Female priests and patriarchy

[Dovekin]

Can you see how unsatisfactory it is to those who want our unity in Christ to be manifest in the governance of the Church? In Judaism, men bore the sign of the covenant, but the covenant of Baptism includes men and women. Why reintroduce the distinction?

Not at all. I am pointing out that your argument is unsatisfactory not just to the people you described, but also to some people of deep faith.

For the Catholic, the best argument against women priests should be: Because the Magisterium has said so.

For the fideist, that is the best argument. For a Catholic, an argument that reveals the love of God for all people is the best argument.

This should settle it pretty nicely.

It would if there were not alternate explanations that are more coherent and believable.

 

[JLP1]

Which is why I have difficulty believing them when they say women are of equal value to their communities. Without men, these communities would have neither sacraments nor leadership. For obvious reasons, the same cannot be said of women.

 

[John10]

Their reverence for Mary does not mean that they would respect all women though.

I do not see how you can honestly believe on one hand that women are inferior and on the other one give so much reverence to Mary, Our Blessed Mother.

People were actually debating if women were made in the image of God, or if they had souls.

That is why I always go for the Catechism, Church Magisterium, and Doctrines on important matters rather than people’s opinion.

 

[JLP1]

People were actually debating if women were made in the image of God, or if they had souls.

How was this even up for debate, given that the Church baptizes women? Was this not always the case?

 

[PeterT]

Basically this - there is a priest in our diocese who very regularly talks about how one day there might be married priests or female priests. I like things the way they are . I love my dad and he’s been a good provider but we have always had a difficult rship and I’ve had more Father / daughter moments with priests in a year than in my whole life time with my actual dad. It’s a vocation like no other

God allows for married priests. Many early priests of the Church were married. Saint Peter was married. The Catholic Church decided to prohibit married priests for mainly temporal issues like the problem of inheritance of church property.

But God has only called men to be priests since the earliest of times of Judaism and He doesn’t appear to have changed His mind when the Church was established on Pentecost.

Priesthood is a vocation not an occupation. God chooses who He wants to become an ordained priest. Hopefully that man will respond to God’s call and enter the priesthood.

To put it another way, if God wanted someone to become a priest, God would have created that person as a boy and not as a girl.

Also, if God was fine with having female priests, I’m sure God — through the Holy Spirit — would have informed the Apostles and all the bishops of his Church throughout the ages about this.

 

[Lea101]

I do not see how you can honestly believe on one hand that women are inferior and on the other one give so much reverence to Mary, Our Blessed Mother.

You would think so. But I know men in certain cultures here love and respect their mothers and sisters, but they still hold beliefs like the superiority of males, that women should not do certain things etc. So I guess it’s really not that rare at all.

Also, Mary was sinless. Much of the disdain towards women were because they viewed women as temptations/seductresses, intellectually inferior etc and therefore must be ‘kept in line’. Given that they view Mary separate from all women because she was spotless and hence not like them, it’s not surprising to see the stuff written about women long ago.
Eg, I believe St Clement was the one that said women should feel shame for being women.

How was this even up for debate, given that the Church baptizes women? Was this not always the case?

Women were baptised but there were some who believed that it was males who were made in his image, or were more complete. Which we now know is heresy. St Augustine said this, too I believe.

https://www.salon.com/2014/10/15/20_disgustingly_misogynist_quotes_from_religious_leaders_partner/

This has the quotes in question. Keep in mind that this has an obvious agenda in place. I would hope this is fabricated, just like how Saints’ quotes tend to be regardless of what they have said. But I don’t know. Maybe someone can fact check.

People claimed there was a formal debate in the Church over women having souls, as far back as 1800s. But I am not sure if that’s a reliable claim to make since I only hear non Catholics talk about it.

 

[dochawk]

yankeesouth:

Women want more ‘power’ in the Church? Nothing more important than passing on the Faith to children.

Because that’s a woman’s job?

*whoosh* . . .

@yankeesouth was pointing out that with that, women already have more power than clerics!

 

[Thorolfr]

Some of those are pretty shocking quotes:

In pain shall you bring forth children, woman, and you shall turn to your husband and he shall rule over you. And do you not know that you are Eve? God’s sentence hangs still over all your sex and His punishment weighs down upon you. You are the devil’s gateway; you are she who first violated the forbidden tree and broke the law of God. It was you who coaxed your way around him whom the devil had not the force to attack. With what ease you shattered that image of God: Man! Because of the death you merited, even the Son of God had to die… Woman, you are the gate to hell. — Tertullian, the "father of Latin Christianity” (c160-225)

I’ve seen quotes by others who put most of the blame on women for the Fall. This quote by St. Augustine is interesting:

Woman does not possess the image of God in herself but only when taken together with the male who is her head, so that the whole substance is one image. But when she is assigned the role as helpmate, a function that pertains to her alone, then she is not the image of God. But as far as the man is concerned, he is by himself alone the image of God just as fully and completely as when he and the woman are joined together into one. — Saint Augustine, Bishop of Hippo Regius (354-430)

This kind of reminds me of what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11: 6-7:

For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or to be shaved, she should wear a veil. 7 For a man ought not to have his head veiled, since he is the image and reflection of God; but woman is the reflection of man.

 

[JLP1]

I would hope this is fabricated, just like how Saints’ quotes tend to be regardless of what they have said. But I don’t know. Maybe someone can fact check.

From what I can tell, the Tertullian quotes were not fabricated; they appear in Book 1 of De cultu feminarium (On the Apparel of Women). I am going off this translation, because I do not know Latin. Unless “On the Apparel of Women” was (a) misattributed or (b) seriously mistranslated, it looks like Tertullian did call women, among other things, “the devil’s gateway.” It may be worth pointing out that Tertullian was never canonized.

The article also cited Thomas Aquinas, so I checked the Summa, and the provided quote is followed by an assertion that the “human nature” of a woman is not “misbegotten.” It’s worth noting here that Aquinas was at least partially refuting Aristotle, and was quoting Aristotle as saying “the female is a misbegotten male.”

I don’t know about the other quotes, though. Maybe someone else can help.

And I can’t believe any claim that the Church ever debated whether women had souls, given that (a) the Church baptizes women, which would at best be a waste of time if women had no souls and (b) the Church venerates female Saints, which would make absolutely no sense if those women did not have souls.

 

[Thorolfr]

I don’t know about the other quotes, though. Maybe someone else can help.

Here’s a fuller quote of the one by St. Albert Magnus in “20 disgustingly misogynist quotes”:

St. Albert the Great, Quaestiones super de animalibus XV q. 11
“Woman is less qualified [than man] for moral behavior. For the woman contains more liquid than the man, and it is a property of liquid to take things up easily and to hold onto them poorly. Liquids are easily moved, hence women are inconstant and curious. When a woman has relations with a man, she would like, as much as possible, to be lying with another man at the same time. Woman knows nothing of fidelity. Believe me, if you give her your trust, you will be disappointed. Trust an experienced teacher. For this reason prudent men share their plans and actions least of all with their wives. Woman is a misbegotten man and has a faulty and defective nature in comparison with his. Therefore she is unsure in herself. What she herself cannot get, she seeks to obtain through lying and diabolical deceptions. And so, to put it briefly, one must be on one’s guard with every woman, as if she were a poisonous snake and the horned devil… In evil and perverse doings woman is cleverer, that is, slyer, than man. Her feelings drive woman toward every evil, just as reason impels man toward all good.”

http://theolibrary.shc.edu/resources/women.htm

That web page has some other quotes:

St. Augustine, De genesi ad litteram, 9, 5-9
“I don’t see what sort of help woman was created to provide man with, if one excludes the purpose of procreation. If woman was not given to man for help in bearing children, for what help could she be? To till the earth together? If help were needed for that, man would have been a better help for man. The same goes for comfort in solitude. How much more pleasure is it for life and conversation when two friends live together than when a man and a woman cohabitate?”

 

[mrsdizzyd]

This isn’t merely an “Argument from ignorance”. We are talking about the divine structure of the church. It is simply the way in which the church was set up by Christ. If Christ did not give us the authority to do something, we cannot just start doing it in 2019. Cannot. Period. In order for us to say that we have authority to do something of a doctrinal nature there must be evidence based on scripture, Tradition, and/or the teaching authority of the church.

If your argument is going to be that Christ could have told them to ordain women, but they decided against it, that argument is going nowhere fast. As Catholics, we believe and profess that the apostles and the church are protected from such catastrophic error by the Holy Spirit.

 

[halogirl]

If they ever go back to married priests would be a bit of a slap in the face for all those who gave up a family to be a priest.

 

[JMMJ]

When God tells us to do things a certain way, we do it that way.

But when did God tell us to have a male only priesthood??? Not trying to be argumentative, but I hear this all the time. God never told us anything of the kind. Humans came to that conclusion based on the fact that his apostles were all male. Quite a stretch, to say the least.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

mrsdizzyd:

When God tells us to do things a certain way, we do it that way.

But when did God tell us to have a male only priesthood??? Not trying to be argumentative, but I hear this all the time. God never told us anything of the kind. Humans came to that conclusion based on the fact that his apostles were all male. Quite a stretch, to say the least.

I’ll turn that question right back around to you: How do you know that Jesus did not instruct the apostles to only ordain men? (I’m not asking you to prove a negative. I’m just pointing out the problem with your objection.)

Their actions certainly suggest that something was communicated amongst the 12 because every church they founded only ordained men even in pagan areas where pagan priestesses were commonplace.

Please remember that Sacred Tradition (and the magisterial teachings of the Church) carries as much weight as scripture. Clearly, they taught a male priesthood.

 

[Sarcelle]

Basically this - there is a priest in our diocese who very regularly talks about how one day there might be married priests or female priests.

There are already married priests.

He does not know that? I find it hard to believe.

 

[stpurl]

Where did you get the idea that 'humans came to the conclusion based on the fact that His apostles were all male?"

You’re kind of saying that one contemporary explanation for male priesthood was ‘made up by men’, when you have absolutely no proof that it was not, in fact, instituted by God.

Here’s a point in God’s favor: The Jewish priesthood was all male. That is known, and specific. Christianity is often referred to as Judaism fulfilled.

Ah, you say, 'but women can be rabbis now in Judaism".
Can they? I do not believe that the Orthodox Jews permit female rabbis. Therefore, there is at least one ‘branch’ of Judaism which still believes in a male priesthood ‘ordained by God’.

Again, ‘female priestesses’ were common throughout the world from ancient times.

It would have been extremely easy for ‘humans’ to come to the conclusion that God, in opening up salvation to the gentiles, also would ‘allow’ women priests. After all, God ‘allowed’ all foods to be ‘clean’, He ‘allowed’ salvation to all people. . . so by your reasoning, IF the priesthood had entailed a ‘service’ only, opening it ‘up’ would have been easy peasy.

But if the priesthood is something more than a service or a job, that becomes another story.

Again, how do you know (since Scripture itself in John tells us that "Jesus SPOKE many MORE things to His disciples which are ‘not in this book’) that Jesus did not say, “Guys, they’ll be after you to allow women to serve me as ordained priests–yeah, weird term, right?–but My Father has good reason for this to be something which men alone can do.”

Do you really see the men who have known Him and loved Him saying, “But Jesus, you have to tell us WHY because otherwise people won’t believe you really told us to do this?”
Instead of saying, “All that you have told us to do, we will do”
And Jesus saying, as He did to Thomas in similar circumstances,
You hear Me speaking to you directly, face to face, and believe. Blest are those who do not see Me as you do, but only hear the words I have given to you which you will proclaim through the ages. . .and still believe."

 

[Diaconia]

Their actions certainly suggest that something was communicated amongst the 12 because every church they founded only ordained men even in pagan areas where pagan priestesses were commonplace.

This was actually the plan of God Himself. When God decided who would be His Chosen People, He selected a rag-a-muffin clan from among the greatest civilizations in the Near Middle East.

He chose a bumbling, weak group to call His own.

He further revealed Himself in two unique ways - Singular, and as a Father. All the competing religions had multiple deities, and all of them had goddesses, many of which were the chief deity.

So:

1. Adonai chose men (exclusively and counter to the other religions of the day) in the three-fold priesthood of our ancestors in faith, the Jewish people.
2. Jesus chose men (exclusively) as the Twelve to continue His priestly work on earth.
3. The Apostles chose men (exclusively) to assist in the ministry as deacons.

God the Father designed this by His choice, Our Lord Jesus made the same choice, and the Church confirmed and followed this choice made twice by God.

This is also why those Churches who have unbroken succession from the Apostles all continue this Divine choice (Orthodoxy and Catholicism). Those collections of Apostolic Churches represent nearly 80% of all Christians, by the way.

Deacon Christopher

 

[halogirl]

But aren’t they anglican priests who converted ?

 

[Sarcelle]

No

There are married priests who did not convert.

The Eastern Catholic Churches do ordain married men.

It is the Latin Rite that only ordains single men.

There are some Eastern Catholics in this forum. You may want to ask them.

 

[halogirl]

only familiar with Roman Catholic (I guess what you call Latin rite ) I have a lot to learn