A question about Catholicism . . .

[Elliot Reilly McMonty]

I have argued again and again with my priest about this one question: why can't women become priests in the Catholic church? He said something about the priest being "married" to the church, but what makes the church female, anyways? I asked him this, and he said something about all twelve of the apostles being male. I began to tell him that that was probably due to (my theory) that Jesus felt, in a male-dominated world, there was no need to have any female apostles. He was causing enough chaos as it was, and making a woman an apostle would cause unneeded uproar. He didn't outright say that women are incapable of being shepherds. I guess it's kinda like how Jesus wore clothes. Really, it has no purpose other than to not promote violence. By now, the priest had begun to repeat himself . . . .

Do you think I am right? If not, can somebody at least give me a reasonable explanation? Does anyone have their own theories?  

[zz1000zz]

The majority of the Catholic system is based upon traditions which have no legitimate basis. This is one of the many examples which shows it ought to be radically changed, if not abolished.  

[Gambol]

No, no. It concerns the whole bit about the church being the "bride of Christ".

Thus, the Church is seen as a feminine entity, and Christ the husband.  

[ioioouiouiouio]

Alot of it comes from verses like this .

This does not mean that the catholic church is correct in their opinion, though. It is simply a misinterpretation based off a change in cultural habits. Back in the corinthian church, women sat on one side and men on the other side of church. As well, it was forbad for women to speak in church (a cultural tradition), so they would ask their husbands to say what they wanted to say. Needless to say, all this shouting across the room meant a rather disjointed service, so paul just forbad women from talking all together.

Nowadays, with integrated services, we don't really have that problem.

As well, this sentiment (though not on the catholic side) could come from verses like this  

[fantrl]

The first bishops, the twelve apostles, were all male.

Jesus gave them the authority of consecrating the Eucharist, and the authority to absolve sins.

Notice that they are all male.

If Jesus wanted female bishops, and from there female priests, he could have done it. He already broke barriers by curing illness, talking to the Samaritan woman, and constantly correcting the pharisees. Women preachers doesn't seem like much of a stretch.

But not even Our Lady was present at the last supper.

Clearly, he was saying something.

Anyhow, even if there is the slightest possibility that women could possibly be priests, there's still reasonable doubt. This is the salvation of souls we're talking about.

Also, what's a good reason to allow women priests? It destroyed the Episcopal Church, and it would probably destroy the Catholic Church.  

[zz1000zz]

fantrl

The first bishops, the twelve apostles, were all male.

Jesus gave them the authority of consecrating the Eucharist, and the authority to absolve sins.

Notice that they are all male.

If Jesus wanted female bishops, and from there female priests, he could have done it. He already broke barriers by curing illness, talking to the Samaritan woman, and constantly correcting the pharisees. Women preachers doesn't seem like much of a stretch.

But not even Our Lady was present at the last supper.

Clearly, he was saying something.

That he was gay? Because, that is as reasonable as your assumption.

Quote:

Anyhow, even if there is the slightest possibility that women could possibly be priests, there's still reasonable doubt. This is the salvation of souls we're talking about.

You know God damns women if they are not handmaidens to the husband. They better stay in the kitchen if they want to go to heaven.[/sarcasm]

Quote:

Also, what's a good reason to allow women priests?

Because bigotry is a pathetic attempt at self-gratification showing a lack of faith?  

[Tarrou]

fantrl

Also, what's a good reason to allow women priests? It destroyed the Episcopal Church, and it would probably destroy the Catholic Church.

No, the ordination of a gay bishop caused friction within the Anglican communion, which, I might point out, lead to the threat of a schism within the communion, but not its 'destruction'. The majority of Anglican provinces allow the ordination of women at some level (mostly as deacons and priests), but the issue is generally left to a given province's discretion. It hasn't been without controversy, of course, but neither has it done the communion any harm.
As to your question, the simplest answer is that we no longer live in first century Judea, and as such it doesn't make sense to project its gender roles onto our modern religious institutions. The Anglicans and many other Protestant denominations have ordained women priests and ministers and thus far God has not seen fit to smite any of them for daring to make women equal members of the faith. So I fail to see the problem here.  

[abirdrrl]

But I'm a man and I wanna be pregnant!

What's that you say... I can't?


DISCRIMINATION!  

[ioioouiouiouio]

Tangled Up In Blue

As to your question, the simplest answer is that we no longer live in first century Judea, and as such it doesn't make sense to project its gender roles onto our modern religious institutions. The Anglicans and many other Protestant denominations have ordained women priests and ministers and thus far God has not seen fit to smite any of them for daring to make women equal members of the faith. So I fail to see the problem here.

Well, you'd think that if God was into the whole smiting bit, don't you think that Osama would be dead already? I mean, mass murder seems a bit worse than... well... alot of things.  

[Tarrou]

Cometh The Inquisitor

Well, you'd think that if God was into the whole smiting bit, don't you think that Osama would be dead already? I mean, mass murder seems a bit worse than... well... alot of things.

Well he used to be into smiting, and it's about time he got back into it, frankly. It's a lot easier to know which thousand-year-old dictates we're supposed to follow when people are dropping dead left and right for not following them. It's a shoddy way to run a universe, I'm telling you.  

[Berezi]

Tangled Up In Blue

Cometh The Inquisitor

Well, you'd think that if God was into the whole smiting bit, don't you think that Osama would be dead already? I mean, mass murder seems a bit worse than... well... alot of things.

Well he used to be into smiting, and it's about time he got back into it, frankly. It's a lot easier to know which thousand-year-old dictates we're supposed to follow when people are dropping dead left and right for not following them. It's a shoddy way to run a universe, I'm telling you.

Most of the people who were smote, at least most of the Israelites, were smote because they didn't care for the poor/widows/orphans, they didn't love God with all of their hearts or their neighbors, and because they worshipped other gods. And those things all come down to the middle part, loving God and loving others. There were occasionally other things, but the lack of love for God and the lack of love for others was always a common thread throughout the prophets, and even in the New Testament. Ananias and Sapphira can be connected to that - they weren't willing to give God everything and were willing to lie about it. That guy that grabbed the Ark of the Covenant can be connected to that - in the sense that he wasn't allowed to touch it, a proclimation given by God so that the people would be reverent. I can't think of any other smitings off the top of my head, but yeah, it works.

Maybe God just decided that He's done enough of that for it to be a witness to us as to how we're supposed to live, or He's just holding off until a later point, at which point mass smiting will occur.  

[ioioouiouiouio]

Tangled Up In Blue

Well he used to be into smiting, and it's about time he got back into it, frankly. It's a lot easier to know which thousand-year-old dictates we're supposed to follow when people are dropping dead left and right for not following them. It's a shoddy way to run a universe, I'm telling you.

Even then God rarely smote people. I mean, there was Lot's city and thats about it for the smiting of 'non-believers'. The rest was, like, ordained conquering.

And He smites a few times in the NT. Elishha cursed those kids and that time with Ananias and Sapphira.  

[Tarrou]

Why won't you two just humor a cranky heretic's facetious ramblings? Mind you, I'm being quite earnest when I say that any biblical or traditional proscriptions against the ordination of women are quite silly, but I'm not seriously proposing that the presence or absence of divine smiting be used as a litmus test for doctrinal orthodoxy. That would be daft, especially since God hasn't smote anyone in more than a millennium, to say nothing of the fact that if that were how God operated, then we'd already have objective proof of which religion is the One True Faith (everyone else being dead by now).

Quote:

Maybe God just decided that He's done enough of that for it to be a witness to us as to how we're supposed to live, or He's just holding off until a later point, at which point mass smiting will occur.

A lot of your fellows will tell you that it's the latter, and then helpfully point you to the book of Revelation.  

[Damaris Vincent]

hmm... where to begin...

As to the original topic of this post, I have heard a good deal of teaching on this lately, and would like to make sure on a few things before I post...

As to the smiting. God didn't just decide one day to suddenly punish a person/group of people. Even in the old testament, God gave warning, and often much more time then any of ever would have, for the people to repent and turn back to Him. When it did seem a quick thing (such as the man who touched the Ark of the Covenant) had had sufficient warning from God. And if you read in story of Ananias and Sapphira, they weren't killed because they didn't give all their money, but because they said that they were giving all their money. God knew their hearts, and used this situation to show that He would not stand for such lip service and deceit. Maybe you all knew these things already...

As to God's seeming lack of smiting today, how do you know that He isn't? In the old testament He used rather natural means to affect His will. Maybe we haven't heard of anything like the case of Ananias lately, but that doesn't mean God's not doing similar things. How do we know how He's working in the areas of the Underground Church (countries with sever christian persecution)? I can't believe God has changed the way He works, for as the Bible says, He is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

Just my thoughts...  

[ioioouiouiouio]

Tangled Up In Blue

Why won't you two just humor a cranky heretic's facetious ramblings?

Nope. We just live to ruin your humour. domokun domokun

Quote:

Mind you, I'm being quite earnest when I say that any biblical or traditional proscriptions against the ordination of women are quite silly

Biblical? no, those are quite serious. Divin Word of God and all that. However, thankfully for us, there are no biblical proscriptions against the ordination of women.