A woman could not suitably represent Christ in this particular capacity. The theological reasoning is to the effect that the ministerial priest shares in a representative way in the office of Christ as bridegroom of the church, and must therefore be, like Christ, of the male sex. (See note 2 below.) Since the 16th century Catholic theologians have regularly characterized the church’s practice as grounded in divine law and have judged the opposed position as heretical or at least verging on heresy. The fathers of the early centuries and the theologians of the Middle Ages regarded the question as settled. The argument from tradition is that the Catholic bishops have always observed the norm of conferring sacred orders only on men and that sects which ordained women to the priesthood or permitted them to perform priestly functions have been denounced as heretical. The biblical component in the argument is twofold: first, that Christ did not call women to the apostolic ministry, since he selected only men as members of the Twelve and second, that the apostles themselves, faithful to the practice of Christ, chose only men for priestly offices, those of bishop, presbyter and their equivalents. According to Vatican II, “Sacred tradition, sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the church, in accord with God’s most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together, each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit, contribute effectively to the salvation of souls” (“Dei Verbum,” 10). These components are not to be taken in isolation but in convergence, since none of them is an independent authority. In these documents the case against women’s ordination is made under four principal headings: Bible, tradition, theological reasoning and magisterial authority.
#Saint andrew daily missal 1990 reprint series#
“Ordinatio Sacerdotalis” is the culmination of a long series of documents issued under Paul VI and John Paul II since 1975. These components are not to be taken in isolation but in convergence, since none of them is an independent authority."
In his apostolic letter, therefore, the pope was not making the teaching infallible but confirming a teaching that was already infallible for the reasons stated.ĭulles: "The case against women’s ordination is made under four principal headings: Bible, tradition, theological reasoning and magisterial authority. After replying in the affirmative, the congregation added that the doctrine, founded on the written word of God, had been constantly held in the tradition of the church and has been infallibly set forth by the ordinary and universal magisterium.
28, 1995, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in a document approved by the pope, responded to a question put to it about whether the teaching of “Ordinatio Sacerdotalis” was to be understood as belonging to the deposit of the faith.
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.” (See note 1 below.) On Pentecost Sunday 1994, Pope John Paul II issued a brief letter “Ordinatio Sacerdotalis,” which concluded with the words: “In order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter which pertains to the church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. The most controversial statement that has come from the Holy See during the present pontificate is in all probability that which has to do with the priestly ordination of women. Their responses can be found here and here. To mark the 25th anniversary of this essay, America asked two scholars, Lucetta Scaraffi and Julia Brumbaugh, to respond. 45, dated May 2, 1996) as “Gender and Priesthood: Examining the Teaching” and was reprinted in America in 2001.
0 kommentar(er)
