Should Women Be Ordained As Priests?

[Danospano]

After reading a related post, I tought I'd post this question.

I'll wait to post my detailed opinion at a later date.

[U2Bama]

I have attempted to vote twice but it alleges that the session has expired. Did you close the polls early on us just like you did to the Republican voters in the Florida panhandle?

[Danospano]

U2Bamba: I see that someone else voted. I think you may have a bad connection. To answer your question: I didn't set a time limit on the poll.

Cheers, Dano

[U2Bama]

It's those damned voter-identification laws.

[Sicy]

If you use AOL and are having troubles please see this thread

:arrow: http://forum2.interference.com/showt...threadid=61088

[Basstrap]

it's the most ridiculous thing in the world for ANYBODY to think a woman can't be a priest...
I'm sorry if anybody here has that viewpoint, but I cannot even come close to respecting it!

I'm not catholic
But I don't see any reason why a man can be any closer to God than a woman. We are not living in the middle ages here.

[Angela Harlem]

Originally posted by Basstrap
But I don't see any reason why a man can be any closer to God than a woman. We are not living in the middle ages here.

Them's the words I would use too.

Totally agree.

[Bonochick]

Of course they should be...why the heck shouldn't they?

[KhanadaRhodes]

so, who's the one who picked no?

[melon]

I also posted this in Sula's female priesthood thread:

Ask the average Catholic, and they support the male priesthood on the fallacy that there were never male priests and that Jesus' apostles were all men. Hence, the belief is that it was always meant to be a male institution. However, female priests did, in fact, exist for the first 500 years of the Catholic Church. Female priesthood was eliminated, in fact, because the leaders at the time saw it as pagan, as there were high priestesses in pagan religions. A pathetic excuse? You bet.

The primary philosophy behind this emanated from St. Augustine (345-430), whose later followers became noted for "Christian stoicism," a movement characterized as being heavily anti-woman, anti-gay, and, generally, anti-emotional (hence, the modern definition of a "stoic").

Quite simply, the Christian stoic movement (not to be confused with the ancient Greek stoic movement, which was materialistic) took the writings of St. Paul to heavy extremes. Later stoics, such as St. Thomas Aquinas and St. John Chrysostom, went as far as to declare fetuses to be completely male, except the fact that Satan often interfered and made females--hence, women were evil. These were also the inventors of original sin, whereas humans were automatically evil upon birth, due to the process of childbirth through the evil woman. Later on, "original sin" was amended to mean that all humans were evil upon birth, due to the sin of Adam and Eve (which, BTW, the Catholic Church now views as a myth).

The ideal Christian, to the stoics, was a celibate, unmarried male, as sex, even with one's spouse, was evil, because it involved "pleasure." The female was forbidden from expressing any pleasure from sex, but males were allowed to "sacrifice" as it became blatantly obvious that procreation would never occur without a male orgasm. As such, this was the origin of the Catholic belief that sex was only for procreation, and, hence, all other purposes were evil. Homosexuals, as expected, hit their nerves the hardest, as these sex acts could never produce children, and, in their infinite wisdom, believed that children could spawn inside of men, as sperm was the whole creator of children to them (reducing women to "incubators"). As such, this was also the origin of most modern homophobia, as the stoics believed this was the worst sin of all.

My point in all of this is to show what kind of tradition the Catholic Church bases this stuff all on, plus to show the irrelevance of those who originated the tradition. What does the Pope say on the matters of female priests? Nothing. "The matter is closed." Rather than tell the truth about female priests in history and come up with a definitive reason why women aren't allowed, he's contented with people using the fallacious version. I mean, he's technically not lying either; just being silent.

Unfortunately, most of our social taboos have less to do with the Bible than the medieval Christian stoics who took certain Biblical passages too far; passages that early Christians took far more lightly. But what do you do when over 1000 years have passed?

Melon

[anitram]

Yes. I'm a Catholic and a woman. While I don't wish to be ordained, the fact I can't be is something akin to bigotry.

[Laura M]

Originally posted by melon
I also posted this in Sula's female priesthood thread:

Ask the average Catholic, and they support the male priesthood on the fallacy that there were never male priests and that Jesus' apostles were all men. Hence, the belief is that it was always meant to be a male institution.


Melon

Well then im not the average Catholic- the church is getting less & less priests they will need women someday imo

[KhanadaRhodes]

Originally posted by Lara Mullen
the church is getting less & less priests they will need women someday imo

[Laura M]

Originally posted by KhanadaRhodes

Tanks!!!

[KhanadaRhodes]

Originally posted by Lara Mullen
Tanks!!!

np!