[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]
We have female ministers, they are called Nuns and they also practice religious instruction. Hell, it was a nun who started and runs EWTN, the Catholic Network. I dare say Mother Angelica would have made a lousy priest, because she’s to good a nun.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< 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. >>>[/quote]Dare I ask what this means Chris?
[quote]Not TOO far., but quiet and silent in church require some elucidation. It all requires at least some actually. My beloved country soared while women, who bear every bit of the image and likeness of their creator that men do, cherished their God given design of fulfilling the awesome and immeasurably honorable privileges of keeping the nest from which new life and hence citizens would emerge.
Now we’re populated by tragedies like this Ironcross person who will go to the mat for their “right” to kill their own offspring. Who have been deluded into thinking that their “Ms.” status is progress and liberty. The high role of women in the New Testament is one of the most consistently misrepresented aspects of authentic New Covenant Christianity there is. That said, I am NOT contending that if it were properly understood the western world’s lost women would rush to embrace it LOL! Nah. The spirit of the age has quite biblically blinded their eyes.
Make no mistake though. MEN are responsible for this fatally disastrous redefinition of womanhood. MEN have been tasked with the responsibility of manning the helm of the home and society. MEN have and are failing catastrophically. This site is the very quintessential definition of everything that is killing this country.
A Spirit filled, self controlled man who loves his wife as Christ loved His church and GAVE HIMSELF for her. A man who cherishes and honors her. Who protects her virtue and purity with his own life. Who sees her as the most precious gift of a loving God save only for the sacrifice of His son. Who views his stewardship over her and the children she bears to him as the gravest and most joyous of responsibilities. THOSE are “testosterone principles” I’ll tell ya.[/quote]
There’s a word for what you have written there, Tirib. It’s misogyny. Couch it in any florid language you like, it remains repulsive. Gift…stewardship…the language of chattel.
What a shocker. Not unexpected, but still.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< 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. >>>[/quote]Dare I ask what this means Chris?
[quote]Not TOO far., but quiet and silent in church require some elucidation. It all requires at least some actually. My beloved country soared while women, who bear every bit of the image and likeness of their creator that men do, cherished their God given design of fulfilling the awesome and immeasurably honorable privileges of keeping the nest from which new life and hence citizens would emerge.
Now we’re populated by tragedies like this Ironcross person who will go to the mat for their “right” to kill their own offspring. Who have been deluded into thinking that their “Ms.” status is progress and liberty. The high role of women in the New Testament is one of the most consistently misrepresented aspects of authentic New Covenant Christianity there is. That said, I am NOT contending that if it were properly understood the western world’s lost women would rush to embrace it LOL! Nah. The spirit of the age has quite biblically blinded their eyes.
Make no mistake though. MEN are responsible for this fatally disastrous redefinition of womanhood. MEN have been tasked with the responsibility of manning the helm of the home and society. MEN have and are failing catastrophically. This site is the very quintessential definition of everything that is killing this country.
A Spirit filled, self controlled man who loves his wife as Christ loved His church and GAVE HIMSELF for her. A man who cherishes and honors her. Who protects her virtue and purity with his own life. Who sees her as the most precious gift of a loving God save only for the sacrifice of His son. Who views his stewardship over her and the children she bears to him as the gravest and most joyous of responsibilities. THOSE are “testosterone principles” I’ll tell ya.[/quote] [/quote]
Leanna it’s really simple, we all know Trib likes to write A LOT.
Get off the internet and back in the kitchen makin sammiches!
And if this site is what is killing this country why do you keep coming back? (honest)
[quote]Leanna wrote:
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]
No problem. I’m not sure of the exact view, but it is definitely not negative: nuns, sisters, brothers, and monks are all lifelong unmarried persons. It seems that most of the Saints come from these ranks.
I’ll point this out, we are embodied spirits; so, we are primarily spiritual mothers and fathers, wives and husbands. However, there is the possibility of being actual mothers and fathers. Nevertheless, to be fully mother and wive it is meant spiritually.
Children are necessary, but as I am sure you can figure out they don’t have to be your biological children. Further, the greatest husband and wife team was Mary and Joseph and they didn’t even have sex, let alone children. So, no it is not tragic in the sense that being childless doesn’t go against God’s will; however we realize that it can be tragic for those who want children but cannot conceive. And, of course, it goes without saying that Catholics that all children are gifts from God.
It means that you upset the lady and there were some objections that she asked that you’d have to answer yourself.
The reason why the American Family is crumbling (in all its visible effects) is not because women are making money. It’s because the man thought he needed to leave the house to make money. Because of a transfer of persons into mere labor. Your beloved Detroit (it is not alone) is a good example of that.
The truth if a woman wants to go out and bring food from afar, let her. Perfect is she. But, a man away from his estate cannot lead anything.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< It means that you upset the lady >>>[/quote]I did? How and where? [quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< and there were some objections that she asked that you’d have to answer yourself. >>>[/quote]And where would these be too? She has one post in that thread with almost zero substance. [quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< The reason why the American Family is crumbling (in all its visible effects) is not because women are making money. >>>[/quote]Of course not. I never said that or anythng even vaguely approaching it. That is a direct contradiction of the 31st chapter of Proverbs. [quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< It’s because the man thought he needed to leave the house to make money. Because of a transfer of persons into mere labor. >>>[/quote]You have said very few, if any, truly idiotic things since I’ve known you Chris, but this is one.[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Your beloved Detroit (it is not alone) is a good example of that. >>>[/quote]My beloved Detroit IS THE quintessential example of everything that’s rotting this nation, though it was not caused by anything having to do with employment conditions or requirements., though I’ve heard that argument. Real families can survive Dad being at work or at war for a while at a time.[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< The truth if a woman wants to go out and bring food from afar, let her. Perfect is she. >>>[/quote]Yes, the 31st of proverbs. Still trying to trap me Chris? =] And “afar” didn’t than hat it does now.[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< But, a man away from his estate cannot lead anything.[/quote]Absolutely untrue. He leads through the godly presence of his trusted wife in his periodic temporary absence through delegated authority. Similar to how the commander in chief leads his troops from the other the side of the world. If he has married wisely he will trust her implicitly. And she him. Common grace having just about dried up this will not function in very many non Christian cases anymore.
It means that you upset the lady and there were some objections that she asked that you’d have to answer yourself.
The reason why the American Family is crumbling (in all its visible effects) is not because women are making money. It’s because the man thought he needed to leave the house to make money. Because of a transfer of persons into mere labor. Your beloved Detroit (it is not alone) is a good example of that.
The truth if a woman wants to go out and bring food from afar, let her. Perfect is she. But, a man away from his estate cannot lead anything.[/quote]
[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]
[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
Here’s one the correct size.[/quote]
Yeah the best way to attract women is to club them and drag them by their hair… Crap this is really funny. I am actually laughing, not like internet laughing.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote: There’s a word for what you have written there, Tirib. It’s misogyny. Couch it in any florid language you like, it remains repulsive. Gift…stewardship…the language of chattel.
What a shocker. Not unexpected, but still.[/quote]Actually it’s called Christ’s love for His church in the book of Ephesians chapter 5. It was the prevailing view of this nation until the sixties when she began killing herself.
[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:<<< Leanna it’s really simple, we all know Trib likes to write A LOT.
Get off the internet and back in the kitchen makin sammiches!
And if this site is what is killing this country why do you keep coming back? (honest)[/quote]Typically clueless misrepresentation there bud and I keep coming back here because there are people here I care about, but more importantly I am convinced to my bones that God wants me here or I would never type one more character here ever. The whole barefoot, pregnant and makin sammiches thing is a deplorable caricature of the glorious life that the Lord has for women who love Him.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< It means that you upset the lady >>>[/quote]I did? How and where? [quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< and there were some objections that she asked that you’d have to answer yourself. >>>[/quote]And where would these be too? She has one post in that thread with almost zero substance. [quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< The reason why the American Family is crumbling (in all its visible effects) is not because women are making money. >>>[/quote]Of course not. I never said that or anythng even vaguely approaching it. That is a direct contradiction of the 31st chapter of Proverbs. [quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< It’s because the man thought he needed to leave the house to make money. Because of a transfer of persons into mere labor. >>>[/quote]You have said very few, if any, truly idiotic things since I’ve known you Chris, but this is one.[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Your beloved Detroit (it is not alone) is a good example of that. >>>[/quote]My beloved Detroit IS THE quintessential example of everything that’s rotting this nation, though it was not caused by anything having to do with employment conditions or requirements., though I’ve heard that argument. Real families can survive Dad being at work or at war for a while at a time.[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< The truth if a woman wants to go out and bring food from afar, let her. Perfect is she. >>>[/quote]Yes, the 31st of proverbs. Still trying to trap me Chris? =] And “afar” didn’t than hat it does now.[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< But, a man away from his estate cannot lead anything.[/quote]Absolutely untrue. He leads through the godly presence of his trusted wife in his periodic temporary absence through delegated authority. Similar to how the commander in chief leads his troops from the other the side of the world. If he has married wisely he will trust her implicitly. And she him. Common grace having just about dried up this will not function in very many non Christian cases anymore.
[/quote]
You upset her by something you said, she obvious is upset about something. She cursed, usually a sign of being upset and offended. Just because it lacks substance, doesn’t mean she doesn’t need it to be answered. \
[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:<<< How is any of what I said clueless? Your not dealing with somebody that just joined this site bud. >>>[/quote]You “kitchen and sammiches” remark is an old worn out straw man caricature with no basis in biblical reality,[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:<<< You like to write out sermons A LOT. Hell you started your own thread so you could. >>>[/quote]If you mean long posts that’s true. The subject matter often requires it. They’re only sarcastically referred to as “sermons” by you because you don’t like what they say.[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:<<<
And just like others on here I’ve seen you talk to people in ways that are very much the opposite of what you preach. >>>[/quote]Yes, you have at times(though I’m sure we define this differently) and there is no excuse for arrogance from someone who preaches salvation by free grace alone. The Lord has dealt with me on that and I have publicly acknowledged it which is why the past few months I have been especially watchful over my attitude.[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:<<< Edit: and Leanna was simply asking questions for understanding[/quote]I don’t know her story so I could be wrong, but I was not impressed by there being any search for understanding. In any case it looks like everybody who has posted so far missed the fact that quite consistently with my own belief system I am blaming MEN for the state of women and all the terrible things she cites. There is NO solution except a return to New Testament marriage, family and sexual practice which was the moral foundation that made this nation great until the 1960’s.
Of course women today are forced to fend for themselves and attempt to raise children alone. My beloved Detroit is a tragic, sick and violent object lesson in the grotesque failure of that very sinful state of affairs. Caused primarily by whoring, self worshiping, hedonistic, narcissistic “MEN”. Who view a woman as a breathing sex toy. This site is a monument to that attitude. I talk about the biblical mandate that a “husband love his wife as Christ loved the Church and give himself for her”. That he cherish and protect her with his own life and I’m a misogynist. You people do not see the twisted upside down reality you’re living in.
This country will soon be gasping it’s last breaths barring a mighty mighty move of the Holy Spirit of God which is the only possible escape from the quicksand of immorality that we have dived into head first. Men must lead. Har dee har har. The college generation coming up now is on a suicide mission to see who can finish destroying the United States the quickest. What else could be expected? Look at their parents and now grandparents.
And btw, I bear personal guilt on this front. I am not siting atop some self erected moral perch peering down at the sewer below. I reveled in that sewer before I knew Jesus and even after I knew Him did not love my wife like He loves His church. I never committed adultery, but I was a horrible, drunken, selfish, worthless husband. In a marriage with a girl who desperately needed me (long story and still am). I failed her and in so doing failed God. It’s only been the last couple years that I am learning exactly what it means for me to love her like He loves me. I begged him to forgive me and to teach me. Boy is He ever.
Once again Tirib, what and how you write is an abject lesson in misogyny. I stand by my statement 100%, and the more you protest how misunderstood you are, the deeper the hole you dig. No one has said men weren’t to blame for how things are at the moment, since men were in charge since the beginning of time to keep half of the world’s population under yoke with a variety of political and religious systems, till they said ‘no more’.
Your solution? More of the same. Funny how you can’t accept how men that don’t subscribe to your world view can espouse the same values towards women that you profess, along with the added bonus of seeing and treating them as equals. Funny how your whole diatribe doesn’t include one single word about how women may feel, how you don’t say whether you apologized to your wife for your behaviour and begged for her forgiveness FIRST. Which I certainly hope you did, and probably did do…but not a word.
It’s all about YOU. Even when you say we men are to blame, not one single word about women and how they may have seen the world, and wanted change. Not…one. Like I said, you’re invested in a chattel and property viewpoint.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Nevertheless, to be fully mother and wive it is meant spiritually. Children are necessary, but as I am sure you can figure out they don’t have to be your biological children. [/quote]
That’s good. Since it appears that it’s tied to the Catholic view of salvation, I wanted to make sure childless people weren’t pitied or outcast.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
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]
Very true! And a good defense for Judas. He was just a necessary actor on the divine stage. Perhaps you’re right and it’s similar to the ‘womens place’ issue we are talking about. Maybe if we step back, we can see that its all part of the divine plan NOW for women to come into their own. The Biblical version is OK too of course…when it works and two are tango-ing.
I will be spending the rest of the day making sammiches…oh no…I’m making the Easter Feast for company tomorrow. Happy Easter! Peace! It’s all good!
See what you get for your efforts Chris? BTW, If folks will ever take my advice and look here http://forums.catholic.com/ they will find this lady’s very ungodly view well represented by the Catholic (almost forgot that big C again) women there.
Her view is certainly not the Catholic(got it first try that time) view, but that’s the point I’ve been trying to gently send to dearest Christopher who has thus far heroically resisted my every stalwart effort at advancing his understanding in the area of authority. I will not however be swayed or grow faint. Brother Chris is my homey and I will plod forward in my quest to see the purpose of the glorious risen Christ fully manifested in his life. (take this as very serious Chris, with a splash of tongue in cheek, stirred not shaken)
