| The Lord's Table - Liberal Catholics A forum for all liberal Catholics. |
 | | 
6th July 2009, 08:39 AM
| | Newbie
    
| | Join Date: 9th March 2009
Posts: 166
Blessings: 67,804 My Mood 
Reps: 1,063,819,214 (power: 1,063,822) | | | women priests
Though I of course respect the Church's authority to decide whether we have women priests or not, I have never heard an arguement against them that I have found convincing. I would therefore welcome women priests if the Church did ever to decide it could and would ordain them (which I'm quite sure won't be in my lifetime anyway).
What do others think? |
7th July 2009, 03:44 AM
| | Critical loyalist
8   
| | Join Date: 18th April 2002 Location: CA
Posts: 9,966
Blessings: 79,863 My Mood 
Reps: 82,864,414,902 (power: 82,864,433) | | | I agree that the arguments that people put forward are weak. I think that it fundamentally comes down to the fear of acknowledging that things have ever been different and that things can change. |
8th July 2009, 01:31 PM
|  | Senior Member
42 
 | | Join Date: 10th May 2007
Posts: 3,164
Blessings: 107,312
Reps: 281,066,741,495,701,312 (power: 281,066,741,495,709) | | "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." -Pope John Paul II, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis Hope this helps.  .
__________________
“For neither does he [the Devil] seek those whom he has already subdued, nor does he take the trouble to overthrow those whom he has already made his own. The foe and enemy of the Church despises and passes by those whom he has alienated from the Church, and led without as captives and conquered; he goes on to harass those in whom he sees Christ dwell.” – Saint Cyprian (Epistle 56)
Pope Benedict XVI is innocent |
13th July 2009, 05:10 PM
|  | Priest
| | Join Date: 25th September 2006
Posts: 3,700
Blessings: 11,948,885 My Mood 
Reps: 18,944,763,352,946,140 (power: 18,944,763,352,955) | | | If the Church has no authority to confer ordination on women, by what authority does it confer ordination on men?
__________________
|
13th July 2009, 06:31 PM
|  | Formerly Jtbdad Christian on every board!
  
| | Join Date: 14th April 2004 Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,965
Blessings: 81,751
Reps: 2,383,015,851,206,685 (power: 2,383,015,851,224) | | | I guess what Rome does is simply a non-issue for me. While I know many Roman Catholic women who I believe would be great priests what Rome does or doesn't do doesn't effect me much, if at all.
__________________ Just a Christian
Lord, make me an instrument of your peace,
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
where there is sadness, joy; O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.
|
15th July 2009, 03:43 AM
| | Senior Member
42
| | Join Date: 10th May 2007
Posts: 3,164
Blessings: 107,312
Reps: 281,066,741,495,701,312 (power: 281,066,741,495,709) | | Originally Posted by JasonV  If the Church has no authority to confer ordination on women, by what authority does it confer ordination on men? By the authority of Christ and His example of ordaining men. The Church only has the authority to do as Christ did when He taught the apostles what to do, how to do it, and who to do it to. If Jesus would have wanted women to be priests He would have ordained His mother first of all since she was more holy than all of the apostles. But He didn't. Priesthood is a calling, not a right. .
__________________
“For neither does he [the Devil] seek those whom he has already subdued, nor does he take the trouble to overthrow those whom he has already made his own. The foe and enemy of the Church despises and passes by those whom he has alienated from the Church, and led without as captives and conquered; he goes on to harass those in whom he sees Christ dwell.” – Saint Cyprian (Epistle 56)
Pope Benedict XVI is innocent
Last edited by LivingWordUnity; 15th July 2009 at 03:49 AM.
|
15th July 2009, 03:58 AM
|  | Minister, Liberal, Quaker, Theologian and TSSF
51  
| | Join Date: 14th May 2002 Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,066
Blessings: 10,477,460 My Mood 
Reps: 1,048,985,195,837,867,008 (power: 1,048,985,195,837,901) | | Originally Posted by Michael96 Though I of course respect the Church's authority to decide whether we have women priests or not, I have never heard an arguement against them that I have found convincing. I would therefore welcome women priests if the Church did ever to decide it could and would ordain them (which I'm quite sure won't be in my lifetime anyway).
What do others think?
From A Jewish Rabbi:
I think these churches are correct to outlaw women clergy and thereby remain faithful to the traditions of Jesus. I only wish they would be more scrupulous about it.
For example, all of the Apostles were Jews. Jesus had no Christian Apostles, so neither should the church have Christian clergy. This could open a whole new career path for Jewish men, and I am all for it.
Similarly, Jesus preferred fishermen for apostles, and so the church should require that clergy learn to fish. All of Jesus’ apostles ate raw corn, so this too ought to be a requirement for clerical positions. To the man, the Twelve were incapable of staying awake with Jesus or standing by his side when he was arrested, beaten, and crucified, so cowardliness ought to be another criteria for clergy. All apostles wore sandals, so shoe wearers have no place at the altars of the church. And they wore robes, so pant-wearing men are also out. None of the Twelve brushed their teeth, took baths on a daily basis, used toilet paper (or toilets for that matter), or vaccinated themselves against any communicable diseases. Not one apostle read the New Testament or observed Christmas or Easter, so these practices should be off limits to clergy as well.
I could go on, but I suspect the point is made. If we are going to appoint clergy based on the choices Jesus made in choosing his apostles we must restrict ourselves to Jewish fishermen with bad breath and itchy anuses. Maybe if the churches were more traditional in this way more men would get involved. I’m sure fewer women would.
__________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
dir="ltr"> "These are the values inspiring those brave workers in Poland... They remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost." - Ronald Reagan Father Ray McIntyre
Anglican Church International
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
15th July 2009, 11:28 AM
| | Critical loyalist
8
| | Join Date: 18th April 2002 Location: CA
Posts: 9,966
Blessings: 79,863 My Mood
Reps: 82,864,414,902 (power: 82,864,433) | | Originally Posted by LivingWordUnity By the authority of Christ and His example of ordaining men. The Church only has the authority to do as Christ did when He taught the apostles what to do, how to do it, and who to do it to. If Jesus would have wanted women to be priests He would have ordained His mother first of all since she was more holy than all of the apostles. But He didn't. Priesthood is a calling, not a right.
.
This is weak sauce. It doesn't even try to make an argument about why women can't be priests and leans heavily on a supposedly implied instruction about the priesthood, an institution whose structure went through a lot of development during the first century. |
15th July 2009, 01:29 PM
| | Newbie
| | Join Date: 9th March 2009
Posts: 166
Blessings: 67,804 My Mood
Reps: 1,063,819,214 (power: 1,063,822) | | Originally Posted by fragmentsofdreams This is weak sauce. It doesn't even try to make an argument about why women can't be priests and leans heavily on a supposedly implied instruction about the priesthood, an institution whose structure went through a lot of development during the first century.
Yes, clearly the priesthood has developed significantly since the Church in Acts where it seems clear that bishops must be married according to the Douay-Rheims translation of 1 Timothy 3:2 "It behoveth therefore a bishop to be blameless, the husband of one wife".
I have to say that "the Church can't change the rules" argument carries little weight with me as it seems that if the Church has the will to change the rules then it can and will. |
15th July 2009, 01:40 PM
| | Priest
| | Join Date: 25th September 2006
Posts: 3,700
Blessings: 11,948,885 My Mood
Reps: 18,944,763,352,946,140 (power: 18,944,763,352,955) | | | When Christ gave St Peter the Keys of the Kingdom, with the power to "loose and bind" that certainly means that The Church can adjust anything it deems necessary.
__________________
| | |
| Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode |
| | |
