Had some interesting discussion with a couple of family members this weekend – one in Pennsylvania and one in Southern New Jersey – over a second crisis in the Catholic Church – one not likely to make page one headlines as that other crisis. I’m referring to the shortage of priests, which seems to be mainly affecting rural areas, for now.
An obvious solution, at least to some, to solve this “crisis” is to ordain women and married men into the priesthood.
Both are not true answers, because the only true answer to the vocation crisis is an increase in valid ordinations. Neither of these two “solutions” are valid in the eyes of the Church. This has always been part of Church tradition, for almost two thousand years. And concerning women’s ordination, not only is it the tradition of the Catholic Church, but also her closest sister, the Orthodox Church, as well.
Why?
Let’s focus on women’s ordination in this post. Women cannot be ordained to the priesthood because, to paraphrase John Paul II from his 1994 apostolic letter Ordinatio Sacerdotum, the Church does not have the ability to do so.
Here’s the reasoning, the way I understand it.
The priesthood has its origin in the choice of the twelve men Jesus chose to be His Apostles and found His Church. In His three years of public ministry, there is not a single record of Jesus conferring this commission on a woman. Not even the Blessed Virgin Mary, the most perfect of all human beings, His sinless mother, received such a commission – and she would undoubtedly have been the ideal candidate had Christ wanted to choose women for this mission. (What do I mean by “commission” here? The ability to baptize, anoint the sick, forgive sins, consecrate the Eucharist – those abilities Jesus specifically gave His Apostles.)
There are many key roles in the Church for women, in ministry and religious orders, but the priesthood is not one of them. A slightly imperfect metaphor is that of childbirth. The honor and duty of bringing new souls into this world has been given to women by God; men do not have this privilege. Similarly, only men can bring the Body of Christ into this world through the sacrament of Holy Orders; women do not have this privilege.
A common response to such reasoning is that if Jesus was alive today, He would do it differently and would ordain women to His priesthood.
How do Catholics respond to this?
Well, for one, we do believe He is alive today, haven risen two thousand years ago, and is present and active through His Church and through the Holy Spirit. Faithful Catholics believe in the Magisterium, the body of teachings of the Church. Teachings may evolve over the centuries, but dogma does not change. (This sentence is at the center of much confusion about the role and power of the Church. Whole books could be written about it, and probably have been. It is a worthy topic to delve into further, but I am digressing.) The inability to ordain women to the priesthood is Church dogma.
Second, it’s never been proven that the specific reason Jesus did not call women to the priesthood was because of the cultural norms of the times. This is just a modern assumption.
Third, this response implicates Jesus as sexist. It says that just because many of the men in first-century Palestine had opinions of women as inferior to men, Jesus must have had, too. We all know that Jesus did not hesitate to overcome and transcend the cultural norms of the times that were unjust, particularly with women.
Fourth, the idea of priestesses was common in many of the pagan religions of the time, though it was not found in Judaism. If Christ wanted to open up His priesthood to women, the precedent was there. And yet He didn’t.
Another common response from those uncomfortable with Church doctrine is to accuse it of being sexist. They accuse the Church of considering women to be inferior, incompetent, or otherwise unable to perform the duties of the priesthood. This has been thoroughly rebuked throughout the teachings of Church, most recently by John Paul II in his two apostolic letters, Mulieris Dignitatem, on the dignity of vocation of women, and Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, which clearly explains that the Church’s inability to ordain women is in no way due to a mistaken belief of women as inferior to men. Indeed, if anyone claims to hold such erroneous beliefs, he is not truly Catholic.
Those who claim that the Church’s inability to ordain women is a ploy to keep “power in the hands of men” are approaching from the wrong direction. They are framing the question as a political problem, when in reality it is a theological one. To me it is a small but vocal minority who refuse to accept Church teaching and her valid reasonings in order simply to rebel. Such statement about “power” so completely miss the mark as to be not worthy of consideration.
See this for a fuller explanation of the Church’s inability to ordain women.
Tomorrow, I’ll post on why the priesthood must remain a celibate institution and not allow for married men, and my thoughts on solving the “vocation crisis.”
An obvious solution, at least to some, to solve this “crisis” is to ordain women and married men into the priesthood.
Both are not true answers, because the only true answer to the vocation crisis is an increase in valid ordinations. Neither of these two “solutions” are valid in the eyes of the Church. This has always been part of Church tradition, for almost two thousand years. And concerning women’s ordination, not only is it the tradition of the Catholic Church, but also her closest sister, the Orthodox Church, as well.
Why?
Let’s focus on women’s ordination in this post. Women cannot be ordained to the priesthood because, to paraphrase John Paul II from his 1994 apostolic letter Ordinatio Sacerdotum, the Church does not have the ability to do so.
Here’s the reasoning, the way I understand it.
The priesthood has its origin in the choice of the twelve men Jesus chose to be His Apostles and found His Church. In His three years of public ministry, there is not a single record of Jesus conferring this commission on a woman. Not even the Blessed Virgin Mary, the most perfect of all human beings, His sinless mother, received such a commission – and she would undoubtedly have been the ideal candidate had Christ wanted to choose women for this mission. (What do I mean by “commission” here? The ability to baptize, anoint the sick, forgive sins, consecrate the Eucharist – those abilities Jesus specifically gave His Apostles.)
There are many key roles in the Church for women, in ministry and religious orders, but the priesthood is not one of them. A slightly imperfect metaphor is that of childbirth. The honor and duty of bringing new souls into this world has been given to women by God; men do not have this privilege. Similarly, only men can bring the Body of Christ into this world through the sacrament of Holy Orders; women do not have this privilege.
A common response to such reasoning is that if Jesus was alive today, He would do it differently and would ordain women to His priesthood.
How do Catholics respond to this?
Well, for one, we do believe He is alive today, haven risen two thousand years ago, and is present and active through His Church and through the Holy Spirit. Faithful Catholics believe in the Magisterium, the body of teachings of the Church. Teachings may evolve over the centuries, but dogma does not change. (This sentence is at the center of much confusion about the role and power of the Church. Whole books could be written about it, and probably have been. It is a worthy topic to delve into further, but I am digressing.) The inability to ordain women to the priesthood is Church dogma.
Second, it’s never been proven that the specific reason Jesus did not call women to the priesthood was because of the cultural norms of the times. This is just a modern assumption.
Third, this response implicates Jesus as sexist. It says that just because many of the men in first-century Palestine had opinions of women as inferior to men, Jesus must have had, too. We all know that Jesus did not hesitate to overcome and transcend the cultural norms of the times that were unjust, particularly with women.
Fourth, the idea of priestesses was common in many of the pagan religions of the time, though it was not found in Judaism. If Christ wanted to open up His priesthood to women, the precedent was there. And yet He didn’t.
Another common response from those uncomfortable with Church doctrine is to accuse it of being sexist. They accuse the Church of considering women to be inferior, incompetent, or otherwise unable to perform the duties of the priesthood. This has been thoroughly rebuked throughout the teachings of Church, most recently by John Paul II in his two apostolic letters, Mulieris Dignitatem, on the dignity of vocation of women, and Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, which clearly explains that the Church’s inability to ordain women is in no way due to a mistaken belief of women as inferior to men. Indeed, if anyone claims to hold such erroneous beliefs, he is not truly Catholic.
Those who claim that the Church’s inability to ordain women is a ploy to keep “power in the hands of men” are approaching from the wrong direction. They are framing the question as a political problem, when in reality it is a theological one. To me it is a small but vocal minority who refuse to accept Church teaching and her valid reasonings in order simply to rebel. Such statement about “power” so completely miss the mark as to be not worthy of consideration.
See this for a fuller explanation of the Church’s inability to ordain women.
Tomorrow, I’ll post on why the priesthood must remain a celibate institution and not allow for married men, and my thoughts on solving the “vocation crisis.”
No comments:
Post a Comment