"don't You Want To Be A Priest?"

[MithLuin]

I agree that that took awhile, but I can understand your third grade teacher thinking maybe that wasn't an age appropriate time to get into it and squash your little girl dreams .

When my sister was in first grade, the parish priest asked her class if any of them wanted to be priests when they grew up (he did this every year). She raised her hand (the only one in the class). Rather than telling her, "sorry, but no," he basically said that he thought that was great. I have never taken that as any indication that he secretly believed that women should be ordained, but rather that he thought her vocation would sort itself out when she got older, and he wanted to support her for raising her hand. He even made an announcement about it in front of the whole school.

My Mom was a bit weirded out by this all, and asked my sister, "Don't you really want to be a nun?" but she shook her head and said no, she wanted to be the person who consecrated the Eucharist at mass (she was 6, keep in mind).

This was not a one day thing, but persisted all throughout elementary school (her classmates called her "Father" in middle school) but finally went away in high school. My sister loved Jesus and was always faithful to the Church, and never made a big deal about saying the rule should be changed or anything like that. I think we thought the reasons for the rule were "stupid" but we respected that the Church was in charge of making them. Maybe we thought things would change when we grew up. My Mom made sure to learn more about these things, so she would understand better what the Church taught. As a high school student, my sister knew that it was her vocation to be married, and today, she is married. She worked as a youth minister for several years, so she did get her opportunity to serve the Church. I don't know why she felt like she wanted to be a priest as a little kid, but God does work in mysterious ways. I never thought it was something she made up, just that (looking back) she must have misunderstood somehow.

Letting it be like that might not have been the best way of handling the situation (I mean, from the point of view of the school/priest), but I think I would have been annoyed if a bunch of adults had been rude about it instead. A six year old (or an 8 year old) has no idea they are stepping into a quagmire and would likely hear "You can't do this because you aren't good enough." Correcting [i]that[/i] error later on would also be pretty difficult! So, I'm glad someone finally explained it to you, [b]Thomist[/b], but I doubt the explanation would have made sense in third grade.

Edited December 22, 2008 by MithLuin

[HisChildForever]

The word "priestess" is just creepy.

[Graciela]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1733619' date='Dec 22 2008, 12:04 AM']The word "priestess" is just creepy.[/quote]

The "creepy" part is your issue, since Christian denominations who currently ordain woman to the priesthood (The Episcopal Church) do not call them "priestesses," but priests or presbyters. Similarly, denominations (like the United Methodist church) call their women who are ordained "deacons", just that- not deaconesses, and ordained elders are called elders not elderesses.

Adding "-ess" to nouns such as priest, deacon or elder at this point in history only serves to highlight gender over the person's recognized role within their denomination as an ordained minister. Those denominations that DO ordain women believe that gender is NOT the most important attribute and that femaleness is not an impediment to ordained ministry, so I find it rather rude to disrespect their usages. Similarly, I would not call an Imam "an Islamic priest", or a Jewish rabbi "a Jewish priest" out of basic human respect and politeness.

A little ecumenical respect might be nice around here.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Graciela

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Graciela' post='1733830' date='Dec 22 2008, 11:41 AM']The "creepy" part is your issue, since Christian denominations who currently ordain woman to the priesthood (The Episcopal Church) do not call them "priestesses," but priests or presbyters. Similarly, denominations (like the United Methodist church) call their women who are ordained "deacons", just that- not deaconesses, and ordained elders are called elders not elderesses.

Adding "-ess" to nouns such as priest, deacon or elder at this point in history only serves to highlight gender over the person's recognized role within their denomination as an ordained minister. Those denominations that DO ordain women believe that gender is NOT the most important attribute and that femaleness is not an impediment to ordained ministry, so I find it rather rude to disrespect their usages. Similarly, I would not call an Imam "an Islamic priest", or a Jewish rabbi "a Jewish priest" out of basic human respect and politeness.

A little ecumenical respect might be nice around here.[/quote]

Thomist-in-Training used the word "priestess" in her post and I was acknowledging it. Obviously I should have quoted her. The common title for those arguing for female priests within the Catholic Church use the word "priestess." I have read it on websites before. By saying "creepy" I meant that the word "priestess" sounds extremely pagan - in fact it [i]is[/i] New Age - and incorporating female priests into our Church would be heresy with a pagan-like twist.

I have no clue where you read disrespect in my comment for other faiths that do [i]not[/i] use the word priestess. In fact I do not believe anyone on this thread even discussed other denominations? (Unless I missed it.) Or were you assuming that I was randomly referring to other faiths? I was in no way discussing denomenations, gender issues, etc. like you are going on about. I am still marveling at whatever bizarre connection you just made.

Why would I blatantly disrespect another Christian faith? Give me some credit, please.

[Graciela]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1733839' date='Dec 22 2008, 11:56 AM']Thomist-in-Training used the word "priestess" in her post and I was acknowledging it. Obviously I should have quoted her. The common title for those arguing for female priests within the Catholic Church use the word "priestess." I have read it on websites before. By saying "creepy" I meant that the word "priestess" sounds extremely pagan - in fact it [i]is[/i] New Age - and incorporating female priests into our Church would be heresy with a pagan-like twist.

I have no clue where you read disrespect in my comment for other faiths that do [i]not[/i] use the word priestess. In fact I do not believe anyone on this thread even discussed other denominations? (Unless I missed it.) Or were you assuming that I was randomly referring to other faiths? I was in no way discussing denomenations, gender issues, etc. like you are going on about. I am still marveling at whatever bizarre connection you just made.

Why would I blatantly disrespect another Christian faith? Give me some credit, please.[/quote]

It does not matter who used the term first, my point was about calling it creepy. And to think that gender issues and other denominations that do have women priests are not invoked when you make such a remark is just naive and insular.

It is NOT the case that advocates for women's ordination in the Roman catholic Church used the term priestesses. The Womens Ordination Conference and Womenpriests, the two largest organizations, clearly do NOT. In fact, neither does the Vatican when it tells women who have been ordained Roman Catholic deacons, priests and bishops that they are automaticalled excommunicated.

The disrespect for other denominations goes on in this latest post when you say that the incorporation of women priests in the Roman Catholic Church would be heresy with a pagan-like twist. Not being in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church is not the same as heresy or paganism, which is implied in your remark. The Anglican churches that do have women deacons, priests and bishops are not "in full communion" but they are clearly not heretic or pagan.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Graciela

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Graciela' post='1733855' date='Dec 22 2008, 12:45 PM']It does not matter who used the term first, my point was about calling it creepy. And to think that gender issues and other denominations that do have women priests are not invoked when you make such a remark is just naive and insular.[/quote]

This thread is solely about women in the Catholic Church who have, at some point, been asked if they would rather be a priest over a sister, etc. This thread has [u]nothing[/u] to do with other denominations. If I was bringing other denominations into it, I would have made that clear. However, the [i]current[/i] discussion is women priests within the Roman Catholic Church.

[quote]It is NOT the case that advocates for women's ordination in the Roman catholic Church used the term priestesses. The Womens Ordination Conference and Womenpriests, the two largest organizations, clearly do NOT. In fact, neither does the Vatican when it tells women who have been ordained Roman Catholic deacons, priests and bishops that they are automaticalled excommunicated.[/quote]

Just because the term "priestess" is not used by the organizations you mentioned (or by the Vatican) does NOT mean that other advocates do NOT use the term. Do a simple Google search.

[quote]The disrespect for other denominations goes on in this latest post when you say that the incorporation of women priests in the Roman Catholic Church would be heresy with a pagan-like twist. Not being in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church is not the same as heresy or paganism, which is implied in your remark.[/quote]

Stop putting words in my mouth. I am in no way implying what you claim. I am not speaking about other denominations. I am speaking of the Roman Catholic Church. Those who advocate women priests within the Church are advocating heresy. I am in no way saying that not being in full communion with Rome is heresy.

My reference to paganism was that those who go about using the term "priestess" are trying to force a very pagan title into Roman Catholicism. Recall that I said pagan-like, [b]not[/b] pagan.

[quote]The Anglican churches that do have women deacons, priests and bishops are not "in full communion" but they are clearly not heretic or pagan.[/quote]

See above.

I do want to add that we see plenty leaving the Anglican church because of this.

[Graciela]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1733871' date='Dec 22 2008, 01:19 PM']This thread is solely about women in the Catholic Church who have, at some point, been asked if they would rather be a priest over a sister, etc. This thread has [u]nothing[/u] to do with other denominations. If I was bringing other denominations into it, I would have made that clear. However, the [i]current[/i] discussion is women priests within the Roman Catholic Church.


I do want to add that we see plenty leaving the Anglican church because of this.[/quote]

Since when are you the one who gets to determine what a thread is "solely" about?

Of course, "plenty" is not a quantifiable term. A few have left, but the Episcopal Church is also getting plenty of former Roman Catholics who find it to be a welcoming sacramental and liturgical church where lay people have voice in the church decision-making alongside the ordained clergy, and where physical maleness is NOT the most important thing about imaging Christ in ordained ministry.

I think that when a discerning womean is asked whther she really want to be a priest, it is an opporunity for her to reflect on whether that question might come from a real recognition of her gifts for ordained ministry by someone who is willing to ask, and not rule it out because of some men in the Vatican making arbitrary rules.

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
let's get back on topic, please. if you'd like to debate what other churches call women priests or debate a men-only priesthood, please take it to the debate table. thank you and God bless.

[Graciela]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1733884' date='Dec 22 2008, 01:41 PM']+J.M.J.+
let's get back on topic, please. if you'd like to debate what other churches call women priests or debate a men-only priesthood, please take it to the debate table. thank you and God bless.[/quote]


The very nature of the question "don't you really want to be a priest?" addressed to a women who is discerning religious life, DOES raise questions about women and ordained ministry, so this has not been off topic.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Graciela

[InHisLove726]

This needs to be moved to the debate table.

Edited December 22, 2008 by InHisLove726

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Graciela' post='1733879' date='Dec 22 2008, 01:35 PM']Since when are you the one who gets to determine what a thread is "solely" about?[/quote]

I just stated what the thread is about. If you are questioning the purpose of this thread take it up with the original poster.

If you have some sort of personal problem with me, private message me. Your sudden hostile appearance was inappropriate. Whether or not you were confused by my statement, you could have approached me with friendly questions.

[quote]Of course, "plenty" is not a quantifiable term. A few have left, but the Episcopal Church is also getting plenty of former Roman Catholics who find it to be a welcoming sacramental and liturgical church where lay people have voice in the church decision-making alongside the ordained clergy, [b]and where physical maleness is NOT the most important thing about imaging Christ in ordained ministry.[/b][/quote]

There is more to it than that.

[quote]I think that when a discerning womean is asked whther she really want to be a priest, it is an opporunity for her to reflect on whether that question might come from a real recognition of her gifts for ordained ministry by someone who is willing to ask, [b]and not rule it out because of some men in the Vatican making arbitrary rules.[/b][/quote]

Heresy.
And I would not [i]dare[/i] call the Pope, Cardinals, Bishops, priests....as "some men."

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1733884' date='Dec 22 2008, 01:41 PM']+J.M.J.+
let's get back on topic, please. if you'd like to debate what other churches call women priests or debate a men-only priesthood, please take it to the debate table. thank you and God bless.[/quote]

Thank you for the reminder; I will be leaving this thread now and will certainly consider making a debate table topic.

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
[quote name='Graciela' post='1733891' date='Dec 22 2008, 11:51 AM']The very nature of the question "don't you really want to be a priest?" addressed to a women who is discerning religious life, DOES raise questions about women and ordained ministry, so this has not been off topic.[/quote]
the question of whether women can be priests in the Catholic Church is a debate topic, so please take it there.

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1733894' date='Dec 22 2008, 11:58 AM']Thank you for the reminder; I will be leaving this thread now and will certainly consider making a debate table topic.[/quote]
thank you.

and now, let us get back on the topic of being asked "But Don't you really want to be a priest?"

[VeniteAdoremus]

I didn't get the question for a whole week!

But maybe it helped that I was staying in a convent during that time.

I would say that female priests are, indeed, an issue for the debate table here (if someone wants to discuss it), although I fully understand how people would want to discuss that within VS, seeing as there's another group of people active here then one usually meets on the debate table.

[TeresaBenedicta]

I've been asked the question a few times... albeit, it's usually phrased, "If you were male, would you want to be a priest?" Although, I've dealt with the original question posed as well.

Even if I were male... I don't think I'd want to be a priest. I couldn't do it... I could never imagine administering the sacraments... I just.. wouldn't be able to do.

Most of the time when the question is asked, I think people don't understand the nature of the priesthood and most importantly, for us women, they don't understand the nature of the religious life. The very nature of the religious vocation is completely different than that of the priesthood. The roles of each vocation are completely different.

[VeniteAdoremus]

[quote name='TeresaBenedicta' post='1734614' date='Dec 24 2008, 05:16 AM']I've been asked the question a few times... albeit, it's usually phrased, "If you were male, would you want to be a priest?" Although, I've dealt with the original question posed as well.

Even if I were male... I don't think I'd want to be a priest. I couldn't do it... I could never imagine administering the sacraments... I just.. wouldn't be able to do.

Most of the time when the question is asked, I think people don't understand the nature of the priesthood and most importantly, for us women, they don't understand the nature of the religious life. The very nature of the religious vocation is completely different than that of the priesthood. The roles of each vocation are completely different.[/quote]

I don't know if I would "want" to if I were male. I'd have a different vocation then, since males can't be religious sisters, can they? (Yes, they can be brothers, but that's different.) At the moment, I certainly can't imagine being able to, but I think my actual not being able to (as a woman) is a big part of that.

I think you're spot on with the nature of vocations. A consecrated sister once told me that "every person is a universe", and we can't hope to get much beyond the outer rims, even if that person is very willing to let us in. And one's vocation is tied to [i]every particle in that universe[/i]. So even within groups of vocations, each vocation is different, let alone with totally different types of vocations!