LordSutch wrote: » But when?Discuss.
gctest50 wrote: » sod that ........ kittens instead : cos lack of OP effortz n lazyness is a sin etc
LordSutch wrote: » Alright then, I'll give it a go. I suspect female priests (RC) can never be accepted, because Rome will always dictate that all Priests must be male.
hinault wrote: » I don't think that we will ever see female priests in the Catholic Church. This stems from the teaching that Jesus Himself only directly called 13 men to serve.
martingriff wrote: » Really because I remember reading where Jesus sent out 72 disciples
hinault wrote: » Jesus Christ did not appoint 72 people.
Mrs OBumble wrote: » Jesus did not ordain anyone.
oldrnwisr wrote: » I believe martingriff is referring to Luke 10:1, although some translations render the verse as 70 rather than 72. Since Jesus sent them away on a mission, they are, by definition, apostles. Their gender is not mentioned so the group may have included women.
hinault wrote: » This stems from the teaching that Jesus Himself only directly called 13 men to serve.
antiskeptic wrote: » From which the notion of priesthood, which is a gross (Old Convenant inspired) extrapolation*. The notion of a bar on female priests is but an extrapolation upon an extrapolation. Upon a pebble, we will build a theology
antiskeptic wrote: » Luke 10:1 And after these things, the Lord appointed also other seventy-two. And he sent them two and two before his face into every city and place whither he himself was to come. Latin Vulgate version.
spurious wrote: » The first people to witness the resurrection were women. Many of the early Church leaders were women. The only way the RCC can survive is with women.
hinault wrote: » Chapter 9 of the Gospel of St.Luke tells the account of Jesus personally appointing 12 apostles.
hinault wrote: » He appointed 13 apostles.
Mrs OBumble wrote: » Agreed. Appointed, not ordained.
Then *having called together the twelve apostles, He gave them power, and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases
martingriff wrote: » So they were the 1st 12 it still does not forbid women being priests. Plus if those disciple he sent out had the power to forgive,retain sins or banish demons then they must have been of a high order (for want of a better word)
hinault wrote: » Again, as St.Luke's gospel seems to be flavour of the month here with some of our resident non-Catholics, verse 1 of Chapter 10 of St.Lukes gospel could not be clearer.
martingriff wrote: » First of all I am a Catholic not sure of the others so less of the digs. I am not counters you that he gave them power over daemons and to forgive sins. But he also gave that authority to the 72 as per Luke's gospel and they came back rejoicing as they could do it. Just because he gave it to the 12 does not mean he did not give it to others which he did in Luke's gospel. No where does it say in anywhere in the bible they could not be women
Darkglasses wrote: » I am curious why you think specifically their gender should be taken as an absolute rule for the following ~2,000 years of the Catholic Church. They were married, Aramaic-speaking Jews - Why are not Priests only taken from these specific bands also? It would make the priesthood all the closer to the original apostles. Maybe Peter's succcessor must be married also? Personally, I believe it is a consequence of the Church's early movement across the Greco-Roman world, and that prior to this there was female leadership in Christian groups. For example, Romans 16:7 : "“Greet Andronicus and Junia, my relatives who were in prison with me; they are prominent among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.”
hinault wrote: » Because Jesus was and is God incarnate, we believe that Jesus is omnipotent and transcendent. Therefore in creating His church, Jesus would have willed it that women be admitted to the priesthood. The gospel accounts are clear. Jesus, God-incarnate, personally only called men to His ministry. If you accept that Jesus is God-incarnate, He is therefore omnipotent and transcendent. He therefore foresaw everything. If He willed it, He would have personally ordained a woman in to His ministry. It is only reasonable to assume therefore that He willed that only men serve His priesthood.
Darkglasses wrote: » To reiterate my question - did he also not will anyone but Aramaic-speaking Israelite Jews to become priests?