What do you think would be the best argument against female priesthood?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LeonardDeNoblac
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

LeonardDeNoblac

Guest
If anyone asked you “Why the Catholic Church doesn’t allow women to be priests?”, how would you answer?
I’m not fully convinced by some of the traditional arguments (“Christ chose only men as apostles” isn’t conclusive, Aquinas’ argument that women are defective in reason - wich comes from Aristotle - is quite problematic ).
I wold argue that, even thought men and women are fundamentally equal in dignity before God, their general natural tendencies are different; God’s plan for the Church is to be a perfect society (even thought, unfortunately, some members of the clergy and of the laity don’t follow God’s plan ), so He has ordained every role in order that only the most suited categories of individuals would play them. So God, in His wisdom, sees men more fitting than women for ministry and spiritual authority, for reasons that only He fully knows.
I think this argument has the benefits of not requiring a natural inferiority of women (same dignity, different roles ) and avoiding implications in politics and society (the topic is spiritual authority, not authority in general ).
What do you think?
 
Last edited:
During Mass, the priest stands in Personae Christae. Jesus is a man, not a woman.

Seems simple enough to me.
 
Christ is the bridegroom, the church is the bride, the priest acts in persona christi, therefore priests are men.
 
Peeps said:
During Mass, the priest stands in Personae Christae . Jesus is a man, not a woman.
Click to expand...
I think some would argue that, since God is neither man or female, Christ could have taken the body of a woman in the Incarnation (even thought He didn’t, and they could argue He did so because as a man He would have been listened more in a fundamentally patriarchal society ), and so there wouldn’t be any reason why women couldn’t stand in persona Christi.
 
Last edited:
LeonardDeNoblac said:
I think some would argue that, since God is neither man or female, Christ could have taken the body of a woman in the Incarnation (even thought He didn’t, and they could argue He did so because as a man He would have been listened more in a fundamentally patriarchal society ), and so there wouldn’t be any reason why women couldn’t stand in persona Christi.
Click to expand...
. . . . Christ didn’t give two bits about what society thought. Does telling people to eat your flesh and drink your blood sound like you care about what society’s norms are?
 
Last edited:
Fauken said:
Christ could have also been born a dog. Shall we ordain dogs now?

And Christ didn’t give two bits about what society thought. Does telling people to eat your flesh and drink your blood sound like you care about what society’s norms are?
Click to expand...
These are good answers.
 
Last edited:
Tell us more about who these people you are discussing this with.
Are they Catholics? Are they unbelievers who dislike a patriarchal system? Are they Christians in another denomination who have ordained women?
 
Did Christ our Lord choose women as Apostles? Nope. Men only in that role. Period.
 
PennyinCanada said:
Tell us more about who these people you are discussing this with.
Are they Catholics? Are they unbelievers who dislike a patriarchal system? Are they Christians in another denomination who have ordained women?
Click to expand...
I’m not currently discussing it with anyone, I suggested an hypotetical situation.
 
This is of course a doctrine of faith, and is superrational, so we can’t make a conclusive argument from natural reasoning. We can try to come up with natural reasons why it is more fitting somehow without claiming any knowledge about those reasons; but, I agree that’s problematic (I don’t think Aquinas himself wrote that part of the Summa Theologica — he died before finishing it).

It really does come down to sacred tradition. Priestesses were widespread and high ranking in the Hellenistic era when Jesus lived. Yet the Apostles were all men and chose to maintain the male priesthood, a distinctly Jewish practice, even though they did not maintain most Jewish laws for the church.

Why did the Israelites have a male-only priesthood? That’s the deeper question, and the roots of the tradition. Again, it’s a belief on faith in divine revelation.

My own thinking about it, which may be totally wrong, is that it’s deeply connected to monotheism and the archetypal transcendent power of masculinity, which ancient pagans believed came from beyond the natural earth, compared to the immanent influence of femininity, which ancient pagans saw as a force surrounding them in nature. These archetypes stem from the nature of fatherhood and motherhood. For the Jews, their God was above and beyond, transcending all the other gods and goddesses, and that absolute transcendence was reflected in the male-only priesthood.

If we follow the logic of salvation history, it is fitting that God incarnated as a male, through a female, involving both sexes in the miracle. Adam and Eve both fell, so both a man and a woman were the means of our redemption. Christ sacrificed himself in the end; the priesthood reflects the maleness of that incarnation and that sacrifice.
 
We were fortunate enough to attend a bar mitzvah and I was impressed with how many men were in attendance. More men than women. As a Catholic, that was a surprise since I see at mass mostly women. I also see mostly women who volunteer for everything. Women appear to be running the place.

In this time we live in, when men seem to have abdicated the role of husband, father, good neighbor, I see a lot of wisdom in selecting men to the role of priesthood. Men of faith are the strong role models our kids need to see. Men who are chaste and prayerful, who are honest, have seemed to have disappeared in the modern culture. We need men like this in society.

There’s the ‘natural’ answer for you, for someone who doesn’t really believe in God, doesn’t attend church.
 
PennyinCanada said:
We were fortunate enough to attend a bar mitzvah and I was impressed with how many men were in attendance. More men than women. As a Catholic, that was a surprise since I see at mass mostly women. I also see mostly women who volunteer for everything. Women appear to be running the place.
Click to expand...
To be fair, and granted I’m not Jewish, but aren’t Bar Mitzvahs for men and Bat Mitzvahs for women? Maybe that’s why there were more men there than women?
 
Fauken said:
To be fair, and granted I’m not Jewish, but aren’t Bar Mitzvahs for men and Bat Mitzvahs for women? Maybe that’s why there were more men there than women?
Click to expand...
I think if the person having the event is male, it’s called a Bar Mitzvah. Women are allowed, like myself. lol
As a side note, as a Catholic, there were things going on that reminded me of the mass.
 
PennyinCanada said:
I think if the person having the event is male, it’s called a Bar Mitzvah. Women are allowed, like myself. lol
Click to expand...
I didn’t say they weren’t allowed. But Bar Mitzvahs are the coming of age of men, Bat Mitzvahs are the coming of age of women. So it would make more sense then that more men would be at a Bar Mitzvah than women.
 
The Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God and Mother of the Church, being the greatest fruit of humanity, received neither the mission proper to the apostles nor the ministerial priesthood. This cannot be by chance, but part of God’s plan.
 
QwertyGirl said:
No. It doesn’t say that for now until the end of time, only men can be priests and that women can’t be.
Click to expand...
It says that women can’t have spiritual authority over men (the topic is spiritual authority because the context is Church organization ). Priests are the ones exercising spiritual authority in the Church. And in 1 Corinthians 14:36-37 Paul states that what he said before is a commandment from the Lord.
 
Last edited:
Dan_Defender said:
The Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God and Mother of the Church, being the greatest fruit of humanity, received neither the mission proper to the apostles nor the ministerial priesthood. This cannot be by chance, but part of God’s plan.
Click to expand...
You made an excellent point.
 
Fauken said:
So it would make more sense then that more men would be at a Bar Mitzvah than women.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure if that’s true. Isn’t this a community kind of event, like when there’s a baptism or confirmation? They are coming of age in the community of believers? Sorry to the op, we are going off topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top