How do pro-women's ordination deal with the 12 male Apostles?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dovekin said:
Don’t get me wrong here. I think 13 at the Last Supper is a reasonable reading. But it is not the only possible reading, and it is far from the most reasonable.i am just explaining why some might find Brendan’s argument unconvinving
Click to expand...
On what basis is the assumption that Mary Magdalene was present at the Last Supper made? Wishful thinking and modern notions of what constitutes female emancipation?

Can anyone who believes she was present come up with any evidence from scripture to support this? The position that expects others to prove that she wasn’t there (even though there is no evidence to demonstrate that she was there) is upside down logic.
 
Dovekin said:
It is not enough just to say JP2 set a binding precedent on something.
Click to expand...
Yes it is. If a teaching is deemed to be infallible then it is exactly that infallible. It cannot be changed, ever. Man cannot just go about changing God’s laws to suit what he views as appropriate for the times.
 
Dovekin said:
Most people who support the ordination of women have moved past that kind of proof texting and recognize that the text is more complex.
Click to expand...
The texts are pretty clear. The Church states it pretty clear. It is just that there is no answer that will suffice those who support and push for the ordination of women. No matter how it is explained or answered it is not accepted. It is a “this is what I want and I refuse to accept the Church’s authority on this matter”, rather than accepting it as it is, that it is revealed to the Church by the Holy Spirit, is part of the deposit of faith and is to be accepted.
Dovekin said:
And if we believe in the teachings in the deposit of faith, we have to be able to say “the Church needs to change racist attitudes” or”The Church needs to defend the helpless” and “I do not believe pedophiles should be defended. These are complex issues that need to be addressed in full.
Click to expand...
These are issues that need dealt with, yes, but they don’t have anything to do with whether or not women can be ordained. They are different topics.
Dovekin said:
It is not enough just to say JP2 set a binding precedent on something.
Click to expand...
I understand. As I said above, there isn’t any answer that will suffice, even when at least two popes state it is binding, it is defended by Scripture and Tradition, the Church tells the faithful it is to be accepted as part of the deposit of faith and it is supported physically and biologically, there are those who refuse to believe women can not be priests.
 
Last edited:
MagdalenaRita said:
It is just that there is no answer that will suffice those who support and push for the ordination of women. No matter how it is explained or answered it is not accepted.
Click to expand...
This is a problem, and one of the things this thread seemed to address. Catholicism is not fideism. Our beliefs have a depth and interconnection that ultimately connect us to the mystery of God. There have to be answers that suffice that go beyond “We say so.”

There may be individuals who will never be satisfied by anything. But there are plenty of others who are unsettled by the issue and unsatisfied with the paths that are laid out. How they “deal with the 12 apostles” can help us discover why they are dissatisfied. What are the deep connections this teaching has?
 
Dovekin said:
Our beliefs have a depth and interconnection that ultimately connect us to the mystery of God.
Click to expand...
There are some mysteries of God that we will never have answers for this side of heaven.
There are times when we must walk by faith in God and by faith in the Church he gave us and accept that God knows best, even if we do not understand.
Dovekin said:
There have to be answers that suffice that go beyond “We say so.”
Click to expand...
Part of the reason that some continue to search for answers to the only male priesthood after hearing and learning the Church’s doctrine on the priesthood, is because they refuse to see it as given to the Church by God and IF they refuse to see that it was given to the Church by God, they refuse to accept that the Church itself can not change it. Those who continually push for women’s ordination continue to understand it as a group of men saying, “we say so”, instead of God says so. There is a, we know better what God has said than the Church or we can interpret Scripture better than the Church.
Dovekin said:
How they “deal with the 12 apostles” can help us discover why they are dissatisfied. What are the deep connections this teaching has?
Click to expand...
I agree that those who do not understand or who are just coming to understand the why’s of the male only priesthood should be guided in understanding Christ choosing only 12 men to be Apostles and why it is only men who are allowed in the priesthood. This is a question that will always be asked and will always need to be explained. It is up to the individual after having heard the reasons, to accept the answer, which brings us back to faith in God and the leading of the Holy Spirit, Church authority and our prayers for souls.
 
Last edited:
AlNg said:
Some Catholic theologians deem the teaching to be not infallible.
Click to expand...
The views of some Catholic theologians does not trump a specific declaration by the Pope that this teaching is infallible under the Ordinary Magisterium. The authority of the Church does not lie with various Catholic theologians.

The issue is closed. The Church, through the authority of the pope, has declared it to be infallible teaching that women cannot be ordained as priests. That is that.
 
Last edited:
Brendan_64 said:
The views of some Catholic theologians does not trump a specific declaration by the Pope that this teaching is infallible under the Ordinary Magisterium.
Click to expand...
I missed where the Pope said that the teaching was infallible. Where was the word infallible used in the specific declaration?
 
AlNg said:
I missed where the Pope said that the teaching was infallible. Where was the word infallible used in the specific declaration?
Click to expand...
In Responsum ad Propositum, then Cardinal Ratzinger states:

Dubium : Whether the teaching that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women, which is presented in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis to be held definitively, is to be understood as belonging to the deposit of faith.

Responsum : Affirmative.

This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium (cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium 25, 2). Thus, in the present circumstances, the Roman Pontiff, exercising his proper office of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), has handed on this same teaching by a formal declaration, explicitly stating what is to be held always, everywhere, and by all, as belonging to the deposit of the faith.
 
Cardinal Ratzinger said so, but is Cardinal Ratzinger infallible? Some Catholic theologians say not.
 
AlNg said:
Cardinal Ratzinger said so, but is Cardinal Ratzinger infallible? Some Catholic theologians say not.
Click to expand...
The remaining part of the text:

The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, approved this Reply, adopted in the Ordinary Session of this Congregation, and ordered it to be published.

Rome, from the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the Feast of the Apostles SS. Simon and Jude, October 28, 1995.

There are a lot of crazy Catholic theolgians out there. It is really a matter of accepting authority or not.
 
Last edited:
This is what Pope John Paul II wrote in the concluding paragraph of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (22/05/1994).

“Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.”

Then, as outlined above by MagdalenaRita, in response to a request for clarification on the issue, Cardinal Ratzinger, as prefect of the CDF, clarified this issue.

The issue is closed, regardless of what opinions various theologians might have. Theologians do not determine Church doctrine, the Church does, through the Magisterium.
 
Last edited:
MagdalenaRita said:
There are a lot of crazy Catholic theolgians out there.
Click to expand...
It is difficult to believe that Father Francis A. Sullivan is a crazy Catholic theologian. After all, William Cardinal Levada, formerly the prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, received his doctorate under Father Sullivan. Do you say that Father Francis A. Sullivan is a crazy Catholic theologian? How come they appointed one of his students to be the prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith?
 
I really can’t say because I do not know much about Father Francis A Sullivan or William Cardinal Levada but just a quick google search showed there are some controversies associated with both of them.

But that doesn’t really matter becaues the Pope has spoken, the issue is settled, it is to be accepted as a deposit of faith. That’s it.

A Catholic theologian does not trump the deposit of faith or an infallible teaching.
 
AlNg said:
I think that Father Sullivan said that although the decision is definitive for now, the criteria for infallibility have not been met.
Click to expand...
Is that his own opinion and interpretation of the matter, or does he speak with authority on this? Catholic theologians can have all sorts of conflicting opinions on all sorts of issues, but Church teaching is not determined by them.
 
Last edited:
Brendan_64 said:
Catholic theologians can have all sorts of conflicting opinions on all sorts of issues, but Church teaching is not determined by them.
Click to expand...
What level of magisterium are you talking about?
It is my understanding that the authoritative teaching of the pope as an exercise at the ordinary level of the magisterium does of course require religious assent and submission. However, it is not infallible teaching at this level, unless it is a teaching of which all bishops universally agree on. Otherwise, it is only when the pope speaks ex cathedra at the extraordinary level of magisterium that the degree of certitude reaches the level of infallibility. According to what I read there were some bishops who did not agree with the statement of Pope John Paul II which was a teaching of ordinary and universal magisterium and therefore would not be considered to be a teaching that met the criteria for an infallible degree of certitude. Please see Code of Canon Law Book III LIBER III. DE ECCLESIAE MUNERE DOCENDI
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2H.HTM
Also please see:
DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH
LUMEN GENTIUM
 
Last edited:
“Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.”

When a pope instructs that this judgement is to be definitively held by the Church’s faithful and then in response to a query on it the prefect of the CDF replies that this teaching is therefore infallible under the Ordinary Magisterium, then that is what it is. Infallible means infallible, must be definitively held means must be definitively held.
 
Last edited:
I’m just thinking out loud on this.

Would it have been reasonable to expect a female evangelist to be able to carry out the missionary job, traveling across the country alone. Maybe if she was Xena the princess warrior?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top