Why doesn't God want Female Priests?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BornInMarch
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’ve seen some good answers here, and I’ve seen some bad ones.

The best answers I’ve seen have been from the people who claimed that Priests have to be men because they are Fathers. This makes sense; despite “Father” being what we call them, we often forget this and treat them like mayors and the parish like a town (instead of treating them like a parent and the parish like a family). The video that sums this up also claims that the question of female priests only really became big due to a declining number of Nuns, and how previously it would have been a moot point because Sisters would be the female leaders in the Church.

An answer I’ve seen that I think is the least helpful is “don’t question it”. While as Christians we accept that God knows best, this answer will do nothing to quell voices of doubt or to convince non believers. Without real answers many will speak and think ill of our church.

Now the worst answer I’ve seen is that humans wouldn’t listen to a women. Not only is this false (the religions of the mediterranean world often had Priestesses and Goddesses [one example being the Vestal Virgins]), it is also demeaning to both God (presuming he can’t change a society to fit his goals) and to humans (presuming that humans are stupid).
 
The big problem with citing Mary in this case is that while Mary is extremely important in the Catholic Church, modern women are not (at least, not in a direct way) and no matter what their competence, they never can be. This, of course, is not true of men.

Given the obvious gifts and successes of ordained women in other churches, I don’t think God has any problem with women priests.I do think that the Church will eventually ordain women in the future, but now is probably not the time.
 
Is that because Male and Female are different when God created? such as the mind, personality… maybe woman is usually feminine and weak? I guess…

Or maybe Jesus knew it’s a bit too harsh for woman to follow Him a long way when He chose disciples? Or because it’s dangerous for woman to go to all places? So He rather chose men only?

That are all my guess…

But I remember there were still a few women always follow Him (Jesus still allowed them) according to bible, some even with Him on the way when Jesus carried the Cross up the hill…
 
Last edited:
Have you all forgotten Phoebe? And Priscilla?

73 posts about the role/ non role of Women in the Church. Not one person has mentioned these two very prominant women. Phoebe is described by St Paul as is Priscilla.

Might be worth reading what women did in the Early Church. Many of our Great saints are women that lived in those extremely difficult times. Christian Women were martyred and crucified alongside men
 
Last edited:
Indeed they were. But we have no real Phoebes or Pricillias in the Church today because, except in local church positions, women aren’t allowed leadership over men, only other women. And even then, they can be easily overruled by a low-ranking man.

The only real reason why women can’t be ordained is the “in alter Christi” doctrine. But this idea is nowhere even hinted at in the Bible. I realize the Bible isn’t the only source of Traditions, but compared to other Traditions this one seems a bit of a stretch, especially in those cases when it can be so very much not in evidence.
 
Last edited:
Seriously, how many female saints have been canonized in the past 30 odd years. Do you put yourself above these modern female saints? We have no real Phoebes or Pricillas today? I find that hard to believe.

I am not arguing for female priests. I am reading, on this thread, about Our Blessed Virgin, Mary Magdalene , but nothing about Phoebe, addressed in a letter by St Paul, as a Deacon.
Or Priscilla, who travelled with Paul and is responsible for many conversions and righting early errors.
 
This thread was never meant to disparage women or women of faith.

It is simply asking why God organized the church in the way that he’s claimed to have.
 
Last edited:
I know what you are saying born in march. And we must not put 21st century values on first century culture, before taking everything into account. Women were tough enough to withstand the rigours of early christianity. That was a violent harsh society where all christians were persecuted. Regardless of gender and age.

Women were very much a feature of the early church. They did not pollute it , and it is not a manmade church.

Thanks for the like @Duesenberg
 
Last edited:
I don’t wish to put myself above anyone. It’s simply that God gave women the same abilities and desires to lead as men, for the same reasons. But in today’s Catholic Church men are allowed to exercise these while women aren’t.

Bible scholars dispute whether or not Christ intended to found a church. Even if He did, men still had a strong part in the organization thereof. And it was men who decided that God wished to exclude women from leadership.
 
I’m not disagreeing with you. The Virgin Mary and St. Teresa of Calcutta and others are evidence of this.
 
See heres the thing with the statement ‘allowed to’ . Its ascribing 21st century values, to gender and gender roles. We all know about the issues with unequal pay, or job descriptions. And they are real issues.

But to try to illustrate my point about why we should not do this…use 21st century gender arguments.

In Australian Aboriginal society, gender has never known inequality in its roles. Men have very specific mens business roles, and women also. They respect the other gender in this. Men dont try to cross over, nor do women.

Western society likes to cry allowed to or not allowed to. This is a man made construct.
 
Last edited:
Aboriginal law and society sees the white gender inequality issue as a totally foreign and inane issue. Especially in traditional society. It just doesnt exist.
 
So they think it’s okay to ascribe unequal roles to men and women. Your point?
 
No, they dont have inequality, its not a thing. They have equal and important roles. And respect this. Its not like modern society.
 
billsannie said:
I do think that the Church will eventually ordain women in the future, but now is probably not the time.
Click to expand...
I used to discuss this with my mother and she would say that she didn’t think the Church worldwide was ready for this idea. As I have grown older, I tend to see more what she meant, especially since the most recent set of big changes from Vatican II is still having reverberations. Should the Church become more ready to receive such a change before the end of the world, God will guide the Pope to implement it then, but I am not holding my breath it will even happen in my lifetime.

In the meantime, there is no need to become aghast at the idea or accuse women of exalting themselves by considering the thought. The reality is that in some parts of the world, we have a severe priest shortage and considering women priests is one of the alternatives, along with considering married priests, transferring priests from other parts of the world to the parts with the shortage, and trying other strategies to increase vocations among single males, that could address the issue. Each one of these strategies has its pluses and minuses, and is reasonable and worthy of discussion.
 
Is there a way to give women leadership in the Church without ordination? Gender equality advocates tend to bring up the argument that the whole big decision making in the Vatican excludes women because only clergy are involved in it. I know women can be leaders in their parish groups, but I wonder if there’s any other role in the ‘hierarchy’.
 
I guess one of the main issues with ideas like men and women complementing each other in the Church (or family) is that many don’t seem to believe it. To many, it looks like something people say to appease women or to be PC. But it doesn’t seem to show. It’s one thing to say it, it’s another to actually show it.

Men’s work is still held to a higher regard, as expected in patriarchal institutions. Leaders are always more important, they’re in a higher position, they’re held to a higher standard and so on. (before people freak out about how they are there to serve us and how the first is the last, they are still leaders and there is still a hierarchy). Now I’m not saying we should allow women priests, but the frustration is understandably there and we should not act like people are angry because they are indoctrinated with the nasty feminism.

The Church as a whole has still a far way to go in valuing women. We keep making the mistake of assuming every parish in the world is valuing women. To say they’re equal is not enough. I can get a slave and tell him that his work is very, very important and we are equal…we are just doing different things but you can see it’s more lip service than anything else.

This topic is quite frustrating to talk about catholics in my opinion, because I would tend to be labeled as ‘girl influenced by the evils of feminism’. Lol
 
I refer you to some words which Pope St. John Paul 2 gave us: The Church has no authority to ordain women.

Until or unless God gives it such authority, it won’t happen.

God does not change.

He did not give the Church the authority to confect the Eucharist with ‘gluten free bread and grape juice’ even though there are people with celiac disease and people who are alcoholics and cannot receive the Eucharist, which is confected under wheat bread and grape WINE.

God did not give the Church the authority to baptize with champagne, sake, tequila, or alcohol wipes. It must be water.

God did not give the Church the authority to change marriage from one man and one woman to one man and another man, or one woman and another woman.

So, why would He ‘change’ the priesthood from men to 'men and women"? It’s the same issue, that of authority. We’re talking SACRAMENTS, not disciplines.

People might not like it. It might not be ‘fair’. Tough noogies. God did not give us a ‘democracy’, He gave us a Kingdom. You have a problem, take it up with the King. We are supposed to be obedient to His will.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top