Church’s Teaching On Male-Only Priesthood Is ‘Infallible’: Vatican Doctrine Chief

  • Thread starter Thread starter yankeesouth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It keeps my hopes alive to see that there are still some orthodox leaders within the hierarchy of the Church.
 
A couple of important points:
  1. the teaching is that Jesus did not give His Church the authority to ordain women to the priesthood; this implies that when Jesus returns, He might give the Church that authority.
  2. the Magisterium has not decided the question of women deacons. Since the teaching is not that women cannot be ordained, but only specifically that the Church lacks the authority to ordain women to the priesthood, the question of ordained deaconesses is open.
 
  1. When Christ returns, "this earth’ is over. No more people to be born, no more earthly life, no more ordinations. Plus, let’s examine scripture. We are told that Christ will reign until His enemies are all defeated. Does that mean that when His enemies are defeated that He will STOP reigning? That what was ‘true’ and right up to the Second Coming suddenly will be untrue?
Church teaching doesn’t do a 180. If the Church has No authority to ordain women NOW, she will have ‘no authority’ to the end. . .and into infinity, which is not ‘time day after day’ but an infinite ‘now’.

Or else you’ll have to do your ‘no authority NOW but maybe when Christ comes again’ to everything, won’t you?

No authority to forgive unrepentant sin for a priest now. . .but maybe 'ok then?"
No authority for two men to marry each other now. . .but maybe OK then?

No authority to confect beer and pizza instead of bread and wine now. . .but maybe OK then?

Do you see the inherent absurdity in the idea that authoritative teachings ‘now’ are somehow going to be totally changed by Jesus “later?”
 
Perhaps women can be ordained as deacons. That would suggest that the ordination of women as priests is not in the same category as forgiving the unrepentant, or same-sex marriage (your examples). The idea that Christ might give His Church an authority, which She does not now have, is tenable, as long as that authority does not contradict the eternal moral law, or the essential elements of the Sacraments. I think that the gender of the recipient of ordination is not essential to the nature of the Sacrament. So i think the Church has the authority, now to ordain women as deacons, though not as priests.

It is not a dogma what will happen when Christ returns.
 
Ah, I see. I agree, since women ‘deaconettes’ would not be ordained, theoretically that could happen. However, it’s even now been stated that JP2’s Ordinatio Sacerdotalis was stating what is already infallible. And I do not believe, as I stated, that if something is already understood as requiring one particular ‘matter’ for a sacrament, (as bread and wine, not pizza and beer, is ‘valid matter’ for Eucharist), that ‘male’ is valid matter for priesthood, and that this cannot or will not change, due to the nature of what a sacrament is.

If the sacrament continues post the Second Coming, it will not change its nature or matter. You think differently. I’d say ‘time will tell’ but actually it won’t, Eternity, which is ‘outside’ time, will hold the answer. One of us will be surprised; one won’t be!
 
The valid matter for ordination is the laying on of hands; it is not the male recipient. It is still an open question as to whether women can be ordained as deacons.
 
Interesting to see different publications headlines. A liberal news source said the vatican re-affirms the ‘ban’ on women priests lol. No such thing as ‘women priests’ so there never was or is a ‘ban’.
 
There may be an open question on deaconesses, but as to whether or not women can be ordained as deacons, the answer is not as “open” to such an innvation as one might think. Nowhere in the Church’s tradition do we see females exercising the role of the deacon. This was affirmed inthe last study done in 2002. And regarding the current commission, Cardinal Muller pointed out, “the focus will be historic in nature” and that “little new will come” from it.

A portion of Cardinal-elect Ladaria’s piece sheds light on this:

“In the first place, as far as the ministerial priesthood is concerned, the Church recognizes that the impossibility of ordaining women belongs to the “substance of the sacrament” of orders (cfr. Denzinger-Hünermann, 1728). The Church does not have the capability to change this substance, because it is precisely from the sacraments, instituted by Christ, that she is generated as Church.”
 
I disagree on the valid matter limited to ‘laying on of hands’ and Pope St JP2 seems to agree with me, as does the entire deposit of the Ordinary Magisterium. I know, in this PC world it seems like God couldn’t POSSIBLY be so ignorant, unfair, etc to ‘deny’ women. . .but then again, since God isn’t ignorant or unfair, and His teachings only DEEPEN, I’m going to trust Him and the Church. Personally, I think if by ‘deepen’ the understanding of ‘the person to be ordained’ was going to be understood as ‘male OR female’, God would have done this ‘from the start’ (it’s not as if ‘female priestesses’ were unknown, they were more used than males in just about every non-Jewish religion, for pete’s sake), rather than wait 2000 years to have us ‘catch up’ to ‘everybody else’.
 
Children get much of their faith formation from mothers and female religion teachers (at least in Catholic school) This is of course welcomed and promoted by the church.

I do see the priesthood role as better being served by males following in Christs self sacrificing footsteps and where possible celibate males.
 
Pride is powerful. It’s kinda sad actually that no matter how many times Christ re-affirms His teaching there will be some who will equate the idea of ‘women priests’ with worldly equality in the form of political correctness and hold out ‘hope’. It will always be an issue between them and Christ who loves them unconditionally but they fail to reciprocate when He says ‘if you love me you will obey my commandments’.

As for deaconesses…I can see it happening only because the hierarchy will give in to the constant attacks of liberal ideology. I wonder how many of the ‘nuns on the bus’ types who shun the habit will be quick to wear whatever garb that will be worn as a deaconess.
 
Last edited:
Each Sacrament has a type of valid matter. For Holy Orders, the valid matter is the laying on of hands. This is not an open question. In no Sacrament is the matter the person who receives the Sacrament. In the Eucharist, the matter is wheat bread and grape wine. For Baptism, the valid matter is natural water. For confirmation, the matter is the holy oil. The valid matter for Holy Orders is not a male person.
 
The valid matter for holy matrimony is the consent of the parties. Matter and form pertain to the validity of the Sacrament, but they do not describe the Sacrament itself. For the Eucharist, the valid matter is wheat bread and grape wine, and the form is the words of consecration. Yet the Sacrament itself is Christ, present under the appearances of bread and wine. So the matter is not the same as the Sacrament.

Marriage can only be given to a man and woman validly, not to two men or two women, but that does not mean that the valid matter is a person from each gender. Similarly, whether or not women can be validly ordained as deacons, the matter of the Sacrament of Orders is not a male person. That is just not how matter and form work.
 
Ah, I’ve heard that said in, ahem, certain circles. Are you going to tell me that the gender of the couple has absolutely nothing to do with the validity of matrimony?
 
Ordination of women cannot happen, but there are some who like to keep the question popping up like a jack in the box. For them, no matter how many times the question is answered in the negative, the response is that well, no just means not yet. Nope.
 
stpurl said:
Ah, I’ve heard that said in, ahem, certain circles. Are you going to tell me that the gender of the couple has absolutely nothing to do with the validity of matrimony?
Click to expand...
No. The couple must be male and female for a valid marriage. But that is not the matter of the Sacrament.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top