• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

3 Catholic Women ordained as Priests

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: aigomorla
im sorry and i dont want to sound sexist, but women were not ment to be priests.

In the catholic faith, they have other roles. Sister ring a bell?

If women were suposed to be priests, Mary would of been one. Which she isnt.


I dont see how the pope is okeying this.

"The ordination ceremony will take place Sunday at the Church of the Covenant on Newbury Street, which is affiliated with two Protestant denominations, the Presbyterian Church (USA) and the United Church of Christ, the Boston Globe reported."

im sorry the term catholic mens universal, but not this universal.

Boston has a messed up arch. They been messed up ever since there priests molested little kids.


As i thought the catholic chuch will EXCommun them:
"The Vatican, however, said the ordinations would be illegal and the Boston Archdiocese sent out an e-mail to all priests saying that women who try to receive sacred orders and priests who try to confer them are automatically separating themselves from the church."
Click to expand...

your inability to spell and use proper grammar inspires me to interpret your post as "the rantings of a dimwitted imbecile"
 
Three Catholic women will be ordained as priests in a Back Bay neighborhood church this weekend, despite the Vatican's admonition that the trio will be excommunicated if they do so.
Click to expand...

so who is ordaining them if the Vatican says no?
 
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: Kadarin
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: Saint Michael
The Catholic Church shouldn't have female priests because that's tradition, and ultimately that's all the church is: archaic, obsolete cultural tradition.
Click to expand...

Pretty much agree. It's a religion. It makes its own rules. There is a titular head (pope) who says what goes. It's not a democracy. It's not a republic. If the big guy says no women priests, tough crap. They aren't forcing anyone to stay Catholic (anymore). If the next pope says 'let there be fempriests', then there will be. The pope singlehandedly abolished purgatory, surely he can annoint women priests.
Click to expand...

The Pope, himself, has been quoted in the past as saying that he would let the idea of limbo "drop, since it has always been only a theological hypothesis".
Click to expand...

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Only a theological hypothesis! As if heaven and hell have been proven through experimentation!
Click to expand...

Yep, they make this stuff up as they go along. It gives the old guys who wear robes and funny hats something to do to justify their existence.
Click to expand...

While I'm pretty firmly entrenched in the anti-religious crowd, what I think they meant by calling it a theological hypothesis was to draw a distinction between limbo and basic tenets of the faith, say, that Jesus was divine. Pretty hard to bother with Catholocism if you deny Christ, but you can get away with not going whole hog for the idea of unbaptized babies floating around in a stasis bubble forever.

Scientists call their fundamental truths "theories" and it causes all sorts of hell when people point at the word and say "see! it's only a theory, it's not like they proved it or anything!" So religion and science have different rules and terms. They really do not belong overlapping anywhere in a ven diagram.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're saying here. In the example regarding limbo, it seems to go as follows:

1. Someone suggests that it really makes no sense to send unbaptized babies to Hell, because that conflicts with the idea of a "loving God".
2. Church agrees, and creates/adopts the concept of Purgatory (or Limbo).
3. Someone else suggests that this really makes no sense, as what purpose is there in confining uncounted billions of unbaptized babies in Limbo for all of eternity?
4. Church agrees, and decides that Purgatory does not, in fact, really exist.

It sounds like utter and complete bullshit to me.
 
Originally posted by: Kadarin
I'm not sure what you're saying here. In the example regarding limbo, it seems to go as follows:

1. Someone suggests that it really makes no sense to send unbaptized babies to Hell, because that conflicts with the idea of a "loving God".
2. Church agrees, and creates/adopts the concept of Purgatory (or Limbo).
3. Someone else suggests that this really makes no sense, as what purpose is there in confining uncounted billions of unbaptized babies in Limbo for all of eternity?
4. Church agrees, and decides that Purgatory does not, in fact, really exist.

It sounds like utter and complete bullshit to me.
Click to expand...

"That sounded like a prayer. A prayer! A prayer in a public school! God has no place within these walls, just like facts have no place within organized religion!"

This thread is full of great victory.
 
It's a slippery slope. If they allow women priests, it's only a matter of time until they have to allow gorilla and bear priests. Next thing you know we're all kissing the ring of Cardinal Ling-ling the Panda. And as we all know, neither Mary nor any of the apostles were bears.
 
Originally posted by: DangerAardvark
It's a slippery slope. If they allow women priests, it's only a matter of time until they have to allow gorilla and bear priests. Next thing you know we're all kissing the ring of Cardinal Ling-ling the Panda. And as we all know, neither Mary nor any of the apostles were bears.
Click to expand...

Somehow this is the fault of gay marriage in california!
 
Originally posted by: Homerboy
"BOSTON -- Three Catholic women will be ordained as priests in a Back Bay neighborhood church this weekend, despite the Vatican's admonition that the trio will be excommunicated if they do so."

Ummm you're not "ordained" if the Vatican doesn't approve of it.
Click to expand...

They can be ordained in another denomination. They just happen to be Catholic, doesn't mean they are trying to become Catholic priests.
 
So here's a point to consider:

If you believe, TRULY believe, and live your life to the tenets of your religion would not your god recognize that regardless of what some mortal thinks? In other words, can a papal excommunication stop you from being Catholic? If not, then the papacy can do nothing about female priests, as a confirmed representative of Jesus' church has given them the boon of priesthood. What the Pope does later cannot remove that. Or, would not your god be more concerned about living your life to his word than to living your life to the interpretation of a mortal, no matter who that mortal be?

My interpretation, from a layperson's standpoint, is that excommunication is a mistake on the papacy's part. To put a controversial twist on it, the Vatican can no more strip you of your Catholicism than the state can stop you from being gay. If there truly be a Catholic god, excommunicating a true believer would reflect far worse on the excommunicator then the excommunicatee come judgment.
 
Originally posted by: sactoking
So here's a point to consider:

If you believe, TRULY believe, and live your life to the tenets of your religion would not your god recognize that regardless of what some mortal thinks? In other words, can a papal excommunication stop you from being Catholic? If not, then the papacy can do nothing about female priests, as a confirmed representative of Jesus' church has given them the boon of priesthood. What the Pope does later cannot remove that. Or, would not your god be more concerned about living your life to his word than to living your life to the interpretation of a mortal, no matter who that mortal be?

My interpretation, from a layperson's standpoint, is that excommunication is a mistake on the papacy's part. To put a controversial twist on it, the Vatican can no more strip you of your Catholicism than the state can stop you from being gay. If there truly be a Catholic god, excommunicating a true believer would reflect far worse on the excommunicator then the excommunicatee come judgment.
Click to expand...

As much as I am loathe to support the church, the power of the pope comes from the belief that he has a bat phone to god. If the pope says no, the belief is that god himself says no. The pope is infallible (even when he contradicts himself) -- I'm not saying it makes sense, but that is the belief. The reasoning given above was spurious, but the pope going "for reasons beyond our pay grade" that should be good enough.

Not to say that any of it makes more sense than a barrel of monkeys in a funhouse mirror, but that is the claim.
 
I guess my two responses to So would be these:

I understand what you say, as I had heard that previously and was aware of it. That doesn't really change my theological/metaphysical question- Can a mortal, ANY mortal, strip you of your inherent being? If our bodies are shells in which the soul resides, is it not the soul that is judged? If it is the soul that is judged, can a soul be forcibly stripped of its faith? If yes, are Catholics comfortable with the concept of the Pope being able to strip you of your immortal soul at his discretion? If no, then will not the soul be judged on its own merits regardless of what a mortal says?

Also, if the Pope is infallible (even when he contradicts himself), is he infallible if he contradicts his own god? Would not the first papal contradiction invalidate the basic premise on which he holds power? If the Pope is the mouth of the Catholic god and the Pope contradicts himself, would that not by extension be the Catholic god contradicting ITSELF? And if the Catholic god is infallible, would that not then negate its own existence?
 
Originally posted by: aigomorla

You cant argue with religion.
You either accept it or you dont.
Putting something tangible on faith is impossible.

Catholicsism is by nature one of the most traditional faiths you can follow. We have rituals and customs. Breaking those would mean in short breaking your faith.

I dont want it to sound sexist, but faith is a very touchy subject.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you *can't* argue with religion, but you can certainly question its practices.

Yeah, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Protestantism, etc. aren't at all traditional. They just, like, make things up as they go. 😕

And since when is calling someone out a bannable offense?
 
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: aigomorla
im sorry and i dont want to sound sexist, but women were not ment to be priests.

In the catholic faith, they have other roles. Sister ring a bell?

If women were suposed to be priests, Mary would of been one. Which she isnt.


I dont see how the pope is okeying this.

"The ordination ceremony will take place Sunday at the Church of the Covenant on Newbury Street, which is affiliated with two Protestant denominations, the Presbyterian Church (USA) and the United Church of Christ, the Boston Globe reported."

im sorry the term catholic mens universal, but not this universal.

Boston has a messed up arch. They been messed up ever since there priests molested little kids.


As i thought the catholic chuch will EXCommun them:
"The Vatican, however, said the ordinations would be illegal and the Boston Archdiocese sent out an e-mail to all priests saying that women who try to receive sacred orders and priests who try to confer them are automatically separating themselves from the church."
Click to expand...

your inability to spell and use proper grammar inspires me to interpret your post as "the rantings of a dimwitted imbecile"
Click to expand...

I don't give a sh*t about his post, but the hypocrisy of the statement is astounding. Especially since his spelling and grammar are good enough for you to grasp his thesis. As if you couldn't understand "there preists" as "their preists." And then you avoid proper grammar yourself and attack the person rather than the issue. Typical sophomorish e-debate were everyone thinks he is right.

Only on the internet. :roll:
 
Originally posted by: Geocentricity
http://www.thebostonchannel.co...s/16920636/detail.html

The Vatican's reasoning for no female priests: Because Jesus did not have female Apostles.

I'll get the ball rolling:

- Jesus preached to ALL (all genders & social classes) to be the salt and the light

That pretty much sums it up.
Click to expand...

First off, JESUS IS FAKE!

If you're going to have a religion based on tradition (because there is nothing else to base it on), then STICK WITH THE TRADITION!

Life is not nor is it supposed to be fair.
 
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
Well now we'll hear stories of hot young female priests molesting alter boys.
Click to expand...

I believe! I believe! I believe! I believe! I believe! I believe!
 
Originally posted by: aigomorla



Originally posted by: So
That's fine, but your argument about WHY it shoudn't happen makes as much sense as a crocoduck. Then again, my spell checker melted when it saw your post, so I'm guessing you haven't taken too many logic courses either...
Click to expand...

This is boardline call out and if you forgot im wearing a mod suit. A lifer should be smarter then that.

Be careful. I'll ignore it since faith is a touchy subject to begin with.
Click to expand...


You probably might want to step out of this thread. Don't try to power trip on someone just because you can't type and your ego can't take it

edit: i see now, a lot of people has pointed this out already
 
Originally posted by: jonks
Scientists call their fundamental truths "theories" and it causes all sorts of hell when people point at the word and say "see! it's only a theory, it's not like they proved it or anything!" So religion and science have different rules and terms. They really do not belong overlapping anywhere in a ven diagram.
Click to expand...

fundamental truths in science are laws - something that we have yet to be able to disprove, despite our very best efforts. ie, the laws of thermodynamics - that one can never get efficiency greater than 1.

theories are fair play - they're argued back and forth, and the net result is an improved theory. in many ways, it's kinda like capitalism 😛
 
Not to say other denominations don't have their own problems, but, when reading straight from the Bible there are a lot of things wrong in my opinion.

In the Bible:
No where does it distinguish who is able to become Pastors/Priests
No where does it say that any sin (Save for Blasphemy) is greater than any other sin (In fact it says the opposite)
No where does it say that we, as Christians, must pray to a human person who will then relay the prayers to Christ

That is just the start of it - No church is perfect; but, as a Christian, the Catholic church really takes far too many liberties and has a lot of things wrong!

-Kevin
 
Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
Not to say other denominations don't have their own problems, but, when reading straight from the Bible there are a lot of things wrong in my opinion.

In the Bible:
No where does it distinguish who is able to become Pastors/Priests
No where does it say that any sin (Save for Blasphemy) is greater than any other sin (In fact it says the opposite)
No where does it say that we, as Christians, must pray to a human person who will then relay the prayers to Christ

That is just the start of it - No church is perfect; but, as a Christian, the Catholic church really takes far too many liberties and has a lot of things wrong!

-Kevin
Click to expand...

This is the problem I have with the church's decision. Basically, they're arguement for not allowing women to become priests is simply because there haven't been any yet, and therefore never should be any. This arguement is no different than saying a woman should not allowed to become president simply because there hasn't been one yet.

Unless it says in the Bible that women cannot be priests then the chruch really has no valid arguement. "Tradition" is not the same as the decree of God. Hopefully the next Pope will be more open-minded.
 
Originally posted by: RaistlinZ


Unless it says in the Bible that women cannot be priests then the chruch really has no valid arguement. "Tradition" is not the same as the decree of God. Hopefully the next Pope will be more open-minded.
Click to expand...

Who exactly do you think wrote the Bible? You're not one of those who actually believe that something has some validity just because it's in a book of fairy tales, are you? The bible is a collection of old myths and fables collected into one place and doctored to suit a specific agenda. It's not some decree from on high. It's fiction, it's written by people, usually by people who were not around for the events that they're supposedly describing. WTF cares what the bible says about women priests? The catholic church has been changing and reinterpreting what they expect you to believe for 2000 years. They don't have any more respect for the bible than I do. Anything a specific pope likes becomes more important, anything a specific pope dislikes is changed, ignored or becomes "well, that's just allegory, not fact, so we don't believe that anymore". At this point in history Scientology's story about Lord Xenu, atom bombs and space ships is purer and less corrupted than the stories in the bible.
 
Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
Not to say other denominations don't have their own problems, but, when reading straight from the Bible there are a lot of things wrong in my opinion.

In the Bible:
No where does it distinguish who is able to become Pastors/Priests
No where does it say that any sin (Save for Blasphemy) is greater than any other sin (In fact it says the opposite)
No where does it say that we, as Christians, must pray to a human person who will then relay the prayers to Christ

That is just the start of it - No church is perfect; but, as a Christian, the Catholic church really takes far too many liberties and has a lot of things wrong!

-Kevin
Click to expand...

1) when jesus told the apostles to spread the word.. that was considered him "ordaining" them as the first priests of the church, and hence, why only men are able to become priests, IIRC.

2) ten commandments is the first that comes to mind, though you're right, it doesn't *specifically* say if one is worse than another. but it would make sense that sins against god come first, no?

at least, that's what i remember if many years of catholic school did me any good at learning about the faith.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top