Women's Ordination Heresy?

[guanophore]

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.

Well, women followed Jesus along with the men. And people say that the fact that Jesus chose male Apostles was because of the customs of the time. Since those have changed, ordaining women would work nowadays. For example, a woman was still considered property, and subject to her father, husband, or older male relative. she could not testify in court, unless she was accompanied by a male, and preferably two males. that is why it was so unusual for Jesus to appear first to Mary Magdelene, and send her (“apostle”) to the brethren. As you recall, they didn 't believe her anyhow (since she was “just” a woman and had to go see for themselves.

And what about Phoebe?

Rom 16:1-2
16:1 I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deaconess of the church at Cen’chre-ae, 2 that you may receive her in the Lord as befits the saints, and help her in whatever she may require from you, for she has been a helper of many and of myself as well.

 

[guanophore]

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.

There is a caveat to that:

John 14:13-14
" if you ask anything in my name, I will do it. "

Asking “in my name” means according to His will and plan. So, if it is not according to His will and plan, then one can sure ask, but it would not be of any avail.

I am sure that it HAS been asked! Anyway, only men can be priests because that is the only way there can be any salvation for men. If women were priests, very few men would ever get saved.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

They separated from us because they felt the Church had become corrupt, among other things. Probably true to some extent at that time. I suspect if the Vatican all of sudden declared female priests were ok, the Eucharist is not what we believe, or contraception was now ok, we’d have another massive separation. The question of the “true” Church would surface all over again. Of course, I don’t ever see that happening.

That can’t happen.

 

[heavenly]

I don’t understand your statement that “this position cannot be defended”. I said that God did not say anywhere in the preserved scriptures that women cannot be ordained, so God has the right to sit back and decide what male apostles and all churches did with the “authority”: they either implemented or took.
Why is the phrase God beyond gender in the Catechism???

 

[kangnamdragon]

John 14:13-14
" if you ask anything in my name, I will do it. "

Asking “in my name” means according to His will and plan. So, if it is not according to His will and plan, then one can sure ask, but it would not be of any avail.

I am sure that it HAS been asked! Anyway, only men can be priests because that is the only way there can be any salvation for men. If women were priests, very few men would ever get saved.

I cannot ask God to lift a rock which He cannot lift. God cannot do the impossible and ordaining a woman would be impossible, so it cannot happen.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

I wonder why this metaphor was chosen above others, to conceptualize this relationship. Why not “ulitimate friend” etc. Why does it have to be a sexualized metaphor? What if women don’t see themselves in this way, what if they see themslves as whole human beings not as a “bride”. Is this an arbitrary metaphor? metaphor?

A bride is not a full human being?

I’m not really sure what your question is…

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

I don’t understand your statement that “this position cannot be defended”. I said that God did not say anywhere in the preserved scriptures that women cannot be ordained, so God has the right to sit back and decide what male apostles and all churches did with the “authority”: they either implemented or took.
Why is the phrase God beyond gender in the Catechism???

He did so implicitly by only ordaining men as Apostles when He was alive on this Earth. As mere fallible human beings who are we to question His Divine judgment?

Women play very important rolls in the Church – they are just different ones than the rolls men have; and vice-versa. A man cannot become a nun, and a woman cannot become a priestess.

There is no historical proof that there were ordained women in the early Christian church (i.e. the Catholic Church); and we can’t modify Sacred Tradition merely to fit our secular whims and cultural ‘values’ (or lack thereof).

 

[guanophore]

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.

Eph 5:21-6:1

21 Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ. 22 Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands. 25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. 28 Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church; 33 however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

 

[patg]

I cannot ask God to lift a rock which He cannot lift.

Which rock would that be?

God cannot do the impossible…

I hope you are kidding…

…and ordaining a woman would be impossible, so it cannot happen.

Only if you place limits on God - I don’t think many are willing to do that.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Whether or not W.O. turns out to be a heresy, depends on…
what God, who has no gender, decides to do about it or change it. GOD has not said anything to date about female priests, it’s all man made rules. Taking a look at what males did with the Bible and its many changes and deletions and scribings, the genderless God could very well tell you that you all blew it by establishing a hierarchy where males were designated religious leaders and women were not. The genderless God could also describe what HE/She saw in history, where in history there were most likely women disciples and apostles suppressed. What is not written down disappears for a while. History is written by those in power. what is we found out that psychological and physical violence was down against women who were acting as apostles by men who were prideful and jealous.It is ridiculous to say that if Jesus had wanted female apostles, he would have designated them, because we all know that all the scribes had to do was DELETE any evidence, being the wretched little sinners they could have been. “Just because some women are stronger than men doesn’t mean that some women should think she can lead a Church.” Gosh, sounds like what the world said to various races out of power over the course of history. The genderless God
has not made a decision or statements about women’s ordination, and in fact, the part of the genderless God that must be female, has waited, looking down at the males prancing around in amusement and probably disgust.

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

APOSTOLIC LETTER
ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS
OF JOHN PAUL II
TO THE BISHOPS
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
ON RESERVING PRIESTLY ORDINATION
TO MEN ALONE

Venerable Brothers in the Episcopate,

1. 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. This tradition has also been faithfully maintained by the Oriental Churches.

                           *  *  *  *  *

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 (cf. Lk 22:32) 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.**

There it is – “to be definitively held by all the faithful.”

 

[kangnamdragon]

Which rock would that be?

I hope you are kidding…

Only if you place limits on God - I don’t think many are willing to do that.

No, I am not kidding. God can only do what is possible for Him to

do.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Why then does our Lord say anything? Also the things you mentioned above are intrinsically evil. 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”

Prove then, that womens ordination is JUST as evil as black magic or demon worship.

Women’s “ordination” is impossible, so how is it “evil”? Even if a bishop of the Catholic Church “laid hands” on a woman (doesn’t that already sound scandalous?) it wouldn’t be valid. Therefore; what’s left to even discuss?

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

No, I am not kidding. God can only do what is possible for Him to

do.

Amen! God will not contradict Himself.

 

[clmowry]

Why is this reference to “God is beyond gender” in there? Can anybody help with this?

Of course God is beyond and not limited to gender. I think this Is most clear in the many descriptions of The Holy Spirit.

However, is Christ genderless? Is Christ God? How does Christ refer to God and His relationship to God? How is He refered to in relationsip with His Church?

Christ and His Apostle’s laid out the roles we are to play. In His Wisdom, He gave us the example to follow. We didn’t make this stuff up. He could have established an all female or a mixed priesthood while He was here on Earth.

He did not.

And as John Paul the Great stated, the Church has no authority to make this change. (Just as it has no authority to Change any other Traditions of Christ and His apostles.)

This, and all Church descent remind of a movie scene with Michael J Fox:

"Just get back out there and tell them the truth.

I told them the truth.

Yeah but it wasn’t the truth they wanted to here, so to them its a lie."

If Christ thinks the Apostles just got it wrong and that it needs to be changed, He could apear to the faithful in all His Glory and straighten us out. Barring that rather ulikely event, as far as the Catholic Church is concerned. The case is closed.

The Church does not have the authority to teach that which contradicts the teaching of Christ as handed down by His Apostles in Apostolic Tradition, on any subject, ever.

Chuck

 

[DB_AND_ALI]

Celebacy is a mere discipline – it has no theological basis, and no one with authority in the Church ever said it did. In fact, we do have married Catholic priests.

However, John Paul the Great said the Church has no authority to ordain women, and “this is to be accepted definitively by all the faithful.”

The matter is closed.

it may be closed in your mind…and please understand that i accept [but don’t agree] the churches law/ruling on the non-ordination of women priests ; HOWEVER if a new pope ruled it to be acceptable , then would you accept this ruling ?

 

[Nagoda]

English really is a ****** language isn’t it?

Well, I guess I’ll have to accept that the Church doesn’t have the authority. I may not like this, but I suppose the Lord can help my unbelief. Oh how I wish it were possible…

But it still seems strange that the church has the power to cast out the very demons of Hell from a persons body if possessed or to bind and loose stuff or to heal diseases and forgive sins… yet she can’t do something as simple as ordaining women.

honestly it just seems bizarre to me. i’ll have to ask jesus why when i get to heaven eventually, if i get there

I hope God does help my faith on this one

Cause the whole thing just seems wierd ya know?

 

[vern_humphrey]

it may be closed in your mind…

Not in my mind, but in the infallible pronouncement of John Paul the Great, who directs all the faithful to believe this definitively.

and please understand that i accept [but don’t agree] the churches law/ruling on the non-ordination of women priests ; HOWEVER if a new pope ruled it to be acceptable , then would you accept this ruling ?

Since it has been rulled on definitively, it is not possible for “a new pope” to rule it to be acceptable – any more than “a new pope” could rule the Real Presense is no longer a matter of Catholic dogma…

 

[patg]

No, I am not kidding. God can only do what is possible for Him to do.

Which is, by definition of being all-powerful, everything.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Which is, by definition of being all-powerful, everything.

So explain to us how God can commit a sin.

 

[Nagoda]

Let me explain it

In THEORY it is possible for God to do anything. However, in practice, God chooses goodness and only goodness due to his purely good nature which prevents him from doing evil (consider this God’s insight in psychological terms). So while in theory God COULD sin, in reality he chooses not to due to his all good nature. if God were to sin, he would contradict himself, his very nature and would therefore no longer be considered God.