Why women cant be Catholic Priests

[Elizabeth3]

How can a man be a bride?

Because he is part of the Body of Christ, which is made up of many members who each have different gifts and functions. (hands are not feet, arms are not legs but altogether they make up the one body.) Women’s bodies signify the many member’s but one body in pregnancy in that there are two (or three or rarely more) distinct persons in one body.

 

[simpleas]

But a man can’t have a baby so he can’t ever be a bride…

So far as I can tell, since reading up on the arguments for female ministerial priesthood, women know that they can not be men, they believe they are part of the body of Christ and that they can administer the supernatural gifts given by Christ himself to the world through the first men to be called.
I can not comprehend why a woman can not receive the power of the most Holy creator and go on to serve the people of God, as a woman…not as a man…

 

[goout]

But a man can’t have a baby so he can’t ever be a bride…

So far as I can tell, since reading up on the arguments for female ministerial priesthood, women know that they can not be men, they believe they are part of the body of Christ and that they can administer the supernatural gifts given by Christ himself to the world through the first men to be called.
I can not comprehend why a woman can not receive the power of the most Holy creator and go on to serve the people of God, as a woman…not as a man…

You use the word “can” a few times in there. I get the logic, but the word “can” signifies the capability to do something, and that’s not the heart of the issue.

Jesus “can” call on angels to lop the heads of his persecutors off. Given the demands of justice according to our worldly thinking, Jesus should lop their heads off and take the power of his worldly throne.
But he doesn’t, because that’s not who he is. It’s not his vocation to wield power according to the world’s expectation. His vocation with the Father is to be who he is.

 

[Elizabeth3]

But a man can’t have a baby so he can’t ever be a bride…

That’s not how the thinking goes spiritually speaking.

There is only one Head and that is Christ, who is ontologically male so only one of the two ways of being human can properly signify Christ as Head in liturgy.

Women are primarily the signifiers of what it means to be many members who make up one body. Because the body has many members, men are included in that, even if their body doesn’t signify this spiritual reality.

In the sanctuary during worship, we see Christ as our Head, signified by the priest, offering Himself to the Father on behalf of the Body.

So far as I can tell, since reading up on the arguments for female ministerial priesthood, women know that they can not be men,

Perhaps more time would be better spent reading something that teaches about liturgy and what is really happening at the Mass and why certain signs are vital to revealing spiritual realities.

“…women know they cannot be men”…and yet they reject that the male body signifies Christ as Head in a way that a woman’s body does not. We signify “the many members as one Body of Christ”, which by the way, is not the spiritual reality that is being conveyed on the altar at the Sacrifice of the Mass. It wasn’t all the members who died for the sins of everyone. It was the one Christ.

they believe they are part of the body of Christ and that they can administer the supernatural gifts given by Christ himself to the world through the first men to be called.

Being a part of the body of Christ is not what is proper in signifying Christ the Head at the altar.

“through the first men to be called”

???

Through the first men to be called, we are all called to be the Body of Christ but that doesn’t mean we are all called to the service of the altar in representing Christ as Head.

I can not comprehend why a woman can not receive the power of the most Holy creator and go on to serve the people of God, as a woman…not as a man…

Do you mean the power of the most Holy Spirit? Who ever said women cannot receive the power of the Holy Spirit to go on to serve the people of God, as a woman? We all receive this at Baptism even if only some are called to the ministerial priesthood to serve the Body so the Body in turn, are able to serve the people of God and even those who may not be a part of the Body.

What is so difficult in understanding that humanity is expressed in two distinct ways - male and female - and each has a distinct way of signifying Christ, whether as Head or Body?

 

[Gorgias]

Your “logic” means that if God wanted both male and female priests he would have had to come as a hermaphrodite. Its a risible argument.

No. If Jesus had named a female apostle – even just one – then the Church wouldn’t be able to make the assertion “Jesus never indicated that there should be women priests”. More to the point, the understanding of Jesus’ actions – that is, the theology of the Church – would never have asserted a male only priesthood.

 

[goout]

The priesthood is not an occupation or merely an official vehicle for work to be accomplished.

1578 No one has a right to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders. Indeed no one claims this office for himself; he is called to it by God.69 Anyone who thinks he recognizes the signs of God’s call to the ordained ministry must humbly submit his desire to the authority of the Church, who has the responsibility and right to call someone to receive orders. Like every grace this sacrament can be received only as an unmerited gift.

 

[simpleas]

You use the word “can” a few times in there. I get the logic, but the word “can” signifies the capability to do something, and that’s not the heart of the issue.

Advocates for women to be included in the ministerial priesthood do believe woman are capable of this ministry because they believe Jesus was speaking to both men and women when he said go out and spread the good news.
It’s us who have placed limits to this.

 

[Gorgias]

Advocates for women to be included in the ministerial priesthood do believe woman are capable of this ministry because they believe Jesus was speaking to both men and women when he said go out and spread the good news.

That an assertion that’s reasonably presented.

In order to evaluate whether it’s true, however, to whom do we have recourse?

 

[simpleas]

“through the first men to be called”

???

Meaning the apostles, over 2,000 years ago when women were viewed very differently.

 

[simpleas]

God.

(10 characters)

 

[Gorgias]

simpleas:

Advocates for women to be included in the ministerial priesthood do believe woman are capable of this ministry because they believe Jesus was speaking to both men and women when he said go out and spread the good news.

That an assertion that’s reasonably presented.

In order to evaluate whether it’s true, however, to whom do we have recourse?

God.

Whew! I’m so glad you acknowledged that!

OK, then:
Matthew 16:19:

[Jesus said to Peter in reply], "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

So… if Peter (i.e., the leadership of the Church) makes a declaration of faith and morals, Jesus asserts that this declaration will be upheld in heaven. In other words, by God.

So, by your very definition, we already have what you’re looking for. The Church has spoken. Jesus promised that God would uphold that decision. Therefore, God assents to the male only priesthood.

Glad we could clear that up.

 

[simpleas]

Whew! I’m so glad you acknowledged that!

OK, then:

Matthew 16:19:

[Jesus said to Peter in reply], "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

So… if Peter (i.e., the leadership of the Church) makes a declaration of faith and morals, Jesus asserts that this declaration will be upheld in heaven. In other words, by God.

So, by your very definition, we already have what you’re looking for. The Church has spoken. Jesus promised that God would uphold that decision. Therefore, God assents to the male only priesthood.

Glad we could clear that up.

Nothing is cleared up…

As far as I’m aware the above quote has to do with forgiveness of sins, not at all what you are suggesting it to mean.

 

[goout]

Nothing is cleared up…

As far as I’m aware the above quote has to do with forgiveness of sins, not at all what you are suggesting it to mean.

The Magisterium also participates in the transmission of revelation.
https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-...p-ii_apl_19940522_ordinatio-sacerdotalis.html

Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.

It’s good to also read this to keep a balanced perspective on an admittedly hard issue:
https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-...f_jp-ii_apl_19880815_mulieris-dignitatem.html

 

[Gorgias]

As far as I’m aware the above quote has to do with forgiveness of sins, not at all what you are suggesting it to mean.

Aah… then this is probably a good opportunity for you to read up on what the Church teaches because, with all due respect, you’re greatly mistaken – this entails a proxy by Jesus for authority over the Church and her teachings.

From the catechism:
CCC 553:

Jesus entrusted a specific authority to Peter: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” The “power of the keys” designates authority to govern the house of God, which is the Church. Jesus, the Good Shepherd, confirmed this mandate after his Resurrection: “Feed my sheep.” The power to “bind and loose” connotes the authority to absolve sins, to pronounce doctrinal judgments, and to make disciplinary decisions in the Church. Jesus entrusted this authority to the Church through the ministry of the apostles and in particular through the ministry of Peter, the only one to whom he specifically entrusted the keys of the kingdom.

 

[Elizabeth3]

through the first men to be called.

Meaning the apostles, over 2,000 years ago when women were viewed very differently

I understand you meant the apostles but I don’t understand how anyone can get to " that they can administer the supernatural gifts given by Christ himself to the world" through the apostles. It was by the laying on of hands from the apostles to those they appointed and so on down the ages. The apostles gave no such indication that anyone can do this unless they are called. God hasn’t called women to this particular ministry.

Has it ever occurred to these women that perhaps Christ chose to come at a time when the distinctions between men and women were more apparent in society because He intended a male priesthood and knew it had a better chance of taking root as part of Sacred Tradition than if He were to come in say, our time? Perhaps it was to be a protection of the spiritual realities that are so necessary in knowing the truth about Him and who He is as Head and as one with us as Body?

 

[goout]

Interesting point.
Is God not capable of communicating the message of salvation across cultural issues?
I think the one who makes thing to be that are not is probably capable of communicating across cultures.

 

[steve-b]

Why Women Can’t Be Catholic Priests | Fr. Dwight Longenecker

Re: Women’s ordination

JPII addressed the issue of “women priests” with an infallible ruling. Some thought the case was an open matter. JPII closed that notion. Even though today some still think the case is open and will change, It won’t because it can’t.

Here’s the text from then JPII Infallibly stated from

"4. Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal Tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the Magisterium in its more recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the Church’s judgment that women are not to be admitted to ordination is considered to have a merely disciplinary force.

Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful. "

That language JPII used, is by definition, an infallible teaching.

when, from Papal encyclicals quoting Vat I
. in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians,
• in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority,
• he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church,
• he possesses,
◦ by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter,
◦ that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals.
◦ Therefore, such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the church, irreformable.

Also

Canon law explaining infallible statements

 

[Elizabeth3]

Yes. The women who advocate for women in the priesthood do so because they think that the priesthood reveals something about them (in terms of capabilities or implies a lack thereof if they aren’t priests) but it doesn’t work that way.

The priesthood instead reveals truths about Christ, that He was the Son of God the Father, who was born of a virgin and offered Himself on the Cross for our sins. It doesn’t necessarily follow that because men are able to signify this truth more fully that it means they are more capable than women in ministering. In fact, women can and do minister to the Body of Christ in many of the same ways that priests do.

 

[BlackFriar]

Do advise how Jesus should have been incarnated if he also desired women priests?

 

[edwest211]

Thank you. That is the final answer.