<p>(Parenthetical to the current topic, thanks to those several pages back who told me what in the world my friends were doing… and yes, it seems to be just a “do your own thing” pasting of culture onto a changed theology. Yikes, why bother to do the traditions if you don’t hold the basic beliefs? Not my place to judge. I won’t bring lasagna.)</p>
<p>back to our previous topic…</p>
<p>“So while I still think it’s kind of bunk, I come back to the thought that the Catholic Church clearly isn’t denying the importance of women (I mean, who loves Mary? Catholics love Mary!), and that maybe priesthood isn’t something I should be as worked up about. But I really do grapple with that one.”
^^^
Well. Yes, Catholics do love Mary. But that does not mean that Women are considered as valid in the Catholic Church as men. If you are going to be happy and comfortable in the Catholic Church, you will need to be okay with that.</p>
<p>I was raised Catholic and at age forty-nine have finally become comfortable with identifying myself as Agnostic. Even as a child I did not feel Catholic. I began questioning at an early age and never really got any satisfactory answers. Having left the church, I am happier and more comfortable than I have ever been.</p>
<p>Most of my friends and family are Catholic and most have respected my decision to redefine my spirituality. Some have felt the need to “save” me. I try to resist the urge to “save” them back. If we are all happy, its all good.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t find that to be true. I think this is one of those cases where the idea of inequality of women in the Catholic Church is most strongly perpetuated by people who really aren’t practicing Catholicism as it’s intended, who don’t have a clear grasp on what the true tenets of the faith are… </p>
<p>A lot of times, people use religion as a weapon to hurt others instead of as a tool to help others. If people are doing that, they’re wrong, and they’re missing the point. I think that’s a terrible, hurtful thing. It certainly isn’t what <em>should</em> be taught within a faith, and it’s not what I was taught, or I wouldn’t have stayed.</p>
<p>I’m fine with Agnosticism and think it’s great. We <em>should</em> question. I think most true seekers of faith, whatever that faith may be, reach for the same higher power and the same underlying moral values that all of us seek to find. I find proselytizing distasteful, but I like sharing my experience… In my experience, the framework that Catholicism provides for my faith life only enhances it. I can certainly see how, faced with a situation that serves to denigrate a person in the name of God, a person would turn away from a religion, and I’d have turned away if I’d had a similar experience.</p>
<p>Wish you’d met some cool Catholics, though…</p>
<p>I’m not sure I understand your reply. Could you elaborate?</p>
<p>*But that does not mean that Women are considered as valid in the Catholic Church as men. If you are going to be happy and comfortable in the Catholic Church, you will need to be okay with that. *</p>
<p>That isn’t true. </p>
<p>Keep in mind that the Catholic Church does NOT believe that the most important thing is to become a priest. The Church teaches that the most important thing is to become a saint and live eternally in heaven.</p>
<p>Men and women have an equal opportunity to become saints. Some might argue that men have more temptations to do “big time sins” which might make it harder for them. </p>
<p>Just because becoming a priest is limited to men only does not mean that the Church thinks any less of women. Does God/nature think less of men because childbearing is limited to women? No. One limitation is not an indication of inequality.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How so? That’s a serious question, not a hostile one. I’ve worked for the Church most of my life and I am a practicing Catholic, but I’ve wrestled with the “pro-woman” piece. I suspect that I tend to dwell on the negative at times, so I’d like to hear the positive.</p>
<p>" In my experience, the framework that Catholicism provides for my faith life only enhances it. I can certainly see how, faced with a situation that serves to denigrate a person in the name of God, a person would turn away from a religion, and I’d have turned away if I’d had a similar experience.</p>
<p>Wish you’d met some cool Catholics, though…"</p>
<p>What situation? I have never felt as though I “fit” the church. Or that the church “fit” me. I spent many, many years as a “Cafeteria Catholic” in order to maintain the status quo within my family of origin and eventually my own family. I think that most Catholics, if they are honest, will admit to picking and choosing the doctrine that they can stomach and quietly tossing out the ones that they can’t. If that wasn’t true, every block would have several families of ten or twelve children. I have gotten to a place in my life where that is no longer okay for me. I want to live authentically and I wasn’t doing that within the Catholic Church. Don’t get me wrong. I’m happy for anyone who finds a faith that brings them solace and satisfaction. For me, leaving the church has been more self affirming than being in it.</p>
<p>And I have met many, many cool Catholics. Heck, some of my best friends are Catholics! As is my husband. Although, I’m not sure that he’s “cool” exactly. :)</p>
<p>"Keep in mind that the Catholic Church does NOT believe that the most important thing is to become a priest. The Church teaches that the most important thing is to become a saint and live eternally in heaven.</p>
<p>Men and women have an equal opportunity to become saints. Some might argue that men have more temptations to do “big time sins” which might make it harder for them. </p>
<p>Just because becoming a priest is limited to men only does not mean that the Church thinks any less of women. Does God/nature think less of men because childbearing is limited to women? No. One limitation is not an indication of inequality."
^^^
Well, I don’t stand a chance at ever being either a Priest or a saint, I’m afraid. There are a couple of things that bother me with your argument. Here, on earth, before one dies and becomes canonized, isn’t being a priest the most important position in the church ( or above, Bishop, Cardinal, etc.)? </p>
<p>What, exactly, is it that would prevent a woman from serving as a priest? The analogy of men being unable to bear children doesn’t really cut it for me. What part of the female anatomy would prevent a woman from performing the tasks that are involved in the priesthood? </p>
<p>I hope that I am not coming off as inflammatory. I am not intending to be. This issue is only a small part of why the Catholic church has never felt like my truth. I am genuinely happy for anyone who has found their truth, regardless of where they find it.</p>
<p>*Well, I don’t stand a chance at ever being either a Priest or a saint, I’m afraid. There are a couple of things that bother me with your argument. Here, on earth, before one dies and becomes canonized, isn’t being a priest the most important position in the church ( or above, Bishop, Cardinal, etc.)? *</p>
<p>First of all, I don’t understand why you say that you have no chance of becoming a saint. Are you under the mistaken impression that only the canonized are saints? Good heavens, that’s not true. EVERYONE who goes to heaven is a saint. Canonization is just the Church offering assurance that a particular person is in heaven. However, your grandma, neighbor, etc, who are in heaven are also a saints. </p>
<p>*Here, on earth, before one dies and becomes canonized, isn’t being a priest the most important position in the church ( or above, Bishop, Cardinal, etc.)? *</p>
<p>Perhaps in the technical sense as far as “church hierarchy” but not in real terms. The vocation of parenthood is considered to be an equal gift from God. I much prefer being a mother over being a priest. The priesthood can be a rather lonely vocation. Everyone wants something from you…all the time. It’s not an easy life. If being a priest was such a desirable thing to become, then many men would be clamoring for that role. It’s a hard life, which is why few choose it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s not about power or status, though. It’s about service. The thing is that anybody can be a saint. Being a priest isn’t all that important… It’s a position of service, if you want to serve mankind through serving the Church, but it’s not the only way to serve the Church. That part, I can see and understand.</p>
<p>I don’t think that the Catholic Church is either as pro-women or as anti-women as has been suggested here.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>All Saints’ Day was one of my favorite little discoveries within the Catholic Church. It’s the day where all the Saints that the Church hasn’t officially recognized and canonized are honored.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ditto! I’m probably just projecting… I had a bad childhood experience with fundamentalists when I was five… :)</p>
<p>With all due respect, the posts above sound like rationalization to me. My husband can be a parent and a priest but I can’t? And while many women would never really want to be a priest (myself included) many, many would love to be and feel called to that vocation. Saying that there are other ways for women to serve the church is true. But what if a woman wants to be a priest and no other form of service will satisfy her calling. Not only is she being denied but the message is being sent to every little girl in the church that they are second best and not worthy to put on the vestments.</p>
<p>A friend of mine who is a Priest once told me that the real reason that women are not allowed ordination is because they were considered unclean. The menses made them unclean and therefore unwelcome on the alter. Women have only recently been allowed to be on the alter, at all. When I was younger there were no female alter servers or Eucharistic Ministers. What was the thinking back then? And how is that different from the continued prohibition against female Priests?</p>
<p>A friend of mine who is a Priest once told me that the real reason that women are not allowed ordination is because they were considered unclean. The menses made them unclean and therefore unwelcome on the alter.</p>
<p>That priest is wrong and rather crazy. That is not the Church’s position. </p>
<p>*When I was younger there were no female alter servers or Eucharistic Ministers. What was the thinking back then? And how is that different from the continued prohibition against female Priests? *</p>
<p>When I was younger, there weren’t any male or female Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist. </p>
<p>But, as to your question about female altar servers. It was long believed that boy altar serving was a good way to help a young man to discern whether he thought he might have a vocation to the priesthood. Having male only altar servers was a custom, not doctrine. Customs can change, doctrines cannot.</p>
<p>*My husband can be a parent and a priest but I can’t? And while many women would never really want to be a priest (myself included) many, many would love to be and feel called to that vocation. *</p>
<p>No man has a right to the priesthood, so even if your husband “thinks” he might want to be a priest, the Church decides whether a man has a vocation, not the man. A man can’t just say, “I want to become a priest,” and the Church goes along with it. Many men are told by the Church that their perceived vocation isn’t real. </p>
<p>That said, any woman who thinks that she has a vocation to the priesthood is mistaken. That vocation is a gift from God, and it’s not God’s plan for women to be priests. If you believe in God and believe in the temptation of evil, then you might be able to understand that a force of evil could convince a woman that she has such a vocation to cause disruption in the Church.</p>
<p>"That priest is wrong and rather crazy. That is not the Church’s position. "</p>
<p>Ouch. While he may be wrong (and I’m not convinced he is) he is the most sane person I’ve ever known. I have known many Priests and he is the only one that I can say had a true vocation and entered the Priesthood for the right reasons.</p>
<p>"No man has a right to the priesthood, so even if your husband “thinks” he might want to be a priest, the Church decides whether a man has a vocation, not the man. A man can’t just say, “I want to become a priest,” and the Church goes along with it. Many men are told by the Church that their perceived vocation isn’t real. "</p>
<p>Seriously? They’re turning away droves of men that want to be Priests? And all of the pedophiles made it through this difficult selection process because…why? Because the church decided that they had a true vocation?</p>
<p>“That said, any woman who thinks that she has a vocation to the priesthood is mistaken. That vocation is a gift from God, and it’s not God’s plan for women to be priests. If you believe in God and believe in the temptation of evil, then you might be able to understand that a force of evil could convince a woman that she has such a vocation to cause disruption in the Church.”</p>
<p>Wow. I hardly know how to reply to this part. Yes, I believe in God but in my humility do not try to define his plan for any man or woman. And if forces of evil are responsible for a woman desiring a vocation as a priest (and THAT would bring down the church?!) then what force is responsible for the evil that is working within the church now?</p>
<p>This thread is getting a bit argumentative here. </p>
<p>It might be helpful to remember that the Church is not a democracy and never will be. Most ancient religions are not democracies. </p>
<p>As Americans, we hold a lot of political or social rules very dear. For example, the hard won equal rights idea. And we demonstrate it in ways that try to ensure that women and men can all hold the same jobs, for the same pay, etc. And we have trouble with institutions that don’t base their structure on democratic principles. </p>
<p>The Church, while seeing everyone as equal in the eyes of God, whether Pope, priest or female, believes that God wants an ordered Church- it defines the order as best it can based on its interpretation of the revelation of God. Hence, coming from Tradition and scripture, there is no evidence that women were ever ordained, or that God wanted them to be.</p>
<p>And actually, the priest who mentioned the “uncleanness” of women as a reason for them not being on the altar isn’t wrong. Remember that the earliest Masses were based on Jewish services and that the Catholic priesthood does derive from the Levitical priesthood. The Jewish concepts of clean and unclean were very prevalent in the early Church, as one would expect since Christianity came out of Judaism. This is not a major reason today for why women cannot become priests, and the Church has certainly allowed women on the altar since Vat II, but it is part of the Tradition I keep mentioning.</p>
<p>^ Thank you, pipmom. So often you express perfectly what I have trouble articulating.</p>
<p>I have two ethnic non Catholic questions here: What does the spot on the forehead symbolize on Indian women and is the term Oriental offensive? I have been told it is the opposite of Occidental but I have also been told that Asians find it offensive.</p>
<p>"No man has a right to the priesthood, so even if your husband “thinks” he might want to be a priest, the Church decides whether a man has a vocation, not the man. A man can’t just say, “I want to become a priest,” and the Church goes along with it. Many men are told by the Church that their perceived vocation isn’t real. "</p>
<p>Seriously? They’re turning away droves of men that want to be Priests? And all of the pedophiles made it through this difficult selection process because…why? Because the church decided that they had a true vocation?</p>
<p>I know this must surprise you, but many, many men have been turned down for the priesthood. My friend’s son was recently turned down. There was actually a book written about this issue, “Goodbye, Good Men.” </p>
<p>I’m not going to “go there” with the sex abuse issue because that is more complicated and has nothing to do with whether someone does or doesn’t have a vocation to the priesthood. You seem to think that if a person has a vocation to the priesthood then he couldn’t choose to seriously sin. That is just not the case. And, yes, the forces of evil would work harder on priests to get them to turn to sin. Why should that surprise anyone. It makes perfect sense. The Church is the enemy of evil, so evil works overtime on the Church. When evil happens, my H always says, “the devil has been busy.” </p>
<p>*Yes, I believe in God but in my humility do not try to define his plan for any man or woman. *</p>
<p>That’s a good attitude to have. We can’t define His plan.</p>
<p>*And actually, the priest who mentioned the “uncleanness” of women as a reason for them not being on the altar isn’t wrong. Remember that the earliest Masses were based on Jewish services and that the Catholic priesthood does derive from the Levitical priesthood. The Jewish concepts of clean and unclean were very prevalent in the early Church, as one would expect since Christianity came out of Judaism. This is not a major reason today for why women cannot become priests, and the Church has certainly allowed women on the altar since Vat II, but it is part of the Tradition I keep mentioning. *</p>
<p>Yes, it’s true that the Catholic priesthood does derive from Levitical priesthood, but if the Church did doctrinally believe that women were too unclean to be on the altar, they would not be allowed on the altar today…and they are allowed.</p>
<p>“The menses made them unclean and therefore unwelcome on the alter.”</p>
<p>Maybe this is more literal than figurative. I always wondered how common accidental spills were before modern super-absorbant pads etc. were invented.</p>
<p>Also, if anybody is wondering if Catholics are keeping up with the times…at my church, the eucharistic ministers pass around a bottle of hand sanitizer just before performing their duties. Now if we could just get rid of the 7th-inning handshakes…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But I like those!!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s called a bindi. While Wikipedia is by no means the end-all-be-all of information, there’s an article on bindis that’s much more knowledgeable than I am:</p>
<p><a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bindi_(decoration[/url])”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bindi_(decoration)</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>…should be used only to refer to inanimate objects, like rugs or jewelry, and never to people. It’s picked up negative and perjorative connotations along the way.</p>
<p>schmaltz-I’m with you on the handshaking. I don’t like touching, nor being touched, by others not in my immediate family.</p>