Women's Ordination Heresy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ICXCNIKA
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I can agree with your first point when you refer to the Catholic Church, the Church gets to set the rules for the Church.

I would disagree with your latter point. Not all men are strong, not all women are placid. Some women are stronger some men are more peaceful. Our gender attitudes may not even be predominantly genetically based necessarily, a lot of it could be simply the way the children of different genders are reared. I see no reason why a man should have authority over his family because he is male. In fact, I would tend to believe that authority should be divided according to the wishes of the couple (some may choose a patriarchal model, others a matriarchal model, and others the more modernly common 50/50 model).
I do agree with you, sorry I was just trying to provide a few examples of the way it could be in family life.(Though I see I did go towards more stereotypes) I did so poorly. My family growing up was definitely more matriarchal, and my parents worked together in making decisions. But when my dad did make a decision, my mom went with it. The Bible states a woman is to submit to her husband, and (if she has a good husband who is faithful and such) I believe that is how it should be. When I marry I would like it to be 50/50. I guess the point is, even if a woman is stronger than most men it doesn’t mean she has any right to think she should lead a church.

None of the apostles were women, thats proof enough for me. If God had wanted women to be priests, He would have made it so long ago.
 
What surprised me is that a professor holding a Ph.D declares that women helped at the Eucharist and led Churches
Doesn’t surprise me.
My ex-FIL has a Ph.D and is most definetly not of infallible thought or opinion.
Matter of fact, I could kick his butt in Trivial Pursuit. Always made him mad.

Anyway, back on track, The Church says “no women priests” and that’s the end of the discussion.
 
Here are my own thoughts on this.

As a progressive Catholic, this is one of the few areas where I am personally in disagreement with the Church. I do not buy any of the arguements against womens ordination that the Church has put forward and this area has always been a struggle to me. Nonetheless, even though I may personally support womens ordination, that does not make me OBJECTIVELY right on the matter. I could be wrong and the Church f\could be right, or the reverse could just as easily happen when I ask God when I die (which I fully intend to do). I have always held that while I could be wrong, and while I may personally support womens ordination (and would personally love to see the Church change on the issue), I refuse to speak out against the Church. She could be right at the end of the day, and I do not hold my position as objective. it is merely an opinion, as fallable as anyone elses. Therefore, though I remain in personal, quiet support of the issue, I also give it up to God and let him deal with it with me when he will, be that at my death or when i am alive.

With that said, would I be considered a heretic in the Church’s eyes?
Well, this is pretty slippery ground. From what you post it seems as though you are accepting the Church’s teaching on this subject…so no you wouldn’t be a heretic. You stated that you refuse to speak out against the Church, so I guess you would need to elaborate on what you mean when you say “…quiet support of the issue.”. If you are leading other people to deny the Church’s teaching through word or deed then you might indeed be a heretic. I don’t think anyone here though is qualified to give you an answer, I know I am certainly not.
 
I don’t recall who exactly put it this way, but it was one of the most reasonable explanations I got concerning the heresy of womens ordination:

The Mass is in essence an eternal marriage celebration between Jesus Christ (the bridegroom) and His Church (the bride). The priest represents Christ and the congregation is the Church, bridegroom and bride respectively.

To replace a male priest with a female priest would be tantamount to advocating same-sex marriage, in essence having a female bridegroom getting married to a female bride.

So unless God turns around and violates a basic biological law and contravenes the natural and supernatural process of bringing about life, this heresy will never pass.
 
I’m a man. I want a child. If I pray to God will He give me one?

Not without a woman.

emp.
 
Here is an essay I wrote for school a while back concerning women in the priesthood. Tell me what you think.:

Should a woman be allowed to be a priestess? Pagans say yes, but for Christians it remains a major controversy; especially for the Catholic Church. For centuries this has been put into question. From ancient and medieval heresies to Protestantism people have taken the side that they should be allowed to be priests. A woman priesthood is wrong. Women should not be allowed to be priestesses because women can not perform the same tasks as men even though they are equal in God’s eyes, it lacks a basis in Christian tradition, and it is not based on scripture.
Code:
Obviously those who support the idea that women should be allowed to be priestesses say that men and women are equal therefore women have to right to be ordained. However, no one has the right to be ordained. The Catholic Catechism states that “no one has the right to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders”, but that they are “called to it by God” (paragraph 1578 of the Catholic Catechism). No woman is called to be a priestess by God, so if she thinks that she is then she is mistaken. It may be another field service to which the Lord calls her to. Now this does not mean that men and women are unequal, but it means that they can not always perform the same tasks. 

Furthermore, it has no basis in Christian tradition. For the Catholic Church, which is the oldest modern Church, has never ordained women as priestesses. It was not until the early 1800’s that the Quakers began to ordain women as priestesses. Thus history itself discredits the authenticity of having a woman priesthood. It does not have any support of Christian tradition. Also, Saint Paul says in his letter to Timothy “I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent” and in his first letter to the Corinthians he stated that “the women should keep silence in the churches” and “they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, even as the law says” (1 Timothy 2:12 and 1 Corinthians 14:34-35). Therefore all Christians should keep to the words of Saint Paul. If the law says that women have no authority over men in the Church then it is plain that a woman priesthood is not possible. It is made abundantly clear through Christian tradition and through the saints that women can not become priestesses.

Finally, God has never chosen women to be priestesses. All of the priests of the covenant of Moses were male. One can not say logically that people just did not approve of priestesses during that day because most if not all of the pagan religions of the period had priestesses.  All twelve of the Apostles were men; however, Mary Magdalene was chosen by Christ to appear to the first and for her to tell his brethren that he is risen. If Jesus wanted to have women in the priesthood then he would have chosen a woman to be one of the apostles. He could have chosen Mary his mother or Mary Magdalene to be one of his apostles. God could have chosen a full woman priesthood or a male and female priesthood, but he did not; thus it is abundantly apparent that God did not and does not want female priestesses.

Women should not and can not be priestesses because it has no basis in any fashion. God has not chosen women to be his priestesses. More importantly he has made it abundantly clear by tradition, and scripture that they should not be priestesses. Though God calls women to serve him, they are not called to be priestesses, but to serve Him in many other extremely important ways.
 
Doesn’t surprise me.
My ex-FIL has a Ph.D and is most definetly not of infallible thought or opinion.
Matter of fact, I could kick his butt in Trivial Pursuit. Always made him mad.

Anyway, back on track, The Church says “no women priests” and that’s the end of the discussion.
No, no. What surprises me is that an educated person would hold an opinion with such thin evidence.
 
The Mass is in essence an eternal marriage celebration between Jesus Christ (the bridegroom) and His Church (the bride). The priest represents Christ and the congregation is the Church, bridegroom and bride respectively.
This is for information purposes only, not to start an argument (not yet anyway 😃 ).

Where did the reference of Jesus being the bridegroom and the Church being his bride originate from? I did a quick online scripture search, and I couldn’t find anything in the Bible, but I could’ve missed it.
 
This is for information purposes only, not to start an argument (not yet anyway 😃 ).

Where did the reference of Jesus being the bridegroom and the Church being his bride originate from? I did a quick online scripture search, and I couldn’t find anything in the Bible, but I could’ve missed it.
Jesus being the bridegroom is referenced in Matthew Chapter 9 verse 15 as well as in Mark and Luke. The Church being the bride, I suppose, can be inferred from Ephesians Chapter 5 verses 22-25. However I think that this particular arguement is very weak. How would a woman priest promote same sex marriage any more than a male priest? I believe that population of the world is roughly half male and half female…so a male Priest marrying male members of the Church would be the same as a female Priest…you get the idea.
 
This is for information purposes only, not to start an argument (not yet anyway 😃 ).

Where did the reference of Jesus being the bridegroom and the Church being his bride originate from? I did a quick online scripture search, and I couldn’t find anything in the Bible, but I could’ve missed it.
The Church is incomparably more than a social organization. She is a spiritual edifice built of living stones, the people of God, the new Israel, the bride of Christ. This last intimate relation the prophet Osee foretold: “I will espouse thee to me forever.” (Osee 2:19) St. Paul tells the Corinthians: “I betrothed you to one spouse, that I might present you a chaste virgin to Christ.” (2 Corinthians 11:2) He tells the Ephesians that Christ is the head of the Church as the husband is the head of the wife, that Christ loves and sanctifies her as a husband loves and takes care of his wife. Hence, as Eve came forth from the side of the sleeping Adam and was flesh of his flesh, so the Church came forth from the side of the dying Christ. As the human race has sprung from the marital union of Adam and Eve, so all the reborn of God are the fruit of the mystic marriage of Christ and his Church.

cf. Revelation 21:1-6 & Revelation 22:17
 
The Church is incomparably more than a social organization. She is a spiritual edifice built of living stones, the people of God, the new Israel, the bride of Christ. This last intimate relation the prophet Osee foretold: “I will espouse thee to me forever.” (Osee 2:19) St. Paul tells the Corinthians: “I betrothed you to one spouse, that I might present you a chaste virgin to Christ.” (2 Corinthians 11:2) He tells the Ephesians that Christ is the head of the Church as the husband is the head of the wife, that Christ loves and sanctifies her as a husband loves and takes care of his wife. Hence, as Eve came forth from the side of the sleeping Adam and was flesh of his flesh, so the Church came forth from the side of the dying Christ. As the human race has sprung from the marital union of Adam and Eve, so all the reborn of God are the fruit of the mystic marriage of Christ and his Church.

cf. Revelation 21:1-6 & Revelation 22:17
Hmm, from the scripture references given, Christ being the bridegroom and the Church being the bride is mainly just a comparison only and/or symbols, and not really spelled out that way.
 
Here is my question in regards to that:

In John’s Gospel does not Jesus say quite a few times to the Apostles ask anything of my Father and it shall be given to you? Since the church has apostolic succession, could she simply not ask God for the power to ordain women as priests? Jesus said ask ANYTHING and ti shall be GRANTED. Would not God theoretically then grant the Church this power if she asked it of Him? and if not, would Jesus then be considered a liar?

Or, do I simply have the context of this passage wrong? if you can provide me with a good solid answer as to why the above scenario would not be possible, I could accept the Church’s teaching that she has not the power.
Not picking on you in particular, but I am interested in the reasoning you offer right here. Is any explanation from the magisterium going to convince every person? Does one being convinced by any particular explanation the reason we ought to accept what the Church teaches? I mean what if we find some argument unconvincing? Does that mean that the Church is really wrong and when Christ said he who hears you hears Me He was not being specific to the magisterium?

My point is the reason something is true is not based on our accepting some explanation. Yes, it is good to study deeper and try to grasp explanations, but we accept these teachings first because we know they come from God ultimately. The explanations may move us or not, but the explanations are not why we accept or reject truth.
 
…I have always taken JP2s statement to mean “well cant do it cause if we have no authority, but if we did have the authority we would”
I found this surprising. Can you say why you think John Paul II meant this?
 
To replace a male priest with a female priest would be tantamount to advocating same-sex marriage, in essence having a female bridegroom getting married to a female bride.
From what I have heard, most of those advocating women ‘priests’ also advocate same-sex marriage.
 
As I have said before, you see heart-warming stories now and then about how some woman, thwarted at becoming a Catholic priest has left the Church and become an Episcopal priest.

That shows us, the issue of sex aside, the Church was right in not ordaining that person – because if we had, the next time she had a dispute with the Church, she’d leave and take her flock into heresy with her.
 
As I have said before, you see heart-warming stories now and then about how some woman, thwarted at becoming a Catholic priest has left the Church and become an Episcopal priest.

That shows us, the issue of sex aside, the Church was right in not ordaining that person – because if we had, the next time she had a dispute with the Church, she’d leave and take her flock into heresy with her.
And what if she turns into a wonderful servant of God as an Episcopal priest, increases her flock, ensures the word of God is heard and understood by all, and brings many closer to God through her actions?

You think God is going to condemn for her for that? Highly doubtful.

Its obvious, predjudice against other Christian denominations is still alive and well, and unfortunately always will be. Very sad. BTW, the reverse is true as well, many Protestants despise Catholics, and call us heretics. Equally sad. We (mankind) are a sinful bunch, aren’t we?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top