Pope reaffirms ban on women priests - Page 39

AngryAtheist8 · #**571** May 3, '12, 10:05 pm

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
Wrong.

Unlike the vast majority of people at CAF, I frequently use evidence and sources to back up my claims (the post below is an example from this thread), as my posting history at this forum shows.

I would like it if you used a bit more fact based commentary Lochias, it would be a pleasant change from your apparent M.O.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lochias

Your "evidence" hasn't won anyone over yet. So, either you're the lone, shining light in a sea of misinformation and darkness...or, your "evidence" is bunk. I know which one my money's on.

And, yes, I'm sure you'd like a lot of things. I like a great many things, too.

I kind of assumed that would be expecting too much

Lochias · #**572** May 3, '12, 10:48 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8

Coming from someone who doesn't use evidence to back up his arguments at all, that means very little.

I claim what the Catholic Church teaches. I don't need to do your research for you. You have a brain and two eyes...go use them.

Lochias · #**573** May 3, '12, 10:49 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8

I kind of assumed that would be expecting too much

...wow. Well, no-one can ever accuse you of being overly humble, I suppose. Jolly good show.

mtngal25 · #**574** May 4, '12, 8:46 am

This woman priest issue has been explained umpteen times and some very immature kiddies can't get over the fact that the priesthood is not a social thing or a "rights" thing. No woman could confect a valid mass. She can go through the motions but it would not do any good. There would be no true mass. This is a theological issue and the church has the power to hold on to the true teachings of the church. If people keep changing things, then there is no continuity and no security in such a church and I would leave it to go elsewhere that holds on to tradition. These experimenters just want to destroy the church because ordaining women would split the church asunder and all the trads would form another church that would hang onto the truth. Then the change fanatics would try to change that group, ad nauseam so that they could claim special powers. If these people were normal thinkers, they would go over to another church that already has women "priests." The fact that they don't, proves that they are interested only in power over others, and not the true Catholic faith of the centuries.

Lochias · #**575** May 4, '12, 12:35 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by mtngal25

This woman priest issue has been explained umpteen times and some very immature kiddies can't get over the fact that the priesthood is not a social thing or a "rights" thing. No woman could confect a valid mass. She can go through the motions but it would not do any good. There would be no true mass. This is a theological issue and the church has the power to hold on to the true teachings of the church. If people keep changing things, then there is no continuity and no security in such a church and I would leave it to go elsewhere that holds on to tradition. These experimenters just want to destroy the church because ordaining women would split the church asunder and all the trads would form another church that would hang onto the truth. Then the change fanatics would try to change that group, ad nauseam so that they could claim special powers. If these people were normal thinkers, they would go over to another church that already has women "priests." The fact that they don't, proves that they are interested only in power over others, and not the true Catholic faith of the centuries.

A-freaking-men.

RobbyS · #**576** May 4, '12, 3:23 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lochias

A-freaking-men.

I second that. It is no big deal for Protestants to have women ministers because they are essentially a lay group. That is how they see the church, no hierarchy.

**PRmerger** · #**577** May 4, '12, 5:08 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by poorsinner7

I already avoid women EMHCs.

Then I don't think you really understand the rationale for why women can't be priests.

Women being EMHC has nothing to do with the priesthood.

Which is why the Church has permitted this.

**PRmerger** · #**578** May 4, '12, 5:11 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobbyS

I second that. It is no big deal for Protestants to have women ministers because they are essentially a lay group.

'zactly. I have no problem with women ministers in Protestant churches. For, essentially, they are doing the exact thing that a male minister is doing--preaching the gospel, managing a parish, counseling parishioners. And of course a woman can do things things as well as a man. Better even.

Of course, one understands that the priesthood is NOT about what he does, for if it were, then naturally women ought to be able to do what jobs a priest does.

At ordination an ONTOLOGICAL change occurs in the man. What existed 10 seconds prior to ordination, exists no more. The universe is changed forever at the confection of this sacrament.

RobbyS · #**579** May 5, '12, 10:03 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by PRmerger

'zactly. I have no problem with women ministers in Protestant churches. For, essentially, they are doing the exact thing that a male minister is doing--preaching the gospel, managing a parish, counseling parishioners. And of course a woman can do things things as well as a man. Better even.

Of course, one understands that the priesthood is NOT about what he does, for if it were, then naturally women ought to be able to do what jobs a priest does.

At ordination an ONTOLOGICAL change occurs in the man. What existed 10 seconds prior to ordination, exists no more. The universe is changed forever at the confection of this sacrament.

Well, it is more like baptism is it not? Protestants also do not acknowledge the efficacy of the sacraments.

RobbyS · #**580** May 5, '12, 2:13 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by heaintheavy

Because.
In time, we see that some rules are made to be broken...or at least, revised.
This is one of them.
But I guess it's just not time....yet.
It makes no sense not to have women as priests. Being a priest is something spiritual and a calling of the soul, it is not linked to specific male sex organs, as childbirth is.
Jesus himself, we are told, did not take part in any sexual activity involving his gender-specific organs.
If several women--including Mary Magdalene, Jesus' favorite--could hang out and move around with the apostles/disciples and help preach, why can't women do so today?
It is unfortunate that mortal men--who exactly was this?--interpreted words collected in the Christian canon centuries after Jesus died to mean that women cannot be priests.
Very much so.
I hope that our granddaughters and their daughters after that will live in a time that is less rigid.

Women priests makes sense only if one is accustomed to thinking of the priesthood as a position of power. But even from that perspective, the fact si that when women do gain a position of power, that position is diminished in status, and men tend to avoid it. Look at what is happening in the universities, as women graduates become the majority. The value of the degree is diminished.

AngryAtheist8 · #**581** May 5, '12, 3:06 pm

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
Coming from someone who doesn't use evidence to back up his arguments at all, that means very little.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lochias;9256344[B

]I claim what the Catholic Church teaches. I don't need to do your research for you. You have a brain and two eyes...go use them[/b].

But in a debate you're supposed to PROVE your arguments.
You can't expect your opponent to do your research and argue your case.

Any lawyer who did that would soon be unable to find work, and he would deserve such treatment.

AngryAtheist8 · #**582** May 5, '12, 3:07 pm

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8

I kind of assumed that would be expecting too much

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lochias

...wow. Well, no-one can ever accuse you of being overly humble, I suppose. Jolly good show.

It would be nice if you would stop projecting your own behavior onto me

AngryAtheist8 · #**583** May 5, '12, 3:11 pm

Originally Posted by heaintheavy
Because.
In time, we see that some rules are made to be broken...or at least, revised.
This is one of them.
But I guess it's just not time....yet.
It makes no sense not to have women as priests. Being a priest is something spiritual and a calling of the soul, it is not linked to specific male sex organs, as childbirth is.
Jesus himself, we are told, did not take part in any sexual activity involving his gender-specific organs.
If several women--including Mary Magdalene, Jesus' favorite--could hang out and move around with the apostles/disciples and help preach, why can't women do so today?
It is unfortunate that mortal men--who exactly was this?--interpreted words collected in the Christian canon centuries after Jesus died to mean that women cannot be priests.
Very much so.
I hope that our granddaughters and their daughters after that will live in a time that is less rigid.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobbyS

Women priests makes sense only if one is accustomed to thinking of the priesthood as a position of power. But even from that perspective, the fact si that when women do gain a position of power, that position is diminished in status, and men tend to avoid it. Look at what is happening in the universities, as women graduates become the majority. The value of the degree is diminished.

You're arguing that when women have something it automatically decreases in value?
That's one of the most sexist things I have ever heard!

Ranp · #**584** May 5, '12, 3:27 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8

If several women--including Mary Magdalene, Jesus' favorite--could hang out and move around with the apostles/disciples and help preach, why can't women do so today?

Because God said women cannot be ordained into the priesthood. This has been part of Holy Tradition (the Word of God) for 2,000 years. Pope Saint Peter, nor any Pope since him, has had the authority to change it. It is an absolute beyond any man. Just as no man has the authority to change the gravitational constant of the universe, so no man has the authority to allow women into the priesthood of the Catholic Church.

Ran

AngryAtheist8 · #**585** May 5, '12, 3:58 pm

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
If several women--including Mary Magdalene, Jesus' favorite--could hang out and move around with the apostles/disciples and help preach, why can't women do so today?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ranp

Because God said women cannot be ordained into the priesthood. This has been part of Holy Tradition (the Word of God) for 2,000 years. Pope Saint Peter, nor any Pope since him, has had the authority to change it. It is an absolute beyond any man. Just as no man has the authority to change the gravitational constant of the universe, so no man has the authority to allow women into the priesthood of the Catholic Church.

Ran

I am fairly certain I did not write that (at the top of the post).