Ordination of Women

[Roy5]

I admire nuns who devote their life to others, especially the poor, often as teachers.

 What troubles me are those arguments (I read some of them here) that suggest that women would not make good priests. They have different temperaments. They don't have the physical strength. Etc. Bollywash! They used to say this about all sorts of work. Why, they even refused women the vote for centuries, yes, here in America, because they actually charged that they weren't intelligent enough, not stable enough, their place was in the kitchen, raising a family, etc. 

 Women make fine ministers where they have been ordained.  Why not priests? As I stated above, my main concern would be that women should not come to dominate the priesthood. That is a real danger in some Protestant denominations, and could become a serious handicap when it comes to ministering to men. 

   One other thing. The Genesis story of creation is often being cited, as though it is ammuniton against ordaining women. What of us who view the Creation saga as a fable, or a parable, with an important moral truth but historically fiction? You can find powerful symbolism in this myth, but when it comes to facts forget it. If Christianity holds on to the notion that Adam and Eve were real people, rather than symbols, if our faith teaches that original sin stems from the devil disguised as a serpent successfully tempting Eve, who then led Adam into grave sin - well, not a firm foundation certainly. We have to take into account what science has discovered since this ancient legend was included in scripture. We can't ask people to believe the unbelievable. Moreover, what kind of justice when generation after generation are born stained with sin because some ancient ancestor ate from a forbidden tree? The whole concept is offensive - well, at least to me. Yes, we do have a weakness which leads us to sin, but it has nothing to do with Adam eating from a forbidden tree! 

   If there is an argument against the ordination of women, it should be a practical one based on reasonable arguments. The only one that I can think of - which I noted above - is the real danger that women - who overall are more religious than men - could come to be the majority of priests, and that would not be good. But what would be good would be to see some women among the men who process down the aisle in their vestments at major Vatican or diocesan events, yes, and women dressed in the red of cardinals. In another century or two people will look back at an all-male clergy and wonder how those folks in 2010 could be so antiquated, so narrow in their thinking, so prejudiced.

  But God bless everybody of all creeds, color, countries and diverse points of view. Freedom of thought and speech are among those important blessings to thank God for as we journey through this Thanksgiving weekend - and always.

  I know this is a minority view here on CAF but millions of Catholics favor a greater role for women within the hierarchy, even ordination, and certainly as Deacons. Just possibly, there are other ways to work toward that end. Those ideas would interest me.

 

[joandarc2008]

I admire nuns who devote their life to others, especially the poor, often as teachers.

 What troubles me are those arguments (I read some of them here) that suggest that women would not make good priests. They have different temperaments. They don't have the physical strength. Etc. Bollywash! They used to say this about all sorts of work. Why, they even refused women the vote for centuries, yes, here in America, because they actually charged that they weren't intelligent enough, not stable enough, their place was in the kitchen, raising a family, etc. 

 Women make fine ministers where they have been ordained.  Why not priests? As I stated above, my main concern would be that women should not come to dominate the priesthood. That is a real danger in some Protestant denominations, and could become a serious handicap when it comes to ministering to men. 

   One other thing. The Genesis story of creation is often being cited, as though it is ammuniton against ordaining women. What of us who view the Creation saga as a fable, or a parable, with an important moral truth but historically fiction? You can find powerful symbolism in this myth, but when it comes to facts forget it. If Christianity holds on to the notion that Adam and Eve were real people, rather than symbols, if our faith teaches that original sin stems from the devil disguised as a serpent successfully tempting Eve, who then led Adam into grave sin - well, not a firm foundation certainly. We have to take into account what science has discovered since this ancient legend was included in scripture. We can't ask people to believe the unbelievable. Moreover, what kind of justice when generation after generation are born stained with sin because some ancient ancestor ate from a forbidden tree? The whole concept is offensive - well, at least to me. Yes, we do have a weakness which leads us to sin, but it has nothing to do with Adam eating from a forbidden tree! 

   If there is an argument against the ordination of women, it should be a practical one based on reasonable arguments. The only one that I can think of - which I noted above - is the real danger that women - who overall are more religious than men - could come to be the majority of priests, and that would not be good. But what would be good would be to see some women among the men who process down the aisle in their vestments at major Vatican or diocesan events, yes, and women dressed in the red of cardinals. In another century or two people will look back at an all-male clergy and wonder how those folks in 2010 could be so antiquated, so narrow in their thinking, so prejudiced.

  But God bless everybody of all creeds, color, countries and diverse points of view. Freedom of thought and speech are among those important blessings to thank God for as we journey through this Thanksgiving weekend - and always.

  I know this is a minority view here on CAF but millions of Catholics favor a greater role for women within the hierarchy, even ordination, and certainly as Deacons. Just possibly, there are other ways to work toward that end. Those ideas would interest me.

Yes but you still haven’t addressed the in persono Christi issue

 

[Bluegoat]

Bluelake…

Do you or yours – faith community – have devotion to Mary?

Do you mean me?

Among Anglicans it varies quite a lot.

Personally, I was never drawn to Mary at all before I had children, though I felt more of a connection when I had small babies. But generally I would say that there are other saints I feel more connection to than Mary.

 

[GKC]

Do you mean me?

Among Anglicans it varies quite a lot.

Personally, I was never drawn to Mary at all before I had children, though I felt more of a connection when I had small babies. But generally I would say that there are other saints I feel more connection to than Mary.

Our assistant priest has a rather marked devotion to the BVM. He provided the statue of OL of Walsingham for our Mary Shrine.

GKC

 

[KathleenGee]

Roy

Most Catholics are happy with our Tradition.

 

[KathleenGee]

The reason I brought up Mary is that she assists the Lord in bringing us deeper into the mystical church, and helping us recognize the worth of who we are…all things of ourselves matter.

The other is that I was never conscious in my life that the priest was male…What I always experienced in the work of the priesthood was that theirs was the work of the Lord among us, that the teachings and traditions of our faith do not come from men.

Our faith is not sourced from men. Our faith and its tradition – in the JudeoChristian faith comes from God Himself. Christ and the Holy Spirit work through the Church to unite us with the Heavenly Father.

The Ratzinger Report talks about the role of women in the church. Pope John Paul II asked for more participation of women in the liturgy.

 

[Roy5]

In persono Christi

 Okay. Christ, while divine, was a human being. That, to me, is the bottom line. Are women less human beings than men? 

 The Bible and other 'strong' arguments were brought forth to justify slavery. We know that that was ridiculous.

 Today I worshiped at a church with two statues of about equal size high and lifted up on either side of the altar. Guess who? Jesus and Mary. And above the altar, in a huge painting across the ceiling, who? Mary! 

  Now, if Mary can occupy such a prime position within the Church, the most revered woman in the world, Queen of Heaven and known under scores of other venerable titles, I guess I wouldn't object receiving the sacraments from another woman. Is any prayer more often recited than the 'Hail, Mary"? True, none of the twelve Disciples were women, but who were at the foot of the cross and the first to visit the sepulchre that first Easter morning? The Disciples at that time were expected to be roaming evangelists, but today priests are usually settled into parishes. Many women could handle this well. They are principals, church administrators, and much else. They have written powerful devotions and teach theology. Why not ordain them? We no longer live in the narrow patriarchal society that existed for so many centuries. Old ideas die hard, but they need to die.

  God bless everybody.

 

[joandarc2008]

In persono Christi

 Okay. Christ, while divine, was a human being. That, to me, is the bottom line. Are women less human beings than men? 

 The Bible and other 'strong' arguments were brought forth to justify slavery. We know that that was ridiculous.

 Today I worshiped at a church with two statues of about equal size high and lifted up on either side of the altar. Guess who? Jesus and Mary. And above the altar, in a huge painting across the ceiling, who? Mary! 

  Now, if Mary can occupy such a prime position within the Church, the most revered woman in the world, Queen of Heaven and known under scores of other venerable titles, I guess I wouldn't object receiving the sacraments from another woman. Is any prayer more often recited than the 'Hail, Mary"? True, none of the twelve Disciples were women, but who were at the foot of the cross and the first to visit the sepulchre that first Easter morning? The Disciples at that time were expected to be roaming evangelists, but today priests are usually settled into parishes. Many women could handle this well. They are principals, church administrators, and much else. They have written powerful devotions and teach theology. Why not ordain them? We no longer live in the narrow patriarchal society that existed for so many centuries. Old ideas die hard, but they need to die.

  God bless everybody.

That is not what in persono Christi means. It means that when the priest consecrates the Eucharist or gives abosolution it is actually Christ that is doing this - the priest is delivering the words - in persono Christi - so to try to do this with a female priest creates all sorts of issues as Christ is male. You are basically promoting a sort liturgical lesbianism.

I explained it before much further back feel free to take a look - it would be good of you to answer the actual question.

By the way the reason those two statues are the same size is that they are they two humans that were born without original sin.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

In persono Christi

 Okay. Christ, while divine, was a human being. That, to me, is the bottom line. Are women less human beings than men? 

 The Bible and other 'strong' arguments were brought forth to justify slavery. We know that that was ridiculous.

 Today I worshiped at a church with two statues of about equal size high and lifted up on either side of the altar. Guess who? Jesus and Mary. And above the altar, in a huge painting across the ceiling, who? Mary! 

  Now, if Mary can occupy such a prime position within the Church, the most revered woman in the world, Queen of Heaven and known under scores of other venerable titles, I guess I wouldn't object receiving the sacraments from another woman. Is any prayer more often recited than the 'Hail, Mary"? True, none of the twelve Disciples were women, but who were at the foot of the cross and the first to visit the sepulchre that first Easter morning? The Disciples at that time were expected to be roaming evangelists, but today priests are usually settled into parishes. Many women could handle this well. They are principals, church administrators, and much else. They have written powerful devotions and teach theology. Why not ordain them? We no longer live in the narrow patriarchal society that existed for so many centuries. Old ideas die hard, but they need to die.

  God bless everybody.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

A priest standing in persona christi acting as Christ Himself sacrificing Himself upon the altar is not the same as a principal or a lead nurse in a hospital, with all due respect. Please read the previous posts on this thread and research what the Catholic view is of the sacerdotal role a priest plays and their reasoning why a priest must be male. It’s not chauvenism or the idea that women are bubble-brains who can’t hack it. That’s not it at all. And just because Catholics are devoted to Mary doesn’t mean they would want her a priest either?

In persono Christi

 Okay. Christ, while divine, was a human being. That, to me, is the bottom line. Are women less human beings than men? 

 The Bible and other 'strong' arguments were brought forth to justify slavery. We know that that was ridiculous.

 Today I worshiped at a church with two statues of about equal size high and lifted up on either side of the altar. Guess who? Jesus and Mary. And above the altar, in a huge painting across the ceiling, who? Mary! 

  Now, if Mary can occupy such a prime position within the Church, the most revered woman in the world, Queen of Heaven and known under scores of other venerable titles, I guess I wouldn't object receiving the sacraments from another woman. Is any prayer more often recited than the 'Hail, Mary"? True, none of the twelve Disciples were women, but who were at the foot of the cross and the first to visit the sepulchre that first Easter morning? The Disciples at that time were expected to be roaming evangelists, but today priests are usually settled into parishes. Many women could handle this well. They are principals, church administrators, and much else. They have written powerful devotions and teach theology. Why not ordain them? We no longer live in the narrow patriarchal society that existed for so many centuries. Old ideas die hard, but they need to die.

  God bless everybody.

 

[Edmundus1581]

If you want to comment, please read the thread. Your point doesn’t have anything to do with what Kathleen said, or my response to it.

Agreed. You’ve two (and others) have had an interesting discussion, and I’ve enjoyed following it.

Personal experience speaks volumes - I thought your point about women in combat was worthwhile.

This whole digression into whether women and men are “ontologically different”, and what that means, has been informative and interesting, and I thank all who have contributed to it.

 

[edwest2]

I admire nuns who devote their life to others, especially the poor, often as teachers.

 What troubles me are those arguments (I read some of them here) that suggest that women would not make good priests. They have different temperaments. They don't have the physical strength. Etc. Bollywash! They used to say this about all sorts of work. Why, they even refused women the vote for centuries, yes, here in America, because they actually charged that they weren't intelligent enough, not stable enough, their place was in the kitchen, raising a family, etc. 

 Women make fine ministers where they have been ordained.  Why not priests? As I stated above, my main concern would be that women should not come to dominate the priesthood. That is a real danger in some Protestant denominations, and could become a serious handicap when it comes to ministering to men. 

   One other thing. The Genesis story of creation is often being cited, as though it is ammuniton against ordaining women. What of us who view the Creation saga as a fable, or a parable, with an important moral truth but historically fiction? You can find powerful symbolism in this myth, but when it comes to facts forget it. If Christianity holds on to the notion that Adam and Eve were real people, rather than symbols, if our faith teaches that original sin stems from the devil disguised as a serpent successfully tempting Eve, who then led Adam into grave sin - well, not a firm foundation certainly. We have to take into account what science has discovered since this ancient legend was included in scripture. We can't ask people to believe the unbelievable. Moreover, what kind of justice when generation after generation are born stained with sin because some ancient ancestor ate from a forbidden tree? The whole concept is offensive - well, at least to me. Yes, we do have a weakness which leads us to sin, but it has nothing to do with Adam eating from a forbidden tree! 

   If there is an argument against the ordination of women, it should be a practical one based on reasonable arguments. The only one that I can think of - which I noted above - is the real danger that women - who overall are more religious than men - could come to be the majority of priests, and that would not be good. But what would be good would be to see some women among the men who process down the aisle in their vestments at major Vatican or diocesan events, yes, and women dressed in the red of cardinals. In another century or two people will look back at an all-male clergy and wonder how those folks in 2010 could be so antiquated, so narrow in their thinking, so prejudiced.

  But God bless everybody of all creeds, color, countries and diverse points of view. Freedom of thought and speech are among those important blessings to thank God for as we journey through this Thanksgiving weekend - and always.

  I know this is a minority view here on CAF but millions of Catholics favor a greater role for women within the hierarchy, even ordination, and certainly as Deacons. Just possibly, there are other ways to work toward that end. Those ideas would interest me.

Only secularists and those who do not know what the Church teaches would think that. Here is the document that addresses the issue. The Church has authority from God, though men have other ideas:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

Church hierarchy is understood as a position of power in a corporation. The Church is not a corporation.

Peace,
Ed

 

[mark_a]

I admire nuns who devote their life to others, especially the poor, often as teachers.

What troubles me are those arguments (I read some of them here) that suggest that women would not make good priests. They have different temperaments. They don’t have the physical strength. Etc. Bollywash! They used to say this about all sorts of work. Why, they even refused women the vote for centuries, yes, here in America, because they actually charged that they weren’t intelligent enough, not stable enough, their place was in the kitchen, raising a family, etc.

Women make fine ministers where they have been ordained. Why not priests? As I stated above, my main concern would be that women should not come to dominate the priesthood. That is a real danger in some Protestant denominations, and could become a serious handicap when it comes to ministering to men.

One other thing. The Genesis story of creation is often being cited, as though it is ammuniton against ordaining women. What of us who view the Creation saga as a fable, or a parable, with an important moral truth but historically fiction? You can find powerful symbolism in this myth, but when it comes to facts forget it. If Christianity holds on to the notion that Adam and Eve were real people, rather than symbols, if our faith teaches that original sin stems from the devil disguised as a serpent successfully tempting Eve, who then led Adam into grave sin - well, not a firm foundation certainly. We have to take into account what science has discovered since this ancient legend was included in scripture. We can’t ask people to believe the unbelievable. Moreover, what kind of justice when generation after generation are born stained with sin because some ancient ancestor ate from a forbidden tree? The whole concept is offensive - well, at least to me. Yes, we do have a weakness which leads us to sin, but it has nothing to do with Adam eating from a forbidden tree!

If there is an argument against the ordination of women, it should be a practical one based on reasonable arguments. The only one that I can think of - which I noted above - is the real danger that women - who overall are more religious than men - could come to be the majority of priests, and that would not be good. But what would be good would be to see some women among the men who process down the aisle in their vestments at major Vatican or diocesan events, yes, and women dressed in the red of cardinals. In another century or two people will look back at an all-male clergy and wonder how those folks in 2010 could be so antiquated, so narrow in their thinking, so prejudiced.

But God bless everybody of all creeds, color, countries and diverse points of view. Freedom of thought and speech are among those important blessings to thank God for as we journey through this Thanksgiving weekend - and always.

I know this is a minority view here on CAF but millions of Catholics favor a greater role for women within the hierarchy, even ordination, and certainly as Deacons. Just possibly, there are other ways to work toward that end. Those ideas would interest me.

Mother Teresa, Mother Angelica, and several Doctors of the Church did not need to behave like male priests to make huge contributions to the Church.

Anyway, I’m interested to know which communities currently ordaining women have *not *abandoned traditional Christian moral values concerning abortion, contraception, divorce, gay marriage, etc., etc.

 

[joandarc2008]

Mother Teresa, Mother Angelica, and several Doctors of the Church did not need to behave like male priests to make huge contributions to the Church.

Anyway, I’m interested to know which communities currently ordaining women have *not *abandoned traditional Christian moral values concerning abortion, contraception, divorce, gay marriage, etc., etc.

Well said -

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

It is noteworthy that most pro-women’s ordination groups are pro-choice, pro-gay, etc. You’re right. There are a few Anglican groups within ACNA that are pro-WO and yet still pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, etc. but they’re a minority. Usually one liberal heterodox leap leads to another…great point

Mother Teresa, Mother Angelica, and several Doctors of the Church did not need to behave like male priests to make huge contributions to the Church.

Anyway, I’m interested to know which communities currently ordaining women have *not *abandoned traditional Christian moral values concerning abortion, contraception, divorce, gay marriage, etc., etc.

 

[Aramis]

Mother Teresa, Mother Angelica, and several Doctors of the Church did not need to behave like male priests to make huge contributions to the Church.

Nor did Deaconess St. Phoebe, assistant to St. Paul.

Nor did Deaconess St. Xenia of Rome.

 

[PRmerger]

Women make fine ministers where they have been ordained.

Truly, Protestant denominations ought have no objection to “ordaining” a woman to the ministry. For, the protestant minister’s role is indeed “a job”; and who could doubt that a woman could preach a great, heartfelt sermon, lead a congregation in prayer, counsel families, manage a parish and nurture a sick child, perhaps with even more emotional investment than any male Protestant clergy?

Why not priests?

This question shows a deeply impoverished understanding of the nature of the priesthood, IMHO.

The priest is not a man who has put on some vestments and been deputized to lead others in prayers and say some words to make a wafer and wine holy.

At the ordination of a priest a profound change occurs. What existed 30 seconds prior to his consecration does not exist anymore. He is a new creation: a priest, configured to Christ. Ontologically there is a change in his being. He may look like the same man, but what has just occurred is earth-shatteringly sublime! Just like in our sacrament of the Eucharist: “to observe that after bread becomes the Sacred Body of Christ, it still tastes like bread and feels like bread, but is now the Body of Christ? There has been an ontological change. A cup of wine still smells like wine and tastes like it, but it is now the Blood of Christ. At ordination an ontological change takes place.” source.

 

[KathleenGee]

I saw a program tonight about Pope Benedict…he received his call to the priesthood when he was 8 or 9, according to his brother, also a priest.

My former pastor had his first calling to the priesthood when he was 4. My other pastor wanted to become a priest when he was 5. There was a demonstration in his community about the same time. He had his dad make him a sign and it said, ‘This guy wants to be a priest.’

All of them said it was a calling to the Lord, not they choosing this vocation.

When I hear of women wanting to be priests, or others questioning why they can’t, it is the spirit of man…not the Lord.

 

[Joseph_L_Varga]

The other day after Mass, inside the church, I was praying the Rosary - the Luminous Mysteries. And when I came to the fifth mystery (Christ Institutes the Eucharist), I conjured a mental image of the Last Supper, with Jesus Christ, surrounded by the Twelve Apostles - all of whom were, of course, male.

No women there, just guys - with beards. And I suddenly remembered this post, by Gurneyhalleck1:

The Anglicans would’ve grown ZZ Top beards but you guys would inherit the women’s ordination debates and headaches!
Hesychios;7193455:

I had often mused upon this, and thought it to be an opportunity lost. Canterbury could have become a Patriarchate for one thing.

However, the more I think about it, perhaps it was for the best. Perhaps even God prevented it. If the Anglican communion had joined with Holy Orthodoxy there is no telling what kind of problems that could have brought into the church on down through the years.
Bluegoat;7193079:

There was a time when many people thought that there would be some sort of Anglican Orthodox union in their lifetime. It’s very sad that it didn’t in fact happen.

And with this image intruding on my mind, the Anglicans growing ZZ Top beards upon joining with Holy Orthodoxy, I started to chuckle.

During Rosary… Do I spend too much time on CAF?

But I realize, this is one more argument against the ordination of women. If they can’t grow ZZ Top beards, they can’t be ordained as priests.

 

[Bluegoat]

The other day after Mass, inside the church, I was praying the Rosary - the Luminous Mysteries. And when I came to the fifth mystery (Christ Institutes the Eucharist), I conjured a mental image of the Last Supper, with Jesus Christ, surrounded by the Twelve Apostles - all of whom were, of course, male.

No women there, just guys - with beards. And I suddenly remembered this post, by Gurneyhalleck1:

And with this image intruding on my mind, the Anglicans growing ZZ Top beards upon joining with Holy Orthodoxy, I started to chuckle.

During Rosary… Do I spend too much time on CAF?

But I realize, this is one more argument against the ordination of women. If they can’t grow ZZ Top beards, they can’t be ordained as priests.

As long as they weren’t wearing sunglasses, I think you are ok.