Women's Ordination

[SouthernSister]

Can someone please tell me where my Priest has an idea that women’s ordination is a possibility in the future? He readily admits that it’s not possible now but is suggesting that it’s something that could be changed. I say it’s an infallible doctrine that only baptized me can be ordained.

Can someone verify and please provide the resource documents?

Thanks.

SouthernSister

 

[arieh0310]

John Paul II’s Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis
Then Cardinal Razinger’s clarification

…and a thorough treating at Pontifications

 

[Brain]

It always astounds me how people still think this is up for debate.

 

[stbruno]

We also discussed the genius of womanhood that our late great pope discussed in his Theology of the body while on retreat last week. This very hot button topic was discussed.Fr.Thomas Loya explained why women’s ordination is not going to happen, not only because that our current Pope will not do it, but no future popes will do it either. It is because, Christ is the Bridegroom the Church…we hear it taught to us in the old and new testaments. The church is his bride…the very tabernacle which welcomes his body. Woman has a special place in her body by nature…it is a tabernacle as well to welcome the bridegroom. If she becomes the bridegroom there is no bride…Please read up more on this amazing document and offer your priest the Christopher West book…Theology of the Body for Beginners. I think most of our priests are totally unaware of this amazing catechesis which will revolutionize the world if is taught as it was meant to be taught.

 

[SouthernSister]

Brain:

It always astounds me how people still think this is up for debate.

Why is that? I think it might have to do with a misunderstanding of when the Holy Father is infallible and when he is not…?

SouthernSister

 

[otm]

It comnes from a period where seminarians were taught with less than orthodox “information” concerning doctrinal development. Many were taught that unless something is defined “ex cathedra” (and most theologians would hold that only 2 things have been so defined - the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception), that it is something that can “evolve” and “change”.

There seems to be an implicit assumption that priests know everything about everything that has to do with the Church - the are supposedly doctrinal experts, moral experts, biblical research experts, experts at counseling all sorts of problems, including but not limited to marital counseling, liturgical experts; the list goes on and on.

And form that assumption flows the anger and disbelief that Father “So and So” would go off in such directions.

The truth is that like anyone in any other field, some know more, some know less; some were good students, some were not; some had interests in some areas, others in other areas. And over all of this is the fact that starting from the dissent which blew up after Humanae Vitae, and the abysmal failure of the bishops, Cardinals and Popes to reign in wayward theologians and professors in seminaries, there was a period of speculative (a.k.a. “cutting edge”) theology, which all too often got passed of as the latest, greatest stuff, so much better than that old, stuffy, “out of date” theology of yester year. So often, that is what Father was taught, by professors and theologians he respected, and he flat doesn’t know any better or get it.

If you think that is not possible, look through these threads and see the kind of questions that get brought up.

 

[arieh0310]

SouthernSister:

Why is that? I think it might have to do with a misunderstanding of when the Holy Father is infallible and when he is not…?

From 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.

How can it be read any other way? It meets all the criteria of an infallible statement: he had the intent to define or clarify doctrine, he is giving a definitive judgement, and he is requiring the assent of all the Church’s faithful. I don’t see any wiggle room.

Even if this statement wasn’t somehow infallible even fallible papal pronouncements require our obedience. To quote Cardinal Newman: “[the See of Peter] is not in all cases infallible, it may err beyond its special province, but it has in all cases a claim on our obedience.”

 

[porthos11]

arieh0310:

From Ordinatio Sacerdotalis:

How can it be read any other way? It meets all the criteria of an infallible statement: he had the intent to define or clarify doctrine, he is giving a definitive judgement, and he is requiring the assent of all the Church’s faithful. I don’t see any wiggle room.

It does not fit infallibility because of the lack of a definition (“I define”).

Nevertheless, this is binding on all and reflects the Church’s magisterial teaching. Perhaps Pope Benedict should infallibly define women’s ordination as invalid once and for all, viz, “I pronounce, declare *and define *that the Sacrament of Holy Orders can be conferred on baptized men alone, and that the Church has not authority whatsoever to confer the Sacrament of Holy Orders on women.”

The mere “I declare” doesn’t clearly show that the Pope intended to engage infallibility, although he may already have been infallible. But the formula above is the traditional way of the Pope clearly intending to excercise infallibility.

 

[m134e5]

SouthernSister:

Can someone please tell me where my Priest has an idea that women’s ordination is a possibility in the future?

He gets the idea from his own presumption or possibly misguidance, and possibly the presumption and misgudance of those who taught him. It is heresy- plain and simple.

 

[arieh0310]

porthos11:

It does not fit infallibility because of the lack of a definition (“I define”).

I think you may be straining gnats on the word “define” verses “declare”. The marks of infallibility are:

1. The pontiff must teach in his public and official capacity as pastor and doctor of all Christians. “in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren” check…
2. Then it is only when, in this capacity, he teaches some doctrine of faith or morals that he is infallible. “a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself,” check…
3. Further it must be sufficiently evident that he intends to teach with all the fullness and finality of his supreme Apostolic authority, in other words that he wishes to determine some point of doctrine in an absolutely final and irrevocable way, or to define it in the technical sense. " I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women" check…
4. Finally for an ex cathedra decision it must be clear that the pope intends to bind the whole Church. “this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.” check…

What point am I missing to disqualify this as an infallible statement?

 

[porthos11]

arieh0310:

I think you may be straining gnats on the word “define” verses “declare”. The marks of infallibility are:

1. The pontiff must teach in his public and official capacity as pastor and doctor of all Christians. “in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren” check…
2. Then it is only when, in this capacity, he teaches some doctrine of faith or morals that he is infallible. “a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself,” check…
3. Further it must be sufficiently evident that he intends to teach with all the fullness and finality of his supreme Apostolic authority, in other words that he wishes to determine some point of doctrine in an absolutely final and irrevocable way, or to define it in the technical sense. " I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women" check…
4. Finally for an ex cathedra decision it must be clear that the pope intends to bind the whole Church. “this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.” check…

What point am I missing to disqualify this as an infallible statement?

Probably none, and Pope John Paul II may have easily been rendered infallible then when promulgating OS.

But this question would not have been raised if he had just used the traditional formula of defining (which he still did when he canonized saints). If he had said “declare and define,” this should have made it clear to everyone.

 

[mosher]

porthos11:

Probably none, and Pope John Paul II may have easily been rendered infallible then when promulgating OS.

But this question would not have been raised if he had just used the traditional formula of defining (which he still did when he canonized saints). If he had said “declare and define,” this should have made it clear to everyone.

That formula is not necessary for an infallible declaration - there is no formal formula. The clarification by the CDF which was solemnly approved by the Holy Father affirmed that the intention of the Holy Father was to declare infallible that the Ordination of Women was, is and will always be impossible.

 

[palmas85]

porthos11:

Probably none, and Pope John Paul II may have easily been rendered infallible then when promulgating OS.

But this question would not have been raised if he had just used the traditional formula of defining (which he still did when he canonized saints). If he had said “declare and define,” this should have made it clear to everyone.

From the apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis dated May 22, 1994
. Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal Tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the Magisterium in its more recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the Church’s judgment that women are not to be admitted to ordination is considered to have a merely disciplinary force.

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.

**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 deosit 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

It looks pretty clear to me but then again maybe I’m dense.

 

[otm]

arieh0310:

I think you may be straining gnats on the word “define” verses “declare”. The marks of infallibility are:

1. The pontiff must teach in his public and official capacity as pastor and doctor of all Christians. “in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren” check…
2. Then it is only when, in this capacity, he teaches some doctrine of faith or morals that he is infallible. “a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself,” check…
3. Further it must be sufficiently evident that he intends to teach with all the fullness and finality of his supreme Apostolic authority, in other words that he wishes to determine some point of doctrine in an absolutely final and irrevocable way, or to define it in the technical sense. " I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women" check…
4. Finally for an ex cathedra decision it must be clear that the pope intends to bind the whole Church. “this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.” check…

What point am I missing to disqualify this as an infallible statement?

I don’t believe you are missing anything in the statements; but that is not an ex cathedra statement, according to Rome, but rather a teaching on a universally held doctrine. That is, it is part of the infallibility of the ordinary Magisterium of the Church, which is the third part of infallibility of the Church; the other two being an ex cathedra statement, and defining statments made by councils with the pope present, or later ratified by him

 

[otm]

mosher:

That formula is not necessary for an infallible declaration - there is no formal formula. The clarification by the CDF which was solemnly approved by the Holy Father affirmed that the intention of the Holy Father was to declare infallible that the Ordination of Women was, is and will always be impossible.

however, I also believe that the CDF stated that this was not an ex cathedra statment, but rather a teaching statement of a matter held since the inception of the Church; i.e. it fits within the third area of infallibility, which is the constant teaching of the universal Church.

 

[awalt]

IMHO and from talking to Diocesan theologians, it is Magisterium teaching which we should follow, but it is not out of the realm of possibility that a future Pope could resurrect it as an issue - but it’s not a given that will happen. The “loophole” of how this couldhappen is clear - JP II said the Church does not have power to change the substantive parts of a sacrament, someone could come out in the future and say this does not substantively change the sacrament, which does not discredit JP II’s statement but opens the door.

To see the difference, check the formality of the Pope’s infallible proclamations on the Marian dogmas. Quite different than this.

 

[arieh0310]

awalt:

IMHO and from talking to Diocesan theologians, it is Magisterium teaching which we should follow, but it is not out of the realm of possibility that a future Pope could resurrect it as an issue - but it’s not a given that will happen. The “loophole” of how this couldhappen is clear - JP II said the Church does not have power to change the substantive parts of a sacrament, someone could come out in the future and say this does not substantively change the sacrament, which does not discredit JP II’s statement but opens the door.

To see the difference, check the formality of the Pope’s infallible proclamations on the Marian dogmas. Quite different than this.

If the charism of infallibility is only used twice in 130 years then what is the point of having an infallible pope at all? (the Immaculate Conception and Assumption were not controversial subjects for Catholics at the time either). These types of issues could easily have been hammered out at an Ecumenical Council.

As OTM stated Ordinatio Sacerdotalis may not have the technical precision nor the associated anathama of an ex cathedra pronouncement, it is nonetheless still protected by the charism of infallibility. JPII did not leave the door open for further discussion, this issue is case closed and irreformable. Here is what John Paul says that he accomplished in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis:

Therefore, the doctrine that the priesthood is reserved to men possesses, by virtue of the Church’s ordinary and universal Magisterium, that character of infallibility which Lumen gentium speaks of and to which I gave juridical form in the Motu Proprio Ad tuendam fidem: When the individual Bishops, “even though dispersed throughout the world but preserving among themselves and with Peter’s Successor the bond of communion, agree in their authoritative teaching on matters of faith and morals that a particular teaching is to be held definitively and absolutely, they infallibly proclaim the doctrine of Christ” (Lumen gentium, n. 25; cf. Ad tuendam fidem, n. 3). (Address of the Holy Father to German bishops, 1999.)

In the Encyclicals Veritatis Splendor and Evangelium Vitae, as well as in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, I wished once again to set forth the constant doctrine of the Church’s faith with an act confirming truths which are clearly witnessed to by Scripture, the apostolic Tradition and the unanimous teaching of the Pastors. These declarations, by virtue of the authority handed down to the Successor of Peter to ‘confirm the brethren’ (Luke 22:32), thus express the common certitude present in the life and teaching of the Church. (“Magisterium Exercises Authority in Christ’s Name,” 24 November 1995.)

 

[mosher]

otm:

however, I also believe that the CDF stated that this was not an ex cathedra statment, but rather a teaching statement of a matter held since the inception of the Church; i.e. it fits within the third area of infallibility, which is the constant teaching of the universal Church.

It is Ordinary use of the Charism because it is confirmation of the usual teachings as has been held from the beginning. When the Pope exercises a so called ex cathedra it must not be against the bishops nor the faithful thus it is always in fact a confirmation of the Sacra Doctrina - rather a definitive clarification of the held faith.

awalt:

IMHO and from talking to Diocesan theologians, it is Magisterium teaching which we should follow, but it is not out of the realm of possibility that a future Pope could resurrect it as an issue - but it’s not a given that will happen. The “loophole” of how this couldhappen is clear - JP II said the Church does not have power to change the substantive parts of a sacrament, someone could come out in the future and say this does not substantively change the sacrament, which does not discredit JP II’s statement but opens the door.

To see the difference, check the formality of the Pope’s infallible proclamations on the Marian dogmas. Quite different than this.

This is not a correct interpretation of the statement as can be easily seen in reading the dubium presented to the CDF referencing the statement. Further, we are bound by obedience to not even bring up the matter for theological discussion. This secondary aspect is juridical and thus can be overturned however since the operative aspect that it points to is a matter of definite certitude through the Charism of Infallibility then the juridical restriction can also be considered to always be in effect. The Theologian is is seeing a nuance that does not exist.

 

[decn2b]

and the subject of Women deacons has not even been approached.

 

[jbuck919]

Pope John Paul II attempted to transfer this from a matter of church discipline to a matter of doctrine. Either that, depending on how you look at it, or he clarified a doctrine that has always been there. Roma locuta, causa (per tempore?) finita.