i also predict that within my lifetime, the Church will discover that it indeed has the authority to ordain women in the same sort of way that it turned out in the 1950 that the Church had actually always taught the assumption of mary as doctrine.