Christian Discussion Thread XI: Anicetus’ Revenge

[Salus Maior]

No woman has ever succeeded in validly obtaining ordination

Debatable really. Women have been ordained by valid bishops.

Being a "valid bishop" doesn't validate when they commit heresy.

[Hakons]

They arn’t.

See here.

So, women actually are permitted to teach and have authority over a man? If so, what's wrong with ordaining women?

Ordination isn't just about teaching. Women can't be ordained because the priesthood is an inherently male order. Christ established the priesthood and He only ordained men to be His apostles. Priests imitate Christ, who is God become man, a male. The purpose of the priesthood is not to exclude women, but to be a valid order for the continuation of the sacraments of the Church. It is beyond the authority of the Church hierarchy to allow female ordination, since the priesthood as it exists is divinely ordained by Christ.

Ordinatio Sacerdotalis explains it quite succinctly. (And is very short for a Vatican document!)

When the question of the ordination of women arose in the Anglican Communion, Pope Paul VI, out of fidelity to his office of safeguarding the Apostolic Tradition, and also with a view to removing a new obstacle placed in the way of Christian unity, reminded Anglicans of the position of the Catholic Church: "She holds that it is not admissible to ordain women to the priesthood, for very fundamental reasons. These reasons include: the example recorded in the Sacred Scriptures of Christ choosing his Apostles only from among men; the constant practice of the Church, which has imitated Christ in choosing only men; and her living teaching authority which has consistently held that the exclusion of women from the priesthood is in accordance with God's plan for his Church."

Furthermore, the fact that the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God and Mother of the Church, received neither the mission proper to the Apostles nor the ministerial priesthood clearly shows that the non-admission of women to priestly ordination cannot mean that women are of lesser dignity, nor can it be construed as discrimination against them. Rather, it is to be seen as the faithful observance of a plan to be ascribed to the wisdom of the Lord of the universe.

The presence and the role of women in the life and mission of the Church, although not linked to the ministerial priesthood, remain absolutely necessary and irreplaceable. As the Declaration Inter Insigniores points out, "the Church desires that Christian women should become fully aware of the greatness of their mission: today their role is of capital importance both for the renewal and humanization of society and for the rediscovery by believers of the true face of the Church.

Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful.

Therefor, the Church has a male priesthood because 1) that is how God created it, 2) it is not discrimination to follow the ordinance of God, and 3) the Church doesn't have the authority to change the priesthood.

[Hakons]

SNIP

Yikes to that rhetoric. If you're fine talking about it, what made you so aggressively against us? If I recall correctly from when you first entered the CDTs a year or so ago, you didn't have this same approach.

[Narland]

I remember reading an account of a Catholic apologist who met Jack Chic at complete random and had an hour long conversation with him. It was... interesting.

I remember that as well. Chick was polite but the apologist could still tell he was a bit unhinged. For instance, Chick hinting that the Vatican had his name in some registry.

I met Jack Chick on several occasions. Unhinged is a polite way to describe the man in general. While he was alive I prayed for him, as I believe he truly did love God. We had the opportunity to discuss exorcism and deliverance in order to get him some theologically sound help. We were concerned about what he promoted as "Spiritual Warfare." He eventually decided that we were "blinded by the enemy" and stopped talking to us.

[Tarsonis]

Debatable really. Women have been ordained by valid bishops.

Being a "valid bishop" doesn't validate when they commit heresy.

Well yeah, the bishops are also excommunicated in the process

[Tarsonis]

SNIP

Yikes to that rhetoric. If you're fine talking about it, what made you so aggressively against us? If I recall correctly from when you first entered the CDTs a year or so ago, you didn't have this same approach.

It sounds like the second part of Augustine’s teaching is coming true:

“ For if he takes up rashly a meaning which the author whom he is reading did not intend, he often falls in with other statements which he cannot harmonize with this meaning. And if he admits that these statements are true and certain, then it follows that the meaning he had put upon the former passage cannot be the true one: and so it comes to pass, one can hardly tell how, that, out of love for his own opinion, he begins to feel more angry with Scripture than he is with himself. And if he should once permit that evil to creep in, it will utterly destroy him. For we walk by faith, not by sight. 2 Corinthians 5:7 Now faith will totter if the authority of Scripture begin to shake. And then, if faith totter, love itself will grow cold. For if a man has fallen from faith, he must necessarily also fall from love; for he cannot love what he does not believe to exist.”

[Narland]

I have a question in general for everyone. Does your congregation make a distinction between teaching and preaching, and are women allowed to preach in the pulpit/lectern and outside of it? I hope I worded that well.

[Minachia]

I have a question in general for everyone. Does your congregation make a distinction between teaching and preaching, and are women allowed to preach in the pulpit/lectern and outside of it? I hope I worded that well.

We have female lectors and Sunday School teachers, but I think all the adult classes are taught by men.

[The Sladerstan]

I have a question in general for everyone. Does your congregation make a distinction between teaching and preaching, and are women allowed to preach in the pulpit/lectern and outside of it? I hope I worded that well.

My denomination does not allow women to preach, that is "shepherd the flock", but they allow women to teach children and other women.

[Rojava Free State]

You were the one who mentioned NAMBLA when I asked about LGBT culture. It was the first thing you thought of. You are the one that has sabotaged the discussion by going down the paedophilia route. So don't fucking blame me for the shit that you have caused, telling me to "piss off" when the only one at blame here is you. The fucking cheek of it.

You're not going to get civility out of this papist cretin. He curse me out several times and lied during our last debate. He knows very well the disrespect he shows and he's proud of it. He's just projecting since he enables pedophiles by defending the Church of Rome, a widely known pedophile organization.

While the Vatican is definitely anything but clean of guilt, your choice of words leads me to believe that you're part of an even worse faith

[Rojava Free State]

I have a question in general for everyone. Does your congregation make a distinction between teaching and preaching, and are women allowed to preach in the pulpit/lectern and outside of it? I hope I worded that well.

My denomination does not allow women to preach, that is "shepherd the flock", but they allow women to teach children and other women.

Sounds like they're not cool with the idea of a woman having authority over a grown man

[Rojava Free State]

So, I can already predict what a lot of people will probably say, but what are your thoughts on Christian identity? The ideology, not the state of being

[Australian rePublic]

There's a theory out there that states that Judaism, up until Second Temple Period (the time of Jesus), would worship multiple gods. What do you guys, as Christians, make of that theory?

[Tarsonis]

There's a theory out there that states that Judaism, up until Second Temple Period (the time of Jesus), would worship multiple gods. What do you guys, as Christians, make of that theory?

Well it’s somewhat correct, though it depends on a couple things. Firstly, The Hebrew cult emerged as a sect of Canaanites at some point between I’d say (and I’m sure Arch is gonna tell me I’m wrong) between 3000-1500 BC. So yeah I morally the Jews would have been polytheistic worshipers, but would have become a strict YHWH alonists by the events of Leviticus and Deuteronomy.


Now the tricky word here is worship. Because the Jews were very much polytheistic; they believed in the existence of others gods apart from YHWH, but they did not worship them. Egyptian, Greek etc Gods were very real to them, but they weren’t “their” Gods. To Them YHWH was their God that they made covenant with, and believed him superior to all other gods as he was the Creator God, maker of heaven and earth. All other gods merely tried to steal his glory. It’s really around the 2nd temple period that Judaism and their Christian offshoot started to believe that all other Gods were false inventions of wayward men, and YHWH is the only God to exist as explained by St. Paul in Romans chapter 1

[Salus Maior]

My denomination does not allow women to preach, that is "shepherd the flock", but they allow women to teach children and other women.

Sounds like they're not cool with the idea of a woman having authority over a grown man

As a Catholic, I think there's plenty of precedent for women in non-bishop/priest roles of authority.

I doubt your average Catholic man could say that he's more of a spiritual authority than, say, St. Therese of Liseaux or any number of female Saints.

[Australian rePublic]

There's a theory out there that states that Judaism, up until Second Temple Period (the time of Jesus), would worship multiple gods. What do you guys, as Christians, make of that theory?

Well it’s somewhat correct, though it depends on a couple things. Firstly, The Hebrew cult emerged as a sect of Canaanites at some point between I’d say (and I’m sure Arch is gonna tell me I’m wrong) between 3000-1500 BC. So yeah I morally the Jews would have been polytheistic worshipers, but would have become a strict YHWH alonists by the events of Leviticus and Deuteronomy.


Now the tricky word here is worship. Because the Jews were very much polytheistic; they believed in the existence of others gods apart from YHWH, but they did not worship them. Egyptian, Greek etc Gods were very real to them, but they weren’t “their” Gods. To Them YHWH was their God that they made covenant with, and believed him superior to all other gods as he was the Creator God, maker of heaven and earth. All other gods merely tried to steal his glory. It’s really around the 2nd temple period that Judaism and their Christian offshoot started to believe that all other Gods were false inventions of wayward men, and YHWH is the only God to exist as explained by St. Paul in Romans chapter 1

Well if that's the case, why don't we, as Christians, acknowledge these gods?

[Tarsonis]

Well it’s somewhat correct, though it depends on a couple things. Firstly, The Hebrew cult emerged as a sect of Canaanites at some point between I’d say (and I’m sure Arch is gonna tell me I’m wrong) between 3000-1500 BC. So yeah I morally the Jews would have been polytheistic worshipers, but would have become a strict YHWH alonists by the events of Leviticus and Deuteronomy.


Now the tricky word here is worship. Because the Jews were very much polytheistic; they believed in the existence of others gods apart from YHWH, but they did not worship them. Egyptian, Greek etc Gods were very real to them, but they weren’t “their” Gods. To Them YHWH was their God that they made covenant with, and believed him superior to all other gods as he was the Creator God, maker of heaven and earth. All other gods merely tried to steal his glory. It’s really around the 2nd temple period that Judaism and their Christian offshoot started to believe that all other Gods were false inventions of wayward men, and YHWH is the only God to exist as explained by St. Paul in Romans chapter 1

Well if that's the case, why don't we, as Christians, acknowledge these gods?

Read Romans 1. They’re not real, they’re made up by man.

[Australian rePublic]

Well if that's the case, why don't we, as Christians, acknowledge these gods?

Read Romans 1. They’re not real, they’re made up by man.

Which is contradictory to what you said about acknowledging their existence

[Tarsonis]

Read Romans 1. They’re not real, they’re made up by man.

Which is contradictory to what you said about acknowledging their existence

No I said the early Hebrews believed they were real. They also believe the Earth was flat and encased in a glass dome with holes that YHWH poured water into when it rained.

[Australian rePublic]

Which is contradictory to what you said about acknowledging their existence

No I said the early Hebrews believed they were real. They also believe the Earth was flat and encased in a glass dome with holes that YHWH poured water into when it rained.

So they were wrong?

[Neutraligon]

No I said the early Hebrews believed they were real. They also believe the Earth was flat and encased in a glass dome with holes that YHWH poured water into when it rained.

So they were wrong?

Jews (although could they really be called Jews at this point?) where indeed polytheistic at one point. There is some debate as to how it became a monotheistic religion, with some claiming it happened due to the absorption of some surrounding cultures, while others claiming it was an internal movement pushed forward by a minority of the priests and royalty after their return from exile.

[Tarsonis]

So they were wrong?

Jews (although could they really be called Jews at this point?) where indeed polytheistic at one point. There is some debate as to how it became a monotheistic religion, with some claiming it happened due to the absorption of some surrounding cultures, while others claiming it was an internal movement pushed forward by a minority of the priests and royalty after their return from exile.

Far as I’m aware:

Hebrews before the settling of the Holy Land
Israelites after the founding of the Kingdom of Israel
Israelites and Jews after the split into Israel and Judea
Just Jews after Israel fell.

[Lower Nubia]

I have a question in general for everyone. Does your congregation make a distinction between teaching and preaching, and are women allowed to preach in the pulpit/lectern and outside of it? I hope I worded that well.

No. They're the same thing.

[Australian rePublic]

Jews (although could they really be called Jews at this point?) where indeed polytheistic at one point. There is some debate as to how it became a monotheistic religion, with some claiming it happened due to the absorption of some surrounding cultures, while others claiming it was an internal movement pushed forward by a minority of the priests and royalty after their return from exile.

Far as I’m aware:

Hebrews before the settling of the Holy Land
Israelites after the founding of the Kingdom of Israel
Israelites and Jews after the split into Israel and Judea
Just Jews after Israel fell.

Nope. Samaritans still exist. They're few and far between, and most live in Israel, but they still exist

[Lower Nubia]

There's a theory out there that states that Judaism, up until Second Temple Period (the time of Jesus), would worship multiple gods. What do you guys, as Christians, make of that theory?

Israel was Henotheistic, which makes sense because the prevailing belief at the time (pre-exile) was that gods ruled over the land, upon entering Egypt, you would be under the Egyptian gods, Upon entering Canaan you would be under the Canaanite gods, upon entering Israel you would be under the God of Abraham.