Women as priests

[mgrfin]

We must uphold woman’s dignity at every turn and to resist the ways in which gender roles have been exagerated to favor men. But it also calls us to resist the other extreme that views men and women interchangeable.

We call priests father for a reason. Priest efficaciously symbolize Christs giving up his body for his Bride so that she can conceive life “in the Holy Spirit.” Only men can do this. As John Paul II reminded us. “It is the Eucharist that above all expresses the redemptive act of Christ the Bridegrom towards the Church, the Bride. This is clear and unambiguous when the sacramental of the Eucharist, in which the priest acts in the person of Christ, is performed by a man.”

If the ministry of the Eucharist were performed by a woman, the symbolism would be become that of bride to bride. There would be no possibility of effecting the nuptuial union.

The Eucharist is the sacrament of the Bridegroom and of the Bride.

For sacraments to be efficacious, the physical reality must properly symbolize the spiritual reality. For instance, if a priest said the words of baptism over someone while pouring motor oil over his head, there would be no sacrament because the cleansing symbolism of water is necessary to bring about the spiritual cleansing from sin. Without an accurate symbol (motor oil symbolizes making dirty), nothing happens.

Similarly, if a bishop laid hand on a woman and proclaimed the words of ordination, nothing would happen because a woman is not an accurate symbol of the Bridegroom. So it’s not a matter of the Church’s stubborn unwillingness to ordain women to the priesthood. It’s a matter of impossibilty.

This was from Christopher West book Good news about Sex and marriage. chaspter 9

If anything women show us what it is like to be the Bride that is awsome! Why would you want to be a priest?

I have to admit I am very uncomfortable with all of this symbolism of Bride and Bridegroom. “The Eucharist is the sacrament of the Bridegroom and of the Bride” Where are you going with this? The concept doesn’t do anything for me spiritually.

The symbolism of Bride and Bridggroom better fit the Sacrament of Matrimony where the love of husband and wife is to follow the love Christ has for his Church.

“To be efficacious the physical reality of the sacrament must properly symbolize the spiritual reality”. Okay that works with water and the pouring in the sacrament of Baptism (without any allusion to Bride and Bridegroom.

Likewise, the species of the Bread and Wine, and the words of consecration, what does that have to do with Bride and Bridegroom.

The reality of maleness in the Priesthood is that Canon law forbides females from being ordined as priests. Of course, the law relates to liceity, and not to validity. So there must be something inherent in maleness in the candidate that makes ordination of males valid, and females invalid.

If it has to do with something inherent, then women will never become priests (not that I ever think they will, but because they can’t).

Scripturally, “every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in the things that appertain to God”.

And, “let a man so account of us as the ministers of Christ and the dispensers of the mysteries of God”.

“Man” seems to be the essential word.

Two conditions are required for valid ordination: male sex and baptism. (A protestant could be ordained without conversion).

Two biblical texts pertain: 1 Cor xiv, 34-35: “Let women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted them to speak, but to be subject, as also the law saith. But if they would learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is a shame for a woman to speak in the church.”

And, 1 Tim ii: 11-12: “Let the woman learn in silencem with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman. to teach nor to use authority over a man: but to be in silence.”

I may not like the texts, but they are what they are, and are indicative that women will never be priests in the Catholic Church.

peace

 

[kleary]

I know this is a pretty general topic, but whenever I’m asked by a Protestant why we don’t let women be priests, I tend to freeze cause I don’t really know. Could someone give me a quick, simple outline of the reasons?

I did not read through the two pages of posts but I will give you what I was always taught and what I have learned as to why a woman cannot be a priest.

You see, at Holy Mass a Sacrifice is made and offered to God, the Holy Trinity.

This “Sacrifice”, offered by the priest at Holy Mass is one and the same as that offered on Calvary by Jesus Christ, 2000 years ago. It is the same as what was offered in the upper room the night before Jesus was crucified.

The One who offered this Sacrifice is Jesus Christ. It cannot be repeated by another. It happened once for all.

However in order to make the once for all Sacrifice visible to all, and for man to eat the flesh of the Son of Man as required in order to have eternal life, and for man to offer Sacrifice pleasable to God the Holy Trinity, Jesus instituted the Holy Mass. God is not bound by time. He can make what happened 2000 years ago visable and applicable to sins committed after that time- for our sake- so we can see it- so we can offer It.

The one who offers the Sacrifice to God the Holy Trintity is taking the place of Jesus Christ in what is being done. This is why the priest, when praying the Canon says “Hoc est enim corpus meum” (For this is MY body") [Note he does not say, "This is Jesus’ body]. The priest is “Alter Christus”, or “Another Christ” when offering the Sacrifice to the Holy Trinity.

The priest is “Alter Christus”. “Christus” is a male person. Therefore the “priest” must be a “male person”. If a female tries to offer the Holy Sacrifice it is invalid. It is the same as a man attempting to conceive a child- it is impossible. Christ is a male person and the “Alter Christus” must be a male person also.

Ken

 

[kleary]

You see- of you REMOVE the “Sacrificial Nature” of the Mass, the way the Episcopalians and Lutherans have done, then there is no barrier to having “woman priests”.

I will go out on a limb here and say if the Novus Ordo was never introduced and we still had the TLM everywhere, Catholics would not even consider the horror of “Woman priestesses”.

 

[mdstanzel]

mgrfin
I believe you settled this like a good Catholic. The truth is that women priests will not happen without a major schism. Celibate priest is a discipline not a doctrine. Discipline that could be relieved, but they will be cautious about it so as to not cause Catholics to run, like I did before to liberal misinterpretaions to VCII. I believed the church was dead and gone forever.

Trying to institute a female clergy would fall under man’s tradition not Tradition and I would never accept that because it not only goes against sacred scripture but sacred tradition [what we conveniently deliniate as “T”] I know the difference now, unlike before. Thank God for all of the orthodox Catholics laity and priests that I have met this past year. I would be Eastern Orthodox had it not been for orthodox Catholics and lots of prayer.

I’m still sifting through the Great Schism though and will not move unless I am convinced without a doubt that I need to move. I’ve hopped around most of my life but realize that I am not in an ecclesial community but rather a real Church with the real presence in the Eucharist. My Patriarche is Benedict XVI, the Bishop of Rome, whom I believe to be the historical Pope in the lineage of Peter. Until I see and believe contradictory evidence then that is my stance as should be all those that claim to be Catholic. To deny the authority of the Church is to deny Christ in His fullness.

So arguing women priest that do not submit to the authority of the Church is like letting Lockheed Martin employees tell me, a government employee, that I have to use Apple computers because they are just as good as my IBM … or some stupid analogy like that.

 

[mgrfin]

You see- of you REMOVE the “Sacrificial Nature” of the Mass, the way the Episcopalians and Lutherans have done, then there is no barrier to having “woman priests”.

I will go out on a limb here and say if the Novus Ordo was never introduced and we still had the TLM everywhere, Catholics would not even consider the horror of “Woman priestesses”.

We have priests because of the sacrificial character of the Mass.
To remove that sacrificial character, then you don’t need priests.
You could have ‘ministers’ like you have in Protestant churches.

If they want priests, they have to have a sacrifice. They don’t want to have that. They want Holy Communion without Calvary.

peace

 

[WynCatholic]

This post is private theological specualtion only. It is not magesterial in any way, 'tho it strives to be faithful to the magesterial spirit of the church. There are several issues to consider in order to esplain fully why women cannot be ordained priests.
The following must all be accounted for in order to obtain an adequate theology of Male only ordination to the priesthood. I think #'s1-3 is most helpful to this process.

1. 
   *]The practice of Jesus and the early church
   *]Jesus theology of Marriage (the other Sacrament of Service): Where did it come from and what does that mean for the understanding of Salvation History?
   *]The theology or understanding that Paul was grasping towards when Paul was discussing women in church leadership… -and not by just tossing him out as a sexist.
   *]The theology of Mary as the new Eve, the Mother of those in Christ.
   *]The theology of the Church as the Bride of Christ, and the Body of Christ.
   *] The theology of the Holy Spirit being our Sabbaoth, the seal of the New Covenant (and thus the Priests as administrators of that Covenant)
   *] The Practices of the OT priesthood supported by the writers of the OT.
   I wish to see if others, with more experience in catholic theology, with real Catholic training and real thinking skills, will see what I think I see.)
   Good luck!!

 

[mgrfin]

This post is private theological specualtion only. It is not magesterial in any way, 'tho it strives to be faithful to the magesterial spirit of the church. There are several issues to consider in order to esplain fully why women cannot be ordained priests.
The following must all be accounted for in order to obtain an adequate theology of Male only ordination to the priesthood. I think #'s1-3 is most helpful to this process.

1. 
   *]The practice of Jesus and the early church
   *]Jesus theology of Marriage (the other Sacrament of Service): Where did it come from and what does that mean for the understanding of Salvation History?
   *]The theology or understanding that Paul was grasping towards when Paul was discussing women in church leadership… -and not by just tossing him out as a sexist.
   *]The theology of Mary as the new Eve, the Mother of those in Christ.
   *]The theology of the Church as the Bride of Christ, and the Body of Christ.
   *] The theology of the Holy Spirit being our Sabbaoth, the seal of the New Covenant (and thus the Priests as administrators of that Covenant)
   *] The Practices of the OT priesthood supported by the writers of the OT.
   I wish to see if others, with more experience in catholic theology, with real Catholic training and real thinking skills, will see what I think I see.)
   Good luck!!

1. 
   Good insight, good post.
   
   peace

 

[WynCatholic]

Good insight, good post.

peace

Thank you.
Alas I realize that you all may theologize as much as you want.
But sad for me, I cannot play along, since I am not at liberty to discuss the putative ‘solution’.
I may havdone an ‘oops’ by deliniating which facets of this theoligcal gem need to be resolved (do I like to mix metaphors or what).
And also peace to your spirit

 

[mdstanzel]

This post is private theological specualtion only. It is not magesterial in any way, 'tho it strives to be faithful to the magesterial spirit of the church. There are several issues to consider in order to esplain fully why women cannot be ordained priests.
The following must all be accounted for in order to obtain an adequate theology of Male only ordination to the priesthood. I think #'s1-3 is most helpful to this process.

1. 
   *]The practice of Jesus and the early church
   *]Jesus theology of Marriage (the other Sacrament of Service): Where did it come from and what does that mean for the understanding of Salvation History?
   *]The theology or understanding that Paul was grasping towards when Paul was discussing women in church leadership… -and not by just tossing him out as a sexist.
   *]The theology of Mary as the new Eve, the Mother of those in Christ.
   *]The theology of the Church as the Bride of Christ, and the Body of Christ.
   *] The theology of the Holy Spirit being our Sabbaoth, the seal of the New Covenant (and thus the Priests as administrators of that Covenant)
   *] The Practices of the OT priesthood supported by the writers of the OT.
   I wish to see if others, with more experience in catholic theology, with real Catholic training and real thinking skills, will see what I think I see.)
   Good luck!!

1. 
   I like your post. Overly zealous theology is being used to manipulate or explain something other than the teaching of the Church. Many Catholics stick their foot in their mouth attempting to defend the truth, but do not do justice to the actual teachings. Like I said, I read something this past year that said Theology exist to show that something is rational to believe" [paraphrased]
   
   The facts are what they are not as we choose them to be. A Catholic that chooses to twist or distort the teachings of the church to fit their own agenda that is not in line with Church teaching is a cafateria Catholic. Some of those are just heretics. And others are just plain confused. I fell into the latter. I don’t even care about Protestant views anymore. That’s what led me out of the church to begin with. A group of protestants argued bettered than me. That just doesn’t make them right and the Catholic Church wrong. I just couldn’t find help to get through the struggles. I married one of them.
   
   Let non-Catholic seek truth. But if they keep beating at the door of the King eventually the King is going to come out and answer them. If they get a clear answer, they better obey the truth or be guilty of rejecting the truth in its fullness. How much one can get away with this is not clear to me, but I would not want to be the one who is caught doing this. Just like baptism for Protestants that reject the necessity of Baptism, when we were in the Church of Christ I always said I don’t know for sure what God would do with them, but I surely would not want to be the one that tried to justify that baptism is not necessary.

 

[WynCatholic]

I like your post. Overly zealous theology is being used to manipulate or explain something other than the teaching of the Church.

Catholic theology is to be the servant of the church, not to determine where the church is to travel

The facts are what they are not as we choose them to be.

I wish to paddle in the shallows of theology, seeking to explain, to understand, in the least harmful way, why the church does what it does, and thinks how it thinks. It is not quite apologetics, for my temperment doesn’t tune well to the demands of debate. Perhaps my fundamentalistic (anti-catholic, btw) evangelical protestant theological training, encourages me to give more credence to what is than to what I think it should be.

If they get a clear answer, they better obey the truth or be guilty of rejecting the truth in its fullness.

When I discovered, over the course of three weeks(or less), that the (gasp) Catholic Church was the heart of the fullness God was leading me to, I was livid, horrified, terrified. But I knew I had to follow, or die.

 

[mikew262]

I suspect things will change as the shortage of priests continues to rise. Nuns are running a ton of dioceses now, a priest stops by on Sunday for one mass. Something is gonna have to give, either women will be ordained or men will be allowed to marry. I have no particular desire either way. Its just the writing on the wall as it were.

And just for the record, I think we arrived at this place mainly because of patriarchial systems having been in place for so long. Its a long and laborious struggle women are well familiar with.

Yep!

 

[mikew262]

I suspect you don’t see the priest as The Groom. (I too find it difficult to understand. I really only accept it because it is Sacred Tradition.)

Is it a fair question if I ask, “Do you think a woman can become a Groom?”

Hopefully, if you answer “No”, then you’ll know why a woman can’t be a priest.

That’s kind of like a conspiracy theory. I think we should be past that.

Since I don’t buy into the bride/groom explanation, then your question above is kind of irrelevant.

Concerning your conspiracy theory comment, isn’t what I said true? The Church’s hierarchy is male dominated. Again, if for no other reason, this is why you’ll never see a female priest. No, conspiracy theory, just reality.

Again, I’m not advocating female priests. OTH, I don’t have a huge problem with the concept either, but to be honest, it would take a little getting used too, if it were ever to come about. It won’t.

 

[mikew262]

I have to admit I am very uncomfortable with all of this symbolism of Bride and Bridegroom. “The Eucharist is the sacrament of the Bridegroom and of the Bride” Where are you going with this? The concept doesn’t do anything for me spiritually.

The symbolism of Bride and Bridggroom better fit the Sacrament of Matrimony where the love of husband and wife is to follow the love Christ has for his Church.

peace

Thank you!!!

 

[mikew262]

The priest is “Alter Christus”. “Christus” is a male person. Therefore the “priest” must be a “male person”. If a female tries to offer the Holy Sacrifice it is invalid. It is the same as a man attempting to conceive a child- it is impossible. Christ is a male person and the “Alter Christus” must be a male person also.

Ken

Christ is God and spirit who took human form as a man. Christ is again in his “spirit” form. IMO, gender is irrelevant to God.

 

[japhy]

Christ is God and spirit who took human form as a man. Christ is again in his “spirit” form. IMO, gender is irrelevant to God.

What do you mean that Christ is “in his spirit form”? This sounds like you’re a) denying a bodily resurrection, and b) confusing the Persons of the Trinity with the misconception of “modes of God”.

Why is gender irrelevant to God if He created it in the first place? Why is homosexuality called an abomination in the Bible? When we are resurrected, we will neither marry or be given in marriage… but we will still be men and women.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Sorry, there should’ve been a there. Let me explain the comment.

“And just for the record, I think we arrived at this place mainly because of patriarchial systems having been in place for so long. Its a long and laborious struggle women are well familiar with.”

I took that to mean that your opinion of the hierarchy of the Church is that is a man-made (that is, male-made) structure imposed on top of what God intended. So the only reason there are only male priests is because men say it has to be that way, and that allowing women to be priests is an element of the liberation of women.

You should take it to mean that I believe that people exist in a world of experiences, some that they take for granted because they cannot remember a time, nor have they been told of a time that was different. They consider it given. Don’t you see that Jesus faced this continuously? He was for the Other, and was constantly upbraided for his unorthodox behavior. Would ANYONE have listened to him had he placed women in his group of apostles? I doubt it. I think you assume God micromanages. I don’t. The Spirit can guide, it cannot force, and if the idea never strikes you, you sure aren’t acting willfully, but only ignorantly.

I tend to be guided by the Church that the determination as they see it is that its essentially tradition that dictates the policy. So I’m just a tiny bit convinced that maybe its not God-prohibited.

Yes, the Church is a ‘male’ domination organization. Who is to say that is not what God wanted?

That’s the way it is, so I guess that is the way he wanted it?

peace

I guess it could be interpreted that way. Its sure way convenient for ya! I don’t by any means think it has to be. God might be pretty irked that we haven’t stopped downplaying the ladies in his Church for all I know.

 

[jmcrae]

You should take it to mean that I believe that people exist in a world of experiences, some that they take for granted because they cannot remember a time, nor have they been told of a time that was different. They consider it given. Don’t you see that Jesus faced this continuously? He was for the Other, and was constantly upbraided for his unorthodox behavior. Would ANYONE have listened to him had he placed women in his group of apostles? I doubt it.

Why not? There were women among the 120 disciples who followed Him. There were four women who followed Him for the full three years. If He had so chosen, He could have ordained those four women along with the 12, and nobody would have thought anything of it - after all, He was the only Rabbi who accepted female disciples, and He was notorious for being a “Mama’s boy” and for talking to Samaritan, Gentile women, prostitutes, and others. Seriously - ordaining them to the priesthood would have been nothing - indeed, it could have been seen as a logical “next step” - yet, He never took that step.

I guess it could be interpreted that way. Its sure way convenient for ya! I don’t by any means think it has to be. God might be pretty irked that we haven’t stopped downplaying the ladies in his Church for all I know.

“Downplaying the ladies?” Not exactly.

Who is the greatest of the Saints, again? (Mary, Queen of Heaven and Earth.)

Today is the feast day of St. Teresa of Avila, who lived in those bad old Middle Ages - and never had a male boss during her entire career. When she was a young novice, she reported to her Mother Superior - nobody else. When she became Mother Superior of the Carmelite Order, she worked as an equal with the Bishops - she was never their servant.

I think the Catholic Church is really the only organization on earth that has always recognized the equal dignity of women.

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

I’m a bit puzzled about the concern expressed about whether Jesus would have been listened to at all. On the one hand, it is noted that he broke traditions where he knew it appropriate. On the other hand, apparently this one tradition would have been the straw that broke the camel’s back? What, one is left to wonder, is the basis for that conclusion? Worse yet, if one were to concede that Jesus gave into this “tradition”, then one would at the same time accuse him of having committed the sin of sexism. Zounds!

This whole line of argument, in logic, comes under the heading of “special pleading.” Never mind what else is on the table in the way of data – talking to Samaritan women at wells; ending the accommodation to divorce that Moses allowed in his laws; not flinching a bit when people were revolted and shocked about the prospect of having to eat his flesh, even when they left him – when we talk about women priests we must, apparently, apply special rules and considerations.

And indeed what we have here is a necessity. If an argument is to be made, then this has to be included. But that does not make the argument valid or cogent or other than what it is – special pleading.

Jesus chose male apostles; his Father chose only male priests. Like Father, like Son, and God cannot be wrong or sinful – full stop. One wonders why the consistency of position between Father and Son is not noted, rather than weakness and sinfulness being ascribed to the Son.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[mgrfin]

Yep!

When was the last time you saw a young nun? The nuns you see are just as old, if not older than their priest counter-parts.

Using nuns was a fill-in. After them, then what?

peace

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

When was the last time you saw a young nun? The nuns you see are just as old, if not older than their priest counter-parts.

Using nuns was a fill-in. After them, then what?

peace

Yesterday. At Mass. A young nun is active in the ministry to deaf Catholics, and at our 9:00 AM Mass is there to sign for them. And she’s a good deal younger than the assistant pastor.

Blessings,

Gerry