women priests

[edwest2]

Hello Ed.

Thank you for your respectful and insightful remarks. Yes, it would prove to be a disaster if by allowing the conversation to be held here, others were given the wrong ideas about Church teaching, but this same thing happens every day here at CAF over every other topic. Folks present their own agendas as if they are Church teaching all the time and refuting them and citing sources that expose them, is pretty much a good chunk of what goes on the boards. It goes on and on and on. Making this particular topic out of bounds does say something about it. But it can also say that fear is a huge factor in not discussing it. I guess I’m partial because I am a woman and because I have on more than one occasion found myself suspected of desiring the forbidden just because I’m a woman and happen to have an out-spoken personality or something. It shocked me and left a mark. That is another reason it needs discussion. But hey, I don’t know what is best for everyone and it isn’t my website, so I gotta go along with the pervading trend here because that is what the hosts have decided. It is their call, not mine. I just wish there was a way to talk about it, maybe a heavily monitored special forum for it. It is going to get worse. Eventually we will have to talk about these women and their supporters as they grow in numbers and have their own places of worship that will attract Catholics away from the true Church.

Glenda

Hi Glenda,

I know of no rule that forbids it but the evidence shows that there are too many posters here who will resort to any tactics they see fit, up to and including breaking the rules and getting a thread deleted or locked.

So I say, go for it. Or I will.

Best,
Ed

 

[Tigg]

Hello Tigg.

So are you saying it shouldn’t be spoken of at all?

Glenda

If threads on women priests are being closed my guess is that it is because the subject itself is closed (at least according to the Church.) I have seen on occasion in the apologetics section that the mod will post that the subject of the thread has been asked and answered and then the thread is locked.

I understand your concern that more and more women think they have been ordained, although all that has happened is that they have an incurred an automatic excommunication and I believe they knew beforehand what the penalty would be. We are living in some very sad times of not only apostasy from the faith, but outright defiance of Christ and the authority He has given His Church. No matter how many reject Church teaching, on this subject and others, it can never change the teaching itself and I would doubt that any amount of dialogue would be persuasive. Just my :twocents:

 

[Xeyed818]

Hello Glenda,

You’re right. I agree. However, I think one way to discuss this is to list the reasons or reasoning behind why women want to be priests. An understanding of their reasons can lead to a dialogue here that presents their beliefs and properly, and charitably, shows these beliefs and related historical references, as erroneous and so on. It is against the rules to provide direct links to these sites but I think they can be named for reference purposes since we should be careful to present their views accurately.

I work in the media and watch social trends as part of my job, and as a vocation. The word “inclusive” sounds pleasant but much like military terminology, it covers over or makes something unpleasant or negative sound agreeable or less bad. I know, and have seen a TV commercial, that, based on memory, showed a woman doing some work and there was a female voice-over that said, “I can be a soldier or a construction worker or a priest.”

A fair and accurate presentation of the reasons for this phenomenon would be helpful since though it is a significant issue, it is not the elephant in the room. It is something that needs to be described so that Catholics and anyone else reading, can grasp it.

Best,
Ed

You’re right. I agree. However, I think one way to discuss this is to list the reasons or reasoning behind why women want to be priests.

Didn’t have much luck finding ‘reasons why’ - it’s mostly justifications for women priests. However, here’s a CAF link from 2010 (43 pages)

**Why Do Women Even Want To Be Priests? **

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=510807&page=43

My personal considerations run along the lines of…

The Catholic Church developed a sizable crack in the foundation over the sexual sins of some priests. The devil, ever aware of opportunities to further his cause, is now widening the gap.

With women ‘priests’ comes married priests, and pregnant female ‘priests’ (married or not). And that would just be the beginning of the headlines. “This has catastrophe written all over it.” After ‘priest’ comes…bishops, cardinals…pope (or a panel of them).

(I differentiate ‘priest’ because priestess is too laden; but priest, to me, is male. Of course, like actors and actresses - women could insist on the title not being gender distinctive.)

“A motive before an action is often quite different from the one told (to self or others) after an action.”

Like Margaret Sanger and her ‘real motive’ with Planned Parenthood, I think those who instigated the push for female priests may have had a very different agenda from that given when recruiting for the ‘polished cause’.

PJ

 

[glendab]

Hello Tigg.

If threads on women priests are being closed my guess is that it is because the subject itself is closed (at least according to the Church.) I have seen on occasion in the apologetics section that the mod will post that the subject of the thread has been asked and answered and then the thread is locked.

I understand your concern that more and more women think they have been ordained, although all that has happened is that they have an incurred an automatic excommunication and I believe they knew beforehand what the penalty would be. We are living in some very sad times of not only apostasy from the faith, but outright defiance of Christ and the authority He has given His Church. No matter how many reject Church teaching, on this subject and others, it can never change the teaching itself and I would doubt that any amount of dialogue would be persuasive. Just my :twocents:

I’m not talking about a dialog with them here at CAF. I know that it not okay with the Church and rightly so, but rather an apologetic response to the topic in general so that when the subject does come up, a reasonable and meaningful response can be made. That’s what I’m talking about. I’m not interested in listening to these women at all and dialog with them only provides a platform from which they can give their speeches. I don’t want that to happen at all, but I would like to hear more about it from those who can give solid responses to the trouble. I also would like to talk about the fact that these women aren’t going away and there are more and more people following them and supporting them. I’d like to hear their whys and wherefores.

Glenda

 

[edwest2]

I suggest this book:

amazon.com/The-Catholic-Priesthood-Women-Teaching/dp/1595250166

And I hope this Catholic Answers tract is also helpful:

catholic.com/tracts/women-and-the-priesthood

Peace,
Ed

 

[simpleas]

I suggest this book:

amazon.com/The-Catholic-Priesthood-Women-Teaching/dp/1595250166

And I hope this Catholic Answers tract is also helpful:

catholic.com/tracts/women-and-the-priesthood

Peace,
Ed

Thanks for the link (caf)

I can’t find where it explains why females should not be priest’s, it has similar quotes from various church fathers that I have come across before, but they don’t explain the actual reason.
I realise the church says it does not have the authority to ordain women, but it is the authority, the church acts for God on the earth.

When a statement like “we have not permitted them to teach” is presented, this say’s two things to me. 1. We (church) are in control (authority) and can permit or not, women to teach (priest) if we desire. 2. Women are like another species separate to men, by the use of the word them.

I suppose its how the indiviual reads and understands what the church is actually saying. Some see it as an out of date teaching that needs to move into the present for the future of the church, some would say men only should be priests and women are satisfied supporting priests in their role, bit like a man and wife but not.

It’s an interesting subject, even if the church say’s it’s a closed case. We as individual’s wouldn’t say we shouldn’t talk/discuss it because that makes it seem like the church is controlling men and women, which I suppose to a degree it does!

Thanks.

 

[on_the_hill]

Frankly, personally, I’d rather have celibate women priests than married male priests. But no one is letting me make that decision, so I’ll just stick with the status quo.

 

[Abu]

simpleas #46
I can’t find where it explains why females should not be priest’s, it has similar quotes from various church fathers that I have come across before, but they don’t explain the actual reason.

You may find the following helpful. Please peruse.

Women and the Catholic Priesthood
By Monica Migliorino Miller Wednesday, September 26, 2007,
Monica Migliorino Miller, Ph.D., is associate professor of sacred theology at St. Mary’s College of Madonna University, Orchard Lake, Michigan, and author of Sexuality and Authority in the Catholic Church.
Extracts:
As a Catholic, theologian, and university professor, I know that many Catholics continue to reject Catholic teaching on the all-male priesthood and certainly cannot articulate the Church’s reasons for the teaching, much less defend it.

The Catholic Priesthood and Women is a defense and an interpretation of the Church’s doctrine. It attempts to provide a new generation of young Catholics and, most especially, seminarians with an understanding of the Church’s teaching and give them a “theological orientation to the topic that engages the chief objections.” Its author, Sister Sara Butler, MSBT, is a well-respected theologian who taught at Mundelein Seminary and currently holds a position at St. Joseph’s Seminary in Dunwoodie, New York. She openly confesses in the book’s introduction that for many years she supported the ordination of women. She credits John Paul II’s “theology of the body” and “his response to the feminist critique in the apostolic letter Mulieris Dignitatem (1988)” for her change of heart on this matter.

Butler believes that those who advocate for women in the priesthood are too preoccupied with the theological arguments and do not sufficiently appreciate or understand the “fundamental reasons” for the Church’s position.

The theology of an all-male priesthood has to do with the complementary/nuptial meaning of human sexuality and Christ’s masculine identity as bridegroom to the Church—a marital I/Thou relation that forms the very order of the covenant of salvation itself.

As important as the fundamental reasons are for the all-male priesthood, these reasons must be doctrinally based on something. In the chapter that deals specifically with these reasons, Butler recognizes that doctrinally the male gender of Christ and the Apostles “is not arbitrary, but significant.” Thus a close connection does exist between the fundamental reasons or Church doctrine and the theological reasons. I would argue that, indeed, the doctrine and the theology overlap and begin to merge into one another. This merger is rooted in the fact that the priest acts in persona Christi. This is not simply a theological argument. It is the doctrine of the Church. Acting in the person of Christ means to act in his role as head to the Church. Eucharistically, Christ cannot simply be identified with the Church. He is the head that causes the being of the Church. Christ’s gender is a sign of his headship—his masculinity is a sign of his difference-in-relation to his people.

Catholics need to be well informed on the subject of this book if they are to offer a reasoned defense to a world that fails to appreciate sexual differences, much less the sacramental significance of those differences.
firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2007/09/women-and-the-catholic-priesth

Further:
Why Can’t Women Be Priests in the Catholic Church?
The reasons for the all-male priesthoodBy Scott P. Richert
catholicism.about.com/od/beliefsteachings/f/Women_Priests.htm

 

[Crow_and_dove]

Usually, I see two sides as well, but women priests? I don’t feel it’s right. That’s why there are nuns. When you’re in the religious life, I thought one was dedicating their life to God, not still affected by the worldly world and wanting “equality” for a little too far of reasons. To me, even women ministers I’ve seen (not in real life) look a little out-of-place. It’s like, it should be a man standing there. Why do women still want to be men? I love being a woman. God made us. Male and female, He made us. Isn’t that good enough?

Forgive me if this has already been stated… But do male priests become so due to being affected by the “worldly world”, or because they feel called to serve God?

I really don’t think women priests want to be men any more than male priests want to become women when they serve Christ, “the bridegroom”.

 

[edwest2]

Forgive me if this has already been stated… But do male priests become so due to being affected by the “worldly world”, or because they feel called to serve God?

I really don’t think women priests want to be men any more than male priests want to become women when they serve Christ, “the bridegroom”.

Being a priest is something reserved to men. The suggestion has been that some kind of equality is being sought, but the Church has stated definitively that it has no authority to ordain women.

Ed

 

[Crow_and_dove]

Being a priest is something reserved to men. The suggestion has been that some kind of equality is being sought, but the Church has stated definitively that it has no authority to ordain women.

Ed

Why does it have no authority here when it does elsewhere? I thought the whole point was to act as Christ’s Church on Earth. Christ never stated “no condoms” but the Church can still make authoritative statements on contraception. Did Christ ever forbid the ordination of women?

 

[edwest2]

Why does it have no authority here when it does elsewhere? I thought the whole point was to act as Christ’s Church on Earth. Christ never stated “no condoms” but the Church can still make authoritative statements on contraception. Did Christ ever forbid the ordination of women?

The Church is the only authority that can interpret Scripture correctly. As Pope John Paul ll stated, the Church was given no authority by God to ordain women. That is now carved in stone.

Regarding condoms, the Church has defined the proper meaning of marriage that derives from both Divine revelation and biology, and that includes the purpose of marriage: to be open to bringing new life into the world. Just because the world tells us otherwise or tries to confuse the issue, I saw no such confusion growing up.

If you want, I could link to Pope John Paul II’s full explanation about priestly ordination.

Ed

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Why does it have no authority here when it does elsewhere? I thought the whole point was to act as Christ’s Church on Earth. Christ never stated “no condoms” but the Church can still make authoritative statements on contraception. Did Christ ever forbid the ordination of women?

Ordination is a sacrament.

The Church has no authority to change the matter for sacraments.

Marriage is between one man and one woman. The Church has no authority to institute marriage between two men, or two women.

Baptism is conferred through water. The Church has no authority to change this to champagne, sake, hand sanitizer. . .

The Eucharist is under the form of wheat bread and grape wine. The Church has no authority to change this to beer and pretzels, or even ‘gluten-free’ and grape juice.

When you’re making comparisons as to what you think the Church has the authority to do, compare apples to apples please. And let me know when “The Church” as in the entire complement of bishops and the Pope, issuing a statement to the entire Church to be held as authoritative teaching, ‘changes’ any of the above.

Holy orders is conferred upon members of the male gender. The Church has no more authority to change this than it does to change any of the above.

Do you trust the Church when it teaches the above? If you do, why don’t you trust it regarding Holy Orders? If you don’t, why not? Because frankly, if you don’t trust the Church in the fundamentals, you really don’t know your faith. A house built on sand is going to collapse and fall when the least little wind blows on it. . .

 

[Abu]

Crow_and_dove #51
Why does it have no authority here when it does elsewhere? I thought the whole point was to act as Christ’s Church on Earth. Christ never stated “no condoms” but the Church can still make authoritative statements on contraception. Did Christ ever forbid the ordination of women?

Why did Christ never ordain any women – not even His Blessed Mother – the Queen of the universe?

It is God the Son Himself who came not to destroy but to fulfill, and who instituted the New Covenant of which His Church is His Bride. That is why He instituted the priesthood at the Last Supper for His male Apostles who became in persona Christi, that is, in the very person of Christ, who becomes truly present at the consecration at Mass. It should be quite obvious why Christ chose only men as no woman could be in persona Christi. There is no flaw there, but a failure to accept reality. The fact that Jesus commanded them to “teach all nations” leaves out no one from that mandate.

Excerpts from:
**Joanna Bogle: Women Priests No Chance.
This Rock (October 1997)
Yet the times have often favored a female priesthood and never more so than when Christ ordained His first priests, nearly 2,000 years ago. Virtually all the pagan religions of His day had priestesses, and it would have been entirely normal and natural for Him to choose women for this task. He had, moreover, a number of excellent potential candidates, from His own Mother, who accompanied Him at His first miracle and stood with Him as He suffered on the cross, to Mary Magdalene or the women of Bethany. Instead, He chose only men, and He remained immovable on this, continuing right to the end to exhort and train them all, leaving thus a Church which turned out to be safely founded on a rock. From those twelve men a direct line of apostolic succession has given the Catholic Church the bishops and priests it has today.

On Ordinatio SacerdotalisCongregation 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 [Epistle] 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.”

Joseph Card. Ratzinger
Prefect
ewtn.com/library/curia/cdfrespo.htm

 

[Crow_and_dove]

.
Do you trust the Church when it teaches the above? If you do, why don’t you trust it regarding Holy Orders? If you don’t, why not? Because frankly, if you don’t trust the Church in the fundamentals, you really don’t know your faith. A house built on sand is going to collapse and fall when the least little wind blows on it. . .

Forgive me, I am not Catholic. I am in the process of learning about this faith, so many of my questions do indeed stem out of ignorance. I did not mean to be overly bold, I just don’t yet understand the reasoning behind the Church and her power vs powerlessness yet.

 

[Crow_and_dove]

The Eucharist is under the form of wheat bread and grape wine. The Church has no authority to change this to beer and pretzels, or even ‘gluten-free’ and grape juice…

This is an aside, but I thought mustum and low-gluten bread could be subsituted? Even though they probably didn’t serve grapejuice or worry about wheat allergies during the Last Supper.

 

[Tesseract]

Holy orders is conferred upon members of the male gender.

You meant male SEX, not male gender.

“Sex” refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women.

“Gender” refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women.

 

[edwest2]

Forgive me, I am not Catholic. I am in the process of learning about this faith, so many of my questions do indeed stem out of ignorance. I did not mean to be overly bold, I just don’t yet understand the reasoning behind the Church and her power vs powerlessness yet.

Welcome. The Church was given the authority by God to correctly interpret the Bible as to what it could and could not do. Through its Teaching Authority, it is not men who decide but a careful study of what God has told the Church that decides. In this case, Jesus Christ, as God, and without being influenced by things that were practiced when He was here, established His order for His Church. Power, as I understand the common meaning, is too often used to force others, including institutions, to do something they don’t want or can’t do.

Regarding this topic, here is the full explanation:

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

Ed

 

[Crow_and_dove]

Welcome. The Church was given the authority by God to correctly interpret the Bible as to what it could and could not do. Through its Teaching Authority, it is not men who decide but a careful study of what God has told the Church that decides. In this case, Jesus Christ, as God, and without being influenced by things that were practiced when He was here, established His order for His Church. Power, as I understand the common meaning, is too often used to force others, including institutions, to do something they don’t want or can’t do.

Regarding this topic, here is the full explanation:

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

Ed

If the Church has been empowered to interpret Scripture (because I am not aware of a passage in which Jesus actually forbids women from any priesthood), She is far from powerless, and this is the key to the controversy, I think. Whatever is believed about the Holy Spirit guiding the Church, there will always be people who interpret the Scriptures differently - both outside and within Catholicism. There will remain those who hope for a closed door to open again.

 

[edwest2]

If the Church has been empowered to interpret Scripture (because I am not aware of a passage in which Jesus actually forbids women from any priesthood), She is far from powerless, and this is the key to the controversy, I think. Whatever is believed about the Holy Spirit guiding the Church, there will always be people who interpret the Scriptures differently - both outside and within Catholicism. There will remain those who hope for a closed door to open again.

This will definitely not happen. Listening to the Church is preferable to listening to men regarding this matter. Yes, there are dissidents inside and outside the Church but informed obedience to the Church is necessary.

Ed