The Church fathers on women
#51
Dear James,

There's that intolerance, finally....Oh well, I was expecting that kind of response eventually. However, unlike many people I know, even though I'm not a Christian I am willing to hear the Catholic side of the story and to listen - one of the reasons I joined this forum. Many, many (most perhaps?) practicing Christians have the opposite attitude with non-Christians; your last message, James, is an example of this. I've always found it curious how the Church claims to be universal, transcending cultures and boundaries, but yet it contradicts itself by incessantly condemning other faiths and practices as evil/dark/immoral, etc., thus creating a separation, a wedge between them and the rest of the world. Maybe I'm just crazy, but this doesn't seem universal at all (or maybe the Catholic definition of universal is also different ???). And didn't Jesus say "Judge not, lest thou be judged"?
In my faith, we embrace religious differences, instead of judging, condemning, or rejecting them. We learn about others, and try to understand them. We may disagree, but a mutual respect is there.
"No surprise there.  You are not Catholic.  The darkness hates the light and can not understand it." Where's the universality and non-judgment in that statement?
Reply
#52
Dear Wandering Penitent.

I am willing to listen. But, yes, perhaps our religious differences risk limiting the dialogue.

Metatron
Reply
#53
Universal means that everyone can join, it does not mean that they can do whatever they want and be a member. You can be of any gender, race, nationality, speak any language, and be highly intelligent or mentally retarded, wise, foolish, strong, week, young, old, whatever. Most of these things, with the exception of nationality, we cannot choose anyways. The things you are listing are a choice, even if the motivation for them may not be. I admit many of us on this forum lack tact and discretion, but that's what you get for having a universal religion that lets such varied people in (not sarcasm).

The best way to understand the church is to see it with a blank slate, not only erasing your preconceived notions of the Church but of history itself.

http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~mward/gkc/book...g_man.html

This is the book I highly recommend reading for that reason. Understand that I greatly desire to have a fruitful discussion.
Reply
#54
Thanks, I'll have a read  :)
Reply
#55
(02-09-2010, 10:54 PM)The_Harlequin_King Wrote:
(02-09-2010, 10:49 PM)Satori Wrote: About this speaking in church. I can't see how this is relevant unless one is a charismatic, for that is the only kind of public worship service I know in which laypeople of either sex are allowed to speak in church. It is the right of the people to hear a sermon from a priest, not from any old fly-by-night who happens to come along.

I suspect that worship in the 1st century Church, while still liturgical, was a few degrees less formal than what we're familiar with. My theory: whatever worship spaces they had were used not only for the liturgy, but for anything that the Christians did together. Presumably including even the agape feasts. It wouldn't surprise me, then, if the early Church made use of "testimonials" and "guest speakers". I haven't done intense reading into the early Church, though, so I can't say with any degree of authority. That;s just the vibe I get from the epistles and some other texts.

Testimonials were certainly said often in gatherings during the Early Church, but they were not liturgical and if anything happened long before the mass started, since most converts would not be allowed in after the mass of the Catechumens. Guest speakers were similar unless they were also priests or deacons, which then they assisted at the Lord's Supper.

The two books I recommend the most are Adrian Fortescue's "The Mass" and James L. Meagher's "How Christ Said the First Mass."
Reply
#56
Quote:Tertullian (160?-220?): "Woman is a temple built over a sewer, the gateway to the devil. Woman, you are the devil's doorway. You led astray one whom the devil would not dare attack directly. It was your fault that the Son of God had to die; you should always go in mourning and rags."[url][/url]

Sounds like he met one of my ex's. 
Reply
#57
(02-10-2010, 01:15 AM)James02 Wrote:
Quote: It's just a question of men and women having different roles; it has nothing to do with inferiority.
Inferior no.  Subordinate to men, yes.

This is not a teaching of the Church. Please try not to spread heresy if you can possibly help it.
Reply
#58
Quote: Dear James,
There's that intolerance, finally....Oh well, I was expecting that kind of response eventually.
  The Catholic Church believes that unless you die a Catholic, you will burn in hell.  So if I tell you that you are fine, you can believe whatever it is you believe, then I will be condemning you to hell.  We really believe that you are going to burn in hell unless you convert.  What do you expect us to do?  Tell you to continue on the road to hell?  No, we hope that you will convert and save your soul and discover our source of happiness.
Quote:However, unlike many people I know, even though I'm not a Christian I am willing to hear the Catholic side of the story and to listen - one of the reasons I joined this forum.
You haven't asked any more questions.  If you are here to troll, please quit wasting both of our time.
Quote:  Many, many (most perhaps?) practicing Christians have the opposite attitude with non-Christians; your last message, James, is an example of this.
You are either ignorant, or purposefully lying.  Evangelicals and Reformed Protestants believe that non-Christians burn in hell.  In fact, they believe most Catholics go to hell.  Jews believe that I am going to hell.  Muslims believe I am going to hell.  Nothing unique with Catholics.
Quote: I've always found it curious how the Church claims to be universal, transcending cultures and boundaries, but yet it contradicts itself by incessantly condemning other faiths and practices as evil/dark/immoral, etc., thus creating a separation, a wedge between them and the rest of the world. Maybe I'm just crazy, but this doesn't seem universal at all (or maybe the Catholic definition of universal is also different Huh?).
There is no contradiction.  The Catholic Church is open to everyone.  That is universal.  But it is Catholic, and it believe SOMETHING.  It condemns what opposes it.
Quote: And didn't Jesus say "Judge not, lest thou be judged"?
  I don't judge you.  God will.  And He told us the criteria to be saved.  You have to be a baptized Catholic.

Quote: In my faith, we embrace religious differences, instead of judging, condemning, or rejecting them. We learn about others, and try to understand them. We may disagree, but a mutual respect is there.
What does "embrace religious differences" mean?  That kind of B.S. doesn't work on this forum.  What religion are you?  If you are a Jew (guessing from your name) then you believe I am going to hell.  Let me ask you, how can I "respect" Jews when they preach that Jesus is boiling in excrement?  How can I "respect" Muslims when they preach that they should kill me?
Quote:  Where's the universality and non-judgment in that statement?
  I wasn't commenting on "universality".  Man is a fallen race.  We need Jesus if we are to overcome our fallen nature.  And obtaining His Grace is open to all, and easily obtained (it's called baptism, not very difficult).  Without Jesus, you will be mired in your darkness. 
Reply
#59
Quote: This is not a teaching of the Church. Please try not to spread heresy if you can possibly help it.
That is most certainly the teaching of the Church.  Here's one Bible quote (with comment in the douay rheims), there are many more.  We can look at the encyclicals also:

Quote: 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. 4 Every man praying or prophesying with his head covered, disgraceth his head. 5 But every woman praying or prophesying with her head not covered, disgraceth her head: for it is all one as if she were shaven.

6 For if a woman be not covered, let her be shorn. But if it be a shame to a woman to be shorn or made bald, let her cover her head. 7 The man indeed ought not to cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man. 9 For the man was not created for the woman, but the woman for the man. 10 Therefore ought the woman to have a power over her head, because of the angels.
comment
10 "A power"... that is, a veil or covering, as a sign that she is under the power of her husband: and this, the apostle adds, because of the angels, who are present in the assemblies of the faithful.
Reply
#60
(02-10-2010, 03:00 AM)James02 Wrote:
Quote: This is not a teaching of the Church. Please try not to spread heresy if you can possibly help it.
That is most certainly the teaching of the Church.  Here's one Bible quote (with comment in the douay rheims), there are many more.  We can look at the encyclicals also:

Quote: 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. 4 Every man praying or prophesying with his head covered, disgraceth his head. 5 But every woman praying or prophesying with her head not covered, disgraceth her head: for it is all one as if she were shaven.

6 For if a woman be not covered, let her be shorn. But if it be a shame to a woman to be shorn or made bald, let her cover her head. 7 The man indeed ought not to cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man. 9 For the man was not created for the woman, but the woman for the man. 10 Therefore ought the woman to have a power over her head, because of the angels.
comment
10 "A power"... that is, a veil or covering, as a sign that she is under the power of her husband: and this, the apostle adds, because of the angels, who are present in the assemblies of the faithful.

Saying that wives are subject to their husbands is not the same as saying that women are subject to men. This is a very obvious distinction between married people and non-married people.

Reading your posts I can see that you are the kind of person who turns others away from Catholicism. Good luck with that.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)