Article: http://www.npr.org/2011/06/12/137102746/women-priests-defy-the-church-at-the-altar
"The audience turned to watch as the women made their way down the aisle, beaming like brides. The two-and-a-half-hour ceremony ended with Holy Communion — the moment they'd been waiting for. Each woman performed the rites for the first time as a priest, breaking bread and serving wine as tears of joy flowed down their faces."
I had to laugh because for all the ceremonials, that was all that was happening! These people's supporters can't even get the theology of the Eucharist right. But then they can't even get the concept of obedience right either, so I might as well not start listing what else they don't understand...
I'll share a bit (ok at length) of Sanctifying Misandry: Goddess Ideology and the Fall of Man by Dr.s Young & Nathanson. During a critique of the feminist documentary 'Veil'‘, “Later on in Veil, the narrator says that "tradition dictates priests be men. Women don't resemble Christ. A theologian replies: 'By that reasoning, all priests should be bearded Jewish fishermen.'" This glib rejoined trivializes the discussion. Superficially, men clearly "resemble" the earthly man, Jesus of Nazareth, more closely than women do. Of interest to theologians in a tradition that acknowledges divine will behind creation of two sexes, however, is that they do so ontologically, not just physically, ethnically, or professionally. Besides, the same tradition says that both men and women are created in the image of God and thus "resemble" the divine saviour, the Christ, in whom "there is no male nor female." That Catholic theologians would attach importance to distinctions of this kind might seem preposterous to outsiders and self-serving and heretical to some insiders, but no understanding of the controversy is possible unless we take both sides on their own terms." (p.85-6)
The problem is that even when trying to represent Catholic teaching sympathetically, people fall off the rails at every level. The passage referenced in the above quote is about the body of Christ the Church, not our functions within that Body. For the Scripture also says that each of us has a different function such as the hands, the feet etc. (I happen to be the fist). the discussion is more complex than even these authors wish to admit. And Dr. Katherine Young is a theologian herself, Anglican by persuasion.
The mass is a representation of the sacrifice of Christ as well as the last supper. We are to meditate on these mysteries wilst at mass. A male voice is more efficacious in transporting oneself into those supernatural realities it’s true. But the Genesis account provides that Man was created first, and after the fall his wife is to be subject to him. This must be looked at in relation to St. Paul’s great mystery where the Church is the bride of Christ. And further in St. Peter’s epistle on wives being clearly subject to their husbands. This all becomes rather bothersome as Clerical marriage is always fussed to this discussion and only the Latin Rite has Priestly celibacy. So how is a married woman priest of the Ukrainian Catholic Church to submit to her Husband and her Bishop/Patriarch at the same time? Two masters wot wot. The epistles go on to say wives are to be silent in the churches. Another severe regarding scripture and this issue is the bible is dictated by God according to the dogmatic pronouncement of Vatican I.
“Further, this supernatural revelation, according to the universal belief of the Church, declared by the Sacred Synod of Trent, is contained in the written books and unwritten traditions which, received by the apostles from the mouth of Christ Himself, or from the Apostles Themselves, by dictation of the Holy Spirit, transmitted, as it were, from hand to hand, have come down to us… Theses the Church holds to be sacred and canonical; not because, having been carefully composed by mere human industry, they were afterward approved by the her authority; not because they contain revelation, with no admixture of error; but because, having been written by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author, and have delivered as such to the Church itself (can. Iv)” (Emphasis mine)
So we don’t get to say that such and such passage was just in those times, or they reflect those cultures. These have been gifted and passed to us as a patrimony from God himself!
The Sacred Tradition described by Vatican I also DICTATED by God is even more against the possibility of female participation based on the slight points I raised above. St Cyril of Jerusalem in his catechism would not even allow for men and women to sit together during the celebration of the Holy Eucharist! It goes on and I only have so much time.
I guess all this was to show that it really was just bread and wine being shared and women priests are not possible for informed Catholics to even entertain without rolling their eyes.
"The audience turned to watch as the women made their way down the aisle, beaming like brides. The two-and-a-half-hour ceremony ended with Holy Communion — the moment they'd been waiting for. Each woman performed the rites for the first time as a priest, breaking bread and serving wine as tears of joy flowed down their faces."
I had to laugh because for all the ceremonials, that was all that was happening! These people's supporters can't even get the theology of the Eucharist right. But then they can't even get the concept of obedience right either, so I might as well not start listing what else they don't understand...
I'll share a bit (ok at length) of Sanctifying Misandry: Goddess Ideology and the Fall of Man by Dr.s Young & Nathanson. During a critique of the feminist documentary 'Veil'‘, “Later on in Veil, the narrator says that "tradition dictates priests be men. Women don't resemble Christ. A theologian replies: 'By that reasoning, all priests should be bearded Jewish fishermen.'" This glib rejoined trivializes the discussion. Superficially, men clearly "resemble" the earthly man, Jesus of Nazareth, more closely than women do. Of interest to theologians in a tradition that acknowledges divine will behind creation of two sexes, however, is that they do so ontologically, not just physically, ethnically, or professionally. Besides, the same tradition says that both men and women are created in the image of God and thus "resemble" the divine saviour, the Christ, in whom "there is no male nor female." That Catholic theologians would attach importance to distinctions of this kind might seem preposterous to outsiders and self-serving and heretical to some insiders, but no understanding of the controversy is possible unless we take both sides on their own terms." (p.85-6)
The problem is that even when trying to represent Catholic teaching sympathetically, people fall off the rails at every level. The passage referenced in the above quote is about the body of Christ the Church, not our functions within that Body. For the Scripture also says that each of us has a different function such as the hands, the feet etc. (I happen to be the fist). the discussion is more complex than even these authors wish to admit. And Dr. Katherine Young is a theologian herself, Anglican by persuasion.
The mass is a representation of the sacrifice of Christ as well as the last supper. We are to meditate on these mysteries wilst at mass. A male voice is more efficacious in transporting oneself into those supernatural realities it’s true. But the Genesis account provides that Man was created first, and after the fall his wife is to be subject to him. This must be looked at in relation to St. Paul’s great mystery where the Church is the bride of Christ. And further in St. Peter’s epistle on wives being clearly subject to their husbands. This all becomes rather bothersome as Clerical marriage is always fussed to this discussion and only the Latin Rite has Priestly celibacy. So how is a married woman priest of the Ukrainian Catholic Church to submit to her Husband and her Bishop/Patriarch at the same time? Two masters wot wot. The epistles go on to say wives are to be silent in the churches. Another severe regarding scripture and this issue is the bible is dictated by God according to the dogmatic pronouncement of Vatican I.
“Further, this supernatural revelation, according to the universal belief of the Church, declared by the Sacred Synod of Trent, is contained in the written books and unwritten traditions which, received by the apostles from the mouth of Christ Himself, or from the Apostles Themselves, by dictation of the Holy Spirit, transmitted, as it were, from hand to hand, have come down to us… Theses the Church holds to be sacred and canonical; not because, having been carefully composed by mere human industry, they were afterward approved by the her authority; not because they contain revelation, with no admixture of error; but because, having been written by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author, and have delivered as such to the Church itself (can. Iv)” (Emphasis mine)
So we don’t get to say that such and such passage was just in those times, or they reflect those cultures. These have been gifted and passed to us as a patrimony from God himself!
The Sacred Tradition described by Vatican I also DICTATED by God is even more against the possibility of female participation based on the slight points I raised above. St Cyril of Jerusalem in his catechism would not even allow for men and women to sit together during the celebration of the Holy Eucharist! It goes on and I only have so much time.
I guess all this was to show that it really was just bread and wine being shared and women priests are not possible for informed Catholics to even entertain without rolling their eyes.
No comments:
Post a Comment