women's ordination

[Grace_Angel]

Don’t you believe in having FAITH?? Why should we always understand everything? I don’t have a problem with the Church not allowing women into the priesthood because the Church says it shouldn’t be that way. I trust the Church because it was established by Christ. I know this because i’ve studied history (& the Bible, etc.). Everything Catholic can be found in scripture (virtually): confession (John 20:19), Purgatory (Matthew 12:32, Matthew 18:23, 1 Cor. 3:15). Its either Christ’s Church or it isn’t. Spending time at the Blessed Sacrament proves it to me, if nothing else.
women r equal in the eyes of God. they may never be “equal” in the eyes of man. But then, blacks may never really be seen as equal either… Christians are supposed to take up their cross and carry it, not expect for this world to be perfect.

Did I say that women were not equal? I suppose men can say that they are not equal because they cannot conceive in their bodies and carry a child to birth. That must surely make them unequal. If we are going to be fair, lets be fair all around.
I spoke nothing about inequality. It has nothing to do with inequality, it has to do with how God Himself designed things.
Priesthood is NOT a job, a career, it is a call by the Lord to certain men and not ALL men. It is a call to Father for Him, children for the Kingdom. Just as woman humanly gives birth for the kingdom, the male prays and offers sacrifice, sacraments, for the children he fathers for the Kingdom.
Its Not A Job.
It has nothing to do with equality or equal rights.
This is what those women who insist dont seem to understand.
Grace Angel.

 

[sinningcatholic]

RE:following posts by contramundum7
CONTRAMUNDUM7, when you are right, you are right.

women cannot and will not be ordained. Read 3 pages any where in the book “Truth of the World”, by Hans Urs Von Balthesar. Truth and truth are NOT the same.

KEEP GOING! YOU’RE DOING GREAT. love, maureen

---

.

 

[Grace_Angel]

Don’t you believe in having FAITH?? Why should we always understand everything? I don’t have a problem with the Church not allowing women into the priesthood because the Church says it shouldn’t be that way. I trust the Church because it was established by Christ. I know this because i’ve studied history (& the Bible, etc.). Everything Catholic can be found in scripture (virtually): confession (John 20:19), Purgatory (Matthew 12:32, Matthew 18:23, 1 Cor. 3:15). Its either Christ’s Church or it isn’t. Spending time at the Blessed Sacrament proves it to me, if nothing else.
women r equal in the eyes of God. they may never be “equal” in the eyes of man. But then, blacks may never really be seen as equal either… Christians are supposed to take up their cross and carry it, not expect for this world to be perfect.

So contramundom7 what is your problem? I didnt say I had one. did I say that women were unequal? so what is your beef.
If I am not mistaken I actually agree with you. Perhaps in America you think differently than we do in Australia.
Grace Angel.

 

[Aleii]

So contramundom7 what is your problem? I didnt say I had one. did I say that women were unequal? so what is your beef.
If I am not mistaken I actually agree with you. Perhaps in America you think differently than we do in Australia.
Grace Angel.

I find this kind of ironic as you and I just seemed to go through the same type of post misunderstanding, just the other way around. But you told me that parts of my post were satanic, that I was playing naive, and that my response to you was hogwash. Those words are insulting, and you never replied to my last 2 posts explaining if you still had some sort of beef with what I wrote or if things were cleared up.

 

[sinningcatholic]

i Grace Angel, i’m an american woman, and STILL don’t understand american women…more, more, more.

I’m pretty sure you and C-7 are saying the same thing. If you trust the Church, you are protected by the Holy Ghost—even will ill befalls ministerial personel-- like the scandal. The Holy Ghost runs the Church, but a ‘micro-manager’ He is not. love, maureen

Did I say that women were not equal? I suppose men can say that they are not equal because they cannot conceive in their bodies and carry a child to birth. That must surely make them unequal. If we are going to be fair, lets be fair all around.
I spoke nothing about inequality. It has nothing to do with inequality, it has to do with how God Himself designed things.
Priesthood is NOT a job, a career, it is a call by the Lord to certain men and not ALL men. It is a call to Father for Him, children for the Kingdom. Just as woman humanly gives birth for the kingdom, the male prays and offers sacrifice, sacraments, for the children he fathers for the Kingdom.
Its Not A Job.
It has nothing to do with equality or equal rights.
This is what those women who insist dont seem to understand.
Grace Angel.

 

[Psalm45_9]

I know that the Church has already spoken on the issue regarding women’s ordination. I was told there were ontological and gerontalogical reasons why. Like fore example ordinatio sacerdotalis for example says that women cannot be priests. Right? The twelve apostles were all men right? Ok. Is it on the basis of gender that women can’t be priests? Is it because of difference in biological parts? My sister asked me this and I didn’t know how to answer that. I’m looking for reasons besides what sacred tradition and the bible say. I would really appreciate your guy’s help. You guys have been so good to me on this forum. And it’s a miracle that I came here. God bless.

Nick

For sacramental graces to occur there must be two things form and mater. If one or the other is missing, no sacrament will occur. With the priesthood we have a man standing in for the God-man Jesus Christ. This man becomes the God-man Jesus Christ at certain points. Jesus is a man. With women’s ordination the mater is missing (a man). Even if the form is there, say a woman goes through the ordination process and kneels before a Bishop. The Bishop lays hands upon her with the full intent of bestowing the sacrament upon her and what happens? Nothing, because although the form is here, the mater is not. Which is why the Church has stated that those women who went through the form in Pittsburg are not Priests. This is not a mater of civil rights, this is a mater of theology. It is the same reason why the church cannot recognize same-sex unions. Say two men actually go through the Catholic wedding ceremony, no sacramental graces will occur, because two men cannot express the sacrament.

 

[Psalm45_9]

Did I say that women were not equal? I suppose men can say that they are not equal because they cannot conceive in their bodies and carry a child to birth. That must surely make them unequal. If we are going to be fair, lets be fair all around.
I spoke nothing about inequality. It has nothing to do with inequality, it has to do with how God Himself designed things.
Priesthood is NOT a job, a career, it is a call by the Lord to certain men and not ALL men. It is a call to Father for Him, children for the Kingdom. Just as woman humanly gives birth for the kingdom, the male prays and offers sacrifice, sacraments, for the children he fathers for the Kingdom.
Its Not A Job.
It has nothing to do with equality or equal rights.
This is what those women who insist dont seem to understand.
Grace Angel.

I had this same issue when I was teaching Holy Orders in RCIA. Perhaps I began talking about this issue wrong. I stated with women in society today having much more rights and taking on more non-traditional roles over the last 100 years, society today just cannot comprehend that there are somethings divinly instituted for just men and for just women. One young lady went off on me, I asked her if I could ever concieve a child within me? She said no, but that’s biological. Once she calmed down I explained, yup and the priesthood is theological. By the end she got that this is a theological issue, not a civil rights issue. But many in our culture today don’t want to listen to theology. I bet you many who are for women in the priesthood are not regular mass-attendees themselves. Those who are mass-attendees probably think Heresy is something like when you kill the Pope and purgatory is second chance that the church stopped believing in after the reformation.

 

[sinningcatholic]

This is a fine response in terms of metaphysics,and correct. To clarify "FORM + MATTER + CAUSATIVE AGENT OF CHANGE (PRIEST) = TRANSFORMATION OF ONE SUBSTANCE TO ANOTHER. Another example is the Eucharist: Say the priest offers up a platter of peanuts instead of bread. Those peanuts will NEVER be changed into the “Bread of Life” “The Body of Christ”. They are “forms” but not the “matter” required. (form indicating a physical nature, and matter indicating the specifics of the form==to differentiate thing, one from another.

Or what if you put maple syrup into your car, instead of oil. The car will not run. Syrup and oil are both forms but their The matter is not correct. Why? Because the AGENT Of CHANGE (the car motor and it’s heat) will break down syrup differently than does motor oil, and the car will stop.

Similarities and differences in Form and Matter:
Explain to your sister that the consistency of maple syrup is about the same as motor oil. Do they have the same potentials? No. Do they have their specific places of utility? Yes. She no more would eat pancakes with motor oil, than would her car run on maple syrup. THE PHYSICAL WORLD SUPERFICIALLY APPEARS RANDOM==giving the appearance that ‘switching and swapping’ alternatives are possible. Kind of like a woman being a priest; it looks the same, but the outcome is not the same.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

UOTE=Psalm45:9;1815341]For sacramental graces to occur there must be two things form and mater. If one or the other is missing, no sacrament will occur. With the priesthood we have a man standing in for the God-man Jesus Christ. This man becomes the God-man Jesus Christ at certain points. Jesus is a man. With women’s ordination the mater is missing (a man). Even if the form is there, say a woman goes through the ordination process and kneels before a Bishop. The Bishop lays hands upon her with the full intent of bestowing the sacrament upon her and what happens? Nothing, because although the form is here, the mater is not. Which is why the Church has stated that those women who went through the form in Pittsburg are not Priests. This is not a mater of civil rights, this is a mater of theology. It is the same reason why the church cannot recognize same-sex unions. Say two men actually go through the Catholic wedding ceremony, no sacramental graces will occur, because two men cannot express the sacrament.

 

[contramundum7]

RE:following posts by contramundum7
CONTRAMUNDUM7, when you are right, you are right.

women cannot and will not be ordained. Read 3 pages any where in the book “Truth of the World”, by Hans Urs Von Balthesar. Truth and truth are NOT the same.

KEEP GOING! YOU’RE DOING GREAT. love, maureen

---

.

Thanks for the encouragement. And thanks for the recommendation of the book, which i haven’t heard of before. I will try to find it… though there aren’t many Catholic books stores where i’m at… God bless you in your walk with Chrisst.

 

[contramundum7]

This is a fine response in terms of metaphysics,and correct. To clarify "FORM + MATTER + CAUSATIVE AGENT OF CHANGE (PRIEST) = TRANSFORMATION OF ONE SUBSTANCE TO ANOTHER. Another example is the Eucharist: Say the priest offers up a platter of peanuts instead of bread. Those peanuts will NEVER be changed into the “Bread of Life” “The Body of Christ”. They are “forms” but not the “matter” required. (form indicating a physical nature, and matter indicating the specifics of the form==to differentiate thing, one from another.

Or what if you put maple syrup into your car, instead of oil. The car will not run. Syrup and oil are both forms but their The matter is not correct. Why? Because the AGENT Of CHANGE (the car motor and it’s heat) will break down syrup differently than does motor oil, and the car will stop.

Similarities and differences in Form and Matter:
Explain to your sister that the consistency of maple syrup is about the same as motor oil. Do they have the same potentials? No. Do they have their specific places of utility? Yes. She no more would eat pancakes with motor oil, than would her car run on maple syrup. THE PHYSICAL WORLD SUPERFICIALLY APPEARS RANDOM==giving the appearance that ‘switching and swapping’ alternatives are possible. Kind of like a woman being a priest; it looks the same, but the outcome is not the same.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

UOTE=Psalm45:9;1815341]For sacramental graces to occur there must be two things form and mater. If one or the other is missing, no sacrament will occur. With the priesthood we have a man standing in for the God-man Jesus Christ. This man becomes the God-man Jesus Christ at certain points. Jesus is a man. With women’s ordination the mater is missing (a man). Even if the form is there, say a woman goes through the ordination process and kneels before a Bishop. The Bishop lays hands upon her with the full intent of bestowing the sacrament upon her and what happens? Nothing, because although the form is here, the mater is not. Which is why the Church has stated that those women who went through the form in Pittsburg are not Priests. This is not a mater of civil rights, this is a mater of theology. It is the same reason why the church cannot recognize same-sex unions. Say two men actually go through the Catholic wedding ceremony, no sacramental graces will occur, because two men cannot express the sacrament.

Thanks 4 your very informative post. I had never thought of that kind of thing before as an argument against women being ordained. Thank God for this forum so that we Catholics can be better informed, thereby helping Protestants to become better informed. Being Catholic is a heavy cross sometimes but it has brought me to Christ in a more “3-dimensional” way (as it were)… God bless…

 

[contramundum7]

Did I say that women were not equal? I suppose men can say that they are not equal because they cannot conceive in their bodies and carry a child to birth. That must surely make them unequal. If we are going to be fair, lets be fair all around.
I spoke nothing about inequality. It has nothing to do with inequality, it has to do with how God Himself designed things.
Priesthood is NOT a job, a career, it is a call by the Lord to certain men and not ALL men. It is a call to Father for Him, children for the Kingdom. Just as woman humanly gives birth for the kingdom, the male prays and offers sacrifice, sacraments, for the children he fathers for the Kingdom.
Its Not A Job.
It has nothing to do with equality or equal rights.
This is what those women who insist dont seem to understand.
Grace Angel.

I may have posted my comments in the wrong place. I was responding to someone who believed women should be ordained but it doesn’t sound like that’s the case with you (??). Sorry.

 

[kleary]

I know that the Church has already spoken on the issue regarding women’s ordination. I was told there were ontological and gerontalogical reasons why. Like fore example ordinatio sacerdotalis for example says that women cannot be priests. Right? The twelve apostles were all men right? Ok. Is it on the basis of gender that women can’t be priests? Is it because of difference in biological parts? My sister asked me this and I didn’t know how to answer that. I’m looking for reasons besides what sacred tradition and the bible say. I would really appreciate your guy’s help. You guys have been so good to me on this forum. And it’s a miracle that I came here. God bless.

Nick

The priest at Mass is “Alter Christus”.

“Christus” is a “Male Person”

The “Alter Christus” must also be a “male person”.

Notice - the priest says, “Hoc est enim corpus meum” [For this is MY body] He does NOT say, “This is Jesus body”, he says MY BODY.

Now the last time I heard the Body of Jesus is male- therefore no woman can be a priest - plain and simple.

Ken

 

[sinningcatholic]

Thanks for the encouragement. And thanks for the recommendation of the book, which i haven’t heard of before. I will try to find it… though there aren’t many Catholic books stores where i’m at… God bless you in your walk with Chrisst.

Hello, and the REAL WORLD is waiting for you, me and everyone–and what is real is God, unknowable, unfathomable, and the author whose work i cited, Hans Urs Von Balthesar wrote multiple volumes under 3 catagories. THIS BOOK IS THE IN THE SECOND COLLECTION "THEO-LOGIC’, volume “The Truth of the World”. DO NOT BE INTIMIDATED BY THE WRITERS brilliance. go for the understanding. What he states IS ALREADY INSIDE YOU; he just gives it words.

I so promise you will not be disappointed. The work is so dense and rich, it’s like learning another language, or learning another entirely new way of thinking. Pauline Press Bookstores are on line, i believe, but if not, Ignatius Press surely is. YOU WILL NEVER LOOK AT THE WORLD WITH LESS HUMILITY AND GRATITUDE TO GOD, should you decide to read any of this.

The “Truth of the World” is in the series “Theo-Logic”
you can look under the Theo-logic catagory, then the title. I’ll go on forever about this writing. Have a dictionary handy, but do not stop reading when you hit an unfamiliar word. Just write the word down, and look it up when you are finished reading. Your mind will accept the latent reference, and the meaning of that single word can ripple your comprehension of the rest of what you read. YOU WILL BECOME VERY INTERIOR AND REFLECTIVE. I promise. love, maureen

 

[contramundum7]

The priest at Mass is “Alter Christus”.

“Christus” is a “Male Person”

The “Alter Christus” must also be a “male person”.

Notice - the priest says, “Hoc est enim corpus meum” [For this is MY body] He does NOT say, “This is Jesus body”, he says MY BODY.

Now the last time I heard the Body of Jesus is male- therefore no woman can be a priest - plain and simple.

Ken

interesting points…

 

[Eddy]

I appreciate people will want to take the view of tradition. But to look at the Biblical reasons for a second:

1. The argument is often used that Christ only called men. Therefore only men can be priests. But, Christ also only called men who were circumcised. Men who were ablebodied. Men between 15 and 30. Men of Arabic descent. Therefore only arabic, male, ablebodied, circumcised men between the ages of 15 and 30 can be called to be priests. The alternative is that Jesus took account of the culture and practicalities of the day.
2. There is the implcation that women were not called to a leadership/authority role. But John 4 would suggest otherwise (many believed because of the women’s testimony). Also, at the end of John’s gospel Mary is sent to tell the others the good news. At the beginning of the gospel, Mary helps facilitate Jesus becoming incarnate. At the end of another gospel, another Mary is first to proclaim the risen Christ.
3. There is the assumption that only men were present at the last supper and at Pentecost. But Arabic tradition and Biblical scholarship strongly suggest women were present too.
4. It’s argued that there have never been women priests in the history of the Church - there is strong historical evidence to suggest otherwise - and women do seem to have had leadership roles in the early church - Acts and Paul’s letters certainly hint at it.
5. Women’s ordination is only a recent issue raised by troublesome feminists. Only that Therese of Liseux’s autobiography shows clearly that she felt strongly called to priesthood. So, was she a good Catholic or not? Personally I’d say of course she was. The Church is broad, and thank God for it.
6. The argument will be made that there is no tradition of women’s ordination. Let’s for a second step back and ask where tradition comes from. The church begins from the Bible - from Biblical times. It therefore reflects the culture of the day. Church tradition continues to develop from Biblical times, but within similar cultural traditions. It is fine to support tradition, but I think it’s good to remain open to where God is leading and speaking - to ask whether to what extent traditions reflect the culture of the day, and to what extent they reflect Godly intention.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed we’re wasting a lot of bandwidth debating a question that has been definitively settled?

The Church does not have the power to ordain women. Period.

 

[rayne100]

I appreciate people will want to take the view of tradition. But to look at the Biblical reasons for a second:

1. The argument is often used that Christ only called men. Therefore only men can be priests. But, Christ also only called men who were circumcised. Men who were ablebodied. Men between 15 and 30. Men of Arabic descent. Therefore only arabic, male, ablebodied, circumcised men between the ages of 15 and 30 can be called to be priests. The alternative is that Jesus took account of the culture and practicalities of the day.
2. There is the implcation that women were not called to a leadership/authority role. But John 4 would suggest otherwise (many believed because of the women’s testimony). Also, at the end of John’s gospel Mary is sent to tell the others the good news. At the beginning of the gospel, Mary helps facilitate Jesus becoming incarnate. At the end of another gospel, another Mary is first to proclaim the risen Christ.
3. There is the assumption that only men were present at the last supper and at Pentecost. But Arabic tradition and Biblical scholarship strongly suggest women were present too.
4. It’s argued that there have never been women priests in the history of the Church - there is strong historical evidence to suggest otherwise - and women do seem to have had leadership roles in the early church - Acts and Paul’s letters certainly hint at it.
5. Women’s ordination is only a recent issue raised by troublesome feminists. Only that Therese of Liseux’s autobiography shows clearly that she felt strongly called to priesthood. So, was she a good Catholic or not? Personally I’d say of course she was. The Church is broad, and thank God for it.
6. The argument will be made that there is no tradition of women’s ordination. Let’s for a second step back and ask where tradition comes from. The church begins from the Bible - from Biblical times. It therefore reflects the culture of the day. Church tradition continues to develop from Biblical times, but within similar cultural traditions. It is fine to support tradition, but I think it’s good to remain open to where God is leading and speaking - to ask whether to what extent traditions reflect the culture of the day, and to what extent they reflect Godly intention.

I agree!

 

[rayne100]

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed we’re wasting a lot of bandwidth debating a question that has been definitively settled?

The Church does not have the power to ordain women. Period.

The pope has not spoken to this ex cathedra, there for it is not dogma and can be falible. Just because it has been tradition, does not mean it is right.

 

[Grace_Angel]

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed we’re wasting a lot of bandwidth debating a question that has been definitively settled?

The Church does not have the power to ordain women. Period.

Vern I guess its one of those questions that the feminist brigade will not let go of. I guess they first wanted women to have a “right” to kill their in utero child, (which they now have) now the next goal is that other male thing called “catholic priesthood” that unassaillable bastion needs to be assailled, follwoing that indeed God can then be called “she”
GraceAngel.

 

[sinningcatholic]

Having read your response (below) and TOTALLY AGREE. so now go and make yet another religion to suit your position. Join the morass of ‘I WANT IT ALL MY WAY…’ CHURCHES…only in america… our American way has the ACLU. The Nazi’s had the SS. The Czars had the numb, killing Cossacks. The Communist block had the KGB. You go bro…but i BELIEVE THIS QUESTION HAS BEEN ANSWERED… AMERICAN liberator WOMAN forces us everyday Catholic women who BELIEVE IN THE CHURCH to under the radar. NO WOMEN PRIESTS… from a Catholic Woman and American and one who understands we don’t call the shots in life. God DOES.

'CREDO: GOD SENT HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON TO DIE FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF MANY." maureen

I appreciate people will want to take the view of tradition. But to look at the Biblical reasons for a second:

1. The argument is often used that Christ only called men. Therefore only men can be priests. But, Christ also only called men who were circumcised. Men who were ablebodied. Men between 15 and 30. Men of Arabic descent. Therefore only arabic, male, ablebodied, circumcised men between the ages of 15 and 30 can be called to be priests. The alternative is that Jesus took account of the culture and practicalities of the day.
2. There is the implcation that women were not called to a leadership/authority role. But John 4 would suggest otherwise (many believed because of the women’s testimony). Also, at the end of John’s gospel Mary is sent to tell the others the good news. At the beginning of the gospel, Mary helps facilitate Jesus becoming incarnate. At the end of another gospel, another Mary is first to proclaim the risen Christ.
3. There is the assumption that only men were present at the last supper and at Pentecost. But Arabic tradition and Biblical scholarship strongly suggest women were present too.
4. It’s argued that there have never been women priests in the history of the Church - there is strong historical evidence to suggest otherwise - and women do seem to have had leadership roles in the early church - Acts and Paul’s letters certainly hint at it.
5. Women’s ordination is only a recent issue raised by troublesome feminists. Only that Therese of Liseux’s autobiography shows clearly that she felt strongly called to priesthood. So, was she a good Catholic or not? Personally I’d say of course she was. The Church is broad, and thank God for it.
6. The argument will be made that there is no tradition of women’s ordination. Let’s for a second step back and ask where tradition comes from. The church begins from the Bible - from Biblical times. It therefore reflects the culture of the day. Church tradition continues to develop from Biblical times, but within similar cultural traditions. It is fine to support tradition, but I think it’s good to remain open to where God is leading and speaking - to ask whether to what extent traditions reflect the culture of the day, and to what extent they reflect Godly intention.