Women Can Be Priests
Reply to post

Peter Kreeft

Page: << < ..3132333435 > Showing page 34 of 35 - Powered by APG vNext Trial
Author
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/21 23:35:25 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Guest

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.

 
 
So what you are saying is that priests are actually bi-sexual since during mass they represent both the Church (the bride) and Jesus (masculine.)
 
All men during mass are the bride (therefore feminine.)
 
Women are unnecessary during mass since men can stand in for the feminine.
 
Men can play both roles:  bride and bridegroom.
 
Women not required.
 
Is that what you are saying?
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/22 05:08:44 (permalink)
Oh, here is another way Kreeft shows his ignorance of Catholicism and Christianity and the New Testament.  There is no marriage in heaven despite the nonsense Kreeft writes.  In Matthew  the Pharisees  ask Jesus about marriage in heaven and Jesus says there is no need for marriage in heaven at all. Take a look at the New Testament and you will see how wrong Kreeft is.  Kreeft is continuously wrong about what he writes about Catholcism.  Kreeft is a Paganist and does not understand or write Christian or Catholic ideas in his writings.  Do  not be misled by Paganist Kreeft.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/22 05:41:17 (permalink)
So man is calling man a god.
 
So man is making god in the image of a man.  man = god.
 
Jesus disagrees.  God is both male and female and spirit,  Man and woman image God not just man.
 
Jesus calls God  "BakerWOMAN making the Bread of Life."  BAKERWOMAN    Feminine, female, woman.  That is what Jesus tells us.
 
Jesus calls God "MOTHERHen gathering her chicks under her wings."  MOTHER HEN  Feminine, female, woman.  Jesus says this in New Testament.
 
Jesus calls God WIDOW searching for the Lost Coin,  WIDOW,  Woman, feminine image of God.
 
Yes, BOTH male, man and female, woman are made both in the image of God.  Jesus lets us know about inclusive and equality of the sexes spirituallly and both women and men represent Jesus and can both be ordained.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/22 05:56:19 (permalink)
Jersus never refers to himself as the bridegroom of the church.  Never.  This false teaching of the church is a perversion and distortion to try to shut women out of priesthood.  Jesus uses other metaphors NOT bridegroom  :  The Good Shepherd
                                                                 The Good Steward
                                                                  Vine we are the branches
                                                                   Bakerwoman with bread of life
                                                                   Widow searching for lost coin
                                                                    Motherhen
                                                                    Harvester (Jesus praises Samaritan woman harvesting souls for the church).
                                                                     Humble Servant of God
 
NOT bridegroom, not.  No need for male only priesthood.  Jesus is equal opportu nity employer, bridegroom is not metaphor for Jesus at all.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/22 10:42:58 (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.

It's obvious that you have never conceived and given birth to a child, and have not directly observed much of the nature of human beings and God. 
If you had ever conceived and birthed a child you would know that it is directly observable that a child is an immortal soul, a creation of God, not man, and a phenomenon of light which exists long before the conception of his/her body by the parents.  You would also know that it is directly observable that the parents' combined sexuality merely opens a doorway for that phenomenon of light, that immortal soul to walk through, and provides nothing more than a physical body for that light to inhabit in this world.   That's observable reality.
It is obvious that you have never miscarried a child and likewise never directly observed this manifestation of a human being on this plane process in reverse, the dying process, as the light of the immortal soul that is the child discards its body within you, long before your own body even recognizes that the child has permanently left and discarded his own body, a week before you are left with the horrendous cramping, the tiny dead body and placenta, and a basin of your own blood.  That's observable reality too. 
It is obvious that you yourself have never gotten very close to birth nor death at all or you would know that God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit are the LIGHT, and you would have observed that exactly what we have in common with God is that we too are of the light, that a human being is a tiny spark of that immense all-encompassing LIGHT, which merely comes to inhabit the body generated by the parents, and without which, that body dies.
 
Your statement that "Eve received her being from Adam" is completely asinine.  It essentially makes the claim that Adam was God.  If you had ever observed the conception of a human being, you would know that human beings do not "receive their being" from any other human being(s) at all.  You would know that bodies are only capable of generating other bodies, and that bodies are not viable on their own without souls.  Your "receiver-reciprocator, initiator-acceptor, God-is-masculine-in-relation-to-us" concepts clearly indicate that you have never once actually observed the process of the manifestation of a human soul into existence on this plane, and that your observations sadly must be limited to observations of genitalia.
 
woman who votes with feet
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/22 16:07:15 (permalink)
Ontologically both women and men image God, are of the same entity and essence, same ontology,  and become ONE, the ALL, both sexes image God. 
 
ONE in Christ, BOTH men and women together, become ONE in God  so no to the solo male "god" idea of yours.  Not Catholic or Universal at all is "god is man" idea.
 
Jesus calls himself who is both fully human and fully divine with many FEMININE ontologies:  BAKERWOMAN ontology, WIDOW and MOTHER HEN ontologies, Female concepts of God too.  Fully divine --  Male and Female ONE in GOD.
 
In ist Peter texts we are told not to lord it over others, noone is to rule over anyone, respect each other, respect everyone, serve each other, serve one another in humility.
Men must not lord it over women.  Anti-women  passages of male domination are scribal inserts not original and contradict the rest of the text.
 
Jesus insists we as clergy and Christians be Humble SERVANTS of God and one another. First last, last, first.  BOTH male and female represent and image God.
 
We as women and men are truly ONE In THE LORD,  God is both male AND Fenale, ontologically.  We both sexes possess male and female hormones too in our bodies.
 
 
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/22 16:24:09 (permalink)
I am mystified by the desire by some to completely exclude girls and women from Catholic Christianity, from any Christianity.  Why the hatred and disdain for women as Jesus warmly welcomed women and chose women as disciples and apostles, making women very significant apostles: Mary Magdalene, Junia, Samartian woman, for example and only women anoint his holy body, with his praise and with Jesus saying these women must always be honored and remembered.  Why the wierd UnChristian desire to omit and exclude women?  Not Christian, not of Jesus is this hatred of women.
Sophie
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 14275
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2007/01/18 01:57:27
  • Status: offline
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/22 17:32:29 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Guest

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.



Dear friend,

Welcome to Circles dialogues at www.womenpriests.org.  We are always pleased to hear another voice!  My name is Sophie.  I serve as Moderator/traffic director here on the discussion boards.  If I can be of any help, plese don't hesitate to ask.

Your obserations about the bride/bridegroom imagery bring us to a problematic point in modern day Vatican teachings. 

A couple of articles from our library that help explain this are found here:

There are a few more article we have on tap.  I will come back to provide you their direct links.

Also, if are keen to make contributions to discussion about the inconsistencies, contradictions and mixed messages which follow the exclusive use of the bride/bridegroom analogy, I'd love to hear from you.  Dedicated current discussion threads about this topic are found here:
An interesting thread found in our archives is here: Bride and Bridegroom in Ephesians?  Though this particular thread is no longer 'open' for contribution, it includes some interesting perspectives.
 
I look forward to hearing from you more.  If you have any questions, please let me know.
 
with love and blessings,
 
~Sophie~

Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/06/23 00:09:43 (permalink)


ORIGINAL: Guest

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.




This would be laughable if it were not so stupid. I am curious if anyone knows whether the Pope believes God is a masculine spirit or is this just a “Kreeftian” invention.
 
Let’s see now, how is God feminine?
 
God is patient.
God is loving.
God is compassionate.
God is forgiving.
God is merciful.
God is gentle.
God is meek and mild.
God is nurturing.
God suffered to give us life.
God protects and defends us (the children of God).
 
These are qualities typically associated with a “feminine” nature but they are not exclusive to women. Men possess these qualities as well. Likewise women may be strong, courageous and initiators of everything from building a family unit to founding a corporation.
 
In any case God is described as Love by St John. I have never heard God described as “the Initiator.” It would seem to me that God is every bit as much a feminine Spirit as masculine Spirit but then we would not be made in God’s image if this were not so.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/07/07 05:29:20 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Guest



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.



 
First of all, this premise that “only men initiate things” is false. But if it were true consider what is being claimed: God the Son has a feminine relationship with God the Father.
 
So if God the Son is assuming a feminine relationship with God the Father, then God would not be exclusively masculine.
 
Therefore God the Son may be most faithfully represented by the feminine and women should be priests.
 
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/07/07 07:41:31 (permalink)
Excellent logical analysis and deduction.  This masculine-feminine polarity stuff is nonsense ultimately.  Never taught by Jesus.  John 4 God is Spirit.  So says Jesus.  Jesus chooses many women apostles.  Humble Servant Of God.  So no discrimination from Jesus.  So ordain women too. 
 
If Jesus is socalled receiver of God initiator, then as you show since women are socalled receiver in this crazy system they thought up, then Jesus is womanly receiver in their system, , Jesus is  feminine because that is what he writes.  So women are great candidates for priest, as in their system Jesus is feminine receiver and they say women are that too.  It is a load of rubbish really not based on scripture or common sense.
 
Just respect Jesus and respect women like he does and ordain women too.  Kreeft is Pagan and all this sex emphasis is not from Jesus.  No reason not to ordain women.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/07/08 02:10:59 (permalink)
The Jesuits at Boston College have really sunk to new lows by allowing Peter Kreeft to teach this sexist nonsense as if it were Gospel.
 
It would be as if the astronomy department at Cal. Tech. hired an astronomer to give a course claiming that the world is flat and stationary.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/07/08 05:20:32 (permalink)
How did Adam initiate the creation of Eve?
 
If an artist takes paint from a tube, applies it to a canvas and creates a masterpiece, did the paint initiate the painting?
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/07/08 13:57:10 (permalink)
God created Eve, in God's image.
 
Adam did not create Eve, God created Eve.
 
The Genesis myth number two is patriarchial crap, written in to demean women.  Genesis story 1 is correct, God creates man and woman, be fruitful, multifply, it is good.
 
Births are from women , not men.  Women give birth to humans.  That is a basic scientific fact as well as a spiritual reality.  Women do truly image God as much as men dp.
 
Priests are to be humble servants of God, not God.  Women too are chosen to be humble servants of God.which is Jesus's defination of a priest.  So ordain women too.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/07/11 04:25:15 (permalink)
 
If you believe in the Adam and Eve story as events that really happened then the analogy I was making is as follows:
 
God = artist
Adam’s rib = paint
Eve = masterpiece
 
So if God (artist) takes Adam’s rib (paint) and creates Eve (masterpiece), I don’t think the rib (paint) would qualify as the initiator. And if the order of creation is so important then all the creatures on the earth and under the earth would be above Adam (not likely).
 
If anything, in the Adam and Eve story, Adam is one of the most passive characters. He eats what is given to him without question. And when confronted by God, he is a coward and sends Eve out to take the blame.
 
And then we have this notion that God the Son has an Eve-like relationship with the Adam-like God the Father. I don’t even want to think about where that leads us.
 
In my opinion, Peter Kreeft has taken the sublime and made it ridiculous.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/07/11 13:54:05 (permalink)
Come to think of it should we not think all earth's creatures--- (well, not mosquitoes)---- should be regarded  very respectfully with us as humble stewards of the earth after all?  Are we not mindlessly and recklessly ruining the earth, polluting it and destroying and making extinct through overharvesting (example capturing too many fish, destroying habitats of many animals, including our own environment and our own habitats, making so much of the earth polluted, unlivable)?  Did St. Francis of Assissi get it right? He encouraged tremendous respect and honor for all God's creatures, including animals.  I have a hubby, kids, a dog, a cat, a goldfish and a budgie (parakeet -- if you are English, Australian ), friends, work colleagues.  There is no denying the animals are  also highly social, highly intelligent and lots of fun too.  People enjoy them and they win over people who before had no  previous liking for a dog or a cat or a pet bird.  The charm of our fellow creatures, fin, fur, scales, feathers.
 
Kreeft is misinformed and I believe disingenious about what he says in lectures and in his writings.  He may know pagan ideas like Socrates and Aristotle however he is ignorant and wrong about Catholic ideas and religion, and shows no knowledge of scripture.  For example Jesus says there is  no marriage in heaven so Kreeft's nonsense about that is exactly nonsense as is so much about what he writes.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/07/11 16:54:22 (permalink)

ORIGINAL: Guest


If you believe in the Adam and Eve story as events that really happened then the analogy I was making is as follows:

God = artist
Adam’s rib = paint
Eve = masterpiece

So if God (artist) takes Adam’s rib (paint) and creates Eve (masterpiece), I don’t think the rib (paint) would qualify as the initiator. And if the order of creation is so important then all the creatures on the earth and under the earth would be above Adam (not likely).

If anything, in the Adam and Eve story, Adam is one of the most passive characters. He eats what is given to him without question. And when confronted by God, he is a coward and sends Eve out to take the blame.

And then we have this notion that God the Son has an Eve-like relationship with the Adam-like God the Father. I don’t even want to think about where that leads us.

In my opinion, Peter Kreeft has taken the sublime and made it ridiculous.


The trouble with Peter Kreeft is that he 'sounds good' to some people.

They don't bother to ask questions or carefully examine what he is saying. They buy into it holus bolus. He is the biggest baloney sandwich. I guess some people really have an appetite for baloney.

Hey. Baloney. Good comparison. I like baloney but when I eat it, I don't ask a lot of questions about what's in it or think about how it got put together. I just eat it because I think it tastes good. And really, it's not good. And deep down I know this.


Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/07/12 16:38:28 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Guest


Hey. Baloney. Good comparison. I like baloney but when I eat it, I don't ask a lot of questions about what's in it or think about how it got put together. I just eat it because I think it tastes good. And really, it's not good. And deep down I know this.



 
 
 
I don’t like baloney. I don’t eat it. You are right, it has no nutritional value, and in my opinion it tastes bad. When a person is sick you don’t feed them baloney, you feed them chicken soup (which in my opinion tastes good).
 
Sexism is like a virus that lives in the body. Feminist ideals are like the chicken soup that help the body recover.
 
I am equal to my husband. The Church is not equal to Christ. They misunderstand the marriage analogy. It is about love and oneness with our creator, similar to what should happen in a good marriage. It is not about stereotyping and contrived male-female roles. And it is definitely not about ascribing a male gender or masculine personality to God. I find such ideas offensive and deeply hurtful. They tear at my heart and plunge my soul into despair about the direction of my Church.
 
Women and men are both fully made in the image and likeness of God. They are equal. One does not have more Godlike personality traits than the other. Wives are not to be submissive to their husbands like the Church is submissive to Christ. Those ideas are wrong. They are false. They always were wrong. They always were false. The requirement in the marriage vows is to love honor and cherish. It is not to be submissive.
 
A husband does not establish his wife like Christ established the Church. The husband does not take upon himself the sins of his wife and redeem his wife like Christ redeemed the Church. The wife does not owe her existence to the Word of her husband. The bride-bridegroom analogy is specific in its scope and meaning. Do not try to make it into what it is not.
 
Men and women are both fully human. They are both created equal in the image and likeness of God. They are both sinners. They make mistakes. They both need to help each other. They do it out of love not out of reciprocity. Women do not give love only when they receive it in return. Marriage is not a quid pro quo relationship. Both husband and wife are required to give of themselves fully in love and devotion. This means using all your talents, not subordinating the mind and spirit of one to the will of the other. Life is a journey to be shared, explored, and celebrated as we strive toward perfection in our oneness with God. We need to lift each other up, not tear each other down, categorize, stereotype, or box half the population into a preconceived idea of what their role should be in the home, in society, or in the Church.
 
To say that “God is masculine in his relationship with us” necessitates the concept of male domination of the female. It sets men above women in every respect and now it seems to be the basis for this heresy which has infected our Church. It is like a virus that lies in wait and strikes at times of crisis and low resistance. Building up the immune system of the body is imperative for the health of the body. Those of us who offer resistance to the festering disease of sexism, strive to keep the body alive and healthy so that it may be an example to the world of what Love looks like.
 
 
 
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/07/23 03:51:31 (permalink)
 
When Peter tried to discourage Jesus from his mission Jesus said to Peter “Get behind me Satan.” Jesus actually called Peter “Satan.”
 
Imagine how the literalist male supremacists would have interpreted that Gospel if Christ had said it to a woman. It’s a scary thought.
 
However, as Kreeft and company might imagine, in this particular case Christ would be the bridegroom and Peter would be the bride.  
 
So it is still the woman leading the man astray, even if the woman is a man.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2008/07/23 12:07:38 (permalink)
Jesus called Peter "Satan" because of Peter's persistant desire to avoid true service to God as a humble servant of God.  Instead the male apostles like Peter vie for who will be leader and do not understand no one is to lord it over each other, they are to humbly serve one another.  Jesus washes the feet to try to drive home the servant and humility role that these disciples do not understand.  Peter's resistance to accepting the dignity and vocation Jesus grants to women apostles and women disciples, also shows the "Satan" aspects of Peter, which Pope still behaves like this sinful unChristian rejection of women, so unlike Jesus who admired and respected and chose many women apostles.
Page: << < ..3132333435 > Showing page 34 of 35 - Powered by APG vNext Trial
Guest
Quick Reply: (Open Full Version)
  Enter the random characters shown
Submit Post
Jump to:
© 2018 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