It’s interesting. I left a comment in reply to one of the commenters who claimed that the Church has never recognized women as real people. And in my reply I posted several Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church who taught the equality of women – but the comment didn’t post. I’ll post part of it here: * A.D. 30 - Jesus taught the full equality of men and women in Mark 3:35, and modeled it in His relations with women.
I am not a Catholic and am not seeking but I have some questions I would like answered.
Catholics believe that bishops guide the flock yes. We do not seek to change with the opinion of the world but instead to cling to God’s law and the teachings handed down by Christ’s apostles. And yes, if a person wants to change the church contrary to it’s basic beliefs, they shouldn’t be a follower there but people are irrational, goofy and stubborn that way.I am not a Catholic and am not seeking but I have some questions I would like answered.
One is that if the Pope is considered infallible by the Catholic church then why would a Catholic demand anything of the Church? Religion in my opinion is to guide the flock, not the other way around. If the Church agrees to change itself in answer to demands from the flock then is not the religion from the flock and not from God? If the Church says no woman or homosexual priests then that is from God for the guidance of the followers of the Church. If the follower does not agree with the Church is that person then NOT a follower but instead trying to lead the Church. Seems cut and dried to me.
Frogman99
Exactly.This deserves a Benedict facepalm.
Sounds about right to me.I am not a Catholic and am not seeking but I have some questions I would like answered.
One is that if the Pope is considered infallible by the Catholic church then why would a Catholic demand anything of the Church? Religion in my opinion is to guide the flock, not the other way around. If the Church agrees to change itself in answer to demands from the flock then is not the religion from the flock and not from God? If the Church says no woman or homosexual priests then that is from God for the guidance of the followers of the Church. If the follower does not agree with the Church is that person then NOT a follower but instead trying to lead the Church. Seems cut and dried to me.
Frogman99
Agreed. Equal in dignity, but not necessarily in vocation. Blessed John Paul II wrote beautifully about this. vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_15081988_mulieris-dignitatem_en.htmlI agree with everything said by the posters who posted above me, and I just wanted to point out that in posting the list of Church Fathers who taught the equality of men and women (see above), I wasn’t trying to imply that they supported women priests. They did not. I was just trying to undermine one of the arguments put forward against the Church, which is that it has never recognized the equality of women and men – in reality, the Church has always taught the equality of men and women because it is part of the teaching and example of Christ. It’s just that the Church has never been given authority to let women be priests. And those are different things: equality does not mean you have the same roles.
Yes. The Church is here to change us; we aren’t here to change the Church.I am not a Catholic and am not seeking but I have some questions I would like answered.
One is that if the Pope is considered infallible by the Catholic church then why would a Catholic demand anything of the Church? Religion in my opinion is to guide the flock, not the other way around. If the Church agrees to change itself in answer to demands from the flock then is not the religion from the flock and not from God? If the Church says no woman or homosexual priests then that is from God for the guidance of the followers of the Church. If the follower does not agree with the Church is that person then NOT a follower but instead trying to lead the Church. Seems cut and dried to me.
Frogman99
“The horror! The horror!” :crying:the cantor …] is typical – and to the point. Asked if she thinks there should be women priests, she answers, “Yes.” …] “There’s no reason that deacons couldn’t be female,” she says.
Priestly ordination, which hands on the office entrusted by Christ to his Apostles of teaching, sanctifying and governing the faithful, has in the Catholic Church from the beginning always been reserved to men alone. …]
As for the figure of “deaconess” (…) the Councils of Nicea and Orange (among others) clearly state:Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren 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.
We have mentioned the deaconesses, who are enrolled in this position, but since they have not received any imposition of hands at all, they are surely to be numbered among the laity. Deaconesses are certainly not to be ordained
I hope the priest of that Parish reads that article, because this is a matter of pastoral attention.[she] counters: “…]And ever since Christ left it in the hands of a man – that’s when things started to screw up.”
Thank you very much for posting this. It is indeed a beautiful letter. I had no idea he was such a feminist!Agreed. Equal in dignity, but not necessarily in vocation. Blessed John Paul II wrote beautifully about this. vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_15081988_mulieris-dignitatem_en.html
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_29061995_women_en.html
Peace,
You are welcome.Thank you very much for posting this. It is indeed a beautiful letter. I had no idea he was such a feminist!
Agreed. I think it will take some time to come to fruition, but the seeds are there.Jason, re your post 18:
This is long overdue, methinks.![]()