Why the Catholic Church Can Never Ordain Women (YouTube video concerning Holy Orders)

[Faxero]

I discovered an informative video concerning the exclusion of Women from the priesthood.

Why the Catholic Church Can Never Ordain Women, by Brett Fawcett
youtube.com/watch?v=n4-6YI5iKzo

video notes
Christ never established women to be priests while he was formulating the Church, therefore women cannot become priests or adapt other positions of Church Authority. Christ’s decisions are not influenced by cultural or sociological standards. God’s decisions are eternal.

The Church, in her wisdom, protects the decisions of Christ, capitalizing on the fact that he never deigned a women to become an Apostle, interpreting this to mean that the exclusion of females from the priesthood is in accordance with God’s will for his Church.

:compcoff: This thread concerns the sacrament of holy orders, and is therefore listed under the sub-forum: Liturgy and Sacraments.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I discovered an informative video concerning the exclusion of Women from the priesthood.

Why the Catholic Church Can Never Ordain Women, by Brett Fawcett
youtube.com/watch?v=n4-6YI5iKzo

video notes
Christ never established women to be priests while he was formulating the Church, therefore women cannot become priests or adapt other positions of Church Authority. Christ’s decisions are not influenced by cultural or sociological standards. God’s decisions are eternal.

The Church, in her wisdom, protects the decisions of Christ, capitalizing on the fact that he never deigned a women to become an Apostle, interpreting this to mean that the exclusion of females from the priesthood is in accordance with God’s will for his Church.

:compcoff: This thread concerns the sacrament of holy orders, and is therefore listed under the sub-forum: Liturgy and Sacraments.

Absolutely. The Church can never ordain female priests, and I would doubt that it will ever allow priests to marry since Christ remained unmarried, but that issue is not as set in stone as as all male priesthood is.

 

[unstoppable_II]

Absolutely. The Church can never ordain female priests,…

The best reason I ever came across is the fact that +F = -M. I haven’t seen an altar boy in years.

…and I would doubt that it will ever allow priests to marry since Christ remained unmarried, but that issue is not as set in stone as as all male priesthood is.

If priests were allowed to marry, there would be a loud hue and cry for SS"M" marriage because homosexual priests [however few are left] would claim they were being denied sexual pleasures that married heterosexual priests enjoy.

 

[MarcoPolo]

On a related note, you’ll also observe in big commercial media phrases like “ban on women priests” which is like saying there is a “ban on three-sided rectangles.” You will almost never see the more affirmatively worded “priest must be male.”

 

[unstoppable_II]

… you’ll also observe in big commercial media phrases like “ban on women priests” … You will almost never see the more affirmatively worded “priest must be male.”

We certainly will never hear silence from Big Media, as though it has more say over how the Catholic Church is run than the Church has over how the media runs itself.

 

[marymary1975]

As Pope JPII stated when he closed the issue, the church simply doesn’t have the authority to ordain women.

As to married priest please note that the church has never allowed ordained priest to marry so the church most likely would never allow priests to marry. What the church allowed at one point was for married men to be ordained as priest. That was a disciplinary rule that was change. If the church ever makes a change on that issue the change would be to go back to the previous rule: to allow married men to be ordain, they are not going to allow priests to get married.

 

[808Catholic]

Priesthood is not a title, job, or rank. One does not simply apply to the priesthood like one applies for a job. It is a sacred position, one that consecrates the person to God forever. There are other consecrated vocations such as religious orders and lay positions filled by many good and holy women. To “demand” equality of the Church is to put oneself on equal footing to God: a heresy. God’s Church is established by God and inspired by the Holy Spirit to remain true to God’s will. We will make errors but prohibiting the ordination of women as priests is not one of them.

Serve God faithfully in all you do.

 

[Faxero]

The Church teaches that there are two kinds of priesthoods: the common priesthood and the sacramental priesthood.

Catechism of the Catholic Church
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c3a6.htm

The common priesthood is applicable to both males and females.

The sacramental priesthood is open only to males.

1591 The whole Church is a priestly people. Through Baptism all the faithful share in the priesthood of Christ. This participation is called the “common priesthood of the faithful.” Based on this common priesthood and ordered to its service, there exists another participation in the mission of Christ: the ministry conferred by the sacrament of Holy Orders, where the task is to serve in the name and in the person of Christ the Head in the midst of the community.

1592 The ministerial priesthood differs in essence from the common priesthood of the faithful because it confers a sacred power for the service of the faithful. The ordained ministers exercise their service for the People of God by teaching (munus docendi), divine worship (munus liturgicum) and pastoral governance (munus regendi).

Although Women lack the spiritual authority needed to deliver forgiveness of sin and whatnot, they hold the spiritual authority needed to raise their children in the faith, and to deliver spiritual advice to other persons, including males.

Thus, Women share in the common priesthood. They fulfill their priestly responsibilities by obeying their assigned gender roles, which do not include the sacramental priesthood which God has opened only to Men.

Further Reading
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=807128 :coffeeread:

 

[Lily_Bernans]

The best reason I ever came across is the fact that +F = -M. I haven’t seen an altar boy in years.

**
If priests were allowed to marry, there would be a loud hue and cry for SS"M" marriage because homosexual priests [however few are left] would claim they were being denied sexual pleasures that married heterosexual priests enjoy.**

An excellent point! Thank you for pointing that out.

 

[claymcdermott]

What do y’all think of this idea:

Were there female cardinal electors (chosen from the laity or from the religious since as most of you know, cardinals have been lay men in the past), then the Church would have an opportunity to explain its sacramental theology, which allows all manner of roles for women and does not restrict them, yet is committed to recognizing that priesthood is only possibly conferred on males?

I think a few female cardinal electors would be a good opportunity to show that an all male priesthood is compatible with a full view of the woman as a whole human being. Thoughts?

 

[808Catholic]

What do y’all think of this idea:

Were there female cardinal electors (chosen from the laity or from the religious since as most of you know, cardinals have been lay men in the past), then the Church would have an opportunity to explain its sacramental theology, which allows all manner of roles for women and does not restrict them, yet is committed to recognizing that priesthood is only possibly conferred on males?

I think a few female cardinal electors would be a good opportunity to show that an all male priesthood is compatible with a full view of the woman as a whole human being. Thoughts?

Church Tradition follows that Christ never selected women to be His Apostles (there were certainly disciples but that’s another subject) and neither did the early “church” when it came to the replacement of Judas Iscariot. Peter called for a replacement, the remaining 10 nominated a few men, and Peter selected the replacement (Matthias, I believe). The Apostles didn’t nominate any women though there were several women who played prominent roles in the group. Even though we’ve had many women saints, there were none to my recollection that were clergy, that is, ordained in the Church.

Not sure what is driving this discussion about women clergy at this time.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

What do y’all think of this idea:

Were there female cardinal electors (chosen from the laity or from the religious since as most of you know, cardinals have been lay men in the past), then the Church would have an opportunity to explain its sacramental theology, which allows all manner of roles for women and does not restrict them, yet is committed to recognizing that priesthood is only possibly conferred on males?

I think a few female cardinal electors would be a good opportunity to show that an all male priesthood is compatible with a full view of the woman as a whole human being. Thoughts?

With all due respect to you, I think things should remain as they are, with all males for the same reason the poster above me stated.

 

[claymcdermott]

Wait, where did I advocate women clergy? Cardinals can be lay people. I said let’s go back to our former practice of lay cardinals, which, we actually had longer than we had a college that was solely episcopal. I feel like no one actually reads what you write on this site. That irks me.

Also, if we are going to go all primitivist here, women, back when the bishop was chosen by popular acclamation in the early church, probably did help pick a few bishops of Rome. Heck, Empress Theodora once had a pope deposed, and then installed her own guy, setting off a long period of Byzantium friendly popes. So, women have helped choose and even in the worst case scenario it seems to be valid.

I did not advocate women clergy. This makes me feel like you did not read what I wrote.

 

[808Catholic]

Wait, where did I advocate women clergy? Cardinals can be lay people. I said let’s go back to our former practice of lay cardinals, which, we actually had longer than we had a college that was solely episcopal. I feel like no one actually reads what you write on this site. That irks me.

Also, if we are going to go all primitivist here, women, back when the bishop was chosen by popular acclamation in the early church, probably did help pick a few bishops of Rome. Heck, Empress Theodora once had a pope deposed, and then installed her own guy, setting off a long period of Byzantium friendly popes. So, women have helped choose and even in the worst case scenario it seems to be valid.

I did not advocate women clergy. This makes me feel like you did not read what I wrote.

My misunderstanding for presuming you were advocating women clergy. I apologize. I am not familiar with the concept of lay cardinals. What are your sources so I can research this further?

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Wait, where did I advocate women clergy? Cardinals can be lay people. I said let’s go back to our former practice of lay cardinals, which, we actually had longer than we had a college that was solely episcopal. I feel like no one actually reads what you write on this site. That irks me.

Also, if we are going to go all primitivist here, women, back when the bishop was chosen by popular acclamation in the early church, probably did help pick a few bishops of Rome. Heck, Empress Theodora once had a pope deposed, and then installed her own guy, setting off a long period of Byzantium friendly popes. So, women have helped choose and even in the worst case scenario it seems to be valid.

I did not advocate women clergy. This makes me feel like you did not read what I wrote.

I read what you wrote and knew what you meant, but no, with respect to you, I do not advocate lay cardinals or the election of a bishop by a lay college of cardinals that includes women. And I’m a woman!

 

[claymcdermott]

Well, mea cu;pa, because a "lay cardinal"is perhaps a bit imprecise, since technically, although there have been many lay cardinals throughout history, they were often - although not ordained - called “clerics,” but the term back then didn’t mean they were ordained in any sense. And popes appointed plenty of princes and dukes and generals and a few Medicis. Just google the phrase “lay cardinal.”

Since they were only “clerics” in a sense we no longer use (a not ordained sense), we could make women cardinals without requiring them to become this thing that doesn’t exist any more. Especially since the pope could abolish the college of cardinals if he wanted to; you could allow for non-ordained women lay-cardinals.

But I think we could point out that non-cardinals, pure and simple laity, are often electors in conclaves or in earlier forums for choosing the next pope. Just google, “Roman aristocracy/ electing a pope” and you’ll see that at several points in history, laymen had a formal place in the election process.

SO, my point is, since any member of the laity could be an elector, so could a woman, because it does not require any kind of ordination.

 

[Usige]

What do y’all think of this idea:

Were there female cardinal electors (chosen from the laity or from the religious since as most of you know, cardinals have been lay men in the past), then the Church would have an opportunity to explain its sacramental theology, which allows all manner of roles for women and does not restrict them, yet is committed to recognizing that priesthood is only possibly conferred on males?

I think a few female cardinal electors would be a good opportunity to show that an all male priesthood is compatible with a full view of the woman as a whole human being. Thoughts?

While not strictly opposed to the idea of lay cardinal electors I would then say it shouldn’t only be open to females, but any qualified Catholic. We shouldn’t make special concessions to one group or it looks like you are simply adding loop holes to appease the masses. Also why stop at only lay cardinal electors? Why not also include a group of clergy from the prysbeteriate and diaconate? As you state later on if women had previously chosen the Bishop of Rome then non-ecclesiastic males did too.

I guess my real question is what problem you think this would solve? How do you think the Church would benefit from feminine insight in selecting the Pope? Do you think it would result in a change of discipline or beneficial refinement of doctrine in some fashion?

 

[HelenRose]

The Church is what the Church is.

I don’t really understand why people who are adamantly opposed to the teachings of the Church remain in the Church.

And if one is not a member of the Church why is it so important to them for the Church to make these changes?

 

[Sugabee43]

Priesthood is not a title, job, or rank. One does not simply apply to the priesthood like one applies for a job. It is a sacred position, one that consecrates the person to God forever. There are other consecrated vocations such as religious orders and lay positions filled by many good and holy women. To “demand” equality of the Church is to put oneself on equal footing to God: a heresy. God’s Church is established by God and inspired by the Holy Spirit to remain true to God’s will. We will make errors but prohibiting the ordination of women as priests is not one of them.

Serve God faithfully in all you do.

Very good!! Also, the priest within the Liturgy of the Mass, acting in persona Christi, and Christ revealed Himself as male while here on earth. Therefore, women cannot act in the person of Christ by virtue of the difference in sex. Sorry, but true. This is exactly the reason for the decline of the Episcopal Church after they voted to ordain women. Slippery slope and all…

 

[claymcdermott]

I actually agree with you Usige. They say that Jacques Maritain was considered, when Pope Paul VI supposedly entertained the idea of reinstitutiing lay cardinals. And of course, Von Balthasar would have been made a cardinal though he was only a priest and not a bishop by Pope Saint John Paul, except that he died before they could actually put a red hat on him.

Either of them, I think, would have made excellent editions to the college - better than a few in there now anyway, and since it’s theologically sound (because it does NOT mean ordianng women) and a sainted pope would have done it, why not? Anyway, not the point of this thread, but I am all for realizing what was apparently the intent of John Paul II with regard to male lay cardinals.