• Pope Francis Says the Ban on Women Priests Will Last Forever
    86 replies, posted
[quote]Pope Francis told reporters Tuesday that the Roman Catholic Church’s restriction on women entering the priesthood is likely to remain in place forever. The remarks — issued aboard the papal plane as the Pope flew back to Rome from Sweden — came in response to a journalist asking whether the church might see female priests in the coming decade, the New York Times reports. “On the ordination of women in the Catholic Church, the last word is clear,” Francis said, referring to an apostolic letter written by Pope John Paul II in 1994. The letter holds that ordaining women was not possible because Jesus chose only men as his apostles. “It was given by St. John Paul II, and this remains,” Francis said. “Really?” asked the journalist. “Never?” “It goes in this direction,” the Pope replied. He also cited the importance of Mary, mother of Jesus, to the church, adding that “women can do many other things better than men.”[/quote] [url]http://time.com/4554358/catholic-church-pope-francis-ban-women-priests/[/url]
It won't last forever. Eventually it'll change. Maybe not soon, now because of this, but the church will eventually adapt.
Unsurprising.
both sexes should be banned from being priests
Not unexpected, but some day the church might adapt its policy to change this.
[QUOTE=Saturn V;51296520]both sexes should be banned from being priests[/QUOTE] Dude I'm an atheist but shit like this doesn't help anyone.
[quote]But a Pew Research Center poll in 2015 found that about 6% of American Catholics were in favor of allowing women to be priests.[/quote] That's surprising, I expected it to be more. Also it's ironic that the Pope is saying this as he's leaving celebrating the Reformation with a [I]woman[/I] Archbishop (that is Lutheran).
[QUOTE=Saturn V;51296520]both sexes should be banned from being priests[/QUOTE] people like you are why it's impossible to actually discuss religious issues on FP because you insist on being one of those smug atheists who hate everything that's related to religion instead of actually being willing to see the POV of the religious. comments like these should be bannable imo
Also, didn't Francis create a commission on looking into female priests? Has that concluded or is it still an ongoing debate?
Why should it be changed exactly? It's house rules. If you don't like it, then pick a different sect or something.
[QUOTE=Svinnik;51296559]people like you are why it's impossible to actually discuss religious issues on FP because you insist on being one of those smug atheists who hate everything that's related to religion instead of actually being willing to see the POV of the religious. comments like these should be bannable imo[/QUOTE] oh no then i thorougly apologize!
[QUOTE=Svinnik;51296559]people like you are why it's impossible to actually discuss religious issues on FP because you insist on being one of those smug atheists who hate everything that's related to religion instead of actually being willing to see the POV of the religious. comments like these should be bannable imo[/QUOTE] Why are you assuming hes a smug atheist? Maybe he just disagrees with the function of a role of a priest in catholic church
It's tradition at this point. I doubt it will change in my lifetime
[QUOTE=Demeschik;51296580]Why should it be changed exactly? It's house rules. If you don't like it, then pick a different sect or something.[/QUOTE] "Let me leave something that I agree with 99% with because I'm not allowed to change that 1% I disagree with instead" When you see something that can improve, you don't abandon it, you try to make it better. [editline]2nd November 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=WhyNott;51296595]Why are you assuming hes a smug atheist? Maybe he just disagrees with the function of a role of a priest in catholic church[/QUOTE] Poe's Law
[QUOTE=The golden;51296688]No. When an organization has such a fucking brutal and twisted history as the Catholic church and they still enforce and believe in mass discrimination of sex/gender/orientation then people have full right to feel anger and be upset at the church. He wasn't making a remark towards religion, he was saying it towards the church itself. Which I think is fine. The church is in dire need of harsh criticism and for people to be angry at it, because it deserves it for the shit it has done and still continues to do.[/QUOTE] Denying woman to the priesthood is equal to "brutal and twisted" things the church did 500 years ago? I mean, it's not a great thing, but it's hardly the worse or equal to the worse the Church has ever committed to. Even so, dire criticism is irrelevant. The church doesn't sway to what the people want in the heat of the moment. If they change to the public's opinion, it'll be a very very very slow process.
Dunno who'd be surprised by this, it's literally a specific command in the bible that women aren't allowed to run a congregation. If they allow that then they risk ending up like the CoE where it got so diluted barely anyone takes it seriously any more.
[QUOTE=Saturn V;51296520]both sexes should be banned from being priests[/QUOTE] yeah god forbid people still worship religion fuck everyone who worships a religion
[QUOTE=redBadger;51296715]yeah god forbid people still worship religion fuck everyone who worships a religion[/QUOTE] Well considering how much trouble it has caused and still does cause it's not exactly an unfair point. /pol/ making a meme about neckbeards and fedoras never changed that.
"lol ban all priests" "FUCK YOU YOU FUCKING PRICK. COMMENTS LIKE YOURS SHOULD BE BANNED" calm down lads
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;51296710]Dunno who'd be surprised by this, it's literally a specific command in the bible that women aren't allowed to run a congregation. If they allow that then they risk ending up like the CoE where it got so diluted barely anyone takes it seriously any more.[/QUOTE] What specific command? I don't recall anything like that. The article even goes to say that the reason the church has this policy isn't because of a command but because of a "follow by example" thing in that Jesus's 12 apostles were all men. There were women priests in the early church, as well.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;51296750]Well considering how much trouble it has caused and still does cause it's not exactly an unfair point. /pol/ making a meme about neckbeards and fedoras never changed that.[/QUOTE] I'm all for criticising a religion (as a "former" Catholic (read: brought up as Catholic) and now an agnostic) and those who use religion as an excuse for their awfulness but you have to admit, the "Reddit Atheism" as I like to call it that seems to propagate in most of these decisions anywhere on the net is nothing but a way of holding smug superiority for a lot of people.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51296763]What specific command? I don't recall anything like that. The article even goes to say that the reason the church has this policy isn't because of a command but because of a "follow by example" thing in that Jesus's 12 apostles were all men. There were women priests in the early church, as well.[/QUOTE] [URL]http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/14-34.htm[/URL] [URL]http://biblehub.com/1_timothy/2-12.htm[/URL] It's why there's a distinction between nuns and priests
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;51296768][URL]http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/14-34.htm[/URL] [url]http://biblehub.com/1_timothy/2-12.htm[/url][/QUOTE] Curious to why the article didn't cite these instead of what it did say.
[QUOTE=Saturn V;51296520]both sexes should be banned from being priests[/QUOTE] Then we can finally have robot priests, brilliant idea
[QUOTE=redBadger;51296715]yeah god forbid people still worship religion fuck everyone who worships a religion[/QUOTE] i like how u got my opinion perfectly spot on lol
[QUOTE=kiloy;51296790]Then we can finally have robot priests, brilliant idea[/QUOTE] Every day we come closer to the Futurama
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51296799]Every day we come closer to the Futurama[/QUOTE] Salvationbot7200 saved me. Will you let him save you?
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51296779]Curious to why the article didn't cite these instead of what it did say.[/QUOTE] The big reason is that Pope John Paul II, for all of his good, spoke [I]ex dogma,[/I] that is, with the power invested in him as Pope to make that a standing belief of the Catholic church which could not be overturned (at least, without severe ramifications to the credibility and strength of the office of Pope.) This is, by the way, a power invented in the 30's. It was meant to counteract the growing strength of Mass Media, particularly radio, as it was leading to growing schisms between the diocese of cardinals who were more and more speaking on a global stage, often with radically different interpretations of biblical beliefs. The Catholic church recognizes that the bible itself is a man made document that has been heavily edited, and for that reason, tends not to appeal directly to it as if it were constitutional, instead appealing to historical letters and records from church founders, on what their intent was and so on.
[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;51296839]The big reason is that Pope John Paul II, for all of his good, spoke [I]ex dogma,[/I] that is, with the power invested in him as Pope to make that a standing belief of the Catholic church which could not be overturned (at least, without severe ramifications to the credibility and strength of the office of Pope.) This is, by the way, a power invented in the 30's. It was meant to counteract the growing strength of Mass Media, particularly radio, as it was leading to growing schisms between the diocese of cardinals who were more and more speaking on a global stage, often with radically different interpretations of biblical beliefs. The Catholic church recognizes that the bible itself is a man made document that has been heavily edited, and for that reason, tends not to appeal directly to it as if it were constitutional, instead appealing to historical letters and records from church founders, on what their intent was and so on.[/QUOTE] Couldn't the current Pope just do the same thing and speak in ex dogma to overturn or alter? Or would that in itself undermine the ex dogma policy?
[QUOTE=Saturn V;51296794]i like how u got my opinion perfectly spot on lol[/QUOTE] then maybe you should have clarified your point instead of making one big ambiguous statement. the sarcastic and snide replies aren't really helping your case either.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.