L
Lazerlike42
Guest
Anybody wish to answer Mr. Higgin’s claim that the requirement for male ordination is not infallible?
- Status
J
John_Higgins
Guest
Nah, LL42, don’t bother. It’s been done to death on these forums. Do a search on Ordinatio Sacerdotalis and you’ll find most of them. I’m in the minority here; I know it, and I don’t care.
John
L
Lazerlike42
Guest
John Higgins:
I’m not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with you. I’m in the middle without any reason to believe either way. I read what you wrote, and I may look up this document you have referenced, but I am also looking to see if there is anyone who could argue the other point.
G
Genesis315
Guest
Well, more specifically, the God-Man made that decision, so I’ll agree with Him.
C
ComradeAndrei
Guest
The priest acts in persona Christi thus, a woman cannot be a priest. Christ was a man, God (even though he has no gender) revealed Himself in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, not Mother, Daughter, Holy Spirit.
The Church has taught this since the begining, the office of the Priesthood is reserved for males, in keeping with the Priesthood of Christ.
The Church has taught this since the begining, the office of the Priesthood is reserved for males, in keeping with the Priesthood of Christ.
G
Genesis315
Guest
Let me resurrect (pardon the pun) one of my my favorite little sayings:
The priest stands “in persona Christi,” not “in persona Christy.”
W
WanderAimlessly
Guest
I did in Post #12.
PF
L
Lazerlike42
Guest
What about what he said in post #13?
W
WanderAimlessly
Guest
How about what he said in post #22:
John Higgins:
Some people just cannot handle the truth.
PF
L
Lazerlike42
Guest
Lol I see your point but I’d still like to know why what he said in #13 is false 
W
WanderAimlessly
Guest
I see your point. I condider something comming from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith have more credibility than a dissenter giving his own opinion.Lol I see your point but I’d still like to know why what he said in #13 is false
PF
L
Lazerlike42
Guest
Ahhh I read over the fact that it was from the CDF
C
CanonAlberic
Guest
Why not?
Peace.
Peace.
J
John_Higgins
Guest
No dicastery or curial office has the charism of infallibilty. So they can’t say what is or isn’t infallible. The rules are clear.
If it were manifestly demonstrated (per Canon Law) no responsum ad dubium (response to doubt) would have been necessary.
Remember, I only said it wasn’t infallible, I didn’t say it wasn’t authentic teaching. So can it change? Probably. Will it change? Probably not likely in my lifetime. The real question is “So what?”
John
PS: The last dogma infallibly defined was in 1950.
If it were manifestly demonstrated (per Canon Law) no responsum ad dubium (response to doubt) would have been necessary.
Remember, I only said it wasn’t infallible, I didn’t say it wasn’t authentic teaching. So can it change? Probably. Will it change? Probably not likely in my lifetime. The real question is “So what?”
John
PS: The last dogma infallibly defined was in 1950.
E
Elliott
Guest
O
otm
Guest
John Higgins:
The third way that something is decided as infallible is the constant and continued position of the Church on the matter since the time of the Apostles.
A careful reading of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis would show that it was couched in those terms if no others.
I will leave it to the theologians to decide if JP@ intended an excathedra statement; but that he intended to declare, and did declare that it was the constant teaching of the Church simply can’t be avoided or denied.
That, howeve, makes the assumption that the only way anything can be decided as infallible is either through an ex cathedra statement by the Pope, or an Ecumenical Council.
The third way that something is decided as infallible is the constant and continued position of the Church on the matter since the time of the Apostles.
A careful reading of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis would show that it was couched in those terms if no others.
I will leave it to the theologians to decide if JP@ intended an excathedra statement; but that he intended to declare, and did declare that it was the constant teaching of the Church simply can’t be avoided or denied.
C
chadwilliams
Guest
Wording of the question was not good, but I voted for no. Not because “the clergy would never allow it,” but because it is not in the Church’s power to ordain women as JPII has clearly stated.
D
dennisknapp
Guest
John Higgins:
How does a teaching become established within the Catholic Church? It has to have support from both Scripture and Tradition. The ordination of women has neither. Therefore, it will not happen.
The Dogma you stated has this support and therefore it became Dogma. The Pope and bishops have a better chance of creating a square circle than making women priests.
Peace
John,
How does a teaching become established within the Catholic Church? It has to have support from both Scripture and Tradition. The ordination of women has neither. Therefore, it will not happen.
The Dogma you stated has this support and therefore it became Dogma. The Pope and bishops have a better chance of creating a square circle than making women priests.
Peace
C
chadwilliams
Guest
John Higgins:
Responsum ad Dubium Concerning the Teaching Contained in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis
October 28, 1995
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
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: In the 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.
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.
Pope Benedict XVI disagrees with you:
Responsum ad Dubium Concerning the Teaching Contained in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis
October 28, 1995
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
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: In the 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.
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.
+ Joseph Card. Ratzinger, Prefect
- Tarcisio Bertone, Archbishop Emeritus of Vercelli, Secretary
W
Wildgraywolf
Guest
Old Testament: God creates priesthood.
New Testament: Jesus “fires” Old Testament priesthood - replaces it.
In the Old and New Testament God chose guys for the priesthood.
The all male priesthood tradition pre-dates existing nations and kingdoms by thousands of years.
What’s so difficult?
New Testament: Jesus “fires” Old Testament priesthood - replaces it.
In the Old and New Testament God chose guys for the priesthood.
The all male priesthood tradition pre-dates existing nations and kingdoms by thousands of years.
What’s so difficult?
- Status