Feb 10, 2012 -- 9:43AM, walkingeagles wrote:

I don't know why women who want to be priests cannot see the impact and the real need for women in other areas of the church. We learned more from nuns than we did from priests when growing up. There is a need for nuns and women in our religion, just as there is a need for Brothers in the different orders. 

Maybe they want to be priests for the same reasons men want to be priests.  

Oct 7, 2009 -- 2:49AM, Justly wrote:

Sep 7, 2009 -- 7:16PM, Snowday wrote:

I hope they start accepting some women clergy.  This has been a point of contention for me personally.

The Church has changed over the centuries.  There was a time celibacy was not a stated requirement.  St Peter was married according to the Bible.  So if the Church can go from not  requiring celibacy to stating it does, I'm sure someday it can go from a male only priesthood to allowing women to heed their calling.  Of course then the "purists" will need to come up with something else.  "None of the 12 Apostles were" will no longer cut it. 

None of the 12 Apostles were women -- that is a very big reason why...

That aside, the Church has indeed changed but She has never (and cannot ever) reverse Herself on matters that pertain to the dogmatic deposit of faith such as the all-male ordained priesthood.

This issue is closed.  No female priests -- ever.  Google "Ordinatio Sacerdotalis" to find out precisely why.

 

A strong role for women in the church is not a new idea.  In Romans addresses Junia as "outstanding among the apostles".  The early church includes records of female deacons and priests. In the medieval church, abbesses were powerful, sometimes holding authority and secular power independently of local bishops - or even over them. In the modern church, they do an enormous amount of work with inadequate credit.  It is iniquitous that the modern church refuses to allow them to take their full place amongst the clergy.

In reflecting on the womenpriests movement, it is worth remembering that the church routinely proclaims (quite rightly) the importance of standing against injustice - but abandons this principle inside its own structures. Faced with the same problem some years ago, women in the Anglican church adopted the same strategy now undertaken by the womenpriests - devising ordination independently of the church authority and declared policy.  Their numbers steadily increased, until the principle became accepted. The same thing will happen in the Catholic Church - it will just take longer.

(See "God's Tricksters")

 

 

 

Sep 7, 2009 -- 7:16PM, Snowday wrote:

I hope they start accepting some women clergy.  This has been a point of contention for me personally.

The Church has changed over the centuries.  There was a time celibacy was not a stated requirement.  St Peter was married according to the Bible.  So if the Church can go from not  requiring celibacy to stating it does, I'm sure someday it can go from a male only priesthood to allowing women to heed their calling.  Of course then the "purists" will need to come up with something else.  "None of the 12 Apostles were" will no longer cut it. 

[QUOTE=WaveringCC;862368]IOW, the proper role for women still comes down to -- barefoot and pregnant.  Oh yes, and its'sOK to iron the altar cloths and arrange the flowers.  Then you must just step aside, like a good girl.

And, of course, it is the divine right of the men to define the roles of women for women (women are to have no say).  And it is the divinely ordained duty of women to accept the roles defined by the men - even though they are to have no say. .

If I weren't so familiar with this line of thought from Ang's many posts on it, I'd think you were joking.

But, I still have the same reaction I have with Ang's posts - I'm so very sad that you actually believe it.

Oh well.

Welcome to the board.  Ang misses you.

Peace and God's blessings be upon both of you.[/QUOTE]

So, do you actually think the Church will change & allow female priests?