T
TommyWommy
Guest
Since Jesus was male, and ordained only males, only males may become priests. So why may Gentiles become priests if Jesus was Jewish, and only ordained Jewish males?
- Status
R
runningdude
Guest
Because there is nothing innately “Jewish” about a human being. One is born with a Male or Female human soul, but became Jewish by entering into the covenant with our Lord.
Therefore, any man who has entered into the Covenant, today through Baptism, may receive ordination!
Therefore, any man who has entered into the Covenant, today through Baptism, may receive ordination!
C
chaser
Guest
So women are innately unable to perform priestly duties?
C
coolduude
Guest
As far as I understand it, yes.
J
Jzyehoshua
Guest
Actually, this is pretty interesting. As seen from Acts 10, the early church did not even think non-Jews could become Christians. It’s ironic since the New Testament is occasionally accused of being anti-semitic. If anything, it was the opposite, God had to intervene to make the early church stop excluding non-Jews/Gentiles.
I would consider decisive verses to be:
I would recommend Romans 11 for an overview of how God used both Jews and Gentiles for His glory. God did not cast the Jews away. As Paul points out, he and the other apostles are all Jews, and there is a remnant left according to grace. God allowed the Jewish nation, apart from this remnant, to reject Jesus, that salvation might come to the Gentiles (v. 11), not that the Jews would fall, but that they might be made jealous and by the witness of the Gentiles be returned to God (v. 31). If they don’t abide in unbelief, they can be graffed in at any time, who are loved for the sake of their fathers - they are described by Paul as the natural branches belonging to their own olive tree in the chapter (vv. 23-25). Paul also says there will be a final coming of Christ where the whole nation of Israel will return to Christ, as it is written, there will come out of Zion a deliverer, who will turn away ungodliness from Jacob. (vv. 25-27)
S
StrawberryJam
Guest
What basis is there in the bible or in any tradition that would lead you to believe women did have any acceptance by tradtition or scripture to take on roles that were never allowed until after and way after the reformation?
You may bring up examples of heroic accomplishments by women in the bible.
Jesus is not going to be compromised over this petty squabble amoung believers.
I see in your comment a real need to understand what you mean by priestly duties.
J
Jzyehoshua
Guest
Well, Priscilla, the wife of Aquila, did help Paul with his missionary work (Acts 18:2,18, Romans 16:3). She also helped in the training of Apollos, who would become one of the greatest Apologists of the early church (Acts 18:26).
While Paul didn’t permit women to teach in some respect (preach?), or usurp authority over the man (1 Timothy 2:10-15) it’s debatable what constitutes usurping authority by a woman over a man. What is more, the Greek word ‘gune’ may mean ‘wife’ specifically in 1 Timothy 2:12, so it may refer to the marriage relationship specifically. I would need to do further study on it to be sure, I merely mention it as a possibility.
D
DavidFilmer
Guest
Reductio ad absurdum easily shows the flaw in this line of reasoning. Jesus only ordained people named Simon, John, James, Matthew, Jude, Bartholomew, and Thomas (I may be leaving somebody out). So, only people with these names can be ordained? My priest is named “Anthony.” By this same reasoning, he does not qualify. Reductio ad absurdum.
Female ordination seems to be the “hot topic” at the moment. There are several active threads discussing this.
In one such recent thread, I showed that the Church has clearly and infallibly pronounced that it has no authority to ordain women. The ONLY reason that the Church does not ordain women is because it does not have authority to do so. There might be other logical and beneficial aspects of a male-only priesthood, but this is all completely and utterly irrelevant - if the Church COULD ordain women, then the Church WOULD ordain women (and the Church would throw all that other irrelevant rationale out the window).
The gender of the Apostles supports the Church’s position, but the Church’s position is not based on this. The Church simply cannot ordain women, because Jesus did not give the Church the authority to do so (but the Church does have the authority to ordain gentiles - and men named “Anthony”).
N
Nita
Guest
The Levite/Aaronic priesthood was a regulation for the Old Covenant. Jesus was establishing a New Covenant which would have a new priesthood.
Hebrews 7:11 Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levit’ical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchiz’edek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron?
7:12 For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well.
Isaiah had long ago foretold a “Gentile” priesthood:
Isaiah 66:18-21 "…and I am coming to gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come and shall see my glory, ,And some of them also I will take for priests and for Levites, says the LORD.
T
TommyWommy
Guest
Thanks, several helpful responses. btw, I do not advocate women’s ordination. Just wanted more clarity on the Jew/Gentile question. 
C
chaser
Guest
So, just playing devils advocate, but what would be the implications of the Catholic church allowing female ordination? Would reversal of infallible doctrine break the legitimacy of the church?
C
coolduude
Guest
It’s impossible for the Church to ordain women. If it wanted to it couldn’t because it wasn’t grated those faculties by Christ. Every ordination would be invalid. Besides, things will never get to that point because the Holy Spirit will not allow the Church to fall into error.
- Status