@@thomasparker3526 You can't "re-interpret" Scripture according to a conservative though. Scripture is Scripture and heresy is heresy, and Christ definitely leaned away from the former.
In Eastern Orthodoxy, can't speak for Catholicism, the priest's hands become Christ's hands, essentially he becomes Christ in our midst when offering the sacrifice and distributing it to the people. "Thine own, of thine own, we offer unto, on behalf of all, and for all."
The Catholic view is practically the same, the priest when preforming the sacraments is acting 'persona christi". They act in the person of Christ. They become Christ so that it's God consecrating the host or granting forgiveness of sins.
Yes it's almost the same ...in catholicism....the priest is " In Persona Christi" meaning he takes the place of Christ .....also only a priests hands are consecrated to touch the Holy Eucharist.
at the time of Pentecost in Acts and during first century there were no hiearchy positions of priest in our Lord's church - that kind of orginization doesn't show up until the 2 nd century - and the Lord's chosen Apostles are no longer in the picture. So when we get to the second century everything about church organization is a contrivance of men apart from the direction of the Lord or his chosen Apostles. Which basicaly leaves us with the pattern found in the first century Didichae text as to how to organize congregations of believers. Lots of churches follow that manner where the church body is lead by a group of elders (or bishops) and under them are appointed deacons that do pragmatic jobs or responsibilities in service to the church body - all to be men.
@@TheSulross We have a clear image of the Church in the book of acts. We have documentation of Presbyteroi (priests) and Episkopoi (Bishops) from the 1st century either through direct documents of the era, attributed ones or citations. So no the were positions of priests in the early Church. Biblical: In Acts 15:22 we can see a college of Aposles headed by James (who is considered the first Bishop/Patriarch of Jerusalem) and elders = presbyteroi = priests In Acts 14:23 Paul ordains preists = presbyteroi = elders We also have deacons in the Bible, lower than priests but with ministerial duties, and we actually know the early church ONLY had female deacons.
A couple of years before C.S. Lewis's time, St Epiphanius of Salamis writes in his _Panarion_ (79.3): > If it were ordained by God that women should offer sacrifice or have any canonical function in the church, Mary herself, if anyone, should have functioned as a priest in the New Testament. She was counted worthy to bear the king of all in her own womb, the heavenly God, the Son of God. Her womb became a temple, and by God’s kindness and an awesome mystery was prepared to be the dwelling place of the Lord’s human nature. But it was not God’s pleasure [that she be a priest]. She was not even entrusted with the administration of baptism-for Christ could have been baptized by her rather than by John. But John the son of Zacharias dwelt in the wilderness entrusted with baptism for the remission of sins, while his father offered sacrifice to God and saw a vision at the time of the offering of incense. And indeed, if any priestesses were to be had in the Church, surely Our Lady would have been ahead of all the Apostles, including St Peter. But she was not, and because she was not, we are to conclude that it is not in the Church's power to ordain women.
***we live now in the 21 Century; if water do not move it will be stagnated. I try hard to find a reazon for women being baned from the sacrament of ordination, but the only reazon that comes is DISCRIMINATION, it is time to go forward, but the Church have always EXCUSES whithou fundament.***
@@judyapple3266 There's a difference between anointing with oil and the Anointing of the Sick (_extrema unctio_). In any case, are you making reference to the anointing of Jesus's feet by Mary of Bethany? That wasn't oil, but nard perfume. Or are you thinking of some other event? If so, please let me know which.
Here are a few passages stand out that directly speak to the role of women in the church: 1 Corinthians 11:3-12, 14:34-35, 1 Timothy 2:11-15 and Titus 1, 2.
If we look at 1KOR 11 we see: 1 Corinthians 11:1-3: 1 Be imitators of me, even as I also [am] of Christ. 2 But I praise you, brothers, that you remember me in all things, and you keep the doctrines as I delivered [them] to you. 3 But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God.
Christ became man and left 12 men to act in his eternal priesthood in order of Melchizedek. Gen 14 … Heb 5, 6,7. Only women can give birth…only some at that. Only men can be priest And only some
@@adelinomorte7421 Yes, Christ walked the earth 2000 years ago, but female priestesses were very common, throughout the Roman Empire. So If Jesus Christ had wanted to ordain women, He would have.
That's also true! If you study Pope JP II's Theology of the Body, it will become clear to you that there are many more reasons than "Tradition" or the 'constant practice of the Church' to explain what God is teaching us in the way He created us differently - male and female.
@@jaskamattila4481 It is somewhat absurd that "a broken species" sounds Christian. I thought we were made in "the image of God"? That we are "perfect"? Why did a deity make us broken?
@@jaskamattila4481 One of the truly irritating statements which seem to be made by Christian Apologists is, "You, as an atheist, think . I, as a Christian, think . Clearly you got the idea from Christianity, that can be the only source for that thought." No, people can reach the same conclusion through different paths, including with morality.
Pope Francis says that female priests is an example of clericalism and that it is saying only priests can have a leadership role in the church. There have been many female saints who contributed to the church without being priests.
Yes. The woman is the receiver and "magnifier" of the Lord, more obedient and humble. There are so many ways women are exalted above men By God in life, in the Scripture and by the Catholic church... The Lord himself has a human mother, but not a human father. A woman is the Ark of the Covenant, and the tabernacle in the most exalted way. A woman is the Immaculate Conception and the Queen of Heaven, not a human man. Woman is the mother of living, giving birth to new life, most dear to God, and caring for it more closely. Woman is (currently suppressed) the more mysterious and exalted, shown being veiled during the Mass, not uncovered for everyone to see. Woman is not created from dust and dirt, but from human bones and meat. And probably many others I forgot. Of course, man is also called to have some of the qualities, but it comes from woman "principle".
@@lumpichu I appreciate your enthusiasm, however that not what I was referring to. We are the Bride of Christ and that marriage is consummated via Holy Communion. The key for us Catholics is to read out of the Bible not into it. My model for humility is Our Blessed Virgin Mary. Also I reject all of what the world is trying to tell me. God Bless ✝️Pray the Rosary ✝️
The Reason is Quiet Simple. A Priest is to Act In Persona Christi. The Priest not only Represents Christ in the Modern Sense of the Word Represent, but Christ Literally Indwells in The Priest, and it is Christ and Not Just The Priest, Who gives us The Sacraments. Jesus Christ was a Man, Not a Woman, and just as We'd never cast a Woman to Play Jesus in a Play or a Film, We should Not do so in The Sacramental Office.
***in my wiew, once the ordinationis IS given to women it is equal to men, I detest seeing the "sacramental office" being at pair with a play or film. THE ONLY REASON IS DISCRIMINATION.***
@@adelinomorte7421 No. If a woman was "ordained.," with a Bishop saying the correct words over her... she would still NOT be a valid priest. For any valid Sacrament, the proper matter must be used. And women are NOT the proper matter for the Sacrament of Holy Orders. So any supposedly "ordained" woman would NOT actually be a valid priest. She would NOT be able to confect Transubstantiation nor absolve sins in the Sacrament of Confession.
@@adelinomorte7421 - I Used a Play or Film as an Analogy, but the Fact Remains Jesus Christ was and is a Man, not a Woman, and The Priest is Not simply a Man Representing Jesus , But Also Embodying Him. It is Not Discrimination, it is what The Sacramental office is. And the Fact that You Put "Sacramental Office" in Quotes Means You can't be Catholic.
@@skwills1629 *** I was born and raised as a Catholic and as Catholic will die, thoughout my Life I had many Faith crisis but always returned to Church. I started to study my Personal case and reached my conclusions after the Vatican ll, so in 1969 returned, to see that all Popes after John XXlll just trucated the reform started "the ecumenism" and modernise the rituals, once in Canada in 1973 I was shocked with the confusion in the Church but as a good soldier waited and see but nothing. My wife died after 47years of marriage. After the bereavement I went into a retreat in Niagara Falls I put everything clear, and the answer was "we are in the same fight for more than 30 years and nothing. After13 years of solitude I met an English Lady and we got married in the Anglican Church , I was recieved as a Guest and I am happy in my 91 years of age I feel like finnaly I got it. I am in my kind of Church but as a Guest, there I feel like a CATHOLIC, I am to old and frail to return in the midlle of a scism that seems to come soon.***
As a Protestant this was excellent work . Whether Protestant like C.S Lewis , Catholic like Pope Paul VI , or Orthodox, we need to stand united against those trying to subvert our faith.
As a woman and a mother, I can say that being a priestess and being a mother would be extremely hard, if not impossible in some cases. Looking back at my pregnancy, birthing. postpartum and nursing experience, I cannot imagine having such a huge responsibility as being a priest/pastor, leading a congregation, serving Liturgy, taking confessions, etc. , ON TOP of what I was already doing as a woman and a mother. Mind you, I have a Master's degree and I was working my entire pregnancy up to 5 days before my labor started. Now, keeping in mind that, up until the last several decades, it was very common for women to have 7, 8, 9 - 12 children, how would one expect a woman to even think of priesthood? I do realize that things are changing, and not every woman is a mother. But most women are. And, in a way, motherhood is just as important as priesthood. One would not exist without the other. So no, I do not see any discrimination here.
There is a pretty big difference between "Most people of a particular group do not want to do a particular thing" and "All people of a particular group are prohibited from doing a particular thing".
alina ***how about the father, can a father of so many children be a priest? in my view the sacrament of ordination should be for men and women single or married period! adjustments to be made in the chuch organization as needed, we are not living in the dark times of the Middle Age, we are living now in the 21 century.***
Agree, Gd share his creating powers with a woman in should way that a new being is form inside her body. A new immortal soul is in hands to care and guide. A job that has eternal consequences. A priest in mass and when imparting the other sacraments acts in Person Christy, Jesus was a male. Man can not give birth and woman should not become priest.
alinabennett4379 ***it is your choice, nobody is forcing you to be a priest, but you can have the sacrament, the quest here is: as long as women is treated as 2nd class something is not improved.***
That is a surface level explanation. The question is why, and that goes deeper into the nature of the masculine and the feminine that are most commonly expressed in our lives as men and women. This gets into why God is seen as masculine and Creation as feminine.
Well said, however I am afraid sooner or later we won’t be allowed to assume Jesus’s true gender. Critics will be like Jesus was forced to identify himself as son of man instead of daughter of man due to the suppression by local traditions and religious obligations to concealment such and such
@@gabrieljosemariaAnd to those people, we pray for them to soften their hearts and be granted virtue, whether they ever do or do not, the Church will live on with or without them.
@@nektulosnewbie But with masculine and feminine, you get into problematic #reality of passive men and proactive women, who step up up when slothful men are passive slobs. *Men are often passive slobs, like drunkards, drug abusers, domestic abusers, gamblers, pornography users, adulterers and criminals.* So the tropes of "masculine" and "feminine" don't cut the mustard.
The extent to which men can go to justify discrimination is truly amazing.We as blacks were told the same things by whites when we wanted self determination.The Israelis are also able to concort absurd explanations to justify their apartheid.
I agree with the exclusive male priesthood, but we know from scripture that God did charge women with speaking to the people. The most important example being Mary Magdalene's first witness of the resurrection.
Yo sound conflicted or confused. If the resurrection event ixs fundamental to the christianity that followed, AND, as you correctly state WOMEN were the first to witness it (Mark), then obviously it is the women who were special above the men. So, why shouldn't women have equal opportunity to assume the priestly vocation?
@@jacuz169 not confused. There are two functions in Christian worship - the liturgy of the word which includes preaching and the liturgy of the Eucharist. I respect those traditions that ordain women and I have friends who are female priests. I am pondering this as a personal inquiry. This is not an ideological stance
@@patriciarocco2610 Of the two functions you describe, are you saying (based on you initial comment) that women should function in role of preaching but not in the liturgy of the Eucharist? Shouldn't these functions be available for anyone who is administratively and spiritually able,? From Dr Bart Ehrman's blog: "...The Christian views ultimately derive from the New Testament...women were actually prominent, important, and authoritative leaders of the Christian church in its earliest days - they were unusually present and active in the Jesus movement while he was living, as well as in the earliest churches we know about, those connected with Paul (who has received a rather unfair rap as one of the world’s great misogynists). But it was not long before men took over the movement and suppressed women’s voices and roles. We are still living with that today..."
However, I would like to say that the Bible also does make it obvious that God does speak directly to women in the example of the prophetesses in I believe Romans and Acts. And also that Mary Magdalene, Mary of Nazareth and other women had a place in jesus's ministry and the apostles. But as it's believed that Jesus' brother James was running the early Christian community in Jerusalem in a 70 elders Mosaic fashion, and this council of elders was certainly all male and decided as a council to make new theology for the new church it can be extrapolated that Jesus's own brother, who would have been in a position to know, would only allow males in the priesthood.
First, let us acknowledge that C.S. Lewis makes it clear that he is referencing the Catholic Church's position, not the myriad Protestant denominations that take a decididly more inclusive approach. That said, here's a question worth posing. Christ was born in the modern-day Near East. So, if we're limiting the priesthood to those who bear a close resemblance to Christ, why focus on discriminating on the basis of gender, should we not also exclude all Black and Asian males as well? Reminds me a little of the comedian Mark Russell's quip, "I agree that those who preach in God's name should bear the closest possible resemblance to Jesus -- pereferably, Jewish carpenters." I believe a genuine Christian should be fully capable of absorbing and comprehending a learned and inspirational sermon, regardless of the race, color or gender of the minister.
There were women in the old-day near east, Jesus didnt give them the priestly authority. Its God's will. Men and women are complementary, not interchangeable.
Simple answer (best I’ve heard): A Priest is a living icon (physical and spiritual representative) of Jesus Christ. Jesus is a Man. Therefore, a priest must be a man.
There's another argument that God has feminine traits--I forgot which verse they argue from, but there are instances where God is described as a loving hen. But that doesn't negate that God reveals Himself as male, albeit that He does not have a gender as we humans do.
***here we are again trying to findi the sex of the Angels; GOD is a Spirit has no body and time/space has no meaning . The fact that it is difficult to understand does not invalidate IT´s nature, God is not like a man or a Woman. Please Meditate in the nature of God.***
Why do we think you need a justification for excluding women (or men) arbitrarily? This assumption is what should be questioned honestly. This is the one that is based on modern perspectives that men and women should be considered equals and that implies they should be treated the same in all circumstances. Mot people don't really behave as though they believe this. Most do not truly think men and women should be treated the same in all circumstances. Most think that a man punching a woman is worse than a man punching a man. And there are plenty of other situations like that.
Yeah a man is phisically stronger, shocker really. But there is no significant difference in intelligence. Funnily enough you need neither to be a priest. Literally a child could ve one
The bible gives the qualifications for an elder. They include being the husband of one wife, excluding polygamous men and assuming a man. If Gods word says they need to be male then that is enough for me. God does not need to explain himself to me.
Hello, The whole essay is available here on youtube if you want to listen to it. Search for "C. S. Lewis - Priestesses in the Church". Should be from the "C. S. Lewis essays" channel. 🙂 They also mention where it has been published, seems like he first published it in a Magazine called time and tide in 1948. 🤔
Good video. It would be helpful to have a reply for the objection: “doesn’t Mary speak to mankind on behalf of God through church-approved Marian apparitions?”
@@VisualCatholic I'd venture a guess that the distinction has to do with the type of mediation. Mary as icon of Church, male priesthood as icon of Jesus. But a simple, accurate way to express this to detractors would be quite useful.
It's a sign of a patriarchal heirarchy and also actually ignores the writings of Paul. There church does not use 'reasoning' as claimed here in the same that it treats same-sex attracted people - it uses and hides behind dogma.
Because masculinity is the active principle of human nature just as femininity is it’s potential principle. Both coexist to make human nature possible but undoubtedly the active principle has the role of presiding. That’s why we use , even unawares and without thought, the masculine nature to designate God and every other reality that signifies a lead. This notion will certainly give rise to every dispute imaginable but reality and fact still remain. Needless to say, femininity has and will continue to have the power to make leadership possible and even to assume it at times. I don’t say this of my own, go contest Aristotle for this when he advises his son Nicomacus. And go contest facts too.
Not everything that Aristotle said does the Church believe. Aristotle believed that the soul is dependent with the body and dies with the body. That is totally not what Christian orthodoxy teaches.
@richardbethencourt1083 oookay, but not everything Aristotle taught was right. Especially not concerning the soul (it dies with the body, he says), about the nature of women (weak men), and physics. You can as a Christian value his philosophy on ethics and virtue, but not much else.
Not in any of the lines of the priesthood of the Old testament were there ever female priests or rabbis. Also consider two other points; firstly considered Paul's words that women must be silent in the church, that would make it difficult for them to exercise authority. Also rabbis and the temple priesthood we're all expected to be married with good families to make a good example for their congregation. Women take a vow of obedience to their husbands when they get married and therefore would have a conflict of authority to lead in the church as well. The first thousand years of the church only required celibacy later and only for monastic vows, not for the entire priesthood. So if things were the way they were meant to be priests would have exemplar marriages and families, and women would be would be suffering the triple deficit of being commanded to be silent in the churches while under a vow of obedience to their husband. On top of that, neither Jesus nor any of the apostles ever ordained a woman when they definitely had the chance.
The Priesthood has ended, The Lord Jesus Christ is our High Priest and He is at the right hand of The Father making intercession for us. Women must remain silent in the church and they can't hold any office in the church over a man.
"Come on, get with the times! Nothing will change with the Church if we allow women priests." Precisely why we can't have them. Bread and wine won't change into the Body and Blood of Christ if we had women priests.
Anytime I hear anything about why the answer is always what men have that women don't. Yes, even I have a manhood is placed in that category. What if the answer is because Men don't have anything God needs? That is the legitimate answer to that question. Don't believe me go read Genesis 3 the first priest failed and who took care of it?
I am told the the church fathers thought that human souls are neither male nor female. If they were correct, that would mean there is no such thing as being "born into the wrong body" because the soul of a boy and the soul of a girl are the same. If that is true, then there is no spiritual difference between men and women. Having said that, how about we at least have some women as deacons like in the Bible and see how that works out? If women like Miriam and Huldah and Anna and Deborah (Deborah was also a judge of Israel) could be prophets, then we should not be so sure than only men can be ordained.
The Bible does say: "In Christ, there is no female or male; Greek or Jew." (Galatians 3:28) But that is about status, rank, egotism. Only women can carry a baby and nurse a baby, so men need something of their own... that is not available to women... or else their fragile egos would break.
Deborah was the political leader of Israel. Only men could be in the Aaronic priesthood. More generally, prophets could be either male or female because they are messengers (the important thing is their message). A priest acts in the place of Christ and must be male.
@@francikeen hmm, that's an interesting argument you provide that only women can carry a baby and that generates male "envy" .... but you forget to mention that women can carry a baby only if they receive the seed from a man (not to mention the care after receiving the seed, in order to finally manage to have that baby), so with the same logic you could say that men are the only carriers of the seed, therefore to compensate for the fragile ego of women you have to make a whole myth of motherhood .. definitely that poisonous path you suggest to follow is not good for anyone, neither for men nor for women ..
So only men are created in the image of God? If the argument is that God is definitely male and to deny that is to deny the Bible's divine inspiration, then that must be true. Women are merely made in an image similar to that of God (at best).
If we can’t ordain female priests because Jesus didn’t, then we can’t name more than 12 apostles (or Bishops) because Jesus didn’t (Luke 6:12-16)? And yet, we have thousands of Bishops in the Church today? So certain rules are convenient and/or necessary to break, while others are not. Maybe it’s now convenient and/or maybe we now need female deacons and priests? Women did not have any official status 2,000 years ago. They had no rights. They couldn't testify in a court of law. They couldn't divorce their husbands, but husbands could divorce their wives. Jesus did not condemn slavery. So, should we rescind all the rights of women and re-institute slavery? No, cultures change and while dogma doesn't, it evolves and develops to suit the culture of the times while maintaining its integrity. The future of the Church is now! Let’s get it right!
You're presenting a straw man fallacy of the argument. The argument is not "we lack evidence that Jesus and the Apostles ordained women." The argument is "Jesus and the Apostles chose not to ordain women." Moreover, wasn't Paul also an Apostle? So there were 13, not 12. ;) and Acts 1 (where Judas is replaced with Matthias) shows they can ordain more.
@@AetheriusLamia While the Catholic Church has a strong tradition of preserving its doctrines, it also acknowledges that these doctrines can develop and evolve over time. The Church believes in the concept of the development of doctrine. This means that while the core teachings remain unchanged, there can be a deeper understanding and application of these teachings as the Church engages with different cultural and historical contexts. Just as the understanding of original sin, the Trinity, and Purgatory have developed over time, there is room for further reflection on the role of women in the priesthood. Historical evidence suggests that in the early Church, there were female deaconesses who held substantial roles and responsibilities. These women were ordained and served alongside male deacons, assisting with baptism, ministry to women, and other pastoral duties. This historical precedent demonstrates that women had a recognized and valued role within the ordained ministry. Paul was not one of the original twelve apostles. Yes, he is commonly referred to as an apostle in the New Testament. His authority and role in spreading the Gospel were widely recognized by the early Christian community. And yes, this suggests that the unofficial title of "apostle" was not limited to the original twelve and that the Church has the authority to extend the title to others. Therefore, the argument can be made that the Church has the authority to extend the sacrament of ordination to women as well. Women hold equal dignity and worth in the eyes of God, and they have made significant contributions to the life of the Church throughout history. Ordaining women to the priesthood would not only affirm their equality but also enrich the Church with their unique gifts and perspectives. As with the case of St. Paul, it can be argued that Jesus looked outside of the twelve apostles and that in doing so, he did not exclusively use men in His mission of salvation, pointing to the unique role of Mary as the Mother of God. Mary's cooperation with God's grace was essential for the Incarnation to occur. She too, played a pivotal role in salvation but was never considered an apostle, although you hear someone occasionally bestow that honor on her as a term of respect and endearment and an acknowledgment that she too, was an emissary of Christ. Jesus' choice to be born of a woman, specifically Mary, emphasizes the importance of women in the plan of salvation. By entering the world through Mary in the manner in which he did, Jesus affirms the dignity and significance of women. This choice reflects God's desire to involve women in His redemptive mission and challenges the notion that only men have exclusive roles in the work of salvation. He could have chosen to have been born in the normal way thereby not exalting Mary's role in salvation. The Incarnation, the act of God becoming human in Jesus, reveals that God values all human nature and the human experience. By taking on human flesh, Jesus elevated and redeemed the entire human experience, including the feminine experience. This implies that women too, as part of humanity, have an inherent role in the work of redemption. By considering Mary's unique role as the Mother of God and Jesus' treatment of women, it can be argued that Jesus did not exclusively use men in His mission of salvation. Rather, He embraced women in their distinct roles and affirmed their importance in the plan of redemption. This perspective supports the notion that women can also be called to serve within the Catholic Church in ordained ministries, as the apostles acknowledged by doing just that. At Pentecost, in the Upper Room, when the Church was founded, there were 120 disciples who were infused with the Holy Spirit. Many of them were women and they too, went out and preached the gospel. I will acknowledge these arguments are not universally accepted within the Catholic Church, and the topic of the ordination of women remains a subject of ongoing theological debate. However, they provide a framework for understanding how the ordination of women can be seen as a development of doctrine and a response to the signs of the times while remaining faithful to the core teachings of the Church.
@@AetheriusLamia Well if they chose men, they also chose Jewish men. And Jesus only chose 12 or 13. So why don't we limit it to 12 or 13 Jewish men as priests and bishops? That is what Jesus chose. Exactly the same logic.
Really? What is "common sense"? Explain what you mean by common sense. Whose definition of common are you using? What do you mean by sense? Is common sense relative, or absolute? You have NO IDEA WHAT ABOUT WHAT YOU SAY! Rdiculous comment.
In what i heard via U Tube, not one scripture of the Bible was quoted or cited as authority!!! Why not ? Tradition of men is NOT authority to those who are looking for Truth ! Here is something to think about : Numbers 23:19. First, God is not a man. 1 Timothy 2:11-15 God is speaking through Paul here in 1 Timothy 2:11-15. Read it please. This isn't Tradition ! This is the word of God. It doesn't matter what the Catholic Church says. It matters what God's Word says. The Catholic Church doesn't speak for God ! The Bible speaks for God!!
Hmm… Where did the Bible come from I wonder? How do we know which books/letters are truly inspired of God and part of Holy Scripture? How did the canon of scripture get compiled, preserved, taught, passed down and interpreted? Pro tip: “the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church” which, according to Sacred Scripture, is the “pillar and bulwark of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15).
@@danieldefonce Your Catholic Church is Apostate, and has been Apostate( corrupt) since it's beginning in the 3rd century. The Catholic Church is a major part of the "woman" that has ridden the political Wild Beast of Revelation, thus making the Catholic Church a major part of Babylon the Great, the world empire of false religion , the "woman" that rides the wild beast, Satans visible political system that includes ALL the Nations of the earth, including the one you live in and under. The Revelation account reveals the destiny of the " Woman " and the "Beast " she rides. Read it for yourself: Revelation, chapters 17 &18. Also as an example of the Catholic Church being in bed with politicians and world leaders consider the Church history just during the 1930's and 1940's, not to mention All the rest of the Catholic Churches filthy history !!!
Please refer to "the Church of Rome"! The expression "Roman Catholic" is oxymoronic. "Catholic" means "universal" , so it cannot be both "Roman" (local), and "Catholic" (universal). Paul, inspired by God the Holy Spirit makes it quite clear that women ought not to be in any position of authority in the church. Read I Tim.3:2ff; Titus 1:5ff. Pretty clear, I would maintain!
The Catholic Church comprises 24 churches. The 23 Churches of the East and the Roman Catholic Church of the West. All in communion with each under under the Holy See. So The Catholic Church means the whole thing and the Roman Catholic Church (95% or so of all Catholics) is the Church of Rome. So you would say the Roman Catholic Church to distinguish it from the Byzantine Catholic Church. Both are part of the Catholic Church. So yes, Roman Catholic is accurate and appropriate.
1. 4:38 "The proposition of a female priesthood entails rejection of the consistent biblical representation of God as male if we believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God" - Which proves that Mary cannot be a Mediatrix, as Roman Catholicism falsely and unbiblically teaches about her (agreeing with 1 Timothy 2:5). 2. 2:40 "There's no problem with a woman speaking to God on behalf of the people. The problem lies in her speaking to the people on the behalf of God or representing God" - Which proves that Marian apparitions (and the doctrines that come of them) that Roman Catholicism holds to are not from God (see 2 Corinthians 11:14). 3. 5:00 "[God] taught [Catholics] how to represent him through the early church and the Sacred Tradition" - Yet Catholics are taught to reject the statements of the early church and Church Fathers' about how to represent God, as 80% of Church Fathers stated (according to a study of the Church Fathers by Roman Catholic Archbishop Richard Kenrick) that Peter was NOT the rock spoken of in Matthew 16:18 but that this 80% stated that either that Christ spoke of Himself as "this rock" or that Peter's statement of faith (ie, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God") was the rock spoken of by Jesus. This means that Roman Catholics are being taught to follow a small minority (ie, only 20%) of the early Church about how to represent God, who is High Priest alone without any papacy as His substitute (see Hebrews 9:11, 1 Timothy 2:5). Further, St. Peter taught that all men AND women are priests if they have been born again via trusting on Jesus as Lord and Saviour from their debts of wrongdoings (see Romans 10:9-10, John 5:24, Acts 10:45-47) and thus have the Holy Ghost living in them (see 1 Corinthians 6:19-20, Romans 8:14-16, Acts 10:45-47) in 1 Peter 2:5 & 1 Peter 2:9 (1 Peter 3:1 expressly proving that Peter's intended audience was women also); St. John affirming the same in Revelation 1:6 & Rev. 5:10. The Biblical prohibition for women, then, is not against being a priest but against being a pastor or teacher (1 Timothy 2:11-12). Here's why: priests (ie, every true Christian) and teachers (including the position called pastor/bishop/overseer) are, Biblically-speaking, not synonymous terms and have two very different functions: the former to speak to and to sacrifice to God, the latter to teach, exhort, and maintain discipline for God.
The absence of women priests in the Catholic Church is a significant topic of discussion. It is often argued that since Christ was male, this is the reason for the exclusion. However, it is worth noting that there is a historical account of a female pope in the papal history, with her name and reign duly recorded. If anyone has any knowledge or information regarding this, please kindly provide clarification.
There has NEVER BEEN and NEVER WILL be a female pope. Pope Joan is a myth from protestant Protestant propaganda. There was a pope who had a mistress who gave birth to an illegitimate child. during the time when the myth came about
You’re talking about Pope Joan. Most scholars believe it was a legendary fiction. Even Protestants during the Reformation didn’t believe it was real, which considering their low opinion of the Papacy is saying something.
It's because the Catholic church sees women as inferior to men. "Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord." - Ephesians 5:222. "For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing." - Ephesians 5:23-24
Not sure why you say the Catholic church and then quote directly from the bible? Read on and see that the bible does not view women as inferior but complementary "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her .. " Eph 5:25
And to add on what Nick said, Christ loved the church so much that He was crusified for it. Men and woman are of equal value in the eyes of God, but have differant complementary roles as stated in Genesis 1:27. God be praised for giving us this live and for Him giving His live so that we may have life.
All this relies (in my view) on an unbiblical notice of priesthood under the new covenant. We should call no one father but our heavenly father. As Christians why do we look to priests as intermediaries to God. A functional view of priesthood over the ontological view seems more biblical to me, perhaps I'm wrong. Viewing priesthood this way undermines Lewis' argument I think. One does not need to be male, if priests aren't seen as God's representative and/ or mouthpiece in the way argued here. This is also not to mention the ways women also represent God on earth as co-bearers of his image as outlined in Genesis, and the (albeit small number of ) ways God IS described in feminine terms within scripture. I also see that scripture was seen as a third reason after tradition and 'Jesus example' (which we get from scripture?). This seems backward. Scripture is primary, tradition less so. I have great sympathy for this theological position though, I just don't think it makes best sense of things overall. Interesting video, that made me think. Thanks for posting.
Ancient Church had female deacons (if you read Paul's epistles referencing deaconesses) and it is my understanding that the Church has only male deacons as far as I remember seeing in Church.
@@caseygrow5951 I am not sure what they did for the church at that time other than that they were called deacons. Early Church followers were majority women and some of them held leadership positions.
*I would never let my daughter wait on a strange man, hand and foot, even at the altar!* I would allow my sons, bc *theoretically* boys are not likely to be seduced by men. Note: *theoretically.* Until recently, heterosexual misbehaviors were the main temptations in life. *Historically, men trained boys, as Apprentices, for future adult jobs.* So there is no reason for altar girls. However, the *Bishops and Priests allow and promote Altar Girls, so don't blame women.* I live near a diocese that does NOT allow altar girls. So any other diocese or archdiocese could do the same. *So don't blame women!*
Actually, it's a good reason not to allow altar girls. Since serving at the altar is a way of seeing if you are interested in joining the priesthood, it might be better if only boys were permitted to do this. Also, once you allow girls to get involved in an activity, young boys will see it as being for girls and opt out.
It's a cultural custom that so far the Magesterium has no real objection to, but indeed the preference is boys only. There are situations in which female altar servers are often a practical necessity, ie when Mass is offered in an all girls orphanage and there is a lack of availability of male altar servers or in a women's convent.
Your point is a complete argument from silence though. Jesus and the apostles didn't, that doesn't mean that they couldn't. Using your logic we can't drive cars, listen to modern music, or use electricity. I've seen plenty of arguments on the topic and I'm not trying to take a side in the argument itself. Just that you beginning justification is completely fallacious.
@@danieldefonce Only if you want to go to that extreme which I wouldn't. Like I said, other arguments can be made. This one is poor. I could use the same logic to say priests can't be disabled because Jesus wasn't. Priests have to be of Jewish ethnicity because Jesus was. Where does this demand for physical likeness begin and end?
@@timothypeterson4781 where the historic teachings and sacred tradition of the Church says it does, brother. Bottom line: It’s not up to you or me as an individual believer to determine what is good or bad for the church universal; it’s up to us to personally submit to the ancient faith of Christ as passed down by the apostles and their successors. The Holy Spirit has been leading the Church throughout the centuries through heresies and controversy (like this particular issue) into all truth by way of Holy Tradition and Holy Scripture. Recall what God the Holy Spirit instructs us through the writing of Paul the Apostle: “Stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter” (2 Thessalonians 2:15). As such, we would do well to heed the longstanding teaching of the Church on this matter and be mindful of what St. Paul wrote to his spiritual successor St. Timothy: “you will know how each one must conduct himself in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15).
Even just from a worldly point of view...who do you trust more in a position of power and influence? A man. Who's going to be a more reliable shepherd for His flock? When evil men and evil ways come, who's going to do most of the work of pushing back and protecting the ones he loves? The answer is always men. Women can and do step up to the plate, I don't deny it. But by and large, men are the ones equipped and intrinsically encouraged to take control and seek to be responsible with it.
@@nyakabb2472 That would be a hatred of women. I'm just speaking facts friend. The fact alone that this has become controversial to say speaks volumes. In fact, it never needed to be said, once upon a time. It was a fact we all accepted when we weren't blinded by the riches of modern thinking.
The issue, with all of this- Is that there is no reason. God failed to give one. Or at least failed to give a good one. And because of that, the reasons are left to interpretation by feeble minded humans. Humans need explinations. We will make our own reasons. In attempts to justify it. Women are sepearate. But why? Maybe they are less holy. Maybe they don't deserve it. When you seperate people from a group. Treat them as seperate. Dont allow them to step up into positions of the church that only men can occupy. Theyre going to be looked down upon. Practices can change. And god can give new life to the bible. Surely at this point, we have good reason, good faith, to allow women forward in his name.
Priesthood was for the Levi. No church should have a priest. They are not Jewish. The protestant churches have a pastor. Prophesy is a gift from the Holy Spirit given to whom God wants to, male or female.
Fatherhood/priesthood and motherhood/consecrated virgin are the vocations that have no real utilitarian value to society, but are given to us for God's own glory. They are complimentary to each other as assigned specifically according to the theology of the body of each biological sex. The priesthood is spiritually exalted fatherhood and the consecrated virgin is spiritually exalted motherhood. Sure, a man can be consecrated and a virgin, but there is no order of men consecrated virgins in the Church. So a woman cannot be a priest anymore than a man can become a consecrated virgin.
From my view as a protestant, this issue stems all the way back to Eve. When Eve stole from God and also influenced Adam to steal from God's tree, one of the punishments for Eve, and subsequently all women after her, was that men would rule over women. My translation of that would be Eve messed up so bad that God revoked women's right to lead. Women tend to make decisions based more on emotion, while men tend to make decisions based more on logic. Satan manipulated Eve's emotions to make her think God was holding out on her and she acted on her own feelings instead of listening to God. So God was like, yeah... we're not going to let that happen again. Adam is solely in charge now. Eve will support Adam in everything he does. Adam had second thoughts about what Eve was telling him to do, but he gave in to his own conscience and did what she said. Probably because boobs. Women not being able to be priests and pastors is a reflection of that punishment. So now, it is a man's job to lead, and woman's job to support; not that women physically can't lead or can't do a good job of leading.
Of course, this argument crashes to the ground, brought down by the fact that there was no Adam and Eve. The story of creation in Genesis is a myth. Scientific consensus is clear that human beings evolved from primates over many tens of thousands of years.
Yeah, I'm not buying what he's selling. Any speech of the eternal God as male or female or sexually differentiated at all is heretical. So this cannot be the basis of an orthodox argument. Jesus is the incarnation of the Son (He) of God as a male human; Jesus is the incarnation of the Word (It) of God as a male human; Jesus is the incarnation of the Wisdom (She) of God as a male human. None of these words are used in their sexed or gendered sense when speaking of God the eternal Son/Word/Wisdom, they are always meant in a stripped sense, specifically stripped of sexual or gendered particularity. He is not male, It is not neuter, She is not female. God is Spirit. This is and has long been the orthodoxy of the Christian faith. All those arguments about the maleness of God must be thrown out as heresy, as they were by even the most patriarchal of the church fathers. If we are to claim that the "manhood taken into God" in Christ is still sexually particularized, we create a new teaching about the resurrection. It suggests that in the resurrection sexual particularity is sustained, which Jesus logically rejects when he rejects marriage in heaven to the Sadducees ("in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels in heaven"). Eternal and spiritual beings may attract male pronouns or female pronouns in language but they do not have those properties in reality. If the Wisdom of God (Proverbs 8, 1 Cor 1) can be given particular and local expression in a male body as she was in Jesus during this life, then the sexually indistinct resurrected Lord Jesus should be equally able to be given particular and local expression in a female body on earth. His humanity is the thing, not his maleness. Finally, as to the question of women teaching the church with authority, the most crucial parts of the sacred deposit of our faith were entrusted first to women and received by the church through the proclamation of women, who were the only sex present. Only Mary can tell Luke of the annunciation and the prophecies of her Magnificat and Elizabeth's speech in the visitation; only Mary Magdalene (the apostle to the apostles) can tell John of finding the empty tomb and meeting Jesus alone in the garden. The good news of the incarnation and the resurrection were first entrusted by angels and the risen Christ to women ("Go and tell my disciples"). That women's involvement as authoritative ambassadors for Christ should be required to stop there and be exclusively taken over by men thereafter should be a peculiar thought, at odds with the very source of the kerygma.
First, Mary herself is referred to as a priest in old poetry and songs. Second, Altar girls have been fine for years...especially in the very devout Vietnamese. Third, I think Jesus would be fine with female priests IF and only IF they acted and dressed like women and not like WACs in the old army.
I don’t think anyone has the right to say what Jesus would be okay with! He has left us the gospels and the early church writings - no where does it hint that women can be priests. Yes of course women can be wonderful holy people, and visionaries, mystics, and as you say, altar girls, though not in traditional rites. I’d also say that having a female element in the running of the church and the hierarchy of power would be a good thing, otherwise you get the completely stupid situation (as described by Fr Murr in his book ‘Murder in the 33rd degree’ where the only female characters in this realm of high intrigue, power and importance, are the cleaners and tea makers! But no.
Not quite... the "altar girls" came only after Vatican II, which we can now see saw a destruction of the Liturgy, prayers, customs and discipline. Not the actual documents of V2 itself, but the modernist clergy & theologians - most from the hippie Woodstock influence - took the chance to label every innovation as "the Spirit of Vatican II" when it is not in the words of V2. Prior to that, all altar servers were boys. Why? Because it was hoped that amongst their ranks, some would realise the reverence, become interested in the priesthood. Not saying girls can't be reverent; in fact, more women pray in church while men watch football. Rather, the issue is the preparation for priesthood. In the same way, the washing of the feet of the apostles must be all men. Again, Jesus was preparing them for a life of service, as priests. So this current pope's innovations like washing women's feet, Muslims feet, wins the praise of the leftist media, everyone says "oh how warm and generous he is". In fact, he is destroying the identity and the spiritual connection to the priesthood. Whether he is genuinely misguided, or intentionally subversive, God alone will Judge. And cannot come soon enough. 82 years old, with one lung, suppressing the true Mass of the Saints of centuries, and no repentance for Pachamama.
The women I’ve encountered in the Catholic Church are rude. Why would anyone think they are called to be a priest? God is a man. Men and women have specific roles- the problem goes back to the garden when Eve took charge and took the fruit and Adam didn’t stand up for his wife against the serpent,
Exactly! If God allowed women to become ordained priests... then men would have nothing of their own... and they would feel inferior to women. "To each their own."
TheGamerDevious ***you are wrong as much as you can be, only women can be mothers, correct. But all fathers can also be FATHERS and love the wife and children the same way; all my Life I observed that in most querels in couples the bad beavior of men is the reason.***
No men and women are for God. Women are not for men . Women are called helper , what is a helper ? An helper is someone who helps. Women are not inferior or less valuable than men. Genesis 1:27 [27] So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 1 Peter 3:7: In the same way, you husbands must give honor to your wives. Treat your wife with understanding as you live together. She may be weaker than you are, but she is your equal partner in God's gift of new life. Treat her as you should so your prayers will not be hindered. Ephesians 5:22-24 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior The Bible never says that the men should make the woman submit but bible tells the women to submit but herself and by her own will. Because love and understanding makes people submit . But priests should be men.
@@JesusChrististheonlyway777 1 corinthians 11:8 and I quote: "For man did not come from woman but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman but woman for man"
Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. 1 Corinthians 14: 34-35 Obviously C.S. Lewis' argument is incredibly weak. Not only is the Church not authorized to ordain women, they MUST remain SILENT in the Church! Why is this not enforced?
We are the bride of Christ. He is the Bridegroom. Clearly stated in multiple places. Letters to Timothy and Titus give clear qualifications of bishop and elder as a husband of one wife.
Jesus chose 12/12 men to be his apostles. If He had chosen 12 randomly (which He didn’t), there is a 0.02% chance he would get 12 men. The first person to know of his coming was the his mother, Mary. The first person to whom he revealed himself as Messiah was the Samaritan woman at the well. The first people to know of his resurrection were the women who came to the tomb. Jesus has no problem choosing women for important tasks-or men. And for the leaders of his church, he chose only men.
@@adelinomorte7421 oh my Goodness, you'd actually ignore Christ's example? Bro, you seriously going to ignore God on the issue of how his own church ought to be correctly structured?
***I will be in good terms with the Vatican wen the sacrament of ordination will be possible for men or women single or married, being celibacy a personal choice. If the Church claims that have no authority, get it. That is enough discriminatiion against women, I will never accept such excuses to hide that "machismo" in the Church.***
You can keep trying to justify a faith system that fits your misogynistic preferences, or you can open your heart to a more loving God and work towards improving the Church and the world we all share. Your choice.
@@aikendrum2908 If God wanted us to ordain female priests, don't you think He would have made that more clear in the beginning and early church? Otherwise this would assume that the one true Church and bride of Christ was wrong for almost 2000 years and I'm not sure anyone wants to go down that road, as this leads to full moral relativism. "If the Church has been wrong about this for 2000 years, what else is she wrong about?" Either truth is truth always and eternal, or everything is just relative. Why is it so important for women to be priests anyways? God has blessed the sexes with different complimentary abilities and capabilities. The priesthood seems to be one of these and I think God has made that clear. That would be like men raging at God that they can't become pregnant, that's just not the way we were created.
@@aikendrum2908 Yes, I've made my choice, I have turned my life around and returned to God our Father. I was led astray from Him for too long and my life was the darkest it's ever been. If you think the church is misogynistic, well, that's just your opinion and you're entitled to it, I just pray that God will show mercy upon you because although the enemy will do his best to separate us from God, we are still his children. I refuse to break the first commandment and try to find some other false God that man has fictitiously created to validate them emotionally, again, I did that for a decade, and it landed me in a living Hell. I know our one true God is forgiving and righteous. I don't believe it's misogynistic, that's just one of the reactionary conclusions people jump to these days in an outrage culture we live in. Women have all the same rights as men and they are able to achieve the same ends as men, the ultimate reward, God's mercy and blessings, it's not like the church is advocating for women to stay in the kitchen and that they can't repent or enter Heaven. It's literally just one simple rule, that women can't be Priests, they're called Fathers for a reason. It's God's word, and if you wish to remain disobedient and if you lack faith, sorry, but that's not our problem, that's a problem within yourself that needs to be healed. Everyone has to experience darkness before they can find the light. Again, the simple, yet harsh truth universally is that some people need to die in order for the rest to survive. A lot of people will unfortunately die unfaithful. That's just how it is. And honestly, the church has lasted thousands of years, it won't crumble suddenly because some people are resentful towards it, there have been people who hate God, the son of God, and the Church since the days Christ walked the Earth, and it's only been thriving ever since. ✌️
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.76[2/2] เดินมาสิบกว่าป่า วันนี้รู้แล้วว่าโจโฉกลัวอะไร!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/R7Yor-t2Au0/mqdefault.jpg)
Lewis' mistake was assuming modernists actually care about Scripture.
indeed, thus the Church of England has betrayed the Christian Faith.
Modernists don’t care about Scripture because they don’t care about God.
Jesus didn't why should we
@@HashbrownMashupJesus did though. He did re-interpret some parts of the Jewish law, but he also in many places fulfilled scripture on purpose.
@@thomasparker3526 You can't "re-interpret" Scripture according to a conservative though. Scripture is Scripture and heresy is heresy, and Christ definitely leaned away from the former.
In Eastern Orthodoxy, can't speak for Catholicism, the priest's hands become Christ's hands, essentially he becomes Christ in our midst when offering the sacrifice and distributing it to the people. "Thine own, of thine own, we offer unto, on behalf of all, and for all."
The Catholic view is practically the same, the priest when preforming the sacraments is acting 'persona christi". They act in the person of Christ. They become Christ so that it's God consecrating the host or granting forgiveness of sins.
Yes it's almost the same ...in catholicism....the priest is " In Persona Christi" meaning he takes the place of Christ .....also only a priests hands are consecrated to touch the Holy Eucharist.
at the time of Pentecost in Acts and during first century there were no hiearchy positions of priest in our Lord's church - that kind of orginization doesn't show up until the 2 nd century - and the Lord's chosen Apostles are no longer in the picture. So when we get to the second century everything about church organization is a contrivance of men apart from the direction of the Lord or his chosen Apostles.
Which basicaly leaves us with the pattern found in the first century Didichae text as to how to organize congregations of believers. Lots of churches follow that manner where the church body is lead by a group of elders (or bishops) and under them are appointed deacons that do pragmatic jobs or responsibilities in service to the church body - all to be men.
@@TheSulross We have a clear image of the Church in the book of acts. We have documentation of Presbyteroi (priests) and Episkopoi (Bishops) from the 1st century either through direct documents of the era, attributed ones or citations. So no the were positions of priests in the early Church.
Biblical:
In Acts 15:22 we can see a college of Aposles headed by James (who is considered the first Bishop/Patriarch of Jerusalem) and elders = presbyteroi = priests
In Acts 14:23 Paul ordains preists = presbyteroi = elders
We also have deacons in the Bible, lower than priests but with ministerial duties, and we actually know the early church ONLY had female deacons.
A couple of years before C.S. Lewis's time, St Epiphanius of Salamis writes in his _Panarion_ (79.3):
> If it were ordained by God that women should offer sacrifice or have any canonical function in the church, Mary herself, if anyone, should have functioned as a priest in the New Testament. She was counted worthy to bear the king of all in her own womb, the heavenly God, the Son of God. Her womb became a temple, and by God’s kindness and an awesome mystery was prepared to be the dwelling place of the Lord’s human nature. But it was not God’s pleasure [that she be a priest]. She was not even entrusted with the administration of baptism-for Christ could have been baptized by her rather than by John. But John the son of Zacharias dwelt in the wilderness entrusted with baptism for the remission of sins, while his father offered sacrifice to God and saw a vision at the time of the offering of incense.
And indeed, if any priestesses were to be had in the Church, surely Our Lady would have been ahead of all the Apostles, including St Peter. But she was not, and because she was not, we are to conclude that it is not in the Church's power to ordain women.
Thank you for this beautiful Patristic Quotation
***we live now in the 21 Century; if water do not move it will be stagnated. I try hard to find a reazon for women being baned from the sacrament of ordination, but the only reazon that comes is DISCRIMINATION, it is time to go forward, but the Church have always EXCUSES whithou fundament.***
That’s a great point!
Our Lord Jesus allowed himself to be anointed with oil by a woman
@@judyapple3266 There's a difference between anointing with oil and the Anointing of the Sick (_extrema unctio_). In any case, are you making reference to the anointing of Jesus's feet by Mary of Bethany? That wasn't oil, but nard perfume. Or are you thinking of some other event? If so, please let me know which.
I've accepted this stance for some time now, but this is the clearest explanation I've heard on the subject thus far
Here are a few passages stand out that directly speak to the role of women in the church: 1 Corinthians 11:3-12, 14:34-35, 1 Timothy 2:11-15 and Titus 1, 2.
Yes!
If we look at 1KOR 11 we see:
1 Corinthians 11:1-3:
1 Be imitators of me, even as I also [am] of Christ.
2 But I praise you, brothers, that you remember me in all things, and you keep the doctrines as I delivered [them] to you.
3 But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God.
Christ became man and left 12 men to act in his eternal priesthood in order of Melchizedek.
Gen 14 … Heb 5, 6,7.
Only women can give birth…only some at that. Only men can be priest And only some
If women could be ordained as priests... then men would have nothing of their own. Of course, I say that tongue-in-cheek.
someone gets it
You all really are mindless robots. Sigh...
johnstewart ***it was 2000 years ago, life today is not the same.***
@@adelinomorte7421 Yes, Christ walked the earth 2000 years ago, but female priestesses were very common, throughout the Roman Empire. So If Jesus Christ had wanted to ordain women, He would have.
I thought it was because the Word is the seed which is planted by a man (the priest), and the woman's role (the church) is to contain and nurture it.
That's also true! If you study Pope JP II's Theology of the Body, it will become clear to you that there are many more reasons than "Tradition" or the 'constant practice of the Church' to explain what God is teaching us in the way He created us differently - male and female.
There are so many ways to justify discrimination. It's why we will forever remain a broken species.
@@UnconventionalReasoning "a broken species" sounds rather christian
@@jaskamattila4481 It is somewhat absurd that "a broken species" sounds Christian. I thought we were made in "the image of God"? That we are "perfect"? Why did a deity make us broken?
@@jaskamattila4481 One of the truly irritating statements which seem to be made by Christian Apologists is, "You, as an atheist, think . I, as a Christian, think . Clearly you got the idea from Christianity, that can be the only source for that thought."
No, people can reach the same conclusion through different paths, including with morality.
Pope Francis says that female priests is an example of clericalism and that it is saying only priests can have a leadership role in the church. There have been many female saints who contributed to the church without being priests.
***THERE ARE MANY WOMEN THAT CAN BE ORDAINED AND WILL NOT BE SAINTS, LIKE NOT ALL ORDAINED MEN WILL NOT BE SAINTS.***
Women can not be ordained, that is biblical and traditional - God chose things the way they are, complain to him.@@adelinomorte7421
he also said female Priests were gnostic heresy
@@adelinomorte7421 women cannot be ordained, end off
So they can contribute, but they cannot truly belong. How nice...
Thanks , I had no teaching on this subject , CS Lewis makes some great points , I will have to reconsider my own position on this
Glad it was helpful!
As a practicing Catholic will say this. The answer lies in the Sacrament of Holy Communion and us as the bride of Christ and consummation.
Yes. The woman is the receiver and "magnifier" of the Lord, more obedient and humble.
There are so many ways women are exalted above men By God in life, in the Scripture and by the Catholic church... The Lord himself has a human mother, but not a human father. A woman is the Ark of the Covenant, and the tabernacle in the most exalted way. A woman is the Immaculate Conception and the Queen of Heaven, not a human man. Woman is the mother of living, giving birth to new life, most dear to God, and caring for it more closely. Woman is (currently suppressed) the more mysterious and exalted, shown being veiled during the Mass, not uncovered for everyone to see. Woman is not created from dust and dirt, but from human bones and meat. And probably many others I forgot.
Of course, man is also called to have some of the qualities, but it comes from woman "principle".
@@lumpichu I appreciate your enthusiasm, however that not what I was referring to.
We are the Bride of Christ and that marriage is consummated via Holy Communion.
The key for us Catholics is to read out of the Bible not into it.
My model for humility is Our Blessed Virgin Mary.
Also I reject all of what the world is trying to tell me.
God Bless
✝️Pray the Rosary ✝️
Jesus had the likes of Mary Magdalene with him. I think if the church leadership decided to ordain female priests, there wouldn't be a problem
The Reason is Quiet Simple. A Priest is to Act In Persona Christi. The Priest not only Represents Christ in the Modern Sense of the Word Represent, but Christ Literally Indwells in The Priest, and it is Christ and Not Just The Priest, Who gives us The Sacraments. Jesus Christ was a Man, Not a Woman, and just as We'd never cast a Woman to Play Jesus in a Play or a Film, We should Not do so in The Sacramental Office.
And just as we would never call a father "Mother;" we should never called a priest "Mother."
***in my wiew, once the ordinationis IS given to women it is equal to men, I detest seeing the "sacramental office" being at pair with a play or film. THE ONLY REASON IS DISCRIMINATION.***
@@adelinomorte7421 No. If a woman was "ordained.," with a Bishop saying the correct words over her... she would still NOT be a valid priest. For any valid Sacrament, the proper matter must be used. And women are NOT the proper matter for the Sacrament of Holy Orders. So any supposedly "ordained" woman would NOT actually be a valid priest. She would NOT be able to confect Transubstantiation nor absolve sins in the Sacrament of Confession.
@@adelinomorte7421 - I Used a Play or Film as an Analogy, but the Fact Remains Jesus Christ was and is a Man, not a Woman, and The Priest is Not simply a Man Representing Jesus , But Also Embodying Him. It is Not Discrimination, it is what The Sacramental office is. And the Fact that You Put "Sacramental Office" in Quotes Means You can't be Catholic.
@@skwills1629 *** I was born and raised as a Catholic and as Catholic will die, thoughout my Life I had many Faith crisis but always returned to Church. I started to study my Personal case and reached my conclusions after the Vatican ll, so in 1969 returned, to see that all Popes after John XXlll just trucated the reform started "the ecumenism" and modernise the rituals, once in Canada in 1973 I was shocked with the confusion in the Church but as a good soldier waited and see but nothing. My wife died after 47years of marriage. After the bereavement I went into a retreat in Niagara Falls I put everything clear, and the answer was "we are in the same fight for more than 30 years and nothing. After13 years of solitude I met an English Lady and we got married in the Anglican Church , I was recieved as a Guest and I am happy in my 91 years of age I feel like finnaly I got it.
I am in my kind of Church but as a Guest, there I feel like a CATHOLIC, I am to old and frail to return in the midlle of a scism that seems to come soon.***
As a Protestant this was excellent work .
Whether Protestant like C.S Lewis , Catholic like Pope Paul VI , or Orthodox, we need to stand united against those trying to subvert our faith.
Glad you liked it. Thanks for leaving a comment!
Yah and the same thing was said by Slave holders too
As a woman and a mother, I can say that being a priestess and being a mother would be extremely hard, if not impossible in some cases. Looking back at my pregnancy, birthing. postpartum and nursing experience, I cannot imagine having such a huge responsibility as being a priest/pastor, leading a congregation, serving Liturgy, taking confessions, etc. , ON TOP of what I was already doing as a woman and a mother. Mind you, I have a Master's degree and I was working my entire pregnancy up to 5 days before my labor started. Now, keeping in mind that, up until the last several decades, it was very common for women to have 7, 8, 9 - 12 children, how would one expect a woman to even think of priesthood?
I do realize that things are changing, and not every woman is a mother. But most women are. And, in a way, motherhood is just as important as priesthood. One would not exist without the other. So no, I do not see any discrimination here.
It's no wonder that the denominations that have women priests/pastors are those that also advocate for contraceptives and abortion.
There is a pretty big difference between "Most people of a particular group do not want to do a particular thing" and "All people of a particular group are prohibited from doing a particular thing".
alina ***how about the father, can a father of so many children be a priest? in my view the sacrament of ordination should be for men and women single or married period! adjustments to be made in the chuch organization as needed, we are not living in the dark times of the Middle Age, we are living now in the 21 century.***
Agree, Gd share his creating powers with a woman in should way that a new being is form inside her body. A new immortal soul is in hands to care and guide. A job that has eternal consequences.
A priest in mass and when imparting the other sacraments acts in Person Christy, Jesus was a male.
Man can not give birth and woman should not become priest.
alinabennett4379 ***it is your choice, nobody is forcing you to be a priest, but you can have the sacrament, the quest here is: as long as women is treated as 2nd class something is not improved.***
Visual Catholicism. LOVE IT!!!
Because God sent his son, not his daughter.
That is a surface level explanation. The question is why, and that goes deeper into the nature of the masculine and the feminine that are most commonly expressed in our lives as men and women.
This gets into why God is seen as masculine and Creation as feminine.
Well said, however I am afraid sooner or later we won’t be allowed to assume Jesus’s true gender. Critics will be like Jesus was forced to identify himself as son of man instead of daughter of man due to the suppression by local traditions and religious obligations to concealment such and such
@@gabrieljosemariaAnd to those people, we pray for them to soften their hearts and be granted virtue, whether they ever do or do not, the Church will live on with or without them.
@@gabrieljosemariaDon't you dare bring leftist ideology into the religion to justify your ridiculous claims
@@nektulosnewbie But with masculine and feminine, you get into problematic #reality of passive men and proactive women, who step up up when slothful men are passive slobs. *Men are often passive slobs, like drunkards, drug abusers, domestic abusers, gamblers, pornography users, adulterers and criminals.* So the tropes of "masculine" and "feminine" don't cut the mustard.
Good vídeo, I am excited for you future content, you've just earned a new sub
Thank you!!
Great channel can’t wait for more
im not a catholic im a lutheran but keep doing content like this
This is the first video I've watched of yours. Great content! Subscribed.
Oh man keep these videos coming this is Catholic content we need!
dude. this channel is great! goos videos man!
"CS Lewis an Anglican Lay Theologian" I wonder what kind of personal pride it would take to say the Sistine Chapel is a basic painting.
What do you mean by this
The extent to which men can go to justify discrimination is truly amazing.We as blacks were told the same things by whites when we wanted self determination.The Israelis are also able to concort absurd explanations to justify their apartheid.
And by representative Nature.
Well done video.
I agree with the exclusive male priesthood, but we know from scripture that God did charge women with speaking to the people. The most important example being Mary Magdalene's first witness of the resurrection.
Yo sound conflicted or confused. If the resurrection event ixs fundamental to the christianity that followed, AND, as you correctly state WOMEN were the first to witness it (Mark), then obviously it is the women who were special above the men. So, why shouldn't women have equal opportunity to assume the priestly vocation?
@@jacuz169 not confused. There are two functions in Christian worship - the liturgy of the word which includes preaching and the liturgy of the Eucharist. I respect those traditions that ordain women and I have friends who are female priests. I am pondering this as a personal inquiry. This is not an ideological stance
@@patriciarocco2610 Of the two functions you describe, are you saying (based on you initial comment) that women should function in role of preaching but not in the liturgy of the Eucharist? Shouldn't these functions be available for anyone who is administratively and spiritually able,?
From Dr Bart Ehrman's blog:
"...The Christian views ultimately derive from the New Testament...women were actually prominent, important, and authoritative leaders of the Christian church in its earliest days - they were unusually present and active in the Jesus movement while he was living, as well as in the earliest churches we know about, those connected with Paul (who has received a rather unfair rap as one of the world’s great misogynists).
But it was not long before men took over the movement and suppressed women’s voices and roles. We are still living with that today..."
I don't recall women being in charge of anything. Typical feminist wishful thinking.
Good stuff
Appreciate it
Priests marry Christs Bride, male to female. Nuns marry Christ, female to male.
A term like "Bride of Christ" or similar cannot be found in the bible. This term comes from replacement theologie.
The Church is the Body of Christ!
@@bernhardbauer5301
Christ The Bride Groom has sacraficially and lovingly chosen The Church to be His Bride.
(Ephesians 5:25-27).
@@simplyregina5364
No. You lack reading skills.
@@bernhardbauer5301 Revelation 19:7-9
Revelation 21:2
Revelation 21:9
@@PablaMMoore That is folklore.
"Christ's bride" doesn't exist, at least not in the bible. This is only phantasie.
When a character is unironically misogynistic the most obvious reason is their writer is an unironic misogynist.
Simple answer
However, I would like to say that the Bible also does make it obvious that God does speak directly to women in the example of the prophetesses in I believe Romans and Acts. And also that Mary Magdalene, Mary of Nazareth and other women had a place in jesus's ministry and the apostles. But as it's believed that Jesus' brother James was running the early Christian community in Jerusalem in a 70 elders Mosaic fashion, and this council of elders was certainly all male and decided as a council to make new theology for the new church it can be extrapolated that Jesus's own brother, who would have been in a position to know, would only allow males in the priesthood.
First, let us acknowledge that C.S. Lewis makes it clear that he is referencing the Catholic Church's position, not the myriad Protestant denominations that take a decididly more inclusive approach. That said, here's a question worth posing. Christ was born in the modern-day Near East. So, if we're limiting the priesthood to those who bear a close resemblance to Christ, why focus on discriminating on the basis of gender, should we not also exclude all Black and Asian males as well? Reminds me a little of the comedian Mark Russell's quip, "I agree that those who preach in God's name should bear the closest possible resemblance to Jesus -- pereferably, Jewish carpenters." I believe a genuine Christian should be fully capable of absorbing and comprehending a learned and inspirational sermon, regardless of the race, color or gender of the minister.
There were women in the old-day near east, Jesus didnt give them the priestly authority. Its God's will. Men and women are complementary, not interchangeable.
Simple answer (best I’ve heard): A Priest is a living icon (physical and spiritual representative) of Jesus Christ. Jesus is a Man. Therefore, a priest must be a man.
There's another argument that God has feminine traits--I forgot which verse they argue from, but there are instances where God is described as a loving hen. But that doesn't negate that God reveals Himself as male, albeit that He does not have a gender as we humans do.
***here we are again trying to findi the sex of the Angels; GOD is a Spirit has no body and time/space has no meaning . The fact that it is difficult to understand does not invalidate IT´s nature, God is not like a man or a Woman. Please Meditate in the nature of God.***
@@adelinomorte7421 Jesus is God embodied, and is definitely male. I suggest you adopt the Christian God as your God, as He is the only true God.
@@DavidNotSolomon***are you kiding me?***
Exactly. The Son manifested Himself as a male@@DavidNotSolomon
Why do we think you need a justification for excluding women (or men) arbitrarily? This assumption is what should be questioned honestly. This is the one that is based on modern perspectives that men and women should be considered equals and that implies they should be treated the same in all circumstances.
Mot people don't really behave as though they believe this. Most do not truly think men and women should be treated the same in all circumstances. Most think that a man punching a woman is worse than a man punching a man. And there are plenty of other situations like that.
Yeah a man is phisically stronger, shocker really. But there is no significant difference in intelligence. Funnily enough you need neither to be a priest. Literally a child could ve one
The bible gives the qualifications for an elder. They include being the husband of one wife, excluding polygamous men and assuming a man. If Gods word says they need to be male then that is enough for me. God does not need to explain himself to me.
Where did Lewis write about this?
Hello,
The whole essay is available here on youtube if you want to listen to it. Search for "C. S. Lewis - Priestesses in the Church". Should be from the "C. S. Lewis essays" channel. 🙂 They also mention where it has been published, seems like he first published it in a Magazine called time and tide in 1948. 🤔
Jesus only chose Jews as Apostles. Soooo, ergo you should have only Jews as Priests.
Good point.
Good video. It would be helpful to have a reply for the objection: “doesn’t Mary speak to mankind on behalf of God through church-approved Marian apparitions?”
Thanks that's an interesting idea. I'll have to think if I've got enough to say on the topic!!
@@VisualCatholic I'd venture a guess that the distinction has to do with the type of mediation. Mary as icon of Church, male priesthood as icon of Jesus. But a simple, accurate way to express this to detractors would be quite useful.
Mother Mary has never claimed to be anything like a priest. Priests are her ‘favored sons.’ She is Queen and Mother, not a priest.
the Catholic church has elevated Mary to a God. She has become a false idol for them.
Mary isn;t a Priest, she just guides people to her son, and in turn, actual Priests through her sons church
The Coptic Pope Shenouda III his book called _On Homosexuality & the Ordination of Women_ is worth a read if you can track it down.
A very holy friend once told me that male and female were spiritual realities before they became manifest as biological realties.
It's a sign of a patriarchal heirarchy and also actually ignores the writings of Paul. There church does not use 'reasoning' as claimed here in the same that it treats same-sex attracted people - it uses and hides behind dogma.
*knew
Because masculinity is the active principle of human nature just as femininity is it’s potential principle. Both coexist to make human nature possible but undoubtedly the active principle has the role of presiding. That’s why we use , even unawares and without thought, the masculine nature to designate God and every other reality that signifies a lead. This notion will certainly give rise to every dispute imaginable but reality and fact still remain. Needless to say, femininity has and will continue to have the power to make leadership possible and even to assume it at times. I don’t say this of my own, go contest Aristotle for this when he advises his son Nicomacus. And go contest facts too.
Not everything that Aristotle said does the Church believe. Aristotle believed that the soul is dependent with the body and dies with the body. That is totally not what Christian orthodoxy teaches.
Thank you but I’m not asserting this as Catholic doctrine -true doctrine- but from nature and rationality.
@richardbethencourt1083 oookay, but not everything Aristotle taught was right. Especially not concerning the soul (it dies with the body, he says), about the nature of women (weak men), and physics. You can as a Christian value his philosophy on ethics and virtue, but not much else.
Logic + consistency = catholicism.
Not in any of the lines of the priesthood of the Old testament were there ever female priests or rabbis. Also consider two other points; firstly considered Paul's words that women must be silent in the church, that would make it difficult for them to exercise authority. Also rabbis and the temple priesthood we're all expected to be married with good families to make a good example for their congregation. Women take a vow of obedience to their husbands when they get married and therefore would have a conflict of authority to lead in the church as well. The first thousand years of the church only required celibacy later and only for monastic vows, not for the entire priesthood. So if things were the way they were meant to be priests would have exemplar marriages and families, and women would be would be suffering the triple deficit of being commanded to be silent in the churches while under a vow of obedience to their husband. On top of that, neither Jesus nor any of the apostles ever ordained a woman when they definitely had the chance.
The Priesthood has ended, The Lord Jesus Christ is our High Priest and He is at the right hand of The Father making intercession for us.
Women must remain silent in the church and they can't hold any office in the church over a man.
Because it is a position of RESPONSIBILITY, which falls on men not women. He never meant for women to carry that burden.
It say in the Bile, men preach.
"Come on, get with the times! Nothing will change with the Church if we allow women priests."
Precisely why we can't have them. Bread and wine won't change into the Body and Blood of Christ if we had women priests.
The Church is the Bride of Christ and a priest is married to Her. That would make the female priesthood a lesbian relationship
Anytime I hear anything about why the answer is always what men have that women don't. Yes, even I have a manhood is placed in that category. What if the answer is because Men don't have anything God needs? That is the legitimate answer to that question. Don't believe me go read Genesis 3 the first priest failed and who took care of it?
I am told the the church fathers thought that human souls are neither male nor female. If they were correct, that would mean there is no such thing as being "born into the wrong body" because the soul of a boy and the soul of a girl are the same. If that is true, then there is no spiritual difference between men and women. Having said that, how about we at least have some women as deacons like in the Bible and see how that works out? If women like Miriam and Huldah and Anna and Deborah (Deborah was also a judge of Israel) could be prophets, then we should not be so sure than only men can be ordained.
The Bible does say: "In Christ, there is no female or male; Greek or Jew." (Galatians 3:28) But that is about status, rank, egotism. Only women can carry a baby and nurse a baby, so men need something of their own... that is not available to women... or else their fragile egos would break.
Humans are body and soul, not just soul.
Deborah was the political leader of Israel. Only men could be in the Aaronic priesthood.
More generally, prophets could be either male or female because they are messengers (the important thing is their message). A priest acts in the place of Christ and must be male.
No. Jesus sent only men. We are to follow Jesus’s example.
@@francikeen hmm, that's an interesting argument you provide that only women can carry a baby and that generates male "envy" .... but you forget to mention that women can carry a baby only if they receive the seed from a man (not to mention the care after receiving the seed, in order to finally manage to have that baby), so with the same logic you could say that men are the only carriers of the seed, therefore to compensate for the fragile ego of women you have to make a whole myth of motherhood .. definitely that poisonous path you suggest to follow is not good for anyone, neither for men nor for women ..
How about because the Bible says women should not be?!!!! FOLLOW GOD’S WORD.
“Man” in the Bible means “mankind” which includes men and women.
So only men are created in the image of God? If the argument is that God is definitely male and to deny that is to deny the Bible's divine inspiration, then that must be true. Women are merely made in an image similar to that of God (at best).
So you want to use C. S. Lewis as an authority?
If we can’t ordain female priests because Jesus didn’t, then we can’t name more than 12 apostles (or Bishops) because Jesus didn’t (Luke 6:12-16)? And yet, we have thousands of Bishops in the Church today? So certain rules are convenient and/or necessary to break, while others are not. Maybe it’s now convenient and/or maybe we now need female deacons and priests? Women did not have any official status 2,000 years ago. They had no rights. They couldn't testify in a court of law. They couldn't divorce their husbands, but husbands could divorce their wives. Jesus did not condemn slavery. So, should we rescind all the rights of women and re-institute slavery? No, cultures change and while dogma doesn't, it evolves and develops to suit the culture of the times while maintaining its integrity. The future of the Church is now! Let’s get it right!
You're presenting a straw man fallacy of the argument. The argument is not "we lack evidence that Jesus and the Apostles ordained women." The argument is "Jesus and the Apostles chose not to ordain women." Moreover, wasn't Paul also an Apostle? So there were 13, not 12. ;) and Acts 1 (where Judas is replaced with Matthias) shows they can ordain more.
@@AetheriusLamia While the Catholic Church has a strong tradition of preserving its doctrines, it also acknowledges that these doctrines can develop and evolve over time. The Church believes in the concept of the development of doctrine. This means that while the core teachings remain unchanged, there can be a deeper understanding and application of these teachings as the Church engages with different cultural and historical contexts. Just as the understanding of original sin, the Trinity, and Purgatory have developed over time, there is room for further reflection on the role of women in the priesthood.
Historical evidence suggests that in the early Church, there were female deaconesses who held substantial roles and responsibilities. These women were ordained and served alongside male deacons, assisting with baptism, ministry to women, and other pastoral duties. This historical precedent demonstrates that women had a recognized and valued role within the ordained ministry.
Paul was not one of the original twelve apostles. Yes, he is commonly referred to as an apostle in the New Testament. His authority and role in spreading the Gospel were widely recognized by the early Christian community. And yes, this suggests that the unofficial title of "apostle" was not limited to the original twelve and that the Church has the authority to extend the title to others. Therefore, the argument can be made that the Church has the authority to extend the sacrament of ordination to women as well.
Women hold equal dignity and worth in the eyes of God, and they have made significant contributions to the life of the Church throughout history. Ordaining women to the priesthood would not only affirm their equality but also enrich the Church with their unique gifts and perspectives.
As with the case of St. Paul, it can be argued that Jesus looked outside of the twelve apostles and that in doing so, he did not exclusively use men in His mission of salvation, pointing to the unique role of Mary as the Mother of God. Mary's cooperation with God's grace was essential for the Incarnation to occur. She too, played a pivotal role in salvation but was never considered an apostle, although you hear someone occasionally bestow that honor on her as a term of respect and endearment and an acknowledgment that she too, was an emissary of Christ.
Jesus' choice to be born of a woman, specifically Mary, emphasizes the importance of women in the plan of salvation. By entering the world through Mary in the manner in which he did, Jesus affirms the dignity and significance of women. This choice reflects God's desire to involve women in His redemptive mission and challenges the notion that only men have exclusive roles in the work of salvation. He could have chosen to have been born in the normal way thereby not exalting Mary's role in salvation.
The Incarnation, the act of God becoming human in Jesus, reveals that God values all human nature and the human experience. By taking on human flesh, Jesus elevated and redeemed the entire human experience, including the feminine experience. This implies that women too, as part of humanity, have an inherent role in the work of redemption.
By considering Mary's unique role as the Mother of God and Jesus' treatment of women, it can be argued that Jesus did not exclusively use men in His mission of salvation. Rather, He embraced women in their distinct roles and affirmed their importance in the plan of redemption. This perspective supports the notion that women can also be called to serve within the Catholic Church in ordained ministries, as the apostles acknowledged by doing just that. At Pentecost, in the Upper Room, when the Church was founded, there were 120 disciples who were infused with the Holy Spirit. Many of them were women and they too, went out and preached the gospel.
I will acknowledge these arguments are not universally accepted within the Catholic Church, and the topic of the ordination of women remains a subject of ongoing theological debate. However, they provide a framework for understanding how the ordination of women can be seen as a development of doctrine and a response to the signs of the times while remaining faithful to the core teachings of the Church.
@@AetheriusLamia Well if they chose men, they also chose Jewish men. And Jesus only chose 12 or 13. So why don't we limit it to 12 or 13 Jewish men as priests and bishops? That is what Jesus chose. Exactly the same logic.
It is common sense
Really? What is "common sense"? Explain what you mean by common sense. Whose definition of common are you using? What do you mean by sense? Is common sense relative, or absolute? You have NO IDEA WHAT ABOUT WHAT YOU SAY! Rdiculous comment.
In what i heard via U Tube, not one scripture of the Bible was quoted or cited as authority!!! Why not ? Tradition of men is NOT authority to those who are looking for Truth ! Here is something to think about : Numbers 23:19. First, God is not a man. 1 Timothy 2:11-15 God is speaking through Paul here in 1 Timothy 2:11-15. Read it please. This isn't Tradition ! This is the word of God. It doesn't matter what the Catholic Church says. It matters what God's Word says. The Catholic Church doesn't speak for God ! The Bible speaks for God!!
Hmm… Where did the Bible come from I wonder? How do we know which books/letters are truly inspired of God and part of Holy Scripture? How did the canon of scripture get compiled, preserved, taught, passed down and interpreted?
Pro tip: “the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church” which, according to Sacred Scripture, is the “pillar and bulwark of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15).
@@danieldefonce Your Catholic Church is Apostate, and has been Apostate( corrupt) since it's beginning in the 3rd century. The Catholic Church is a major part of the "woman" that has ridden the political Wild Beast of Revelation, thus making the Catholic Church a major part of Babylon the Great, the world empire of false religion , the "woman" that rides the wild beast, Satans visible political system that includes ALL the Nations of the earth, including the one you live in and under. The Revelation account reveals the destiny of the " Woman " and the "Beast " she rides. Read it for yourself: Revelation, chapters 17 &18. Also as an example of the Catholic Church being in bed with politicians and world leaders consider the Church history just during the 1930's and 1940's, not to mention All the rest of the Catholic Churches filthy history !!!
Romans 16.
Please refer to "the Church of Rome"! The expression "Roman Catholic" is oxymoronic. "Catholic" means "universal" , so it cannot be both "Roman" (local), and "Catholic" (universal).
Paul, inspired by God the Holy Spirit makes it quite clear that women ought not to be in any position of authority in the church. Read I Tim.3:2ff; Titus 1:5ff. Pretty clear, I would maintain!
The Catholic Church comprises 24 churches. The 23 Churches of the East and the Roman Catholic Church of the West. All in communion with each under under the Holy See. So The Catholic Church means the whole thing and the Roman Catholic Church (95% or so of all Catholics) is the Church of Rome.
So you would say the Roman Catholic Church to distinguish it from the Byzantine Catholic Church. Both are part of the Catholic Church.
So yes, Roman Catholic is accurate and appropriate.
1. 4:38 "The proposition of a female priesthood entails rejection of the consistent biblical representation of God as male if we believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God"
- Which proves that Mary cannot be a Mediatrix, as Roman Catholicism falsely and unbiblically teaches about her (agreeing with 1 Timothy 2:5).
2. 2:40 "There's no problem with a woman speaking to God on behalf of the people. The problem lies in her speaking to the people on the behalf of God or representing God"
- Which proves that Marian apparitions (and the doctrines that come of them) that Roman Catholicism holds to are not from God (see 2 Corinthians 11:14).
3. 5:00 "[God] taught [Catholics] how to represent him through the early church and the Sacred Tradition"
- Yet Catholics are taught to reject the statements of the early church and Church Fathers' about how to represent God, as 80% of Church Fathers stated (according to a study of the Church Fathers by Roman Catholic Archbishop Richard Kenrick) that Peter was NOT the rock spoken of in Matthew 16:18 but that this 80% stated that either that Christ spoke of Himself as "this rock" or that Peter's statement of faith (ie, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God") was the rock spoken of by Jesus. This means that Roman Catholics are being taught to follow a small minority (ie, only 20%) of the early Church about how to represent God, who is High Priest alone without any papacy as His substitute (see Hebrews 9:11, 1 Timothy 2:5).
Further, St. Peter taught that all men AND women are priests if they have been born again via trusting on Jesus as Lord and Saviour from their debts of wrongdoings (see Romans 10:9-10, John 5:24, Acts 10:45-47) and thus have the Holy Ghost living in them (see 1 Corinthians 6:19-20, Romans 8:14-16, Acts 10:45-47) in 1 Peter 2:5 & 1 Peter 2:9 (1 Peter 3:1 expressly proving that Peter's intended audience was women also); St. John affirming the same in Revelation 1:6 & Rev. 5:10. The Biblical prohibition for women, then, is not against being a priest but against being a pastor or teacher (1 Timothy 2:11-12).
Here's why: priests (ie, every true Christian) and teachers (including the position called pastor/bishop/overseer) are, Biblically-speaking, not synonymous terms and have two very different functions: the former to speak to and to sacrifice to God, the latter to teach, exhort, and maintain discipline for God.
Remember that CS Lewis was not catholic
The absence of women priests in the Catholic Church is a significant topic of discussion. It is often argued that since Christ was male, this is the reason for the exclusion. However, it is worth noting that there is a historical account of a female pope in the papal history, with her name and reign duly recorded. If anyone has any knowledge or information regarding this, please kindly provide clarification.
There has NEVER BEEN and NEVER WILL be a female pope. Pope Joan is a myth from protestant Protestant propaganda. There was a pope who had a mistress who gave birth to an illegitimate child. during the time when the myth came about
You’re talking about Pope Joan. Most scholars believe it was a legendary fiction. Even Protestants during the Reformation didn’t believe it was real, which considering their low opinion of the Papacy is saying something.
CS Lewis is correct. So says the Bible. No other opinion matters.
If U read your new testament you will find that ALL believers in Jesus are Royal Priests after the order of Melcezadec. Including women
It's because the Catholic church sees women as inferior to men.
"Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord." - Ephesians 5:222.
"For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing." - Ephesians 5:23-24
Not sure why you say the Catholic church and then quote directly from the bible? Read on and see that the bible does not view women as inferior but complementary "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her .. " Eph 5:25
And to add on what Nick said, Christ loved the church so much that He was crusified for it. Men and woman are of equal value in the eyes of God, but have differant complementary roles as stated in Genesis 1:27. God be praised for giving us this live and for Him giving His live so that we may have life.
Nope
The more powerful that women become, the faster the nations fall into chaos and ruin.
The biblical role of priest is to bring the people's sacrifices to God. Jesus fulfilled this so we don't need priests anymore, male or female.
All this relies (in my view) on an unbiblical notice of priesthood under the new covenant. We should call no one father but our heavenly father. As Christians why do we look to priests as intermediaries to God. A functional view of priesthood over the ontological view seems more biblical to me, perhaps I'm wrong. Viewing priesthood this way undermines Lewis' argument I think. One does not need to be male, if priests aren't seen as God's representative and/ or mouthpiece in the way argued here. This is also not to mention the ways women also represent God on earth as co-bearers of his image as outlined in Genesis, and the (albeit small number of ) ways God IS described in feminine terms within scripture. I also see that scripture was seen as a third reason after tradition and 'Jesus example' (which we get from scripture?). This seems backward. Scripture is primary, tradition less so. I have great sympathy for this theological position though, I just don't think it makes best sense of things overall. Interesting video, that made me think. Thanks for posting.
That's easy - because he was a Christian and followed Jesus's word instead of being a heretic.
Ancient Church had female deacons (if you read Paul's epistles referencing deaconesses) and it is my understanding that the Church has only male deacons as far as I remember seeing in Church.
Can you explain what they did and their position in the Church at the time?
@@caseygrow5951 I am not sure what they did for the church at that time other than that they were called deacons. Early Church followers were majority women and some of them held leadership positions.
Cool no female Priest, then why alter girls? 🌺✝️🌺
*I would never let my daughter wait on a strange man, hand and foot, even at the altar!* I would allow my sons, bc *theoretically* boys are not likely to be seduced by men. Note: *theoretically.* Until recently, heterosexual misbehaviors were the main temptations in life. *Historically, men trained boys, as Apprentices, for future adult jobs.* So there is no reason for altar girls. However, the *Bishops and Priests allow and promote Altar Girls, so don't blame women.* I live near a diocese that does NOT allow altar girls. So any other diocese or archdiocese could do the same. *So don't blame women!*
@@francikeen ***MENKIND IS MARVELLOUS IN FIND EXCUSES***
Actually, it's a good reason not to allow altar girls. Since serving at the altar is a way of seeing if you are interested in joining the priesthood, it might be better if only boys were permitted to do this. Also, once you allow girls to get involved in an activity, young boys will see it as being for girls and opt out.
@@sanjivjhangiani3243 Yes, it would be better if only boys were allowed to be Altar Servers, as potential training for the priesthood.
It's a cultural custom that so far the Magesterium has no real objection to, but indeed the preference is boys only. There are situations in which female altar servers are often a practical necessity, ie when Mass is offered in an all girls orphanage and there is a lack of availability of male altar servers or in a women's convent.
Your point is a complete argument from silence though. Jesus and the apostles didn't, that doesn't mean that they couldn't. Using your logic we can't drive cars, listen to modern music, or use electricity.
I've seen plenty of arguments on the topic and I'm not trying to take a side in the argument itself. Just that you beginning justification is completely fallacious.
Simple solution: A Priest is a living icon (physical and spiritual representative) of Jesus Christ. Jesus is a Man. Therefore, a priest must be a man.
@@danieldefonce Only if you want to go to that extreme which I wouldn't. Like I said, other arguments can be made. This one is poor. I could use the same logic to say priests can't be disabled because Jesus wasn't. Priests have to be of Jewish ethnicity because Jesus was. Where does this demand for physical likeness begin and end?
@@timothypeterson4781 where the historic teachings and sacred tradition of the Church says it does, brother. Bottom line: It’s not up to you or me as an individual believer to determine what is good or bad for the church universal; it’s up to us to personally submit to the ancient faith of Christ as passed down by the apostles and their successors. The Holy Spirit has been leading the Church throughout the centuries through heresies and controversy (like this particular issue) into all truth by way of Holy Tradition and Holy Scripture. Recall what God the Holy Spirit instructs us through the writing of Paul the Apostle: “Stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter” (2 Thessalonians 2:15). As such, we would do well to heed the longstanding teaching of the Church on this matter and be mindful of what St. Paul wrote to his spiritual successor St. Timothy: “you will know how each one must conduct himself in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15).
@@danieldefonce But Jesus is God and God is male, female, and more. God is not limited.
Why is the Catholic Church letting practising gay men be priests?
Even just from a worldly point of view...who do you trust more in a position of power and influence? A man. Who's going to be a more reliable shepherd for His flock? When evil men and evil ways come, who's going to do most of the work of pushing back and protecting the ones he loves?
The answer is always men. Women can and do step up to the plate, I don't deny it. But by and large, men are the ones equipped and intrinsically encouraged to take control and seek to be responsible with it.
Misogyny at its best
@@nyakabb2472 That would be a hatred of women. I'm just speaking facts friend. The fact alone that this has become controversial to say speaks volumes.
In fact, it never needed to be said, once upon a time. It was a fact we all accepted when we weren't blinded by the riches of modern thinking.
How is this not just sexist?
Because it's Biblical.
The issue, with all of this- Is that there is no reason. God failed to give one. Or at least failed to give a good one. And because of that, the reasons are left to interpretation by feeble minded humans.
Humans need explinations. We will make our own reasons. In attempts to justify it. Women are sepearate. But why? Maybe they are less holy. Maybe they don't deserve it.
When you seperate people from a group. Treat them as seperate. Dont allow them to step up into positions of the church that only men can occupy. Theyre going to be looked down upon.
Practices can change. And god can give new life to the bible. Surely at this point, we have good reason, good faith, to allow women forward in his name.
men and women are different - this is part of god's plan
C.S Lewis is Evangelical.. they don't have a Priest .. so his argument is false .. a prophet can speak on behalf of god .. man and women can prophesy
He's Anglican
Priesthood was for the Levi. No church should have a priest. They are not Jewish. The protestant churches have a pastor.
Prophesy is a gift from the Holy Spirit given to whom God wants to, male or female.
It's not just the church, but the Scripture, that gives a big thumb's down to female clergy. That should be that.
This says nothing.
Fatherhood/priesthood and motherhood/consecrated virgin are the vocations that have no real utilitarian value to society, but are given to us for God's own glory. They are complimentary to each other as assigned specifically according to the theology of the body of each biological sex. The priesthood is spiritually exalted fatherhood and the consecrated virgin is spiritually exalted motherhood. Sure, a man can be consecrated and a virgin, but there is no order of men consecrated virgins in the Church. So a woman cannot be a priest anymore than a man can become a consecrated virgin.
From my view as a protestant, this issue stems all the way back to Eve. When Eve stole from God and also influenced Adam to steal from God's tree, one of the punishments for Eve, and subsequently all women after her, was that men would rule over women. My translation of that would be Eve messed up so bad that God revoked women's right to lead. Women tend to make decisions based more on emotion, while men tend to make decisions based more on logic. Satan manipulated Eve's emotions to make her think God was holding out on her and she acted on her own feelings instead of listening to God. So God was like, yeah... we're not going to let that happen again. Adam is solely in charge now. Eve will support Adam in everything he does. Adam had second thoughts about what Eve was telling him to do, but he gave in to his own conscience and did what she said. Probably because boobs. Women not being able to be priests and pastors is a reflection of that punishment. So now, it is a man's job to lead, and woman's job to support; not that women physically can't lead or can't do a good job of leading.
Of course, this argument crashes to the ground, brought down by the fact that there was no Adam and Eve. The story of creation in Genesis is a myth. Scientific consensus is clear that human beings evolved from primates over many tens of thousands of years.
Yeah, I'm not buying what he's selling.
Any speech of the eternal God as male or female or sexually differentiated at all is heretical. So this cannot be the basis of an orthodox argument.
Jesus is the incarnation of the Son (He) of God as a male human; Jesus is the incarnation of the Word (It) of God as a male human; Jesus is the incarnation of the Wisdom (She) of God as a male human. None of these words are used in their sexed or gendered sense when speaking of God the eternal Son/Word/Wisdom, they are always meant in a stripped sense, specifically stripped of sexual or gendered particularity. He is not male, It is not neuter, She is not female. God is Spirit. This is and has long been the orthodoxy of the Christian faith. All those arguments about the maleness of God must be thrown out as heresy, as they were by even the most patriarchal of the church fathers.
If we are to claim that the "manhood taken into God" in Christ is still sexually particularized, we create a new teaching about the resurrection. It suggests that in the resurrection sexual particularity is sustained, which Jesus logically rejects when he rejects marriage in heaven to the Sadducees ("in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels in heaven"). Eternal and spiritual beings may attract male pronouns or female pronouns in language but they do not have those properties in reality. If the Wisdom of God (Proverbs 8, 1 Cor 1) can be given particular and local expression in a male body as she was in Jesus during this life, then the sexually indistinct resurrected Lord Jesus should be equally able to be given particular and local expression in a female body on earth. His humanity is the thing, not his maleness.
Finally, as to the question of women teaching the church with authority, the most crucial parts of the sacred deposit of our faith were entrusted first to women and received by the church through the proclamation of women, who were the only sex present. Only Mary can tell Luke of the annunciation and the prophecies of her Magnificat and Elizabeth's speech in the visitation; only Mary Magdalene (the apostle to the apostles) can tell John of finding the empty tomb and meeting Jesus alone in the garden. The good news of the incarnation and the resurrection were first entrusted by angels and the risen Christ to women ("Go and tell my disciples"). That women's involvement as authoritative ambassadors for Christ should be required to stop there and be exclusively taken over by men thereafter should be a peculiar thought, at odds with the very source of the kerygma.
Thanks for sharing your argument, interesting!!
First, Mary herself is referred to as a priest in old poetry and songs. Second, Altar girls have been fine for years...especially in the very devout Vietnamese. Third, I think Jesus would be fine with female priests IF and only IF they acted and dressed like women and not like WACs in the old army.
Thanks for your perspective. I share your respect for the devotion and courage of Vietnamese Christians!
I don’t think anyone has the right to say what Jesus would be okay with! He has left us the gospels and the early church writings - no where does it hint that women can be priests. Yes of course women can be wonderful holy people, and visionaries, mystics, and as you say, altar girls, though not in traditional rites. I’d also say that having a female element in the running of the church and the hierarchy of power would be a good thing, otherwise you get the completely stupid situation (as described by Fr Murr in his book ‘Murder in the 33rd degree’ where the only female characters in this realm of high intrigue, power and importance, are the cleaners and tea makers! But no.
@@MsDormy ***in the escrpitures there are no mentions of Jesus to ban women from the sacrament of ordination.***
tradition made the scriptures, and tradition says: No, women can not be priest@@adelinomorte7421
Not quite... the "altar girls" came only after Vatican II, which we can now see saw a destruction of the Liturgy, prayers, customs and discipline. Not the actual documents of V2 itself, but the modernist clergy & theologians - most from the hippie Woodstock influence - took the chance to label every innovation as "the Spirit of Vatican II" when it is not in the words of V2.
Prior to that, all altar servers were boys. Why? Because it was hoped that amongst their ranks, some would realise the reverence, become interested in the priesthood. Not saying girls can't be reverent; in fact, more women pray in church while men watch football. Rather, the issue is the preparation for priesthood.
In the same way, the washing of the feet of the apostles must be all men. Again, Jesus was preparing them for a life of service, as priests. So this current pope's innovations like washing women's feet, Muslims feet, wins the praise of the leftist media, everyone says "oh how warm and generous he is". In fact, he is destroying the identity and the spiritual connection to the priesthood. Whether he is genuinely misguided, or intentionally subversive, God alone will Judge. And cannot come soon enough. 82 years old, with one lung, suppressing the true Mass of the Saints of centuries, and no repentance for Pachamama.
The women I’ve encountered in the Catholic Church are rude. Why would anyone think they are called to be a priest? God is a man. Men and women have specific roles- the problem goes back to the garden when Eve took charge and took the fruit and Adam didn’t stand up for his wife against the serpent,
Y'all READ your Bibles. SMH.
Asking why women can’t be priest is like asking why men can’t be mothers.
Exactly! If God allowed women to become ordained priests... then men would have nothing of their own... and they would feel inferior to women.
"To each their own."
TheGamerDevious ***you are wrong as much as you can be, only women can be mothers, correct. But all fathers can also be FATHERS and love the wife and children the same way; all my Life I observed that in most querels in couples the bad beavior of men is the reason.***
Well said! Thank you.
"Woman was made for man but man was not made for woman. Man was made for God"
No men and women are for God.
Women are not for men . Women are called helper , what is a helper ? An helper is someone who helps.
Women are not inferior or less valuable than men.
Genesis 1:27
[27] So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
1 Peter 3:7: In the same way, you husbands must give honor to your wives. Treat your wife with understanding as you live together. She may be weaker than you are, but she is your equal partner in God's gift of new life. Treat her as you should so your prayers will not be hindered.
Ephesians 5:22-24
Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior
The Bible never says that the men should make the woman submit but bible tells the women to submit but herself and by her own will. Because love and understanding makes people submit .
But priests should be men.
@@JesusChrististheonlyway777 1 corinthians 11:8 and I quote:
"For man did not come from woman but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman but woman for man"
"The Roman Catholic Church doesn't allow women to become priests"...for now.
Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
1 Corinthians 14: 34-35
Obviously C.S. Lewis' argument is incredibly weak. Not only is the Church not authorized to ordain women, they MUST remain SILENT in the Church! Why is this not enforced?
We are the bride of Christ. He is the Bridegroom. Clearly stated in multiple places. Letters to Timothy and Titus give clear qualifications of bishop and elder as a husband of one wife.
Just look at where the woman priests are now and ask yourself if you'd trust that church with your salvation
Jesus chose 12/12 men to be his apostles. If He had chosen 12 randomly (which He didn’t), there is a 0.02% chance he would get 12 men. The first person to know of his coming was the his mother, Mary. The first person to whom he revealed himself as Messiah was the Samaritan woman at the well. The first people to know of his resurrection were the women who came to the tomb. Jesus has no problem choosing women for important tasks-or men. And for the leaders of his church, he chose only men.
CS Lewis was one of the weakest Christian thinkers in the 20th century.
Jesus sent men, not women. Thats good enough for me.
I agree, we should follow his lead through the ages.
***ENJOY BEING YOU***
@@adelinomorte7421 oh my Goodness, you'd actually ignore Christ's example? Bro, you seriously going to ignore God on the issue of how his own church ought to be correctly structured?
***I will be in good terms with the Vatican wen the sacrament of ordination will be possible for men or women single or married, being celibacy a personal choice. If the Church claims that have no authority, get it. That is enough discriminatiion against women, I will never accept such excuses to hide that "machismo" in the Church.***
Ok, thanks for watching anyway!
You can keep trying to find a belief system that fits your preferences, or you can open your heart to God and learn to practice faith
You can keep trying to justify a faith system that fits your misogynistic preferences, or you can open your heart to a more loving God and work towards improving the Church and the world we all share. Your choice.
@@aikendrum2908 If God wanted us to ordain female priests, don't you think He would have made that more clear in the beginning and early church? Otherwise this would assume that the one true Church and bride of Christ was wrong for almost 2000 years and I'm not sure anyone wants to go down that road, as this leads to full moral relativism. "If the Church has been wrong about this for 2000 years, what else is she wrong about?" Either truth is truth always and eternal, or everything is just relative.
Why is it so important for women to be priests anyways? God has blessed the sexes with different complimentary abilities and capabilities. The priesthood seems to be one of these and I think God has made that clear. That would be like men raging at God that they can't become pregnant, that's just not the way we were created.
@@aikendrum2908 Yes, I've made my choice, I have turned my life around and returned to God our Father. I was led astray from Him for too long and my life was the darkest it's ever been. If you think the church is misogynistic, well, that's just your opinion and you're entitled to it, I just pray that God will show mercy upon you because although the enemy will do his best to separate us from God, we are still his children. I refuse to break the first commandment and try to find some other false God that man has fictitiously created to validate them emotionally, again, I did that for a decade, and it landed me in a living Hell. I know our one true God is forgiving and righteous.
I don't believe it's misogynistic, that's just one of the reactionary conclusions people jump to these days in an outrage culture we live in. Women have all the same rights as men and they are able to achieve the same ends as men, the ultimate reward, God's mercy and blessings, it's not like the church is advocating for women to stay in the kitchen and that they can't repent or enter Heaven. It's literally just one simple rule, that women can't be Priests, they're called Fathers for a reason. It's God's word, and if you wish to remain disobedient and if you lack faith, sorry, but that's not our problem, that's a problem within yourself that needs to be healed.
Everyone has to experience darkness before they can find the light.
Again, the simple, yet harsh truth universally is that some people need to die in order for the rest to survive. A lot of people will unfortunately die unfaithful. That's just how it is. And honestly, the church has lasted thousands of years, it won't crumble suddenly because some people are resentful towards it, there have been people who hate God, the son of God, and the Church since the days Christ walked the Earth, and it's only been thriving ever since.
✌️
I doubt this is what god wants and if you actually want the answer don't look to men.
But look to god