I'm not Catholic, and I don't really have any problems with you, quite the contrary, I know the history of the church and I know how it basically founded and saved western civilization.
But there are several things that seem to me to be eternally debated. one of them is the issue of “church doctors.”
Can women be doctors or not? related photo is one side of this debate. It has always seemed to me that women have had more authority and elevation in Catholicism than in other religions. and please, let's have a serious discussion without memes, without insults and without any kind of juvenile nonsense.
thanks for reading
"Authority" in the Church means a position of leadership, like a bishop or Pope. Women cannot be bishops.
They worship a goddess, the divine feminine, Ishtar/Diana/Sophia/Mary. So it actually is feminine leadership.
but they can be doctors
hello.
I am no longer Catholic and I ended up finding truth in another belief, I asked the same question you asked, and I asked if having women as doctors and what that means and the type of importance that this poses for the church could fit into this question . I cited questions about which women have never really had very high doctorates since the Old Testament and my answer was that I was exaggerating, and I only had the examples we all know of women as an answer. unfortunately it wasn't a very concise answer and I asked some people at the church and basically got answers that said yes, others that no and some that "this is complicated". I really don't know how to answer you, I'm sorry. But if I were to base myself on the general order of the answers I had, I would say yes
I always think these things strange. many women having a lot of theological focus, especially when it involves mystics.
I don't know how to explain it, but I think that holy women seem to have a lot more "focus" and seem to break their existence as a way of "changing the classic concepts of gender" I don't know how to explain it
I think I know what you're talking about. Is it something like this?
>radicalcatholicism
Oxymoron. Catholics should be meek.
But picrel is pretty cool
>Can women be doctors or not?
Yes. They can.
women can have influence and a certain healthy representation in matters, being theologians.
Women cannot teach
>women cannot teach
Lol, so what is our role?
There are many ways in which women can serve the gospel. Luke 2:36-38 mentions that Hannah prayed continually. No greater responsibility than prayer exists and women have an equal right with men to approach the throne of God in prayer.
Women can teach. While she cannot have authority over men, a Christian woman can and should teach other women and children (Titus 2:3-5), and if she maintains a humble spirit, she can also help men better understand the Scriptures (Acts 18 :24-26). In the first century, women prophesied (Acts 2:17-18; 21:9), that is, they revealed God's will through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Deborah, in the Old Testament, was a woman much sought after because of her wise advice. Timothy's faith was attributed to the influence of his mother and grandmother, both of whom were devout. Christian women must know the Scriptures and be able to humbly show what God's will is.
They probably used the same website or it's the sameflag.
but I would like to hear the opinion of other more traditional Catholics at least
they refute you.
We are not Muslims, women inherited all their status. Regardless, France has a long history of rather powerless queen mothers in regencies, see Louis XIII, XIV and XV. In reality, a powerful Queen Mother is generally a good thing, as it allows for the consolidation of power under someone who actually benefits from strengthening royal authority, rather than several nobles with often selfish intentions vying for power and influence. The only reason the regencies of Louis XIII and XIV were successful in maintaining royal authority is due to the fact that they had loyal prime ministers who were sonless and heirless and were often willing to support the kingdom over their brothers and nephews.
bro
I saw that
Yes haha
She uses translator.
Why did they refute me?
I don't even debate these women, I didn't actually make any posts here, I just want to know other points of view and I found the OP's question interesting. Does that make me "Muslim"? moronic. muh islamic oppression. go back to your house.
They can though. There is nothing stopping them from catechizing people, or from promulgating theology in a secular setting.
They cannot consecrate or ordain, however.
Or rule. Except in the stead of a bishop, as in the case of an abbess in her abbey.
>As a leader in the early Church, Paul is not issuing a categorical ban on women in the teaching ministry. He is specifically prohibiting them from the teaching and governing ministry exclusively reserved to the ordained clergy (see 1 Corinthians 14:34-35). That would mean, for example, as it does in the present day, that women cannot give homilies at Mass, a teaching function reserved to priests, and deacons.
>St. Paul clearly affirms elsewhere the equal dignity of men and women in Christ (see Galatians 3:28), as well as the fact that women can pray and prophesy otherwise within Christian worship (see 1 Corinthians 11:5). Paul adds that women provide an important service in teaching the Faith in word and deed in other contexts (see Titus 2:3-4).
Catholic bros, is that true?
Yes
Why?
"yes" is very simple.
No.
So answer the reason!
you just say "yes" and "no" like robots
What else do you want? the sources have already been passed.
see here
and here
And here
No
In Hebrew and Christian history, there were women prophetesses (Miriam) and women can be missionaries, including several of them.
and of course, many denominations ordain women like Anglicans and Methodists
Well, some say that Christ had female disciples.
Why did they wait until 1970 to make them doctors of the church?
Good question
Yes.
>The queen mother of Israel had a powerful influence on the kingdom. This power and authority flow from her status as Gebirah (queen mother) and not from her as a person. In Israel, the queen mother preceded her son into existence, sometimes she ruled in his stead (Cf. 2 Kings 10:13: "We are relatives of Ahaziah," they replied. "Let us visit the princes and the queen's family- mother" and sometimes also abuses his authority. (Cf. 2 Jeremiah 13:18: "Say to the king and the queen mother: come down from your throne.")
https://udayton.edu/imri/mary/q/que en-mother-in-old-testament.php
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that this comes from the same or similar sites. Anyway, it seems very convenient the way things are written and we see people on either side using the words of any of Christ's disciples to base their opinions. especially among female pastors. but who am I to say anything?
>They probably used the same website or it's the sameflag.
I'm sure I've read these same messages in other threads. I don't know if it's the same person or different ones, at least we know that one of them is not Anglo and is probably latino
you just need to refute them. I challenge you.
Are you moronic? where did I say I am "Muslim"? I'm this guy
I haven't even given my view on this, I can either agree or disagree. Tell me, have you been using a translator for a long time?
good for you. but I still think it's suspicious.
It's really not bro. There are women in the NT who are leaders of their home churches, named by Paul himself. Like Priscilla, among others.
He actually describes her, along with her husband, as a "fellow worker in Christ". And as working together to correct misconceptions that other preachers had. Her input was clearly of value to the early church.
I based my answer off my own memory and a random Catholic Answers article which bothers to cite scripture.
You know you could just look up on a Catholic website if women can be considered doctors of the Church rather than asking randos on IQfy.
The Vatican has since 1970.
And?
So question answered. If the Vatican says so than the Catholic church says so.
basically what I realized reading all the posts is that women do have this right and that Christian patriarchy is somewhat malleable
Also are there Territorial Abbesses? Or have their ever been? Probably not as they wouldn't give such an honor to a female monastic community but I would not be surprised if they did.
Actually they did
When and where?
they can.
in fact, even among Protestants women could have some involvement in theological matters of the church, you are probably Muslim
It's funny that you still use the same strawman of calling someone a Muslim if they say A about women, right?
tell me moron, are we missing a lot? instead of leaving women in theological positions like you do? It's really something "irreplaceable"?
"Ohh look! The Muslim hate women guys" please bro
irrelevant. the onus is on you, why should we treat women as weak and beings who should not have any type of property in the church? their belief treats women as almost animals. there is a difference
>their belief treats women as almost animals. there is a difference
not Muslim nor the guy, but that was extremely cringe. literally
huh? But since the Bronze Age weren't religious issues considered masculine?
No.
just on the sand peninsula
Here's an entire thread of a Muslim being utterly humiliated for saying that Islam is not misogynystic.
sameflag
Why do you pretend to be two people at the same time? Why was he humiliated? by the way, I read the statement and the topic is basically a BAIT made by a non-Muslim.
grow up friend, don't pretend to be two people
>Why do you pretend to be two people at the same time?
I'm not? moron.
John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist movement, was the first within his movement to authorize a woman to preach. In 1761, he granted a license to preach to Sarah Crosby.[9]