Why women cant be Catholic Priests

[simpleas]

Yes Jesus trusted Peter 2,000 and more years ago with the keys to the Kingdom, the keys are still in trust to the current leader who can make certain decisions, very powerful ones!

 

[simpleas]

When I said through the apostles I meant by the laying on of hands.

 

[Sugabee43]

Please do read @steve-b’s last post quoting St. John Paul II and stop barking.

 

[guanophore]

So unless God lifts the ban himself I guess women will not priests.

I think this is a very important point. The Holy Spirit is omnipotent, after all, and is perfectly capable of convincing the Church leadership that things need to change.

I meant that there is no function in particular that deacons can do but laypeople can’t (by divine law). So unordained deaconesses could be given the same functions as actual deacons (to be clear, I’m not saying this would be a good idea, just that it’s possible).

I am interested to see a source on this. Non-ordained persons do not preach during the Mass (or should not) and it seems difficult for me to believe that this would change.

So then they would not be Deacons, but something else. They’d be practically pretending to be Deacons, but not really be Deacons. Why do it then?

And why do it to the Congregation! If there is a need for women to serve as they did in the early Church, they would need to be called something different. The closest thing we have now to this role is that of a nun. It is true that the number of nuns serving in parishes has drastically reduced, but there are oblate roles and diocesan consecrated roles that would be far more appropriate.

 

[steve-b]

Wingz:

So unless God lifts the ban himself I guess women will not priests.

I think this is a very important point. The Holy Spirit is omnipotent, after all, and is perfectly capable of convincing the Church leadership that things need to change.

Just a quick comment

From Jesus mouth to our ears, The HS doesn’t speak on His own.

Jn 16:12-15

 

[guanophore]

Just a quick comment

From Jesus mouth to our ears, The HS doesn’t speak on His own.

Jn 16:12-15

Exactly. If Jesus wants something to change, such as the ordination of women, the HS will reveal it to the Church.oint_up_2:t2:

 

[edwest211]

There is an idol called Change. It is a god to some. And it always demands change. This will never happen.

 

[simpleas]

That’s not how the thinking goes spiritually speaking.

There is only one Head and that is Christ, who is ontologically male so only one of the two ways of being human can properly signify Christ as Head in liturgy.

Women are primarily the signifiers of what it means to be many members who make up one body. Because the body has many members, men are included in that, even if their body doesn’t signify this spiritual reality.

In the sanctuary during worship, we see Christ as our Head, signified by the priest, offering Himself to the Father on behalf of the Body.

So men can be included in the body (bride) as male, even though they will never give birth to the body as a female can, but women can not become a icon of Christ because she isn’t a male.

Isn’t there something a miss here?

 

[simpleas]

Exactly. If Jesus wants something to change, such as the ordination of women, the HS will reveal it to the Church.oint_up_2:t2:

Perhaps the Holy Spirit is revealing it to the church but many choose to ignore it…

 

[Elizabeth3]

So men can be included in the body (bride) as male, even though they will never give birth to the body as a female can, but women can not become a icon of Christ because she isn’t a male.

Isn’t there something a miss here?

No. What part of “the Body has many members” do you not understand? Do women not give birth to children of both sexes? Do men not father children of both sexes? Surely, you aren’t saying only female children and women are in need of a Savior by implying there is something amiss if men can be part of the Body?

What part of "there is only one Christ who was a man, the Son of God, who offers Himself in the Sacrifice of the Mass to the Father, and who is best represented by a male priest who stands in persona Christi, don’t you understand? Wouldn’t there be something amiss in a woman standing as the Son?

You’re making the priesthood all about what the priest would signify about all humans-male or female-as members of the Body who can be Christ through our words and actions towards others. That spiritual reality is already covered in the liturgy. That is what the Body is and what we as women physically signify to everyone. Everyone is to go forth, after receiving Christ, to carry Him out to the world and be fruitful in bringing children to the Father, through Holy Mother Church.

The priesthood is about signifying Christ and the full truth about Him that I stated above.

If women who advocate for the priesthood would stop thinking of it in a self-focused way and instead focus on what truths it reveals about our Savior, they would be much happier.

 

[goodcatholic]

There is an idol called Change. It is a god to some. And it always demands change.

I only came to the same conclusion about 6 months ago.
If I can just add a short anecdotal analogy. I went to a physical therapist to treat my Achilles heel. he refused to use an ultrasound machine saying “oh the latest research says its all bunkum. We use dry needling now” Yet my GP (an older guy) reckons the ultrasound machine is the best treatment.
Sometimes it is generational. The current generation has to prove they are smarter than the previous one.

 

[Maximilian75]

???

What do you mean?

 

[guanophore]

Perhaps the Holy Spirit is revealing it to the church but many choose to ignore it…

They may try, but God will not be mocked. It is His Church, and she will conform to His rule. Those who do not wish to participate will be out in the cold, gnashing their teeth, saying 'Lord, Lord!". Anyone who doubts this need only give another quick read of the letters to the Churches in Revelation.

 

[PetraG]

Perhaps the Holy Spirit is revealing it to the church but many choose to ignore it…

This is the thinking that gives rise to new Protestant denominations…who then give rise to new Protestant denominations, who give rise to other Protestant denominations…

Every single one of them was started by Christians who believed the Magesterium was not listening to the truth being revealed (or that had previously been revealed) by the Holy Spirit.

 

[goout]

steve-b:

Just a quick comment

From Jesus mouth to our ears, The HS doesn’t speak on His own.

Jn 16:12-15

Exactly. If Jesus wants something to change, such as the ordination of women, the HS will reveal it to the Church.oint_up_2:t2:

That’s an example of a thought that is at the same time true, but in truth not applicable.
It’s an ontological issue, and it’s definitively stated and binding per the Magisterium.
God, through the HS, could do anything, but God has no contradiction.

 

[simpleas]

No. What part of “the Body has many members” do you not understand? Do women not give birth to children of both sexes? Do men not father children of both sexes? Surely, you aren’t saying only female children and women are in need of a Savior by implying there is something amiss if men can be part of the Body?

No, I’m saying men can be classed as the bride of Christ (the church) which is feminine in relation to God, yet woman can not be thought of as male in order to act in persona Christi.

You’re making the priesthood all about what the priest would signify about all humans-male or female-as members of the Body who can be Christ through our words and actions towards others. That spiritual reality is already covered in the liturgy.

Yes I tend to think of things in a spiritual sense than in the physical.

Guess I just don’t understand all the deep theological teachings, which is quite frustrating for me and slightly worrying as I may not know my faith at all.

Thanks.

 

[Jimbo]

I get it to an extent, and I appreciate your empathy and desire to eliminate pain. But, there is a difference between ‘I caused you pain’ and ‘you are choosing to feel hurt’.

The Catholic Church is a religious organization that gets to set it’s own rules.

This isn’t a case of ‘Women don’t get to vote because they’re women’. This is a case of ‘This private organization gets to define it’s roles’.

 

[Thom18]

guanophore:

Exactly. If Jesus wants something to change, such as the ordination of women, the HS will reveal it to the Church.oint_up_2:t2:

Perhaps the Holy Spirit is revealing it to the church but many choose to ignore it…

Or, perhaps the Holy Spirit isn’t, the Church is teaching soundly, and some choose to ignore it…

 

[Elizabeth3]

No, I’m saying men can be classed as the bride of Christ (the church) which is feminine in relation to God, yet woman can not be thought of as male in order to act in persona Christi.

Right. Because as members of the Body of Christ, men are standing in relation to Christ as part of the Body. But the priest is not standing in relation to Christ (as an individual he is) but as priest he’s standing IN the person of Christ, who as we know is male and the Son of the Father.

Yes I tend to think of things in a spiritual sense than in the physical.

But it seems you want to think of things only in the spiritual sense and forget that the physical, as created by God, has meaning too that points to the spiritual. The two can’t be separated or it can lead to all kinds of heresy as we’ve seen in Church history.

 

[Elizabeth3]

I get it to an extent, and I appreciate your empathy and desire to eliminate pain. But, there is a difference between ‘I caused you pain’ and ‘you are choosing to feel hurt’.

The Catholic Church is a religious organization that gets to set it’s own rules.

This isn’t a case of ‘Women don’t get to vote because they’re women’. This is a case of ‘This private organization gets to define it’s roles’.

I am sympathetic to the many women who are pained by this issue and the reason for the pain isn’t because women want to make their own rules that are fair and it sees the Church as being unfair when it won’t allow women to be priests.

The root of pain for most of the women who struggle with this issue is that they are struggling in identifying themselves as female and women, with a God who is spoken of in male terms and a Savior who came to us as a man. They very much look at God and think “Is it true that I’m so utterly other in my being than my creator, that there is nothing in Him that I resemble?” Men can hear words like Son, Father and see that Christ was a male and can identify with God as Sons much more easily than women can. At least in the human sphere, you can identify with your father because you look like Him or because you share DNA, but in relation to God the terms are so male focused that it can be very painful to think that nothing about your femininity or being female, signifies God.

So when women who feel this pain, read that Christianity teaches they are made in the image of God, that there is “no male nor female” in Christ, and that we are all One in Christ, they turn this pain on what they think is the patriarchal Church and it’s defective male-centric theology, and begin to rethink theology that is more inclusive whether by language or action, to show that femininity does have a place in the God-Head and they can identify themselves as daughters who reflect and image their Father. (or their Father/Mother as they sometimes say.)

Edited to add that it is also thought that if there is no resemblance to God in any way and God is “all Good” then it implies that being a woman is associated with sin, wickedness and evil. They see many of the writings of the Church Fathers seeming to imply such as well.