Female priests.

My opponent has 2 arguments. 1. He attempted to further explain why the church is female 2. He offered the explanation that God's word is why female priests can't exist First, CON offered the explanation of the Church being the Mother while the priest is the Father and congregation = the children. That sounds nice and all, but he missed the entire point of my Round 2 rebuttal- The special relationship between the Church/church-goers, priest/Church, priest/congression, etc, cannot be put into words. Rather the words act as symbols to help explain the RELATIONSHIP, not set definitive parameters of who can and cannot hold certain positions. I mean that's like saying Catholic men can not have particular relationships (for lack of a better term) with winter or time because of the terms Father Winter and Father Time. Now, you're probably thinking "A RELATIONSHIP with winter? Huh? " Yeah, exactly. It doesn't seem to make sense because winter is not something that has anything to do with gender and neither is the word church. The Church has 2 definitions: the actual building and the group of people that make up congregation. Well we've already established that the congregation = the children so how can the child be the Mother as well? And the other definition of the Church being the actual building in which services are held doesn't apply either. .. a priest/male cannot marry a building regardless of its gender (assuming it had one). As you can see, this makes no sense at all. And the point is that the terms "Father" and "Mother" are simply supposed to facilitate one's understanding of the relationship between, say, a priest and his "children. " A priest serves as a source of guidance and teaches about right and wrong. That is what a father is supposed to do, so it makes sense that they call a priest Father. But that is what a mother is supposed to do also, so a female priest could just as easily be called Mother. I argue that the Priest isn't "father" as CON wrongfully suggests because the Church is "mother" . .. instead, a priest is father because of the role he plays in the church (leader/teacher) and he is a LIVING MALE so obviously we won't call him a female term such as Mother. So again, the terms of father/mother/daughter/children simply help describe relationships (like similies and metaphors)- that has nothing to do with whether or not a woman should be able to become a priest. Like I said, a male priest can be Father, and a female priest can be Mother. The term "Mother Church" can still exist just fine even if there were female priests who were also called Mothers. I don't think the Catholic World would stop turning if they had to share the term. Afterall, God is called Father and so are priests. [GASP! ] Similarly, nobody suggests that God is a male (Jesus was born a man but God is sexless)- it just happens to be the term that people associate "Him" with. How about this other example- the U. S. is called the "mother land" but if a President says he's married to his work, married to his country, that does not make it "homosexual. " Give me a break. Anyway, in conclusion of this point, CON writes, "My opponent is telling you that it's possible to be a mother, a daughter, and a bride, without being a female. Futhermore, the baptismal is often referred to as what? The womb. One cannot have a womb without being female. " . .. CON is a liar. I am not saying that you can be a mother/daughter/bride and not be female. I'm saying that the Church is not female. The Church is sexless. Both the building is sexless, and the congregation that makes up the Church and attends is sexless- it is a GROUP (made up of SOME females, and SOME males). Also, a baptismal is NOT a womb nor is it inside of a female. It is probably made of marble and it is not living. ALL OF THESE TERMS ARE ****SYMBOLIC**** AND THUS SHOULD HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH STOPPING PEOPLE FROM ACHIEVING CERTAIN POSITIONS IN THE HIERARCHY OF THE CHURCH. So the other argument my opponent offered was that women can't be priests because "God said so. " Well, PROVE IT. Where did God say that women could not be priests? The Bible? No. There are no scriptures in the Bible that suggest women cannot be ordained. Even if there were, God did not write the Bible. Men did (figures). So although they were "inspired" through God's Holy Spirit to pen the Good Book, the Bible is not to be taken literally in every instance according to the Catholic Catechism. This is probably because of all the inconsistencies and flat out mistakes it includes, such as the assertion that the world is flat and immovable, the moon emits its own light, etc. So the point is that the Bible is not to be taken literally, and even if it said women shouldn't be priests (WHICH IT DOESN'T), remember that this is the same Bible that also says wearing two differnt fibers (such as a polyester-cotton blend) at the same time is a sin, and that hugging a girl on her period makes you unclean, and you should not be touched for at least 30 days. So, clearly society (including Catholics) do not receive or practice the Bible literally in every concept. The reason people assume women should not be priests is because Jesus chose 12 men for his apostles. This is bad reasoning. First of all there is no way to prove that his 12 apostles were men. There is a STRONG belief (documented) that Mary Magdalene was one of Jesus' favorite apostles (and wife). CON cannot disprove this any more than I can prove that she was. His only "proof" is the Bible and we've already established that not only is the Bible not a good factual source because it contains many mistakes, but also that Catholics do not always follow the Bible exactly as it is written (consider the examples I have given + many others. .. ). Plus, even if all of Jesus' disciples were men, consider the fact that he lived 2,000 years ago and gender roles in society were much different than they are today. During that time, it would have been very difficult for a public figure such as Christ to sustain a close relationship with a female that he was not married to. If Christ were to come back and have (new) disciples, it is possible and even probable that women would be included. To conclude my portion of the debate, I will re-cap my arguments thus far. I would like to point out that the Church is not only a religious entity but a poltical one as well. No one can deny the blatant linkage to religion and politics, ESPECIALLY in the past. The Church's power and influence was insurmountable in earlier eras. At that time, men presided over the world even more than they do today. The idea of having a women hold such a high position (clergymen were elite) was unfathomable. It makes sense that women did not have that opportunity during that time. However, we have evolved as a species and today women are considered of equal value to men, not only in society, but in the Church as well. The fact remains that Catholocism wishes to uphold tradition, and that is the single reason why women are not allowed to become priests. Why were, traditionally, male-only priests? For political and societal reasons that do not exist today. Further, my opponent still has not recognized things brought up in Round 1- the tradition of alter servers now including women as of recent years, and the shortage of priests. I will agree that nuns don't have to be further discussed, however, I would like to point out thatin terms of the political hierarchy I have mentioned, men are above women- priests are called "father" and nuns "sister. " This is the final round and my opponent cannot offer any new arguments according to the rules of debate. His 2 reasonings supporting his position have been dismantled by me in this round and therefore CON has not successfully opposed the resolution.