Originally posted by lucifershammer
Worship is a primary responsibility of all humans - ordained/consecrated or lay. What I'm saying is that women have a different responsibility or vocation, no less in dignity, in the Church.

Equality does not mean identity.

You say women has a different responsibility (singular). Interesting. Tell me, what would that responsibility be?

If we're talking equality in terms of what is possible for women to do versa men, I find it extremely hard to believe that a woman couldn't lead men in spiritual matters (such as the popes responsibilities).

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
If the role of the President of the United States were defined to be held by a white man, it would be the case that black men would have no potential to fulfill it. Would black men have a legitimate gripe against those who thus defined the role of President?

If the definition reflects the metaphysical reality of the position (as with "male mother" ), then they don't. If it doesn't, then they do.

EDIT: IIRC a person who is not a natural-born US citizen cannot become the President of the US. Do you think naturalised citizens have a legitimate gripe against those etc.?

Originally posted by stocken
You say women has a different responsibility (singular). Interesting. Tell me, what would that responsibility be?

As human beings, to love God and love their neighbour. As women, to be loving mothers, daughters and wives. As it is for men to be loving fathers, sons and husbands.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
As human beings, to love God and love their neighbour. As women, to be loving mothers, daughters and wives. As it is for men to be loving fathers, sons and husbands.

But this way the overall responsabity of men is higher then of women when you take into account the male only jobs in the church.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
If the definition reflects the metaphysical reality of the position (as with "male mother" ), then they don't. If it doesn't, then they do.

EDIT: IIRC a person who is not a natural-born US citizen cannot become the President of the US. Do you think naturalised citizens have a legitimate gripe against those etc.?

What? Arnold can't be president?

(Not knowing what IIRC stands for, I may very well have missed the point.)

Originally posted by stocken
What? Arnold can't be president?

(Not knowing what IIRC stands for, I may very well have missed the point.)

Nope people who were born outside of the us can't run it.

Do you wish he could?

Originally posted by Will Everitt
But this way the overall responsabity of men is higher then of women when you take into account the male only jobs in the church.

A lot of mothers I know would disagree with you. LOL

In any case, it isn't a question of one responsibility being "more" or "less" than the other. They're different. That's all.

Originally posted by Will Everitt
Nope people who were born outside of the us can't run it.

Do you wish he could?

Wheew, I really have to work on my sarcasm. That was a joke.

Although, seeing as they have Bush now, Arnold would actually be an improvement.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
IIRC a person who is not a natural-born US citizen cannot become the President of the US. Do you think naturalised citizens have a legitimate gripe against those etc.?

Yes. It wouldn't surprise me if that requirement were amended in my lifetime.

Originally posted by stocken


(Not knowing what IIRC stands for, I may very well have missed the point.)

"If I'm Roman Catholic." It's used like "as sure as I'm standing here."

Originally posted by lucifershammer
A lot of mothers I know would disagree with you. LOL

In any case, it isn't a question of one responsibility being "more" or "less" than the other. They're different. That's all.

You wouldn't characterize the Pope as having more responsibility than Cardinal Law's housekeepers?

Originally posted by stocken
(Not knowing what IIRC stands for, I may very well have missed the point.)

If I Recall Correctly

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
You wouldn't characterize the Pope as having more responsibility than Cardinal Law's housekeepers?

Not "more" in the sense of "greater" or "more important". Every task, every responsibility, every job has a dignity of its own.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Not "more" in the sense of "greater" or "more important". Every task, every responsibility, every job has a dignity of its own.

Tell that to a reluctant male prostitute?

---

I actually wrote "mail prostitute", first. ha ha. 😵

Originally posted by stocken
Tell that to a reluctant male prostitute?

---

I actually wrote "mail prostitute", first. ha ha. 😵

Argh. Nice catch, though. I meant every legitimate responsibility, every legitimate task, every legitimate* job.

In any case, we were talking about the relative responsibilities of men qua men and women qua women as given by God.

---
* "legitimate" is not equal to "legal"!