My Broken Fiat
  • Blog
  • About / Contact Me
    • My 'Reversion'
    • Why "MyBrokenFiat?"
  • The Archive
  • Prayers
  • Blog
  • About / Contact Me
    • My 'Reversion'
    • Why "MyBrokenFiat?"
  • The Archive
  • Prayers

Women Priests: Part II

7/29/2011

17 Comments

 
A few friends pointed out that my original blog on Women Priests was pretty awful.  I concede they were very much right.  I apologize, and hope this one explains the Church's position better.  I appreciate the feedback, and appreciate even more the chance to try again.  You're all wonderful... even if you do think I'm a crazy. :)
Picture
I was a little disappointed with my original blog a couple days ago on this topic.  Some of my friends still didn't understand, and others directed me to this site which outlines several more reasons that the Catholic Church is simply "wrong" for not allowing women priests.

Apparently, the Holy Spirit had foreseen this.  In anticipation of this heresy battle, He dropped a prayer / revelation book into my lap called "The 24 Hours of the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ." This sequence was penned by Luisa Piccarreta and translated by Saint Hannibal M. Di Francia (Luisa's Spiritual Director), but Luisa always said this prayer comes from Christ Himself.  Currently, Luisa is on the path towards Sainthood, and I would only be too happy to write more about her in another blog at some point.  But suffice to say, I know the Holy Spirit was being proactive by leading me to this particular set of prayers.

Anyway...

Last night, I prepared myself to take part in the Eucharistic Supper hour.  In reading and mediating on this hour, Jesus patiently explained to me that He did not ordain His Apostles through the Passover meal as so many of us believe.  It was in the washing of their feet that Christ imparted their worthiness to caress the Host of His Eucharist!

What an eye-opener!  And it makes perfect sense, too!  Only in John's gospel are we explained the "Ordination of the Apostles" in this manner.  Jesus removed His prayer shawl, remaining only in what we would recognize as a priestly alb and wrapped a towel around His Waist.  He knelt in submission and humiliation to accomplish a task so lowly that even Jewish slaves were exempt from the act!  St. Peter, horrified that His God would humiliate Himself so drastically, refused to allow Jesus to touch his feet.  Jesus, probably with a heart-smile at St. Peter's distressed expression of affection, simply replied, "Unless I wash you, you will have no inheritance with me."  In other words, Jesus was imparting to St. Peter that this act of cleansing must be accomplished in order to follow the Will of God to prepare him for the task about to be commissioned.

So contrary to what the women in the above link state, women were NOT present for this, nor were they present for the secondary Eucharistic meal after the Passover supper they prepared.  Jesus, through Piccarreta, said of this washing of the feet:

I so much cherish this act of receiving Me in the Eucharist, that I do not want to entrust this office to the angels, and not even to my dear Mother, but I Myself want to purify them, down to the most intimate fibers, in order to dispose them to receive the fruit of the Sacrament; and in the Apostles I intended to prepare all souls.

Thus, we come to understand that it was in this act of total subjugation that Christ calls His Apostles to be like Him - to serve one another and more importantly, to serve the Church - humbly and with gentleness.  Upon completing the Washing of the Feet, Christ then instructs them in the act of Consecration by, for the first time, creating Himself in the form of bread and wine - two of the most humble and universal commodities humanity knows.  He then instructs THEM and ONLY THEM to "do this in remembrance of Me."  But in order to share this act of Consecration with them, Christ, Himself, wished to make them ready to accept this gift into their hearts.  I bow my head in appreciation of such a beautiful and humbling thought.

So again, the argument that women were around for the Passover feast has no bearing on the ability of our Church to recognize the ordination of women as priests.  Simply put, women were NOT present for this cleansing in preparation for bestowing the gift of the power of Consecration.

Picture
Next, this site attempts to utilize Our Most Blessed Mother as a means for their end.  *Shakes head*  This is mortifyingly wrong.  Again, if Christ had wanted women as priests, I assure you, Our Lady would've been first in line, well ahead of St. Peter!  But again, folks seem to have difficulty understanding that men and women are called for different purposes.  We are equal in dignity, but we have NOT been created to do the same things.  We've been created to compliment one another, and the job of a priest is one of those things men have been created for.  The Blessed Mother understood her place as the Ark of the New Covenant.  She brought forth Christ not through her own power, but through the power of the Holy Spirit!  She accepted His Gift through her fiat, she did not consecrate her womb in order to manifest the Presence of Christ within her!  

Also, this "one priesthood" nonsense is exactly that... nonsense.  There are two types of priesthoods recognized by the Catholic Church (not counting the Priesthood of Christ).  One is the ministerial priesthood - which is the familiar clergy of priests and bishops we know and love.  The second is the "common" (or, ironically, the "Royal") priesthood that each of us is a part of through Baptism.  The two serve VASTLY different functions and one cannot exist without the other since they both exist to SERVE each other.  

To put it simply, all apple trees are trees, but not all trees are apple trees, right?  The same is true of Ministerial Priests.  They all belong to the Royal Priesthood through Baptism, but not all royal priests are ministerial.  To claim otherwise is simply fallacious.  Utilizing a tiny seed of truth to start your garden of lies will inevitably turn into a jungle of folly.
 

Picture
Then we've got the argument that there have been female deacons in the past - some women even going so far as to claim Mary and Martha as their prime examples.

Let me go ahead and dispell that lie outright.  Mary and Martha, the sisters of Lazarus, were NEVER anywhere even remotely near the capacity of priest.  Their place was always at the feet of Jesus, learning from Him and serving Him as their honored Guest and Teacher. 

With that nonsense aside, I'll delve into the topic of female deacons.  The women spoken of by this "WomenPriests" organization were nothing more than helpers to maintain dignity and humility through the sacrament of baptism.  At the time, Baptism consisted of being wholly submersed in water, thoroughly soaking undergarments.  As a result, these "deaconesses" referred to were at the ready with towels and fresh linens so the newly baptized might change themselves into more presentable attire. 

St. Epiphanius says it best in his piece "Against Heresies" when he wrote:

"We come to the New Testament. If women were ordained to be priests for God, or to do anything canonical in the church, it should rather have been given to Mary in  the New Testament... but it was decided differently. She was not even entrusted with baptizing.  Nowhere was a woman established among [clerics].  There were four daughters of the evangelist Philip, who were prophetesses, but not priests. Although there is an order of deaconesses in the Church, yet they are not appointed to function as priests or for any administration of this kind, but so that provision may be made for the propriety of the female sex [at baptism]."  

And just to hit it home one more time that these women were NOT a part of the three "sacred" offices of Holy Orders (which, BTW, are priesthood, diaconate and subdiaconate), the Council of Nicea had this to say:

"We have mentioned the deaconesses, who are enrolled in this position, but since they have not received any imposition of hands at all, they are surely to be numbered among the laity."

So once again, WomenPriests.org, you are spreading fallacy.  I really wonder how much of this you understand and how much you are simply ignorant of.  Considering the poor religious education we receive anymore, I wouldn't be surprised if these ideas spring forth innocently from ignorance of where our religious beliefs (as true Catholics) come from.  Then again, with all the research they've apparently done to tear down Catholic teaching, they must've come across even a small portion of what I've explained above.

*Sigh*  Prayers, folks.  Prayers to the wonderful Holy Spirit are necessary.  May He touch their minds with the light of wisdom, understanding and faith.

17 Comments
Jess link
7/29/2011 07:10:18 am

I'm not sure why it too me so long to stumble upon your blog. I see your posts on Facebook all the time. Anyway, here we are!

I feel like we could debate this back and forth for all eternity, so before I even consider starting that ball rolling, I want to say that it's a very well-written piece.

That said, I don't agree with it at all (whomp whomp). I wish I could get my friend Liz in on this. She has her MA in Theology and teaches religion, so I'm sure she'd have a wide array of arguments to support women in the priesthood. But without her education at my disposal, I can only state what I believe.

There is a very good, logical reason why there were no female apostles in the bible. Women had very little power in this society. Quite frankly, the whole idea of women as equal beings is a modern concept. Jesus was preaching a very controversial idea that he wanted to spread as successfully as possible. It would be absolutely foolish to put that in the hands of women, who by the very dictates of their culture, were lower class citizens.

Moreover, the Bible was inspired by God, but written by men. You can see the traces of each author's personal style in each book. We could get into the whole situation with the Gospels and the Q-Source, but let's save that for another time.

Men also had a say in which books made it into the Bible and which were cast aside.

Let's say you're a man living in a society where men have great power. They own their wives. They make all the decisions. They are gods in their own households. Which makes more sense: sharing stories of Jesus granting great power to women during his ministry, or sharing stories of Jesus granting great power to men.

So if Jesus picked women, despite their lowly status, to create his church alongside Peter, that was carefully omitted from the story.

I firmly believe Mary Magdelene as just as important to Jesus as his male apostles. Isn't it Mary who announced Jesus had risen? Doesn't that make her the first true apostle?

The argument that Jesus annointed men and therefore, only men can be priests does not carry water. Likewise, the argument I've heard that priests stand in for Jesus and Jesus was male makes even less sense.

I feel the exclusion of women in the priesthood is simply that - an exclusion. You cannot say that both genders are alike in dignity if one gender has all the power.

Reply
Brian
8/1/2012 04:46:07 pm

Jess, or anyone since it's been so long since this was originally posted. Fr. down below makes a good point about the cultural aspect at the time not being an explanation for why Jesus did not ordain women priests at the time. To follow up on that, I wanted to point out that cultural taboos didn't stop Jesus from doing many other things. The most important aspect of Christianity is that Jesus rose from the dead. I'm told that women were not considered trustworthy witnesses in court at that time. (I'm no expert, though.) If that's the case, why would Jesus have chosen women to be the very first witnesses of the Resurrection which the NT records. He wasn't shy to let the most important claim in Christianity to be made first by women. So I just don't think Jesus would have cowered to culture if He had intended for women to take on the role of priests. I feel to make this argument diminishes, by not noticing, how much Jesus lifted up women and showed their indispensable nature and role.

Reply
Jorge Suarez
7/29/2011 07:15:45 am

Good point: Women were not present.

Neither were black people, white people, Asian people... unless you were a middle-eastern Jew male, you cannot be a priest!

Reply
Gina
7/29/2011 08:44:31 am

Hey Jess! Long time no talk! Glad you stopped by nonetheless, even if it was to engage in verbal warfare. Ha ha!

In all seriousness, though, I appreciate your logical and well-thought out response. Seems you don’t need to worry about enlisting help from your friend (though she’s more than welcome to join the festivities). You’re very much capable of providing your own valid arguments. :)

I’m going to attempt taking your points one at a time, because you offer very key points which do make a lot of sense. So bear with me!


1) It would be absolutely foolish to put [preaching] in the hands of women, who by the very dictates of their culture, were lower class citizens.
I have to admit liking this point of view very much.

I admit it never really crossed my mind, but in light of the current topic, it doesn’t make sense. You don’t have to be a priest to preach the Gospel. Sure, women can’t expect to preach from the pulpit, but we can run Bible Studies, teach CCD, even open a soup kitchen! There are plenty of opportunities for women to preach, but as I said, this is more an argument regarding a woman’s ability to act as a ministerial priest, whose first job is to bring souls to Heaven through the Sacrament of the Eucharist.


2) The Bible was inspired by God, but written by men… Men also had a say in which books made it into the Bible.

Like you said, this is a convo for another time as it doesn’t have any bearing on the current topic either.


3) So if Jesus picked women, despite their lowly status, to create his church alongside Peter, that was carefully omitted from the story.

See, it wasn’t omitted… it’s just not there in the way that most folks wanna see it. We have plenty of examples of the power women held. The Blessed Mother, herself, holds such great sway as intercessor that she was able to bring about the 1st Miracle of Jesus (Wedding Feast) sooner than prescribed!

Martha and Mary, too, were able to move the heart of Jesus into resurrecting their brother, Lazarus.

Mary Magdelene (I’ll speak more on her regarding your next point) is so perfect an example of humility and confidence in Christ that she is extolled by Jesus and given the honor of witnessing salvation, herself, at the foot of the Cross.

Women are named countless times throughout the epistles as prophetesses, deaconesses, and examples of heroines of the message of God. We even have two books named after women.

Women are very much part of salvation history, but again, there are those that wish our role “different.”


4) I believe Mary Magdelene as just as important to Jesus as his male apostles.

You believe right! :) Mary WAS just as important, but that doesn’t mean she was given the same role to play as the Apostles.

Your example about Mary announcing to them that He had risen is also true, but not in the way you think. Mary Magdelene, for her role in this regard, has been called “The Apostle to the Apostles.” She was not, in fact, the first apostle through this action.

The Blessed Mother, in knowing Jesus, and ever following His Will is the first apostle. John the Baptist and St. Elizabeth (even before St. Joseph!) would then come next in line as they were the 2nd and 3rd to know who it was that the Blessed Mother carried within her at the Visitation.

St. Peter and the others, however, have the distinction of being the first 12 specifically called for Ministerial duty. Jesus took these 12 men and for three years taught them, trained them, and finally, consecrated them in their service to the Church. Mary Magdelene was not part of this process because her calling was different.


5) The argument that Jesus annointed men and therefore, only men can be priests does not carry water. Likewise, the argument I've heard that priests stand in for Jesus and Jesus was male makes even less sense.

Sorry, you’re gonna have to give me examples as to why these don’t carry water with you. My only answer, at this point, is that Jesus (as God) came to be the perfect example in all aspects of life. If He did not pass along the act of Consecration to women, as the Church – always echoing the actions He exemplified on Earth – we simply cannot ordain women in this capacity.


6) I feel the exclusion of women in the priesthood is simply that - an exclusion. You cannot say that both genders are alike in dignity if one gender has all the power.

It is an exclusion. You’re right. I agree. I just differ on the slight you take at feeling this is a stab at a woman’s dignity. Much like the inability of a man to carry life in a womb he doesn’t have doesn’t detract from his dignity as a person, a woman’s inability to be a priest does nothing to diminish her dignity.

And finally, your argument that the Chu

Reply
Gina
7/29/2011 08:46:28 am

Hey Jess! Long time no talk! Glad you stopped by nonetheless, even if it was to engage in verbal warfare. Ha ha!

In all seriousness, though, I appreciate your logical and well-thought out response. Seems you don’t need to worry about enlisting help from your friend (though she’s more than welcome to join the festivities). You’re very much capable of providing your own valid arguments. :)

I’m going to attempt taking your points one at a time, because you offer very key points which do make a lot of sense. So bear with me!


1) It would be absolutely foolish to put [preaching] in the hands of women, who by the very dictates of their culture, were lower class citizens.
I have to admit liking this point of view very much.

I admit it never really crossed my mind, but in light of the current topic, it doesn’t make sense. You don’t have to be a priest to preach the Gospel. Sure, women can’t expect to preach from the pulpit, but we can run Bible Studies, teach CCD, even open a soup kitchen! There are plenty of opportunities for women to preach, but as I said, this is more an argument regarding a woman’s ability to act as a ministerial priest, whose first job is to bring souls to Heaven through the Sacrament of the Eucharist.


2) The Bible was inspired by God, but written by men… Men also had a say in which books made it into the Bible.

Like you said, this is a convo for another time as it doesn’t have any bearing on the current topic either.


3) So if Jesus picked women, despite their lowly status, to create his church alongside Peter, that was carefully omitted from the story.

See, it wasn’t omitted… it’s just not there in the way that most folks wanna see it. We have plenty of examples of the power women held. The Blessed Mother, herself, holds such great sway as intercessor that she was able to bring about the 1st Miracle of Jesus (Wedding Feast) sooner than prescribed!

Martha and Mary, too, were able to move the heart of Jesus into resurrecting their brother, Lazarus.

Mary Magdelene (I’ll speak more on her regarding your next point) is so perfect an example of humility and confidence in Christ that she is extolled by Jesus and given the honor of witnessing salvation, herself, at the foot of the Cross.

Women are named countless times throughout the epistles as prophetesses, deaconesses, and examples of heroines of the message of God. We even have two books named after women.

Women are very much part of salvation history, but again, there are those that wish our role “different.”


4) I believe Mary Magdelene as just as important to Jesus as his male apostles.

You believe right! :) Mary WAS just as important, but that doesn’t mean she was given the same role to play as the Apostles.

Your example about Mary announcing to them that He had risen is also true, but not in the way you think. Mary Magdelene, for her role in this regard, has been called “The Apostle to the Apostles.” She was not, in fact, the first apostle through this action.

The Blessed Mother, in knowing Jesus, and ever following His Will is the first apostle. John the Baptist and St. Elizabeth (even before St. Joseph!) would then come next in line as they were the 2nd and 3rd to know who it was that the Blessed Mother carried within her at the Visitation.

St. Peter and the others, however, have the distinction of being the first 12 specifically called for Ministerial duty. Jesus took these 12 men and for three years taught them, trained them, and finally, consecrated them in their service to the Church. Mary Magdelene was not part of this process because her calling was different.


5) The argument that Jesus annointed men and therefore, only men can be priests does not carry water. Likewise, the argument I've heard that priests stand in for Jesus and Jesus was male makes even less sense.

Sorry, you’re gonna have to give me examples as to why these don’t carry water with you. My only answer, at this point, is that Jesus (as God) came to be the perfect example in all aspects of life. If He did not pass along the act of Consecration to women, as the Church – always echoing the actions He exemplified on Earth – we simply cannot ordain women in this capacity.


6) I feel the exclusion of women in the priesthood is simply that - an exclusion. You cannot say that both genders are alike in dignity if one gender has all the power.

It is an exclusion. You’re right. I agree. I just differ on the slight you take at feeling this is a stab at a woman’s dignity. Much like the inability of a man to carry life in a womb he doesn’t have doesn’t detract from his dignity as a person, a woman’s inability to be a priest does nothing to diminish her dignity.

And finally, your argument that the Church only shows one gender having a

Reply
Gina
7/29/2011 08:48:09 am

Hey Jess! Long time no talk! Glad you stopped by nonetheless, even if it was to engage in verbal warfare. Ha ha!

In all seriousness, though, I appreciate your logical and well-thought out response. Seems you don’t need to worry about enlisting help from your friend (though she’s more than welcome to join the festivities). You’re very much capable of providing your own valid arguments. :)

I’m going to attempt taking your points one at a time, because you offer very key points which do make a lot of sense. So bear with me!

1) It would be absolutely foolish to put [preaching] in the hands of women, who by the very dictates of their culture, were lower class citizens.
I have to admit liking this point of view very much.

I admit it never really crossed my mind, but in light of the current topic, it doesn’t make sense. You don’t have to be a priest to preach the Gospel. Sure, women can’t expect to preach from the pulpit, but we can run Bible Studies, teach CCD, even open a soup kitchen! There are plenty of opportunities for women to preach, but as I said, this is more an argument regarding a woman’s ability to act as a ministerial priest, whose first job is to bring souls to Heaven through the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

2) The Bible was inspired by God, but written by men… Men also had a say in which books made it into the Bible.

Like you said, this is a convo for another time as it doesn’t have any bearing on the current topic either.

3) So if Jesus picked women, despite their lowly status, to create his church alongside Peter, that was carefully omitted from the story.

See, it wasn’t omitted… it’s just not there in the way that most folks wanna see it. We have plenty of examples of the power women held. The Blessed Mother, herself, holds such great sway as intercessor that she was able to bring about the 1st Miracle of Jesus (Wedding Feast) sooner than prescribed!

Martha and Mary, too, were able to move the heart of Jesus into resurrecting their brother, Lazarus.

Mary Magdelene (I’ll speak more on her regarding your next point) is so perfect an example of humility and confidence in Christ that she is extolled by Jesus and given the honor of witnessing salvation, herself, at the foot of the Cross.

Women are named countless times throughout the epistles as prophetesses, deaconesses, and examples of heroines of the message of God. We even have two books named after women.

Women are very much part of salvation history, but again, there are those that wish our role “different.”

4) I believe Mary Magdelene as just as important to Jesus as his male apostles.

You believe right! :) Mary WAS just as important, but that doesn’t mean she was given the same role to play as the Apostles.

Your example about Mary announcing to them that He had risen is also true, but not in the way you think. Mary Magdelene, for her role in this regard, has been called “The Apostle to the Apostles.” She was not, in fact, the first apostle through this action.

The Blessed Mother, in knowing Jesus, and ever following His Will is the first apostle. John the Baptist and St. Elizabeth (even before St. Joseph!) would then come next in line as they were the 2nd and 3rd to know who it was that the Blessed Mother carried within her at the Visitation.

St. Peter and the others, however, have the distinction of being the first 12 specifically called for Ministerial duty. Jesus took these 12 men and for three years taught them, trained them, and finally, consecrated them in their service to the Church. Mary Magdelene was not part of this process because her calling was different.

5) The argument that Jesus annointed men and therefore, only men can be priests does not carry water. Likewise, the argument I've heard that priests stand in for Jesus and Jesus was male makes even less sense.

Sorry, you’re gonna have to give me examples as to why these don’t carry water with you. My only answer, at this point, is that Jesus (as God) came to be the perfect example in all aspects of life. If He did not pass along the act of Consecration to women, as the Church – always echoing the actions He exemplified on Earth – we simply cannot ordain women in this capacity.

6) I feel the exclusion of women in the priesthood is simply that - an exclusion. You cannot say that both genders are alike in dignity if one gender has all the power.

It is an exclusion. You’re right. I agree. I just differ on the slight you take at feeling this is a stab at a woman’s dignity. Much like the inability of a man to carry life in a womb he doesn’t have doesn’t detract from his dignity as a person, a woman’s inability to be a priest does nothing to diminish her dignity.

And finally, your argument that the Church only shows one gender having all the power

Reply
Gina
7/29/2011 08:49:03 am

Hey Jess! Long time no talk! Glad you stopped by nonetheless, even if it was to engage in verbal warfare. Ha ha!

In all seriousness, though, I appreciate your logical and well-thought out response. Seems you don’t need to worry about enlisting help from your friend (though she’s more than welcome to join the festivities). You’re very much capable of providing your own valid arguments. :)

I’m going to attempt taking your points one at a time, because you offer very key points which do make a lot of sense. So bear with me!


1) It would be absolutely foolish to put [preaching] in the hands of women, who by the very dictates of their culture, were lower class citizens.
I have to admit liking this point of view very much.

I admit it never really crossed my mind, but in light of the current topic, it doesn’t make sense. You don’t have to be a priest to preach the Gospel. Sure, women can’t expect to preach from the pulpit, but we can run Bible Studies, teach CCD, even open a soup kitchen! There are plenty of opportunities for women to preach, but as I said, this is more an argument regarding a woman’s ability to act as a ministerial priest, whose first job is to bring souls to Heaven through the Sacrament of the Eucharist.


2) The Bible was inspired by God, but written by men… Men also had a say in which books made it into the Bible.

Like you said, this is a convo for another time as it doesn’t have any bearing on the current topic either.


3) So if Jesus picked women, despite their lowly status, to create his church alongside Peter, that was carefully omitted from the story.

See, it wasn’t omitted… it’s just not there in the way that most folks wanna see it. We have plenty of examples of the power women held. The Blessed Mother, herself, holds such great sway as intercessor that she was able to bring about the 1st Miracle of Jesus (Wedding Feast) sooner than prescribed!

Martha and Mary, too, were able to move the heart of Jesus into resurrecting their brother, Lazarus.

Mary Magdelene (I’ll speak more on her regarding your next point) is so perfect an example of humility and confidence in Christ that she is extolled by Jesus and given the honor of witnessing salvation, herself, at the foot of the Cross.

Women are named countless times throughout the epistles as prophetesses, deaconesses, and examples of heroines of the message of God. We even have two books named after women.

Women are very much part of salvation history, but again, there are those that wish our role “different.”


4) I believe Mary Magdelene as just as important to Jesus as his male apostles.

You believe right! :) Mary WAS just as important, but that doesn’t mean she was given the same role to play as the Apostles.

Your example about Mary announcing to them that He had risen is also true, but not in the way you think. Mary Magdelene, for her role in this regard, has been called “The Apostle to the Apostles.” She was not, in fact, the first apostle through this action.

The Blessed Mother, in knowing Jesus, and ever following His Will is the first apostle. John the Baptist and St. Elizabeth (even before St. Joseph!) would then come next in line as they were the 2nd and 3rd to know who it was that the Blessed Mother carried within her at the Visitation.

St. Peter and the others, however, have the distinction of being the first 12 specifically called for Ministerial duty. Jesus took these 12 men and for three years taught them, trained them, and finally, consecrated them in their service to the Church. Mary Magdelene was not part of this process because her calling was different.


5) The argument that Jesus annointed men and therefore, only men can be priests does not carry water. Likewise, the argument I've heard that priests stand in for Jesus and Jesus was male makes even less sense.

Sorry, you’re gonna have to give me examples as to why these don’t carry water with you. My only answer, at this point, is that Jesus (as God) came to be the perfect example in all aspects of life. If He did not pass along the act of Consecration to women, as the Church – always echoing the actions He exemplified on Earth – we simply cannot ordain women in this capacity.


6) I feel the exclusion of women in the priesthood is simply that - an exclusion. You cannot say that both genders are alike in dignity if one gender has all the power.

It is an exclusion. You’re right. I agree. I just differ on the slight you take at feeling this is a stab at a woman’s dignity. Much like the inability of a man to carry life in a womb he doesn’t have doesn’t detract from his dignity as a person, a woman’s inability to be a priest does nothing to diminish her dignity.

Reply
Gina
7/29/2011 08:52:41 am

And finally (since I kept running out of room above!), your argument that the Church only shows one gender having all the power has been disproven in my response to point number 3 (and 4, actually!).


And Jorge, I promise I haven't forgotten your commentary either. Thank you, too, for taking the time to drop in. My response to you is this:

Your argument simply makes no sense. We don't only have Jew-Priests. We have plenty of African, Italian, Indian, British, etc priests. ? So what exactly was your point so I'm better able to clarify?

Reply
Jorge Suarez
7/29/2011 09:29:13 am

And, if you take "the ones whose feet I wash" thing literally, then why would it extend beyond ANY of the present men at all? As long as they choose to commission someone it goes.

Reply
Gina
7/29/2011 09:35:03 am

Jorge,

I take the washing of the feet within the context of Pentecost, Jesus telling Peter (repeatedly) to "feed My sheep," the Last Supper in general, and pretty much all Cenacle activity... not to mention the Magisterium of the Church, too!

Again, I can't really follow what your points actually are. I apologize.

Reply
cathmom2five link
5/31/2012 05:17:29 am

Well done my friend. Visiting from Catholic Bloggers Network. When I first saw the title I was scared ;). I once did a paper on this topic when I was getting my Bachelors in Theology and this book was very helpful:
Women and the Priesthood
by Alice von Hildebrand and Peter Kreeft

Reply
Gina link
5/31/2012 05:29:48 am

Welcome aboard! Glad you found my little corner of the internet.

Thank you for the heads up. I'm only now getting to know Dr. Hildebrand (as embarrassing as that is to admit). I've only read snippets of her work before, but after hearing her talk about her now deceased husband on EWTN, I started learning more about her.

This book will now find its way onto my reading list. Blessings to you.

:)

Reply
Gina
5/31/2012 05:31:12 am

Oh - and PS...

I see your e-mail address listed, but no blog. Do you have one of those (as I love to find new blogs by Catholic Moms!!!)?

Thanks!

Cathmom2five link
5/31/2012 05:41:11 am

Yes! :) my little corner: www.truthbeautyandgoodnessintheworks.blogspot.com

Reply
Fr Levi link
6/14/2012 01:22:49 am

Hi Gina,

just a few thoughts on this issue:

the main arguments in relation to the ordination of women to the ministerial priesthood revolve, I would suggest, around the following areas:

scriptural: there are no women priests in the New Testament. One can argue endlessly at which point in Gospels Christ instituted the ministerial priesthood. The fact remains that the New Testament Church always interpreted his actions as authorising a male-only priesthood.

Tradition: The Church has always followed in the footsteps of the early Christians on this issue. So much so that it is only in the last several decades that anyone has so much as thought to argue seriously against the idea of a male-only priesthood.

Theology: the main argument that those who argue in favour of women's ordination is to quote Gregory of Nyssa's dictum: what is not assumed is not redeemed. However, he said this in relation to the 4th Century Christological debates and it has relevanceonly to sotierology (the theology of salvation), not the issue of women's ordination. To suggest it as relevant is to imply that one must be ordained to the ministerial priesthood in order to be saved, an argument that no one would wish to make.

Cultural: this argument suggests that the lack of women priests in the early church was an artifact of a patriarchal society. However, this is to ignore that the Ancient World did in fact have women priests, attached to the various pagan cults. The early Church, which was not slow to slough off various cultural elements of Judaism in order to advance the Gospel deliberately chose not to inculturate themselves to the extent of having women priests also. In the context a a gospel that was very pro-women, this is suggestive that they thought it important not to.

Equality'justice/rights: no one has a right to be a priest; it is not a matter of justice that those who wish to be ordained should not be; it only becomes a matter of inequality if their is some form of unjust discrimination being practiced. It is not unjust for the Church to refuse to act outside the parameters she is sure were set for her by Christ.

By no means exhaustive, & I am by no means an expert, but these would be, I think, the main arguments against the ordination of women.

Every blessing.

Reply
Gina link
6/15/2012 09:21:28 am

Hi Father,

I appreciate your in-depth response. My appreciation!

Seems you and I are on the same page with much of this. I touched on a lot of that in my original posting, too. :)

I never actually heard of the idea that one must be ordained into the ministerial priesthood for salvation. I admit that's a new one! Ha ha. Hope to never hear it again, truth be told. Yipes!

And no worries - you're way more expert than I'd be on this subject, dear Father. Thank you for the food for thought. I'm truly touched that you'd find time to make your way back here. Blessings!

~Gina

Reply
masingu link
6/5/2018 07:48:37 am

We should agree to the fact that both genders are alike in dignity if one gender has all the power.

It is an exclusion. You’re right. I agree. I just differ on the slight you
take at feeling this is a stab at a woman’s dignity. Much like the inability of a man to carry life in a womb he doesn’t have doesn’t detract from his dignity as a person, a woman’s inability to be a priest does nothing to diminish her dignity.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Top Rated Entries

    My Darkest Secret

    Do Animals Have Souls?

    10 Things a Parent of an SPD Kid Wants to Say

    Fun and Easy Lenten Crafts

    Tattoo Taboo

    Blessed Mother as Intercessor

    Loss of Life

    Women Priests II

    Animal Sacrifices

    Render Unto Caesar

    Veiling

    The Godparent Poem

    Broken Friendships

    Miscarriage Reflection

    NYT Anti-Catholic Ad

    Categories

    All
    180
    Abortion
    Adoption
    Adoration
    Adultery
    Agnosticism
    Angels
    Animals
    Annulment
    Apparitions
    Art
    Atheism
    Bahamas
    Baptism
    Blessed Mother
    Blessed-mother
    Blogging
    Books
    Boycott
    Breastfeeding
    Bullying
    Cafeteria Catholic
    Cafeteria Catholics
    Cats
    Ccd
    Celibacy
    Chaput
    Children
    Christmas
    Churches
    Confession
    Conscience
    Contests
    Contraception
    Cookies
    Corapi
    Crafts
    Creation
    Cross
    Defense Of Faith
    Depression
    Divine Mercy
    Divine Providence
    Divine-providence
    Divorce
    Dolan
    Donation
    Dreams
    Easter
    Education
    Eucharist
    Euthanasia
    Evangelization
    Family
    Feasts
    Food
    Forgiveness
    Free Will
    Friendship
    Fun
    Gaza
    Guest Post
    Hat Tip
    Health Care
    Heaven
    Hebrew
    Hhs
    Holy Week
    Homeschooling
    Homily
    Homosexuality
    Illumination
    Incarnation
    Incorruptibles
    Indulgences
    Infertility
    Inspiration
    Intentions
    Intercession
    Intercessions
    Interview
    Islam
    Jewelry
    Kidney
    Komen
    Language
    Lawsuit
    Lbm
    Lent
    Lightbulb Moments
    Liturgy
    Mandate
    Marriage
    Martyrs
    Mass
    Media
    Medjugorje
    Mercy
    Mexico
    Miracles
    Miscarriage
    Moderation
    Moses
    Motherhood
    Music
    Myla
    Nuns
    Old Testament
    Parenting
    Parishes
    Pedophilia
    Pentecost
    Persecution
    Personal
    Philadelphia
    Philly
    Pilgrimage
    Planned Parenthood
    Poetry
    Politics
    Poll
    Pope
    Prayer
    Pregnancy
    Priests
    Prophecy
    Propoganda
    Purgatory
    Question Box
    Quick Takes
    Random
    Recipes
    Reflections
    Relics
    Religious Freedom
    Reviews
    Ridiculous
    Rosary
    Sacrament
    Sacrifice
    Saint
    Saints
    Scandal
    School
    Science
    Seed
    Sewing
    Sexuality
    Sin
    Social Issues
    Social Issues
    SPD
    Spiritual Dryness
    St Anthonybd986ec1d5
    Steubenville
    Suffering
    Tattoos
    Terrorism
    TLM
    Triduum
    Trinity
    Trust
    Twa
    Vatican
    Veiling
    Veils
    Vincent
    Visionaries
    Wedding
    Women Priests

    Pages I Stalk

    A Woman's Place
    Dymphna's Road
    Having Left the Altar
    Fr. Z @ WDTPRS
    Spirit Daily
    These Stone Walls
    St. Joseph's Vanguard
    Catholic Sistas
    Catholic Icing
    Liturgical Time
    Traditional Latin Mass
    Shameless Popery
    Life Victorious
    Catholic Dads
    S'aint Easy
    Truth, Beauty and Goodness
    The Way Out There
    Written by the Finger of 
       God
    Little Catholic Bubble
    So You're a Church Musician
    There and Back Again
    Make It - Love It
    St. Monica's Bridge
    Seeking Renewal 
    Picture

    Archives

    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    February 2017
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    December 2010
    October 2010
    October 2005

    RSS Feed

Copyright 2021