Women Priests?

[PRmerger]

That teaching that is touted so widely today has not been proclaimed from the Chair of Peter (Ex Cathedra). The all male priesthood is based solely on tradition, and northing more. It is not an infallible dogma of the Church.

Are you of the opinion that only Ex Cathedra teachings are to be given our religions assent?

 

[PRmerger]

That teaching that is touted so widely today has not been proclaimed from the Chair of Peter (Ex Cathedra). The all male priesthood is based solely on tradition, and northing more. It is not an infallible dogma of the Church.

Perhaps you are unaware that Sacred Tradition is the Word of God?

The CC professes that God’s Revelation comes to us through 2 channels: Sacred Scripture AND Sacred Tradition.

So it is a peculiar comment of yours to say something is based “solely on tradition”. If by that you mean “culture” then I can see how you would attach “solely” to it. But I can assure you that the all-male priesthood is not based, at all, on custom.

If by “solely on tradition” you are referring to Sacred Tradition, you ought to be very, very careful about attaching such a dismissive attitude to a channel of the Word of God.

 

[benjohnson]

The person that fills the deaconate position has the same duties, whether male or female.

I’ll see your two (confused) priests and raise you a Pope.

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

“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.”

Here’s an observation - if a Lutheran can figure out Catholic teaching, then you can too.

 

[hn160]

The only reason women are not priests is because it was not culturally acceptable in that age, the age that Christ lived. If you looked at all the cultures during that time you will not find women in power positions. It was not safe to make women missionaries and send them out on mission because of the terrible things that might happen to them. Those were heathen times and the only place a woman was safe was in her home surrounded by her family.

I have had priests tell me there is no theological reason why a woman can’t be ordained a priest. Up to about 450 AD there was an estimated 1,600 women deacons in the Church, but from that time forward were gradually pushed out of the deaconate. The Greek Orthodox Church, to this day, has ordained women deacons. Their chain of women deacons has been unbroken from the time of the Apostles. It did fade for awhile, but has come back with a gusto within the past two hundred years. Wait and see. I believe that Pope Francis will give the OK for women deacons. The time of women ordination to the priesthood will surely come, but probably not in our time. :bighanky::

Then the words of St. Paul don’t matter or were they for that time only? The word of God can not be changed.

 

[Moonbug]

Perhaps you are unaware that Sacred Tradition is the Word of God?

The CC professes that God’s Revelation comes to us through 2 channels: Sacred Scripture AND Sacred Tradition.

So it is a peculiar comment of yours to say something is based “solely on tradition”. If by that you mean “culture” then I can see how you would attach “solely” to it. But I can assure you that the all-male priesthood is not based, at all, on custom.

If by “solely on tradition” you are referring to Sacred Tradition, you ought to be very, very careful about attaching such a dismissive attitude to a channel of the Word of God.

Yes, it is solely traditional. Please note! I said nothing about Sacred Tradition. We are talking about tradition in a sociological sense. The cultural bindings have eased through the centuries, but they are still culturally binding. There was no visible evidence of a priesthood as we know it today. until toward the end of the second century. Up until that time, women played an important part in the development of the Church. Saint Photini, the woman at the well, was proclaimed by Peter himself as “Equal to the Apostles” because of her missionary zeal and her passionate preaching. After the reign of Constantine, a structured hierarchy began to evolve,.Sacred Tradition is not always a channel for the Word of God. Sacred tradition in ages past affirmed that slavery was permissible. It was, but not now. It was believed that all suicides went straight to hell, but no longer,—mental illness—benefit of a doubt. Unbaptized infants who die without baptism were not permitted to be buried is concerted ground (same for suicides). That teaching has changed also.

These are non-essentials of our faith, but they profoundly effected Catholic families in the past. Latin is no longer required to say Mass. Things change, the World changes.

 

[PRmerger]

Yes, it is solely traditional. Please note! I said nothing about Sacred Tradition. We are talking about tradition in a sociological sense. The cultural bindings have eased through the centuries, but they are still culturally binding. There was no visible evidence of a priesthood as we know it today. until toward the end of the second century. Up until that time, women played an important part in the development of the Church. Saint Photini, the woman at the well, was proclaimed by Peter himself as “Equal to the Apostles” because of her missionary zeal and her passionate preaching.

Were you under the impression that the CC has ever declared that women are NOT equal to anyone??

 

[PRmerger]

. Sacred tradition in ages past affirmed that slavery was permissible.

You need to offer some sort of documentation for this, please.

It was believed that all suicides went straight to hell, but no longer,—mental illness—benefit of a doubt.

And for this.

Unbaptized infants who die without baptism were not permitted to be buried is concerted ground (same for suicides). That teaching has changed also.

Yes, it has changed. That is a discipline of the Church, and as such, these disciplines can and will change.

A male-only priesthood is not a discipline of the Church.

These are non-essentials of our faith, but they profoundly effected Catholic families in the past. Latin is no longer required to say Mass. Things change, the World changes.

Indeed. And thank goodness for the development of doctrine!

However, you cannot disregard the very plain teaching of the magisterium regarding the inability to ordain women.

Can you comment on this statement from our pope?

“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.”

 

[Isaiah45_9]

These are non-essentials of our faith, but they profoundly effected Catholic families in the past. Latin is no longer required to say Mass. Things change, the World changes.

I don’t think you read Blessed John Paul II Apostolic Letter: Ordinatio Sacerdotalis

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.

 

[Moonbug]

Were you under the impression that the CC has ever declared that women are NOT equal to anyone??

Absolutely not. The Church has always held women in great respect. In the old tradition of the Hebrew faith, many women have played pivotal roles in their history. The Book of Ruth, the Book of Esther, Both were essential to God’s plan for the Hebrew people. Where would our Church be without the Blessed Virgin Mary? Or without the devoted service of Mary Magdalena. Many of the proclaimed “Doctors of the Church” are women.

Remember St Paul’s instructions to his helpers in the various Christian communities he wrote his letters to on how to find those who were to officiate at the breaking of the bread. It was simple and to the point, and you will notice that he never mentioned gender. Now you might say, "He didn’t have to for it was understood that women were excluded. If that is so, then why are so many women mentioned in “The Acts” and in “Paul’s Letters” as being leaders in their various communities? :bible1:

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Absolutely not. The Church has always held women in great respect. In the old tradition of the Hebrew faith, many women have played pivotal roles in their history. The Book of Ruth, the Book of Esther, Both were essential to God’s plan for the Hebrew people. Where would our Church be without the Blessed Virgin Mary? Or without the devoted service of Mary Magdalena. Many of the proclaimed “Doctors of the Church” are women.

Remember St Paul’s instructions to his helpers in the various Christian communities he wrote his letters to on how to find those who were to officiate at the breaking of the bread. It was simple and to the point, and you will notice that he never mentioned gender. Now you might say, "He didn’t have to for it was understood that women were excluded. If that is so, then why are so many women mentioned in “The Acts” and in “Paul’s Letters” as being leaders in their various communities? :bible1:

I think your browser is blocking Ordinatio Sacerdotalis

 

[PRmerger]

Absolutely not. The Church has always held women in great respect. In the old tradition of the Hebrew faith, many women have played pivotal roles in their history. The Book of Ruth, the Book of Esther, Both were essential to God’s plan for the Hebrew people. Where would our Church be without the Blessed Virgin Mary? Or without the devoted service of Mary Magdalena. Many of the proclaimed “Doctors of the Church” are women.

'zactly.

So it’s inutile to comment on Peter declaring the woman at the well to be “equal to the Apostles”.

 

[Reuben_J]

I don’t think you read Blessed John Paul II Apostolic Letter: Ordinatio Sacerdotalis

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.

Indeed. We were discussing on the Creed in the CCC the other night on the portion of the Church having a Teaching Office, the Magisterium. We invariably touched upon JPII Ordinatio-Sacerdotalis. This is interesting because the Pope did not speak Ex-Cathedra in the document but yet the proclamation that priestly ordination is not for women is infallible.

The infallibility falls under the Universal Ordinary Magisterium – teachings not formally defined but constantly taught and believed throughout the history of the Church. This is interesting in that the infallibility of Pope JP II statement on this comes from the belief of the Church and that he spoke infallibly because this certain infallibility comes from the Church.

 

[benjohnson]

This is interesting because the Pope did not speak Ex-Cathedra in the document but yet the proclamation that priestly ordination is not for women is infallible.

Even this Lutheran would say that because the Pope is reiterating the truth, not only does the Pope speak for Catholics, but all of Christendom.

Moonbean, Our friend in Christ, you may want to look at this if you have the time. I promise[1] that it’s not Ordinatio Sacerdotalis . Click here.

[1] Lutherans are scoundrels of the highest order.

 

[MarcoPolo]

I have had priests tell me there is no theological reason why a woman can’t be ordained a priest.

Curious which priests told you this? Names?

 

[zz912]

1. The only reason women are not priests is because it was not culturally acceptable in that age, the age that Christ lived. If you looked at all the cultures during that time you will not find women in power positions.
2. I have had priests tell me there is no theological reason why a woman can’t be ordained a priest.
3. Up to about 450 AD there was an estimated 1,600 women deacons in the Church, but from that time forward were gradually pushed out of the deaconate.
4. The Greek Orthodox Church, to this day, has ordained women deacons. Their chain of women deacons has been unbroken from the time of the Apostles.

1. This is completely, factually wrong. Priestesses were plentiful in the culture of the time. In fact it was all over. Where did you get this incorrect belief from?
2. Those priests were wrong, or ignorant. There are plenty of theological reasons why, and it has been laid out clearly, especially on these boards.
3. They were never ordained deacons. The female deacons in the first centuries were never ordained, and they only assisted in things that the men could not, such as baptizing women (for modesty sake). They were never ordained.
4. No, they have NEVER ordained a woman as a deacon or priest in the sacramental sense. That is scandalous to claim such a lie about the Greek Orthodox Church. The only deaconess titles were not holy orders, but honors given to Abbesses.

 

[Contarini]

1. This is completely, factually wrong. Priestesses were plentiful in the culture of the time. In fact it was all over.

Yes, but these were ritual functions, not leadership functions. Or can you give me evidence to the contrary?

It was commonly accepted in the culture that women could not exercise positions of authority because they were less rational than men. This is the reason consistently given by Christians until very recent times for why women should not be ordained.

1. They were never ordained deacons. The female deacons in the first centuries were never ordained,

How do you know this? They certainly had more restricted functions. But do we actually have primary sources that clearly distinguish between “ordained” and “non-ordained” versions of the diaconal office in this way? This seems just as strained to me as the claims on the other side that there used to be female priests (in the Catholic/Orthodox Church–we all know that there were female priests in heretical churches).

Edwin

 

[benjohnson]

Yes, but these were ritual functions, not leadership functions. Or can you give me evidence to the contrary?

Do we have to stick to Jews? If not:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God%27s_Wife_of_Amun
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categoryriestesses_of_the_Roman_Empire

You point (I presume) that were weren’t many priestess is true. The conclusion that Jesus was just a pawn of his culture doesn’t nesesserly follow - even Jews had Ester and Deborah. Recall that Deborah lead an army to fight and die in battle - truly the ultimate in leadership. What’s noteworthy is that their introduction in the Bible doesn’t remark that these powerful women were some sort of novelty.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Deaconesses were the forerunners for women priests. Lutherans in north America have a long history of deaconess in schools, hospitals, social services with many motherhouses.

The first photo is the consecration of deaconesses in 1948. The second photo is recent consecration of deacons and deaconess in the LCMS. The day is coming when the Missouri Synod yields to ordaining these women.

elca.org/Who-We-Are/History/ELCA-Archives/Exhibits/Lutheran-Deaconess-History.aspx

 

[benjohnson]

The day is coming when the Missouri Synod yields to ordaining these women.

All of our deaconesses are highly trained and are awesome messengers of the gospel. Hence, none clamor for to be a pseudo-pastors. Unlike others, they actually know their scripture.

 

[SteveVH]

God is not subject to the cultures of men. Jesus broke many cultural taboos; speaking with the Samaritan woman at the well, defending a prostitute, eating with tax collectors, etc., etc. The very idea that Jesus was limited by the culture in which he lived is ludicrous. Yet he never chose a woman to be an Apostle.