Irish-Catholic and Dangerous: Reason #3,987,240 Why Women Cannot Be Priests
Interesting read mainly because there are such strong biases in the writer’s view, so that the he doesn’t seem to feel the need to explain things properly. The post read like someone laughing at the idea of a female Catholic priest, and furthermore, there seems to be an expectation (assuming) that others will laugh accordingly at the ludicrous idea. I didn’t find the article about women priest funny or absurd in any way, but then again I’m not a Catholic or a Christian – so I’m just curious and confused. So, a woman being a priest is ridiculous in this blog post… It makes no sense to me apart from it being the following of tradition, which may have been initially set up because in that context perhaps only men were suitable for priesthood. What would actually make a woman being ordained a priest, bad? What innate difference in men and women stops women from being priests? Yes women an men are obviously different, but how, with regards to being a priest?
17 Comments so far
Leave a comment
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
This post might help clarify for you: http://irishanddangerous.blogspot.com/2006/06/letter-to-editor.html
If not, then try reading the other reasons linked at the bottom of the original post that you linked to above.
Hope that helps.
Comment by Danny Garland Jr. May 15, 2007 @ 9:58 pmAfter reading the linked post from Danny Garland Jr. and the comments also left there by people who seem to know him, I don’t know what to say. I can’t argue with any of it based on the bible or based on tradition because I simply have no argument; however I just can’t see the actual logic behind reasons outlined in the letter. It just seems so backwards! The idea that a woman can’t be a priest in the Catholic church seems to be something that existed in a different historical context but it has seemingly continued on for no reason. The main reason I have no argument is that I really can’t argue with the section of the post that states that we should listen to the Pope. Since the Pope is the one and only current authority on the matter, then the entire matter is settled and thus women cannot be priests in the Catholic church. Bearded or not, I really can’t see the difference between men and women when it comes to holy leadership. I guess since it’s a matter of faith, why question it? If Catholic women are happy to not be priests and happy to remain “equals” to men while pursuing other roles within the church, then there’s no need to question it. I just personally can’t see the any actual reasons that would make it a problem. But I guess I don’t have to be able to.
Comment by Arnie May 16, 2007 @ 12:36 amTo clarify, it isn’t the Pope who is the authority on the matter, it is Jesus Christ. The Pope is merely obeying the teaching and authority of Christ.
The priesthood (in Judaism and Christianity [Christianity at least until 1970 when Anglicans started ordaining women]) has always been seen as spiritual fatherhood. This is not to say that women can’t be leaders or holy, it’s just that they can’t be priests. It really comes down to what the priesthood stands for and the metaphysical reality of being. The priesthood is an extension of the High Priesthood of Jesus Christ. The priests today act in his person, or in persona Christi Capitis: In the person of Christ the Head. When the priest blesses you or performs the Sacraments, it is not the priest acting, but Christ acting through the priest. Hence, since Christ was of the gender male when he became incarnate, metaphysically speaking a woman cannot be a priest. It would not work because a woman is the wrong substance. This is nothing against women. As I said in my post, the Church has a very high view of women. The Blessed Virgin Mary, by virtue of being the Mother of Jesus Christ, who is God, and thus the Mother of God, is the highest exalted creature. She is not a goddess or anything like that. She is a creature….but she is the perfect creature. This being said, Christ never chose her to be a priest. He chose all men, because the priesthood is about spiritual fatherhood. The Catholic Church feels it does not have the authority to change something that Christ has established. Nor could the Catholic Church if they wanted to.
Comment by Danny Garland Jr. May 16, 2007 @ 1:01 amFair enough. Danny Garland Jr, Thanks, and I appreciate your time and effort to make me understand how this all works from a Catholic point of view. Although I don’t fully understand (hence I don’t think it’s fair), I can see why the “women cannot be priests idea” is coming from, and why it can’t be changed – and I can respect it. The main confusion I possess is that of the “metaphysical reality of being” – how are men and women really that different? I can see why the tradition from the time of Christ shouldn’t be changed so I suppose that’s enough of a point for some people to disregard the idea of women priests. Regardless of historical context, how is anyone meant to change a system started by the highest authority? So that part is understood. Are there particular traits in women that stop them from being priests? As I said, it’s the metaphysical difference aspect that confuses me.
Comment by Arnie May 16, 2007 @ 10:40 amKeeping in mind that the priesthood is to represent spiritual fatherhood, not motherhood, due to the fact that God has revealed Himself as Father, from whom all fatherhood comes from…..and also the obvious physical (as in appearence) differences of men and women ( not to mention emotional, psychological, and other differences, i.e. men are more inclined to rationalize things, whereas women are more inclined to go with their heart (i.e. faith))…….read this and let me know if it clarifies the subject for you:
Comment by Danny Garland Jr. May 16, 2007 @ 12:30 pmhttp://irishanddangerous.blogspot.com/2006/08/reason-3987235-why-women-cannot-be.html
It makes sense when looked at in this fashion – many reasons in Catholicism are given for why women may not, and should not be priests (or priestesses) within the rigid frame that is outlined for the reasoning. I can understand the factors that allow one to come to this conclusion. Nevertheless, I can’t truly grasp it because any faith that I have, doesn’t define God so specifically. By this I mean, I can see what you’re saying, however in the way I think, a female priest(ess) in any religion would not be a bad thing. I thank you for your time and I, because of your time, have a greater understanding of why women cannot be priests in your eyes, and in Catholic way of thinking. Good luck in all your future endeavours, and thanks again.
Comment by Arnie May 17, 2007 @ 12:46 pmArnie,
Thanks for listening and giving me a chance to respond and explain the views of the Catholic Church.
Good luck to you as well and God Bless!
Comment by Danny Garland Jr May 17, 2007 @ 10:00 pm[...] my Transient Spaces buddies – example 1, example 2, example 3, example 4, example 5, example 6, and from my own blog. So in these examples, the author of the blog post has responded to comments left by others by [...]
Pingback by Confusion, annoyance and the search for a better way! « Sathfilms May 23, 2007 @ 8:05 pm[...] 4. http://sathfilms.com/2007/05/12/irish-catholic-and-dangerous-reason-3987240-why-women-cannot-be-pri... [...]
Pingback by Blog posts for Jenny and Transient Spaces « Sathfilms May 31, 2007 @ 3:06 pmI think its funny how these things work. I mean even in modern day, when alot of people have realised that things like the bible need to be interpreted and maybe not 100% abided by, things like this are still apparent.
It just goes to show that, to a certain extent, and in some part of society and religion women are still seen as “not as capable” as men.
Comment by Sarah May 31, 2007 @ 3:43 pmIt may be strange but, women priests are not customary in Hindu religion as well. Arguments supporting this trend are generally around physiological, psychological and hormonal, none of which is spiritual.
Comment by Saki June 2, 2007 @ 6:00 amGood point. Yes, I can’t agree with that rubbish either. How can that really be justified? Anything “unclean” about people which is physiological surely can’t be a judgement on whether they can be or do something holy. That’s my opinion anyway. Spiruality is personal, and I can’t see how any of those things matter.
Comment by Arnie June 2, 2007 @ 1:38 pmArnie,
I just stumbled over your page here and this discussion….
I’m happy that you brought it up – and I enjoyed reading your comments as well.
As a matter of fact – there ARE already a few Catholic women priests… Illegaly but licitly ordained, and called by God….
And I hope that the Church is one day soon going to change this so that all those women who are called will be allowed to officially discern and follow their call.
It’s not as simple as some have tried to make it look like in the answers above. It’s actually pure nonsense – that stuff about women being of another “substance”! I don’t know whether to laugh or cry….!!
It’s simply not true, and thus can’t be used as an argument. Also all the other common arguments against women priests are like straw that vanishes by a tiny little flame of the truth…
And things are changing indeed – although very slowly.
It’s actually only cultural stuff that stops women from following their call – nothing in the Bible is said against it – on the contrary – also women are serving in the early Church in equal roles as men, and Mary Magdalene was the first apostle, sent by Jesus himself to proclaim the good news to the male apostles.
I could write a lot about this – I’ve spent lots of time researching this and written about it in articles and on the internet, but most of it is in Swedish – only some of it is in English. And to write about even only the most essental things here would take the whole day… So I’ll give you some links below instead, where you’ll find much more to read.
From the Church fathers, and especially during the Roman empire, and all the way to our days, things changed so women were pushed out into the margins. Some of the “fathers” wrote terrible things about women – just because that was the common view in their days.
And this sadly destroys lives of women even today…
Here’s a very good article explaining why things turned out like they now are in the Catholic Church regarding this:
http://charlottetherese.110mb.com/church_without_women_leaders.htm
We had a long discussion about women priests in Sweden recently that several thousands followed – although not so many made any comments:
http://katolskvision.egetforum.se/viewtopic.php?t=113
There you’ll also see a press release about it in English as the first posting in the thread.
And at this webpage you’ll find some articles and videos about the ordinations of Catholic women (under the headline: kvinnliga/gifta präster = women/married priests).
http://www.geocities.com/katolskvision/kvartiklar.html
Coincidentally, some more Catholic women are actually being ordained today, just as I’m writing this…
Also – have a look at this webpage where you’ll find the truth about this, which the official Church tries to hide – and many good references – it’s in English, and in several other languages too:
http://www.womenpriests.org/index.asp
Here’s also a brand new blog at that page – about the subject – feel free to participate there:
http://www.womenpriests.org/dreamshareact/
Comment by Charlotte July 15, 2007 @ 12:54 amThanks so much for your comment. I must admit, that although some of people who previously commented tried to answer my questions, I was truly confused. “Metaphysical differences” between men and women was the initial reason, then suddenly tradition of male apostles became the reason. I couldn’t see a real reason why there can’t be female priests, in fact, the reasons given seemed kind of backwards. And thanks for the various links – I’m slowly making my way through the articles. It’s very interesting, and at the same time, quite disturbing – it is a reflection of many other issues that exist with in the Catholic Church and outside it as well.
I feel strange participating in the blogs linked above since I am not a Christian, let alone a Catholic.
Comment by Arnie July 18, 2007 @ 1:32 pmJust for the record, the women who were “ordained”, were not done so either legally nor licitly. You can go through the motions, but that doesn’t change the reality that women cannot be priests.
The issue is not about women or men being superior over another. Catholics will admit that women are more spiritual and the better. The priesthood is not about that. Catholics do not degrade women either. The most honored creature amongst Catholics is a woman, the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Comment by Danny Garland Jr. October 12, 2007 @ 12:34 pmSee this post for refutation of Charlotte’s nonesense:
http://irishanddangerous.blogspot.com/2007/10/reason-3987242-why-women-cannot-be.html
awts~
Comment by hesi February 17, 2008 @ 9:12 pmPriesthood isn’t a right, first of all. The issue regarding whether women should be priests or shouldn’t be priests isn’t about equal rights at all, as people today seem to think it is.
Comment by Estefania March 25, 2008 @ 5:04 amWomen and men are both equal to God and the soul IS genderless, but God, God being Jesus, did appoint men to be the leaders of his Church, the Church meaning the people who are followers of Christ, and this choice is not mere chance. Jesus went against every practice of his time, he really stood out against other Jews and the social norms, so if He wanted women to be priests, He would have chosen them regardless of when He lived.
An ordination, part of the Catholic sacrament known as Holy Orders, is a call to a specific vocation (duty/task within the Church). Every human being has a vocation, whether it is to marry and have children (and in that way spread the knowledge and the teachings of Christ), or become a nun, brother, friar, deacon, priest, bishop, cardinal(…etc.) and teach the children of God in that way. Though more important it is only right that this group of people be a smaller number and very special in their mindsets.
God would never call someone to the wrong vocation but a human, being prone to mistakes and misinterpretation of God’s calling, may see such vocations as gender-specific. The truth of the matter is, God is not gender-specific.
I do not know why He is even called a “He”, perhaps it is because He sent a Son and the Son is not only the Son but the essence of God Himself. In any case, God, who is not a creature like we are, has no gender. He is neither man nor woman because he is not biological: He just Is and always Has Been.
All this established, it would be heretical for a woman to be called by God to the priesthood. If this were possible, then Jesus Himself would have appointed women to the apostleship, but He didn’t. And it wasn’t because of the social norms of his era because He was always up to contradicting them. [Women in the Bible were the ones privileged of knowing He had risen on Easter Sunday before anyone else. Since no one listened to women, why would that be included in the Bible unless it were true. It is obvious in the entire Holy text that women WERE in fact equaly important to men.] He chose men because He intended for His Church to be ordered in that way, the men being the head and the women the backbone.
Isn’t it just that women give birth and new life in the flesh, but men who can’t do that be able to give birth and life in the spirit? I find it only fair. Women obviously have a more important job because without them there would be no one to teach the faith and no Church, either. And if women could be priests then men could be able to give birth, but alas it is not so. It is not a right to give birth it is a privilege, and such is the priesthood–a privilege not a right.
As a last thought, ponder upon this: Jesus was a man, the head of the Church who in essence is feminine. Since priests are supposed to represent Jesus, who was a man, then a woman priest would only be blasphemous to the entire order that Jesus instituted while He was humanly alive (Catholics believe that the Communion is indeed the real flesh and blood of Christ and thus is still physically among us, in the lesser state, until His return to earth at the Rapture). And again, it is not because of the differences between men and women, it isn’t because men are better than women. If some say that Jesus would have chosen His apostles differently had He been alive today, well Catholics believe He is still alive today so that statement would never change what we believe about Him and the practices He blessed us with. The people who truly know the Word and the Bible and have a close relationship with Jesus know that it is the way He wants it.
I only hope that my information has brought you new knowledge and also has synthesized what has been said in the above comments. God bless and Happy Easter season!