Good Morning ULC,

You may or may not have heard, but there are a couple of Catholic Priests fighting for equality and woman's rights to be ordained with the "Universal Church"

Reverend Roy Bourgeois stated that, “I will never be at peace being in any organization that would exclude others."

The priest goes on to call the Vatican's ordination policy 'spiritual assassination' and 'violence'.

I'm very glad that we here are accepting of others, it makes life much easier knowing that we're part of a much bigger fight to sustain religious tolerance, freedom and equality in a world which still falls to the sword of religious discrimination.

WWJD? Right...

Source: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachus...rdaining_women/

thats simular to what Luther told the pope so many many years ago. his rules were unfair and priests should also be able to live like normal people and not in a palace for worship. finally he told the pope enoght is enoght and him and any priests wishing to flollow him are leaving. and that was the start of lutheranism. which also broke off in other groups years later and started the worker priest movement. we are priests in the same apostolic succession and live and work like normal people too.

Where as their religion does no harm to others the Roman Catholic Church may rightfully exclude those that do not wish to practice as they do. This includes women that wish to be priests.

If the women wish to become something other than Roman Catholic and become priests in a religion that allows women to do so that is also their right to do so. To force others to go against their non-harmful non-violent beliefs that you are unqualified for what ever reason (no matter how you feel about that reason) is more wrong than them telling you that they don't want to hear your message.

If you object to the group find another.

Oh wait we are that group aren't we. We accept anyone and that is the calling for this group of misfit reverends. ;p


But really, there are other catholic branches the women may hang from and be happy serving there.

Luther never left the catholic church willingly. In fact his followers left the church before he was excommunicated. The big difference with Luther was that he was going after the pope for violating the fundamentals of the church doctrine and the issuance of indulgences for the rich. ("Selling out God's Church for silver and gold")

the roman catholic church despite having vats of blood on their hands (as they beleive in original sin) must wake up to the times we have proof that in early christianity there were female leaders of the church who were ordained to do so. Modern catholicism is a gathering of mideval aged mentality primates worshipping a god whom they refuse to listen to. Women deserve better, and eventually the good ole boys club will either fall, or pull their head out of their rears permanently.

yeah, the RC is a all boys club.

I have to agree with Br. Joseph in part, that any religion has the right to accept those they see qualified, and write doctrine according to their belief just as long as no one is harmed, and therefore should not be told they must accept women as priests. We as ministers of the ULC must support with respect, everyone’s right to practice their chosen religion free from persecution and ridicule. To do otherwise is to be dictators of another’s affairs, and in fact, make us all hypocrites in being ministers to the ULC church which we all belong to.
A final thought is about us as ULC ministers. As we are all aware, we come from a variety of backgrounds and practices. It is not unreasonable to think we may have some ministers who practice the Catholic faith. Certain notions of and descriptions of, contained in this thread, may have been found offensive and disrespectful by those members. Despite how we may feel our observation and emotions justify our expression, the fact is we are supposed to be about respect for all denominations. What happens to the Catholic faith as a result of their own actions is not up to us, but how we represent ourselves as ULC ministers is.
Just thought I’d throw that in there just in case there are they who might not feel comfortable to speak for themselves.

God’s blessings,

Rev. Campbell.

Well, Now this is an interesting thread.

There are so many good points within. Yes I agree, to each his own. Yes I agree, who are we, the ones who preach acceptance of all, to say anything against the rules of another, no matter how antiquated. Yes, I agree, we, as does everyone doth have a choice to stay or leave, as we see fit, and even to select another arm of the same faith.

BUT...

I also think that many of us are here today, not as a result of our 'wanting' to be in our own set of rules, but for the mere fact that the rules, which are in many cases justified by 'doctrine', which as you all know my beliefs on - a man-made/authored scripture of self-propaganda and benefit - the rules themselves are flawed.

OUR Ministry has found that MANY books of faith, as I like to refer to the doctrines, have no where within there text any such rules, excluding any person from ministering the good word. Yet along the way, powers to be felt the need to limit who said and did what.

We would be ultra-naive if we did not consider the fact that the RC as well as many faiths were 'institutionalized' during a time of segregation (of color, ethnicity, and sex). How many of us can recall the fever pitch when the RC church exclaimed - A POLISH POPE??? Now a German? Of course, the glass roof has been broken on the misconception that only WE great Italians have the ear of God, and can serve as the Pope. A 'tradition' once mandated by Doctrine - that the leader most high of the RC church shall be chosen amongst the Roman Cardinals, has since been seen for it's basic misconception that ALL men are not created equal under God's watchful hand.

Of course we need only look back less than a hundred years to see that Black men were apparently incapable of serving the Lord in the capacity of Priest. Of course that rule - made complete sense - no? Of course not - but how did the change come about?

Not to be one to throw a stone without baring self-witness, I must also confess my own prejudice in this matter. Growing up Episcopal, it was not until only a few decades ago, that Women were not considered for ordination. Yes, they could serve as lay people in the church, but not hold the title of clergy. In fact, because of this 'training' as a youth, when I was first presented with a ceremony conducted by a male priest, with a woman assisting in the Eucharist - I could not accept the fact that SHE could do such a thing. When getting up from my pew to receive communion, I switched lines, in order to receive the host from the male priest.

Of course now, as I have matured, I see the ridiculousness of that misconception, but at the time it was internal, based on years of practice.

My wife is a great example of what I consider the key in this issue. She is a Roman Catholic. As such she rarely goes to church. Like many RC members under the age 50, she has no idea why she is a RC, other than the fact that she always has been, and most likely always will be. In fact she feels guilty when ever she enters another church, of any other faith, albeit closely associated - Episcopal, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, Inter-Denominational - Christian based, etc..). She is absolute in the fact that should could never change 'faiths', as her family would disown her, and she would be cast to the pitches of heck. She is not able to site any doctrine justifying that thought - yet it exists.

Thus if my wife was also of the heart to serve HER God, in a way other than attending church at key Holidays - if she was a committed zealot, how could she rightfully do so, without being outcast from what SHE believes is the ONLY FAITH?

Converting to another religion, regardless of how similar it may be in both doctrine and ritual, simply is not an option for many - because of their core foundation belief (albeit the one belief we are mostly against) that their religion is the only religion.

So our discussion here today, and I am certain for many to come, is NOT that they are wrong, nor that they do not have the right to set such parameters in their guides - but rather to discuss, in our opinion if it is truly a mandate of God (and for this purpose - their God) or one established years and years ago by an all male and threatened group of Man's men - who for the need of control, outcast the Joan's of Arc of there day, and established a right of passage solely for they the chosen ones?

We are in a unique position, and as such we should not fool ourselves. As much as we promote freedom of choice herein, we do so out of necessity and not always desire. We are here, because of the lack of acceptance by many of our original faith systems to fulfill our personal needs to serve. Sure many of us are here as a result of believing in something outside the box of a traditional setting, but all the same - there are some who have found there way here as a result of persecution.

Our unique position allows us to share our thoughts and ideas on these subjects, and in a small way (20 million ULC Ministers Worldwide strong) hopefully promote change within OUR belief system and THEIRS to be more accepting of others - regardless of Age, Sex, Ethnicity, and the like. Who are we to change them? We are Ministers of God - It is our JOB to change people.

WE MINISTER to ALL people daily, in hopes to affect change. Then too our goal is to minister to the RC church, and churches like them. We preach our doctrine of acceptance daily amongst ourselves - should we not preach it to those in need of hearing it?

One of my favorite passages in the Bible (NIV) is Mark 2:15-17. 'While Jesus was having dinner at Levi's house, many tax collectors and 'sinners' were eating with him and his discples, for there were many who followed him. When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the 'sinners' and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: "Why does he eat with tax collectors and 'sinners'? On hearing this, Jesus said to then. "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but the sinners."

Are the teachers not in this case the RC church leaders? Are those who are in need of his guidance not the same?

We are not in our present position to preach to only those who believe, but to those who do not. We can not sit here and minister a belief of acceptance and not try to minister such a belief to others less accepting. For it is not those who agree who need to hear us.

None of us here are of the mind set that it is our responsibility to convert others from their core belief system or faith - (at least none of us I have listened to via these message boards) - no one is saying - leave the RC church and come pray with me - my God is smarter. No, that is not our goal, intent, or even desire.

However when we see unjust behavior, and unfair rulings - which can not be justified by God's Word (especially their God's Word) - then who shall fight that cause - if not us? Who shall stand for the sinners and say - accept these persons oh Lord - for they too wish to serve you?

From a spiritual standpoint - it is exactly why we are here - to promote acceptance.

From a mere common sense standpoint - the adverse attributes of a religion which has in recent years seen a decline in 'traditional' membership and those who wish to serve as clergy - and a mass exodus of splintering to Evangelical sects, must ask itself - Why do people say they are RC, but not attend? Why do people who say they are RC go to other churches for service and communion? Why is the younger generation, not coming through our doors?

Is it for lack of modern music - because we have added drums? Is it for the lack of upbeat sermons - because we have stopped the heck and brimstone preaching? Is it because our attire is too formal - because our Nun's now dress in modern frocks?

The RC church must at one point look within themselves to see WHY people call themselves RC. Do people call themselves RC because God stated they are to be followers of MAN or followers of Jesus? Does the RC church truly believe that only a man can take Your hand and lead you down the path of Jesus?

Rules, Rules, Rules. It is always man-made rules that will be the death of us all. One Rule–Believe in God for God said, Do as you would to others and you would have them do unto you.

(Don't get me started on the whole homosexual thing.! )

Dear Dr. Ray,

Wow, very well thought out response dear brother!
That being said, I would still like to add a cautionary note. While it is a good thing that we preach tolerance to others, it is just as, if not more important to demonstrate our beliefs. The bible tells us that the practice of our devotion to God is what makes the word a living thing, and that our words without the practice are just more words. There is nothing wrong with preaching our philosophies and beliefs, but to expect others to heed those words or adopt them just because we say so would at the very least, result in disappointment.
Over the years the Catholic Church has changed, and yes, in part, due to the demand for those changes. However, a lot of changes have more to do with the division within the church and the branching out of offspring faiths. New and more expanded minds had united and sot to effect changes, or they went their own way and started a new. The people will follow what rings true to them, and should another religion sound that bell, that's where the people will go.
We as ULC ministers know there are millions who find their place within our church. Millions affect billions, and so in time, I believe our efforts as ULC ministers will be the role model of more than we could ever hope to know. We have the opportunity to demonstrate a form of co-existence the world has always wanted but were never able to achieve. Patience, tolerance, harmony, love, unity, peace, understanding, and respect are all possible to everyone, and we are the example of that existence. We are being noticed more and more, and I believe our actions are just as effective as our words.
Personally, I agree with your feelings about man made doctrines. They are flawed and usually self-serving, be it the individual or group. I was once Roman Catholic, and I tell you true, it was preached in church that turning your back on your faith was sinful. Being a product of a religious upbringing and a student of a Catholic school, I had this message repeated to me from a very young age. Add the ongoing catechism prep for first communion and confirmation, and I was terrified to even think about exploring other religions. Because I was so young, it never occurred to me that there was a great difference between faith in a religion and faith in God. Once I was blessed with that insight, it was easy for me to leave that church, which before my blessing, would have been an unthinkable thing for me, just as it is for many now. It became possible for me, and it can be possible for others, and we as ULC ministers offer the example of that possibility to everyone who will hear. Though we can scream our message, it is our actions that are unavoidable and deafening.

God’s blessings,

Rev. Campbell.

Being of Native American descent it would be easy for me to cop an unhealthy attitude about all Judeo-Christian and Abrahamic faiths. But my ancestor the Seneca Prophet, Handsome Lake, reminds me in his teachings that the sacred texts are just that; sacred and full of wisdom and great philosophies. His cautionary statement about the "Black Book mind-changer' is to beware from whose hand the book is taken. Therein he recognizes the distortions of the sacred for the benefit of mankind's own ulterior motives, that is, the desire for power and control.

Shall I throw the baby out with the bathwater? No! But I shall glean the best from all of these wisdoms and use it to enhance the quality of life for all mankind, selflessly.

Aldous Huxley's foreward to "A Brave New World" states; "The greatest triumphs of propaganda have been accomplished, not by doing something, but by refraining from doing. Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth."

Somewhere in the middle of all the cacophony of the noisy gongs and clanging symbols of prejudice, religious persecution, doctrinal affronts, and dogmatism, we will find this "Truth". But as we seek to know this "Truth", we must remember that truth (small 't'), in the ears and eyes of man, is a relative term. As such, we must also remember that everyone has a different learning curve as well as intellectual bank. These are the ones we must help, guide, direct, comfort along the way and maybe down our same path...or not. But in the end, it must be left up to the individual's own discernment as to whither they go and whom they will follow. But this in itself does not disallow one from standing and speaking their truth. Nay, to do otherwise would be to allow others to dictate their will, not God's, upon you.

As a social activist and advocate for the oppressed and dowtrodden, it is easy for me to distinguish the potential in every human being and to assist them in becoming a human doing. To empowr themselves with their own potential by showing them a different path. It is not for me to babysit or save anyone, only God can do that. Nor can I empower anyone. They must do that for themselves. It is my responsibility though, to educate them to another perspective or option that might help them rediscover themselves when they are feeling lost and lead them to their own empowerment.

"Be not afraid, but stand and speak."....But do it gently, okay? Then all may profit and prosper from God's Love, Truth, Justice, Hope, and Peace....And may the same be given to all of you....God's Peace....To`na Wanagi

A small side note if you will indulge me.


Throughout this discussion of the attributes of the original question two things jump out at me, for which I am immensely thankful.
1. That there is the freedom of speech allowing such an honest and open discourse on an area many avoid as it is always so touchy and potentially volatile.

2. We, as ULC Ministers, are so welcoming and strong in our belief of respect and diversity that such a discussion can take place and yet we all remain, ULC ministers.

These two points are important, and we should each reflect on the opportunities and freedoms these association grant us, when so very many throughout the world and in many different doctrines of religion cannot.

Thanks for listening,

Rev Jeff

Rev. Jeff as usual points out the obvious - how we are all so very capable of disagreeing amicably, even when we all agree so adamantly. LOL.

Yes our freedom of speech here without insult or anger is always refreshing and EDUCATIONAL. WE at times pose questions to each other that we have not considered in some time, thus allowing us to self-reflect and make better decisions in our own lives.

I think we can all agree, that although we feel change is both inevitable, and at times a good thing - our opinion and even our preaching is designed to affect change, but not to force change. In fact, trying to force another group to think the same way will only make them circle the wagons. In order to truly affect change - the individual must decide via their own free will to make said change. The same goes for an organization.

THUS - God has given us free will - so as to allow us to commit to the choices we make.

On that note - I think it is great that we are all given the chance to make our own interpretations and decisions when it comes to these matter. For those of you who agree with me - good choice. Those who don't - you have time to learn. LOL. Just kidding. (You have very little time. -LOL)

This topic has been my favorite - great post.

Well, I need to scan the other categories of postings before settling in early tonight. Cathy has her surgery tomorrow morning, so it is up early. Thank you to all who have sent your prayers. (A special Thanks to Rev. Jeff and his wife Lisa - ever so thoughtful - you brightened Cathy's day. And as a RC that is hard for her to do. LOL)

All in jest - I love my little RC and break bread with her often.