Women Can Be Priests
Reply to post

Peter Kreeft

Page: << < ..3132333435 > Showing page 33 of 35 - Powered by APG vNext Trial
Author
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/08/17 05:59:50 (permalink)
Why is there so much preoccupation with sex our Church? On the one hand: priesthood -- celibacy, abstain from sex, no sex, sacrificing sexually active relationships.On the other hand:  Peter Kreeft -- you bet there will be sex in heaven! Maybe its because men are in charge of sorting out doctrine and generally speaking, men tend to be preoccupied with sex.

Quite frankly, when I think about heaven, the question of 'what will the sex be like' has never been a pressing concern.  In fact, it's never entered my mind.  Now I learn about  Peter Kreeft's fixation?


Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/08/18 03:38:08 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Sophie

God is an equal opportunity employer. But He employs the men and women He created, not the neuters of our imagination.


 
I agree. God is an equal opportunity employer but apparently the Catholic Church is not.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/08/19 05:19:26 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Sophie

And that consuming fire of love is our destined Husband, according to His own promise. Sex in Heaven? Indeed, and no pale, abstract, merely mental shadow of it either. Earthly sex is the shadow, and our lives are a process of thickening so that we can share in the substance, becoming Heavenly fire so that we can endure and rejoice in the Heavenly fire.


 
If a masculine God is engaging in some sort of analogous spiritual sex with people (body and soul) in heaven, this concept has definite homosexual connotations with respect to God and males. If the Church Hierarchy really believes this, why are they so opposed to homosexual relationships?
 
Also it seems odd that so much emphasis is placed upon one’s adult body and sexuality. So what about children, fetuses, or gestating embryos? One would have to conclude that they also would have spiritual sex with God. Will the children, fetuses, and embryos be given adult bodies that they did not have in life?
 
musettee
New Member
  • Total Posts : 1
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2007/08/19 06:39:59
  • Status: offline
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/08/19 07:02:23 (permalink)
Take the snake, the fruit tree and the woman from the tableau , and we have no fall, no frowning Judge, no inferno, no everlasting punishment - Hence, no need for a savior. Thus the bottom falls out of the whole Christian theology. Here is the reason why in all the biblical researches and higher criticisms, the scholars never touch the position of women.

Elizabeth Caddy Stanton


“ The first step in the elevation of women under all systems of religion is to convince them that the great Spirit of the Universe is in no way responsible for any of these absurdities.”
Elizabeth Caddy Stanton
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/08/19 09:59:19 (permalink)
  Great perspective from Elizabeth Caddy Stanton about the damage stressing original sin myth does to women,  when all along it is original blessing.  We must celebrate and not demean or fear the blessed creative power of sexuality from which new life on earth comes.  Women and men should not be feared just because together they create the new generation of life with God's help.
   Jesus agrees with Elizabeth Caddy Stanton and like Paul says all is created New, we are new humans in Christ.  Jesus does Not see sex as filthy or women as worthless and contaminated beings.  Jesus praises and sanctions women to do all spiriitual tasks the men do.  Jesus saves the adultress and does not condemn her or her sexuality. Jesus  heals the hemorraging woman, she touches him and he heals her.  Jesus praises the anointing woman so that all will remember her good deed. The Samaritan woman is taught theology and praised for going to teach Jesus's Gospel as a missionary and prreacher to Samaria and Jesus has no condemnation for her sexuality and living arrangement. 
    Take the snake of eternal life, the international sign of doctors and healing, the ancient sign of immortality, take the tree, the sign of eternal life and continuation and fertility, take the woman along with the man, the sign of partner, co-worker, love, nurturance, strength, mother, wife, sister, friend, aunt, grandmother, healer, comforter, problem solver.  This is the positive view Jesus had for women.  Ordain women too as priests and deacons as Jesus sees women as part of Original Blessing.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/08/23 21:24:59 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Sophie

Yet, though confused, the expectations remain. Our hearts desire, even while our minds reject, the old "stereotypes". The reason is that the old stereotypes were closer to our innate sexual instincts than are the new stereotypes. We have sexist hearts even while we have unisex heads. Evidence for this claim? More people are attracted to the old stereotypes than to the new ones. Romeo still wants to marry Juliet.


 
 
I couldn’t disagree more. Perhaps Peter Kreeft’s heart is sexist along with those of his followers, but Kreeft has no right to project his feelings on others.
 
I fail to see how Shakespeare’s “Romeo and Juliet” represents a sexist heart. More likely, “Taming of the Shrew” would fall under that category.
 
In any case, I find little attraction in a man who bullies, embarrasses, or uses physical strength to impose his will on a woman. This is the stereotype that passes for a sexist heart and I can live without it. For example, John Wayne kicking Maureen O’Hara around in “The Quiet Man,” diminishes my regard for the character he plays. Some people may like the movie but in my opinion it makes the character less of a man, less masculine and very unattractive.
 
However, I find the non-sexist “modern man” much more attractive. He is someone who can love and admire a woman, and show it by treating her tenderly with dignity and respect. He is also someone who can feel love deeply. Characters like those played by Keanu Reaves and Sandra Bullock in “The Lake House” exemplify this. The story shows a man who can love a woman, who will listen to her and do as she asks. It shows a man who can cry over the death of his father. There is a slow dance scene in the movie where the two hold each other so sweetly that there is a sense of what “two becoming one” really means. It was not the physical act of procreation; it was the joining of two similar hearts. For me this was an example of a most attractive and real man.
 
Reflecting on this I see a parallel in the men who contribute to this site. Those who support ordination of women are the men who exemplify what Christ intended in how we should treat one another. They are respectful and courteous in stating their beliefs and opinions. And they show their honor and regard for women as spiritual leaders. On the other hand many of those who oppose ordination of women do their utmost to cite misogynist passages from the bible as justification for exclusion of women and then claim they are not sexist because they have relatives who are women. Often they are sarcastic and ill-mannered. Their objective is to upset rather than engage in genuine dialogue. Perhaps, like Kreeft, they seek to emulate the sexist stereotype that they believe is so attractive, but rest assured it is not.
 
No, not every one has a sexist heart or finds it attractive. Those of us (men and women alike) who reject such stereotypes are able to experience a strong and abiding love and we are no less masculine or feminine because of it.
 
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/08/23 21:28:24 (permalink)
simply abiding in love!
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/08/23 21:38:32 (permalink)
Their objective is to upset rather than engage in genuine dialogue


Engaging in genuine dialogue = a sign of being a peacemaker and person who keeps love as a priority

One whose objective is to upset and provoke = not a peacemaker and a little more distant from the principle of love.

Which pattern shows the sign of someone following the path of Christ?
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/09/24 21:31:56 (permalink)
 
 
 
 
Here is a more comprehensive outline of arguments against women’s ordination (many of which originated in this thread) along with answers taken from various contributors. This is an expansion of my list which was previously posted. I have found it helpful to consolidate this information. I hope you may find it useful also.
 
 
___________________________________________________________________________

God has a masculine nature. There is no feminine nature in God.

God is not masculine. Such ideas are not consistent with Catholic teaching. God encompasses both male and female for we are both made in the image and likeness of God.
___________________________________________________________________________

In calling God “Father,” Jesus defined God as masculine. Therefore only men may represent God.

Defining God as masculine is not consistent with Catholic teaching. In calling God Father, Jesus was not defining God as masculine or male. Jesus also used female imagery/analogies to describe God as well (e.g. Mother hen, baker woman, woman with coin). Both male and female may represent God.
___________________________________________________________________________

The most important analogy of Christ and his Church is that of Bridegroom and Bride. Since the Bridegroom is male, only men may represent Christ.

The analogy is not meant to be taken literally. It is meant to exemplify Christ’s love and devotion, and the need to be prepared for the hour of Christ’s coming. It is not meant to imply the spiritual equivalent of a sexual union. Christ also said unless you eat my body and drink my blood you shall not have life within you. This does not make us spiritual cannibals. Female analogies of God were also used by Jesus (see above).
With respect to only men representing Christ, it should be noted that since men are able to represent the bride (Church) it follows that women should be able to represent the groom (Christ).
___________________________________________________________________________
 
The Eucharist may be likened to Christ as the bridegroom impregnating the Church as the bride with spiritual life.

Bad analogy and poor understanding of biology. The Eucharist is about nourishment, the bread from heaven. Christ’s sacrifice is spiritual food. The Eucharist is a banquet, not a sexual union.
Comparing a man’s sperm with spiritual life makes no sense since sperm provides only half of the DNA required for human life.
 ___________________________________________________________________________

God selected only men to be priests just like God selected only water for baptism. It is not about inferior or superior. This is just the way God designed it.

Not a logical argument. The use of water in baptism is a separate issue from a male only priesthood. Scripture shows both men and women were called by Jesus to proclaim him as the Messiah and give witness to the Truth. Furthermore, scripture shows Timothy and subsequent teachings by Aquinas and Augustine exclude women based on fallacious teachings of intellectual and moral inferiority. It cannot be a true teaching if it is not based on truth.
___________________________________________________________________________

Jesus chose only 12 Jewish male Apostles to start his Church, therefore only men may be priests.

Jesus’ choice of only Jewish men for the Twelve was determined by the nature of their symbolic role as “patriarchs” of restored Israel. The succession of disciples does not need to be male any more than it needs to be Jewish.
Jesus chose female disciples also (Mary Magdalene, Susanna, Joanna, Mary of Bethany, Martha, Priscilla, Nino, Junia, etc.). Accounts in the scriptures of women’s involvement are not as complete as those of men, but we know women were entrusted with important missions (e.g. proclaiming the resurrection, preaching the Good News).
___________________________________________________________________________

Jesus became a man, in part, to make being male a defining characteristic of the priesthood, therefore only men may be priests.

Jesus became a man to show us the way to live and to sacrifice his life for our salvation, not to give men special status in the Church. In fact one could say that Jesus chose to be male to teach men that qualities such as love, compassion, forgiveness, meekness, humility, service, and self-sacrifice will not compromise their manhood.
(Sr. Elizabeth Johnson CSJ) “On the cross Jesus symbolizes the exact opposite of male dominating power. Rather on the cross power is poured out in self-sacrificing love. The cross is the kenosis [emptying] of patriarchy. Looking at the cross, some feminists have reflected sociologically it was probably better that the incarnation happened in a male human being; for if a woman had preached and enacted compassion and given the gift of self even unto death -- is not this the way women are supposed to do anyway? -- but for a man to live and die this way in a world of male privilege is to challenge the patriarchal idea of the dominating male at the root.")
___________________________________________________________________________

Mary, the mother of God was not called to be a priest. Peter, not Mary, was given the keys to heaven. Since Mary was not called to teach in the synagogue and proclaim her son as God, it indicates that women are to be excluded from the priesthood. It also elevates motherhood (not fatherhood) equivalent to a spiritual calling.

Mary was called to be God’s biological mother just as Joseph was called to be his adopted father. Mary and Joseph are role models of parents and have elevated the status of motherhood and fatherhood.
Cultural prejudices would have prevented her from preaching in the synagogue. Although she did not assume a role as one of the Twelve, this in no way proves that women should be excluded from the sacrament of Holy Orders. Also giving Peter the keys to heaven in no way restricts women from ordination to the priesthood. In fact one could say that when Mary became the Mother of God she automatically received the keys to heaven. For what mother does not possess the keys to her own house?
Through Mary we literally received the Bread of Life/The Word of God/The Pascal Lamb. She brought God (the Way, the Truth, and the Light) into the world. In her very being she exemplifies the priesthood like no man ever could. By her many subsequent apparitions, Mary has brought the Word of God and healing to the world (a true Apostle). Mary is not the reason women cannot be priests. She is the very reason women should be priests.

___________________________________________________________________________

There were no women at the Last Supper, therefore only men may consecrate the host.

Whether women were at the Last Supper has been a matter of dispute. We do not have a definitive source in the Scripture. Even if only men were there, this still does not require an all male priesthood. Jesus did not say “only men should do this in memory of me.” If one assumes that the male gender of those in attendance were a defining criteria for consecrating the host, one could also argue that women should not attend the reenactment of the Last Supper (Mass) either.
___________________________________________________________________________

Man is the absolute origin of human life but woman is only a contributing cause. Therefore only men may represent God.

Not true. Not consistent with the science of reproduction. Not consistent with scientific understanding of the evolution of human beings. Not consistent with the creation story in Genesis 1.
It is consistent with Adam and Eve myth of creation, which chronologically contradicts the first creation story and is not scientifically sound. This is not a valid argument.
___________________________________________________________________________

Men are more like God because they love their children out of choice whereas women love their children out of necessity.

Good men and women both love their children intimately and of their own free will. If women rise to the occasion more often than men in loving their children it would make them more Godlike not less Godlike.
___________________________________________________________________________

Feminists who want to be priests are man-haters who hate their own bodies, promote lesbianism and abortion, and want to be men.

Nonsense. This is stereotyping to foster disdain for feminists. Feminists who want to be priests do not hate their bodies nor do they want to be men. They are not promoting lesbianism and abortion. (It should be noted that there are many who would not call themselves feminists, yet they do promote a gay/lesbian lifestyle and abortion.)
___________________________________________________________________________

A woman wanting to become a priest is like a woman trying to be a man. It would make her a spiritual lesbian.

A priest acts on behalf of Christ. A priest is not Christ. Becoming a priest will not transform a woman into a man, symbolically or any other way. The term spiritual lesbian implies spiritual sex. We are children of God, not spiritual sex partners.
 ___________________________________________________________________________

The Holy Spirit impregnated Mary with Jesus, therefore God is masculine. Otherwise God would be a lesbian.

The miracle of the incarnation cannot and should never be likened to a sex act.
___________________________________________________________________________

God gave woman a special biological role to give birth and man a special spiritual role to impregnate the congregation with spiritual life.

The roles in biological reproduction are bound by physical condition. There is no spiritual or physical impediment to exclude women from the priesthood. No male or female, we are all one in Christ. What does this mean? In the waters of baptism, our walls of division are washed away. Race, class, and gender remain as human realities, but for the baptized, these distinctions are no longer relevant. Men are still men women are still women, but in the baptized family of faith, in the church of Jesus Christ, whether you are a man or a woman is no longer determinative as to how you shall serve the community. It is a spiritual matter, not a matter of gender or race or class. The spirit of Christ is boundary-shattering, wall-removing, gate-opening.
___________________________________________________________________________

Allowing ordination of women would be like adopting the notion of a pagan priestess serving a female deity.

Women who receive Holy Orders would be priests, not priestesses. We do not worship pagan gods. We worship the one true God who is neither male nor female, neither masculine nor feminine yet equally encompasses both.
 ___________________________________________________________________________

Men have masculine spirits and women have feminine spirits. The nature of the masculine spirit is Godlike; whereas the nature of the feminine spirit is not.

Both men and women are made in God’s image. The spirit of a woman is not less Godlike than the spirit of a man. This is bad theology. Not part of Church teaching and is refuted by the Catholic Catechism.
___________________________________________________________________________

The perfect human image of God is male not female. That is why Jesus became a man and not a woman. That is why we call God “Father.”

Not true. Not in agreement with Catholic Catechism. Both male and female are made in the image of God. God is both Father and Mother. Calling God ‘Father’, helps to remind us of our intimate relationship with God. The term Father is meant in the generic sense to encompass both Father and Mother.
___________________________________________________________________________

Women should accept their lot in life regarding exclusion from Holy Orders and be quiet, otherwise they will be heretics and dammed to hell.

Excluding women from the sacrament of Holy Orders is wrong. It is unjust discrimination on the basis of sex. It is a sin. It is the moral obligation of every Catholic of good conscience to denounce this practice.
___________________________________________________________________________

If women are ordained, the priesthood will lose its elite mystique.

The mystery of God’s call will not be compromised by acknowledging the call of women. The elite nature of male privilege will be replaced by equality in the selection of those with a pure and loving heart. The priesthood is about humility, service, and love. It is not about conferring a special elite status to anyone.
___________________________________________________________________________

Women priests would be demeaning to women. It would make women look like cross dressers wearing male sexual organs.

To the contrary, acceptance of women to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders would give them equal respect and dignity throughout the world. (If, as Kreeft claims, sexual imagery is to be elevated to spiritual status, it seems hypocritical that the Church would find acceptable the imagery of homosexual orientation in representing Christ at the altar).
 ___________________________________________________________________________

If women are ordained, the roles of men and women become blurred. This is not a good thing for society. We will not be able to distinguish between male and female.

Not worried. Most people do not have a problem distinguishing between male and female.
___________________________________________________________________________
 
If women were ordained it would be an ecclesiastical disaster. The Church would be torn apart because Rome would lose it’s credibility as a source of moral authority.

It would not destroy the Church, it would infuse new life. Equality and justice would shine forth. It would be a beacon to the world of God’s love and acceptance of all (men and women alike). Perpetuating an injustice is far more harmful to the Church than correcting past mistakes.
___________________________________________________________________________

God supports subjugation of women "Yet your urge shall be for your husband, and he shall be your master. (Gen. 3,16)"

The Adam and Eve story is not scientifically sound. It contradicts the theory of evolution as well as the first Genesis story. The story is meant to be instructive of the consequences of sin. The quoted passage refers to the sin of man in his separation from God. It is a sin that man must overcome. It is not about the will of God in how we should be treating one another.
Even the Pope acknowledges that the male domination curse on Eve was not the will of God but the result of what happens when we separate ourselves from God through sin. So if male domination is the result of sin, it cannot be pleasing to God.
 
 ___________________________________________________________________________


It is not unjust for men not to be able to give birth likewise it is not unjust to reserve ordination to men alone.

There is no physical or spiritual reason to prevent a woman from receiving the sacrament of Holy Orders. This exclusion of women from the priesthood is man-made, not natural. This is unjust. It cannot be compared to innate sexuality.
 ___________________________________________________________________________
 
Just like men can’t have babies, women can’t be priests.
 
The comparison “just like men can’t have babies, women can’t be priests” is a false comparison. As noted previously, roles in biological reproduction are a natural condition, whereas exclusion of women from the priesthood is man-made. It would be like saying, -- just as objects can’t fall upward, my house can’t be painted white. It is not a valid comparison.
 
___________________________________________________________________________
 
St. Paul  & St. Timothy taught that women should be submissive and remain silent.

Such passages attributed to Paul/Timothy were influenced by fallacious cultural beliefs about women. The tradition of excluding women from preaching, when subjected to critical examination, may be recognized as based on cultural attitudes of female inferiority rather than on divine revelation, and certainly not sanctioned by Jesus. St. Paul also taught that women should keep their heads covered and no one does that anymore. In addition, there are biblical passages attributed to Paul/Timothy that support slavery and we reject this practice today as immoral.
___________________________________________________________________________


The Church does not have the authority to ordain women.

To say that the Church cannot act on its own authority is not a credible argument since the Church should have the authority to act justly on its own. This would mean that Christ could have done justly what it would have been unjust for the Church to do on its own. This is an absurd argument.
___________________________________________________________________________
 
Excluding women from the sacrament of Holy Orders is a matter of tradition. That's the way it's always been done. End of conversation.
 
Arguments based solely on tradition are not valid. Such arguments are typically found in archaic societies entrenched in irrational and harmful practices. It is the kind if thinking that has prevented primitive societies from advancing. It is the kind of thinking that prevents our Church from correcting its errors.
Even Cardinal Ratzinger stated: “A traditional conviction, when subjected to critical examination, may be recognized as based on cultural attitudes rather than on divine revelation. It may become clear that it was not really a tradition of authentic Christian faith. The Church has never taken antiquity to be the sole criterion of an authoritative Tradition.”
___________________________________________________________________________
 
God says it should be this way. Although an all male priesthood might seem like the subjugation of women, we don't completely understand God. We know God loves everyone so sometimes we just have to accept things in faith.
 
Men are the ones who have practiced subjugation of women, not only in the Church but in all walks of life. This exclusion of women from Holy Orders is an extension of man’s gender prejudice and not a mystery of faith.
Even the Church admits that women have all the necessary qualities (intellect, heart, and spirit) to be priests however they cannot be ordained because of their gender. To say it is “God’s Will.” is suggesting that God gives men and women the same talents and graces to be priests and then decrees that only men may use them. The idea is illogical and God is not illogical.
 
___________________________________________________________________________
 
Man can represent the bride but woman can’t represent the groom. Therefore women priests would be rebelling against their womanhood.
 
First, if a man can represent the bride, there is no reason why a woman could not represent the groom. The premise is false.
Second, Jesus never compared the priesthood to a bridegroom. (Nothing about sending men out as bridegrooms to bring Jesus brides) This is a misinterpretation of the Bridegroom/Bride analogy.
Third, becoming a priest will not compromise a woman’s womanhood. Rather it will elevate it, not just in the Church but in the world. The priesthood is not about manhood, it is about service to God. Admitting women to the priesthood would be recognition of true equality between men and women, not just paying it lip service.
___________________________________________________________________________

Men should not exert authority over women or men, but man is “Head” of woman. Men and women are equal but man is “Head” of woman. Man is “Head” of woman but this is not a power issue.
 
This is a mass of contradictions. Man cannot be considered “Head” of woman and then equal to woman. If woman is not inferior to man, then she should not be relegated to an inferior status.
___________________________________________________________________________

Man (in marriage) must serve the woman and the woman (in marriage) must submit to being served by the man.
 
Not sure what is being proposed here. No information on who makes the decisions of what is served and when and where it is served. Also no mention is made of the service provided by the woman and who decides that. While it may sound attractive on the surface, it seems to suggest a dominant-submissive relationship in reality, with men making the decisions.
Marriage should be an equal partnership with each submitting to the other out of love for the other. It should never be a matter of one party making all the decisions or being “Head” of the other.
___________________________________________________________________________

The man totally gives of himself (sexually and in other ways) to the woman and makes sacrifices in marriage and the woman totally gives of herself to the man and makes sacrifices in marriage, but the man’s  giving reflects Christ’s giving of self on the Cross and the woman’s does not.
 
If the giving of love in marriage (which encompasses one’s complete self) reflects Christ’s self giving, then both men and women reflect Christ.
Furthermore, man’s “gift” in a sexual union cannot be likened to Christ’s suffering and death on the Cross. The man is deriving intense sexual pleasure and self gratification. This is not a sacrifice. In fact if one were to use a sexual outpouring analogy, a woman’s ability to give birth would make her more worthy than a man to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders. A woman giving birth is most like Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross. She suffers horrible pain in childbirth and sometimes even pays with her life, to bring new life into the world just as Christ suffered and died to give us spiritual life. This makes her more Christ-like, not less Christ-like. This makes her more worthy to be a priest, not less worthy.
___________________________________________________________________________

God is “all just” but discriminates against women in excluding them from the sacrament of Holy Orders. Christ made the priesthood for men only, but women shouldn’t feel slighted by this discrimination.
 
Again, this is illogical. An “all just” God would not discriminate against a whole group of people on the basis of a natural condition (race, sex, national origin, blue eyes, etc.).
___________________________________________________________________________

A woman’s body does not make her a valid substance for the sacrament of Holy Orders. It was not Christ’s humanity, or nationality, or race but his gender that defined the priesthood.
 
A woman cannot be likened to an inanimate substance. Women are flesh and blood and spirit, created in the image and likeness of God. Both female and male are equal in the eyes of God. God does not discriminate on the basis of sex. It should never be forgotten that Jesus selected female disciples also (Mary Magdalene, Susanna, Joanna, Samaritan woman, Mary of Bethany, Martha, Priscilla, Nino, Junia, etc.) and sent them forth to preach the good news. They were not there by accident. Jesus chose them, they did not choose him. God has worked miracles through women as well as men. Obviously in the eyes of God a woman is a valid source through which physical and spiritual miracles can occur. God would not reserve the power of transubstantiation and forgiveness of sins to men alone, for the gifts of God flow freely to all who are open to embrace them.
 ___________________________________________________________________________
Sophie
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 14275
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2007/01/18 01:57:27
  • Status: offline
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/09/25 03:59:24 (permalink)
 
 
 
 
 
 
Dear friend,

  Well done! 
 
with love and blessings,
~Sophie~


Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/10/22 09:37:20 (permalink)
I have seen this just now and I'm upset: apart of our campaign, for which there can be different ideas, but comparing the Holy Sacrament to a sexual intercourse??? But this person merits excommunication, and also a denounce to the public authorities for offence to religion, if in your countries this reate exists!
Every consacred soul is married to Christ, and sisters in particular, and instead of defensing us who are diminishing, this one calls us lesbians?!But how does he permits? I have already heard similar accuses against those - male or female - who choose chastity but it is one of the few things able to make me cry.
The image of the Church as a bride is a metaphor, but the vocation of a person is a reality, let's not make similar confusions. Our patron Therese of Lisieux for example was called to priesthood really as the fullness of her vocation of bride of Jesus, and for this very reason few people have lived purity more than her. Maybe Peter Kreeft ignores even the name of this Doctor of The Church...
Karolina of the Guardian Angels 
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/10/22 10:04:39 (permalink)
The theologian von Balthasar, who says this (it was not Kreeft's idea) is considered by the Vatican to be a world class theologian.  One of John Paul II's favourites.  Not everything vB says is so outrageous.  But this is what happens when one tries to make unTruth convincing as though it were Truth.
 
The Vatican excommunicate vB?  I am sure the Vatican could not imagine such words being spoken.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/10/22 10:20:02 (permalink)
  It is a very flimsy argument that Von Balthasar uses to try to pretend men only can be priests.  God is Spirit says Jesus to the Samaritan woman in book of John chapter 4.  God is not man,  God is Spirit.  Jesus recognizes very well that women can also represent him.  The priest blesses the bread and the wine, which represent Jesus and the priest is NOT Jesus.  We do not worship the priest and the priest does not need to be a man.  This is wrong and ridiculous to say only men can be priests or call the bread and wine of Jesus, the sacred body and blood of Jesus a sex act or orgasm of a man!  It is definately not and Van Balthasar is wrong!  It is the spiritual body of Jesus and not orgasm and not a sexual nuptial orgasm act at all.
  Besides Jesus does not refer to himself as a bridegroom yet over and over he refers to himself as the Good Shepherd, the Vine, we are the branches, the Good Steward, the Widow With the Lost Coin, The Bakerwoman With the Bread of Life, The Mother Hen Who Gathers Her Chicks Under Her Wing, these are the metaphors Jesus uses  and not orgasm or bridegroom.  We are not marrying Jesus and God is Spirit.
Sophie
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 14275
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2007/01/18 01:57:27
  • Status: offline
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/10/23 02:47:14 (permalink)
 
 
 
 
Dear friends,
 
If you have any questions about this, please let me know.  As a side bar note of interest for you, a dialogue thread now housed in our Archives is Bride and Bridegroom in Ephesians?  includes related discussion.
 
with love and blessings,
 
~Sophie~

Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/21 22:45:35 (permalink)
God is neither male nor female, but He is musculine in relation to us.

We are made in the image of God since within God there is the initiator (the Father), the receiver-reciprocator (the Son) and the love between them (Holy Spirit). Adam images the Father and Eve the Son, because Adam has his being first and Eve receives her being from him. Adam therefore acts as the initiator and Eve as the receiver-reciprocator while both are equal in dignity and ontological worth.

This is why the Church is also the bride and Christ the bridegroom. It is Christ who initiates (proposes), and the Church accepts.

It's all a part of the Sacramental reality of this world. God is not "like us"; it is the opposite. We are a bit "like God". The whole creation is a multiplicity of signs pointing to the nature of God, with the human family most closely imaging the God's relational nature between the persons of the Godhead.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/21 23:01:35 (permalink)
God is SPIRIT Jesus teaches us and the Samaritan woman in John 4.  God is NOT 'male"  God encompasses BOTH Male AND Female, not solo male.
 
God creates two sexes-- Woman AND Man, not just man represents God.  Made in the Image of God God made Man AND Woman.
 
Eve is NOT the Son !  Eve is the Daughter of God who is Souse of Adam, she is NOT bridegroom of God as daughter of God she does not commot inscest with God.
 
Adam is NOT God and Adam does NOT create Eve, he does not Lord over Eve, they are co-partners of children and the world given by God.
 
BOTH sexes image God, Ineffable God.  Eve receives her being from God.  God creates her for the world.  Adam is NOT God. 
 
Eve is Co-Creator along with Adam of children through sex, equally through her own eggs which together with spermatozoa from Adam, both man and woman have childten.
 
That is modern science, it takes BOTH man AND woman to create human life as given by God, who is Ineffable SPIRIT not male.
 
We are made in the image of God, both male and female and God is not restricted to masculinity.
 
 
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/21 23:07:37 (permalink)
Scientifically we each posess both male and female hormones estrogen and androgen and we both together create new human life.  We both as man and woman image and represent God.  God is NOT restricted to "male" or "masculine".  God is infinately more than a "male" entity.  It takes BOTH sexes in all species except single cell amoebas , and in each animal there is also male, female hormones just as both male and female are in each human.  That is God's PLAN, to ensure equality of wisdom and the truly wise and mature person values both men and women of the world, as Jesus does, he loves women too and admires, appreciates and chooses women too to represent him , to preach, to be his Co-workers in the church as St. Paul also shows us.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/21 23:10:09 (permalink)
Eve is Spouse of Adam and is daughter of God.  Eve does not marry God, that would be incest,  she marries Adam.  God makes humans in both sexes, both sexes image God, both male and female represent God.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/21 23:16:21 (permalink)
Scientifically women's egg is very active in the fertilization process and not "passive receptor" at all.  The egg only receives certain sperm and destroys many inferior sperm.  This is shown scientifically.  God has made a plan that fully engages women even at the microbiologcal level of reproduction.  Both man AND woman create new human life.
The Catholic church must fully engage women too and let them too be odained as priests and deacons.  God encompasses both male and female, ineffable spirit , not limited or restricted to just the male.  Jesus never teaches this or treats women at all with limits or restrictions;  Jesus lets women do all tasks in his church.  Ordain women too.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14706
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/21 23:23:21 (permalink)
Jesus himself deliberately chose women to represent himself to the community. Mary Magalene is the chosen witness for the Crucifixion and Resurrection as book of Mark definately shows us beloved disciple is a child.  Jesus deliberately chose and praises Samaritan woman to learn he is the Messiah! to preach to gentile Samaria!  praises her for doing what the male disciples do not do, they do nothing while she reaps the harvest and teaches his Gospel and theology.  Apostle Ju nia is praised as Outstanding and Foremost Apostle and Phoebe as a wonderful loyal deacon of the church who deserves our praise and all the help from us as she  and other women work tirelessly for the church and for Jesus.  Men AND women represent Jesus and God.  So says Jesus.  Jesus is the ultimate authority of the church, the pope admits that.
Page: << < ..3132333435 > Showing page 33 of 35 - Powered by APG vNext Trial
Guest
Quick Reply: (Open Full Version)
  Enter the random characters shown
Submit Post
Jump to:
© 2020 APG vNext Trial Version 4.6

This website is maintained by the Wijngaards Institute for Catholic Research.

Wijngaards Institute for Catholic Research

Visitors to www.womenpriests.org since 11 January 2014

Wijngaards Institute for Catholic Research