Infallibility of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis

[JKirkLVNV]

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.

I have several questions about Ordinatio Sacerdotalis that I would like clarified. This thread wasn’t opened to debate the document or the teaching, so please don’t do that, though I’ve contributed to the hijacking of a thread a time or two.

What I would like to know is this:

 A)  Is this an encyclical, a bull, an apostolic exhortation or what?
 B)  Is this infallible in and of itself or does it merely confirm the

infallible teaching of the ordinary magisterium? I want to know why it isn’t infallible in and of itself since our old Holy Father says quite clearly that he undertook to remove all doubt in a matter touching on the divine constitution of the Church, he invoked his office, and he told us it was to be “definitively” accepted by the faithful.
C) I’ve heard people say that beloved HHJPII never spoke infallibly on any matter. Are not canonizations infallible?

Thank you!

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

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.

I have several questions about Ordinatio Sacerdotalis that I would like clarified. This thread wasn’t opened to debate the document or the teaching, so please don’t do that, though I’ve contributed to the hijacking of a thread a time or two.

What I would like to know is this:

A) Is this an encyclical, a bull, an apostolic exhortation or what?
B) Is this infallible in and of itself or does it merely confirm the
infallible teaching of the ordinary magisterium? I want to know why it isn’t infallible in and of itself since our old Holy Father says quite clearly that he undertook to remove all doubt in a matter touching on the divine constitution of the Church, he invoked his office, and he told us it was to be “definitively” accepted by the faithful.
C) I’ve heard people say that beloved HHJPII never spoke infallibly on any matter. Are not canonizations infallible?

Thank you!

A. I believe that this is an Apostolic Letter.
B. It merely confirms the infallible teaching of the ordinary magisterium. He is not defining anything that has not already been defined, several times.
C. I don’t believe that canonizations are considered a “Matter of the Deposit of Faith”.

 

[Catholic2003]

[Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/j...i_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html) is an Apostolic Letter. (It says so right at the top.)

The following are all true, and say the same thing using different terms:

• Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is not infallible in and of itself.
• Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is not ex cathedra.
• Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is not an exercise of the extraordinary papal magisterium.

Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is an exercise of the ordinary, non-infallible papal magisterium.

Pope Pius XII, in the encyclical [Humani Generis (http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/p.../hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html), made it completely clear that the non-infallible papal magisterium can settle theological disputes, so that they “cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians.”

 

[Catholic2003]

From Vatican II’s Lumen Gentium 25:

Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly whenever, even though dispersed through the world, but still maintaining the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter, and authentically teaching matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement on one position as definitively to be held.

This is where the “to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful” language from Ordinatio Sacerdotalis comes from. This teaching is infallible by the ordinary and universal magisterium, because all the bishops of the Catholic Church (which includes the Pope) have taught that this judgement, that women cannot be ordained to the priesthood, as definitively to be held.

 

[porthos11]

Canonizations are actually accepted as an exercise of papal infallibility.

Even though HH John Paul II did not use the traditional forumulas “If any man say…so and so… let him be anathema” or “We declare, define, and pronounce…”, we need to examine whether or not OS fits the requirements:

1. Was the Pope speaking in a matter of faith and morals?
   • note the words “pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself” and “no authority whatsoever.” This is a pronouncement on a supernatural matter, not one of mere discipline.
2. Was he speaking to the universal Church?

• see the phrases “I declare” “definitely held by all of Christ’s faithful.” (John Paul II dropped the use of the “royal we”)

1. Was this a declaration as Pope or as a private theologian?

• see the description: “Apostolic Letter” “to the bishops of the Catholic Church” No doubt this is a Papal document, not a mere opinion.

What say you?

I say, the pronouncement is infallible.

 

[Deacon2006]

I always find it funny that so many people try to define infallibility. Sure we can use the V1 formula or we can use a council or we can use a teaching accepted by the community for millenia or maybe we can simplly use our brains.

Every time the Pope declares something to be true, then guess what it is true and the church has every right to expect full acceptance of that truth. If you plot to turn over that truth then maybe you are a pharisee but you are not a faithful catholic.

As for OS, the chief inquisistor, in his opinion, declared that it was an infallible teaching, oh and guess what he is now the PB16. Women cannot be priest because they cannot recieve Holy Orders in any degree.

Read Nicea to see what they said about women who thought they were HO deacons.

God Bless

 

[Catholic2003]

porthos11:

What say you?

I say, the pronouncement is infallible.

I say, you might want to reconsider dissenting from Cardinal Ratzinger now that he is Pope Benedict XVI. Here is what he said about Ordinatio Sacerdotalis when he was prefect of the CDF:

In this case, an act of the ordinary Papal Magisterium, in itself not infallible, witnesses to the infallibility of the teaching of a doctrine already possessed by the Church.

 

[porthos11]

That is, if OS “merely” ordinary. The “I declare” part appears pretty extraordinary to me.

Regardless though, even if OS is really not infallible ( I was just guessing, although the three conditions still stand), the teaching is.

 

[Deacon2006]

Catholic2003:

I say, you might want to reconsider dissenting from Cardinal Ratzinger now that he is Pope Benedict XVI. Here is what he said about Ordinatio Sacerdotalis when he was prefect of the CDF

In this case, an act of the ordinary Papal Magisterium, in itself not infallible, witnesses to the infallibility of the teaching of a doctrine already possessed by the Church.:

:tsktsk: Deliberately shrotening a quote to give an impression contrary to the one the author was making is unethical.

This is what a fuller quote from the CDF now PB16 reveals .

“In response to this precise act of the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, explicitly addressed to the entire Catholic Church, all members of the faithful are required to give their assent to the teaching stated therein.** To this end, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with the approval of the Holy Father, has given an official Reply on the nature of this assent; it is a matter of full definitive assent, that is to say, irrevocable, to a doctrine taught infallibly by the Church.** In fact, as the Reply explains, the definitive nature of this assent derives from the truth of the doctrine itself, since, founded on the written Word of God, and constantly held and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary universal Magisterium (cf. Lumen Gentium, 25). Thus, the Reply specifies that this doctrine belongs to the deposit of the faith of the Church. It should be emphasized that the definitive and infallible nature of this teaching of the Church did not arise with the publication of the Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. In the Letter, as the Reply of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith also explains, the Roman Pontiff, having taken account of present circumstances, has confirmed the same teaching by a formal declaration, giving expression once again to quod semper, quod ubique et quod ab omnibus tenendum est, utpote ad fidei depositum pertinens. In this case, an act of the ordinary Papal Magisterium, in itself not infallible, witnesses to the infallibility of the teaching of a doctrine already possessed by the Church.”

By leaving out the the fact that the cardinal declared the doctrine infallible and irrevocable yet you are implying the opposite would lend credibilty to an accussation that you might not be an honest broker with your posting

God Bless

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Thank you all for your responses. Further questions:

A) Whether or not OS is an infallible declaration (and at the very least, let’s say it’s not, but that it confirms the infallibility of what’s already and always been taught), is there an opportunity, any wiggle room for a pope, somewhere down the line, to abrogate this and allow the ordination of women, citing a deficiency in OS? These people who are hoping for it seem to think one can and I would like to be able to explain why it can’t be reveresed.

B) What does this imply for the ordination of women as deacons?
I don’t think it is possible, as Holy Orders are Holy Orders, be it deacon, priest, or bishop.

Again, thanks!

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

JKirkLVNV:

Thank you all for your responses. Further questions:

A) Whether or not OS is an infallible declaration (and at the very least, let’s say it’s not, but that it confirms the infallibility of what’s already and always been taught), is there an opportunity, any wiggle room for a pope, somewhere down the line, to abrogate this and allow the ordination of women, citing a deficiency in OS? These people who are hoping for it seem to think one can and I would like to be able to explain why it can’t be reveresed.

B) What does this imply for the ordination of women as deacons?
I don’t think it is possible, as Holy Orders are Holy Orders, be it deacon, priest, or bishop.

Again, thanks!

The Church looked into the matter of women as deacons as a separate situation and found that the same teaching applies.

It is irreformable and cannot be changed ever!

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Br. Rich SFO:

The Church looked into the matter of women as deacons as a separate situation and found that the same teaching applies.

It is irreformable and cannot be changed ever!

I do not doubt you, as I believe that deacons are part of major holy orders, so what applies to one applies to all but can you provide any links to documents where the Church states such a thing? Looking for ammunition for this topic.

People love to throw out that the early Church had deaconesses while ignoring the fact that a deaconess was not and is not a female deacon.

 

[Deacon2006]

When people talk about ancient churches that had deaconness first you must gather all the evidence and then dismiss that evidence was generated from an ancient heretical or schimatic bishop or sect. And then you must balance it against what Nicea had to say. That is deaconness are laity in every respect.

There is only on sacarament of Holy Orders it confers the priesthood of Christ in three degrees D, P, B and this priestly ordination sacarament is availiable only to men.

God Bless

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Deacon2006:

When people talk about ancient churches that had deaconness first you must gather all the evidence and then dismiss that evidence was generated from an ancient heretical or schimatic bishop or sect. And then you must balance it against what Nicea had to say. That is deaconness are laity in every respect.

There is only on sacarament of Holy Orders it confers the priesthood of Christ in three degrees D, P, B and this priestly ordination sacarament is availiable only to men.

God Bless

There is valid historical evidence that the early church had deaconesses. The problem is with our culture and language today.

Today we have words, like, actor and actress. They are two words that are gender specific that describe the samething while telling us the gender of the individual who makes a living acting. So people assume when they see the word deaconess that this is nothing more than a female deacon, which is not the case.

They make this assumption with out looking to the historical evidence. This evidence shows that a deaconess was not a female deacon.

 

[Deacon2006]

Very True.

I found the research of Aime Georges Martimort, Deaconesses An Historical Study. (1986) Ignatius Press. to be a very well researched book that makes the exact same point.

God Bless

 

[Catholic2003]

Deacon2006:

There is only on sacarament of Holy Orders it confers the priesthood of Christ in three degrees D, P, B and this priestly ordination sacarament is availiable only to men.

Wow, talk about quoting out of context.

Ordinatio Sacerdotalis addressed the issue of priestly ordination of women, that is, Holy Orders at the level of the priesthood. It did not address ordaining women to the permanent diaconate, the future possibility of which is still an open question.

The earlier CDF declaration Inter Insigniores makes this perfectly clear.

Because of the historical debate regarding diaconesses, I don’t think a convincing case can be made for the ordinary and universal magisterium teaching that women cannot be ordained to the permanent diaconate. Thus, should the Holy Father wish to irrevocably rule out this possibility infallibly, he would have to do so ex cathedra.