What is the scriptural argument for the ordination of women?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Edmundus1581
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Many non-Catholic, non-liturgical bodies will cite:

1Pet.2:5 and like living stones be yourselves built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people, that you may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.

From this verse and citing others they claim there is no longer any need for an ordained priesthood, only preachers, teachers, missionaries, etc. If that were the case, and denying Christ established any sacraments, but only allowed symbols of the faith to remain, then there is no need to be concerned from whom we receive the word of God or even communion.

Another verse they cite is:

Mark.15:38 And the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom.

matching it with:

Heb.10:20 by the new and living way which he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh…

Many claim the priesthood was abolished by Christ therefore we need no priest to represent Christ, but can go directly to him–as if priests were a hindrance rather than a medium, but that’s another issue. So again, if there is no priesthood, it doesn’t matter who preaches or teaches us.
Della…you made a good start…also the very work of Christ is included…He died to bridge the gap of separation between us and God…we each NOW can approach God with no human mediator…we have a High Priest in Christ to intercede for us…He fulfilled all ritualistic requirements on our behalf…to be required to go to a human “priest” to perform rituals for us in order to be “saved”…puts another human being in line between us and God…Jesus’ death “rent the veil in twain” that would separate us from Him.

Friends do not “ordain”…only God can ordain to His ministry…all we can do is “record” and bear witness that each person who exercises gifts of ministry do so under the direction of God…all Friends are ministers and priests…we have no “ordained” clergy as each of us is called to be a member of this holy priesthood…but if individuals…including women…exhibit gifts of ministry…their “giftedness” can be “recorded” with the Meeting they serve.
 
I don’t believe its a mystery that women played a significant role with Jesus as Disciples, or in the early Church, they were martyred right along side the men. However the historic story of the ordained Priesthood seems to tell a different story.

There is no real support of Ordained Women in the NT, Tradition, Oral or Written or ECFs, why is this early female Priest not mentioned in Church history…“anywhere” ?

To me OT verse’s do nothing for the claim of ordained women in the Priesthood, since the OT is completed with the messianic prophecy. NT evidence is not only lacking, but non-existant.

That one would want to make the arguement that women should be ordained in the Church is a completely different story when opposed to the truth of history.

To me this seems like a strawman, since its based on lacking facts from the start. About as logical as the church went into apostasy “sometime” after the apostles.

The better percentage of us here agree there’s an existing documented history and then set out to collectively put the jig-saw puzzle together. As difficult as that is at times, it certainly seems more logical than ignoring the existing facts, but thats IMHO. 👍

Just Sayin.
 
Many non-Catholic, non-liturgical bodies will cite:

1Pet.2:5 and like living stones be yourselves built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people, that you may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.

From this verse and citing others they claim there is no longer any need for an ordained priesthood, only preachers, teachers, missionaries, etc. If that were the case, and denying Christ established any sacraments, but only allowed symbols of the faith to remain, then there is no need to be concerned from whom we receive the word of God or even communion.

Another verse they cite is:

Mark.15:38 And the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom.

matching it with:

Heb.10:20 by the new and living way which he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh…

Many claim the priesthood was abolished by Christ therefore we need no priest to represent Christ, but can go directly to him–as if priests were a hindrance rather than a medium, but that’s another issue. So again, if there is no priesthood, it doesn’t matter who preaches or teaches us.
Thanks Della,

What I have got out of this thread is that, for Protestants, there is an underlying issue of the nature of ministry, and you have added, most helpfully, to our scriptural collection of their point of view on the subject.

Once again, I want to say that it is refreshing to see that on this issue, which is so simple and black-and-white to Catholics, it is possible to hold a contrary position and still be a scriptural community.

Glad I asked! 😃

Thanks everyone.
 
This is from a tract on the Catholic Answers website. Tract is a defense of the Catholic tradition of calling priests “father”. I think it could apply to this discussion.
catholic.com/tracts/call-no-man-father

Peace
David

Spiritual Fatherhood

Perhaps the most pointed New Testament reference to the theology of the spiritual fatherhood of priests is Paul’s statement, “I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (1 Cor. 4:14–15).

Peter followed the same custom, referring to Mark as his son: “She who is at Babylon, who is likewise chosen, sends you greetings; and so does my son Mark” (1 Pet. 5:13). The apostles sometimes referred to entire churches under their care as their children. Paul writes, “Here for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be a burden, for I seek not what is yours but you; for children ought not to lay up for their parents, but parents for their children” (2 Cor. 12:14); and, “My little children, with whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you!” (Gal. 4:19).

John said, “My little children, I am writing this to you so that you may not sin; but if any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 John 2:1); “No greater joy can I have than this, to hear that my children follow the truth” (3 John 4). In fact, John also addresses men in his congregations as “fathers” (1 John 2:13–14).

By referring to these people as their spiritual sons and spiritual children, Peter, Paul, and John imply their own roles as spiritual fathers. Since the Bible frequently speaks of this spiritual fatherhood, we Catholics acknowledge it and follow the custom of the apostles by calling priests “father.” Failure to acknowledge this is a failure to recognize and honor a great gift God has bestowed on the Church: the spiritual fatherhood of the priesthood.

Catholics know that as members of a parish, they have been committed to a priest’s spiritual care, thus they have great filial affection for priests and call them “father.” Priests, in turn, follow the apostles’ biblical example by referring to members of their flock as “my son” or “my child” (cf. Gal. 4:19; 1 Tim. 1:18; 2 Tim. 2:1; Philem. 10; 1 Pet. 5:13; 1 John 2:1; 3 John 4).

All of these passages were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and they express the infallibly recorded truth that Christ’s ministers do have a role as spiritual fathers. Jesus is not against acknowledging that. It is he who gave these men their role as spiritual fathers, and it is his Holy Spirit who recorded this role for us in the pages of Scripture. To acknowledge spiritual fatherhood is to acknowledge the truth, and no amount of anti-Catholic grumbling will change that fact.
 
This is from a tract on the Catholic Answers website. Tract is a defense of the Catholic tradition of calling priests “father”. I think it could apply to this discussion.
catholic.com/tracts/call-no-man-father

Peace
David
Protestants aren’t against spiritual fathers. Pentecostals often use the term. We don’t connect it to any priesthood, but then again when we read those scriptures we don’t see them as referring to a priesthood. We see them referring to those to whom we owe our spiritual formation.
 
Protestants aren’t against spiritual fathers. Pentecostals often use the term. We don’t connect it to any priesthood,
Hello Itwin,
Thank you for responding. Do Pentecostals connect “spiritual fatherhood” to women?
Peace
David
 
Hello Itwin,
Thank you for responding. Do Pentecostals connect “spiritual fatherhood” to women?
Peace
David
Jumpin in…don’t Catholics have “spiritual mothers”? Do you connect them to “fatherhood”?
 
Della…you made a good start…also the very work of Christ is included…He died to bridge the gap of separation between us and God…we each NOW can approach God with no human mediator…we have a High Priest in Christ to intercede for us…He fulfilled all ritualistic requirements on our behalf…to be required to go to a human “priest” to perform rituals for us in order to be “saved”…puts another human being in line between us and God…Jesus’ death “rent the veil in twain” that would separate us from Him.

Friends do not “ordain”…only God can ordain to His ministry…all we can do is “record” and bear witness that each person who exercises gifts of ministry do so under the direction of God…all Friends are ministers and priests…we have no “ordained” clergy as each of us is called to be a member of this holy priesthood…but if individuals…including women…exhibit gifts of ministry…their “giftedness” can be “recorded” with the Meeting they serve.
Well, it wasn’t an endorsement, just an explanation. Catholics go by Sacred Tradition, which includes, but is not exclusive to the Holy Scriptures. In both the writings of the Early Church Fathers, continual Church teaching (the Magisterium), and the Bible we find plenty of historical record that Christ established a visible Church with leaders called bishops, who appointed priests as more and more people were added to the Church and they couldn’t possibly minister to all of them. We don’t see our bishops and priests as between us and God as a barrier but rather as conduits of grace, since Christ appointed the Apostles to be ministers of the sacraments of salvation.
 
Are the Australian bishops working to bring this concern back to the forefront again, ordination of women?

It was a very strong focal point in my prior archdiocese. I thought Cardinal Ratzinger, on behalf of the Holy Father, made a definitive statement in 1994 that women could not become priests in the tradition of our faith, how the apostles and successors understood Christ and put faith into action.

A follow up statement came out from the Vatican that those Catholics wanting women’s ordination were not promoting heresy either.
 
Well, it wasn’t an endorsement, just an explanation. Catholics go by Sacred Tradition, which includes, but is not exclusive to the Holy Scriptures. In both the writings of the Early Church Fathers, continual Church teaching (the Magisterium), and the Bible we find plenty of historical record that Christ established a visible Church with leaders called bishops, who appointed priests as more and more people were added to the Church and they couldn’t possibly minister to all of them. We don’t see our bishops and priests as between us and God as a barrier but rather as conduits of grace, since Christ appointed the Apostles to be ministers of the sacraments of salvation.
LOL…friend Della, I realize you made no endorsement…but you DID offer a good starting point on how many Protestants view priesthood of believers and an understanding of why some Protestants…Friends included…find no problem receiving ministry from women…their “giftedness” is acknowledged…because they are recognized as having a gift of ministry…because this gift of ministry is seen in actual action within the Meeting.
 
LOL…friend Della, I realize you made no endorsement…but you DID offer a good starting point on how many Protestants view priesthood of believers and an understanding of why some Protestants…Friends included…find no problem receiving ministry from women…their “giftedness” is acknowledged…because they are recognized as having a gift of ministry…because this gift of ministry is seen in actual action within the Meeting.
I would not agree that the verses cited are “a good starting point”. 🙂 Rather they are a misinterpretation, misuse of Scripture, besides usurping the Church’s authority to speak for Christ.

Many Protestants, including Friends have no sacramental liturgies, either. The priesthood is not mainly about preaching/teaching/ministering the Gospel, although those are aspects of it. Rather, the priest brings Christ to us in the sacraments Christ established. And since Christ established a male only priesthood, women cannot be ordained. Women do teach and do a host of other ministeries within the Church–none of which are closed to them.
 
I would not agree that the verses cited are “a good starting point”. 🙂 Rather they are a misinterpretation, misuse of Scripture, besides usurping the Church’s authority to speak for Christ.

Many Protestants, including Friends have no sacramental liturgies, either. The priesthood is not mainly about preaching/teaching/ministering the Gospel, although those are aspects of it. Rather, the priest brings Christ to us in the sacraments Christ established. And since Christ established a male only priesthood, women cannot be ordained. Women do teach and do a host of other ministeries within the Church–none of which are closed to them.
I understand your beliefs on the matter…I do not accept them…BECAUSE of the work of Christ…He is our only Advocate with the Father…no human stands in His stead for us…we can approach Him directly…but I do understand your beliefs concerning the matter.🙂
 
I understand your beliefs on the matter…I do not accept them…BECAUSE of the work of Christ…He is our only Advocate with the Father…no human stands in His stead for us…we can approach Him directly…but I do understand your beliefs concerning the matter.🙂
And I do accept them because of the work of Christ–all his work recorded in Sacred Scripture, the Early Church Fathers, and the Magisterium. It’s why the Church does not and cannot ordain women. There is no support for it in anywhere in Sacred Tradition, but plenty of support for the ministerial priesthood.
 
Hello Itwin,
Thank you for responding. Do Pentecostals connect “spiritual fatherhood” to women?
Peace
David
Spiritual fathers, spiritual mothers, spiritual sons, spiritual daughters. The analogy flows naturally.
 
Are the Australian bishops working to bring this concern back to the forefront again, ordination of women?
Hi Kathleen,

Greetings from Australia!

Simple answer: no. One bishop, Bishop Morris of Toowoomba, promoted the idea in 2006 and after refusing to recant over several years, was removed from his post by the Vatican, in 2011. His removal was a high profile case here. This is the only recently reported case of an Australian bishop supporting the ordination of women and my view from the pews is that, while a small number of people are still in support, the issue is mostly dead - particularly following Pope John Paul’s 1994 Apostolic Letter.
It was a very strong focal point in my prior archdiocese. I thought Cardinal Ratzinger, on behalf of the Holy Father, made a definitive statement in 1994 that women could not become priests in the tradition of our faith, how the apostles and successors understood Christ and put faith into action.
Was your diocese Toowoomba? If there was another diocese in support of it, recently, then I am surprised, and would be interested to know. Not out of controversy, but just because, as described above, I thought the matter was dead, except in Toowoomba.

If you were visiting Toowoomba/Queensland, then I hope you enjoyed your time there!

The 1994 Apostolic Letter was issued under the name of Pope John Paul II. It may be that Cardinal Ratzinger was the primary author, but even so it was signed by John Paul II, so carries his authority.
A follow up statement came out from the Vatican that those Catholics wanting women’s ordination were not promoting heresy either.
Interesting. I haven’t heard of this. Still, there are many things I haven’t heard of 🙂

Thankyou,

Edmundus
 
John 20:22

And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. “If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained.”

Luke 22;15-20

15 And he said to them, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. 16 For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God.” 17 After taking the cup, he gave thanks and said, “Take this and divide it among you. 18 For I tell you I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” 19 And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 20 In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.

Matthew 20: 26-29

Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.” 27 Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

Mark 14:22-26

22 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take it; this is my body.” 23 Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, and they all drank from it. 24 “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many,” he said to them. 25 “I tell you the truth, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it anew in the kingdom of God.” 26 When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.

This Tradition follow’s in the early writting’s left behind by Ignatius of Antioch and Justyn Martyr. And continues through the centurys. There is “no” deviation ever!

JOHN- "If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained.”

WHO? Who was given the authority to forgive sin and HOW?

Matthew - 16;17-19

Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona[PETER]: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee[PETER] the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou[PETER] shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou[PETER] shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

This authority to bind and lose is given to “all” the Apostles as we continue Scripture. This authority consists on morals and faith and most certain in your forgiveness of sin. There is no other way your sin is forgiven but in you mind.

[Where in the world does the Bible state sins are forgiven by Jesus Christ any other way?]

[Where does the Bible state that women were of the 12-Apostles?]

You are only forgiven this way, and by those who are ordained through Apostolic Succession! That whats passed!

Christ “never” states just pray to me and your sins are forgiven.

In fact in all the Apostolic Churchs the Mass has a similiar structure, Gospel, Offertory, celebrating the Eucharist, Dialogue…Liturgy of the Apostles. They differ in Hymns, Prayer, etc. The Mass is structured so similiar, that the Apostles would understand the content had they been here today. All these Churchs trace their history directly to the Apostles.

The fact that this may change with Women, or can be changed is irrelevant. It hasn’t been changed by those who were given the authority of by Christ or the Holy Spirit, but through lacking vague interpretations.

The world will reject the truth as it has for 2000 years, though this rejection has reached unparalleled heights at this last hour. Satan today is waging his final battle against the Church. and what is his plan but to undermine the cross of Christ! And what is the cross, but the Sacrifice of Calvary planted in our midst - the Mass.

The mystical body of Christ is now passing through its passion.

Christ underwent His sacrifice on Good Friday, but at the Last Supper on Holy Thursday He instituted this sacrifice as an ongoing sacrifice [the Mass] that would continue to the end of time. During the Mass the actual event of Calvary is re-enacted upon the altar, though it be mystical and unbloody, but nonetheless real. Each Mass is one and the same sacrifice, not many. The priest is merely the instrument used through whom Christ daily perpetuates His sacrifice among us.

The denials and false protestations coming forth today from their pulpits are the sharp thorns which today’s modernists are driving into Our Lord once again, with the mallet of their intellectual pride.

The excessive talking and celebration today in the Church is a replay of the jeering crowd dancing around the cross, as they too celebrated that the suffering Jesus was finally done away with.

The Mystical Body is truly passing through its Passion! But the followers of Christ needn’t despair because Christ has given them the remedy to conquer this temptation, and that is the cross. The standard of the cross has been the victory of the saints and martyrs down through the ages of time. His promise is that He would always remain with His Church “even to the consummation of the world.” (Matthew 28:20)

I hear all these loose interpretations attributed to St Paul. Well heres what St Paul DID state! (1 Cor. 11:26)

For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till He comes!
 
Edmundus…thanks for clarifying…it was an American archdiocese, and the push for women’s ordination continued for a number of years until the new vicar general had them removed from being on the review board for seminarian candidates, of whom a number of them they refused in, and some of the vocal ones wanted to end daily Mass…?..Not a nice experience and it took a good number of years to heal among the faithful. We seldom read much of John Paul II…

To want to have women as priests is not a heresy…this came out from the Vatican on our local Catholic radio station a few years later…1995? or so?
 
Excellent point, grandfather! 👍
LOL! Ok, lets see…Tertullian was instrumental in not allowing women into ordination of any sort within the RCC from the late century!

After…he pushed Montanist, of course.

The founder of Montanism was Montanus had he 2 women Priests, Priscilla and Maximilla and the three of them began the “New Prophecy”, of the Trinitarian concept, 3 heads, 1 substance…

I know Tertullian did not like everything Montanist implied or said, however, Tertullian became a Montanist… and he also began the term, and creed of the (Latin Western), of the “Trinity”.

Therefore, Tertullian was against women in ordination as a part accepted in Montanism, but, explained and elevated the Trinity concept, of 3 heads, 1 substance in the Roman Catholic Church.

Specifically read his, De Carne Christi and De Resurrectiona Carnis and lastly, Tertullian’s Adversus Praxlam. Peace
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top