Women Can Be Priests
Reply to post

Peter Kreeft

Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 4 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 2007/05/02 22:52:46 (permalink)
  Ooops  Therese   I should have listed    Louis   Bouyer  and his article The Priest and Eucharist,  not Jean.
  The other mysoginist  article against women is Hans Urs Von Balthasar  The Uninterrupted Tradition of the Church.
   It is on a Scholars link as shown above by Sophie.   Very eye opening of some serious deranged false teaching regarding the Eucharist sacrament put out by the Vatican--put this in the Garbagecan---                      from  Annette
 
     I love that name, Balthasar, it sounds Middle Eastern like Persian, too bad his theology is not as engaging as his name.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/03 13:52:06 (permalink)
  Kreeft must be self-promoting shamelessly here! He's listed a long list of unpublished books in progress!
Maybe we all should do that, our dream list of our books in progress, our books we could get published one day!
  Holy Mother of Pearl!  What is he doing coming on this web site?  "Day of the living mysoginist zombie" movie soon to be released  next!  Follow me, I am Mr. K., learn to hate the women and say no to the Gospel, say no to Jesus and God!
Lessons on contempt of women and Jesus and God by Mr. K!  Good Grief!
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/03 16:16:40 (permalink)
Kreeft states “women priests would demean and insult women, for it would be like asking them to be cross-dressers or to wear male sex organs. It would remove the distinctive dignity of women qua women as symbols of the Church, whom Christ, symbolized by the priest, marries. A symbol or sign is to be looked along, not looked at. What would priestesses mean, what would they symbolize? They would signify to all women that they are spiritual lesbians instead of brides.”
 
If a female priest signifies to women that they are spiritual lesbians, does a male priest signify to men that they are spiritual homosexuals? After all they are asking men to take on the symbolic female identity of bride as part of the Church. Also the term spiritual lesbian implies spiritual sex. This makes no sense. We are all children of God, not spiritual sex partners.
 
This shows the danger in the literal interpretation of a metaphor. To me the Bridegroom/Bride metaphor is meant to exemplify God’s love, devotion, caring, self-sacrifice, and joy in being united with us, not the spiritual equivalent of sexual intercourse.
 
When Jesus says unless you eat my body and drink my blood you shall not have life within you, are we to interpret this as being spiritual cannibals?
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/03 17:43:30 (permalink)
using Kreeft's words, you've captured the problem in a nutshell!!! excellent analysis.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/03 17:47:15 (permalink)
  The cross dressers are cardinals and bishops and priests who dress in long decorated gowns with capes and embroidery and beautiful white lace overgowns. If one is to accuse any one of cross dressing, it would have to be the male Curia who dress like women.  Women would actually wear the gowns better as that is a far more normative outfit for women. Mr. K is wrong!
     The  Eucharist as male self-giving orgasm, male priests fertilizing souls according to , children  and women in the congregation too  is what Mr. K tells us is what the eucharist is all about.  NO!  Mr. K is wrong again.
    Homosexual and pedophile behavior as communion activity.  Not what the mass is about at all! I see no scripture from Jesus about this. This is a morally bankrupt, disgusting ridiculous interpretation of the mass.
    Do this in remembrance of me , take my body which is given up for you, is not about a sex act .  This is a disreputable twisting of the eucharist simply to try to find a way to exclude women from being priests.
     Jesus extended his ministry beyond the 12 tribes of Israel to include the Gentiles.  Jesus chose MORE than 12 apostles or disciples: women too, Mary Magdalene, Susanna, Joanna, Samaritan woman, then Junia and Paul.
      The Roman Church has to admit the truth: more than 12, more than just to Israel.  Clinging to male only 12 is NOT the Jesus story, NOT the New Testament Gospel and religion Jesus and God established for us.  We can not omit the women Apostles and disciples, we can not omit that Jesus ministered to Samaria and Gentiles too.    God bless from Connie
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/03 17:58:46 (permalink)
  I must add too, Jesus uses other metaphors which are ignored by Mr. K and Van Balthasar and Bouyer because they disprove their "only males"  entitlement nonsense.  Not just Bridegroom, bride;  Not eucharist as sex act by male semen of male only priests.
  Jesus  says he is Good Shepherd who saves even his lost sheep.     Very powerful compassionate responsible  concept.
 
   Jesus  says he is like  a Mother Hen who longs to gather his little chicks.  Here Jesus is a Woman, a Mother.
 
   Jesus says he is a BakerWoman making the bread of life for us.   Here again Jesus identifies with being a Woman.
 
    Jesus says he is a Vine, we are his branches.  Another beautiful metaphor of connecting inclusion.
 
  These metaphors and parables of Jesus show how women are equal to Jesus and how he identifies with the worth and value of women to image him, to be the Christ to others.  Ordain women as Catholic priests: Jesus and God's plan.
 
 
   
 
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/03 18:52:15 (permalink)
  The stuff of Mr. K is so wierd and extreme it makes me laugh!  Just as long as no one takes him seriously and actually believes the junk.
   I thought about his arguments again today and they are so out there crazy I started laughing about them.  Maybe that was his intent.  He is a comedian.        Cheers from  Janet,  housewife extraordinaire!
  
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/03 22:06:08 (permalink)
   "If we make our goal to live a life of compassion and unconditional love, then the world will indeed become a garden where all kinds of flowers can bloom and grow."----------- Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, b. 1926 ,Swiss born American Writer
 
 Women ought to be allowed to be Catholic priests! Yes, indeed!
Sophie
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 14275
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2007/01/18 01:57:27
  • Status: offline
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/05 02:20:41 (permalink)
Dear friends,

I am not quite sure where to post this!!! Pope Benedict thread? Peter Kreeft? Here goes! I'll include here and in  RE: Bride and Bridegroom in Ephesians?

This article from the Vatican's news engine Zenit exemplies why it is important that we understand the theories underlying the arguments.  Our ability to articulate why this kind of thinking is problematic helps open the eyes of others.  The position advanced by Kreeft, von Balthasar, Bouyer and the Vatican should not be underestimated for its ability to appeal to uncritical audiences. This line of theological reasoning has friends in high places and is currently receiving promotion from front and centre stage.
 
As we remember that the teaching on limbo is in the process of change...

Called to serve as agents for change!

with love and blessings,
~Sophie~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Scholar: Ordaining Women Is Disrespectful
Says Promotion of Female Priests Overemphasizes Masculinity

ROME, MAY 4, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Those who want to ordain women to the priesthood manifest a failure to recognize the dignity of women, said an expert in moral theology and women's issues.  Pia de Solenni asserted this during her April 27 conference at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross in Rome. De Solenni won the Pontifical Prize of the Academies in 2001, receiving an award from John Paul II for her doctoral thesis on St. Thomas Aquinas. She is the director of Life and Women's Issues at the Family Research Council in Washinton, D.C.

At the conference, de Solenni used St. Thomas' arguments to analyze the issue of the ordination of women to the priesthood in light of the natural complementarity between the sexes. St. Thomas taught that woman was not created from man's head in order to rule over him, nor from his foot to be ruled by him, but from his side in order to rule with him, she explained.

Ordinatio Sacerdotalis

The 1994 Vatican document Ordinatio Sacerdotalis concentrates on three basic points, de Solenni explained: "Christ, in ordaining only men, acted freely without constraints by cultural norms; nonadmission to the priesthood is not a sign of lesser dignity; the Church does not have the faculty to ordain women."

De Solenni illustrated the first point saying that many claim Christ ordained only men because of the cultural norms of his day. Since the role of women has changed, some say the Church should also adapt and allow women to be ordained to the priesthood, she said.  De Solenni contended, however, that the Gospels show how Christ often broke with the cultural norms of his day: In fact, it was to the Samaritan woman at the well that he revealed himself clearly as the Messiah -- to her as to no other, she said.

Equal dignity

Ordinatio Sacerdotalis points out that the non-admission of women to the priesthood does not signify a lesser dignity. The entire history of the Church, said de Solenni, "witnesses to the presence and active participation of women. It was the consent, understanding and devotion of a woman that brought the Church to us," and the fact that the Virgin Mary was not chosen by her son to be a priest "indicates that the sacrament does not discriminate on the basis of dignity or merit," de Solenni explained.

De Solenni reiterated a point from Ordinatio Sacerdotalis which says the question of women's vocations should not be confined to ordination. "Woman will never be the bridegroom, in any form. The temptation to force upon women a masculine paradigm arises from our confused notions of power and authority which, in turn, devalue her vocation as a bride, clearly illustrated by Mary," de Solenni said. Ordaining a woman, she said, "would be, in essence, to show complete disregard for the reality she is as a woman, as a bride."

Masculine vs. feminine

De Solenni asserted: "The promotion of ordaining women to the priesthood is a sign of misunderstanding and even disrespect for the dignity of woman."

The fact that "the significance of the feminine identity is so largely misunderstood or even disregarded, indicates that our very notion of Church is in peril, has lost personality. She has become an 'it,' a mere institution, rather than a living being," de Solenni added. The discussion of ordaining women to the priesthood has been a sort of "overemphasis of the masculine," she said. "No doubt," continued de Solenni, "women need a voice in the Church, but it must be an authentic voice and not their voice made to sound like a man's."

Women, she stated, have a unique role in the Church and in society and that role should not be forced into masculine paradigms. "To do so," she said, "runs the risk of losing what is truly feminine -- not the femininity of fashion, but the varied femininity of women saints, whose personalities and strengths span just as far as those of men saints … if not more."  ZE07050410
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/05 02:59:25 (permalink)

de Solenni: “St. Thomas taught that woman was not created from man's head in order to rule over him, nor from his foot to be ruled by him, but from his side in order to rule with him, she explained.”
 
If the Vatican truly believed this, women would not be excluded from the sacrament of Holy Orders. Ordaining women to the priesthood will not transform them into men. Such claims are ludicrous. The literal interpretation of metaphors is being used by the Vatican in place of reason to bolster their flawed arguments.
 
Do not be discouraged. Trust in God.
 
Therese
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 1816
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2006/01/26 12:56:16
  • Location: Canada
  • Status: offline
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/05 05:59:06 (permalink)
You've expressed this very well.
 
The whole notion that women's priesthood will overemphasize masculinity is ridiculous.
 
It's the argument made by someone locked into a rigid, reductionist, fundamentalist interpretation of one metaphor from Scripture. 
 
These people are in need of our prayers.  May they be opened to see the grandeur and depth and breadth and height and multi-faceted nature of God.  God's/Christ's relationship with us cannot be reduced to one simple metaphor.
 
Therese
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/05 06:31:34 (permalink)
I will defend the Church.
 
The first thing that has to be looked at is the idea of masculinity and feminity. Now in our modern minds, we tend to think of masculinity as being a word used to describe things that are like men, or that share qualities of men, and femininity is a word used to describe things that are like women or that share qualities of women. The problem is that that is the complete opposite of how things really work. Masculinity is simply quality of being, one that is abstract and not based on tangible things. In other words, things aren't called masculine because masculinity is like men: men are called masculine because they are like masculinity.

In its most fundamental aspect, the quality of masculinity is the quality of transcendance, while in its most fundamental aspect, femininity is the quality of immanence. To be transcendant from a thing is to be beyond and seperate from a thing. To be immanent is to be within and in some way united with a thing. That is why the gender of a species which creates the offspring and then steps back is called the male. The father of a child plays his part in the conception, then he steps back and is seperate and beyond the child. Throughout human history the father has also played in many ways a more transcendent role after birth in that he has been the one beyond the child, the one in a different world, out working and setting rules and so forth. The gender of the species which are immanent with the child are called female. They are feminine. The child is with them for nine months, living inside the mother. The child then feeds directly from the mothers breasts, and throughout human history the mother has been the primary caregiver, the one involved in raising the child. We see this in our language, too. We call ships "she" and "her" instead of "him" and "he" because we are immanent with them - we ride inside them.

Now God is called "He," He is the "Father," because He is masculine. He is transcendant - beyond the world, seperate from it. This hits at the very reason we have male priests. We have male priests because the priests are standing in the place of God. The action of sacrificing Christ belongs only and exclusively to Christ Himself - to God. Priests are merely standing in for Him as that sacrifice is offered. Priests have to be male because they have to be masculine because they are standing in for God who is masculine. The act of sacrifice to God is a transcendant act because God Himself is transcendant. By its nature, any act that attempts to offer something to a transcendant God must be itself transcendant, because that act must "leave" the world, it must transcend the world, and go to God who is outside of the world. A transcendant act is by its nature masculine, because transcendance is the funamental quality of masculinity. By definition, feminity is immanent, not transcendant.

This is why, for instance, when you had the ancient pagan religions that worshipped idols, they had priestesses. An idol was a statue that was not believed to represent a god, but to literally be a god. An idol was a god that was literally in the world. Any act of sacrifice to an idol would be immanent, because it would stay in the world. The god was right there - there was nothing to transcend. God, however, is outside of the world, so to reach to Him is to transcend the world. That is why, as Dr. Kreeft says, having priestesses is not a matter of deciding how we should worship in our religion - it is literally and actually a completely different religion. The differences between priests and priestesses is the difference between a God who is not in the world, who is beyond it, above it - who created it, and having a God who is in the world - who is part of the world, and by nature of being in the world cannot have created it, or else He would have created Himself, which obviously makes no sense.

If we believe that God created the world, then by definition, by nature, inevitably, we must have masculine priests. We must have priests that sacrifice transcendently, that the sacrifice may transcend our world and reach to God who is outside of and beyond the world - who created it. If we have priestesses, then we have immanent sacrifices which by definition, by nature, inevitably remain in the world, and therefore what we sacrifice to must be in the world, and cannot have created it.

That's why we don't have female priests.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/05 11:10:06 (permalink)
If, as you say, the Church defines God as "separate from the world" 
then, of course, it is vital that priests must reflect that essential separation.
 
However, the Church has also defined hell as "separation from God"
and so by the same logic it is quite obvious:
that the world is hell.
 
Yes, I agree with you. 
For as long as we continue to insist that the world must be separate from God
for as long as we continue to insist that the world is and must continue to be hell,
we must never, ever,  have women priests!
 
In the meantime I shall drink my tea
and laugh at such uninspiring theology that insists that the purpose of the priesthood is:
to TEACH, PREACH, DEMONSTRATE, REINFORCE and MODEL
HUMANITY'S SEPARATION FROM GOD AS THE WILL OF GOD.
 
NOBODY needs a Church to constantly remind them they're in hell.
The ONLY reason people need a Church at all
is to remind them of the way out of hell.
Preaching, teaching, demonstrating, reinforcing and modeling
humanity's separation from God AS THE WILL OF GOD
ISN'T the way out of hell.
 
-Aura Waters
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/05 16:25:44 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Guest

I will defend the Church.

In its most fundamental aspect, the quality of masculinity is the quality of transcendance, while in its most fundamental aspect, femininity is the quality of immanence.

 
In Christianity, the transcendent, almighty, and holy God, who cannot be approached or seen, becomes immanent primarily in the God-man Jesus the Christ, whom many believe to be the incarnate Second Person of the Trinity. --Wikipedia
You are saying in being transcendent men surpass physical existence but women in being immanent, represent the divine existing and acting within the mind or the world.
Even if this were true, then women world be better suited to represent Christ since he was the divine incarnate.
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/05 17:37:48 (permalink)

ORIGINAL: Guest

I will defend the Church.

Now God is called "He," He is the "Father," because He is masculine. He is transcendant - beyond the world, seperate from it. This hits at the very reason we have male priests. We have male priests because the priests are standing in the place of God. The action of sacrificing Christ belongs only and exclusively to Christ Himself - to God. Priests are merely standing in for Him as that sacrifice is offered. Priests have to be male because they have to be masculine because they are standing in for God who is masculine. The act of sacrifice to God is a transcendant act because God Himself is transcendant. By its nature, any act that attempts to offer something to a transcendant God must be itself transcendant, because that act must "leave" the world, it must transcend the world, and go to God who is outside of the world. A transcendant act is by its nature masculine, because transcendance is the funamental quality of masculinity. By definition, feminity is immanent, not transcendant.

If we believe that God created the world, then by definition, by nature, inevitably, we must have masculine priests. We must have priests that sacrifice transcendently, that the sacrifice may transcend our world and reach to God who is outside of and beyond the world - who created it. If we have priestesses, then we have immanent sacrifices which by definition, by nature, inevitably remain in the world, and therefore what we sacrifice to must be in the world, and cannot have created it.

That's why we don't have female priests.


Hogwash! You are speaking about mythology and laying on gender. God is the Great ALL, that is, both masculine and feminine. Patriarchy has fashioned a whole set of jargon to sustantiate its claims of supremacy.

The priest represents the people and makes an offering for them. Therefore, since the people are the church, and the church is The Bride, the priest stands for both the Bride while also standing for the Altar Christos. The church's theology trips all over itself one this count. Time to rethink!



Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/05 18:08:09 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Guest

ORIGINAL: Guest

I will defend the Church.

In its most fundamental aspect, the quality of masculinity is the quality of transcendance, while in its most fundamental aspect, femininity is the quality of immanence.


In Christianity, the transcendent, almighty, and holy God, who cannot be approached or seen, becomes immanent primarily in the God-man Jesus the Christ, whom many believe to be the incarnate Second Person of the Trinity. --Wikipedia
You are saying in being transcendent men surpass physical existence but women in being immanent, represent the divine existing and acting within the mind or the world.
Even if this were true, then women world be better suited to represent Christ since he was the divine incarnate.


 
 
Sorry for the typos and the missing part of the message. It should read as follows:
 
In Christianity, the transcendent, almighty, and holy God, who cannot be approached or seen, becomes immanent primarily in the God-man Jesus the Christ, whom many believe to be the incarnate Second Person of the Trinity. –Wikipedia
 

You are saying that in being transcendent, men surpass physical existence, but women, in being immanent, represent the divine, existing and acting within the mind or the world. Even if this were true, then women would be better suited to represent Christ since he was the divine incarnate.
 
 
If, however, you are claiming that masculinity is exclusively divine and femininity is exclusively human, then you are ascribing a special connection between the nature of God and the nature of man, which does not include the nature of woman. It would mean that man’s nature is more godlike than woman’s nature.
 
 
This is the height of male arrogance, creating God in man’s image.
 
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/05 19:39:26 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Guest


Yes, I agree with you. 
For as long as we continue to insist that the world must be separate from God
for as long as we continue to insist that the world is and must continue to be hell,
we must never, ever,  have women priests!

NOBODY needs a Church to constantly remind them they're in hell.
The ONLY reason people need a Church at all
is to remind them of the way out of hell.
Preaching, teaching, demonstrating, reinforcing and modeling
humanity's separation from God AS THE WILL OF GOD
ISN'T the way out of hell.

-Aura Waters

 
The "kingdom" and God are within, not in outer space.  I wonder how the church got into Platonic philosophy and Gnostic separation into an unholy place on earth. 
 
And where is this hell... this "Hades" or "Gehenna"?  It is either the town dump as the Hebrew word implies or the Greek mythological fire of torment ala Dante? 
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/05 19:58:33 (permalink)


The "kingdom" and God are within, not in outer space.  I wonder how the church got into Platonic philosophy and Gnostic separation into an unholy place on earth. 

And where is this hell... this "Hades" or "Gehenna"?  It is either the town dump as the Hebrew word implies or the Greek mythological fire of torment ala Dante? 

 
How about this for bad theology? ---
 
Weeping and wailing in this vale of tears...
 
Turn then, most gracious advocate, thine eyes of mercy toward us.
And after this, our exile, show to us...
 
Isn't the paraclete the Holy Spirit?
 
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/05 19:59:10 (permalink)
The father of a child plays his part in the conception, then he steps back and is seperate and beyond the child.

 
This sure isn't the way scriptural metaphors describe God, Christ or the Holy Spirit.
 
Sounds like your looking for something to prop up a way of thinking that keeps women in the home and out of the public sphere.
 
Once man has sown his seed, off he goes into the great wild yonder.
 
 
Guest
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 14705
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/02/20 19:01:46
  • Status: online
RE: Peter Kreeft 2007/05/05 20:13:15 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Sophie

The ground of Mary's greatness is the thing so simple and innocent that it is too simple and innocent for the feminists to see. The reason she is crowned Queen of Heaven, the reason for her great glory and power is her total submission to God-her sacrifice, her suffering, her service. Muslims see it, but so-called "Christian" feminists do not. It is islam, the total surrender, the fiat, and the peace, the shalom, that are the secret treasures hidden in this submission, the delicious fruit of this thorny plant. Modem feminist "Christianity" becomes radically different from Christianity (or Judaism or Islam) when it drifts into a radically different ideal of sanctity, of the summum bonum, the greatest good, meaning of life, and purpose of all faith. Feminists need most fundamentally what we all need most fundamentally: to go to the cross, unclench the fist, and bow the knee.

 
The reason for Mary being crowned "Queen of Heaven" was to allow for a pseudo-goddess that takes the place of the Holy Spirit/Paraclete in a time when pagan cultures would not have converted to Christianity if there were no female version of the deity.
Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 4 of 35 - Powered by APG vNext Trial
Guest
Quick Reply: (Open Full Version)
  Enter the random characters shown
Submit Post
Jump to:
© 2019 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