A
Annabelle_Marie
Guest
That’s what I would say! I have absolutely no desire for women priests or to be a priest…
- Status
That’s what I would say! I have absolutely no desire for women priests or to be a priest…
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Not if its true, any more than its unfair to declare that men are (usually) physically stronger than women. But I have never seen or heard any convincing evidence that it is.
And if it is not true, then the most likely explanation for why the idea of God the Father has been so promoted and popular (instead of God the Mother) is because it supports patriarchal institutions and concepts.
However, if advocates of women’s ordination think this way (and many of them do more or less) than why have anything to do with the Church at all?
Something is keeping them in the Church, but what?
A
Alan55
Guest
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.
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.
B
BlueShadow123
Guest
Maybe because they feel like they would be good at it?
Its a little sad that they can’t be. But oh well. Rules are rules.
Its a little sad that they can’t be. But oh well. Rules are rules.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Thing is, the ‘experience’ of a call , the ‘desire’, 'the ‘testing’ etc. mean diddly squat --and I’m not meaning to be rude, honestly–. . .
because people can be absolutely, totally, sincerely convinced that they are right when they are absolutely, totally, 100% wrong wrong wrong.
**IOW, just because people ‘feel’ something is no guarantee that what they ‘feel’ is good, truthful, accurate, etc. **
Wanting to ‘serve’ is a worthwhile thing. But suppose that a young man --or woman–wanted to be a firefighter. . .wanted it so much that he or she thought the strength of the desire and the ‘purity’ of the intention was a total guarantee that they ‘should’ be a firefighter. . . yet the young man or woman lacked some fundamental capability to be a police officer (for example, they could not manage to lift 50 pounds of weight, a requirement for a firefighter). . .and was ignoring that lack because of being blinded by the strength of desire and the ‘nobility’ of the intention. Suppose they kept on insisting that the inability to lift weight didn’t matter, because the only thing that mattered was that they ‘felt the call’ and that this was such a ‘pure intention’. But if somehow they did manage to get themselves named as firefighters even though they couldn’t handle the weight requirement, not only would they put themselves at risk, they would put the people they were supposed to be saving at risk.
Now you may say that there is no ‘basic requirement’ for priesthood that a woman could not fill --but since God Himself made the decision–and He is far more “just” and ‘equality concerned’ than any mere human–the only way of waffling out is arguing that God ‘didn’t’ make the decision (and good luck trying to prove a negative). Add to that argument that everything then goes up for grabs (hey, if somehow the ‘wicked patriarchical men’ managed to pervert God’s teaching on ‘male priests’ then they ‘could have’ perverted God’s teaching on everything, yes?) and why bother to try to proclaim a Christianity that nobody can be ‘sure’ God really 'taught?'
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
** 2. It always has struck me as ironic that Catholicism has such adulation and adoration and veneration of Mary, who surely stands above any and all priests (except for Christ) in church doctrine, yet denies women the priesthood.**
That puzzled me actually, until I realized that the Virgin Mary became less human and less like a real woman as Marian adoration developed. Its really quite strange.
As I posted on another thread, according to Catholic doctrine the Virgin Mary is:
-Eternally Virgin, both physically (meaning that she never lost her hymen) and practically.
-Without Sin (meaning that she never had any lustful thoughts of any kind).
-Untroubled by the normal pain of labor during the Christ Child’s birth.
-And many Catholic theologians have speculated that she was untainted by a woman’s monthly cycle (she never had a period). Though I am unsure whether or not this is official Church doctrine.
That puzzled me actually, until I realized that the Virgin Mary became less human and less like a real woman as Marian adoration developed. Its really quite strange.
As I posted on another thread, according to Catholic doctrine the Virgin Mary is:
-Eternally Virgin, both physically (meaning that she never lost her hymen) and practically.
-Without Sin (meaning that she never had any lustful thoughts of any kind).
-Untroubled by the normal pain of labor during the Christ Child’s birth.
-And many Catholic theologians have speculated that she was untainted by a woman’s monthly cycle (she never had a period). Though I am unsure whether or not this is official Church doctrine.
E
edwest2
Guest
We, meaning everyone in Western society, have been led to believe that change is automatic. Apparently, it just happens one day. That’s why you see threads which include the words “Isn’t it time…?” The complete sentence always means, Isn’t It Time For The Church To Change Something?"
According to who? Those addicted to change? And I should add, those who worship change? God is not man. God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Humans are temporal. And yes, it’s OK to change your hair style or try different clothes.
And what have men done lately? Marxism? Communism? Capitalism? And those who do not believe in God usually take the next choice - men. Scientists, experts. They look to them and their ideas.
When God is not relevant, those from outside the Church say, You won’t be relevant anymore if you don’t change. Even some Catholics believe that their beliefs are their beliefs. To be kept in a box and taken out only on Sundays and what happens at Church stays at Church. Then they go back to the “real” world.
My fellow Catholics, do you pray to a person? Will you be judged by the living, flesh and blood God? We are told the same Jesus will return.
But the scoffers scoff and use their imaginations to invent women priests or “gender neutral” housing. There are differences between men and women - real differences. Yet I read about how some women are “no longer chained to their biology.” Really? And how does one go about doing that?
The other problem is that a handful of people have created victim classes which they then manipulate. They create enemies and they look at the Church as not founded by God but a bunch of guys who said, “Look, we gotta keep those women under our thumbs, see? So we’ll set up this all male clubhouse thing and don’t let no girls in.” Uh Uh. That is a willfull disregard of what God, not men, established.
The Church is not forcing women out. The Church was established by God. People can reject that but it doesn’t change anything.
God bless,
Ed
According to who? Those addicted to change? And I should add, those who worship change? God is not man. God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Humans are temporal. And yes, it’s OK to change your hair style or try different clothes.
And what have men done lately? Marxism? Communism? Capitalism? And those who do not believe in God usually take the next choice - men. Scientists, experts. They look to them and their ideas.
When God is not relevant, those from outside the Church say, You won’t be relevant anymore if you don’t change. Even some Catholics believe that their beliefs are their beliefs. To be kept in a box and taken out only on Sundays and what happens at Church stays at Church. Then they go back to the “real” world.
My fellow Catholics, do you pray to a person? Will you be judged by the living, flesh and blood God? We are told the same Jesus will return.
But the scoffers scoff and use their imaginations to invent women priests or “gender neutral” housing. There are differences between men and women - real differences. Yet I read about how some women are “no longer chained to their biology.” Really? And how does one go about doing that?
The other problem is that a handful of people have created victim classes which they then manipulate. They create enemies and they look at the Church as not founded by God but a bunch of guys who said, “Look, we gotta keep those women under our thumbs, see? So we’ll set up this all male clubhouse thing and don’t let no girls in.” Uh Uh. That is a willfull disregard of what God, not men, established.
The Church is not forcing women out. The Church was established by God. People can reject that but it doesn’t change anything.
God bless,
Ed
E
edwest2
Guest
That puzzled me actually, until I realized that the Virgin Mary became less human and less like a real woman as Marian adoration developed. Its really quite strange.
As I posted on another thread, according to Catholic doctrine the Virgin Mary is:
-Eternally Virgin, both physically (meaning that she never lost her hymen) and practically.
-Without Sin (meaning that she never had any lustful thoughts of any kind).
-Untroubled by the normal pain of labor during the Christ Child’s birth.
-And many Catholic theologians have speculated that she was untainted by a woman’s monthly cycle (she never had a period). Though I am unsure whether or not this is official Church doctrine.
Actually, Mary represents as close to an ideal woman after Eve as could be possible. Conceived without sin. Both Adam and Eve had no sin until their disobedience. Mary, like Christ, represented a return to a true humanity. To be more like Christ is to be more authentically human since the Church teaches that Jesus suffered all the temptations we do.
Peace,
Ed
B
Bub
Guest
For the same reason that a man wants to be a priest.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Do you have any idea how much you sound like a bitter old man Ed?
In thread after thread you have complained about the younger generation, modern trends, and now change itself. This is not profound, its just waxing nostalgically about the past.
But as I have said before I don’t believe in the ‘Good Old Days.’
On a more specific note, what are people supposed to rely on if not the experts?
Have the priests in charge (that’s called theocracy)?
God Himself (who seldom shows up at meetings or returns phone calls)?
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Actually, Mary represents as close to an ideal woman after Eve as could be possible. Conceived without sin. Both Adam and Eve had no sin until their disobedience. Mary, like Christ, represented a return to a true humanity. To be more like Christ is to be more authentically human since the Church teaches that Jesus suffered all the temptations we do.
Peace,
Ed
Oh I forgot something, the Virgin Mary’s Bodily Assumption into Heaven.
The point is that Mother Mary is primarily defined by what she lacks. Since she never had procreative sex and was without sin that means she lacked a sex drive. Because the only sinless use of the sex drive is procreative and unitive sex.
Due to the fact that she was without sin she never questioned God or any of His commands. This means that her good behavior was effortless, instead of being a matter of discipline or determination the way that it would be for ordinary human beings. Because as the Sinless Mother of God it never occurred to her to behavior badly (remember that bad thoughts are sins too).
And she had no monthly cycle because frankly, the Jews thought menstrual blood was unclean (and Christianity was made up primarily of Jews and former Jews for a long time).
The Virgin Mary never experienced real childbirth and labor because of course the Christ Child would not cause his mother pain (unlike every other baby throughout history).
And her hymen remained intact even though she gave birth to a child because…well to be honest I have always thought it was a bit creepy how concerned Catholic theologians and priests were about the Virgin Mother’s private parts. But the point is that this too made her profoundly different from a non-idealized woman.
Now I have a question for you:
What (if anything) did the Ideal Woman do when her Child was being publicly humiliated and tortured?
What did the Virgin Mary do when Jesus was being put on the Cross?
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
I realize that I am starting to veer off topic in my discussion with Ed, so let me say this.
My mother was an intelligent, thoughtful, caring woman. She was also educated and accomplished, getting her Bachelors Degree and Masters Degree and then getting a job in her field shortly before she died. She would probably have made a better spiritual leader (such as a pastor or priest) than most of the men I know.
But she never would have considered becoming a Catholic priest, even if the position were offered to her, because she considered the Church sexist and corrupt.
All of the fans of women’s ordination consider the Church sexist for excluding women from the priesthood by definition, and many of them are not shy about calling the Church corrupt. So why do they want to join at all?
Why is their response so different from my mother’s?
My mother was an intelligent, thoughtful, caring woman. She was also educated and accomplished, getting her Bachelors Degree and Masters Degree and then getting a job in her field shortly before she died. She would probably have made a better spiritual leader (such as a pastor or priest) than most of the men I know.
But she never would have considered becoming a Catholic priest, even if the position were offered to her, because she considered the Church sexist and corrupt.
All of the fans of women’s ordination consider the Church sexist for excluding women from the priesthood by definition, and many of them are not shy about calling the Church corrupt. So why do they want to join at all?
Why is their response so different from my mother’s?
E
edwest2
Guest
It’s not true, but I understand that people have been told to believe that. The early history of the Church has its founder crucified, members put in person, and some of them crucified. And a few people post as if the Church was established just a few years ago in a smoke-filled room by a bunch of guys wearing suits. Who then turned it into a global racket.
I think the response of the womenpriests is partly an offshoot of the radical feminist movement where women denounce their God given female nature and replace it with an equal to man nature. They don’t want to trust the Church and a few probably want to undermine it. Power and control are the goals.
God bless,
Ed
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
They have a point to a certain extent. The Church of the poor and enslaved effectively ceased to exist when Emperor Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire. The Church has been a part of the establishment and power elite since then (at least in Europe).
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
I think the response of the womenpriests is partly an offshoot of the radical feminist movement where women denounce their God given female nature and replace it with an equal to man nature.
God bless,
Ed
This line particularly interests me Ed.
Are you admitting that the Church thinks that a feminine nature is not equal to a
masculine one?
God bless,
Ed
This line particularly interests me Ed.
Are you admitting that the Church thinks that a feminine nature is not equal to a
masculine one?
D
davidv
Guest
No, the Church thinks no such thing. A simple seach of the Catholic Catechism would have revealed the Church’s thinking. Woman, dignity of, 1645, 2334, 2393edwest2:
This line particularly interests me Ed.
Are you admitting that the Church thinks that a feminine nature is not equal to a
masculine one?
How can your conclusion be reached from Ed comments?
J
John_of_Woking
Guest
The Question is
Why Do Women Even Want To Be Priests?
The Answer: Ignorance of the office/nature of Holy Orders **or **as Lucifer once said “non serviam.” There is a problem with obedience
Why Do Women Even Want To Be Priests?
The Answer: Ignorance of the office/nature of Holy Orders **or **as Lucifer once said “non serviam.” There is a problem with obedience
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
I was honestly teasing him about what appeared to be a ‘Freudian Slip.’
E
edwest2
Guest
This line particularly interests me Ed.
Are you admitting that the Church thinks that a feminine nature is not equal to a
masculine one?
I certainly am not. They denounce what God gave them and pretend to be men. As far as what the Church teaches, here it is:
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040731_collaboration_en.html
It is lengthy but quite clear.
God bless,
Ed
P
PatrickSebast
Guest
Quick nitpick: Constantine only legalized Christianity, it wasn’t made the official religion for several more decades under Theodosius.
Perhaps not of major importance, but I hear this said so often it becomes almost irritating at times.
- Status