Women in the Priesthood

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mark_Marilyn
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mark_Marilyn

Guest
The Conservatives allege (or imply):
  1. The difference between men and women is absolute!
  2. a.) Women simply have NO place in the clergy. 😦
    In such a vital role in the Church, they have nothing to contribute. 😦 (not in the clergy, anyway)
2 b.) It may be that God made woman to be the servant of man.
  1. Those women who feel they have a “calling,” or seriously believe that women have a right to become priests, are simply being mislead.
…But many progressives deny all of the above, and insist:
  1. Men and women are essentially made of the same material, spirit, basic human nature, etc., but have differences determined by DNA and hormones, etc. This was not well understood in ancient times. Fact: women have souls, too.
  2. In many modern, “progressive,” philosophies and policies, equal rights, and equal treatment under the law, are desirable.
    Our Lord treated women with more respect than was usually customary for rabbis and religious leaders (and most men) in ancient Palestine region.
  3. There is no sound or convincing reason for excluding women from religion altogether, or from high respectable ranks, or from the priesthood. Our Lord has never been on record ordering women specifically out of any position of high responsibility.
    Women have made considerable contributions to the Church, religion and religious culture thoughout history.
 
I think that this topic has been covered on several previous threads. As a retreat director friend once told me, there’s not much point in beating to death in discussion something that is just not going to happen.

I’m sure that if Jesus had named women as apostles, there would long since have been women priests. But he didn’t, and there aren’t, and there won’t be.
 
What are you suggesting? There can and never will be women priests for the simple fact ITS IMPOSSIBLE!! If a dog were to receive the Eucharist, he would receive the Eucharist but thats it, he would not receive salvation from it because he has no soul. Also, women being priest is like men having babys. If a man really wants to have a kid well he can’t because he does not have the proper organs.
 
actually, you are right! look at how much jesus respected women! Look at how Jesus saw them as equals! ANd then notice how many woman apostles there were, and how many of the early priests were female. (0 in case you need to check). “yeah, so society wouldnt accept female priests back then but we are enlightened now.” you might say.

Do you think Jesus would have watered down His message to make it more palitable to the masses? (He wouldnt have, look at when people were uncomfortable about the real presence in john 6, Jesus actually reemphasized the unpopular teaching). If he wanted female priests He would have made them and said “who cares about societal norms.”

Furthermore:
Priesthood is not abnout power and the availability of it is not an equality issue. I actually am a budding seminarian (starting next fall if accepted) and i can attest to the fact that it isnt about authority or power in the church.

And also:
No matter how much i want to be a mother and bear and nurse children (i dont but lets pretend), i cannot because i am a man. If i tried to be a mother and act like (or even become) a woman, people would say that i was confused and even disturbed. See an analogy?

And if that isnt enough we have:
  • An infallable declaration
  • 2000 years of tradition
  • Theological explainations galore
 
I am a recent convert, and a strong feminist, so I hope you will pay attention to my answers.

The Conservatives allege (or imply):
1. The difference between men and women is absolute!

Yes, it is. Anatomy is absolute. Men cannot bear children: women cannot sire them.
    1. a.) Women simply have NO place in the clergy. 😦
      In such a vital role in the Church, they have nothing to contribute. 😦 (not in the clergy, anyway)
*You make it sound as if women are excluded from the priesthood because they are considered useless. This is not true. Just as a chocolate chip cookie is not the proper matter for the Host, the female body is not proper matter to act in persona Christi. Jesus was male. And, Jesus chose 12 men to be His apostles. If it’s good enough for Him, it’s good enough for me. I am His follower, not His teacher.
  • 2 b.) It may be that God made woman to be the servant of man.*
That is not how the Church interprets “helpmeet,” or whatever word your favorite Bible version uses in Gen 2:18. Gen 1:27 shows that the sexes have equal dignity, both being made in God’s image and likeness.

3. Those women who feel they have a “calling,” or seriously believe that women have a right to become priests, are simply being mislead.

Misled by who?
There are many opportunities for women that feel they have a calling. Those who teach Catechism classes arfe building the foundation of the Church. Those who are apologists, those who are theologans - we can spend our time quite profitably.

Women who think they have a “right” to be a priest are mistaken, yes. Our rights are a secular matter, a matter of civil law. The Church is about faith. There may be some teachings I don’t understand; I have faith that I will understand some day. (1 Cor 13:12)

The fact is that the door is forever closed; there is no possibility that women will become priests. I accept that. You should too, if you intend to be a faithful Catholic.
  • …But many progressives deny all of the above, and insist:
  1. Men and women are essentially made of the same material, spirit, basic human nature, etc., but have differences determined by DNA and hormones, etc. This was not well understood in ancient times. Fact: women have souls, too.*
While DNA and hormones weren’t well understood (or understood at all!) in ancient times, they didn’t need to understand them. What with anatomy, and only women having the power to give birth, it was well understood that the sexes were different! The same, and different. I refer you again to Gen.1:27.

2. In many modern, “progressive,” philosophies and policies, equal rights, and equal treatment under the law, are desirable.
Our Lord treated women with more respect than was usually customary for rabbis and religious leaders (and most men) in ancient Palestine region.

Both are true. Our Lord did not, however, treat women “equally”, or the BVM and Mary Magdalene would have been apostles. He did them the honor of having them be the first to see Him after His resurrection; He loved and honored them. But He did not make them priests.

*3. There is no sound or convincing reason for excluding women from religion altogether,

If your church is excluding women from religion, you should report it to the Archdiocese.

or from high respectable ranks,

In my parish, out of 26 “high ranks,” 13 are held by women. Again, if your church is excluding women from holding high offices, you should report it to the Archdiocese.

or from the priesthood.

*See my answer to 2a. *

Our Lord has never been on record ordering women specifically out of any position of high responsibility.
*
I’m not sure what you mean by this. *

Women have made considerable contributions to the Church, religion and religious culture thoughout history.

*Of course they have. Nobody would deny that!

Even though Jesus said, “My yoke is easy and my burden is light” (Mt 11:29), He still said there is a yoke and a burden. In other words, He never said it would be easy to follow Him.

You are just making it harder for yourselves by getting agitated about something that will not change. May the dear Lord grant you the serenity to accept the things you cannot change…
 
Mark & Marilyn:
The Conservatives allege (or imply):
  1. The difference between men and women is absolute!
  2. a.) Women simply have NO place in the clergy. 😦
    In such a vital role in the Church, they have nothing to contribute. 😦 (not in the clergy, anyway)
2 b.) It may be that God made woman to be the servant of man.
  1. Those women who feel they have a “calling,” or seriously believe that women have a right to become priests, are simply being mislead.
…But many progressives deny all of the above, and insist:
  1. Men and women are essentially made of the same material, spirit, basic human nature, etc., but have differences determined by DNA and hormones, etc. This was not well understood in ancient times. Fact: women have souls, too.
  2. In many modern, “progressive,” philosophies and policies, equal rights, and equal treatment under the law, are desirable.
    Our Lord treated women with more respect than was usually customary for rabbis and religious leaders (and most men) in ancient Palestine region.
  3. There is no sound or convincing reason for excluding women from religion altogether, or from high respectable ranks, or from the priesthood. Our Lord has never been on record ordering women specifically out of any position of high responsibility.
    Women have made considerable contributions to the Church, religion and religious culture thoughout history.
Click to expand...
On the conservative side:
  1. That one I will agree. The differences between men and women are absolute!
  2. God only made women to be servants of men in that He made men to be servants of women too. Mutual submission. Check out John Paul The Great’s talks on theology of the body.
  3. Those women who feel like they have a calling to the priesthood are not being mislead. They are misleading themselves.
On the liberal side:
  1. Women have souls, YES!! Why would you want to damage their eternal souls by making them into men’s souls?
  2. Why does being a priest make a woman higher in her calling? Who said priests are above women? Jesus certainly didn’t. Priests are servants of The Church.
  3. Yes our Lord is on record of making men only in the priesthood. Read Acts of the Apostles. Yes women have significant roles in authority in The Church. Those roles just happen to not be in the priesthood.
Why is this so hard to comprehend?
 
Mark & Marilyn:
The Conservatives allege (or imply):
  1. The difference between men and women is absolute!
  2. a.) Women simply have NO place in the clergy. 😦
    In such a vital role in the Church, they have nothing to contribute. 😦 (not in the clergy, anyway)
2 b.) It may be that God made woman to be the servant of man.
  1. Those women who feel they have a “calling,” or seriously believe that women have a right to become priests, are simply being mislead.
…But many progressives deny all of the above, and insist:
  1. Men and women are essentially made of the same material, spirit, basic human nature, etc., but have differences determined by DNA and hormones, etc. This was not well understood in ancient times. Fact: women have souls, too.
  2. In many modern, “progressive,” philosophies and policies, equal rights, and equal treatment under the law, are desirable.
    Our Lord treated women with more respect than was usually customary for rabbis and religious leaders (and most men) in ancient Palestine region.
  3. There is no sound or convincing reason for excluding women from religion altogether, or from high respectable ranks, or from the priesthood. Our Lord has never been on record ordering women specifically out of any position of high responsibility.
    Women have made considerable contributions to the Church, religion and religious culture thoughout history.
Click to expand...
Women will never be ordained in the Catholic Church.

CCC 1577 "Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination."66 The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry.67 The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.
 
40.png
SummaTheo:
What are you suggesting? There can and never will be women priests for the simple fact ITS IMPOSSIBLE!! If a dog were to receive the Eucharist, he would receive the Eucharist but thats it, he would not receive salvation from it because he has no soul. Also, women being priest is like men having babys. If a man really wants to have a kid well he can’t because he does not have the proper organs.
Click to expand...
While I agree that it is impossible for a woman to be a priest, may I point out that comparing woman to dogs might give the wrong impression to someone who feels that the Catholic Church fails to give women the proper respect?
 
40.png
BlindSheep:
While I agree that it is impossible for a woman to be a priest, may I point out that comparing woman to dogs might give the wrong impression to someone who feels that the Catholic Church fails to give women the proper respect?
Click to expand...
I never compared women to dogs. Its about how women can’t receive Holy Orders. Sorry I see how one can confuse it.
 
Mark & Marilyn:
The Conservatives allege (or imply): …
…But many progressives deny all of the above, and insist:…
Click to expand...
Church teachings shouldn’t be labeled as “conservative” versus “progressive”. Truth is neither conservative or progressive-it is simply truth.

The simple truth (as someone stated above) is: men can’t carry a baby in their womb and women can’t impregnate a man. This is a reality of the way God created us. If He had intended for men and women to be the same, He certainly could have designed us that way, but He didn’t.

Yes, our Lord treated women with more respect than was customary at the time, and I think He would still do that today. Treating women with respect shouldn’t mean turning women into men. Jesus knew the true beauty and dignity of every human person. He understood both men and women because He designed us.

Now as to the point of women in the priesthood, I disagree with what say the exclusively male priesthood implies. It does not imply that women are subservient to men; priests should serve the Church, not the other way around. (And all Chirstians are called to be servants.) But just as women can’t be physical fathers, we can’t be spiritual fathers either. That doesn’t imply we are any lesser than men–merely different.
 
Mark & Marilyn:
The Conservatives allege (or imply):
  1. The difference between men and women is absolute!
Click to expand...
This is true. Are you trying to deny it?
  1. a.) Women simply have NO place in the clergy. 😦
    In such a vital role in the Church, they have nothing to contribute. 😦 (not in the clergy, anyway)
Click to expand...
The vital role that anybody plays in the Church is to become holy. Becoming a priest does not guarantee holiness. True power does not lie in any office, no matter how great. True power comes solely from God. A woman who wishes to be powerful should strive to be a saint. After all, the most powerful person in the Church (next to Jesus, who is God) is a woman, Mary.
2 b.) It may be that God made woman to be the servant of man.
Click to expand...
God made all of us to serve each other. Didn’t Jesus say that the one who wishes to be the leader should be the servant of all?
  1. Those women who feel they have a “calling,” or seriously believe that women have a right to become priests, are simply being mislead.
Click to expand...
*Simply *being misled? They’re being led much farther astray than that.
…But many progressives deny all of the above, and insist:
  1. Men and women are essentially made of the same material, spirit, basic human nature, etc., but have differences determined by DNA and hormones, etc. This was not well understood in ancient times. Fact: women have souls, too.
Click to expand...
The Church hardly denies that women have souls. So do infants. Having a soul does not make one instantly eligible for the priesthood.
  1. In many modern, “progressive,” philosophies and policies, equal rights, and equal treatment under the law, are desirable.
    Our Lord treated women with more respect than was usually customary for rabbis and religious leaders (and most men) in ancient Palestine region.
Click to expand...
Our Lord also said He would build a Church on Peter, and that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it. The Church, therefore, is right.
  1. There is no sound or convincing reason for excluding women from religion altogether, or from high respectable ranks, or from the priesthood. Our Lord has never been on record ordering women specifically out of any position of high responsibility.
    Women have made considerable contributions to the Church, religion and religious culture thoughout history.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of reasons, as other posters have stated above. Making contributions to the Church, religion, and religious culture are not qualifications for the priesthood.
 
Mark & Marilyn:
The Conservatives allege (or imply):
  1. The difference between men and women is absolute!
  2. a.) Women simply have NO place in the clergy. 😦
    In such a vital role in the Church, they have nothing to contribute. 😦 (not in the clergy, anyway)
2 b.) It may be that God made woman to be the servant of man.
  1. Those women who feel they have a “calling,” or seriously believe that women have a right to become priests, are simply being mislead.
…But many progressives deny all of the above, and insist:
  1. Men and women are essentially made of the same material, spirit, basic human nature, etc., but have differences determined by DNA and hormones, etc. This was not well understood in ancient times. Fact: women have souls, too.
  2. In many modern, “progressive,” philosophies and policies, equal rights, and equal treatment under the law, are desirable.
    Our Lord treated women with more respect than was usually customary for rabbis and religious leaders (and most men) in ancient Palestine region.
  3. There is no sound or convincing reason for excluding women from religion altogether, or from high respectable ranks, or from the priesthood. Our Lord has never been on record ordering women specifically out of any position of high responsibility.
    Women have made considerable contributions to the Church, religion and religious culture thoughout history.
Click to expand...
Jesus picked men for the priesthood. Was he conservative or progressive?
 
Mark & Marilyn:
The Conservatives allege (or imply):
  1. The difference between men and women is absolute!
  2. a.) Women simply have NO place in the clergy. 😦
    In such a vital role in the Church, they have nothing to contribute. 😦 (not in the clergy, anyway)
2 b.) It may be that God made woman to be the servant of man.
  1. Those women who feel they have a “calling,” or seriously believe that women have a right to become priests, are simply being mislead.
.
Click to expand...
This is not a matter of what conservatives beleive as opposed to what liberals believe. The Male Priesthood is settled, infallible ,Catholic Doctrine.
 
There seems to be a radical misunderstanding being made manifest here.

The Priesthood is conferred by the Sacrament of Holy Orders. That Sacrament, like all Sacraments, was not invented by the Church, but received by her, as a part of the Deposit of the Faith. Therefore, changing the Sacrament is out of the question; it is to be guarded as well as accessed; and its examination and exploration is to be under the direction of those vested with the Church’s teaching authority – her Magisterium.

Appeals to real science and the pseudo-science of pop psychology are popular on the issue of priestesses, but it is an error to expect them to give any definitive insight into the question. Neither the science nor the pseudo-science concerns itself with the supernatural at all. In the case of the pseudo-science, its origins are so firmly rooted in atheistic humanism (read Henri Cardinal De Lubac’s “The Drama of Atheistic Humanism” if you doubt that) that bringing it to bear on the question is rather like examining an ant under a magnigying glass outside on a hot, sunny, summer’s day. And arguing from its premises is very much making psychology a religion, as Abraham Maslow attempted to do.

And in the end, it is a question of obedience, and a testimony to how creative humans can get when it comes to justifying disobedience.

There is perhaps room for discussion on “women priests” in the rarified atmosphere of a sociology seminar room, where such discussion would fit right in, but no place for its discussion in Catholic discourse. We should be grateful that the Magisterium has made that clear, as it avoids a lot of wasted time.

Blessings,

Gerry
 
God calls the shots. In the OT only the male descendants of Aaron I believe are priests. No matter how wonderful or faithful a member of another tribe was he could not be a priest. I don’t think many of the prophets were priests so God calls whom he calls but if God can call a single male line of a family to be Levitical priests why is it so crazy that he would call only men to be priests under the new covenant?

God is not a sexist so we must trust His calls and answer the call He is making to you.
 
40.png
estesbob:
This is not a matter of what conservatives beleive as opposed to what liberals believe. The Male Priesthood is settled, infallible ,Catholic Doctrine.
Click to expand...
I just though that the latest pronouncement was that the Church currently didn’t have the authority to change the practice regardless of the merits one way or another?
 
40.png
steveandersen:
I just though that the latest pronouncement was that the Church currently didn’t have the authority to change the practice regardless of the merits one way or another?
Click to expand...
That is correct
 
40.png
steveandersen:
so there’s always hope
Click to expand...
For what ??? :confused:

Perhaps the question was not well formed in the first place. It is not a question of the Church not “currentlly” having the authority to change the Doctrine. The clarification made it clear that the Church had no authority to do so, has no authority to do so, and will have no authority to do so. It is De Fide, a part of the Deposit of the Faith, which cannot be changed.

Blessings,

Gerry
 
40.png
steveandersen:
so there’s always hope
Click to expand...
Reminds me of a scene in “Dumb and Dumber” Jim carry asks Lauren Holly" if there is a chance they can have a relationships. She says not one in a million. he gets excited and exclaims “so theres a chance!!”

Also reminds me of another joke. The Pope asks God will we ever see married Priests? God replies “Not in you lifetime” he then asks if we will ever see female Priests? God replies “not in my lifetime”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top