[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Well, I would recommend Christopher West’s beginner guide. Awesome explanation of Catholic theology. It encompasses more than just the sexuality.[/quote]
I’ll check it out. Thanks.
[quote]Leanna wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Leanna wrote:<<< Do you think God The Creator still creates the world and everything in it or did he get beat somewhere? Take your time. [/quote] http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/the_key_to_everything?id=5080368&pageNo=22
[/quote]
I was confused why you posted a link to a 25 post thread as the answer to my question, but I finally saw your response in post 23 (of 25). Was that intentional?
Anyway, your response was more or less that God completed his work, in Genesis 2.
So, just to be clear, are you saying that God does not continue to create? Because He was complete in Genesis 2? Hasn’t God continued to Create from Genesis to NOW?
[/quote]I was trying not to hijack this thread which is about Catholicism. I will answer you there again.
[quote]Leanna wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Leanna wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
Basically, Mr. Chen is trying have a long-dong contest between his flavor of faith and Catholicism. Basically, I am showing my dong to be bigger, by showing the short comings of ‘sola scriptura’ in that, if it were obvious as Luther believed, then everybody would get the same thing out of scripture, but they do not. To the point were people build completely different belief systems on preferred parts of scripture to detriment of others.
[/quote]
Thanks for responding. I didn’t realize I barged in on a long dong contest, so my apologies for that. To take my point a little further, why is it important that everyone ‘get the same thing’ out of the scriptures? People are different. In different phases and stages of ‘spiritual evolution’, if you will. They are going to naturally look for, and get what they need from scripture – whatever that it. That’s the beauty of it.
[/quote]
It’s not important for people to get ‘the same things’ out of scripture. Well to a point, I mean there are some basics on which people should agree, it cannot be completely arbitrary. But it is a diverse text with many diverse things and it is for the many not the few. As Paul says, there are many parts to the body of Christ and each part is as important as another. From the academics to the nurturing, it’s based on a common theme. Love. Love of God, love of neighbor and there are many many ways to do that. A proper examination of faith reveals that their are many rooms in God’s house. He made us all very different for a reason, we are to be united in faith and love.
A lot of people whine about ‘organized religion’ and I have to chalk that up to what I would call a ‘spiritual immaturity’. What I mean by that, is that such a notion hasn’t been carefully examined. To say that one ‘organized’ religion simply emphasizes a different part of scripture vs. another really hasn’t looked into it that carefully. I, and the church, have no issue with Protestants or indeed any people of faith. When we say we are the ‘One True Church’, it’s not a proclamation that we are better than anybody else. Firstly, it’s really just a reaction and a defense. Second, what we are defending is that the Catholic Church is the only ‘church’ that can legitimately trace our lineage directly to the apostles and as for the Roman Catholic Church, can be the only church that can legitimately trace our roots to Matthew 16:18.
The problem is, is that we are constantly attacked. For some reason, we simply cannot live in peace, not even with our Christian brethren. Constantly, daily people want to tear us down. It’s sad really, but we have to defend ourselves. Defend we will. We have to, because our responsibility is great. There are 1.2 billion Roman Catholics in the world, 1.5 Catholics, counting the Russian, Orthodox, and Coptic traditions. We have to defend ourselves against attacks. To many people depend on this church, to let some pseudo-intellectuals to tear us down and attempt to make us irrelevant.
History is on our side, for most of Christianity’s history, ‘Catholic’ was “Christianity”. ‘Catholic’ means ‘Universal’ which came from the greek ‘Katholikos’, meaning, universal. And that’s really the point. It’s for all people who hold Christ at the center. It’s not to alienate people or to be above or beyond anybody. It was conceived originally to call all man to the feast and to share in the Glory of Christ. It was never the intention to alienate people. But enter man in to the equation and quite frankly, man screws it up. There is no doubt, that people with in the church have done great damage to the church, to people, and to God. We cannot help what others have done, we can only apologize and try to do better.
You are right. What people do not understand is that religion is just a means, God is the end. When you lose focus of that, you might as well not even practice a religion.
But don’t underestimate the profound ability of people to bastardize the scripture, meld it to say what they want and use verses to justify it.
If an interpretation of verses does not fit in context of the chapter, book and the bible itself, then you’ve interpreted wrong. But people will bastardize masterfully, and call it the word of God and people will believe them, sad to say. To many sheep refuse to think for themselves. We are called to wisdom and that is a personal journey.
[quote]Leanna wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Leanna wrote:<<< Do you think God The Creator still creates the world and everything in it or did he get beat somewhere? Take your time. [/quote] http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/the_key_to_everything?id=5080368&pageNo=22
[/quote]
I was confused why you posted a link to a 25 post thread as the answer to my question, but I finally saw your response in post 23 (of 25). Was that intentional?
Anyway, your response was more or less that God completed his work, in Genesis 2.
So, just to be clear, are you saying that God does not continue to create? Because He was complete in Genesis 2? Hasn’t God continued to Create from Genesis to NOW?
[/quote]
Hmmm, actually that is an interesting question. The answer is I don’t know. What I know is that what he created is sufficient to continue with out further creative intervention, but if he is continuing to do it, beats me.
“In his homily, Benedict said the dissidents claim to be motivated by concern for the church. But he suggested that in reality they were just making â??a desperate push to do something to change the church in accordance with (their) own preferences and ideas.â??”
How long do you figure before these changes happen anyway? I respect his resolve btw and he’s right about women in senior leadership.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
How long do you figure before these changes happen anyway? I respect his resolve btw and he’s right about women in senior leadership.[/quote]
The changes will never happen. Can’t.
Wanna bet? At least on the celibate priests thing? Mark my words. Some pope and college of bishops WILL find a way to justify it. Probably in your lifetime.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Wanna bet? At least on the celibate priests thing? Mark my words. Some pope and college of bishops WILL find a way to justify it. Probably in your lifetime. [/quote]
You mentioned women so I assumed you were referring to the womyn priest(esses). That will never happen. I’ll put 10k on that. I’d bet more, but I want the bet to be realistic because I’ll never be able to collect on my end of the bet by nature of the bet. And, I want to seem like I have good faith in this bet.
However, I would never argue that married men could not become priests, they have been since St. Peter.
My spiritual director is married with ten rug rats…and 2 grand-babies (he’s 35). Priestly celibacy is not a doctrine or dogma. It is not a central tenet of the faith given to us by Jesus or the Apostles. It is a disciplinary rule within the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church from the early Middle Ages (largely based off refraining from causing scandal among the laity).
So, it would be ridiculous to bet on something that already happens.
What does the Catholic Church have against women in the priesthood? Just like the Scottish Rite Masons. They still won’t allow women in their meeting/ceremonial ranks either.
Women are precious to God and have many vital functions in His kingdom by His design. Some they do share with men. Men are however tasked with the helm of final authoritative leadership in the church, society and family. This is one area I agree in principle with the Catholics on.
A woman in whom dwells the Spirit of the living God will not grope and grasp for that for which she was not designed. That is a perversion of God’s created order and is a leading contributor to exactly the decomposition of the western world that we are at this very moment witnessing.
[quote]Leanna wrote:
What does the Catholic Church have against women in the priesthood? Just like the Scottish Rite Masons. They still won’t allow women in their meeting/ceremonial ranks either. [/quote]
The Catholic Church has nothing against women. Women just can’t be fathers. In other words, you have three basic arguments that of utilitarianism, sentimentalism, and civil rights. In the utilitarianism it is argued that some women can do the job just as well as a priest. They are good preachers, good listeners, faithful servant, &c.
Then you have the sentimental argument, which is that Jane wants to be a priest, she is so nice. So this and that, how can you be so cruel and hurt her like this…not giving her the opportunity to become a priest. Her mother has been a pillar of the Church for decades, you are hurting her by not letting her daughter become a priest.
Then you have the civil rights argument, men and women are equal, thus women should be able to be priests.
These are all arguments that can contribute to a debate, but they don’t have much weight within the Catholic Church. The Church starts with another premise altogether: theology and the truth of theology governs all decisions. Utilitarian, sentimental, and civil rights are important in civil society are of low priority when making decisions in the Catholic Church.
I’ll write on this more. I have to go to class.
Regards,
BC
P.S. The highest created person (as in both women and men) in the Catholic Church is a woman.
Not suprisingly, the Bible has some contradictory (and divisive) passages on the subject. How much of it should be considered a reflection of the culture in that time and place, as opposed to ‘God’s Will’? Some say the paternal slant of Christianity in general was an intentional departure from the previous maternal slant of paganism. The greco/roman pantheon had a more balanced male/female approach.
Regardless, my favorite Bible verse on the subject is this:
Galatians 3:28 ESV - There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Surely, an enlightened moment!)
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Women are precious to God and have many vital functions in His kingdom by His design. Some they do share with men. Men are however tasked with the helm of final authoritative leadership in the church, society and family. This is one area I agree in principle with the Catholics on.
A woman in whom dwells the Spirit of the living God will not grope and grasp for that for which she was not designed. That is a perversion of God’s created order and is a leading contributor to exactly the decomposition of the western world that we are at this very moment witnessing.[/quote]
Int-ter-rest-ing. That all fine and good, but there is one basic problem there that you have not addressed, Mr. Tiribulus. What do you suppose happens when the men are (1) deserters (2) cheaters (3) poor providers (4) lousy leaders? When that happens, the women are forced, by the laws of nature (some say God), to ‘grope’, ‘grasp’, fend for herself, feed and lead her family, develop skills, run her life, and become smart enough and strong enough to never be that co-dependant so that the pain and bullshit would never happen again! Ta-da…the women’s rights movement. Simple survival.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
That is a perversion of God’s created order and is a leading contributor to exactly the decomposition of the western world that we are at this very moment witnessing.[/quote]
I see by the number of posts that you have that you spend a great deal of time expressing your opinions online. That’s quite understandable, for your own safety and protection. I don’t think that would go over very well in the REAL WORLD. Would you tell a newly deserted mother with kids that her efforts to become independent, to lead and to provide for her family, to earn equal income for the same effort, is a ‘perversion of God’s created order’? Would you pity her and treat her like a pathetic victim that can do nothing but wait for hand-outs until another male-leader comes along for her?
[quote]Leanna wrote:
Not suprisingly, the Bible has some contradictory (and divisive) passages on the subject. How much of it should be considered a reflection of the culture in that time and place, as opposed to ‘God’s Will’?[/quote]
Not much (if any, but I haven’t much studied the topic in general) should be a reflection of the culture, Jesus was a revolutionary. He was so counter cultural that they killed him. Jesus often used women to teach his disciples. Further, he chose a woman to be born into this world. Even so, it wouldn’t have been against the culture of the day to have priestesses, there were plenty. So, there was more fundamental reasons beyond culture to why he choose men to fill the hierarchy of the Church.
Maybe for Protestantism, but in Catholicism we love Mary above the Pope and all the other Saints.
[quote]Regardless, my favorite Bible verse on the subject is this:
Galatians 3:28 ESV - There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Surely, an enlightened moment!)
[/quote]
Of course, the Jews at the time had a tendency to be dismissive, at the time, of other people. Just like any culture. However, this passage is referring to salvation within the body of Christ, not the hierarchical priesthood.
Anyway, to continue on topic.
The argument for favor of men, or for favor of reserving the priesthood to men begins with the creation of man (general). Man (general) was separated into man and woman and both were equal in the sight of God, and both are created in his image. Adam and Eve show us the equality of the sexes. However, they are not the same kind because by their nature they are complementarity. Adam and Eve are used by Jesus and St. Paul and tradition to explain the sexuality of man (general).
Man and woman are not identical, we are not a-sexual. Our nature is intrinsically related to being male or female. This identity leads to who we are and who we are meant to be. It has to do with out eternal destiny (meaning our maleness or femaleness has some play in it). Sexuality is not accidental it is substantial part of our humanity.
Adam and Ever for us the proper and nature relationship between the sexes. Of course our primal goal is to be fruitful and multiply. And being that man and woman are created for one another, and this is fulfilled through the sacrament of marriage (which JPII calls primordial sacrament). This is our destiny, salvation, and meaning in life.
Man, fully man as a husband and father. A woman, fully a woman as a wife and mother. This is the order, both natural and supernatural leading this relationship to new life only by this created order. This relationship is also foundational to the Church and of course to human society.
This order is tantamount to the discussion I talked about earlier, woman’s ordination. If I can propose that this is the case, we can consider how the economy of salvation works through the mystery of man’s (general) sexuality. Looking at the relationship between Jesus and his mother, this is quite evident. Let me explain, St. Paul says in 1 Cor. 11 “in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman.”
The Blessed Virgin shared the actions of redemption that her Son undertook, “A sword pierced her own heart also.”
Adam and Eve showed us how to be humans, the New Adam and Eve show us how to be redeemed humans. Mary shares in Christ’ redemptive work, that is why Catholics call her co-Redeemer, but she does so as fully woman and fully mother. Christ, does so as fully man, and man as Son. Their sexuality is not accidental, it is a substantial way they effect salvation.
Now, to the role of priests. The role of priest is the alter Christus (in persona Christi). His role is the part of Christ and Christ works through the priest in the Eucharist sacrifice. The priest, as man, his sexuality matters, it is substantial, because he brings this action of redemption the fact that he is not only human, but like Christ, he is a man. Women do this, participate, in the redemptive sacrifice as did the Mother of God, as woman and mothers. Women to be a priest is thus as impossible as it would be for a man to be a mother.
This is the theological model which the Catholic Church has had in her history to explain the essential ways of life and salvation.
Just to point out that Tirib is baptized Catholic, but he is not even nominally Catholic, he is a Calvinist Protestant. So, his answer may or may not have anything to do with the Catholic Church.
Nevertheless, since this was brought up in a Catholic Q&A I find that it might be helpful to give a Catholic point of view on this issue.
Women should stay barefoot, pregnant, in the kitchen and this would have never happened. Just kidding, that isn’t even my own point of view.
[quote]Leanna wrote:
Int-ter-rest-ing. That all fine and good, but there is one basic problem there that you have not addressed, Mr. Tiribulus. What do you suppose happens when the men are (1) deserters (2) cheaters (3) poor providers (4) lousy leaders? When that happens, the women are forced, by the laws of nature (some say God), to ‘grope’, ‘grasp’, fend for herself, feed and lead her family, develop skills, run her life, and become smart enough and strong enough to never be that co-dependant so that the pain and bullshit would never happen again! Ta-da…the women’s rights movement. Simple survival. [/quote]
I don’t think groping, grasping, is the same as fending for herself, feed and lead her family, develop skills, &c. The pain and bullshit avoidance is accidental not substantial for doing the things you have mentioned. The good wife does all this with her husband by her side as she would without. Proverb 31.
Lol
I’m sorry, I can’t even make a full comment on this because this makes me laugh at what trouble Tirib has caused in his thread. I’ll leave you with a quote from Abp. Fulton J. Sheen, “When a man loves a woman, he has to become worthy of her. The higher her virtue, the more noble her character, the more devoted she is to truth, justice, goodness, the more a man has to aspire to be worthy of her. The history of civilization could actually be written in terms of the level of its women.”
Oh, and here is another quote for realizing what today is, “Unless there is a Good Friday in your life, there can be no Easter Sunday.”
[quote]Leanna wrote:
What does the Catholic Church have against women in the priesthood? Just like the Scottish Rite Masons. They still won’t allow women in their meeting/ceremonial ranks either. [/quote]
Are you interested becoming a priest?
It’s not complicated, female clergy has a different role than the male clergy, that’s all. They are certainly no less important, but they do have the harder job. The woman are the hands of the church. They do the dirty work…
The instructions on the priesthood comes primarily from scripture and there is no scriptural precedent for female priests. Will it change? I doubt it. There is no big line of women waiting to become priests, except for Sinad O’Conner.
It’s a misunderstanding to say that the woman clergy have no influence in the church. It was Mother Teresa after all, one of the greatest saints in the history of the Church, who bitched out the counsel of Cardinals and Bishops for various things. They were subject to her, not the other way around.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Leanna wrote:
Not suprisingly, the Bible has some contradictory (and divisive) passages on the subject. How much of it should be considered a reflection of the culture in that time and place, as opposed to ‘God’s Will’?[/quote]
Not much (if any, but I haven’t much studied the topic in general) should be a reflection of the culture, Jesus was a revolutionary. He was so counter cultural that they killed him. Jesus often used women to teach his disciples. Further, he chose a woman to be born into this world. Even so, it wouldn’t have been against the culture of the day to have priestesses, there were plenty. So, there was more fundamental reasons beyond culture to why he choose men to fill the hierarchy of the Church.
Maybe for Protestantism, but in Catholicism we love Mary above the Pope and all the other Saints.
[quote]Regardless, my favorite Bible verse on the subject is this:
Galatians 3:28 ESV - There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Surely, an enlightened moment!)
[/quote]
Of course, the Jews at the time had a tendency to be dismissive, at the time, of other people. Just like any culture. However, this passage is referring to salvation within the body of Christ, not the hierarchical priesthood.
Anyway, to continue on topic.
The argument for favor of men, or for favor of reserving the priesthood to men begins with the creation of man (general). Man (general) was separated into man and woman and both were equal in the sight of God, and both are created in his image. Adam and Eve show us the equality of the sexes. However, they are not the same kind because by their nature they are complementarity. Adam and Eve are used by Jesus and St. Paul and tradition to explain the sexuality of man (general).
Man and woman are not identical, we are not a-sexual. Our nature is intrinsically related to being male or female. This identity leads to who we are and who we are meant to be. It has to do with out eternal destiny (meaning our maleness or femaleness has some play in it). Sexuality is not accidental it is substantial part of our humanity.
Adam and Ever for us the proper and nature relationship between the sexes. Of course our primal goal is to be fruitful and multiply. And being that man and woman are created for one another, and this is fulfilled through the sacrament of marriage (which JPII calls primordial sacrament). This is our destiny, salvation, and meaning in life.
Man, fully man as a husband and father. A woman, fully a woman as a wife and mother. This is the order, both natural and supernatural leading this relationship to new life only by this created order. This relationship is also foundational to the Church and of course to human society.
This order is tantamount to the discussion I talked about earlier, woman’s ordination. If I can propose that this is the case, we can consider how the economy of salvation works through the mystery of man’s (general) sexuality. Looking at the relationship between Jesus and his mother, this is quite evident. Let me explain, St. Paul says in 1 Cor. 11 “in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman.Ã? For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman.”
The Blessed Virgin shared the actions of redemption that her Son undertook, “A sword pierced her own heart also.”
Adam and Eve showed us how to be humans, the New Adam and Eve show us how to be redeemed humans. Mary shares in Christ’ redemptive work, that is why Catholics call her co-Redeemer, but she does so as fully woman and fully mother. Christ, does so as fully man, and man as Son. Their sexuality is not accidental, it is a substantial way they effect salvation.
Now, to the role of priests. The role of priest is the alter Christus (in persona Christi). His role is the part of Christ and Christ works through the priest in the Eucharist sacrifice. The priest, as man, his sexuality matters, it is substantial, because he brings this action of redemption the fact that he is not only human, but like Christ, he is a man. Women do this, participate, in the redemptive sacrifice as did the Mother of God, as woman and mothers. Women to be a priest is thus as impossible as it would be for a man to be a mother.
This is the theological model which the Catholic Church has had in her history to explain the essential ways of life and salvation. [/quote]
Thanks for the explanation regarding priests. That seems reasonable.
You say that marriage is ‘our destiny, salvation and meaning in life’. What is the Catholic view on a lifelong unmarried woman (or man)? What about a married couple that has no children - for whatever reason? Are children a necessary part of the sacrament and salvation? Do Catholics view that as tragic?
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Leanna wrote:
What does the Catholic Church have against women in the priesthood? Just like the Scottish Rite Masons. They still won’t allow women in their meeting/ceremonial ranks either. [/quote]
Are you interested becoming a priest?
It’s not complicated, female clergy has a different role than the male clergy, that’s all. They are certainly no less important, but they do have the harder job. The woman are the hands of the church. They do the dirty work…
The instructions on the priesthood comes primarily from scripture and there is no scriptural precedent for female priests. Will it change? I doubt it. There is no big line of women waiting to become priests, except for Sinad O’Conner.
It’s a misunderstanding to say that the woman clergy have no influence in the church. It was Mother Teresa after all, one of the greatest saints in the history of the Church, who bitched out the counsel of Cardinals and Bishops for various things. They were subject to her, not the other way around.[/quote]
No, I don’t want to be a priest. But I did go to a church with a female minister for a while. I learned a lot from her and she still has my respect. I ended up moving away, but I thought she did a great job and carried me far. I’m a much better person due to her influence. So I was always curious why the Catholics wouldn’t allow it, that’s all.
[quote]Leanna wrote:
Not suprisingly, the Bible has some contradictory (and divisive) passages on the subject. How much of it should be considered a reflection of the culture in that time and place, as opposed to ‘God’s Will’? Some say the paternal slant of Christianity in general was an intentional departure from the previous maternal slant of paganism. The greco/roman pantheon had a more balanced male/female approach.
Regardless, my favorite Bible verse on the subject is this:
Galatians 3:28 ESV - There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Surely, an enlightened moment!)
[/quote]
Yes but you need to read Timothy and Titus for clerical instruction.
You’re seeing it as a slight to women and it’s not. After all it is the Catholic Church who venerates and honors the Blessed Mother. God saw fit to honor her and so we honor her. She is the only person whom Jesus himself honored and took orders from in the scriptures. We recognize that anybody who God himself honors, is to be honored, not desecrated, maligned, or marginalized as some protestant sects have chosen to do.
Further, we do recognize that the courage of the woman in scripture far out weighed the men, it was women who stayed with Jesus through out his passion, it was woman who were not afraid to show their faith in him when all others scattered. It was women who took care of the body and stood by Jesus the entire time.
John was the only disciple at the crucifixion, but it was the women who stood by Jesus.
The role to the women are different not less. They are the ones caring for the least of God’s people, in who his presence looms large.
Maybe women can do the man’s job in the church, but it’s the man who cannot do the women’s job. If both men and women are doing the same job, then who’s taking care of the people?
We need the female clergy to do what they do or the church will not stand. Without the female clergy, the church cannot continue. It will fall.