Women in the Priesthood

[stanley123]

SummaTheo:

Reasons why the Church’s teaching on women’s ordination is infallible: ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/ORDIN.TXT

Is this person who wrote this as knowledgeable in theology as Father Francis A. Sullivan?
According to Father Francis A. Sullivan, S.J., professor emeritus of the faculty of theology at the Gregorian University in Rome, writing in his book: “Creative Fidelity”, and speaking of the papal pronouncement on the ordination of women, in the afterword: “…it seemed to me at least doubtful that the judgment expressed in this papal letter had been infallibly taught by the ordinary universal magisterium.”

And

“I do not see how it can be certain that this doctrine has been taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium.”

 

[Catholic2003]

Gerrygarvin:

Does anyone have some good historical sources on this? And i mean primary sources, not some dubious historical analysis done by a priest/bishop/cardinal with a PHD in theology?

From Inter Insigniores:

The Catholic Church has never felt that priestly or episcopal ordination can be validly conferred on women. A few heretical sects in the first centuries, especially Gnostic ones, entrusted the exercise of the priestly ministry to women: this innovation was immediately noted and condemned by the Fathers, who considered it as unacceptable in the Church.[7] It is true that in the writings of the Fathers one will find the undeniable influence of prejudices unfavourable to women, but nevertheless, it should be noted that these prejudices had hardly any influence on their pastoral activity, and still less on their spiritual direction. But over and above considerations inspired by the spirit of the times, one finds expressed—especially in the canonical documents of the Antiochian and Egyptian traditions—this essential reason, namely, that by calling only men to the priestly Order and ministry in its true sense, the Church intends to remain faithful to the type of ordained ministry willed by the Lord Jesus Christ and carefully maintained by the Apostles.[8]

[7]. Saint Irenaeus, “Adversus Haereses,” 1, 13, 2: PG 7 580-581; ed Harvey, I, 114-122; Tertullian, “De Praescrip. Haeretic.” 41, 5: CCL 1, p 221; Firmilian of Caesarea, in Saint Cyprian, “Epist.,” 75: CSEL 3, pp. 817-818; Origen, “Fragmentum in 1 Cor.” 74, in “Journal of Theological Studies” 10(1909), pp. 41-42; Saint Epiphanius, “Panarion” 49, 2-3; 78, 23; 79, 2-4; vol. 2, GCS 31, pp. 243-244; vol. 3, GCS 37, pp. 473, 477-479.

[8]. “Didascalia Apostolorum,” ch. 15, ed. R. H. Connolly, pp. 133 and 142; “Constitutiones Apostolicae,” bk. 3, ch. 6, nos. 1-2; ch. 9 3-4: ed. F. H. Funk, pp. 191, 201; Saint John Chrysostom, “De Sacerdotio” 2, 2: PG 48, 633.

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

stanley123:

Is this person who wrote this as knowledgeable in theology as Father Francis A. Sullivan?
According to Father Francis A. Sullivan, S.J., professor emeritus of the faculty of theology at the Gregorian University in Rome, writing in his book: “Creative Fidelity”, and speaking of the papal pronouncement on the ordination of women, in the afterword: “…it seemed to me at least doubtful that the judgment expressed in this papal letter had been infallibly taught by the ordinary universal magisterium.”

And

“I do not see how it can be certain that this doctrine has been taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium.”

Well Fr. Sullivan is NOT, repeat NOT, someone who exercises the Magisterium of the Church. What he thinks may be all very interesting, in an academic sense, but has no authority. The Holy Father, and the Prefect of the Congregation of the Faith, on the other hand, did exercise Magisterium, and enjoyed the protection of God the Holy Spirit.

Academics, even in Rome, don’t exercise Magisterium, and don’t have the protection from teaching error provided by God the Holy Spirit to the Magisterium.

So, as for Fr. Sullivan’s opinion, interesting, but so what? The Catholic Faith is not a contest of ideas.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[stanley123]

Gerry Hunter:

Well Fr. Sullivan is NOT, repeat NOT, someone who exercises the Magisterium of the Church. What he thinks may be all very interesting, in an academic sense, but has no authority. The Holy Father, and the Prefect of the Congregation of the Faith, on the other hand, did exercise Magisterium, and enjoyed the protection of God the Holy Spirit.

Academics, even in Rome, don’t exercise Magisterium, and don’t have the protection from teaching error provided by God the Holy Spirit to the Magisterium.

The problem with that is that official documents "have proposed three ways of establishing that a doctrine is taught by the ordinary and universal magisterium: consultation of all the bishops, the universal and constant consensus of Catholic theologians, and the common adherence of the faithful. The CDF has not invoked any of these criteria in support of its assertion that the doctrine excluding women from the priesthood has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium."See p. 183, “Creative Fidelity,” by Father Francis A. Sullivan, S.J.

 

[steveandersen]

jegow:

Yeah, hope for what?..

that they one day might be given the authority.
(the mechanism? I don’t know.)

all this talk of the differences between men and women, the philosophy and imagery etc is all well and good but it seems to be the tail wagging the dog.

 

[emsvetich]

“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, 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.” – Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, John Paul II, 22 May 1999 (Apostolic Letter)

Now you have. And if you’re truly a Catholic, then you just need to get over it. This is infallible, and it’s never ever going to change. So stop trying to argue and start trying to understand.

I am having a hard time believing that this discussion is still going on. The above quote from John Paul ll that was graciously supplied by masterjedi is the “definitive” judgement. There has been much said and referenced about opinions by theologians, feminists, rebels, heretics, questioning Catholics, agnostics, apparent cafeteria catholics and others. If you want to differ from Catholic “divine constitution” and you call yourself Catholic, you will have to look into your own motivation. If you (like some who have expressed opinions here) are not Catholic, or have a bias against Catholic belief because it doesn’t make sense to you, feel the need to continue to tell us how the lack of a female priesthood somehow proves the error of the Catholic Church in a modern society, I say continue. This is an exercise in futility. The pope has spoken. He is the only person who counts on this topic.The Church is not for everyone. Obviously, even the protestants have issues, there are over 30,000 denominations over there. They seem to have at least several unresolved issues also. Everyone has a choice. If this point really sets you off, choose somewhere else or continue your search. The Church, bless her, doesn’t bend to polls. As for me, I have made my choice. I am staying.

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

stanley123:

The problem with that is that official documents "have proposed three ways of establishing that a doctrine is taught by the ordinary and universal magisterium: consultation of all the bishops, the universal and constant consensus of Catholic theologians, and the common adherence of the faithful. The CDF has not invoked any of these criteria in support of its assertion that the doctrine excluding women from the priesthood has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium."See p. 183, “Creative Fidelity,” by Father Francis A. Sullivan, S.J.

And there is no more need to do so than there is need for the Holy Father to state “I hereby infallibly declare …” or some such other similar formula when he exercises his Extraordinary Magisterium. Nor is the list exhaustive.

In case it was missed, here’s the direction from the CDF, complete with reference to Vatican II (which Fr. S. seems to have overlooked):

CONCERNING THE TEACHING CONTAINED IN ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS RESPONSUM AD DUBIUM

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

October 28, 1995

Dubium: Whether the teaching that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women, which is presented in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis to be held definitively, is to be understood as belonging to the deposit of faith.

Responsum: In the affirmative.

This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium (cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium 25, 2). Thus, in the present circumstances, the Roman Pontiff, exercising his proper office of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), has handed on this same teaching by a formal declaration, explicitly stating what is to be held always, everywhere, and by all, as belonging to the deposit of the faith.

The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, approved this Reply, adopted in the ordinary session of this Congregation, and ordered it to be published.

Rome, from the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the Feast of the Apostles SS. Simon and Jude, October 28, 1995.

Joseph Card. Ratzinger
Prefect

Tarcisio Bertone
Archbishop Emeritus of Vercelli

And I, too, share the amazement that this thread has gone on for so long, in the light of the clear teaching provided on the issue.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[stanley123]

Gerry Hunter:

And there is no more need to do so than there is need for the Holy Father to state “I hereby infallibly declare …” or some such other similar formula when he exercises his Extraordinary Magisterium. Nor is the list exhaustive.

In case it was missed, here’s the direction from the CDF, complete with reference to Vatican II (which Fr. S. seems to have overlooked):

If you would read the book by Father Sullivan, you would see that he does not overlook the declaration from the CDF, but that he spends a lot of time explaining why he does not see " how it can be certain that this doctrine has been taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium." Briefly, he explains that certain criteria must be satisfied before this could be held, and he shows why the declaration from the CDF or the declaration from the Pope do not meet these criteria necessary for infallibility. Still, though, it is an authoritative teaching of the Church.

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

stanley123:

If you would read the book by Father Sullivan, you would see that he does not overlook the declaration from the CDF, but that he spends a lot of time explaining why he does not see " how it can be certain that this doctrine has been taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium."

If he chose to be, he could be as certain as any other Catholic can be when it is declared to be so by those who exercise the Magisterium of the Church. And given the protection of God the Holy Spirit on their teaching, it’s hard to imagine any more certainty.

This is not a matter of a contest of ideas, or a legislative formula. It is authority, God-given, protected, and exercised.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Orionthehunter]

Gerry Hunter:

And there is no more need to do so than there is need for the Holy Father to state “I hereby infallibly declare …” or some such other similar formula when he exercises his Extraordinary Magisterium. Nor is the list exhaustive.

In case it was missed, here’s the direction from the CDF, complete with reference to Vatican II (which Fr. S. seems to have overlooked):

CONCERNING THE TEACHING CONTAINED IN ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS RESPONSUM AD DUBIUM

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

October 28, 1995

Dubium: Whether the teaching that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women, which is presented in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis to be held definitively, is to be understood as belonging to the deposit of faith.

Responsum: In the affirmative.

This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium (cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium 25, 2). Thus, in the present circumstances, the Roman Pontiff, exercising his proper office of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), has handed on this same teaching by a formal declaration, explicitly stating what is to be held always, everywhere, and by all, as belonging to the deposit of the faith.

The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, approved this Reply, adopted in the ordinary session of this Congregation, and ordered it to be published.

Rome, from the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the Feast of the Apostles SS. Simon and Jude, October 28, 1995.

Joseph Card. Ratzinger
Prefect

Tarcisio Bertone
Archbishop Emeritus of Vercelli

And I, too, share the amazement that this thread has gone on for so long, in the light of the clear teaching provided on the issue.

Blessings,

Gerry

I’m not justifying the confusion but I do think I have some insight into it. I think that becuase this is a matter of “discipline” and not “moral teaching” people (suffering under poor catechesis) think it is up for debate by the faithful or that lobbying the Pontiff will somehow result in a change.

Submit and Obey is my motto. If your conscience is bothering you, go pray about it some more.

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

Orionthehunter:

I’m not justifying the confusion but I do think I have some insight into it. I think that becuase this is a matter of “discipline” and not “moral teaching” people (suffering under poor catechesis) think it is up for debate by the faithful or that lobbying the Pontiff will somehow result in a change.

You may well be on to something there. It is indeed a matter of discipline – the discipline of the Sacrament of Holy Orders. And as for the morality issue that many “dissidents” harp on, I can think of nothing more immoral than substituting conclusions from humanistic reflections for what is given in the Deposit of the Faith.

Orionthehunter:

Submit and Obey is my motto. If your conscience is bothering you, go pray about it some more.

That’s one fine motto you’ve got yourself there.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[stanley123]

Gerry Hunter:

It is authority, God-given, protected, and exercised.

I said it was authoritative. There is no issue on that point. What Father Sullivan questions is whether it satisfies the conditions required for infallibility. Do you agree that there is a difference between authoritative teaching and infallible teaching? Or do you say that there is no difference between the two?

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

stanley123:

I said it was authoritative. There is no issue on that point. What Father Sullivan questions is whether it satisfies the conditions required for infallibility. Do you agree that there is a difference between authoritative teaching and infallible teaching? Or do you say that there is no difference between the two?

What we are talking about here in this thread is a teaching declared under the ordinary and universal Magisterium of the church. Therefore, it is infallible. It is not just the teachings set out under extraordinary Magisterium that have the protection of God the Holy Spirit.

As for any difference between authoritative and infallible, it’s a red herring for this issue.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[stanley123]

Gerry Hunter:

As for any difference between authoritative and infallible, it’s a red herring for this issue.

This is where Father Sullivan would disagree with you. There is a difference between an authoritative teaching of the Church and a teaching that meets the requirements for infallibility.
Not every authoritative teaching of the Church meets the stricter requirements for infallibility. There is no issue on whether the teaching on women’s ordination is authoritative. There is an issue on whether the teaching is infallible.

 

[Whalljim]

Gnosis:

I am speaking of being saved in the metaphysical sesne. It is argued that women can not represent Christ because there is a metaphysical difference between a woman and Christ. Yet when Christ himself took the place of both male and female on the cross…there seemed to be no such metaphysical barrier.
?

It would seem that this just means Christ can cross any metaphysical barrier. It doesn’t necessarily follow that his creations can do the same thing.

As to legitimate arguments; I hear that as an argument often for several things. Most recently it was birth control. It always reminds me of Christ’s telling his followers that ‘You must truly eat my body and drink my blood’ and how several of them left him that day, because ‘this is too hard!’ to believe. Yet, Jesus didn’t back down because that teaching wasn’t popular. And the apostles didn’t leave because it was hard.

Such a teaching was far harder for a practicing jew of the day to accept than it is for us to accept some of the teachings of the Church today. But we kick and scream and whine (yes, I’ve done it too in the past) because we don’t like it nor do we like an authority outside of our own and beyond our ability to change. Such teachings don’t fit in with our world view or the idea that equality somehow equals a total sameness in ability and action.

But…The Church does have that authority. And it has a hierarchy its created over the years to manage that authority. If you believe that Jesus Christ was the Messiah, and that he founded the Church, gave it all the authority it has, and made it his earthly instrument of salvation, why do you doubt what that Church has consistently taught, and what its hierarchy has legitimately laid down using its authority?

I agree there are things that aren’t easy. Not by a long chalk. But for me, when I was younger and fought harder against the teachings I didn’t like, I kept getting bound tighter and tighter by the Truth of what the Church is. If you accept the Church, her authority, and her ability to use it, there isn’t alot of wiggle room here.

 

[estesbob]

stanley123:

This is where Father Sullivan would disagree with you. There is a difference between an authoritative teaching of the Church and a teaching that meets the requirements for infallibility.
Not every authoritative teaching of the Church meets the stricter requirements for infallibility. There is no issue on whether the teaching on women’s ordination is authoritative. There is an issue on whether the teaching is infallible.

Not according to the Pope who, I believe, outranks Fr Sullivan

 

[Brendan]

stanley123:

This is where Father Sullivan would disagree with you. There is a difference between an authoritative teaching of the Church and a teaching that meets the requirements for infallibility.
Not every authoritative teaching of the Church meets the stricter requirements for infallibility. There is no issue on whether the teaching on women’s ordination is authoritative. There is an issue on whether the teaching is infallible.

The question on if the teaching articulated in O.S. was asked of the appropriate Dicastery.

The Pope, with the Discastery involved, the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), issued a teaching that this was, in fact, an infallible teaching.

Do you hold that it is possible for the Pope to teach that something is, in fact, an infallible teaching when it is not?

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

stanley123:

This is where Father Sullivan would disagree with you. There is a difference between an authoritative teaching of the Church and a teaching that meets the requirements for infallibility.
Not every authoritative teaching of the Church meets the stricter requirements for infallibility. There is no issue on whether the teaching on women’s ordination is authoritative. There is an issue on whether the teaching is infallible.

What Brendan said.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[emsvetich]

**No man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation.–**John Calvin defending Mary’s perpetual virginity

I just saw this on another thread and thought that this quote could easily apply to the argument on this topic as well.

 

[Catholic2003]

I would just like to caution anyone reading this thread about coming to any conclusions about the orthodoxy of Fr. Sullivan based on second-hand presentations of his ideas. I have found Fr. Sullivan to be a very reliable source for information about the Church’s Magisterium, as long as his position is read and understood in full.