F.A.O. jinc 1019,
Dear jinc 1019,
Cordial greetings and a very good day.
In addition to what has been said, the sole basis for an exclusively male priesthood is that a priest must be a man because he represents a man, Jesus Christ, and by his ordination acts in persona Christi Capitis, in the very person of Christ, who is the *Bridegroom *of His Bride, the Church. Indeed, this is why the ordination of the Blessed Virgin would not make sense, for she represents the Church as Bride, not the Church’s Head and Groom. The ultimate reason for the ordination of men only to represent Christ as Head, therefore, lies in the fact that God the Son became a man and not a woman. Moreover, He became a man in order to be the Husband of the Church and at the same time the perfect image of the Fatherhood of God (see S. Jhn. 1: 18; 14: 8-10; Col. 1: 15; II Cor. 4: 4; Heb. 1: 1-3). A woman cannot be a Christian priest, because she cannot be a husband and father.
Sacred Scripture, dear friend, it is quite true, does provide further cogent reasons for the prohibition against ordaining women to the priesthood, but these are not the sole basis. Thus in I Timothy 2: 11-13, St. Paul says, “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression”. First, it is important to observe that St. Paul writes not out of mere male prejudice, for it is he who authors one of the most vigorous passages in the N.T. on the equality of men and women as children of God (see Gal. 3: 26-8). However, there was never any question of making women presbyters or official ministers of the Word. In First Timothy he insists that the equal standing of men and women in the Church does not remove the natural distinction between the sexes (something which a spurious egalitiarianism seeks to do), which was incontrovertably established by the prioritity given to man in creation (2: 13). St. Paul will not allow a woman to assume the place of leadership within the Church as an authoritative teacher of doctrine, since that would clearly set aside the order of nature and ipso facto put her in the position of exercising authority over the men in the congregation of the faithful. As the authoritative teacher of the people of God, a priest stands before them to rule and govern, but a woman could never occupy this office without violating the very Church doctrine that she would seek to teach to the men and women of her flock. Notwithstanding what the contemporary world, indoctrinated by decades of feminist ideology, may say to the contrary, a woman’s attempt to usurp the role of priest and teach men would be self-contradictory in the sight of God.
St Paul, dear friend, gives two reasons for this ban on women becoming priests. First, he makes his appeal to the fact that Adam was created before Eve (Gen 2: 21ff.), and in the view of I Cor. 11: 8f. (“For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for man”), this means that the origin and *raison d’ etre *of woman are to be found in man. As therefore God’s purpose in creating Eve was to provide a ‘help meet’ for Adam (Gen. 2: 20), it is not permissible for a woman to assume for herself the headship which belong soley to the man.
Second, St. Paul shows that Eve’s part in the Fall was owing to her being deceived (II Cor. 11: 3). The Devil deceived the woman; the woman did not deceive the man, but persuaded him (Gen. 3: 17), “thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife…”. In the preceding verse (I Tim. 2: 13), the Apostle teaches why a woman should not exercise authority, in verse 14, why she should not teach - more easily deceived, she more easily deceives, is the point which he is seeking to impart. This, for very obvious reasons, would render her highly unsuitable for the priesthood. You will observe that St. Paul places all the emphasis upon the word ‘deceive’ (mentioned twice), so as to drive home this particular lesson. He is not blaming Eve to excuse Adam, for he shows in Romans 5: 12ff. that the entire race was wounded by the transgression of the one man who was its Head.
The teaching of St. Paul in the Epistles, dear friend, is jolly cogent corroborative evidence as to why women are banned from Holy Orders and sadly, owing the impact of feminism, is not taken into account by modern Catholics as it once was. There is a tendency among some to dismiss it as being culturally bound, or, as I said earlier, put it down to St. Paul’s supposed prejudice against women. However, the Holy Spirit, speaking through St. Paul, says, “the women should keep silence in the churches…for it is shameful for a woman to speak in church…what I am writing to you is the command of the Lord”. “I suffer not a woman to teach nor to usurp authority over the man”. Therefore, women are excluded from the teaching and governing mandate of Holy Orders by reason of “the command of the Lord”, nothing remotely to do with cultural conditioning, as even the argument of the I Timothy passage, itself firmly rooted in Sacred Scripture, plainly evinces.
God bless and trust that is of some help, dear friend.
Warmest good wishes,
Portrait
Pax
