EcceNovaFacioOmni Posted September 12, 2004 Posted September 12, 2004 (edited) Putting all the sheer ridiculousness of this womens-ordination website aside: My question to WomenPriests.org: How can you consider yourself credible when you ridicule the Angelic Doctor? [img]http://www.womenpriests.org/images/aquinas.gif[/img] Edited September 12, 2004 by thedude
picchick Posted September 12, 2004 Posted September 12, 2004 Neither do I. What is the cartoon suppose to say?
Piccoli Fiori JMJ Posted September 12, 2004 Posted September 12, 2004 I'm a wee bit confused... which aristolte are we talking about?
immaculata Posted September 12, 2004 Posted September 12, 2004 is he implying what I think he's implying? :angry:
toledo_jesus Posted September 12, 2004 Posted September 12, 2004 [quote name='Chris Zewe' date='Sep 12 2004, 03:39 PM'] Pero es muy verdad... [/quote] Pues, mientras que la historieta está técnico correcta en su aserción que a Aristotle influenció a Aquinas, la representación del santo como un bufón ignorante está insultando y desafortunadamente una táctica común de esta gente irreverente.
EcceNovaFacioOmni Posted September 12, 2004 Author Posted September 12, 2004 It's supposed to make Aquinas look like a sexist dolt.
picchick Posted September 12, 2004 Posted September 12, 2004 [quote name='immaculata' date='Sep 12 2004, 04:43 PM'] is he implying what I think he's implying? :angry: [/quote] What do you think that he is implying?? I still don't get it. Is he saying that he thought that there were no place for women in the world and God was wrong for creating them and that he needed some inspiration from Aristotle?
franciscanheart Posted September 13, 2004 Posted September 13, 2004 oh i thought it was talking about Thomas Aquinas being a "sexist" when speaking about natural law. i dont know though, maybe im just missing something.
picchick Posted September 13, 2004 Posted September 13, 2004 I still don't get it!!! Why don't I understand this!!!/???
mmmerf Posted September 13, 2004 Posted September 13, 2004 Yeep. Aquinas was anything BUT a sexist. He was ahead of his time (several centuries, in fact) in reminding people that men and women were [b][i]created as equals[/i][/b]. He gives us the quote: "Remember, woman was formed from man's side, not his foot." Which is a refutation of anyone who'd place men above women. To say that women must be priests is to say that the only way they'll be recognized is if they do what the men do. Which is ridiculous. They have their own unique role, and if anything it is our mothers more than any other that lay the foundations of society. But we live in a society that despises motherhood, because it despises sacrifice. So when we point out that the chief vocation of any woman, any person in fact, is to love, we are ridiculed. No no, says the world. We do not want sacrifice. We want authority. Well then, find another religion. The Lamb that sits upon the throne got there through Calvary. :irate: Sorry. Anyways. Dave
Theoketos Posted September 13, 2004 Posted September 13, 2004 I think that it implies that One: Aristotle is completely arbitrary and sexest. Two: So is St. Thomas Three: That St. Thomas used Aristotle for his own agenda, which was to put women down against what is really reasonable. It is also ment to make men look foolish and stupid, as well as fat. The Cartoonist did not even get the Dominican Habit correct.
Piccoli Fiori JMJ Posted September 13, 2004 Posted September 13, 2004 (edited) Women as Priests? Psh... Ha! That's funny in itself... Sorry... -_- EDIT: Had "women for Priests" instead of what it is now... my bad... Edited September 13, 2004 by FutureNunJMJ
Ash Wednesday Posted September 13, 2004 Posted September 13, 2004 No doubt, lampooning an Angelic Doctor of the Church is inappropriate if you're asserting "Roman Catholicism." It's like someone making fun of St. Therese. :shame:
EcceNovaFacioOmni Posted September 13, 2004 Author Posted September 13, 2004 [quote name='Ash Wednesday' date='Sep 13 2004, 04:30 PM'] No doubt, lampooning an Angelic Doctor of the Church is inappropriate if you're asserting "Roman Catholicism." [b]It's like someone making fun of St. Therese[/b]. :shame: [/quote] WomenPriests.org does talk about her. They try to make the claim she had a vocation to the priesthood. Comon. I think there was a total refutation of this website somewhere...
Carnanc Posted September 13, 2004 Posted September 13, 2004 hm... I really don't think I understand it yet.
Guest T-Bone Posted September 14, 2004 Posted September 14, 2004 Why don't all those unhappy with the teaching of the Church go found thier own cafateria style religion, and leave the faithful Catholics alone. At least Martin Luther put his money where his mouth was...
Ash Wednesday Posted September 14, 2004 Posted September 14, 2004 [quote name='thedude' date='Sep 13 2004, 04:55 PM'] WomenPriests.org does talk about her. They try to make the claim she had a vocation to the priesthood. Comon. I think there was a total refutation of this website somewhere... [/quote] No kiddin'? People can be so silly. I suppose they brought up the Pope Joan garbage, too.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now