[Cronos]

Here's my 2¢ -- the Church moves slowly, carefully. I don't think we're ready for women priests -- remember that you may be ok with it in the West, but the Church exists in Africa, the Middle East, South Asia, East Asia etc and the Church is globally spread.

It is moving slowly -- women are encouraged to participate more in the Church as sacristans, deacons, alter-servers etc. And you can't convince me that nuns ain't as tough as priests and definitely in many cases as or more important!! Maybe in the next century or after that we could have female priests, but it would be after a lot of thought and care.

The Anglican Church went head-long into change and it snow-balled, first they allowed female priests, then they allowed abortions, then practising gaybishops. And when Genie Richards was made bish, Christian homes in Nigeria and elsewhere were burnt.

[ArrogantBustard]

I don't think we're ready for women priests

It's not a matter of whether we're "ready" ... It's a matter of whether it's "right".

It's not. Wrong should never be done, even if a majority are "ready" for it.

[ichabod1]

Being a nun is just as good as being a priest. IMO, there should be one difference, that of consecrating the elements, that and the apostolic blessing. Nuns can and should run things administratively. I know, we don’t like that much when these same feminazis get in there running things, but I think it’s biblically sound — after all didn’t the Apostles say that they couldn’t be bothered with waiting at table? Course, that’s what deacons were created for, but at any rate, I think priests should be freed of administrivia whenever possible to allow them to preach and administer the sacraments and possibly even have time to go home and relax a little once in a while.