Pope shakes hands with woman priest

[wisdomseeker]

Pope Benedict XVI greeted and shook hands with a woman priest, Rev Dr Jane Hedges, canon steward of the Abbey. She is also a campaigner for women bishops. It is noteworthy that the Vatican has said that the ordination of women is a grave crime (July 15, 2010), but still the Pope shakes hands with a woman priest.
Please see:
telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/the-pope/8010064/Pope-shakes-hands-with-woman-priest-in-historic-service-at-Abbey.html

the way i see is these women decided to be there to show BXVI that they are priests and there was nothing he could do. they are arrogant and misled. they knew exactly how offensive this is for the holy father and they did it anyway. this is a bad sign and humiliating for the holy father.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

the way i see is these women decided to be there to show BXVI that they are priests and there was nothing he could do. they are arrogant and misled. they knew exactly how offensive this is for the holy father and they did it anyway. this is a bad sign and humiliating for the holy father.

A little context here. The Holy Father was visiting Westminster Abbey. Dr Jane Hedges is the Canon Steward of Westminster Abbey. It doesn’t seem odd at all that she’d be there.

 

[Crash001]

So you would say that this is only a Church law and not a moral law, and as such, can be changed sometime in the future, as other Church laws have been changed?

It sounds like you’re just looking to stir up some controversy for faithful catholics.

 

[RedSoxWife]

The Pope has no authority over the Church of England, so it seems he was just extending a peaceful sign to them. Just because we don’t agree with their ordination policies doesn’t mean we cannot treat them like our brothers and sisters in Christ.

Now, if it was a woman who claimed to be a priest in the Catholic Church, then I would have something to say.

This was exactly my thought when I read the OP! I don’t have a problem with my parent’s Lutheran church having a female pastor. I would definitely have a huge problem with it if she was prancing around pretending to be a Catholic priest. On the other hand I have HUGE problems with the her teachings on pretty much everything.

 

[curlycool89]

See, this is why I am so glad I am not the pope. If I smile and say “Hi” to someone, that somehow automatically means “I rubber-stamp everything you say and stand for, I acknowledge the validity of everything you claim about yourself, and I support whatever you will endorse in the future”.

That pretty much sums it up. It looks like Pope JPII met with the Dalai Lama several times, and no doubt they shook hands, but that doesn’t mean we should all convert to Tibetan Buddhism.

I’m quite shocked actually. Jesus ate with sinners, so there’s no real reason why the Pope can’t shake the hand of a false “priest”.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Pope Benedict XVI greeted and shook hands with a woman priest, Rev Dr Jane Hedges, canon steward of the Abbey. She is also a campaigner for women bishops. It is noteworthy that the Vatican has said that the ordination of women is a grave crime (July 15, 2010), but still the Pope shakes hands with a woman priest.
Please see:
telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/the-pope/8010064/Pope-shakes-hands-with-woman-priest-in-historic-service-at-Abbey.html

A handshake is a greeting when people meet. It doesn’t necessarily mean friendship, but it does imply being on speaking terms.

Should the pope refuse to speak to a woman priest? I thought we were supposed to dialog with other religions. You can’t have a dialog if you won’t even shake hands and have a conversation.

Shaking hands doesn’t mean you agree on everything (or anything).

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Sid, sid, sid.

My goodness me.

The Archbishop of Canterbury is the leader of the Anglican clergy --all of whom are (in remaining Anglican and not say accepting Anglicanus coetibus (sp.)) in rebellion against the Catholic Church. . .yet Benedict shook his hand.

Not only that the Archbishop (who mind you is in rebellion against Rome) shook the hand of BENEDICT. Does that mean that the Archbishop in shaking the Pope’s hand is 'going home to Rome?"

Well, by YOUR logic of ‘a handshake means I’m accepting you even though I’ve spoken against you and taught that your actions are gravely sinful’,
then the ARCHBISHOP has ‘embraced’ Catholicism just as much as Benedict has ‘embraced’ ,

This is not up to your usual standard, sid. Are you so discouraged upon seeing how well Benedict came across in England and Scotland?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Lest we forget:

Benedict was not shaking the hand of a catholic woman who claimed to be a catholic priest.

This woman is an Anglican who claims to be an Anglican priest.

Anglicans who are not in communion with Rome (by definition) do not have valid orders anyway according to Catholic teaching.

So Benedict is extending courtesy to any Anglican clergy (male or female) in shaking his/her hand, but he is not thereby stating that (according to Catholic teaching) either the male or the female ‘priest’ has valid orders.

Similarly, the male or female ‘priest’ of the Anglican communion, in shaking hands with Pope Benedict, is not saying, “well, here we are, and now we are all in communion with Rome so we’ve all morphed into Catholic priests here!”

 

[wisdomseeker]

yep. it seems that we have lost the Tradition of symbolism. there is a meaning for everything we do. at least it used to be for the CC. today, this is no longer the case, anything goes. it does not matter what we do today, all it matters that we show to be polite to each other. never mind what God has tought us.

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

yep. it seems that we have lost the Tradition of symbolism. there is a meaning for everything we do. at least it used to be for the CC. today, this is no longer the case, anything goes. it does not matter what we do today, all it matters that we show to be polite to each other. never mind what God has tought us.

God taught us to reach other to others with love, compassion, and show them the light of Christ. God himself set the example by asking the Samaritan woman for water at the well.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

yep. it seems that we have lost the Tradition of symbolism. there is a meaning for everything we do. at least it used to be for the CC. today, this is no longer the case, anything goes. it does not matter what we do today, all it matters that we show to be polite to each other. never mind what God has tought us.

Please enlighten us about the meaning of a handshake. Especially please focus on how a handshake implies that people agree on everything. Please provide references.

 

[Dan-Man916]

So you would say that this is only a Church law and not a moral law, and as such, can be changed sometime in the future, as other Church laws have been changed?

From Ordinatio sacerdotalis:

the position of the Catholic Church: “She holds that it is not admissible to ordain women to the priesthood, for very fundamental reasons. These reasons include: the example recorded in the Sacred Scriptures of Christ choosing his Apostles only from among men; the constant practice of the Church, which has imitated Christ in choosing only men; and her living teaching authority which has consistently held that the exclusion of women from the priesthood is in accordance with God’s plan for his Church.”(1)

This is not Church merely law but is based in these, which are unchangeable.

 

[manualman]

There’s actually an old joke on this precise topic. The pope attends an ecumenical gathering and meets and greet leaders from other religious denominations by their self-professed titled. The pope greets Methodist bishops, Lutheran bishops, Anglican bishops, Independent evangelical bishops and so on… The Orthodox Patriarch of Constatinople overhears the pope great a female Episcopal bishop and say “It is very good to meet you Bishop Smith.”

The Patriach later chides the pope “Did I hear you actually recognize the episcopacy of that woman over there, Peter?” The Pope retorts “Why not, Andrew? She’s as much a bishop as any of these other guys…”

 

[prodigal-sun]

Pope Benedict XVI greeted and shook hands with a woman priest, Rev Dr Jane Hedges, canon steward of the Abbey. She is also a campaigner for women bishops. It is noteworthy that the Vatican has said that the ordination of women is a grave crime (July 15, 2010), but still the Pope shakes hands with a woman priest.
Please see:
telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/the-pope/8010064/Pope-shakes-hands-with-woman-priest-in-historic-service-at-Abbey.html

So what! What do you think… this causes a scandal or something! As a Catholic, I have no doubts what our Holy Father believes & teaches about the sacrament of Holy Orders in regards to female. I also understand how we are to treat people with love & respect.

BXVI has now explained both very well!

Peace!

 

[CMatt25]

I don’t have a problem with my parent’s Lutheran church having a female pastor.

Does Benedict too consider the Lutheran church a church or is it an eccclesial community? What defines the difference?

 

[manualman]

There is only ONE Church. But the Church often informally uses the term “churches” to refer to the local manifestation of THE church. If the leadership of your organization has not received the Sacrament of Holy Orders from a bishop with an unbroken line of succession from the apostles themselves, your organization is NOT a church, it is a christian ecclesial community.

The eastern orthodox have valid apostolic succession as do some schismatic groups like the Polish National Catholic Church (and arguably the SSPX). Their local communities can accurately be called churches.

Lutheranism (in my experience) does not consider ordination to be a sacrament and has discarded the necessity of unbroken apostolic succession. In formal terms, it’s not a church. But in practical everyday terms, there is no point in poking a stick in their eye over definitions. Let them call their leaders bishops and their communities churches if they like. One step at a time.

 

[Dale_M]

Does Benedict too consider the Lutheran church a church or is it an eccclesial community? What defines the difference?

As with Manualman, my sense is that, according to formal Catholic teaching, a Church has valid apostolic succession and ecclesial communities do not.

The Patriach later chides the pope “Did I hear you actually recognize the episcopacy of that woman over there, Peter?” The Pope retorts “Why not, Andrew? She’s as much a bishop as any of these other guys…”

Yes, I think that summarizes this issue in a nutshell.

 

[sidbrown]

Tough question - well done

I’ve looked again at the document in question, and it actually identifies the attempted ordination of women as a “grave delict” against the sacraments.

So, then it is more than a church law - agreed, and your point is well made.

Nevertheless the document is specifically addressed to Catholics, and, more particularly, to senior clergy. In my reading, it would not actually apply even to me, if I were to attempt to “ordain” a woman.

My point is that you are incorrect to invoke the document in the context of the Holy Father shaking hands with the woman “priest” of another community.

I was only reporting on what the headlines announced.

 

[sidbrown]

Sid, sid, sid.

My goodness me.

The Archbishop of Canterbury is the leader of the Anglican clergy --all of whom are (in remaining Anglican and not say accepting Anglicanus coetibus (sp.)) in rebellion against the Catholic Church. . .yet Benedict shook his hand.

Not only that the Archbishop (who mind you is in rebellion against Rome) shook the hand of BENEDICT. Does that mean that the Archbishop in shaking the Pope’s hand is 'going home to Rome?"

Well, by YOUR logic of ‘a handshake means I’m accepting you even though I’ve spoken against you and taught that your actions are gravely sinful’,
then the ARCHBISHOP has ‘embraced’ Catholicism just as much as Benedict has ‘embraced’ ,

This is not up to your usual standard, sid. Are you so discouraged upon seeing how well Benedict came across in England and Scotland?

I reported this as a item wothy of discussion. It happened and I don;t see why we cannot comment on it one way or the other. Some people might view this as controversial since the Vatican has come out and said that the ordination of women priests is gravely wrong. Others will see nothing wrong with it. I was at a funeral in an Episcopal Church recently and the Episcopal Mass was said by a female priest. I felt uncomfortable with the situation of a female priest, but I went along with it, since it was a funeral. But at the same time, it was running through my mind and I could not forget that the Vatican had said that it was gravely wrong to ordain women priests.

 

[Dale_M]

I was only reporting on what the headlines announced.

Yes, but the headline suggests more significance to the handshake than it merits. Whoever wrote the headline is either unfamiliar with Catholic teaching or is deliberately trying to stir the pot.

From a non-Catholic point of view, the Pope shook hands with a female priest. But from a Catholic point of view, the Pope shook hands with a female minister of the Anglican faith.