Discrimination in the Catholic Church

[Me Myself]

Human traditions vs sacred traditions are different. See, from Jesus time he elected apostles that are male, which seems to be the natural order that God himself willed. We just follow. But, even if the church have clearly stated that it can't ordain women as priest, the pope has pronounced that they too have obligations but not in priesthood. I just don't see it discriminating knowing that a person also has other obligations to fulfill even if not in priesthood.

Because the obligations they are able to fullfill are determined by gender.

Again, if Jesus and his disciple being all men is the only thing that makes penises mandatory for being a priest, then them all being poor should make poverty mandatory too. It´s exactly the same logic with the difference that at least poverty wouldn´t be discriminatory because women can decide to renounce their possesions, while they can´t and shouldn´t be asked to renounce their womanhood.

Jesus and the disciples were all poor, why is this not a requisite for priesthood if being all male is enough for making masculinity a requisite?

 

[Me Myself]

That is if it isn't contrary on the tradition. The church follows tradition in order not to deviate from its original roots which, as they say are apostolic in origin. Deviating from it means to deviate from the true church.

(Sorry doble post)

False, Catholic church has debiated from tradition more than once. As told you before, celibacy wasn´t originaly a requirement for priests (and was very very much contrary to the tradition of priesthood must I tell you) but they changed it.

Chatholic church has changed it´s traditions through time.

 

[Renji]

And being a police officer is not "higher" or "lower" than being a nurse, but we've come to recognize it as discrimination when we say that police officers must be men and nurses must be women.

But the church hierarchy isn't about 'who's who.' In the Church, all have functions that have similarities and differences.

 

[Renji]

(Sorry doble post)

False, Catholic church has debiated from tradition more than once. As told you before, celibacy wasn´t originaly a requirement for priests (and was very very much contrary to the tradition of priesthood must I tell you) but they changed it.

Chatholic church has changed it´s traditions through time.

About celibacy, the church has a good stand about that, which i will not elaborate because of being far off topic. It has changed but it has undergone through a council, hence it's validity. Even in the bible, the apostles resolve issues (like whether gentiles be circumcised or not) . The issue about the ordination of women as priest has been written already by church fathers in Apostolic letters,hence, it will not change. Women, cannot be ordained, but as the cathecism goes, we are all part on the threefold mission of christ and one of them is being priestly, hence women has also obligations such as that (preaching, etc) but they can't be ordained.

 

[Me Myself]

About celibacy, the church has a good stand about that, which i will not elaborate because of being far off topic. It has changed but it has undergone through a council, hence it's validity. Even in the bible, the apostles resolve issues (like whether gentiles be circumcised or not) . The issue about the ordination of women as priest has been written already by church fathers in Apostolic letters,hence, it will not change. Women, cannot be ordained, but as the cathecism goes, we are all part on the threefold mission of christ and one of them is being priestly, hence women has also obligations such as that (preaching, etc) but they can't be ordained.

As you say, church can change it through a council so it could happen any time.

About your thought of the church father´s opinions to be perfect in all senses... I don´t know who lied to you but most church fathers had one or another beleif that today would be considered heretical.

 

[JacobEzra.]

So if God is the one performing the sacrament why must it be through a male Priest specifically? Why can't a female bless a sacrament if God is the one who is faithful? I grew up in a church with female Priests and Deacons. Are you telling me that a female Priest invalidates the Eucharist?

Truthfully, any sacrament from a non-Catholic priest is invalid.

 

[Renji]

Because the obligations they are able to fullfill are determined by gender.

Again, if Jesus and his disciple being all men is the only thing that makes penises mandatory for being a priest, then them all being poor should make poverty mandatory too. It´s exactly the same logic with the difference that at least poverty wouldn´t be discriminatory because women can decide to renounce their possesions, while they can´t and shouldn´t be asked to renounce their womanhood.

Jesus and the disciples were all poor, why is this not a requisite for priesthood if being all male is enough for making masculinity a requisite?

A catholic nun would surely laugh upon hearing this. Actually they don't feel like hey, i'm just a nun, but rather they feel a deeper sense of responsibility that can't be compared to any other vocation. They don't feel as if being a nun is just being a nun, but rather, they feel "what can i do as a nun?" They don't also compare it to priesthood for both vocations do pastoral work. As to why doesn't priesthood and stuff doesn't require poverty, well, that's because Jesus taught of simplicity and not poverty. His example lead us to a conclusion that one should be simple and humble as a servant. He did not say to be poor.

 

[Mister Emu]

I was thinking of the argument that's been made here that this arrangement was instituted by Christ himself. Presumably, Christ wouldn't have said "we can't ordain females", right?

Indeed... God has differentiated the sexes in duties and honors.

But the point I was trying to get at is that Tradition only becomes Tradition once it's established. When a practice is first instituted, it can't rely on Tradition for its justification.

No it cannot. Tradition, in the Catholic sense, has its source in the divine.

Unless a person is ordained, he or she can have no influence in the Church hierarchy or on the policies of the Catholic Church.

That is an overstatement.

False, Catholic church has debiated from tradition more than once. As told you before, celibacy wasn´t originaly a requirement for priests (and was very very much contrary to the tradition of priesthood must I tell you) but they changed it.

Celibacy is a departure from tradition, but not Tradition.

Truthfully, any sacrament from a non-Catholic priest is invalid.

Orthodox sacraments are valid. Baptisms in the proper form/intent/matter are valid no matter where they occur or who administers them. Marriage can be valid outside the Catholic Church as well.

 

[Me Myself]

As to why doesn't priesthood and stuff doesn't require poverty, well, that's because Jesus taught of simplicity and not poverty. His example lead us to a conclusion that one should be simple and humble as a servant. He did not say to be poor.

Or to be a man, but he was still a men and a jew too. So why are non jews priests?

I am not telling you you should be poor to be good, I am telling you that according to "if Jesus was x then it must be a requirement for priesthood" argument, then because Jesus was poor poverty would be a requirement.

I agree that you do not need to be poor to serve God, and you also don´t need to be a woman.

I disagree that because Jesus nor disciples were not women then women are not able to make to priesthood. Jesus never said this, Jesus never said one needs to be a woman so you can "Make this in commemoration of me".

Now you might tell me, "yeah, but he said that to the guys who were there who were all men, so it must be a rquirement" and I would tell you, yes they were men , but they were also poor. Either they are both requirements or none of them is requirement.

 

[JacobEzra.]

Orthodox sacraments are valid. Baptisms in the proper form/intent/matter are valid no matter where they occur or who administers them. Marriage can be valid outside the Catholic Church as well.

I wasn't talking about Orthodox. They are still Catholic anyway.

So priest ordained in protestant churches are valid priest?

 

[sojourner]

One of my nieces is Catholic and quite devout. I don't know if it's still her current plan, but at one point, she was thinking about becoming a nun. In a different Catholic Church, I think she might've considered becoming a priest.

While my preference would be for her to choose a different path altogether (though I'm not going to try to lead her away from it), I instinctively bristle at the idea of anyone putting any sort of arbitrary barrier in front of her that might stop her from becoming whatever she wants to be.

Well, it's not really about "what she wants to be." It is all about "what God wants her to be." What the church is saying is that "God doesn't want females in the priesthood." And really, how can you possibly argue that point? I would say that if God wants a woman to be a priest, then God also wants her to be in a different denomination.

 

[sojourner]

God cant do what?!? You have just provided me with a brilliant example of why we are better off without priests. No priest is involved in my relationship with God and were doing just fine. I have no scandals. No one trying to tell me that I have to subscribe to the political ambitions of the wealthy egotistical and God hears my preyers very well thank you.

When Gods asks you why you were following the teachings of man rather than the messenger he sent for you what will be your answer?

You realize, of course, that Jesus was fully human. Therefore, his teachings are "of man."

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Human traditions vs sacred traditions are different. See, from Jesus time he elected apostles that are male, which seems to be the natural order that God himself willed. We just follow. But, even if the church have clearly stated that it can't ordain women as priest, the pope has pronounced that they too have obligations but not in priesthood. I just don't see it discriminating knowing that a person also has other obligations to fulfill even if not in priesthood.

If you're arguing that people can or can't do something on the basis of gender, then you're arguing for discrimination.

Any division of people based on some characteristic is discrimination. If a school refuses to admit students with poor grades, then they're committing discrimination: justifiable discrimination based on a relevant characteristic, but still discrimination.

What you're doing here is arguing that the Church's stance is not harmful discrimination.

Why, haven't the good news reached them? In my country for instance, there are plenty of religious orders and charismatic communities lead by nuns. If they don't have the goodnews yet, it would have impossible to them to organize such groups and teach people to 'turn from their wicked ways' and pray, etc. This is also pastoral work that they can do even their not a priest.

Right... so it is not necessary for a group to be eligible to be clergy for the "good news" to reach them. Therefore, your argument that it's necessary for non-Jews so that the "good news" can reach non-Jews (or anyone else who doesn't posess some characteristic posessed by the Apostles) lacks foundation.

That is if it isn't contrary on the tradition. The church follows tradition in order not to deviate from its original roots which, as they say are apostolic in origin. Deviating from it means to deviate from the true church.

How does this argument boil down to anything other than "we don't allow women to be priests because we think that's what God wants"?

 

[sojourner]

Truthfully, any sacrament from a non-Catholic priest is invalid.

According to ... whom, exactly? If you wanna play "members only club," that's your problem. The rest of the church is quite happy living together with its differences.

 

[sojourner]

I wasn't talking about Orthodox. They are still Catholic anyway.

Or are the Catholics still Orthodox anyway? You seem to display a level of entitlement that would make Jesus blush.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well, it's not really about "what she wants to be." It is all about "what God wants her to be."

As someone who doesn't believe in God, I think these are pretty much the same thing.

What the church is saying is that "God doesn't want females in the priesthood." And really, how can you possibly argue that point?

Easy. If I thought that the Catholic Church had authority in this regard, then I might be inclined to defer to it. However, because I don't think it has any authority at all, it's just a matter of personal preference when it gets right down to it. Personal preference attributed to a deity, but still just personal preference.

I would say that if God wants a woman to be a priest, then God also wants her to be in a different denomination.

Why couldn't this God want the Catholic Church changed to accommodate women priests? If God does want women to be priests, regardless of denomination, then He's already implicitly declared this Church teaching to be false.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Truthfully, any sacrament from a non-Catholic priest is invalid.

So much for Apostolic Succession.

Are you sure you're not a Donatist?

 

[JacobEzra.]

So much for Apostolic Succession.

Are you sure you're not a Donatist?

No other church has Apostolic succession.

 

[JacobEzra.]

Are you sure you're not a Donatist?

I have already declared my position on what the Donatist believed, in which I profess the Catholic faith, not the heretical sect.

 

[JacobEzra.]

Or are the Catholics still Orthodox anyway? You seem to display a level of entitlement that would make Jesus blush.

Both.

They are a sister church, with sibling envy.