From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Stephen A. Creps)
Subject: Re: So Forgach Supports Shutting Down Catholic masses
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:23:16 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.021535.23365@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>: : The pope, [...] continues to treat women of the church like
second-class citizens.
>: 
>: 	By not allowing women to have the opportunity to have
>: leadership positions. Will a woman ever be a priest? Bishop?
>: Archbishop? Cardinal? Pope?
>
>>   Could you please tell me what you know about the above positions,
>>then?  I'll give you a hint in that all are priests.  But please tell
>>us what you know about the nature of the priesthood.  Not some
>>sarcastic answer, but according to how the Catholic Church defines the
>>priesthood.  My guess is that you don't know anything about it.  Your
>>comment implying that the priesthood is merely a "leadership position"
>>seems to confirm that.
>
>	The Catholic Church has a hierarchy. Priests give orders to
>laypeople. Bishops give orders to priests, archbishops to bishops,
>Cardinals to archbishops, and the Pope to Cardinals.
>
>	What more is relevant? Or do you prefer male bosses to female
>ones?

   You are greatly exaggerating the amount of "bossing around" that
gets done in the Catholic Church.  A fundamental error you seem to be
making is that the Church is merely a social organization created by
human beings, and assuming its members believe this.

   You still have not addressed my observation that you seem to think
the priesthood is _merely_ a leadership position.  It is not.  The
priesthood is passed on through the Sacrament of Holy Orders, which
Sacrament can only be administered to men.  Now I could give many
references from Scripture supporting this, but I have a feeling you
don't accept Scripture as any kind of authority, so I won't bother.
The same for the Tradition of the Church.

   Let me ask you a question: can _men_ be priests (i.e. as defined by
the Catholic Church)?  My guess is that you will say no, because you
don't accept the Catholic Church as God's Church, nor do you even
believe in God (as I have taken from other of your posts -- correct me
if I'm wrong).  In this case, according to what you believe, why does
it even matter that women cannot be priests, when not even men can be?

   It can't be because of this hierarchical authority, because one
is not forced to remain in the Church if one cannot accept it.  Or one
can even ignore it in most cases with impunity (if one ignores any
spiritual effects of this).  Besides, if one cannot accept it, and
that it is God's will, then why would one _want_ to remain in a church
whose teachings one believes to be false?

   Let me also give an analogy for why women cannot be priests.  That
of motherhood.  On one level, motherhood is a physical characteristic;
that is, only women can be mothers because of biology.  This can be
determined physically.  Now the priesthood (i.e. Holy Orders) is a
spiritual characteristic, as is Baptism.  Both leave a "mark" on the
soul, however this "mark" cannot be measured in any physical way.  The
only way they can be measured is by the authority of the Church.  If
we can accept by the authority of the Church that these "marks" are
even made on the soul, then we can also accept by the authority of the
Church who is able to receive them.  If we cannot accept by the
authority of the Church that they even exist, then the point is moot
anyway.

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show,talk.religion.misc