If other denominations want priests, that is their choice. We don’t have Catholic women priests.

As an American Anglican (ACNA), I agree with restricting holy orders to men only. Unfortunately, there are some in my tradition who are not in agreement and it is a painful moment for us. Lord, in your mercy.

Love the video great information. It seems though that the site does not want to take my thumbs-up.

Excellent summarizing lecture by Sr. Sara Butler, to both men and women with or without teaching authority, based on the One and Holy Christian Faith as unalterably maintained through the centuries by the Catholic Church, the Pope and the Magisterium. More of these. Thank you. PAX CHRISTI 😇

It is good to hear a woman defending the Catholic Church's traditional position on this issue. As I understand it, St JPII's statement on this in 1994 was definitive and final. The ''deaconesses'' mentioned in Acts were not the same as male deacons, they were more like proto-nuns. The church does value women and we want and need nuns/religious sisters.

Thank you for the good and inspiring teaching 🙏 God bless you

😊 perfectly explained.

As an orthodox: pride is the greatest of all sin

Lord Jesus Christ instituted the Priesthood and no priestesshood.

I agree women cannot be priest. Women need to be proud to be women, stop saying "I hate getting my menses." I miss it because I can never now be a Mom.

No women. Im a woman. Thank you Sister for your clarification. Agree wih the teaching of Christ's sacrament of Holy Orders.

The Most Holy Virgin Mary, the greatest woman ever, never asked to be a deaconess or priest. She respected God's Divine Order and it was that that has made her the greatest woman ever, with total submission to God. THAT made her higher than all Deacons and all Priests, not a mad rush for power and control to become an impostor of God..

Because God says so………..

It is all about the Eucharist !!

Beyond belief, indeed. Thank you.

Jesus calls all of us, men and women, to salvation. Therefore Noone is being excluded from the church.

How could a woman , when Christ was a man, a woman diidnt die on the cross, the 12 apostles were.men, a woman cannot be a priest according to Catholic theology

Excellent talk. But of course women's ordination is a hot topic in Ireland--Ireland is a pagan country now.

There's an order for leaders n Father God does it right every time.

Which makes women Deacons an absolute absurdity

Under the guidance of a canon lawyer , for over two decades I have been researching the questions of female ordination, the inclusive use of feminine pronouns in reference to God, contraception, and the question of traditional versus non-traditional marriages. And I discovered an ancient theology from the Jews which had been referenced by St. Paul in his various epistles, by St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica, by St. John Damascene in his book on The Orthodox Faith, and by medieval bishops, saints, martyrs and a pope. It is redundant to state that this ancient theology known as "The Radiance of God" is not an innovation, not a new explanation, but an explicit mystical Jewish teaching that undergirds the New Testament, and which the likes of Israeli historian, Gershom Scholem, and Orthodox patriarchs regard as having predated St. Paul. It is certainly more than just a social norm from which Jesus might have adopted the custom of an all-male apostleship. For the sake of brevity, "The Radiance of God," is the Jewish metaphysical explanation for Divine Personhood, why the Ultimate Being is Person, why the Divine Being is paternal, and why God sacramentally created Adam and Eve to represent Creator and Creation. As St. Thomas Aquinas unpacks 1 Corinthians 11:7, he perfectly echoes the Jewish theology of The Radiance to express the self-same teaching handed down from one Jewish generation to another since the Garden of Eden, a tradition that remains unbroken to this day in the all-male priesthood. "The Radiance" simply states that just as the Creator is the source of Creation's being, so did God the Father make Eve from the side of Adam in the Book of Genesis. St. Thomas Aquinas explains 1 Corinthians 11:7 accordingly, that just as Creator is the Principal of all Being, so is Adam the source of Eve, the first woman. Given this Jewish mystical theology, Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians 11:7 makes perfect sense: Adam is the glory of God and Eve is the glory of Adam. For this reason, St. Thomas Aquinas goes on to explain that Eve indirectly points to God as made in His image, by firstly being an image of Man (Adam). This notion of woman as the "glory of Adam" permeates all of Jewish mystical theology, where a primordial Adam bears within him all of God's creation, in whom all the light of God radiates onto Creation in a manifold way. Given this mystical Jewish background, it then makes perfect sense why Paul in Hebrews 1:3 speaks of the Son as the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being. St. John Damascene echoes Hebrews 1:3 repeatedly in his analogies of the Trinity, calling the Father the Sun, the Son the Ray, and the Spirit the Radiance conveyed by the Son. The Radiance also teaches that Man represents the glory of God because the Bridegroom first donates his seed to the Bride and it leaves his body; while Woman represents the glory of the created person (man/mankind) because as the Bride, she receives the seed of man into her body where she then unites it to her seed which remains within her until the fulness of time (delivery). And so even in the very design of human anatomy, the Jews solidly teach that Man represents the First Principle of Being who is the creator, and Woman, dependent on Adam for her existence. It is not a reason for the subordination of gender, but a sacramental sequence from source to recipient that points to the prerogative of the singular Divine Act of Being to overflow into the Creation of the heavens and the earth. When a man stands as priest to the Church, he sacramentally embodies in his manhood, the very essence of Adam as the glory of the Creator, the first principle of Being, the source of all supernatural grace. I could go on and on regarding the sacrificial nature of the masculine, versus the feminine in The Radiance, for both male and female are truly called to be self-giving (just as the Trinity is Eternally Co-Inherent and Ecstatic Self-Giving Being Unto the Other), but with the sacramental sequence of Adam and then Eve always in mind. In the ancient and primeval theology of The Radiance of God, both the male and female human person find their rightful place in divine intent, from Genesis.

Only the men have there fingers anointed to give communion So That is the way it is

Priesthood is reserved for men because God wanted like this!!!

Thank you Sr. Sara for this enlightenment. 🙏

Would have like to hear the q&a

I found it interesting how the speaker differentiated between priestly ordination and the deaconate. It would be then interesting to address the deaconate.

Merci beaucoup pour votre confirmation.

Instead of adding tarnish to the Catholic faith; try instead being a role model like Holy Mother Mary & take her cue.

What I find interesting is how similar Catholicism is to orthodox. In Eastern Orthodoxy, priests can marry. And of course, they don’t have a Pope.

Where can one find the Paul Gandrol essay that was mentioned?

Does not the woman has the most prominent role among all human beens, the role of one that give oportinity to a human been to be part of creation? What else does she need in this world?

Thank you 🙏🏻❤️🙏🏻❤️🙏🏻❤️

Co equal authority is different than authority over or lording it over. Neither men or women are to do that ministering in Christ nor in homes.

God the Father instituted the Levitical priesthood (male only) in the Old Testament and Jesus (God the Son) instituted a sacramental priesthood (male only) in the New Testament. You can not use the excuse that it was the culture as many pagans had female priests. God deliberately chose men as His priests.

Didn't Jesus say ( of the church) "whatever you loose on earth is loosed in heaven. Whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven". Didn't Jesus promise the Holy Spirit to us to lead us into all truth? What authority did Jesus in fact, give the church?

Beyond belief? She agreed with the matter of symbolism in baptism and Eucharist (“chips and beer”), but denies the same for the symbolism of a priest. It does not fit. In the Eucharist the priest takes the role of the male incarnation of Christ and he acts as the high priest who sacrifices (breaks) the lamb of God on the altar, an exclusively male role in the old covenant. The feminist approach of seeing only purely functional aspects in everything and demanding equality destroys the symbolism of the rites in religion. And the denominations that no longer place any value on this symbolism have in fact also lost their sense of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

🙏🙏🙏❤

When a woman administers baptism, who does she represent. When she says " I BAPTISE ), in the name of the FATHER and of thr SON and of the HOLY SPIRIT, who does she represent . The Father? She is not a father and can never be a father. The Son ., she is not a son and can never be a son. The Holy Spirit ., she is not a spirit and can never be a spirit. Does she stand " in the place of Christ" or does she represent the Church. How is the Sacrament valid when administered by a women who fulfills the usual conditions of matter and form. The Theologians of the early church wrote about women being unsuitable to administer Baptism not about women being unsuitable candidates for sacramental priesthood citing the usual arguments:- Jesus was a man He chose only men The Apostles chose only men Mary was not chosen by Jesus for the priesthood We have an unbroken tradition of a male priesthood. That was all turned on its head when Pope Urban II allowed women to administer baptism in the context when men went to fight in the crusades leaving their pregnant wives at home. So women were allowed to baptise their dying newborn infants. An act of wonderful charity despite the fact that the weight of history was against it. We can't claim that something can't be allowed because it never happened before. The Incarnation and the Ressurection are a case in point. No discussion on the sacramental priesthood is complete without addressing the question of who does the sacerdotal service of the washing of the feet. Who has always done so, women! Who has been relied upon by the church leadership to do so, women! I mean the the church's reliance on women to teach in catholic schools, to heal the sick, to look after the poor and the orphaned, to assist priests when they went in to new missionary territory.

❤

Virtual Space is free. KZfaq Management never invented the Computer.

That also is developed Catholic Tradition to have another set celibate male ministerial priesthood daily re- offering Christ to the Father ritually in bread and wine and receiving Him in Communion bread. The main essential matter is to receive Christ in our hearts by faith serving Him to the end.❤️🙏

Yet the Church is still raling from sanctfied priests, who comitted horendous atrocities against the INNOCNENT. Can anyone please expain how Our Lord would respond to such behaviour, tell this to the Children.

What else!?

The anthropology of it

To dismiss and discard St. Paul’s writing, is to discard and disrespect the Scriptures!

So…. Was Paul of Tarsus a catholic priest ? What is the defense of the answer.

You cant have female deacons without ipso facto having female presbyters, bc the Sacrament is one (Orders). You would have to then admit female bishops, and priests.

So other denominations that allow women pastors are wrong?

.Women given other high ranking positions is always an option.I was first hand witness of a nun from the islands some time ago. She was undeniably high volatile personality flashing smile attractive personality. She was apparently assigned home visits to families in difficulties.I listened to her amusing recounting just how jealous the wife was of her husband's attention to her. I inadvertently found myself looking at her extremely uplifted bosom.A nun in an uplifted bra?Nope not an option it is so ordained to men for a good reason.

I do not support women as priests because menstruation is precluded regarding three specific duties of priests: 1. Consecration of the Eucharist, and 2. distributing the Eucharist by hand, and 3. Exorcism. And, although hearing confession does not concern menstruation or blood issues, women also seem to be precluded from hearing confessions and conferring forgiveness of sins because Christ breathed only on his male Apostles when he said he was conferring the power on them to "forgive sin." The Bible makes it crystal clear by Christ's actions and words that these duties are not for women. So if anybody disagrees with Jesus, who's right? Menstruation precludes women from priests' duties of consecration & distributing of the Eucharist and also of Exorcism. These preclusions have scriptural authority that make it plain that human or animal blood is not to be introduced or present at the altar during consecration of the Eucharist, or during passing out of the Eucharist, or during Exorcisms. Biblical references are, first of all, in the Old Testament, during Elijah's contest with the priests of Bael. When the "priests" were losing the contest, what did they do? They began cutting themselves to invoke demonic powers. So from this incident we know that the presence of human blood when combined with invocation ritual attracts and feeds demonic powers. And we still see this use of human or animal blood combined with ritual invocation in such depraved practices as Voodoo and Ashura festivals in Islam. And don't forget, these priests were priests of Jezebel, again emphasizing menstruation. Do even a cursory internet search of the words "menstruation" + "occult ritual" and you will find out about the high esteem in which menstrual blood is held in the occult. The other Biblical reference regarding the presence of human or animal blood during ritual invocation is in the Book of Mark when Jesus healed the possessed man who lived in the tombs. And what did this man do continually? He CUT himself, confirming that human blood (or animal blood) when combined with religious invocation attracts demons. And Mark gives us further information on why. The legion demons in this instance beg Jesus not to send them back to the pit, and this confirms that demons must possess a body in order to stay out of their place in Hell. And what's that quintessential characteristic of the body? It's blood, of course. The Bible says on several occasions that the life of the flesh is in the blood. So demons need a body to possess, and blood is the most important characteristic of a body. The presence of blood is also indicative of our fallen state because Adam and Eve did not have blood coursing through their bodies before the fall. Eve did not menstruate before the fall. The first blood appeared when Eve was deflowered by the Devil after he seduced her and she bled. Another incident from the Bible. When Christ appeared to Mary Magdalene after his Resurrection, he did not allow her to touch him, yet, only a matter of hours later, Jesus allowed Thomas to probe, with his bare fingers, the wounds from Jesus' Crucifixion. Why? Well, what was Mary Magdalene? She's always depicted as a young, attractive woman, that is, a menstruating woman. And Jesus' body is the Eucharist, right? And he did not allow a woman to touch it. This means that the Eucharist is only to be handed out by those with consecrated hands, that is, priests. With all this said, I'm not sure if women are eligible for the position of Deaconess, mainly because I'm not sure what Deacons do. It Decons' duties involve consecrating the Eucharist or handing it out, or of exorcisms, or of taking confessions, then the position of Deacon is not appropriate for women. Adding to the confusion of women's part in the Church are the hateful and insulting writings from Paul about women. And it's not clear whether Paul's writings refer to women working in positions in the church or to all women in general. It has to be understood that Paul was using Jewish Law in his plainly prejudiced attitudes against women. Paul was a Pharisee, remember, and the clearest example of his using Jewish Law regarding women was his statement that "Cephus" (Peter) was the first to see Jesus after his Resurrection. But Paul was using Jewish law, which stated that only two MALE witnesses were valid. Yet, the Bible states it was Mary Magdalene, and Catholics believe it was Mary, Jesus' mother to whom Jesus gave the honor of appearing to first. In either case, Jesus revealed the most important news in the history of humankind to a woman first. He told Mary Magdalene to go tell others of it. This is huge. It shows Jesus believed in women's intelligence and he told her to go and teach the apostles of his Resurrection. So if Paul will "not suffer a woman to teach," then who is right? Jesus or Paul? If anybody disagrees with Jesus, who's right? Mary Magdalene has been called the "Apostle to the Apostles." It's NEVER mentioned by any man, but Jesus also revealed who he was, the Messiah, to a woman first, to the Woman at the Well. And when he told her this, she ran back to her village to tell the others, and Jesus never said to her, "I will not suffer a woman to teach." The Woman at the Well has been called the first evangelist. In the incident with Martha and Mary, when Martha protests Mary's studying with the men under Jesus, he says "This will not be denied her." At the same time, he did not criticize Martha, the traditionalist woman. Jesus loves, respects and honors both types of women, the traditionalist and the non-traditionalist. Indeed, without women teachers, writers, and saints, what on earth would the Catholic Church do? Who educates more people all over the world than ANYBODY else? It's the Catholic Church. And what would Catholic schools do without the nuns who do most of the teaching? And female saints are revered and respected and held in the highest esteem in Catholicism. No one has ever done more for women than Jesus Christ. In the incident with the woman caught in adultery, Jesus wrote the names of the male accusers in the sand, and what they were doing, stating that, "He who is without sin" should throw the first stone. And Jesus announced a new era for women when he told a group of men who were asking how they could get rid of wives they were tired of, that "in Moses time, your hearts were hardened," but that in Jesus' new covenanat, things would improve for women. The men were asking Jesus why his pronouncements on women and marriage were different from those of Moses (from Jewish Law, the Law that Paul was quoting regarding women). The new status of women is a part of Jesus' new covenant. At the Cross, who was loyal to Jesus? Although one Apostle, John, was there with him, it was mostly women (Mary his mother and a female cousin of hers, and Mary Magdalene). All of the other apostles betrayed Jesus at the Cross. And it was the women on the streets of Jerusalem who wept for Jesus, while all the male apostles except John hid to save their own hides. Veronica wiped his face with her veil, and he honored her with the image of his face permanently on her veil, a healing image. Before his Crucifixion, Jesus allowed himself to be annointed with oil by a woman, who washed his feet with her hair. So all of these duties are probably open to women: healing, annointing with oil, teaching, writing, evangelizing and the like. I'm not disregarding Paul, or saying, as some do, that he should be removed from the Bible. I respect the work he did. But Paul was not perfect. He was a murderer before Jesus changed him. The important lesson to learn from Paul is that if he could be saved, then practically anybody can. Paul was plainly mistaken by limiting his writings and pronouncements about women to Jewish Law. Paul never knew Jesus when the two of them were in physical bodies, so Paul simply didn't know of Jesus' interactions with women. Paul was not perfect, but neither were most of the other apostles either. As stated, they all, except John, betrayed Jesus at the Cross. Yet their work is valuable and respected and essential in spreading the faith.

All in Christ benefit from Christs Perfect Offering and enjoy Communion with Him. That is Developed Catholic Tradition to Re enact or Re Offer Sacrifice Daily and Ritually with Elements to Receive in Communion Bread.❤

Then why is it that there are priests who are gay. I can attest to that.

All should also know the other side of this stand taken by this speaker here by googling and reading Rosemary Radford Ruether’s “Can Men be Ordained?”

My current priest is a woman. My previous priest was a woman. My current bishop is a woman. Our sacraments are REAL. Our church is alive, growing . . . and, oh yeah, *One Holy Catholic and Apostolic* (and True!). ☩✝☦🕈 The Roman argument against ordaining women resembles nothing so much as the one it made 400 years ago against Galileo (for Galileo's contradiction of the RCC's "Traditional" and allegedly "Biblical" assertion that the Sun moves around the Earth). “And yet it [the Earth] moves” (“Eppur si muove”), as attributed to him. *Women ARE divinely called to ordination, and women ARE priests.* That's a simple fact, a living Reality, and a beautiful Truth! 🌈 "But Jesus was a man"? [the "Icon Argument"] As a very wise (and earthy!) Benedictine once told me, "we're called to BE like Jesus, not PEE like Jesus!" 😄 God bless and defend women called to be priests (may their numbers increase! 😇)!

I must say it's a tad bit annoying she keeps referring to Pope John Paul II as "Saint".

I heard a priest one day explaining that a woman priest results in spiritual lesbianism as the woman priest would be interacting with a female, Christ’s bride, the Church. Initially, quite confronting, but it makes sense.

Patriarchy must give way to egalitarian according to scripture. Even in the Old Testament Debra was a Judge of Israel. History and church tradition and Judaism unto Christ have given women a bad and unfair rap. Galatians 3:28 says There is no male or female in Christ. All are One in the Spirit and Baptized into One Spirit. 1Peter 2:9-10 All are priests in Christ- binding and loosing Matthew 16-18 and whoever hears disciples in Christ hears Christ Himself. Priscilla and Aquila ministered together Acts 18 and some widows were head of church homes. Junias was a female apostle Romans 16:2 and 1 Timothy 2-4 deal with particular church problem of the time and so emphasis He to make a point to correct abuse and not to denigrate women. In the Godhead the Father Leads Son and Spirit in co equal Authority and so in church is co equal authority of pastors and as well husband and wife in home has husband lead in co equal authority concerning one another and children with no lording it over one another and definitely in church no lording it over each other but submit to one another in peace and harmony.❤🙏

Firstly without maybe baptism no sacrament was even mentioned in the bible. There was no priesthood before at least the midth of the second century. In 1 Corinthians 11 20ff Paul rebukes them for abusing the common supper by overeating by rich christians and starving by poor ones. 1 Cor 1:33 "So then, my brothers and sisters, when you gather to eat, you should all eat together. 34 Anyone who is hungry should eat something at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment" There is no priest, no eucharist cerimony, a pure commemoration. Even in the Didache, in introduction for new Christians such scaramental and sacerdotal instituions are mentioned. And last bit not least, if the apostels would be taken as basis for a priesthood, they all had been CIRCUMCISED JEWS OBBEYING THE LAW OF MOSES! So to only pick up the sexual attribute is friolous!

The apostles were not compulsorily celibate, so why does the RC church force it's priests to do what Jesus never commanded, especially since it attracts paedophiles as well as good men? It's not good that the RC church refuses to learn from its mistakes.

If the JPII’s statement was “final and definitive,” why wouldn’t another pope’s statement stating the opposite be definitive and final?

NO women priests ever, NO women deacons ever

Jesus may have appointed only men but that's no excuse for blatant discrimination, bigotry and misogyny. Jesus also observed Saturday as the Sabbath but Catholics had no problem changing that and filling their churches and cathedrals with graven images.

"Thumbs up" l have been blocked from several sites also...... Mostly those sites that are normal & not woke:

Protestants: no Mary, no Jesus. Therefore, God will not recognize you.

But the church has power to change the nature of the law

The old boys club. I just believe in a loving Creator for all. I believe Christ was just a kind man who travelled and spread kindness. People of that time made him out to be more than he claimed to be. I love him for what he stood for. I am glad religion was never forced on me. To me as I see what is going on , I feel Catholics enslave women. Look at Roe, look at other issues. Women are suffering because of the Catholic religion . Religions have committed so many atrocities throughout history. Glad I don’t feel obligated to believe in any of them.

We dont even know if God has a gender, since he made both , the woman and man, in his image. Jesus came as a man because women had no voice back then, as a woman he could have been stoned for speaking to men and performing miracles. Who would have paid attention to a woman? He accepted men and women just the same, but we people make rules according to our convenience, the convenience of the fittest.

Only men should be Priests. Goes back to 12 Apostles. Women can be nuns and should wear habits like Mary.

Since you seem to be a frequent speaker, I don’t understand why you have such a difficult time reading your own speech which you have presented many times? Also, while not all can be dynamic speakers, we can all improve. I suggest you get some help to become a better speaker to make your presentations more interesting.

Mary -Magdalene is Jesus'Lover. Nuns ought to remember that

A lot. Less. WAR. as. Women in power. pride. Yes a factor. God. Help us.

Father of God gave rights to men to lead the people of Israel by the men's prophets. Hence our god is not against women. God chooses men for priesthood. King always men, queens always women. Men priests are representing the Jesus Christ and women nuns are representing Mother Mary. Jesus is not the father of everyone, He is our God, but Mother Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ and also believers of Jesus Christ. Both are not our father and mother. Priests can't marry a Mother Mary and Nuns can't marry Jesus because Nuns are always Mother of all the priests. No nuns can say, i am going to marry Jesus Christ. Because Jesus is their son, so priests are their son. Priesthood is for men........ Which is decided by God. Amen.

An interesting case: Circumcision was very much 'in' in the time of Jesus. Heck, He was a beneficiary too. Some years later, the male! leaders of the Church decided that it is (fortunately) OK to skip it. As long as a tradition serves the interests of a (clerical in this case) caste, it is worth to invoke it. Another case: For (proverbial) 30 silver pieces, priestly celibacy was traditionalized. Did Jesus see it coming in His days on Earth? What about now?

Luckily, I attend à Christian Church that has no bras. We have a lot of women priests! Yay for us, there were a lot of women who followed Christ Jesus. The men were jealous.

The whole discourse is flawed: while there were in the early church "presbyters", in time the catholic resuscitated the priesthood in the style of the old testament. The priesthood, as it exists today, as a caste, should not have come about. Only married presbyters

Personally, I think you should wear a veil. I hate short hair.

Wonan at the Altar. What for this discussion at all. Nobody has such authority. Mas would be not valid, and there could be no Holy Eucharist.

Sorry, but this presentation is so dull that I can’t listen to it for 35 minutes. I could read this speech 3 times and make it more interesting. It’s a monotone. Worth reading, but not listening to it.

What’s next, a Trans Pope ?

All in all we have no teaching by jesus on gospels about this priest hood So its all traditions crested bynmen but not the gospel so no compulsion

Picky, picky, picky

Jesus was not inspired by any human customs nor anything human. To claim otherwise is to deny His omnipotence and omniscience.

We are at a critical moment in time if we have make priests I’d rather have female priest than none at all.

there were women deacons in the early church

Talk all you want, Sister, but look in the mirror! You are not speaking for the young who refuse to attend a church that exists for itself and its outmoded rules, ceremonies, and traditions! Jesus was all about people, love, and charity, not rules, laws and catechisms! He hated Pharisees who did what the Catholic Church has done for centuries: ignored simplicity and focused on ceremony and itself instead of people! As I see the Pope and cardinals prancing around in their "uniforms", I suddenly realize that the Catholic Church is in the business of intimidating people, making them sit in a pew and helplessly watch their priests do everything!

Eat your place. I'm not interested

St. Peter. Was married check gospel of st Mathew.

There is no more priests in the NT. Jesus is out high priest, he offered himself up to the father as a perfect sacrifice once and for all time.

I'm catholic but I think this doesn't make any sense. Women should be able to be priests of bishops etc... Why women don't vote to choose a pope? Why a woman cannot be the (next) pope?

So appropriately called the "catholic priesthood". It's just that. It is not a biblical priesthood. At least not according to, none other than the supposed first pope. You see, Peter has a different "take" on the priesthood and who saints are. It surely isn't as the church teaches. I guess Peter was a heretic, teaching contrary to the church. Basically, there is NO such thing as a Catholic priesthood in the bible. And there is no such thing as saints as taught by the church. To that , Paul says all believers are saints. So much for st. Ignatius and the other saints the church has canonized. So says Peter.

The Catholic priesthood is without New Testament support.