Contraception (Pilhet) - Revision history

P.B. Pilhet: fix

2012-12-10T00:44:09Z

fix

P.B. Pilhet: fix format

2012-12-10T00:41:48Z

fix format

P.B. Pilhet: fix format

2012-12-10T00:34:43Z

fix format

P.B. Pilhet: fix formating

2012-12-10T00:29:06Z

fix formating

P.B. Pilhet: change formatingj

2012-12-10T00:24:39Z

change formatingj

P.B. Pilhet: Change formating

2012-12-10T00:20:17Z

Change formating

P.B. Pilhet: fix spelling

2012-12-04T14:17:57Z

fix spelling

P.B. Pilhet: /* NOTES AND REFERENCES */ Adjust format

2012-12-04T14:13:21Z

‎NOTES AND REFERENCES: Adjust format

P.B. Pilhet: Adjust format

2012-12-04T14:12:19Z

Adjust format

P.B. Pilhet: adjust format

2012-12-04T14:11:01Z

adjust format

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{opinionarticle}}
 <center><font size="5"><font color="brown">'''''ALREADY SEARED'''''</font></font></center>
@@ Line 170: / Line 171: @@
-<references />
+====NOTES AND REFERENCES====
@@ Line 178: / Line 180: @@
 <font size="1">
 *NOTE:  Notwithstanding all other statements on this website/page, this article is NOT licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike License 3.0 Generic (CC-BY-SA).  All rights are reserved to both Justin Matas and the Biblica, Inc.™ (see below), appropriately.
-*Unless otherwise stated, all Scriptural quotations are taken from: THE HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.</font>
+*Unless otherwise stated, all Scriptural quotations are taken from: THE HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.</font></div>

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:41, 10 December 2012
Line 172:		Line 172:
	====Notes and References====		====Notes and References====

−	~~{{reflist}}~~	+	<references />

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{opinionarticle}}
 <center><font size="5"><font color="brown">'''''ALREADY SEARED'''''</font></font></center>
@@ Line 171: / Line 170: @@
-====NOTES AND REFERENCES====
+{{reflist}}
@@ Line 180: / Line 178: @@
 <font size="1">
 *NOTE:  Notwithstanding all other statements on this website/page, this article is NOT licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike License 3.0 Generic (CC-BY-SA).  All rights are reserved to both Justin Matas and the Biblica, Inc.™ (see below), appropriately.
-*Unless otherwise stated, all Scriptural quotations are taken from: THE HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.</font></div>
+*Unless otherwise stated, all Scriptural quotations are taken from: THE HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.</font>

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:29, 10 December 2012
Line 174:		Line 174:
	====NOTES AND REFERENCES====		====NOTES AND REFERENCES====

−	{{reflist~~\|close~~}}	+	</div>{{reflist}}<div style=" width:auto; border: 2px solid brown; background-color:Whitesmoke; padding:10px;">

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:24, 10 December 2012
Line 174:		Line 174:
	====NOTES AND REFERENCES====		====NOTES AND REFERENCES====

−	{{reflist}}	+	{{reflist\|close}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:20, 10 December 2012
Line 174:		Line 174:
	====NOTES AND REFERENCES====		====NOTES AND REFERENCES====

−	~~<font size="1">~~{{reflist}}~~</font>~~	+	{{reflist}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:17, 4 December 2012
Line 16:		Line 16:


−	I was temporarily persuaded by this argument, until I re-read the controversial verses more thoroughly. To make a long story short (this essay isn't on women's ordination, after all), I simply couldn't get around the force of Paul's statements. The things he said did not seem to be the simple angry rhetoric used against gossiping women – no, he was asserting that God has different roles for women in church and society than men. It's a natural part of their femininity. It's not that women are not equal to men, it's just that the Lord has other plans for them than being priestesses.<ref>I know some Protestants object to the word “priest” being applied to certain Christian ministers. However, many don't realize that the word “priest” is simply derived from the word “presbyter”, which is itself found in the original Greek of the New Testament as “presbuteros” (“πρεσβύτερος”). It simply means “elder”, and very early on in the Church it came do designate the ministers who presided over the Eucharist. In English, the word “priest” denotes both Christian presbyters and Jewish temple ministers; in the Greek New Testament, however, these Jewish ministers have a separate name, “hiereus” (“ἱερεύς”). It is proper to use either priest or presbyter when describing “elders” in the Catholic Church, as both mean the same thing. I should also note that Christian presbyters are intrinsically different from Jewish priests. The latter hold the priesthood on their own, offering repeated sacrifices of their own. The former are not priests of themselves, however, but simply share in Christ's priesthood (it belongs properly to Him alone), being the instruments of Christ's ''one'' sacrifice (not many), which is re-presented (not re-performed) in the sacrifice of the Eucharist. St. Paul clearly speaks of the Eucharist as a sacrifice in 1 ~~Cornithians~~ 10:14-22. Note how he compares pagans eating meat sacrificed to demons on the “table of demons”, and then describes Christians partaking of the Eucharist on the “table of the Lord.” Thus, the word “table” here is a ~~synomym~~ for “altar.” The early Christians were also quite clear that the Eucharist is a sacrifice.</ref>	+	I was temporarily persuaded by this argument, until I re-read the controversial verses more thoroughly. To make a long story short (this essay isn't on women's ordination, after all), I simply couldn't get around the force of Paul's statements. The things he said did not seem to be the simple angry rhetoric used against gossiping women – no, he was asserting that God has different roles for women in church and society than men. It's a natural part of their femininity. It's not that women are not equal to men, it's just that the Lord has other plans for them than being priestesses.<ref>I know some Protestants object to the word “priest” being applied to certain Christian ministers. However, many don't realize that the word “priest” is simply derived from the word “presbyter”, which is itself found in the original Greek of the New Testament as “presbuteros” (“πρεσβύτερος”). It simply means “elder”, and very early on in the Church it came do designate the ministers who presided over the Eucharist. In English, the word “priest” denotes both Christian presbyters and Jewish temple ministers; in the Greek New Testament, however, these Jewish ministers have a separate name, “hiereus” (“ἱερεύς”). It is proper to use either priest or presbyter when describing “elders” in the Catholic Church, as both mean the same thing. I should also note that Christian presbyters are intrinsically different from Jewish priests. The latter hold the priesthood on their own, offering repeated sacrifices of their own. The former are not priests of themselves, however, but simply share in Christ's priesthood (it belongs properly to Him alone), being the instruments of Christ's ''one'' sacrifice (not many), which is re-presented (not re-performed) in the sacrifice of the Eucharist. St. Paul clearly speaks of the Eucharist as a sacrifice in 1 Corinthians 10:14-22. Note how he compares pagans eating meat sacrificed to demons on the “table of demons”, and then describes Christians partaking of the Eucharist on the “table of the Lord.” Thus, the word “table” here is a synonym for “altar.” The early Christians were also quite clear that the Eucharist is a sacrifice.</ref>


−	To me, it seemed that the person I had been debating with was taking modern feminist ideology (which is very new, having only been around about a hundred years or so) and trying to re-interpret the Scriptures in a more liberal sense to suit those newer values; and this is against the traditional view that had been around since Christianity's inception. For fear of being labeled “sexist”, modern folk water down the Lord's teachings about masculinity and femininity. The way the Scriptures and Christian tradition have walked hand-in-hand on this issue since the time of Christ until very recently should be more than enough proof that women cannot receive priestly ordination.<ref>Though women cannot currently be ordained into any of the sacramental Orders (diaconate, presbyterate, and episcopate), there is conclusive evidence from the early Church that women did function to some extent as deaconesses. This is because in ancient times people were baptized completely naked. Since male deacons obviously couldn't perform this task for women candidates, other women did the job instead. The evidence does not warrant the conclusion, however, that these women received the “laying on of hands” mentioned by St. Paul, or any special grace like that which is ~~confered~~ on male deacons. Canon 19 of the Council of Nicaea (held in AD 325) seems to indicate that deaconesses were not ordained sacramentally.</ref>	+	To me, it seemed that the person I had been debating with was taking modern feminist ideology (which is very new, having only been around about a hundred years or so) and trying to re-interpret the Scriptures in a more liberal sense to suit those newer values; and this is against the traditional view that had been around since Christianity's inception. For fear of being labeled “sexist”, modern folk water down the Lord's teachings about masculinity and femininity. The way the Scriptures and Christian tradition have walked hand-in-hand on this issue since the time of Christ until very recently should be more than enough proof that women cannot receive priestly ordination.<ref>Though women cannot currently be ordained into any of the sacramental Orders (diaconate, presbyterate, and episcopate), there is conclusive evidence from the early Church that women did function to some extent as deaconesses. This is because in ancient times people were baptized completely naked. Since male deacons obviously couldn't perform this task for women candidates, other women did the job instead. The evidence does not warrant the conclusion, however, that these women received the “laying on of hands” mentioned by St. Paul, or any special grace like that which is conferred on male deacons. Canon 19 of the Council of Nicaea (held in AD 325) seems to indicate that deaconesses were not ordained sacramentally.</ref>

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:13, 4 December 2012
Line 174:		Line 174:
	====NOTES AND REFERENCES====		====NOTES AND REFERENCES====

−	{{reflist}}	+	<font size="1">{{reflist}}</font>

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:12, 4 December 2012
Line 174:		Line 174:
	====NOTES AND REFERENCES====		====NOTES AND REFERENCES====

−	~~<font size="1">~~{{reflist}}~~</font>~~	+	{{reflist}}

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 <div style=" width:auto; border: 2px solid brown; background-color:Whitesmoke; padding:10px;">
 <center><font size="5"><font color="brown">'''''ALREADY SEARED'''''</font></font></center>
 <center><font size="4"><font color="brown">'''Why I Am Now Against Contraception, and an Appeal to My Fellow Christians'''</font></font></center>