Why Do Women Even Want To Be Priests?

[Tantum_ergo]

We have no guarantee. What we have is an educated guess looking at the results of similar changes in the past. A black person and a white person, while they have different skin pigments (a purely physical trait), are seen as equals where before they were not. Changing the laws of the country to accept that blacks and whites are equals was not taken with open arms (clearly). But, the fact that blacks and whites are equals is a known fact, and while at the beginning whites didn’t want to accept it, eventually it was accepted and our country is the better for it.
In the event that our current conceptions (well, my conception, since clearly you do not view women as equals) are incorrect, enough evidence will have been made to change the doctrine back to the way it was. However, I do not feel that there will ever be enough evidence to prove that women are less then , and not equal to men (in the eyes of God or otherwise).

Just a point of info, my dear: I’m a woman so stating that I ‘clearly don’t view women as equals’ is rather an epic fail. I suppose since I don’t include a ‘gender smiley’ next to my signature you simply ‘assumed’ that I was male based on your ‘assumption’ that only a ‘male’ would espouse the thoughts I expressed. Well, if you can make a wrong assumption on something like that, you probably can make wrong assumptions on lots of things if you don’t have ‘all the facts’ before you assume. (I’m using "you’ in the ‘generic’ sense here, not singling you out personally.)

I’ll ask you personally though to come up with evidence that the current teaching of the Catholic Church on the subject is absolutely not "God’s teaching’ (you should be able to prove that, correct?)

Because if it IS God’s teaching, shouldn’t we follow His teaching regardless of societal opinion? I mean, if we’re going to bother with believing in God, it would be logical to abide by His teachings and not to ignore or defy them, don’t you agree?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

---

I disagree with the competition statement 100%. It represents the divisive feminist nonsense that denies even a species relationship between men and women. “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.” Gloria Steinem

The radical destroyers of the family encouraged things like Women’s Studies and Women’s Literature in Universities. This was done to create a further sense of separation.

Cooperation is the correct word. The radical feminists only want eternal class warfare. They were not and are not solution oriented.

Cooperation and healing and forgiveness are the keys to male-female relationships.

Peace,
Ed

Simply out of curiosity, do you ever read your posts before hitting the send button?

Competition is one of the cornerstone’s of capitalism. If women cannot compete then they are not players in the marketplace, they are only pawns at best.

 

[Betterave]

No, I’m not kidding you, and I meant what I said.

So did I. I’m curious: what are your credentials for making authoritative statements about history (statements that you feel you don’t even need to explain or defend when they are challenged)?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

like I said earlier, you are viewing authority in a really vain and shallow manner.

Secondly, Holy Orders is not a “competition”…

And you are not reading posts (or mine at least) before replying to them. Otherwise you would know that I was specifically NOT referring to female ordination.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

You’re right up to a point, but you only get one yes. Whoever the Nobel people are, they are free to be as idiotic as they want to be…same for a private business. There is something weird about these questions though. There is nothing in catholicim that says that women are never called to make societal contributions outside the home, but we also believe that where God’s will is, there is a way…no need to make this into a competition thing.

Competition in the business world is not about competition?

Are you saying a business or awards committee would automatically be idiotic if they chose a woman for a job or award?

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Do you know anything about history?

Yes, Hitler had a lot of female supporters, but he had at least as many male supporters. But the individuals most responsible for his rise to power were the male German political leaders who helped him become Chancellor because they thought they could control Adolf and use him for their own benefit (they were wrong).

Bad judgment is not something that either gender can claim sole ownership of.

Furthermore most of the great monsters in history have been male. People like Ivan the Terrible, Stalin, Hitler, Genghis Khan, and Attila the Hun. Now this might be due to the fact that women simply have not had the opportunity to abuse power on such a grand scale (for the most part). But the fact that most of history’s monsters have been men seems undeniable.

Pelosi’s actions as a Speaker of the House and a leader in the democratic party don’t even come close to that. Besides, judging all female leaders based on her example would be no more fair than judging all male leadership by Neville Chamberlain or Hitler’s example.

Imagine if in the future a woman were to be Speaker of the House and she would be “the best speaker ever”. That could be possible.

But, it still wouldn’t be an example to say “Woman can be Speaker of the house= woman can be priest.”

The most perfect creature ever created was Mary. Jesus loves his Mother.

He did not make her a Priest.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Just a point of info, my dear: I’m a woman

So what?

A woman can discriminate against and look down on women as a whole. It happens all the time. Why do you think female infanticide, abortions motivated by the fact that the fetus is a girl, and feeding sons properly while malnourishing daughters is so common in places like China, India, and Africa?

 

[Betterave]

God is God. There is no gender involved, so we should not base our practices on the “gender” of God (which does not exist).

First, God is a man, not a woman. (Remember Jesus?) Second, isn’t what you’ve written here a just a bit of a simplistic claim?

Why shouldn’t we? Does the role of priest require some sort of heavy lifting that us wee females can’t handle? Are women less able to understand and study the Bible? Are women, dare I say it, less than men in your opinion? What makes women incapable?

I take it you’re a woman. You are just as capable of ‘heavy lifting’ as the rest of us when it comes to opening up a book. So why are the reasons you mention so completely foreign from the reasons the Church gives for male ordination? It seems reasonable to surmise that you’re quite content with worldly caricatures of the Church’s position and as such are not really qualified to offer a reasonable comment on the advisability of the Church’s changing her position.

I’m not sure if you know any history but St. Thomas Aquinas said that Kings/Princes are powerful and should be obeyed because God gave them that power. Therefore, everything they say or do is the will of God. Clearly, this was a problem because as Catholics we view only the pope as infallible on Church doctrine. This lead to the issue between the separation of Church and State, and on to democracy etc etc…

I don’t know if YOU know any history, but do you *really *think Aquinas ever taught or implied that everything kings say or do is the will of God? Cause, like, wow! That’s nuts!

 

[edwest2]

No, because God is not a man or a woman. God is God. There is no gender involved, so we should not base our practices on the “gender” of God (which does not exist).

Well, are we more fair in “allowing” men to become nurses, a long-standing stereotype of a “woman’s” role? Uhmmm…YES?! There are no roles other than the role of father and mother that we as people are ‘ontologically’ meant to have–and those roles are purely based on our chemical makeup. Sure, men probably make better generals because of their natural makeup in their brain which makes them more logical and better able to cut off emotions. This is why men are usually generals. Women are usually pre-school teachers because they have the motherly instinct and are more caring towards children. This is why women are usually pre-school teachers. But is that to say that men can’t become pre-school teachers and women shouldn’t become generals? Are ALL women more emotional/less logical and ALL men more logical/less emotional?
Obviously, no. Not man and woman is the same as other men and women.
This really gets me, “this new concept is true and the concept that there could be ‘roles’ limited to one sex only are somehow untrue” WHAT ROLES ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT. You can’t make a general question like that and expect it to even remotely lead to any sort of point. Like I just said, women and men are capable of many of the same roles aside from roles which require physical strength or emotional caring–BUT even then there are exceptions.

Why shouldn’t we? Does the role of priest require some sort of heavy lifting that us wee females can’t handle? Are women less able to understand and study the Bible? Are women, dare I say it, less than men in your opinion? What makes women incapable?

Your logic in this question is also inaccurate and misleading.
First of all, women are not “Ignoring and Defying” God because shocker women AREN’T BECOMING PRIESTS! I don’t see a slew of women becoming priests in the Catholic Church. Why? Because it’s NOT ALLOWED. So they aren’t ignoring and defying God at all.
I’m not sure if you know any history but St. Thomas Aquinas said that Kings/Princes are powerful and should be obeyed because God gave them that power. Therefore, everything they say or do is the will of God. Clearly, this was a problem because as Catholics we view only the pope as infallible on Church doctrine. This lead to the issue between the separation of Church and State, and on to democracy etc etc…
Do you think the people of that time who were the victims of the King’s “power” and unfair policies ever wished that the King wasnt the one who had power? Or that his family line succession wasn’t the ~doctrine~ of that government?
Hmm, I’m gonna guess they did. And you know what? Wishing for a change in “doctrine” “law” or “power” Does not mean that those people were “ignoring and defying” the Catholic Church or God because, well, they did what they’re King made them do, what the CHURCH made them do. They probably wished the law wasn’t that way though. Shame on them for wishing?

Again, another bit of inaccurate logic. Refer to the Aquinas/Kingly power point.

I have no idea what you are leading to with the first question.
And for the second one, are you quoting “corrupted” because you believe the Catholic church was never corrupted? I don’t understand. Clearly there are issues in the history of the Catholic church (ie Middle Ages/Aquinas).
The idea of Female Ordination could be a corruption, I suppose. Curious, do you think the fact that alter servers can be girls also be a corruption? Or the fact that Mass isn’t said in Latin a corruption? I guess either of them can be. But the fact that they are there doesnt make the church less viable–the fact that laws are changed doesn’t mean the Catholic Church is wrong in it’s teachings, only that it is changing. As is clearly exemplified by the multiple changes in the last 100 years alone.

No one said it was a “corruption”, only that it is a tradition that could change. The face that men are priests is not wrong or corrupt. The fact that only men can become priests is not “corrupt” because men have always only been able to become priests. The fact that we as a society finally recognize the equality of women, the ability of women, the desire women have to be just as faithful in the Catholic Church and want to preach It’s word in the Mass, and still allow this tradition to continue is wrong.

It is not a tradition that can change. You should read what Pope John Paul II had to say:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

Peace,
Ed

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Imagine if in the future a woman were to be Speaker of the House and she would be “the best speaker ever”. That could be possible.

But, it still wouldn’t be an example to say “Woman can be Speaker of the house= woman can be priest.”

The most perfect creature ever created was Mary. Jesus loves his Mother.

He did not make her a Priest.

I am not saying that.
I never said that.

I was responding to a poster saying that female leadership is automatically bad.

 

[edwest2]

Simply out of curiosity, do you ever read your posts before hitting the send button?

Competition is one of the cornerstone’s of capitalism. If women cannot compete then they are not players in the marketplace, they are only pawns at best.

You have a highly distorted view of the roles of men and women. I have run my own business and I was there to help found another. You seem to be talking about a purely personal theory you have that is informed by God knows what.

Bottom line - this thread is just part of an ongoing attempt to prove man knows something that God does not. In other cases, it’s just worship of the god, Change, in the church of the human mind.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Betterave]

Competition in the business world is not about competition?

Are you saying a business or awards committee would automatically be idiotic if they chose a woman for a job or award?

Don’t you think there’s a bit of an equivocation in what you’re saying? Obviously no one will deny (I hope!) that a woman and a man are in competition if they are seeking the same job. But they are not in competition qua man and qua woman - they are in competition qua job applicants. Competition for a job is not a competition between maleness and femaleness, just because the competition is between a male and a female.

 

[Betterave]

I am not saying that.
I never said that.

I was responding to a poster saying that female leadership is automatically bad.

If anyone ever actually did say that, as a wholly general statement in the way you imply, he or she would not be speaking as a Catholic.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

You have a highly distorted view of the roles of men and women. I have run my own business and I was there to help found another. You seem to be talking about a purely personal theory you have that is informed by God knows what.

Bottom line - this thread is just part of an ongoing attempt to prove man knows something that God does not. In other cases, it’s just worship of the god, Change, in the church of the human mind.

Peace,
Ed

All right then Ed, you tell me:
How can women participate in capitalism if they cannot compete for jobs, customers, favorable reviews, etc.?

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

I am not saying that.
I never said that.

I was responding a poster saying that female leadership is automatically bad.

I wasn’t disagreeing with you.

I was pointing out that:

Pelosi being a bad speaker —> all women would be bad speakers = women would not be good priests. Wouldn’t be an accurate segue

Because

If a woman can be a good speaker =/= a woman can be a priest.

Hope I was more clear.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Don’t you think there’s a bit of an equivocation in what you’re saying? Obviously no one will deny (I hope!) that a woman and a man are in competition if they are seeking the same job. But they are not in competition qua man and qua woman - they are in competition qua job applicants. Competition for a job is not a competition between maleness and femaleness, just because the competition is between a male and a female.

Perhaps.

But she gave me a vague answer so I was trying to put her on the spot so that she had to answer me clearly.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Again, why is it that only a lesbian could be found who would step up to the plate to be ordained a “Catholic” priest?

lifesitenews.com/?/news/lesbian-catholic-priestess-denied-catholic-funeral-rites

 

[AngryAtheist8]

If anyone ever actually did say that, as a wholly general statement in the way you imply, he or she would not be speaking as a Catholic.

I am not sure what Charlemagne II was speaking as, but I know what he was saying.

 

[karbear]

Competition in the business world is not about competition?

Are you saying a business or awards committee would automatically be idiotic if they chose a woman for a job or award?

I’m not saying anything like that. If an awards committee wants to take a pass on recognizing a valuable contribution just because of gender, that would be silly. But it is their decision. As far as I know, that type of award is usually about some intellectual achievment or a recognition of service. And I don’t care one way or the other what kind of decision a business makes about whether or not they want to hire women managers.

I am saying that women do not have to be competitive with men to be valuable. I am saying that she is not unequal in a marriage just because she does not make the same exact type of contribution that her husband does.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Don’t you think there’s a bit of an equivocation in what you’re saying? Obviously no one will deny (I hope!) that a woman and a man are in competition if they are seeking the same job. But they are not in competition qua man and qua woman - they are in competition qua job applicants. Competition for a job is not a competition between maleness and femaleness, just because the competition is between a male and a female.

I realize that competition between individual men and women isn’t the same as competition between masculinity and femininity.

But several posters in this thread (such as Ed, Charlemagne II, and PetersKeys) seem to be arguing that women shouldn’t be able to compete with men for things like jobs, awards, and customers at all.