T
Thorolfr
Guest
Arguments based on an absence of evidence are not very strong. If there is no evidence, we can’t say that Christ did not entrust the apostles with the ability to ordain women or that “women can’t be priests.” We can only say that we don’t know whether they can be priests and we don’t know whether Christ gave his apostles the power to ordain women. From Wikipedia:The Apostles could only pass on the authority they were given. They could not simply take a power that Christ did not entrust to them.
There is zero evidence that Christ gave the Apostles authority to ordain women. Zero, None. Without that authority, the Pope can no more make up a power to ordain women than he could to change the moon into cheese.
Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam ), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents “a lack of contrary evidence”), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true. This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes the possibility that there may have been an insufficient investigation to prove that the proposition is either true or false. It also does not allow for the possibility that the answer is unknowable, only knowable in the future, or neither completely true nor completely false.
Last edited: