Women In the Priesthood

[Heathen_Dawn]

mercygate:

Heathen (I’m still reeling from the revelation that you are a man),

Oh? Why?

I am a woman educated as an Episcopal Priest. Nobody in the history of Christendom ever coveted Priesthood more than I. But when I honestly asked myself, what I really wanted, the answer was that the only priesthood I was interested in was the Priesthood of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. And that was in the Catholic Church.

I have that now as a lay Catholic in a way I never could have had it functioning at the altar as an Episcopalian.

The ordained Priesthood is a priesthood of the altar. Mine is the priesthood of the flesh. I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of the Lord than to dwell in the tents of Kedar.

Good for you … but there are many women who wouldn’t consider the Catholic Church just because of this issue.

JamesS:

Heathendawn requested proof from the Bible where it says specifically women 'can’t be priests.

1 Corinthians, Ch 14 V 34-39

"As in all the churches of the Saints, the women should keep silence in the churches. For they should not be permitted to speak. But should be subordinate, as even the law says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them asks their husbans at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in Church. What did the word of God originate from you, or are you the only ones it has reached.

From the NT, yes. I’m glad I don’t believe this is the Word of God. Just remember, the terrorist attacks on the USA are for the reason that certain people believe that killing infidels is in their Word of God. They can’t change their stance on this any more than you can change your stance on the ordination of women. Because Scripture says so.

Greg_McPherran:

1 Cor 11:7-9 A man, on the other hand, should not cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; nor was man created for woman, but woman for man;

A woman did not write the Bible, that’s for sure.

WBB:

No, your understanding of the Catholic stance is clouded by your pagan religion. Only society with its neo-pagan attitudes blurs the line.

The pagan values are the modern values. The Catholic values, it seems to me, are similar to the values in Saudi Arabia. In my own former religion, Orthodox Judaism, women are not allowed to testify in court. Why? Because they’re women. Into all the Abrahamic religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, is patriarchy built. The 10th commandment lumps woman together with oxen and donkeys as man’s possessions.

DeniseR:

Men are the only ones who can be priests.

Women are the only ones who can give birth.

There are just some things in natural law that can’t be changed.

This isn’t a natural law, this is a very, very artificial law. Women can be priestesses. Not in Catholicism, right—but not because of women’s inability, but because of the law, the unnatural law made by the ecclesiastical authorities (or Jesus himself—doesn’t change my point).

(cont. on next)

 

[Heathen_Dawn]

(cont. from previous)
Tantum ergo:

The priesthood is NOT the “heart of spiritual life”. The priesthood is a VOCATION.

I don’t think so. It’s a vocation, yes, but also the closest to spiritual life you can get. It’s full-time devotion to holy things.

Marriage is a vocation. Single life is a vocation.

I disagree completely. Marriage is a necessity, and single life is the previous state.

Three: The issue of “women priests” is, was, and WILL BE closed. Priesthood is a sacrament, and sacraments need VALID MATTER. Just as the issue of the sacrament of marriage requires as VALID MATTER one MAN and one WOMAN, and may NOT be changed. Just as the issue of the sacrament of the Eucharist requires as VALID MATTER wheat bread and grape wine, from the mustum state at the very beginning of fermentation through fully fermented wine, and may NOT be changed.

Now, you could (and apparently you are) argue that nothing can stop you from having Adam and Steve come forward and recite vows, even in some church, and be CALLED “married”.

You can take nachos and beer, have some “priest” come forward and supposedly “Consecrate” them, and CALLl it “Eucharist”.

You can take a woman, have her receive “Holy Orders” and CALL her a “priest”.

You can also go to a court and legally get yourself to be CALLED “Jesus”. . .but that doesn’t make you the second person in the Trinity.

Adam and Steve together are not valid matter–therefore, there is no sacrament of matrimony for them–EVER.
Nachos and beer are not valid matter–therefore, they are not Eucharist. Ever.
A woman demanding Holy Orders is not valid matter–therefore, she may not be a priest. Ever.

A human being is not GOD ALMIGHTY, so a human may not presume to override God’s own law with impunity. Ever.

I can agree homosexual marriage won’t work, for the simple reason that it could never produce offspring. But your discounting of women priests rests upon bare assertion. Following the Eucharist analogy—you say nachos and beer consecrated by a priest are still nachos and beer, while bread and wine consecrated by a priest is actually the body and blood of Jesus. Well, there is dispute over that from infidels like me, in that I don’t see anything distinguishing between untranssubstantiated nachos and beer and transsubstantiated bread and wine. All you have for your case is mere say-so—Scripture and Tradition that people have to take on faith.

Faith isn’t necessary a bad thing—I’m an ex-atheist, I know this. But faith can be misused to sanction bad things, such as the inequality of the sexes, as we can see here.

 

[jimmy]

caroljm36:

Not theological grounds, but women priests would drive out men. In 100 years all priests would be priestesses. But we NEED men–due to their frail phychological makeup, they could do the Church a lot of damage from without. The exclusive privilege of priesthood gives them a reason to stay in and keep it all together.

And no, I have NO substantiation for these assertions!

Now carol, we aren’t that bad.

 

[DianJo]

WBB:

Well, you are correct, but if I may elaborate a little. Society defines the roles of man as hunter, fisherman, athletic…these are roles that woman can fill as well. Similarly, society defines the roles of woman as homemaker, seamstress, nurse…these are roles that men can fill as well. The Church see men and women differently in that there are certain roles that men can fill that women cannot and vice versa. Men can be two things that women cannot…a husband and father. Likewise, women have 3 roles that men cannot fill…wife, mother, and suckling an infant at her breast. By virtue of this fact it can be seen that women cannot be priests because the priest is “Father” of his parish, and as he functions in persona Christi he is the “husband” of his Church parish. This is the simplest explanation I have ever come across, and the one that makes the most sense. Simply put, a woman cannot be a priest any more than she can be a father or a husband.

Great clarification!!! Especially the part I bolded!
Thanks.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

So, Heathen Dawn, as I read it, you’re saying, “I am not a Catholic, nor even a non Catholic Christian, and therefore since I don’t believe in your religion, I don’t have to accept any rationales you might give.”

In other words, while we are expected to accept that you have your own belief, which you profess, because you have reasoned it to be “true for you”, we cannot be given the same courtesy from you.

We aren’t asking you to accept Catholicism for yourself. What we are asking–nay, requiring–is that you “play fair”. You are not. You are attempting to extrapolate your beliefs, your worldview, your mindset, your polemics, into our religious beliefs. You’re attempting to take our beliefs and make them “correct”–by your definition. . .without any proof that yours is* itself* the correct definition, and ours is not.

So please, do us all a favor. Don’t try to tell us what is the “heart of our spirituality”. Don’t try to tell us who can and who can’t be a priest. Don’t try to tell us what we should believe, what you think we* do* believe, and all the things that perfect you find wrong in our faith. In return, we won’t try to tell you what you believe, who can’t be a priest, priestess, god or goddess in your religion, what we think you believe, and all the things that perfect we find wrong in your faith.

 

[DianJo]

mercygate:

Women in leadership? Many women are now in leadership and ministerial roles. Liturgical coordinators, parish administrators, members of diocesan commissions, diocesan canon lawyers, and such. The Pope has appointed women to theological faculties in Rome and to other advisory boards. They are also involved in evangelical ministries and important pro-life ministries. The Holy Spirit is calling women (and laymen in general) to a vast and exciting field of opportunities.

Thanks, mercygate! I am a women and I have felt “the calling” of service to God. I do whatever I can to serve: Pastoral Council and Youth Formation for the parish, Divisional and hourly coordinator of our Perpetual Adoration Chapel, CCD teacher 10th grade, graduate of New Wine (a 3 year diocese wide lay training program), Linen committee (care for the church linens used at Mass), committe for our parish’s 100th year anniversary. I regularly help others from other committees that need additonal help. So women are not thought of as second class citizens. On the contrary, we are utilized to the best of our abilities and I feel very privilged to be able to answer God’s call.

God had a purpose in calling Adam to be the head of the “household” and putting Christ as the head of the Church. I repect His judgment and I submit to it willingly.

 

[WBB]

Heathen Dawn:

The pagan values are the modern values.

Yes, we have a name for that. Zeitgeist. “Modern” values are those that are here today and gone tomorrow. However, the values of the Catholic Church have stood for millenia.

 

[mercygate]

Heathen?

You turned your back on Orthodox Judaism for Wicca? You gave up Abraham, Moses, the Prophets, Judges and Kings for Wicca?

Of course, we don’t know what stripe of Orthodoxy you came from, and maybe you were in one of those extremely restrictive sects (I’m in metro New York, so I know about extreme groups), but modern Orthodoxy is doing lot of serious halachic work on how to bridge the culture gap between certain aspects of Jewish law and the obvious talent, capability and achievements of women. One of my colleagues, a modern Orthodox Jew, served for two years as president of her schul.

 

[mtr01]

Heathen Dawn:

I don’t think so. It’s a vocation, yes, but also the closest to spiritual life you can get. It’s full-time devotion to holy things…

This is not limited to the priesthood. In fact if full-time devotion to holy things is your criterion, then the priesthood is most definitely *not *the “closest thing to spiritual life you can get”, as a priest has various “wordly” issues to deal with in the administration of his parish. On the contrary, the consecrated life as a religious, especially those cloistered in a contemplative order would be not merely the “closest thing” to spiritual life, but the actual unadulterated spiritual life. The best part? It’s available to women as well as men.

 

[DianJo]

Tantum ergo:

Back to Heathen and others. . .

It strikes me that the “concern” you seem to feel that we women are UNFAIRLY (in your opinion) “kept from the heart of spiritual life” is somewhat disingenuous.

One: The priesthood is NOT the “heart of spiritual life”. The priesthood is a VOCATION. Marriage is a vocation. Single life is a vocation. The “heart” of spiritual life is not any given VOCATION–the heart of spiritual life is GOD ALMIGHTY. I am not “kept from the heart of spiritual life” by anything other than MY OWN WILL IF I CHOOSE SIN INSTEAD OF GOD.

Two: I am no “closer” to God, nor am I “better” than others, in my given vocation than is anyone else. God does not “prefer” priests, or married people, or single people. All have unique and special roles to play. May I remind you that the saints were not all priests? That we have, not only married people, single people, men and women of every race, as saints?

Three: The issue of “women priests” is, was, and WILL BE closed. Priesthood is a sacrament, and sacraments need VALID MATTER. Just as the issue of the sacrament of marriage requires as VALID MATTER one MAN and one WOMAN, and may NOT be changed. Just as the issue of the sacrament of the Eucharist requires as VALID MATTER wheat bread and grape wine, from the mustum state at the very beginning of fermentation through fully fermented wine, and may NOT be changed.

Now, you could (and apparently you are) argue that nothing can stop you from having Adam and Steve come forward and recite vows, even in some church, and be CALLED “married”.

You can take nachos and beer, have some “priest” come forward and supposedly “Consecrate” them, and CALLl it “Eucharist”.

You can take a woman, have her receive “Holy Orders” and CALL her a “priest”.

You can also go to a court and legally get yourself to be CALLED “Jesus”. . .but that doesn’t make you the second person in the Trinity.

Adam and Steve together are not valid matter–therefore, there is no sacrament of matrimony for them–EVER.
Nachos and beer are not valid matter–therefore, they are not Eucharist. Ever.
A woman demanding Holy Orders is not valid matter–therefore, she may not be a priest. Ever.

A human being is not GOD ALMIGHTY, so a human may not presume to override God’s own law with impunity. Ever.

ABSOLUTELY FANTASTIC POST!!!

 

[Heathen_Dawn]

Tantum ergo:

So, Heathen Dawn, as I read it, you’re saying, “I am not a Catholic, nor even a non Catholic Christian, and therefore since I don’t believe in your religion, I don’t have to accept any rationales you might give.”

In other words, while we are expected to accept that you have your own belief, which you profess, because you have reasoned it to be “true for you”, we cannot be given the same courtesy from you.

What a lot of reading into things. I’m only participating in a discussion board, for goodness’s sake! I wanted a window into your mind, I wanted to know why women aren’t allowed to be priests in your religion, and I wanted to know if there’s a substantial reason for this. OK, I get the message: this is all arbitrary, the only reason is that Scripture and Tradition say so. That was all I wanted to know. Thank you.

We aren’t asking you to accept Catholicism for yourself. What we are asking–nay, requiring–is that you “play fair”. You are not. You are attempting to extrapolate your beliefs, your worldview, your mindset, your polemics, into our religious beliefs. You’re attempting to take our beliefs and make them “correct”–by your definition. . .without any proof that yours is* itself* the correct definition, and ours is not.

I don’t care what you do. I’ve seen what goes on: no communion for non-Catholics, no priesthood for women, etc etc. It’s your right, and it’s my learning that religion can often be a source for much unniceness. Then again, I live in a country where people are killed daily in the name of God and religion, so this is nothing new.

Don’t try to tell us what is the “heart of our spirituality”.

I’ll tell you what I think it is, and you can disagree with me.

Don’t try to tell us who can and who can’t be a priest.

I ain’t. As I said: this thread caught my interest, and I was just inquiring whether the CC’s stance against the ordination of women had a good reason or not. Now that I’ve got my answer, I won’t bother you anymore.

Don’t try to tell us what we should believe, what you think we* do* believe, and all the things that perfect you find wrong in our faith. In return, we won’t try to tell you what you believe, who can’t be a priest, priestess, god or goddess in your religion, what we think you believe, and all the things that perfect we find wrong in your faith.

You’ve really been offended by my participation in this thread, and I can see that from your attributing things to me I never thought of doing. I’m awfully sorry you feel that way, and I won’t continue participation in this thread. Still, however offensive it may be, I think it doesn’t reach a tenth of the intentionally malicious offence you get from the Protestants.

 

[Heathen_Dawn]

mercygate:

You turned your back on Orthodox Judaism for Wicca? You gave up Abraham, Moses, the Prophets, Judges and Kings for Wicca?

Yup. I was an Orthodox Jew for two years. I’ll send you a PM with a link to my article where I explain why I left Orthodox Judaism.

Of course, we don’t know what stripe of Orthodoxy you came from, and maybe you were in one of those extremely restrictive sects (I’m in metro New York, so I know about extreme groups),

I was an Ultra-Orthodox Jew (you know, those with the black hats and suits).

but modern Orthodoxy is doing lot of serious halachic work on how to bridge the culture gap between certain aspects of Jewish law and the obvious talent, capability and achievements of women. One of my colleagues, a modern Orthodox Jew, served for two years as president of her schul.

They change things de facto, but they do not change things de jure—that is, they leave the Halakhah (Jewish law-code) as it is, with the chauvinistic decrees unmodified. So their work for gender equality can easily be undone in the next generation (part of it has—the trend of letting boys and girls dance together was ruthlessly suppressed in the 1980s).

 

[shannon_e]

Heathen,
I don’t know if you saw the response I posted to your following question: if not, it’s #68:
Heathen Dawn:

But my question still stands: prophetesses yes, priestesses no-- WHY? What’s so special about the priesthood that only men can be members of it? Is there any reason behind this, or is it plain arbitrary?

I’d like to comment about the following exchange:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tantum ergo
The priesthood is NOT the “heart of spiritual life”. The priesthood is a VOCATION.

I don’t think so. It’s a vocation, yes, but also the closest to spiritual life you can get. It’s full-time devotion to holy things.

Quote:
Marriage is a vocation. Single life is a vocation.
I disagree completely. Marriage is a necessity, and single life is the previous state.(end quote)

Heathen, in our faith, to use your wording, we are all called to a “full-time devotion to holy things.” That is why we say that all states of life are vocations. All are of equal importance and of equal value. They are the same mission expressed differently.

Peace to you.

 

[shannon_e]

Heathen,
I don’t know if you saw the response I posted to your following question: if not, it’s #68:
Heathen Dawn:

But my question still stands: prophetesses yes, priestesses no-- WHY? What’s so special about the priesthood that only men can be members of it? Is there any reason behind this, or is it plain arbitrary?

I’d like to comment about the following exchange:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tantum ergo
The priesthood is NOT the “heart of spiritual life”. The priesthood is a VOCATION.

quote by HD: I don’t think so. It’s a vocation, yes, but also the closest to spiritual life you can get. It’s full-time devotion to holy things.

Quote: (by Tantum ergo)
Marriage is a vocation. Single life is a vocation.
quote by HD: I disagree completely. Marriage is a necessity, and single life is the previous state.(end quote)

Heathen, in our faith, to use your wording, we are all called to a “full-time devotion to holy things.” That is why we say that all states of life are vocations. All are of equal importance and of equal value. They are the same mission expressed differently.

Peace to you.

 

[J.R]

Heathen Dawn:

Yup. I was an Orthodox Jew for two years. I’ll send you a PM with a link to my article where I explain why I left Orthodox Judaism.

I was an Ultra-Orthodox Jew (you know, those with the black hats and suits).

They change things de facto, but they do not change things de jure—that is, they leave the Halakhah (Jewish law-code) as it is, with the chauvinistic decrees unmodified. So their work for gender equality can easily be undone in the next generation (part of it has—the trend of letting boys and girls dance together was ruthlessly suppressed in the 1980s).

Heathen, I was wondering where you went. We never finished our discussion on souls. Please return to that post and continue. Thanks

 

[mercygate]

Heathen Dawn:

Yup. I was an Orthodox Jew for two years.

Whoa. Two whole years? Half of me is thinking you hardly gave it a shot, but the other half of me knows that if you weren’t born to it, two years is pretty impressive. Most people wouldn’t even TRY.

I getcha about the halachic thing. I truly respect Jewish halacha and ethical thinking, and in my work, I encounter extraordinary and difficult cases, but there does also seem to be a fair amount of “this is what I want to do, Rabbi, so figure out some legal rationalization that will allow me to do it.”

 

[Pious_Redeemer]

There even has been a female pope. Historians call her pope Johanna. That’s the reason why every new pope was ‘touched’ to check whether he had testicles or not.

 

[puzzleannie]

there has never been a female pope, that is the medieval version of an urban legend, actually and anti-Catholic hoax the specifics of which have been posted several times on this forum, check out the tracts on the CA homepage.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Pious Redeemer:

There even has been a female pope. Historians call her pope Johanna. That’s the reason why every new pope was ‘touched’ to check whether he had testicles or not.

Wait now… he pope is “touched”? Where did you learn that from?

 

[mlchance]

Pious Redeemer:

There even has been a female pope. Historians call her pope Johanna. That’s the reason why every new pope was ‘touched’ to check whether he had testicles or not.

Historians also know that the so-called female pope is a medieval legend. She never existed.

– Mark L. Chance.